Opression, Defined (or, rather, DEFIED)

There is but one obligation of the free man; it is his only encumbrance.

The free man must always, at all costs, resist chains.

To do otherwise would make him, therefore, enslaved.

A rhetorician would argue that by definition the very need to resist is by default a form of enslavement.

Death itself being the great liberator, there is but a slice of difference in it – for it is in the resistance (just as Christ’s resistance of Satan’s temptation) that we find our great release.

The promised land is simply that.

The free man resisting the chains oppression (including the one of his own heart and mind).

And what are the chains that bind?

Corporations being taken over by a slum lord from throne on high; lofty-minded individuals full of “principles” who seek to inflict and restrain all others by same selfish principle; those who use agenda to control all they survey.

It is their way, or the highway.

The free man would always choose the path that leads to greater freedom.

Our forefathers chose that path.

The liberators of death camps and slaves and those behind the iron curtain sought, selflessly, to take the blessings of liberty to all lands and extend them to all peoples.

Liberty can never be unrestrained for by unleashing it in its entirety, it can, through the liberty of one, inflict restraints on others; the great restraint is in the liberal application of liberty (so much so, that all are truly free).

As the saying goes, our liberty extends to the point that our neighbor’s nose begins.

It is incumbent that we not slug him, irrespective of the temptation.

However, it also incumbent on all who value freedom to take every opportunity to smash the very “taint” of anything resembling enslavement.

At every turn of the screw, at every stab of the knife, we must counter with ever-increasing opportunity for both resistance to the chain, and promotion of greater liberty throughout the world.

This is the hallmark of the American.

This is what defines us.

No matter the cost, we must always defy oppression!

The Swansong(s)

Well, gentle readers, I guess you could tell by my recent posts that I have been getting “way” too personal, and that my tone and mood have been “way” too final.

Admittedly, I have been toying the idea of ceasing and desisting on the publication of “The Precipice” (or, Precipii, as you may wish).

The thing is…I’ve had a crisis of conscious where some of my content has been concerned.

I today empathize with Lee Atwater.

I can’t remember if I’ve written a column about ol’ Lee, but he was essentially one of the pioneers of “attack” politics (one might say he was “causally” in league with the likes of  James Carville, Karl Rove, Jody Powell (predecessor) or Robert Gibbs).

The bottom line, he developed cancer and then became “penitent” for his “evil” ways (the rabid, attack dog of his healthier days).

Some said the same thing happened to someone who I am very much a fan of, Barry Goldwater (1, 2, 3).

Philosophy aside, I remember so vividly seeing him at our local airport when I was just a boy (a very small boy – some believe I really, never, was small, but…), ahem.

It was my memory that his coming to my little town eclipsed even the Reagan revolution.

It was magic.

Anyhow, some said that Goldwater got soft in his old age.

There is a story I once heard that at some point in time a liberal and a conservative got together, sat down, laid out their objectives, and found that they were virtually identical.

The one said to the other “Liberal: be my running mate.”

The conservative pondered, so I am told.  Considered (which is astoundingly remarkable to me, and perhaps a foreshadow of things to come), but ultimately, he declined.

The liberal, if memory serves, was John Fitzgerald Kennedy.

The conservative…Barry Goldwater.

The bottom line is, the end game may always be the same.

It may be that both “think” they know what is “best” for America.

Now, as we watch history unfold before our eyes, we are seeing the genesis of the methodology one would use to achieve these “grand” objectives (round up the usual suspects).

OK, so I’m diverging.

The point is, we all may have a crisis of conscious at varying times (often tied to varying events).

The bottom line, after careful consideration, there is no way in hell that I will close “The Precipice”.

I owe it to my readership to continue publishing, and further, I owe it to my country.

Any who truly believe in freedom MUST shout the truth from the rooftops.

The Precipice is my vantage, and as long as you look up, you will find this raptor on its edge quietly peering down and awaiting his opportunity to descend on his prey.

I could become “terminal” tomorrow (thank God I haven’t, yet) – but if I did, I believe that someone, even if only a lone specimen, somehow that lone eagle will continue to soar.

Long live freedom of speech, long live The Precipice, and long live America (for, all of the above means, long live me and thee).

Until next time, readers – keep on soaring above the clouds with your eyes forever fixed on the rats below.

The Hessian with an Agression for Oppression.

need I say more?

Yo, anti-semite, or simite-sam --- is yo is, o is yo a'int? Cuz, I damn sho know what I damn is...

There comes a time!

There comes a time, when one must assess!

All that is, that makes this mess.

There comes a time, when one must think,

what brought us here, unto this brink?

And then, by rights, one has to ask,

how is it so, that I must task?

This evil deed, that I must do,

in spite of all, that I construe?

Evil is, as evil do,

and I, today, shan’t misconstrue.

For all that seems is prone to be,

all that is, and all we see.

This life goes on, what is defined,

and I become that life, refined.

I’m now defiled by group onset,

as outcast now, and now bereft.

But mad ’tis is, as mad doth do,

pray for thy soul, for thy soul construed.

For as it is, as is defined…

Farewell, dear friends.

This life, ’tis mine!

The Edge Gives Way

The eagle’s talon this week have found themselves grasping at loose rock.

All you base jumping, loyal fans beware.

The Precipice is a high perch, and from its lofty height one can view (most) all things (grand, ain’t it?).

But it is a long way down (thank God for wings).

It has been my (ahem) firm commitment to keep all (yeah, right) things personal off the pages of the Precipice.  Those of you who have followed since its inception will remember the various sites and providers we have used (I went back and checked our posts and we have been with WordPress for well-more than a year now…doesn’t seem possible – but we have received no ill complaints and I’m relatively happy here as publisher-in-chief).

Well, on to the personal items.

An eventful week.

A friend approached me about another friend who is what many modern (and mainstream) Christians are referring to as “seekers” (I don’t particularly like this term, but I’m not expending the brain juice to come up with one better, so, it suffices).

Essentially, it set me to thinking about this whole “process” of getting sheep into the fold (and more apt, keeping sheep in the fold).

Now, this takes on whole new meaning if you apply the concept of witness to that of “statesmanship”.

Specifically, I reference the news that the GREAT state of Oklahoma has (for all intents and purposes) declared its sovereignty.

YEEE-HA!

As a sovereign individual, I applaud them (I wish Tennessee had that kind of backbone).

I’m not “in the army now”, and I’ll be damned if I’m taking orders from anybody.

While the United States militia is for all intents and purpose a “purely” socialist entity (we are yo momma and yo daddy boy – yo in the army now) – I’m still a freeborn man, and a capitalist.

Screw the army (and the rest of the quasi-socialist entities).

But I had a friend the other night ask me “Do you really think the federal government is going to allow them to do that?” (declare sovereignty, that is).

Well, let’s think about that.

What can they do to stop them?

Our troops are spread out over the entire planet.

If they were to turn troops on Oklahoma, every state in the Union would reconsider its “affiliation”.

There is nothing wrong, that I can see, with being sovereign.  It simply means that like all Americans, you ain’t gonna put up with anybody’s crap.

Now, that’s the real American way.

But back to the analogy.

I got to thinking about the symbol of the minister, preacher, deacon and warden (generally, any leader of the flock) – the staff.

You know, so many think it is used to prod the strays back into the fold.

I grew up around farm animals, so I know what it is to get them in a line, keep them in a line and “herd” them to a coral or through a chute, or into a trailer or up on a truck.

You do have to try and keep them in line, or else the whole heard resorts to its true nature and scatters to the winds.

Now, I’m from the school that ascribes to “gentle” prodding.  Just a poke in the shoulder.

If one escapes, I’ll let it go.  Round it up later, after I’ve corralled the herd.

But I don’t believe in beating them bloody.  I’ve known some who do.

The other thing that most people do not realize is that prodding is not something one had to do very often with a well-trained herd.

They typically just fall into routines.

They follow the leader (the other a-hole out in front of him).

It’s their nature.

The real use of the prod is not so much to keep them in line, but rather, to keep the wolves at bay.

That is when the stick becomes weapon (not unlike many Christians who turn it against the flock – man, I’ve not been physically abused, but the kinds of mental torture I’ve endured at some of their “PSYOPS” “witnessing” have been worse than any physical pain I’ve endured, and that includes football, wrestling, boxing and long-distance hikes.

Once they get to thumpin’ them bibles, you can sometimes feel like you are caught inside a drum.

I believe that if you look at the predicament faced by B.O., you see the same concept at work.

He has a “straggler” in Oklahoma.  Texas too (you listening, Tennessee??? “T” for Tejas, “T” for Tanasai).

How he proceeds will shape what the rest of the herd will do.

To my friends who ask “do I really think the Federal Government will allow this?”, I respond “do you think they really have a choice?”.

If BO turns his staff on the Oklahomans, he’ll wind up fighting that battle all over.  As each state declares its independence from BO’s staff and sceptor, so too will they declare their National Guardsmen.

Then what?  Civil war?

I think not.

Essentially what we have is something like a massive weight that is pressing down on the states, and all their citizenry.

Something has to give when that kind of pressure is applied.

You see the same happening right now with California and the President’s approach to it.

This is not the time for a cavalier attitude, nor is it the time to wield that staff like a weapon.

Your sheep are not the problem.

It is the cruel master who usually suffers when his critters “turn on him”.

But this is the true nature of radicalism.  It doesn’t care about people, it only cares about its agendas and its objectives.

This is what happens when undue pressures are applied and applied unfairly (and what undue pressure is not unfair).

I don’t think I need to iterate them here for you, but what the hell (wouldn’t want any to misconstrue) – the dismantling of capitalism, the powergrab with the money in the banks (or with the seats in the Senate), the “fairness” doctrine (gag order), doing away with the secret ballot used to vote a union in or out, redistribution of wealth through home loans and bailouts, essentially absorbing US corporations (banks, automotive) and then dictating who their CEO’s will be (and being “choosy” in who gets multi-million dollar bonuses and who does not)…this list can go on, and on, and on, and on.

If this is not turning the staff against the flock, then I do not know what is.

Now, this Christian believes whole-heartedly in stating a case for the “sheeples”…let the sheep decide between staying within the boundary of the trail and the staffs that man its flanks, or to go out into the wilderness and take their chances with the wolves.

Now, I’m someone who has spent a lot of time in the wilderness, and I like it (but, then, I am a Shepherd – literally)…I’m not afraid because I know the secrets of dealing with the wolves.  I know how to keep them at bay.

It is unfortunate, but most of the flock does not.

Arrogant.

You’re damned right.

Self-righteous?  I’ll just let you decide that one.

The fact is, I would NOT want to be in the Chief Shepherd’s shoes right now.

There are grumblings within the herd, and when the herd ain’t happy…

Add the storms of pestilence, disease, war and famine (joblessness) to the mix, and you have the makings for an epoch period of colossal, biblical proportion.

How to avert it?

I would say that the staffs should only be wielded as weapon when there is real peril that the herd will be attacked by wolves.

When you have a so-called “seeker” wishing to join the herd, be leery, but also, be especially gentle and careful with that soul.

When they come into the flock, you want them to feel comfortable being there.

The wilds are a crazy place (and, as I said, I prefer them as I don’t have to deal with a bunch of a-hole following a-holes)…but, I know what it is like to come back into the herd as well.

Its kinda stark and lonely beyond the perimeter of the pathway.  There is much more opportunity to “do good” out there, but there is a sigh of relief within the ranks.

Life inside the herd can be a comfortable place, but under the leadership of a cruel Shepherd, it can be horrendous – so much so, I’d prefer dealing with the entire universe of wolves (and all their predatory cousins).

So, the eagle flies and seeks another perch on high, another precipice in which to latch his talon (don’t worry WordPress – it will be within your universe).

God, here’s hoping that it is always solid ground (dolomite) looking down on fertile hunting ground!

REVOLTING !

Art is either plagiarism, or revolution.

-Paul Gauguin

Headline Views:

“China and U.S. Ships Clash in South Sea”

“US Banks Need Billions and Billions More”

“Obama Feels Pressure on Gay Issues”

Oklahoma, Texas and Others Considering Autonomy

hmmmmm….

Well, above is your plagiarism.

Precipii quotes (or misquotes – all from memory) headlines of the “hundred days”.

Now, Gauguin’s quote is direct.

I always liked Paul Gauguin.  His paintings of Island girls were…stimulating (to say the least).

But there was something more to them than an image evocative of lustful interests (although, lust takes many forms – lust for life, lust for money, lust for food).

There is no doubt is work is ethereal.

What I always liked about them was that for me, I had thoughts of paradise.

Everything about them looked so…easy.  It was as if there was no strife on these islands, as if it were eden.

Gauguin’s sense of humor (and a hint at the subject with the suspended apples) is illustrated in the link above.

If you haven’t taken note, many of Precipii’s articles have of late been focused on the concept of good and evil.

One could argue that it is all about perspective.

One looks at the paintings, and he (or she) could think of a beautiful place, like eden, and then dream of what life on the other side must be like.

As long as the dream does not become wanderlust, one can still go about one’s life and in it, perhaps, remind oneself that a little bit of Gaugin is all around.  Looking for hints of paradise in everyday life.

Goodness then becomes not only a frame of mind, but also something that resides in the heart.

Now the down side of all this is that one might become as the hippies and spend every waking moment seeking paradise – trying to “re” create it here on earth (silly humans, trying to go beyond emulating God and in kind becoming (what the halleucenagenic hippie perceives, anway)…becoming God.

Now we get to the crux of what truly constitutes blasphemy.

Taking the name of God in vain is crossing that threshold and believing oneself to be God.

“God will not hold him guiltless.”

So, there ya go.

Tells me to stay away from halleucenagins and hippies and utopians and socialists and focus more on how to plant and cultivate a golden delicious apple tree.

By the way, were you aware that Eve did not (necessarily) consume an apple?  Biblically, it only references as a fruit – no specifics – (could have been a peach on that tree of evil).

Well, moving right along.

Precipii must always take the little moments to englighten…hmmmm.

So, we have a lot of bad news lately.

Reminds me of that song “So you had a bad day” (I would add “Mr. President in there somewhere, but hey, that’s just how we roll).

I suppose it is no joking matter that ships are scraping one another down China way.

Or that Kommiczar Pelosi is appropriating “billions and billions” to the banks (you’d think with all this money they’d be able to build a death star or something and ship all the home loan defaulters “up there” to man the ship).

Oh well, again with the sad sarcasm (I wonder if this, yet, defines the sardonic) ?

Now for this writer, it is the distinction (or lack of ability to distinguish) between sarcasm (good) and the sardonic (bad, bad, bad – fifty licks with a ruler).

Gaugin: Symbols of Good and Evil: wrestling.

Sardonic is when you cross the line.

Sardonic is when SNL depicts Sarah Palin as a back-alley, coathanger abortionist or a guest on the Springer show.

But then SNL has never been known for its good taste.

Essentially, real people on the show can be reduced to the Southpark cartoon kids.

You’ll not find enlightment, but a great deal of nervous laughter.

But isn’t this, really, what we have become?

No more can we distinguish between light-hearted humor and the morose sardonic as all sacrasm today has crossed that line.

Where Guaguin “winks”, Chevy Chase wears a black and darkened hood.

Placing this mask on one’s face, the world becomes a dark and evil place.  There is no good in it.

The wrestling match is won.

So here is my “thought for the day” – in spite of the headlines, seek ye the goodness first.

Look about the world in a light-hearted fashion, and find that paradise that already exists (wrought by the true master’s hand).

And try and find a little true sarcasm while you are at it.

It never hurts to laugh at ourselves.

Now, if only the bitter and halleucenagenic hippie could learn to do that.

You listening, Chevy?  Senator-elect Franken? Steve Martin?  Tina Fey? (oops).

Hope so.

Be nice to see something really funny for a change!

Oh, and thank you Mr. Gauguin – for making this world a little more beautiful.

For more on Gauguin .

The Duality of Contention

Its Sin, and its Virtue

It is both contemptible, and it is praiseworthy.

On the one hand, contention is the hallmark of the loyal opposition.

On the other, it is the bane of the ruling class.

So what is the fine, divining line for what represents “good” contention?

One must first analyze the concepts of both good, and evil.

The rational mind can easily make such determinations.

For example, when a duck is roasting above an open campfire, “fire is good”; however, put yourself in the place of the duck in the form of a house fire, and “fire is bad”.

The rationalist would say that it is futile to measure, or to try and measure, good and evil.

They would say that it is all based on perspective.

I suppose they’d have somewhat the conundrum on their hands were it to be their cousin, Eddie the duck, who transpires in his house due to fire…but the rationalist would probably say “ah, just go ahead and chow down on old Eddie – never was worth much anyway – oughtta do somebody some good in death, since he didn’t in life”.

I would argue that there is evil in this rationale.

What are you willing to sacrifice so that there can be an improvement in your own condition?  Moreso, what are you willing to see others sacrifice for your own hide?

Being in the minority party now, contention takes on somewhat a “new” light for me.  Now I am forced to defend all, and I am forced to do so by a party that basically falls into the category of the cold rationalist.

They will do whatever it takes to hold on and survive.

I am reminded of spoiled brats I grew up with who would do most anything to “get their way”.

Well, I’m afraid that my contention is a bit different.

I am not willing to sacrifice others for my own sake.

I am, however, most willing to put them in harm’s way for something that is beneficial to us all.

For example, I will not sacrifice one company to save another, when through tried and true principles (free market enterprise), they could both be salvaged.

I was twenty hours from receiving a minor in business, and I remember vividly the mantra of our professors, from econ to business management they railed “Profit is King”.

From the standpoint of business operating in a capitalist system, there is absolute truth in this statement.

The unfortunate thing is, we are no longer a capitalist system (some say never to be again, but I disagree – all things are possible with God, and I believe, free men).

Henry Ford once said “they can have any car they want as long as it is black and a Model T”.

General Motors introduced the concept of a paint line.

People could have a choice.

And boy, did they ever choose.

So much so, that the concept of diversification took on new life.

From the concept sprang not only paint lines, but different car lines.

What was once one, became many.

Cadillac, Pontiac, Chevrolet, Oldsmobile, GMC (and I’m sure I’m leaving some out) – the concept grew into the titan.

I learned, also in business school (and probably before through friends and other classes) that the Japanese have a saying that “on a clear day, you can see Mt. Fuji” (the island chain, I understand, is more extensive than meets the eye in Japan and I’m sure it is akin to my seeing my smoky mountains from far reaches – reminding me of home).

A book came out once entitled “On a Clear day, you can see GM”.

General Motors is one of the flagship corporations that made this nation strong.

It is in part what has stood as a rampart of sorts.  It is one tier in a lined fortress.

ALCOA, IBM, US Steel, Unisys, Microsoft…the list can go on, and on ad infinitum.  Each one represents a rampart in our fortress.

And now we have the voice of “change”.

“Mr. Obama, tear down those walls!”.

Yeah.

It is one thing to tear down a wall that is oppressive and designed to keep people in.

But let’s consider, these are multi-national corporations.   They employ people all over the world.

They are not designed to either keep people in, or keep people out.

Theirs, is but one mission.

Profit.

They are not prejudiced.

I once worked for a heavy metals company.  I remember fondly how they would say, “we know how to do one thing, and we know how to do it well.  We make that metal.  That metal is our pay.  We do it right because we know there is a reward in the end in the form of our paychecks that we get from making the stuff. It is what we do”.

Now we have Obama and his merry band telling us that they have it all wrong.  That somehow, this needs to be changed.

It is not “fair” that they should make a profit through their hard work when others do not.

Horseshit.

Fair.

You want fair?

Fair is seeing the feather-bedding sons-a-bitches getting off their assess and help the rest of the world turn a profit.  That is fair.

Fair is having a system where everyone is expected to pull their weight.

Fair is a world free from muzzles of the kind Congress and BO’s stinking plans want to place on blogs and talk radio through the “fairness” doctrine.

HORSESHIT!

There is no fairness in their regulation (UNLESS your lazy ass is laying in a feather bed).

He is single-handed tearing down what this nation has built from dust.

He is taking a thriving, positive system and turning it into one that “plays favorites”.

He is essentially reducing it to the lowest common denominator, the sluggish, apathetic sorry piece of shit laying in a feather bed while others accept risk and build civilization.

I am no rationalist when it comes to good and evil.

I believe that any can see the difference between the two.

There can be no good in dismantling through regulation.

The bible states that evil will twist the truth and use it to its own devices.

I believe we are witnessing this first-hand.

There is no good in the policies that are being forced down the throat of this nation today.

What we have is an evil Pygmalion one with an intent not to improve the lot of some lowly individual (what was lowly about American capitalism – once the envy of the world?).

What we have is someone with their own concept of what is righteous and good, and yet from what I see, there is no good in any of his policies.

To destroy what was once something others held in high esteem – where is the good in that?

I remember when Russians (before the wall came down) – when common Russians desired to wear Levi jeans.

We took them for granted.  They were “knocking around” clothes.

They were prized behind the iron curtain.

What is evil in that?

Rampant greed?

Sure, if the object is greed.  But what if it is simply to have a quality pair of durable britches that happen also to be (in some individual estimation)…stylish?  Is that evil?

I always detested that teacher from school who would say “if you bring bubble gum into the class, you have to bring one for everybody”.

Like hell.

It was my ass that was out on the weekends picking up bottles to turn them in for coins with which to buy the bubble gum.

Let the other bastards get out in the hot sun and pick up bottles so that they too can enjoy and nice, juicy chew in school.

What is unfair is for you to expect me to work double-time for the damned lazy slugs who would not get up off their fat assess to change their minds, much less earn a piece of bubble gum.

Contentious.

Your damned right.

But I believe that mine is a form of contention that stands for what is true, and what is right, and therefore, what is righteous.

No more mister nice-guy.

It is time to take off the gloves, and fight for my damned piece of bubble gum.

Speak! (but don’t listen)

So I catch this Connie Shultz on C-SPAN this morning talking about Dick Cheney.

She says that if he’s a real patriot that he should shut up.

I got pissed, got up and poured a cup of coffee and come back to hear her telling one of the Demonrat callers what they should do to counter the opinions on the right.

She tells them to write their congressmen, to right letters to the editor and to start blogs.

Wow.

We should simply shut our mouths so that they can be heard whining and moaning some more.

Yeah.

Just like a Demonrat to stand up for our Constitution, but only when it is convenient to their causes.

Well, I’m here to tell ya, I ain’t shuttin up.

I hope Cheney doesn’t shut up either.

Hell, I even encourage every one of you – let YOUR voices ring out.

Don’t be stifled by these bastards on the left.

They want to control everything from the boardroom to the bathroom (reference BO’s CEO “implants” at the helms of banks and auto manufacturers, or old Cousin Al Gore’s six-gallon toilet that won’t even flush one of my little pooches contributions to the environment).

(For “more gore on Gore” see 1, 2, 3, 4).

These people are arrogant scum who think that they (and their lousey opinions) are all that matters.

It is high time to let them know different.

At every opportunity, let them know what you think.

You do still matter, in spite of their self-righteous opinion.

Just a Spoon Full of Sugar

In his article in the New York Times, “Seeking to Save the Planet, with a Thesaurus”,  John M. Broder quotes “an e-mail account” of a study by a group called EcoAmerica.

Essentially, what his article is saying (and please, don’t take my word for it – read it for yourself) – what I see him saying in his article is that the message that is being sent on the business of global warming needs a sugar coating to make it easier to swallow.

When I was a kid, we used to use tobacco spit or licorice on our lures.  Supposedly it would take the human scent off our artifial bait and make them more palatable for the fish, thus making them easier to swallow – hook, line and sinker.

Uh, yeah.

Well, I don’t know about you, but I’m not swallowing this whole concept put out by the libs.

When I was in “PR School” (where I studied, it was a “subsidiary” of the journalism school), they taught us that the best approach to use in a PR campaign is the truth.

As a case study, they liked to cite the poisoned Tylenol case.

Poison.

Now there is an interesting concept.

Poison can be construed as anything that kills ya.

Kryptonite is poison to Superman (and, apparently the truth, to the new, “super” man); with Samson it was his lust for Delilah, and we have all heard of politicians who are so drunk with power that power itself became their poison (reference any number of Caesars, Boss Tweed, Adolph Hitler or Sadaam Hussein – a lust for power became their poison).

Well now we have to listen to a bunch of pseudo-scientists tell us that we can take a little sugar with their message and suddenly it will become as crystal-clear as the truth they keep telling us that they are telling (my Grandmother called them “fibs”).

True public relations is just that.

Relating, or relaying, to the public the best, possible representation of the truth (anything that is “re-counted” is a representation of the truth – you had to “be there” to actually see it).

What gets relayed is of extreme importance.

This is why you want your message, as a professional, to be as close to the absolute truth as you can get it (and remember, there are few absolutes – God and Christ are the only two that come to my mind). They “think” they have absolute zero pegged at minus 270° Kelvin, but who knows when they will again break that low point – some say “never”, but then, “never” is another absolute.

Well, I don’t know about you but if it is workable and a decent representation, I won’t need a spoonful of sugar to help make it go down.

Oh, and last time I checked, hook, line and sinkers ain’t medicine and the only thing they are designed to do is get sucker-fish on board the boat.

You want me to swallow something that ultimately leads to my getting hooked and brought aboard your boat when I know for damned sure I am a whole lot better off swimming free in the ocean with all the other little fishes.

I don’t think so.

So here’s an idea for those wishing to re-package the “greening” of America – how about a good, healthy dose of the truth?

Begin by talking about the complexities of our global weather system.

See, I think part of the problem is, well, it is with the messenger himself.

These alarmists want you to think that the world exists in some kind of petri dish or laboratory Erlingmyer flask.

They fail to mention that this “biosphere” is not contained in any of their laboratory experiments.

This “bubble” floats on a black sea of bubbles called the universe.

There are so many forces at work – and they work in different fashions at different times.  Physics, chemistry, astro-physics – man, God made one heck of a vast and complex system.

I think he wanted us to have a toy we would never get tired of trying to solve.  Unlike the Rubik’s cube, every twist in the universe just leads to another turn.

The solution always lies with how we deal with the current conditions – how do we “weather” the storm.

With its complexity, the global system can not be placed in one of their categorical bubbles or petri dishes.

The system changes, adapts, improvises.

It simply sustains itself through adjustment.

Like a machine that recalibrates itself to changing conditions.

The problem, in my estimation, is that the party of change really doesn’t deal that well with change.  What they deal well with is regulation.

The day will probably come when they try and put a governor on the earth itself, to control its spin.

They’ll ulitimately do so much regulating that the top will simply spin out of control.

I remember what I was taught as a child – little boys who play in the fire will pee in the bed.

The liberal’s intellectual answer to a changing global environment is to get a spoonful of sugar, use a new bait, or try obfuscation and re-packaging to make the message easier to swallow.

It is like calling the perfect storm a Summer shower.

Well I don’t know about you, but I see force-feeding as their next move.

I think we’ve learned what they are all about.

To quote Elvis Presley, how about a little less conversation and a little more action.

Don’t simply “tell” us what is wrong with our world, show us.

And here is one better -

Show us what your “change” is doing to improve this situation that you, in your “peace, love and drugs” -world so self-righteously perceive and then so unjustly force on the rest of us living here on planet earth.

Just simply show us the truth that you keep telling us that you are telling.

Let us decide how we are going to deal with it.

As to your licorice-coated hooks and lures – I’m spitting them out.

Your boat just don’t float this old country boy, and personally, I don’t think there is a one of us who wants to become sushi for one of our President’s gala events.

It is like being on a fishing expedition with people who nothing about fish, lakes, boats, rods, reels or tackle – but they know everything about what consitutes positive change.

I think it is time land-lovin’, tree-huggin’ hippies stick to the shore.

Stifling the Harbinger

Stifling Americans for over 100 Days.

Article from “Big Hollywood”.