Monthly Archives: July 2012

Weekly Meditation: What do you want?

So last week I asked you to focus this week on two questions: Who am I? What do I want?

These are questions that are at the heart of all practical ethics, philosophy, and psychology.  By flip of a coin I decided to take “What do I want?” first.

I assume that whatever the list you have is it probably boils down to one of four things:

  • Things you would like other people to do (child succeeding in life, having better coworkers, world peace)
  • Physical items or actions that require you to make money to pay for them (new house, money in the bank, etc.)
  • Relationship (love, etc.)
  • Accomplishments that you need to do (a bucket list basically)

Okay.

Now, if I forgot something I’m sure it will still fit into what I’m about to say.

First off do you have any power to control these things (for the moment let’s ignore the law of attraction, the idea that your thoughts help create the world around you and just focus on what you have control over in a simple physical world)?  The Lotto ticket, the behavior of others, world peace.  You have little control over these things.  Scratch those off the list for the moment because if you’re only focused on what you can’t control you’ll often ignore what you do have control over.

The next thing I want to ask, does your list include one of the following?  “To achieve Happiness” or “To achieve Enlightenment.”  No?  But isn’t that what everything else is for, to be Happy?  To be complete?  Add at least one of those to your list.

Now, in light of that last addition (kudos if you already had it on the list) the next question is will what is left on your list actually bring you happiness?  If the answer is no, then strike it off the list.

Now you probably have a few things left like a healthy sum of money or having a job you enjoy.  With something like money, money is a very nice thing and I have no problem with it, but understand mostly of what you want it for is not the lavish lifestyle it could bring, but for the safety it offers.  If you have money, if you own your own house, car, whatever free and clear, if you’re completely out of debt there is security in that. I’d be a fool to deny it.  But understand that security, while wonderful, is hard to buy.  Disease strikes the poor and rich alike, despite what people who whine about universal health care claim, accidents can hit everyone.  I’m not saying don’t seek the safety net money provides, you’d be crazy not to seek it to some degree, but understand you’re going to die one way or another, so it matters more how you live what time you have than delay and say I’ll live when I have X.

So we should be down to the things that will make you happy (which strangely enough often bring money with them).  I do foresee however that there may be some things left on the list that you wish were different but don’t realize that you already have the power to change.  Probably the most common is that you want a better job.   Fair enough.  But understand most us don’t have a perfect job with a high salary, good hours, rewarding work, great bosses, coworkers, subordinates and customers.  If you do you are blessed.  Most of us don’t.  But you need to realize most of us are also not working for a pittance (yes, I realize with Obama in office some of us may be, but I’m envisioning someone reading this meditation long after that useless ass is gone), bad hours, meaningless work stupid and vicious bosses, terrible coworkers, horrific subordinates, and god-awful customers.  The jobs I’ve ever had didn’t have everything terrible (and I’ve had some jobs you wouldn’t do for twice the salary I was being paid).  We’re usually somewhere in the middle.  Yes some of us have a truly horrific or even no job…but most of us aren’t in that horrific situation, and if you aren’t at the far end of the spectrum, understand it’s perspective on your job that makes it miserable or fulfilling.  The issue is often that if you are doing everything you can, even significantly less than perfect situations can be quite enjoyable…and there are lots of situation that aren’t your job but are comparable in that you first have to ask are you giving everything you should before you should ask for something better.

A word on relationships.  I’m probably not the best person to ask as I am currently single.  However I will say I have realized settling doesn’t lead to happiness.  You want a relationship with a person who is perfect for you…not just a relation for the sake of having a relationship.  And really finding that relationship may not be in your power to bring it sooner rather than later, so enjoy what relationships you do have (friends, family, etc)

So this week, and sorry for being a little late, I want you to go back over your list.  With these thoughts in mind does the list look any different?  And whether it does or not are these items just on a list or are you actively working toward them?  And how are you going to act after any realizations you come to?

Leave a comment

Filed under Meditation, Religion, Root Charka Abundance, Spirituality

Romney at VFW: America the Hope of the Earth



But remember we’re arrogant

But remember we’re not special in the world

And let’s not forget that we believe in American exceptionalism like Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism (yeah thanks Barry for comparing us to that excuse for a nation)…and that we should apologize to the butchers who kill our men but not when you slander a man and accuse him of felonies when you have not even an iota of proof (by the way we have tons of proof, the least of which is your Executive Privelage order, that shows you actually were complicit in the string of felonies known as Fast and Furious)…and that we should support every revolution backed by Al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood (Syria, Lybia, Tunisa, Egypt) but let people in Iran who want democracy to be murdered.
I’m ready for a change, how about you?

Also, Mitt is going to meet with anti-Communist figher Lech Walesa and the great Tony Blair, two men who understand what America is, and Obama isn’t (by the way Walesa has refused to meet with Obama).



1 Comment

Filed under Afghanistan, American Exceptionalism, Civil Liberties, Conservative, Constitution, Economics, Evils of Liberalism, Foreign Policy, Government is corrupt, Government is useless, Individualism, Israel, Mitt Romney, Obama, Patriotism, politics, Tyranny

This article and the videos after it are a wonderful denfense of the purpose for and prosperity that derives from tax shelters…next time someone starts whining about Romney’s Caymen accounts send them here.

International Liberty

My friend Pierre Bessard of Switzlerand’s Liberales Institut has a column in today’s New York Times defending financial privacy from the predations of both international bureaucracies and American tax collectors. Pierre sagely notes that the Swiss system respects the privacy of citizens, unlike the “Orwellian” systems in places like America. This approach results in a very high level of tax compliance in Switzerland, and also provides a refuge for oppressed people around the world:

…for us here in Switzerland, our financial privacy laws are a foundation for individual dignity and basic property rights. Unfortunately, the confidentiality that is the hallmark of Swiss banking is coming under increasing pressure. …Earlier this year, Switzerland was put on a “gray list” by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and threatened with financial sanctions, leading the government to provisionally renegotiate tax agreements with a dozen countries so far. …Switzerland, which is home to an…

View original post 427 more words

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

We did build that.

 

You know, there are huge cities in China, with planned roads, prebuilt office buildings, residential, commercial, and factories already to use.  Roads, electricity, water, wifi.  Planned and built at government expense.  They sit empty. 

 

Meanwhile economic prosperity existed before public utilities, before roads were paved, before government subsidized railroads or canals.

 

Success created the roads, the utilities, all the things Barrack Obama and Elizabeth Warren claim is the cause of success.

14 Comments

Filed under Capitalism

From Republicans and Reincarnation: Part of the Ethical Argument for Capitalism

Robbing Peter to Pay Paul vs. Peter giving to Paul

“The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of misery.” —Winston Churchill

            Let’s look at two hypothetical systems.

System 1:

Peter is rich.  Very rich.  The government takes what it considers a reasonable amount of money (which has nothing to do with what a reasonable person would consider a reasonable amount).  Let’s say 31 cents on the dollar.  The government then takes that money and spends about 18 cents, of every dollar Peter makes, on Paul.  So what is the point of this system?  Supposedly it’s to help Paul improve his station in life.  We take money from Peter because Peter can afford it.  So now let’s looks at this.  Through the questions we established earlier.

  1. Is the action leading to a positive, neutral, or negative end?
  2. Is the action unethical or ethical?
  3. Is the benefit this action is providing removing a material or spiritual obstacle, or both?
  4. Is this a long-term benefit or short-term benefit?
  5. Is the action benefiting a large number of people or a small number?

I’m going to take these in reverse order, so bear with me.  This is hurting at least on face value a smaller portion of the population (not really, Peter as representative of “the rich”[1] is actually a fairly large portion of the population) to help a larger portion of the population (again not really, Paul as representative of those on the dole is a relatively small portion of the population[2]…but we’re going to play in the opposition ballpark for the moment).  So at least the argument (no matter how flimsy it is) is that few people are hurt and lots of people are helped.

But how are they helped?  Is this a long-term benefit or a short-term benefit?  When we talk about this we have to think about what Paul will do with that welfare check.  Now I couldn’t find figures on how many welfare checks are spent on capital investment or college tuitions, but given the fact that until the 1990’s welfare reform the number of people leaving the dole could not be described as a mass exodus, I think it’s a safe assumption that not much of that money was being used to better Paul.  Quite frankly it’s human nature.  People value things by what they sacrifice to get it, by the amount of work that goes into it, by what had to be done to earn it—thus money just thrown at you without strings has little value.  As such it will be spent on things of no lasting value.  Yes there are numerous examples of people who climbed their way out of welfare, and I applaud these people for the strength of character to fight human nature’s more lazy and apathetic tendencies, but no one can be foolish enough to say that these few examples are indicative of the whole—nor ignore the fact that many of these people who have gotten themselves out of the cycle of poverty are some of welfare’s harshest and most vocal critics.  Thus welfare in general is at best a short-term fix; it by no means attacks the root of the problem.[3]

So it helps lots of people, but is only a short-term solution.  Now obviously this has material benefit (at least for Paul, to hell if it actually depresses the economy as a whole) but does it actually have any spiritual benefits?  Sadly, and rather obviously, the answer is no.  Peter gets none of the spiritual benefits described in the previous chapter that come from giving, because he did not give by choice, the money was taken from him against his will.  Nor is Peter also likely to give to charity now, or at least not as much, because human nature is that once that money has been taken, then that person feels that they’ve already given, when they haven’t.  In fact if anything this leaves Peter more negative and bitter toward humanity as he now sees money stolen from him and given to people who are less than deserving and not using said money to better themselves.  This is likely to make Peter more bitter toward humanity around him, more cynical, and overall a worse human being.  So it’s actually a spiritual negative.  How about for Paul?  The answer is again in the negative.  Paul feels no need to earn this act of charity; it was given to him by an unfeeling, cold, heartless institution, not another human being.  The insult to self-esteem alone comes as a spiritual negative.  More often than not the psychological effects of such a handout will make Paul feel even in less control of his life than before because now that he must depend on the government for his existence—this increases his feelings of powerlessness, increases fear that he is not in control of his existence and rather a mere victim of fate and circumstance.  In short another spiritual negative.

Finally is it ethical?  No!  The phrase is “to rob Peter to pay Paul” for a reason.  It’s stealing money from a human being by force.  I know I don’t pay my taxes out of the goodness of my heart; I do it because I don’t wish to go to jail or have a standoff with the FBI and ATF.  I’m pretty sure that’s the same reason you pay your taxes.  They have jails and guns, a lot of them—certainly more than I would like to make a standoff against.  So in the end it’s theft.  A clear violation of “Thou shalt not steal” or its numerous variations in every religion on earth, and New Agers are no different on this point.  Stealing is stealing; it’s a complete and total violation of any conception of ethics I can think of.   Now we do honor the myth of Robin Hood, but not because he was a thief, as someone once tried to disprove my point that we never believe theft to be a good thing.  Notice that if you actually look at all the legends, it wasn’t that he robbed from the rich and gave to the poor (a more modern socialist reinterpretation) but rather robbed from the robbing tax collector and gave back to the people who had actually earned the money.  His heroism isn’t in the theft, it’s in putting his life on the line to get back for people what was stolen from them, what was originally theirs (which is what we would like to think the police do when they put their life on the line for us).

But don’t the ends justify the means you ask—to which I respond: did you read the previous paragraphs?  Even if there were cases where the ends justify the means, I can’t see how stealing hard-earned money from people is justified by short-term material benefits and long-term spiritual and economic harm.  The welfare system in all its myriad forms is actually harming the spiritual growth of everyone it touches.  Unless you were an atheist you couldn’t possibly support it, and even then to believe that this system pragmatically worked you’d need to be an atheist and a moron to… (Or am I being redundant there?)

System 2:

            So let’s say that starting today we started reducing all welfare entitlements.  Making them harder to get, requiring more oversight of the people who get them, and requiring even further time constraints in regards to how long you can be on the program.  In terms of social security this would be cutting benefits, raising retirement ages and begin to either privatize or simply eliminate[4] through a phased out process.  Now you might be wondering why I’m not suggesting this second system as being one of completely wiping welfare, social security, Medicaid, and Medicare simply off the face of the earth.  The answer would be that for better or much much worse, these programs have unfortunately become part of the country’s society and while they do eventually need to die, just cutting them with a machete, while greatly satisfying, will cause short-term chaos, and long term societal scars.  Welfare, like heroin, is not an addiction that one just quits cold turkey.[5]  There does need to be a large initial cut to show we mean business of somewhere in the ballpark of 10% cuts right off the top—but this needs to be followed by a 10 to 20 year plan of phasing these programs out of existence.

So assuming we do the right thing, and cutting these programs back with the intention of eventually leaving them only as significantly smaller local programs or just out and out killing them.  What are the benefits and losses?

First, how many people are helped?  While I’m sure we all agree that supply-side economics doesn’t work quite as well or as quickly as everyone thought it did back in the ‘80’s, but it does work, albeit its effects take time to work through.  When the economy improves everyone benefits, and when you cut government intrusion the economy improves…eventually.  But the fact of the matter is that more money in the hands of the people is still more money circulating through the economy and not being lost in some bureaucratic nightmare land that creates nothing but red tape and paperwork and thus doesn’t really add anything to the flow of the economy.  More money, more things being bought.  More things being bought, more profit.  More profit, more investment.  More investment, more jobs…you know how this goes.  So certainly this will take time, but then again that’s what we conservatives like—long-term fixes, not short term band-aids.  Further if we do this properly as a long term rollback of funds people receiving these handouts should have time to plan and adjust to the changing environment (like doing things of such a radical nature as getting an education, getting a job, or actually saving for retirement…I know it’s radical thinking, but I believe it just might work for most people).  So there is no harm to this group either.  So everyone makes out with the status quo if not better.

As I already said these are long-term benefits.  Long term the economy does better, more people have jobs, more people have control of their lives, and if we don’t fall in the trap of socialism again, this is a self-perpetuating system.  Yes, long term we will have recessions, can’t do anything about that, but they will work themselves out, and if people begin to learn how to save properly and educate themselves properly to be able to move from career to career if needed they will not need to worry.

But more than these advantages, this puts the control of a person’s life back in their own hands.  A major spiritual benefit.  For both Peter and Paul, the government is no longer butting into their lives more than it needs to.   This will reduce the likelihood of fear in their lives.  It will also increase the feelings of security since for Paul survival depends on himself now, and for Peter there is less worry about how much the Brownshirts at the IRS will be taking this year.  Further, as I pointed out previously, more money in Peter’s hands will increase the odds and amounts that Peter will give to charity, and this charity will come from living human beings who care about people not the cold, mechanical system of welfare.  With this charity to Paul comes the emotional and ethical ties that will force Paul to in some way to be worthy of the gift he has been given and improve himself.

So materially, psychologically, spiritually this provides long-term benefits to the majority of people.  But is it ethical?  Well we’re not stealing from anyone, so there it’s ethical.  And as I stipulated this program has to be carried out slowly, so were not just uprooting people from the system they have become accustomed to…But I hear one last objection about it being ethical coming from the far left: That people have a right to health care or a livable wage, or a right to care from the government in old age and that to deny them that right is unethical.

The crux of this argument is that everyone has a right to these things.  If you believe this you A) have not the foggiest conception of what a right is and B) are just as confused about ethics.  No one has a right to health care or a livable wage or even happiness.  What you have a right to is that the government will not overtly deny you the chance to achieve, to earn, or to buy these things.  But neither the government, society, your neighbor, nor your brother owes you these things.  You have rights to what you come into this world with: Life, Liberty, and the ability to pursue happiness (emphasis on the pursue).  Nor is anyone ethically required to provide these things to you just because you exist (except for your parents as long as you can’t provide these things for yourself).  First and foremost a person is ethically bound to seek their own happiness, not yours.  Now we are ethically bound to help those in immediate need; the Parable of the Good Samaritan comes to mind, but notice that in that case the story revolves around people who are not victims of their own laziness but literally victims to the violence of others or circumstance completely out of their control.  Yes we are ethically bound to help those people.  We are even ethically called for to be generous and charitable, but keep in mind the entire concept of generosity and charity are dependant on the idea we are not bound to help people out of duty, law, or right…if we were it wouldn’t be generosity now would it?  Further generosity does not call for us to help everyone who would come and demand our help—that would bankrupt anyone and certainly lead to personal unhappiness, a very unethical end.  Charity, to have true meaning and worth, must be to those who will use it for their own long term benefit and betterment, not merely short term waste, and anyone who demands the work and property of others as their own isn’t someone who cares about personal betterment because this is indicative of a character that believes in not doing anything for themselves.  Anyone with this sort of entitlement and need for instant gratification can never better themselves, because they cannot even conceive of what is required to better themselves[6].  Hence they are not worthy of the generosity or charity you would give.

Charity is ethical.  But its generosity must be coupled with a desire to improve one’s self, otherwise whatever work or money that is given is merely wasted.  The claim that one has a right to other people’s works is an affront to that belief and merely helps to instill a feeling of helplessness and that is irresponsible.


[1] Of course this isn’t accurate as it is more like the top 50% of wage earners that liberals like to define as “the rich”…so ask yourself do you personally make more than $45,000…if you do, then many in Congress define you as “the rich”.

[2] Unless you count all those elderly people who were somehow too stupid to have any understanding of saving for retirement, and rather chose to live like leaches off people who actually have jobs and know what the stock market is for, but one has trouble feeling sympathy for someone who had over forty years to plan for the inevitable and didn’t do anything about it.  And if you tell me they expected the government to be there for them…well that makes me lose even more respect for them. Even the Sheriff of Nottingham wasn’t dumb enough to think Robin was going to give the money back to him when he retired.

[3] I’m actually going to exclude all job training and education problems from this critique as those do actually attack the root of the problem and do exhibit long-term thinking.  I have no problem in theory spending money on those…although I’m sure the money itself could be spent more wisely.

[4] Even privatizing the system is the government still saying you’re too incompetent to handle your own money…which I’ll grant you, a good portion of America does fit into that description, but it’s still the government calling you stupid…this from an organization currently run by some of the biggest buffoons the world has to offer.  A statement about pots and kettles comes to mind.

[5] Interestingly enough, welfare also shares the quality of heroin of leaving its users emaciated, soulless shells of their former selves.

[6] I would like to point out that this critique is not aimed necessarily at those who are poor, but rather at the demagogues and activists that propose such a system of entitlement and character flaws, who in effect create a system that encourages the poor to stay victims and not seek a better life.

To read more Republicans and Reincarnation: The Conscience of a New Age Conservative is available at AuthorHouse, Amazon, and Barnes & Noble 

Leave a comment

Filed under Books, Books for Conservatives, Books for New Agers, Capitalism, Charity, Conservative, Economics, Equality, Evils of Liberalism, Free Will, God, GOP, Government is corrupt, Government is useless, Individualism, Long Term Thinking, Love, Natural Rights, New Age, Patriotism, philosophy, politics, Republicans and Reincarnation, Taxes, Tyranny, Welfare

Weekly Meditation: Focusing on the important things…

I’m sorry, I really wanted to have a more detailed and thought provoking meditation this week…but 6 days of state mandated teacher training has left my brain still unable to function properly. It is often the case that 1 hour of boring and useless work is more damaging to the brain than 10 hours of pushing your mind and body…6 8-hour-days of propaganda and BS based off decades old, out-dated biased research.  Thank you state of Arizona.

 

Anyway, as I try to retrieve balance through more serious mediation, may I suggest this week we all focus on two very important questions:

“Who are you?” and “What do you want in life?”*

These two questions are at the heart of psychology, philosophy, and spirituality, and have been asked in a myriad of forms over the ages.

 

Next week I’m going to bring your answers to these questions back to our eternal battle with the ego, but for this week I just want you to spend a few minutes a day and in silence ask yourself these two questions and come up with a list (mental or written down, it doesn’t matter) and be prepared to seriously look at that list soon.

Who are you?

What do you want in life?

PS It might help if you cleared all your chakras mentally before engaging in this if you have the time.  With the chakras cleared of negative energy and filled again with light and love you might get clearer and more preceptive answers.

 

 

 

*No, I’m not quoting a sci-fi show of questionable production values, these are important philosophical questions. Kudos, though if you get the reference.

 

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under 4th Chakra, 5th Chakra, 6th Chakra, 7th Chakra, Chakra, Crown Chakra, Faith, Free Will, God, Individualism, Love, Meditation, New Age, Prayer, Religion, Sacral Chakra. Desires, Seventh Chakra, Sixth Chakra, Solar Plexus Chakra Willpower, Spirituality, The Ego, Third Eye Charka, Throat Chakra

The Dark Knight Rises: First Review–You must see this film

You know how I usually go into great detail when I do a movie review…with spoilers and discussion of philosophy and what not…I’m going to do that, don’t worry, The Snark Who Hunts Back and I are already planning a joint review on those terms…

…but I couldn’t go even minutes without telling everyone to see this movie.  See it this weekend, drag your friends along.  I won’t spoil anything for you, but let me just say that this may surpass Atlas Shrugged Part II as this year’s biggest cinematic “Fuck You and the horse you rode in on” to socialism, Occupy Wall Street, and the Obama campaign message.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

You didn’t build that…

Yes I know I should have a whole article ripping this moron a new one about how little he understands about business.  And I will do it…but right now I have several work projects to get done (because surprisingly I do have to build some things, on my own without this worthless jackass’s help).

In the mean time, enjoy…

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

International Liberty

I’ve defended Mitt Romney for utilizing the efficient financial services sectors of so-called tax havens.

But I may have been focusing on the trees and missed the forest. By highlighting the perfectly legal nature of Romney’s investments and commenting on the valuable role of tax havens in the global economy, I’ve neglected the main argument, which is that people have a right to do whatever they want with their own money and it’s none of our damn business.

What is our business, by contrast, is what politicians are doing with the money they confiscate from us. This Lisa Benson cartoon helps to make that point, though it would be even better if she had written “Romney’s Stash for His Own Money” and “Obama’s Stash for Our Money.”

Obama, needless to say, is an expert at squandering other people’s money, as illustrated by money pits such as the faux stimulus

View original post 107 more words

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Weekly Meditation: Calming the Mind

Okay this is not going to be a long meditation.

As you may have noticed there has been a slight lack of posting here at The Conservative New Ager for the last week or so…

I am juggling my regular work duties with a massive assignment, plus having to go to daily seminars to keep my teaching credential up to date (FYI: All classes you are required to take to keep a teaching credential are utterly worthless and will never make anyone a better teacher…but they will cost you hundreds of dollars and massive amounts of time.  I’m so glad we spend so much time putting such useless burdens on teachers).

In other words: I’m swamped.  My brain is tapioca and while I would love to go into great detail on the nature of the ego and how to kill it, don’t have the time nor mental coherence to do so.

But I have time to breathe.  Slow long breaths.  No thoughts.  No ideas.  No mantra. One or two long breaths that expand not just the chest but the diaphragm as well.  And sometimes that is all the meditation we need.  So, while I might suggest you go back and focus on one of the more detailed meditations this week…remember every time that you are stressed that before you dive into any assignment to take a long slow breath and clear you mind.

We sometimes forget how calming and effective this simple action can be.

Leave a comment

Filed under Chakra, Faith, God, Happiness, Meditation, New Age, Religion, Spirituality

Ramblings of Conservative Cathy – Does Obama understand the word “Irony”?

Obama has some interesting comments:

…“Now, my understanding is that Mr. Romney attested to the SEC, multiple times, that he was the chairman, CEO and president of Bain Capital and I think most Americans figure if you are the chairman, CEO and president of a company that you are responsible for what that company does.
Ultimately Mr. Romney, I think, is going to have to answer those questions, because if he aspires to being president one of the things you learn is, you are ultimately responsible for the conduct of your operations, but again that’s probably a question that he’s going to have to answer and I think that’s a legitimate part of the campaign.”…

So just to sum up, Romney was not only responsible for everything Bain did while he was CEO (but according to Obama, responsible for what happened after he left)…but everything else is Bush’s fault, all Bush’s fault.

The fact that I’m pointing out Obama’s hypocrisy and idiocy…Bush’s fault.

2 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

The Ethical Argument for Capitalism

Now for a more detailed argument for what was on this video you could read the book this video is based on, Arthur Brooks’ The Road to Freedom which came out this year (I have not read it yet, but know Brooks’ work and know it will be a good read…right now I’m working my way through Milton Friedman again so I have all the data to eviscerate Paulbots, and that takes time)…

Or…

You could read Chapters 5 &6 in Republican and Reincarnation which also offer the ethical argument for capitalism.  (I may bit biased in recommending which one you should try first).

1 Comment

Filed under Books, Books for Conservatives, Capitalism, Conservative, Economics, Election 2012, Free Will, Government is useless, Long Term Thinking, Republicans and Reincarnation

Weekly Meditation: Finding yourself in the silence part I

As we continue from last week in our attempt to weaken the ego’s hold on you I am reminded by another line from my favorite musician’s music:

“Don’t believe the things you tell yourself so late at

You are your own worst enemy, you’ll never win the fight.”–Ingrid Michaelson, “Parachute”

The ego whispers in your ear a thousand and one fears and insecurities and makes you believe that they are your fears and your insecurities.  It distracts you with a myriad of false desire to distract you from what you really want. It keep you from knowing how great you really are and focusing on what you really want.

And while we need to replace these false ideas that the ego is putting into your head with correct ones, we first need to ignore the ego. So this week we’re going back to the the old favorite of clearing your mind.  Five minutes, three times a day of thinking of nothing.  Lotus position if you can is the best as it allow for the spine to be straight and the breath to be deep.

Clear you mind.  It takes practice, and the ego will be trying to distract you, so no worries if a random thought intrudes.  Just keep trying to let your mind be blank.

Leave a comment

Filed under Faith, God, Love, Meditation, New Age, philosophy, Prayer, Religion, Spirituality

Ramblings of Conservative Cathy – What to do about these Liberals??

 

I recently got involved with twitter and it has been interesting/educational and fun to some extent.

When you are in the mood you can jump into a conversation and make a comment and then sometimes it will be cordial but often you are attacked. That part does not bother me so much but it is the caliber of the discussion/argument that I have issues with.

Now first before I discuss my problems with Libs let me first list my own shortcomings. I read things or hear things and only take away what I consider important and can never remember where I read it or heard it or which it actually was. Now I know that is a serious problem if debating someone but still I at least know some things (even if I don’t know how I know it), and I can always go and research for documentation if necessary. But generally when quoting a Republican or book written by a Conservative it is so well documented/referenced that you know that it is fairly accurate. I check out some and others that make sense to me or I already know about I don’t. So that delineates my shortcomings. Let me first reiterate that I do check things out – I only resend about 10% (maybe less) of the political emails/tweets I receive as they are not accurate or they are offensive in my opinion. Even conservatives have their morons.

And let me also add this, I talk with libs not to convert but to try and understand – I know, naïve of me, but it is the way I am

Now what I have learned about Liberals –
*They function on feeling (I know shocked right?).
*When they give you documentation it is a biased article or site that has no documentable facts or they only take the statements from an article they like and dismiss the rest of the article. Strange, when I at least like to look at the other side to know what I am fighting against.
* The arguments are circular and pointless
* They cannot see that they contradict themselves with their own ideas
* They cannot follow an idea to an end conclusion
* They do not seem to live in the real world
* They all seem to be victims and looking for the negative
* They need to be cared for
This one is offensive to me especially for women as I went through the women’s lib era and hate to see women now settle for not a man to take care of them but a government instead

*But most of all they do not seem to understand right/wrong and delve into good/bad based on a feeling. They seem unwilling or unable to determine right from wrong and good vs. evil. They want me to tell them how to determine right and wrong. They have no understanding of ethics or morals. They are unwilling to make a judgment and seem willing to relinquish themselves to majority rule/whims. This is the most shocking to me and I am ill equipped to respond to this. I stand on principles that I have arrived at through my whole life (although I must say I have always felt this way to one extent or another) To me right and wrong are generally inherent in oneself although you can discuss some gray areas.
It is always wrong for me to insist that people conduct themselves as I want and I am only concerned when it affects me personally in a harmful manner. This concept is beyond them. They want to control people based on majority beliefs at a particular time. Can they not see that right and wrong in the basic sense never changes.
For example you can discuss abortion and gay issues all day long but until it actually affects your life it should really not concern you. Now asking for me to pay with my tax dollars for an abortion is affecting me or teaching my children things in school that I find offensive is affecting me but otherwise it is a silly discussion for policy/government involvement. But I will always support someone’s right to choose for themselves as long as it does not involve me personally. You can have anything on TV or in movies as long as I can get my money back or am not forced to participate in watching it if it offends me but using my tax dollars to support it is wrong regardless of majority opinion (if it really exists).

This is how I determine these things as long as I am not forced to participate (and taxes are by force) then I do not care and you should not either – just don’t do it (whatever that is) that offends you.

But how is making me do something that I find offensive just because the majority have decided it is so right?
Obviously it is not. Government should not be in the business of making people conduct themselves in a certain way – only protecting them from people trying to harm them. Again I am ill equipped to explain it in a better term to make you understand if you don’t already. But that is what the original intent of the constitution was to protect the people from the majority and from the evil of government not to protect people in general or to control them to meet the majority viewpoint.

If given specific instances I can answer with my opinion as to what the right course is based on ethics/morals/constitution but I am unable to explain it beyond that.

So the point to my rant is how to I convey my logic/thought process to libs when obviously they do not use thought/logic/ethics or morals in determining their thought processes. Not sure they use thought at all as it seems they just group think.

So basically my rant is asking for help in conveying an idea that should be obvious to anyone who can think and see end results. How do you deal in specifics or general thought when it is all over the place?

Or do I concede that they do not think but feel and are not concerned with end results of their feelings?

How do I respond to a different type of thinking?

For example when someone tells me that Germany and all of the Norwegian countries are doing well with socialism – ignoring the fact that they have been reducing their social programs to deal with financial problems – how do I respond when they are oblivious and do not want to see actual facts?

I guess I must accept that ½ the country is incapable of logical thought process – that there is a end result to all actions and they must accept responsibility for that even when it was not what they intended.

Oh well I guess unless I want to have fun there is no point and I still will learn nothing about how they think/ or lack thereof.

Such is the current division of our country. Twitter is not meant for meaningful discussion – this I have learned.

Oh, and as a side note how did we go in women’s rights from not needing a man to take care of us to requiring the government to protect us???

17 Comments

Filed under Capitalism, Constitution, Education, Election 2012, Evils of Liberalism, Government is useless, Individualism, Long Term Thinking, People Are Stupid, politics

Trying To Snatch Defeat From The Jaws of Victory

Is the Republican Party out to kill itself?

I am perpetually bothered by the simultaneous lack of pragmatism and idealism in the GOP when it comes to campaigning this election.

Oh where to start?

(And let’s just ignore that I could get a whole blog off of all the Republicans who complained about the Tea Party that put them back in power in the House.)

Well let’s deal with Mitt Romney.  Nothing this man does makes conservatives happy…which is odd as we have been saying for years we need the common sense and wisdom of the private sector brought to government (check), we need someone with character (check) we need a fiscal conservative (check) we need a foreign policy conservative (check) we need someone  who will stick to their guns but make tactical concessions to achieve the larger goals (check again).  His record and his words are everything we have said we’re looking for (I’ll admit that the reality might fail, but I choose to hope for the best).  But somehow not only are liberals attacking him but our own party seems hell bent to do their job for them.

Now, as any reader of this blog is well aware I loathe the uberliberal RINO team of John McCain and Sarah Palin.  Really hate them.  Bleeding heart liberals and mindless populists who stand for nothing, every inch of them.  But I remembered the 11th Commandment during the election and didn’t publicly hit them every chance I got.  I had hopes of publishing Republicans & Reincarnation before the 2004 election, didn’t work out that way, but there isn’t a single word condemning either McCain or Palin because as much as I loathe them you don’t destroy your party’s brand and reputation over a single person.  But Republicans right now can’t hit Romney fast enough.

Romneycare!  A call which is ignorant of what was included by Romneycare and why Obamacare needs to go.  I’d like to remind Republicans we hate Obamacare for not just the mandate but for all the aspects of it: the loopholes, the creation of the massive bureaucracy, the restrictions of freedom of choice, the worsening of medical care, the destruction of the private sector, the intent to turn us into a single payer system…it’s just the mandate was the easiest thing to attack it on Constitutionally. The only one of those Romneycare has is the mandate (in fact Romneycare was designed to stop the Massachusetts legislature from doing all of that)…but the mandate, you know, the mandate which is unconstitutional to anyone who actually is capable of reading the Constitution (Roberts clearly does not belong in that list) but actually fully constitutional at the state level.  (This is even more ironic that the same people who hit Romney over the constitutional mandate at the state level, will also rightly scream about the federal government overreach in Arizona and that federalism demands that states have powers to act independently of the federal government….oh I see you only like federalism when it matches your beliefs…why are you a conservative again?)

Or “He raised taxes in Massachusetts!”  No he didn’t.  He raised fees (which is how a good libertarian and conservative government raises money) and he closed loopholes in the tax code (again something we conservatives want to do).  Yes it would have been nice if rate reduction had accompanied, but the pseudo-socialism of trying to give breaks to certain groups but not others is just as evil as high taxes.  Better only one evil than two.

I could go on but the fact of the matter so far is that any and all policy attacks on Romney at Bain, at the Olympics or as Governor turn out to be bullshit if you do the research.

But let’s get to the problems of Republicans saying he’s not campaigning hard enough, he’s not hitting Obama enough, he’s not on the attack.  That’s right.  Because we all know how history works.  Did Reagan win against Jimmy Carter by letting Carter always put his foot in his own mouth and then just calmly going “There you go again”?  No, he did it by attacking Carter every minute of every day and calling Carter out as the socialist and anti-Semite that he is.  Oh, no, I got those backwards, Reagan ran a fairly low key campaign constantly jabbing Carter, but letting dim Jimmy do most of the work by constantly talking like the f’ing moron he is…you know, much like Obama is doing.  In fact there are a lot of comparisons to be made between Romney and Reagan. 

But is history enough?  No.  Why should Romney take a national holiday off to spend time with his wife and family, thus showing character, and regaining energy for the push of this coming month.  Why should he take the day off when Obama once again humiliates himself by trying to use the 4th to push legislation no one wants.  No Romney should have been on the campaign trail,  “Get off the jet ski!”  Yes he should be out there politicizing the 4th as well, thus mitigating how much of a jackass Obama looked like making statements about the DREAM Act on the 4th.  Yeah that would have been brilliant.  (And if Romney had been on the campaign I’m sure the same people would be bitching how a real man would spend the holiday with his MS stricken wife and family).

Or in perhaps my favorite move, from Breitbart.com, the site that praised Thomas, Scalia, Alito, and Kennedy as being defenders of conservatism for saying it was an unconstitutional mandate not a tax but chided Romney as not being a conservative for saying it was an unconstitutional mandate not a tax…you have this lovely hit piece ROMNEY WATCH: WEBSITE NOWHERE ON LATEST UNEMPLOYMENT FIGURES (which I give you as  a screen shot because this is just too good to have claims I edited it)

So, ignoring that Romney gave an almost immediate statement

This message was carried on C-SPAN, Fox News, CNN, Drudge, and RealClearPolitics…he made similar comments on Twitter and Facebook.  So I’m not sure what the statement “Where is the Romney campaign?”  Where are you nameless Breitbart writer?  How did you miss all of this?  “Meanwhile Obama’s campaign’s website, Obama’s economic plan is near the top of the page.”

Oh really?  At the top I was greeted with an opportunity to share a meal with Joe Biden if I donate and I get a picture of Joe.  I’ll pay you to keep the dumbfuck away, but not to actually meet him (unless I get to slap him for every dipshit thing he’s said during his term as VP).

Scrolling down I see more begging for money…

And then,  I go up to the “Issues” category and find “Jobs and the Economy”

Now a look at Romney’s campaign…(a note I did not get around to getting these screen shots until 7pm Pacific Coast Time…but I will say this  is the typical kind of stuff you will see on Romney’s site any day).

Hmm…on the top of the Romney page…yeah can’t see a “Jobs & Economy” plan anywhere (A.  Yes it’s the forth slide in a series, but it is there if you’re even there for only a few moments B. This was there last week)

And if I scroll down a little (three things on the economy, one which, The Best of America, I know has been there since Wednesday)

And finally, yep the Jobs & Economic Growth in the same place, under the issues categories.

In other words, the Romney site is three time as blatant about the economic situation as the Obama page.  (Not to mention he’s right about the economy).

Of course my favorite part of the Breitbart hit piece is” The jobless statistics came out nearly three hours ago. Voters looking for answers from Mitt Romney are going to go to his campaign website—“  Three whole hours.  Wow, way to sound like a whiny liberal who needs instant gratification constantly.  Yeah, because for a written piece we should consider what Obama said, construct a well thought out response that attacks it on points…but no, we need an immediate knee jerk prewritten general piece.  Oh and I love how voters on Romney’s site don’t know how he will respond…you know because the 160 page plan with the 59 point plan and the 5 laws he will send to Congress and 5 executive orders he will sign (on day one) hasn’t been there since the early part of the primary…I’m so glad the writer of this piece has taken the last 10 months do his research and not found something that is staring him right in the face.

And to top it all off the Breitbart website let this trash be published without a name.

And you wonder why I think since Breitbart’s death his website has degraded into an MSNBC-esque Romney hit machine.

Oh, and to top it all off…

Then I was told by three people today that this morning’s review of how we stand in the Senate races was overly optimistic. (And two of them were Republicans!)  I’ll grant you the optimistic part, but not the overly.  I made the point that we could win all of the toss up states.  Unlikely but not impossible.  I pointed out a few races that were very likely but with the right set of circumstances (money, boots on the ground donating time and utterly demoralizing the opposition early) we could win them.  With the exceptions of the extreme long shots I posted all the relevant polling data.  I didn’t try to hide anything.  I trust my readers to be able to read and make conclusions on their own.  But apparently the “I’m overly optimistic “ thinks I should not show that we are in a position to win.  Oh yeah that will work.  Let me publish a headline.  “Our odds of winning the Senate is maybe 30%” (Honestly, with the currents winds of change and Obama poisoning the Democrat brand, our odds of taking the Senate are around 90%, but you get the point) …but let’s go with that really cautious line. I’m sure that will bring out the money and the volunteers, I’m sure of that.

“Well that’s not a balanced and dispassionate look at things” I was told.  This isn’t a balanced and dispassionate blog!  I’m sorry if you’ve missed this, but the reason I write is to hasten the demise of ideologies I abhor.  Until Communism, socialism, progressivism, Islamofascism, social conservatism, and isolationism  have all been thrown on the dust heap of history ranking up there with Carthage as moments in history  that not only failed, but failed with everyone involved being destroyed I will keep not being “balanced and dispassionate.”  Now don’t read into that I have illusions that I currently have a huge following or great sway—I have no such illusions—but I’m a high school teacher, I’ve learned the value saving one mind at a time (in case you’re wondering my politics don’t come into my classroom).

I’m sorry but people have to believe that they CAN win.  You have to be truthful, but tell them the good stuff.  Don’t lie, but downplay the weaknesses…because anything dealing with human beings has the risk of becoming self-fulfilling prophecy.  If the Republicans believe that they will win and that they have candidates who will wipe the floor with the liberal scum, then guess what, they’ll donate time, they’ll donate money, they’ll challenge friends and neighbors who insult their candidates and they’ll win a few converts along the way.  However, if you just hit your own side and say that “you’re being overly optimistic” you’ll kill morale and prove that you’re right we can’t win, because if people believe they can’t win, they’ll stay home, keep their money and may not even vote.

But let me be clear about some facts.

Fact 1: Romney is a fiscal and foreign policy conservative and if you say otherwise you’re either ignorant, an idiot or a liar.

Fact 2:  The Republican Party is in the position where it can win a majority in the Senate.

Fact 3: Put Fact 1 & 2 together and you have at least 2 years of very conservative policy and extreme economic growth.

Fact 4: That is worth fighting for.  With words.  With money.  With time donated.

Fact 5: If you’re just going to naysay and complain and speak against Facts 1 & 2 you’re not helping.

I don’t know what is wrong with this part of the Conservative party that seems hellbent on self-destruction, but I do know I will not give in.  We will fight and WE WILL WIN in November.

Leave a comment

Filed under American Exceptionalism, Anti-Semitism, Budget, Capitalism, Conservative, Constitution, Debt, Economics, Election 2012, Evils of Liberalism, GOP, Government is corrupt, Government is useless, Long Term Thinking, Mitt Romney, NeoConservative, Obama, Patriotism, People Are Stupid, philosophy, politics, Problems with the GOP, Ronald Reagan, Taxes, Tyranny