CONSPIRACY? NAH, COINCIDENCE.

.
“For a long time it had seemed to me that our government was too complicated in its machinery and that we had outgrown our Constitution. It has been by constant wonder that our people were willing to go along without protest with such an inefficient machine.”
~ Edward Mandell House,
founder of the Council On Foreign Relations (CFR),
explaining in a July 10, 1922 letter why he wrote his book ‘Philip Dru: Administrator.’

[We have] “a defective government, defective in machinery and defective in its constitution and laws. ... Our Constitution and our laws served us well for the first hundred years of our existence, but under the conditions of to-day they are not only obsolete, but even grotesque.”
~ Edward Mandell House
House's viewpoint through the protagonist in his 1912 novel ‘Philip Dru: Administrator’ [pages 124 & 180]

[The United States are] “hold-outs, more concerned with the sovereignty of nations than with the ultimate sovereignty of peoples.”
~ Kingman Brewster (CFR member)
writing in the 1971, 50th Anniversary edition of ‘Foreign Affairs’ - the official publication of the Council On Foreign Relations

“An end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.”
~ Richard Gardner (CFR member)
writing in ‘Foreign Affairs’, 1974

Over and over again, it has been stated by various researchers that one of the principal goals of the Council On Foreign Relations, founded primarily by Edward Mandell House in New York on July 29, 1921, is the creation of a single global government. Think what this would mean for the U.S. Constitution and the liberties secured for you by the Bill Of Rights. Well, they simply wouldn’t exist any longer, would they? Unless, of course, this global government is to be formed on the basis of our American system. Can you see Russia and China and Iran and India and Pakistan and Cuba adopting our Constitution and Bill Of Rights? I didn’t think so.

Now, irrational people - those folks who worry about every little thing and tend to make mountains out of mole hills - they get concerned (unduly nervous, if you axe me) when confronted by the fact that since 1940, every single Secretary Of War/Secretary Of Defense (with the possible exception of Louis Arthur Johnson) has been a member of the Council On Foreign Relations. It looks like this:

Henry Stimson [1940-1945]
Robert Patterson
James Forrestal
Louis Johnson (non-member?)
George Marshall
Robert Lovett
Charles Wilson
Neal McElroy
Thomas Gates, Jr.
Robert McNamara
Clark Clifford
Melvin Laird
Elliott Richardson
James Schlesinger
Donald Rumsfeld
Harold Brown
Caspar Weinberger
Frank Carlucci
Dick Cheney
Lesley Aspin
William Perry
William Cohen
Donald Rumsfeld (again)
Robert Gates [2009]

And, OK, yes, it’s also true that every Secretary Of State since 1929, except for James Byrnes and our own Nurse Hellary Ratched, has been a member of Edward Mandell House’s Council On Foreign Relations:

Henry Stimson [1929-1933]
Cordell Hull
Edward Stettinius
James Byrnes (non-member)
George Marshall
Dean Acheson
John Foster Dulles
Christian Herter
Dean Rusk
William Rogers
Henry Kissinger
Cyrus Vance
Edmund Muskie
Alexander Haig
George Schultz
James Baker
Lawrence Eagleberger
Warren Christopher
Madeleine Albright
Colin Powell
Condoleeza Rice
Hillary Clinton (non-member) [2009]

Hokey-Smoke! What sort of gambling odds do you suppose you could have gotten in 1928 if you had placed a bet that regardless of whether the Democrat or Republican party controlled the White House, 20 of the next 22 Secretaries Of State would come from one private, non-governmental organization, and that beginning in 1940, 23 of the following 24 Secretaries of War/Defense would come from that same non-governmental organization?

Thank goodness our current Secretary Of State Hellary Clinton is not a member of the Council On Foreign Relations or else I would begin to think that there’s something fishy going on here. Hellary’s wife Bill was a CFR member, but the one who wears the pants in the Clinton household is not affiliated with the CFR. Whew! Doesn’t that make you breathe easier?

On page 7 of its August 17, 2009 issue, The New American magazine published this:

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is not a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, but she is very familiar with the influential private organization and its impact on U.S. foreign policy. She made this very clear, in fact, when she spoke at the CFR’s branch office in the nation’s capital on July 15.

Introduced for her speech by Council President Richard N. Haass, Clinton began by thanking him for his kind words and expressing delight at being able to be at the relatively new CFR outpost “down the street from the State Department.” She noted that she had often been inside the “mother ship in New York City,” meaning the CFR’s main headquarters at Park Avenue and 68th Street. But after issuing these innocuous pleasantries, she told her very friendly audience: “We get a lot of advice from the Council, so this will mean I won’t have as far to go to be told what we should be doing and how we should think about the future.”

Now, granted even though Nurse Hellary Ratched isn’t a CFR member, that does come off sounding as if the U.S. State Department is being dictated to by some private, non-governmental organization beyond the oversight of We The People. But this simply cannot be the case because I never voted in favor of an exclusive group forming foreign and domestic United States policy, and if you didn’t vote for that either, then it can’t be happening.

Comrades, don’t worry - be happy! There is no conspiracy here; you’re being paranoid. This doggtor’s prescription to relieve your mental anguish?... Take two episodes of ‘LOST AMERICAN STEROIDATORS ON NASCAR IDOL ISLAND’ and call me in the morning.

~ Doggtor Stephen T. McCarthy, S.A. with a Ph.D. in B.S., and an S.O.B. who’s S.O.L.
.

RAPING THE WHOLE WORLD (And Getting Away With It)

.
"Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws."
~ Amschel Mayer Rothschild

Actually, inflation is a tax, a hidden one the public generally doesn't perceive as such.
~ James Perloff

When the Fed produces more currency, making prices rise, who do we blame? Not the Fed. Not politicians. Instead, we blame the local retail store. "Why are you guys jacking up your prices?" Or we blame the candy company for making smaller chocolate bars, or the cereal company for putting less corn flakes in the box. But these businesses are simply trying to cope with the same dilemma as we are: inflation. The culprit is the Federal Reserve, and the problem is not that prices are going up, but that money's value is going down.
~ James Perloff

The following article appeared the day before yesterday in the Airheadzona Repugnant newspaper:

August 25, 2009

OBAMA WANTS BERNANKE FOR 2nd TERM

Associated Press

OAK BLUFFS, Mass. - Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, widely credited with taking aggressive action to avert an economic catastrophe after the financial meltdown last fall, will be nominated by President Barack Obama for a second term, the Associated Press learned Monday night.

Obama plans to make the announcement today during a break from his vacation on Martha's Vineyard. A senior administration official discussed the nomination on the condition of anonymity because it was not yet public.

In remarks prepared for the announcement, Obama praised Bernanke for leading the country through a financial crisis and, with his expertise on the Great Depression, helping to prevent a similar crisis.

"Ben approached a financial system on the verge of collapse with calm and wisdom, with bold action and outside-the-box thinking that has helped put the brakes on our economic free-fall," Obama said in prepared marks.

In sticking with Bernanke, Obama is looking to reassure the financial sector as well as foreign central banks that his administration has no plans to change course on its largely well-received approach to rescuing the industry from its meltdown or its management of overall monetary policy.

Bernanke has won admiration from Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill even as some lawmakers have urged him to retain the Fed's independence.

The only thing sadder than the fact that everything in this article is a lie, is the fact that very few Americans could recognize that.

Let’s start with the obvious: USAP did not choose to keep Ben Bernanke on as the Fed chairman. That decision was made for USAP by our “Monopoly Money Manipulators” and he’s simply announcing it and playing the part of one in authority so as to give the appearance to the Americonned People that the President is running the show and the Federal Reserve is subservient to the government of We The People.

The court jester does not appoint the king to his throne; the king selects the court jester. Anyone who doesn’t realize that the Federal Reserve is the king of this kingdom, that person has no real understanding of how their government and country operates. If the Federal Reserve had told USAP that it wanted Pee Wee Herman named as the new Fed chairman, guess what would have happened. USAP would have crapped in his pants and then nominated Pee Wee Herman for the new Fed chief.

And if a president refused to follow orders from the “Money Trust”? Well, I would urge everyone to avoid flying with him or eating with him (unless you’ve brought your personal food taster). I would certainly advise everyone to refuse the same flu vaccination that is administered to the president, and I sure as hell wouldn’t be in the same car with him if he was scheduled to drive past any book depositories.

In an address delivered in Ireland by former president Bill Clinton in August of 1998, the Prez said: “When you get to be the leader of a big country, someone else makes all the decisions.” What do you suppose he is hinting at in this remark? (Or does it simply depend on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is?)

However, since a president IS the president for the very reason that he is already onboard with the “Money Trust” agenda, disagreements over significant matters are highly unlikely and not worth contemplating further.

What else is wrong with this article? Well, how about this? [USAP’s] “administration has no plans to change course on its largely well-received approach to rescuing the industry from its meltdown or its management of overall monetary policy.”

No plans to CHANGE course? We’re going to continue with the same Federal Reserve scoundrel who was running things when King George was the president and when the financial roof first started to cave in on us? But I thought “CHANGE” was what USAP was all about it. I mean, correct me if I’m wrong, but it seemed that during the presidential campaign, every other word out of USAP’s face was “Change.” (The other word in that “every other word” equation was “Hope”, remember? Well, I’m seeing little of the former and feeling none of the latter.)

OK, but the biggest friggin’ lie in this whole article is the idea being conveyed that Ben Bernanke is some kind of savior who has helped us out of a big economic mess. Well, first of all, we ain’t out of it yet. In fact, to quote The Carpenters: “We’ve Only Just Begun.” Secondly, we wouldn’t have been in the mess to begin with if the Federal Reserve System didn’t exist. Fact: If we were to abolish the Federal Reserve System, 97.652% of America’s problems would disappear with it. That is an exact figure which I myself intricately worked out over the course of several months. And anyone familiar with my math skills knows that they are unimpeachable, unfathomable, and undecipherable.

What else is wrong with this picture? Try this: “Bernanke has won admiration from Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill.”

Hokey-Smoke! The Democrats AND the Republicans like this guy? BOTH PARTIES? You mean they’re not arguing about it? But they ALWAYS argue about EVERYTHING. Wow! This dude must be really, really good! Either that, or both parties are in cahoots in the scam to brainwash and emotionally abuse and financially rob the American citizens. Take a guess which scenario is the authentic one!

Am I just mindlessly yakking here? Well, if you thought so, I’m about to prove differently to you, and in the process you’re going to learn 97,652% more about the Federal Reserve (the king of this kingdom) than you presently do. (Don’t question my math!)

Examine James Perloff's graph which charts U.S. inflation:




I’ll bet you’re wondering right about now why inflation started climbing right around World War I, never returned to previous low levels, and has since gone “off the chart,” aren’t you? Well, I’m about to link you to an EXCELLENT article by James Perloff which will explain that to you in terms even an Airheadzonan could understand. And I’ll bet that’s more than you can say for Rush Limboob, Sean “You’re an Un-American” Hannity, Michael “Trotskyite” Medved, and Bill O’Really? These pseudo-conservative deceivers avoid this subject, and do you know why? Well, think about it – I’ll wait . . .

I’m still waiting . . .

Figured it out yet? “Got Smarts?”

I kid you not, ‘Our Monetary Mayhem Began With The Fed’ by James Perloff is one of the three best articles on any subject that I have ever found online. It is factual, lucidly written, eye-opening and anger inducing as all get out! If you don’t read this, then you ain’t no "Ferret-Faced Fascist Friend" of mine. In fact, if you don’t read this, then there’s no point in you ever returning to 'Xtremely Un-P.C. And Unrepentant', because I can assure you I will never be posting a Blog Bit that’s any more important than this one.

And I don’t want to hear any weenie-wussy excuses like, “Oh, the print is too small.” You know perfectly well that you can copy the article, paste it into a Word File and then enlarge the print to any size your eyesight requires. If you give a damn about your country and future generations of Americans (i.e., your children & grandchildren), you’ll read this article. It’s as simple as that.

Afterwards, you should give serious consideration to reading the book ‘The Creature From Jekyll Island: A Second Look At The Federal Reserve’ by G. Edward Griffin. If I’ve told ya once, I’ve told ya a thousand times: this book will turn your current understanding of the political paradigm right on its ear. Why are we allowing private bankers and government arseholes to treat us like Loose Dogs and Lemmings? Learn the truth and join the fraternity of Ferret-Faced Fascist Friends. The F-F F F needs men and women just like YOU!

~ Stephen T. McCarthy

Here Come Da Links… Alright, let’s get on it:

OUR MONETARY MAYHEM BEGAN WITH THE FED by JAMES PERLOFF; 2009, April 02.

The Creature From Jekyll Island: A Second Look At The Federal Reserve by G. Edward Griffin.
.

SEX, TATTOOS & VIOLENCE R US - #3

.
BREAKING NEWS!
Reliable sources close to Xtremely Un-P.C. And Unrepentant indicate that there may me be some truth to the rumor now widely circulating that pop music star Michael Jackson has died. Stay tuned and we will pass along further information just as soon as it becomes available to us!

ARGUING WITH GOD
Yesterday, Brother Nappy suddenly says to me, “You know how you sometimes hear stories about someone who kills a bunch of innocent people and then later claims that they heard God tell them to do it?”
“Yeah,” I said. “What about it?”
Nappy says, “Well, how come they don’t just say, ‘No, God. You kill them. You’re God, aren’t you? Can’t you kill a few people without help from me?’ ”

PREVENTATIVE MEDICINE
Last week, Brother Nappy came to me and said, “I need to take a few Excedrin tablets. Can I get some from you?”
“You have a headache?” I asked him.
“No, but just in case I get one.”
“How many you want?” I asked.
“Three.”
And I said, “Really? Three? When I’m feeling perfectly fine, I usually take just two.”

BAD ACTING SCHOOL
Some months back, Nappy and I were watching the 1956 movie THE TEN COMMANDMENTS. At one point in scene #14 titled “Hebrew Cloth”, Charlton Heston playing the part of Moses says, “LOVE CANNOT DROWN TRUTH, NEFERTIRI.”
A few seconds later, Nappy says to me, “He said that just like Batman, didn’t he?”
I said, “Yeah, kind of. I guess.” But the truth is, I wasn’t really paying close enough attention.

So, about 15 seconds further into the film, Nappy tells me, “Wait. Rewind. Let’s go back and see that again.” So I backed the DVD up to that point and let ‘er rip. A few moments later I was ROTFLMAO. Make no mistake – I mean that literally. I was LITERALLY rolling on the floor, laughing my a## off! Well, I usually watch TV while lying on the floor to begin with, so I didn’t have far to go. But I was rolling back and forth on the carpet WITH TEARS IN MY EYES! Nappy and I were laughing so hard that we actually had to stop the movie and take a 10 minute break to regain our composure before we could go on.

Charlton Heston delivers that line so EXACTLY the way Adam West later delivered his lines in the 1960s television version of Batman that it’s like Heston is supernaturally channeling West as a prophecy of things to come. He even sounds like Adam West! I mean, you can almost see the Batman cowl on Heston as he says the line. I can’t understand how Nappy picked up on it the first time and I didn’t - heck, I’m the bigger Batman/Adam West fan.

Anyone who knows and enjoys their 1960s Batman simply MUST make it a point to obtain a copy of The Ten Commandments, even if only to catch this one moment. Buy it, rent it, steal it, just get it! Honestly, this was the best laugh I’ve had thus far into 2009! I was ROTFLMAOWTIME. (And some people wonder why I keep Nappy around. If God ever tells me to kill him, I’ll tell God, “Yeah. Sure. And you intend to replace him with?...”)

RECIPE FOR A SHORT & HAPPY LIFE: GIN, VERMOUTH & GREEN OLIVES
Several weeks ago, I received an e-mail from a friend of mine. He said this:

I'm planning a road trip cross-country in the spring, stopping and visiting friends along the way. If it comes to pass, God willing, I may actually meet ya in this life. The martinis will be on me. Gin, no vodka.

I had to laugh. It’s good to know that at least someone out there is actually paying attention to the nonsense I say. And I sure did like it better when the rules of this world were Old School simple.

CAREFUL WITH THAT BUNSEN BURNER, EUGENE!
My friend Ed and I were exchanging comments recently when we wandered into the subject of religion. On the fly, I gave a brief description of my religious worldview, and I think I nailed it better than I ever have before. Sometimes spontaneity is the key. Here’s my religious self-assessment:

I was strongly influenced early on by Joel Goldsmith and I guess I’m sort of a “Bad Christian Meets A Christian Science Laboratory Explosion.”

“YEAH, LAUGH IT UP, FUNNY BOY!”
On August 8th I officially became “Old.” I turned 50 years old. Damn! It’s painful just typing that. In my own eyes, I’m now a grandchildless grandpa. Ouch! The funniest birthday card I received came from my old friend Pooh, who actually turned 50 before I did. On the front is a caricature of Bob Dylan singing, “KNOCK, KNOCK, KNOCKIN’ ON HEAVEN’S DOOR…” Inside it says “Enjoy your new birthday theme song.” Pooh added some tender sentiments of his own [this is rude and crude, but funny]:

“Yes indeed, The Times They Are A-Changin’. I hope this card finds you well and before your AARP package arrives. I have scouted out 50 for you and it’s like your warranty just expired. Words to the wise on aging: Never pass a bathroom. Don’t waste a hard-on. Never trust a fart!
Love*, Pooh.
*JW”

“JW” are the initials Pooh and I have been including for many years everytime one of us writes the word “love” to the other. JW stands for John Wayne, and so this means “Love in a strictly manly sort of way.” Not that either of us has any doubts about the other bloke’s heterosexuality – heck, we’ve known each other since 1978. But the key to good writing is making it clearly understood.

DRINKING AN OLD DOG NEW TRICKS
I also received a funny birthday card from my dear friend The Flying Aardvark. The cover shows two dinosaurs and they’re saying, “Hey there… remember us?” Inside it continues, “We used to sit behind you in home room.”
Yeah, laugh it up, funny girl!

In the ‘Gifts Given’ category, the Aard took the gold medal by far. I received an Eddie Cochran compact disc. Eddie was an ultra-cool 1950s rocker who died at a very young age in a tragic car crash. He’s most famous for his classic teen anthem “Summertime Blues” but I think my favorite Cochran tunes are “Nervous Breakdown” and “Somethin’ Else.” Back in my young thug days, I used to wear a small black & white Eddie Cochran pin on my black leather jacket, so this was an interesting gift for a bloke who just hit the Big 5-0 (say it ain’t so!) I’m an Oldie but a Goodie.

The Aardvark also give-eded me the P.J. O’Rourke book HOLIDAYS IN HELL, “In which our intrepid reporter travels to the world’s worst places and asks, ‘What’s funny about this?’ ” Oh, Baby, you knooooow what I like!

I also got the JW movie THE QUIET MAN – without a doubt, JW’s best non-Western. And she sent me a batch of her world famous Rum Balls. I was intoxicated for two weeks without ever reaching for a bottle.
“Have you been drinking this evening, Mr. McCarthy?”
“No, ossifer. I hasn’t drinked a drop.”
“Uh-huh. You want to step out of the car, please.”
“Sure. …Which one?”

The Aard’s Yummy Rum Balls kill two birds with one stone when your biggest problems are simultaneous hunger and sobriety.

When it comes to good friends, one just can’t top the high-flyin’ Aardvark. (And she got me high and flyin’ too! Friends don’t let friends live sober.)

AARDVARK WISDOM
In a phone conversation with my long distance pal, the Aardvark said a simple but profound thing while trying to cheer up my 50-year-old mind. The Aard said that when she was approaching the age of 40 she realized that she was only going to have an “ordinary” life, but through the years she has developed a greater appreciation for the ordinary. Eloquent. Unfortunately, what I heard was: “Stephen, you need to buy a red, convertible sports car.”

IN MY YOUTH . . .
I could drink all day and night and never get “tired”; I could hit the side of a barn with a shot glass from six paces; I could track a pink elephant through the darkest jungle streets and alleys. In my youth, I had skills, baby, SKILLS!

TO CATCH LIGHTNING IN A BOTTLE
The dude is unbelievably superfast. So, let me axe ya: how long do you suppose it will be until Usain Bolt is caught?

SLUTSPACE
What is it with these women who keep contacting me at MySpace, inviting me to view their nude photos? Do I really look like that kind of guy?

Here’s a picture that was included with the latest invitation:



Uh. No, thanks. “Arkansas Bowling Alley Groupie” isn’t my type.

RON PAUL HAS MY BACK
The Catholic newspaper THE WANDERER included an exclusive interview with Ron Paul in its August 13, 2009 issue. At one point the interviewer said: “The GOP has been regarded as the pro-life party in these past few elections, and the party hasn’t done very well. What do you think the prospects are for the GOP as a vehicle for conservative ideas in general, and especially for pro-lifers?”

RON PAUL: “I don’t think – you know it’s shifting, but over the years we never suffered from it. I mean Ronald Reagan took a pro-life position, but it is true that the Republican Party, like in many other issues, would speak more strongly than their actions – they didn’t do a whole lot once they were in office.”

Hmmm… Well, ain’t that just what I said in my Blog Bit
#1 RULE OF POLITICS ?

And later in the interview, Doctor Paul said: “Keynesianism in economics came in vogue in the 1930s. And that is a philosophic issue that is pervasive in the Republican and Democrat Parties – it is both."

Hmmm… Well, ain’t that just what I said in my Blog Bit MARX VS KEYNES: COMPARATIVE SOCIALISM IN MINIATURE ?

FROM CANTON-BOUND CAREER TO COMEDIAN FODDER CARTOON

IT’S A WOMAN’S PREROGATIVE TO CHANGE HER MIND.
~ attributed to Everywoman

THE PARTITIONS WERE SO THIN THAT ONE COULD HEAR A LADY IN THE NEXT ROOM CHANGING HER MIND.
~ attributed to Mark Twain

He’s back again. And again. And AGAIN. Allah’s Unholy Trousers! Brettboy Favregirl has UNRETIRED YET AGAIN! Oh my gosh! This guy is UNQUESTIONABLY the most embarrassing mangirl to ever wear an NFL uniform. He has reached a level of sadness that no one has ever even imagined before. One week after announcing he truly has retired from football (yet again!) he’s at camp in Minnesota and wearing a Vikings uniform. UN-FREAKIN’-BELIEVABLE.

Honestly, I think that Favre is just such a friggin’ media hound that he can’t stand the thought of not being in the press and having his mug displayed on ESPN every week, so he simply can’t bring himself to hang up the cleats. Here’s a guy who would call a press conference to announce that he has nothing to announce.

However, the first (and still biggest) sign of this character’s lack of character was the bit he pulled years ago in “giving” Michael Strahan the sack record. That’s the point where I really became anti-Favre.

Don’t get me wrong, from everything I know about him, I actually LIKE Strahan. And truthfully, I would prefer that he owned the sack record rather than Mark Gastineau, whom I did NOT like. But a “real” competitor would NEVER “give” something to an opposing player on the field of battle. That is the best definition I could think of for the term “Unsportsmanlike Conduct.” Not only did Favre, in my opinion, put an asterisk on the sack record, but in doing so he left a stain on the permanent record of his offensive line in Green Bay. It’s no wonder one of his O-Linemen took him aside in the locker room after that game and had words for him.

Although I’m no psychiatrist (and don’t play one on TV either), isn’t there a sign of Favre’s ego even showing through that Strahan incident? It’s as if he was nonverbally saying, “I, Me, Brett Favre, the Center Of Attention, the Center Of The Universe, I have the power to bestow upon you, Michael Strahan, the all-time single season sack record. Here’s a Milk-Bone from my Royal hand – Good dog.”

Favregirl is like a numerically smaller but equally bad Beatles song: “#4 - #4 - #4 - #4 . . .” He’s like the monster in some "B" horror movie who always seems to rise yet again from certain death. #4 has now officially turned his whole career into a cartoon.

JOHN McLAME
I was yakking politics with The Great L.C. recently when I said:

“Did you notice how when the principal concern of Americans was the war in Iraq, and when it was clear that most of the country was tired of it and wanted to see the troops returned home, John McCain publicly said he would be fine with it if we maintained American soldiers in Iraq for one hundred years? He said the last thing that most Americans wanted to hear at that time.

“And then when our financial system started to tank and the economy superseded the Iraq War as the single most troubling issue for most Americans, McCain chose that time to publicly announce that he thought “the fundamentals of our economy are strong.” Again, the worst thing he could have said if he wanted to be elected president of the United States. How odd that McCain had a special knack for saying the last thing he should have said in each instance. It’s almost as if HE SECRETLY DIDN’T WANT TO WIN THE ELECTION.”

. . . Or else he’s just operating with a pathetic micromind.

CSI: SILICONE VALLEY
If THIS isn’t a sign of our times, I don’t know what is.

~ Stephen T. McCarthy

Back Issues:
SEX, TATTOOS & VIOLENCE R US - Issue #2
SEX, TATTOOS & VIOLENCE R US - Issue #1

Forerunner to S. T. & V. R US:
7 Remastered RANDOM THOUGHTS + 1 Previously Unreleased BONUS TRACK And 1 ALTERNATE TAKE
.

McCARTHY AT HOLLYWOOD AND VINE; Episode #124 (Or, CUCKOO FOR CUCKOO'S NEST)

.
[From the STMcC archive; August 21, 2006.]

HOW BIG OF AN IDIOT TAKES ONE OF THE GREAT FILMS OF THE 20TH CENTURY AND TURNS IT INTO RIGHT WING PROPAGANDA? I HOPE HILLARY DOES GET YOU AND THE REST OF YOUR FERRET-FACED FASCIST FRIENDS.
~ JOAN P.

Last night, Brother Nappy and I watched the movie ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO’S NEST for the 1,674th time. At one point, I turned to Nappy and I said, “I just don’t have any respect for anybody who wouldn’t include this movie on their Top Ten Favorite Films list.”

Three years ago I wrote a review of this movie which I posted on BigBitch.com (that’s Amazon.com to y’all). I had dreamed up my own political interpretation of the movie and made a review of it. This was before USAP exploded on the scene with his “Hope” and “Change” slogan, and there was no clear leader emerging from the Republican party to run for the presidency. Without a doubt, Hillary Clinton was considered the White House frontrunner at that time. I was genuinely concerned about her winning the next election and my review reflected that concern.

Shortly after posting my review, a woman named Joan P. left the comment I opened this Blog Bit with on my ‘Cuckoo’s Nest’ review. My review really ticked Joan off and that totally tickled me. In fact, it still tickles me. She was so ticked and I was so tickled that I’m thinking this review might be worth posting here even though it’s now very outdated.

***SPOILER ALERT***
If you’ve never seen the movie ‘One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest’ and you’re thinking that someday you might, you should read no further because I will be discussing important plot points that you won’t want revealed in advance.

Still here? OK, then don’t blame me for spoiling the movie for ya.

In viewing this great film again last night, I was particularly impressed with Jack Nicholson’s ability to "play dead." It’s not easy to play dead when there’s a big camera close up on your face and you can’t twitch, blink, breathe or belch. It requires a good deal of concentration. Or relaxation. Something. Whatever it requires, Nicholson has it.

I know of what I speak because in 1979 I had to “play dead” on an episode of the television show M*A*S*H. Although I am anti-war, I was not a fan of the TV show; way too Leftist for my tastes. But any true fan of the show will remember the episode I’m referring to because it was notable for its story which unfolded in real time and which included a ticking clock in the lower right corner of the screen throughout the episode - an episode which was titled “Life Time.”

A bloke named George needs an aorta graft within 20 minutes or he ain’t gonna make it. Another bloke named Harold has had half his brain blown away (I was Harold – typecast as the "brainless bloke" again!), and the doctors are hoping that Harold will die in time to provide the missing aorta for George. Meanwhile, Harold’s buddy, Roberts, can’t accept the fact that B.J. and Hawkeye aren’t trying to save the life of his friend - to the contrary, they are hoping he will die quickly.

Anyway, I had to gasp and cough a little and then die on camera. But I didn’t really die. See? It was all pretend! “The report of my death has been greatly exaggerated.” But I gotta admit, Jack Nicholson "did dead" better than I did. But then that’s why Jack made the big bucks. “I don’t know Jack!” but still I can tell ya that dying in front of the camera ain’t as easy as it looks. There’s a lot of pressure and the seconds feel like days. Nevertheless, it was good practice for when Uncle Sam comes for me.

I now dedicate this old review to all of my "ferret-faced fascist friends." You know who you are:

INTERVIEWER: Hello, and welcome back to McCARTHY AT HOLLYWOOD AND VINE. We’re here today with Stephen T. McCarthy and discussing one of his very favorite films: ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO’S NEST. Tell us, Stephen, when did you first see this highly acclaimed film?

McCARTHY: CUCKOO’S NEST was released in nineteen seventy-five, and I saw it numerous times at The Avco Cinema Center in Los Angeles. I and a group of friends – some who later went on to become police officers – sneaked into the theatre repeatedly during its initial run. To this day, it remains entrenched on my all-time Top Ten movie list.

INTERVIEWER: Stephen, you little criminal! We never would have thought it of you. I understand that you have a rather original perspective on this classic film. Want to share that with us?

McCARTHY: Well, back in seventy-five, I thought I was just viewing a magnificently crafted and masterfully acted film centered on the important theme of individualism and finding and being true to one’s own voice. I had no way of knowing that the movie was actually remarkably prescient with regards to the American political situation that would manifest over thirty years later.

INTERVIEWER: Would you care to elaborate?

McCARTHY: To the viewer in nineteen seventy-five, this movie, which won five Academy Awards, appeared to tell the story of a man who feigns mental illness in order to avoid his prison work detail. While he is undergoing psychiatric evaluation, his rebellious, individualistic spirit “infects” the real “nut cases” who begin to assert themselves much to the resentment of the domineering head nurse at the mental institution. But here in aught six, we can see that the movie was actually foretelling the political situation that this country now finds itself in.

INTERVIEWER: To you, the characters in this movie represent something completely different, don’t they?

McCARTHY: Yes. Actually, CUCKOO’S NEST is about the 2008 Presidential Election. The mental institution itself symbolizes the United States – a loony bin if there ever was one. The domineering, manipulative, and vindictive head nurse, Mildred Ratched, represents Hillary Clinton – a power-hungry woman driven by her insatiable quest for control. It should be pointed out that Louise Fletcher won an Oscar for her remarkable portrayal of Ms. Clinton. Capturing every aspect of the senator’s traits, she paints us as good a portrait of Clinton as Clinton herself could have done.

INTERVIEWER: But the senator’s road to The White House is not without obstacles, is it?

McCARTHY: No. Standing in her way is the rebellious underdog, Randle Patrick McMurphy, a man who seeks to bring the nuts around him back to their senses. McMurphy personifies the true American spirit opposed to the Socialism of Nurse Ratched. There is one scene in particular that forcefully illustrates this friction: McMurphy petitions to have the television in the community room turned on so that he and his fellow Americans – or “the mental defective league”, as he accurately refers to them - can watch the second game of the 1963 World Series. Baseball, being “America’s Pastime”, is naturally repugnant to the Leftist Nurse, and so she resorts to her unique brand of sophism in order to prevent genuinely American traditions from being broadcasted into the community (room).

INTERVIEWER: And Nurse Ratched is aided and abetted by-

McCARTHY: She is voted into power and protected by women and minorities. This is conveyed by her ever-present subordinate female nurse and by the mental institution’s watchful and protective orderlies. Ratched’s eventual success in quashing all sense of individualism and driving the country deeper into the pit of Socialism is “shockingly” revealed in the eventual castration of America’s spirit, that being R. P. McMurphy. The castration, however, is thinly veiled by the fact that the scalpel is actually wielded against his “Northern” hemisphere.

INTERVIEWER: Is there no happy ending here?

McCARTHY: No, I’m afraid not. With the true American spirit now impotent, Ms. Clinton occupies the ultimate position of power that she coveted, and the principles of Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, and George Mason, those formerly enduring ideals NATIVE to America, “fly the coop” - that is, “they leave the cuckoo’s nest.” This is represented by the “Native American”, Chief Bromden, who heads for the hills.

INTERVIEWER: And isn’t it true that-- Hey, wait, Stephen, where are you going?!

McCARTHY: To pack my bags! I’m afraid that Nurse Ratched really is going to win the 2008 election, and I also need to be ready to escape this insane country and “head for the hills.”

~ Stephen T. McCarthy
.

PAGING DOCTOR DECEPTION AND HER BUG-EYED ASSISTANT

.
My good buddy Br'er Marc sent the following link to me, and this is one you really need to see. The site includes very little text and plenty of pictures so even Airheadzonans shouldn't feel intimidated by it.

USAP promised us "Hope" and "Change" but he never said anything about "Honesty."
Yes, he did mention "Transparency" but I could see right through that. After all, Bill "It Depends On What The Meaning Of The Word 'Is' Is" Clinton said he would have the most ethical presidential administration in history and we all saw how that worked out. I've learned that if a Democrat's mouth is open it's only to emit gas or lies.

Anyway, this link has to do with the sorts of people who are trying to convince the Americonned People (that's YOU) that Obamacare is a good thing. In other words, it's about FAKE Doctors and Bug-eyed Marxists. This one is not to be missed, so do click:

DOCTOR DECEPTION AND HER BUG-EYED ASSISTANT

I hope that when I get my 15 minutes of fame it's for something positive!

~ Stephen T. "Lonesome Dogg" McCarthy
.

3 4 U: TRUTH, DISGUST & RAGE

.
TRUTH

See if you can guess when the following was written and who wrote it. [Emphasis mine throughout]:

Chapter 8; “NEW ORDER FOR THE NEW AGE”

It is as if a giant plan is unfolding, everything perfectly on cue. Europe sets the date for its union. Communism collapses. A hugely popular war is fought in the Middle East. The United Nations is rescued from scorn by an easily swayed public. A new world order is announced. Christianity has been battered in the public arena, and New Age religions are in place in the schools and corporations, and among the elite. Then A FINANCIAL COLLAPSE accelerates the move toward a world money system. The United States cannot afford defense, so it turns its defense requirements over to the United Nations, along with its sovereignty. The United Nations severely limits property rights and clamps down on all Christian evangelism and Christian distinctives under the ‘Declaration of the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and Discrimination Based on Religious Belief’ already adopted by the General Assembly on November 25, 1981.

Chapter 9; “A PROMISE OF HOPE”

If during this decade there is a WORLDWIDE BANKING COLLAPSE and a worldwide crash of the proportions of the Great Depression of the 1930s, people will be ready for a new order. When there are starving people standing in bread lines, when their physical needs are not being met, they will be ready for CHANGE.

Think of the various New Deal agencies Roosevelt created by fiat. His use of executive power was so unprecendented that the Supreme Court initially struck down key parts of the New Deal program. But when Roosevelt threatened to pack the court and change its character, the justices changed their minds. Roosevelt could do whatever he wanted, because the ECONOMIC CRISIS created a compliant majority in the Congress who would blindly follow his lead. Any reasonable OFFER OF HOPE was acceptable.

In 1990, we saw the virtual collapse of the Japanese Stock Market, the Nikkei Dow. It has leveled out over the past year but is still in a volatile position, not unlike what the United States is going through at this moment. The underlying problems are about as bad as they always were. Loans are made on the strength of stocks; stocks are run up on the basis of appreciation of real estate; and real estate is escalating on the strength of bank loans and stock market prices.

The result is overpriced real estate, overpriced stocks, interconnected stocks, and weak if not insolvent banks, holding loans BASED ON INFLATED REAL ESTATE PRICES and a synthetic stock market, which, combined, have created a pyramiding of wealth that is completely artificial. That is a dangerous and potentially disastrous situation which has not changed since the 1991 shakeup. THE DISASTER HAS ONLY BEEN POSTPONED.

In “The Congressman’s Confession About The New World Order”, I related how I first began to take seriously the Global Conspiracy Concept after I read Pat Robertson’s 1991 book ‘The New World Order’ in early 1994. Since that time, my extensive study of this subject has caused many varying political factors to coalesce in my mind into absolute certainty that there exists an agenda being followed by wealthy Elites and myriad social engineers to form a single, global government which will ultimately enslave the rest of mankind. We’re talking about a One-World Tyranny; a Brave New World kept in place by evil, ruthless 1984 methods. I am just as certain that these Elites will achieve their goal. Only God will be able to overturn it, and He will do so in His own time.

Last week I reread Pat Robertson’s ‘The New World Order’ for the first time in 15 years. As you’ve guessed by now, the passages I quoted above come from this book. Think what you will about Pat Robertson (I myself have a few reasons not to fully trust the man) but you must concede that he obviously knew his stuff when he wrote this book so many years ago. In rereading it, I was surprised to find just how good it is. It holds up better than I had anticipated, and, in fact, I would say it is still one of the better publications available on the topic. It is no mystery to me why this paperback set my mind on fire with a strong newfound interest in politics in ’94.

To be sure, Robertson’s ‘The New World Order’ does have its faults. Upon first reading it, I thought that Robertson seemed to be running some interference for President George H. W. Bush, and I still feel that way. To even imply that in his repeated use of the phrase “the new world order” in many public speeches that the first President Bush may not have intended the same meaning for it that the Elite social planners do is preposterous!

And if Robertson really believes that “none of us should suddenly become philosophical determinists or fatalists” and that we “must act to stop” the implementation of the New World Order, then he apparently doesn’t take The Bible’s book of Revelation seriously enough. It’s a done deal, Pat, baby - saving the country is an impossibility. Attempting to point INDIVIDUALS in the Godly direction before they voluntarily accept “the mark of the beast” is our only reasonable, attainable goal.

And speaking of things done “voluntarily," in chapter 11, “The Words Of The Prophets”, Robertson writes:

In the United States today we have the highest voluntary income tax compliance of any nation on earth. If the American people ever become persuaded that the Internal Revenue Service is incompetent, corrupt, unfair, or ideologically biased, voluntary compliance would plummet and the government would not be able to place enough revenue agents throughout the country to collect the tax revenues due it. Americans voluntarily comply and pay taxes because, despite misgivings, we still trust our government. When the bond of trust is severed, the government will fall apart.

HA! Yeah, I’m serious, he really wrote that! In a strict legal sense, he’s right about the income tax being voluntary. The I.R.S. has even used the word “voluntary” itself in some of its 1040 tax form booklets. But let someone decide to discontinue volunteering to pay income tax and see what happens to him. The rest of that paragraph was simply laughable even in 1991.

In chapter 12, “The Great Divide”, Robertson states:

Before the [1990] election, the conservative incumbent, Jesse Helms, was trailing his liberal opponent, the black mayor of Charlotte, Harvey Gantt, by as much as eight percentage points in public opinion polls.

Robertson goes on to show how distributing 750,000 church bulletins listing the stands taken by the candidates on some of the major election issues helped win the election for Helms. Although I would never accuse a person of being a racist based on such a minor observation, I must ask, what did Harvey Gantt being Black have to do with anything? Gantt’s race was not the least bit germane to the point being raised in the remainder of Robertson’s paragraph. Little things like that sometimes indicate undisclosed attitudes. Unless a man’s race is pertinent to the issue, I don’t expect to find it mentioned in dialogue or writing. I’m not accusing Robertson of racism, but we must remain attentive to clues large and small – they do sometimes add up to hidden meaning.

The New World Order agenda is beyond race; it’s beyond gender; it’s beyond age and political parties. It has nothing to do with Republican or Democrat.

Although I take issue with some points in Pat Robertson’s book, and although I don’t really like or totally trust the author, his 1991 publication is one I definitely can recommend to anyone who wishes to gain a greater understanding of where we are and where we’re destined to go.

DISGUST & RAGE

Last night I watched the 1976 movie NETWORK… for the first time. Can you believe that? I’ve often seen clips of it over the decades, and obviously, I was well aware of the famous Howard Beale (Peter Finch) line, “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take this anymore!” But seeing excerpts from it again in a documentary I recently watched, and then learning from my dear friend The Flying Aardvark last Saturday that William Holden (one of my all-time favorite actors) has a major role in Network, I made seeing it an immediate top priority.

Well, overall, I wasn’t positively crazy about the movie: it was over-the-top ridiculous at times (granted it was meant to be somewhat satiric) and I thought Faye Dunaway receiving an Oscar for best actress as Diana Christensen only illustrates yet again what a joke the Academy Awards are. I don’t think I really believed a single sentence Dunaway uttered throughout the film – but she did display her aptitude for remembering a lot of lines written in a script and spouting them out in front of a camera.

However, the movie does contain some memorable scenes and a few particularly brilliant monologues. Most noteworthy was Arthur Jenson (Ned Beatty) dressing down Howard Beale:

You have meddled with the primal forces of nature, Mr. Beale, and I won't have it! Is that clear? You think you've merely stopped a business deal. That is not the case. The Arabs have taken billions of dollars out of this country, and now they must put it back! It is ebb and flow, tidal gravity! It is ecological balance!

You are an old man who thinks in terms of nations and peoples. There are no nations. There are no peoples. There are no Russians. There are no Arabs. There are no third worlds. There is no West. There is only one holistic system of systems, one vast and immane, interwoven, interacting, multivariate, multi-national dominion of dollars. Petro-dollars, electro-dollars, multi-dollars, Reichmarks, Yen, Rubles, Pounds, and Shekels.

It is the international system of currency which determines the totality of life on this planet. That is the natural order of things today. That is the atomic and subatomic and galactic structure of things today! And YOU have meddled with the primal forces of nature, and YOU WILL ATONE! Am I getting through to you, Mr. Beale?

You get up on your little twenty-one inch screen and howl about America and democracy. There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and ITT and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, Union Carbide, and Exxon. Those are the nations of the world today.

What do you think the Russians talk about in their councils of state — Karl Marx? They get out their linear programming charts, statistical decision theories, minimax solutions, and compute the price-cost probabilities of their transactions and investments, just like we do. We no longer live in a world of nations and ideologies, Mr. Beale. The world is a college of corporations, inexorably determined by the immutable bylaws of business.

The world is a business, Mr. Beale. It has been since man crawled out of the slime. And our children will live, Mr. Beale, to see that perfect world in which there's no war or famine, oppression or brutality — one vast and ecumenical holding company, for whom all men will work to serve a common profit, in which all men will hold a share of stock, all necessities provided, all anxieties tranquilized, all boredom amused.

Hokey-Smoke! Other than that nonsense about “no oppression or brutality” and “a common profit” and “all men holding a share of stock”, that is one of the best descriptions of the New World Order mentality that I’ve encountered. The New World Order is really of the Elite, by the Elite, and for the Elite (who are primarily represented by international banking) and when it is finally instituted in its “totalitarian totality”, it will make a hell of Earth – as if Earth isn’t wretched enough already.

And coincidentally Max Schumacher’s (William Holden) dressing down of Diana Christensen (Dunaway) is not a bad representation of how I think of these Elite people who work behind the scenes in bringing us the satanic New World Order:

You are … indifferent to suffering, insensitive to joy. All of life is reduced to the common rubble of banality. War, murder, death are all the same to you as bottles of beer. The daily business of life is a corrupt comedy. … You are madness, virulent madness, and everything you touch dies with you. Well, not me. Not while I can still feel pleasure and pain and love. … I feel lousy about the pain that I've caused... I feel guilty and conscience-stricken, and all of those things you think sentimental, but which my generation calls simple human decency.

All in all, Network is not a great movie but certainly interesting and recommended viewing. Paddy Chayefsky’s screenplay is filled with disgust and rage. His disgust, I share 24/7; the rage, I experience when sober. So, for the benefit of those around me, I try not to make a habit of sobriety.

"I need a cold mojito."

~ Stephen T. McCarthy
"As a dog returns to his own vomit, so a fool repeats his folly."
~ Proverbs 26:11
.




.

"NOTHING IS SECRET THAT WILL NOT BE REVEALED" (Luke 8:17)

.
[From the STMcC archive; May 30, 2007.]

Book: “THE UNSEEN HAND” by A. Ralph Epperson; 1985

Grade: A

“The man in the street does not notice the devil even when the devil is holding him by the throat.”
~Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

How many books have you ever read in which the author printed their home phone number on the first page, allowing readers to contact them directly? Well, you’ll find Mr. A. Ralph Epperson’s number just inside the stark black, white, and gold cover of his excellent “Introduction to the Conspiratorial View of History”, THE UNSEEN HAND. I have never met Mr. Epperson, though I have spoken with him by phone on 3 or 4 occasions over the last 12 years; he is one of the nicest, most accommodating authors I’ve ever been in contact with, and this 1985 book is one I would strongly urge every red, white, black, brown, and yellow American who deeply cares about the Red, White, and Blue to read.

THE UNSEEN HAND is the first of Mr. Epperson’s publications I perused - that was about a dozen years ago. I subsequently read several more, and while they all contained valuable information, this nearly 500 page tome with the small print and comprehensive approach to the infamous “New World Order” was easily his best.

[In the year 2000, I was practically forced by The Spirit to undertake an extensively detailed study of Freemasonry. This is far too complex a subject to address in this review, but that same year, I managed to persuade a high-ranking Mason to give me a personal tour of “The Most Worshipful Grand Lodge” of Phoenix, and I was granted a limited time to study that same afternoon in their library located in the Grand Lodge. Part of my mission was to confirm to my satisfaction that the quotations that Mr. Epperson used in his book “Masonry: Conspiracy Against Christianity” did indeed originate with genuine Masonic publications, and that he was not quoting out-of-context in order to twist and misrepresent their meaning. Not only did I find Mr. Epperson to be a very reliable researcher who was adhering to truth, but when I was unable to locate a particular book even in the Masonic library, he xeroxed the pages in question from his copy of it and mailed them to me at his own time and expense. A VERY nice gentleman! And for my part, I was happy to relate to him a few pieces of interesting information that I was able to gain knowledge of as a result of my guided Lodge tour by maintaining an “Aw-shucks, gee-whiz, golly-gosh, I’m so impressed” attitude. It’s amazing what you can learn by playing dumb. Of course, in my case, some folks swear it ain’t an act.]

THE UNSEEN HAND is a thoroughly researched and referenced study that briefly examines nearly every aspect of the “New World Order” conspiracy, from Forms of Government to Science, from Laetrile to The Atomic Bomb, and everything in between, such as Secret Societies, The Federal Reserve, Population Control, Income Taxes, The Civil War, and about 32 other related topics. With each chapter addressing a separate facet of the conspiracy, obviously no subject herein is given a full treatment - for that you will need to search out books targeting a particular area in question, and those books ARE out there. Nevertheless, THE UNSEEN HAND is a remarkable overview, large and densely packed with solid information (including an index) that draws a lucid, meticulous, and faithful picture of the unseen forces that shape our world while we sit mesmerized in front of the glowing box of superficial and misleading images that serve only to fill our minds with the ideas “They” wish us to entertain.

Although this book does contain some, what on its face would seem to be, outrageous and insane charges, I would caution everyone not to dismiss ANYTHING out-of-hand. Dig deeper before dismissing! It has been suggested that Epperson’s contention that Jesse James lived to the age of 107 and that Karl Marx was a satanist raises some doubt about the validity of his book. While I tend to believe that the outlaw’s assassination by a Robert Ford bullet has been fairly well established now, there is reason to believe that James may have been a member of the Knights of the Golden Circle, as Epperson claims. And though Marx’s connection to satanism is unproven (and thus Epperson ought not to have framed it quite so affirmatively), I’ve looked into that question sufficiently to state that the suspicion most definitely is not without merit. (See “Was Karl Marx A Satanist?” by Richard Wurmbrand.) As for Epperson’s opinion of the John Birch Society: buy the book, dial his phone number, and ask him directly.

Overall, THE UNSEEN HAND is an illuminating Introduction To The Conspiratorial View Of History by a very serious researcher. The book collects an enormous body of evidence from a massive amount of sources and organizes it in a very logical way. Along with “The Creature From Jekyll Island: A Second Look At The Federal Reserve” by Griffin, “None Dare Call It Treason: 25 Years Later” by Stormer, and “Foundations: Their Power And Influence” by Wormser, I consider THE UNSEEN HAND a “must-read” for all American patriots. It may be a history book, but don’t kid yourself, it is really all about our future!

I would like to close by quoting those immortal words of Admiral Yoey O’Dogherty, spoken to the brave men aboard the U.S.S. Queeg after the rout of Communist Chinese forces at the battle of Phatphuc Mao: “Men, we’ve kicked enough Red heinie for one day. Let’s get some pizza ’n’ beer and study America’s Constitution. We’ll have strawberry blondes for dessert.”

~ Stephen T. McCarthy
.

#1 RULE OF POLITICS

.
THE BONES OF PATRIOTS PAST
(Or, ‘The Socialists Who Cried Conservative’)

by Stephen T. McCarthy

Once upon a time, there was a number of conservative Americans. When the conservative people saw how socialists calling themselves Democrats or Liberals had stolen their liberties guaranteed to them by the Bill of Rights and had pissed all over the U.S. Constitution, they knew something had to be done.

Then a group of politicians calling themselves Republicans said, “We have seen the destruction done by the Democrats. Like you, we are political conservatives, and if you vote us into authority, we will reverse the damage done by the Democrats. We will reduce the size of government, we'll cut federal spending, and we'll return your individual rights to you and honor your state’s right to govern itself.” And the Republican media pundits said, “Yes! Protect the Constitution by voting Republican, and things will improve!”

So, the conservative people voted Republicans into power. And the Republicans stole the liberties guaranteed to The People by the Bill of Rights and they pissed all over the U.S. Constitution.

So, in the next election, the majority of people voted the Republicans out and the Democrats back in. And the Democrats stole the liberties guaranteed to The People by the Bill of Rights and they pissed all over the U.S. Constitution. The conservative Americans knew something had to be done.

Then the group of politicians calling themselves Republicans said, “We agree with you conservative Americans. If you vote us into authority, we will undo what the Democrats have done. We'll reduce the size of government, cut federal spending, return your individual rights to you and honor your state’s right to govern itself.” And the Republican media pundits said, “Yes! Protect the Constitution by voting Republican, and things will improve!”

So, the conservatives voted the Republicans back in again. And the Republicans stole the liberties guaranteed to The People by the Bill of Rights and they pissed all over the U.S. Constitution.

So, a majority of The People became disgusted and brought the Democrats back into power, and the Democrats stole the liberties guaranteed to The People by the Bill of Rights and they pissed all over the U.S. Constitution. The conservative Americans were angry and they said, “Doggone it! Something MUST be done about this terrible situation. Our country is being destroyed!”

And the group of politicians calling themselves Republicans said, “We agree with you conservative Americans. If you vote us into authority, we will undo what the Democrats have done. We'll reduce the size of government, cut federal spending, return your individual rights to you and honor your state’s right to govern itself.” And the Republican media pundits said, “Yes! Protect the Constitution by voting Republican, and things will improve!”

And the conservative Americans dug up the graves of George Mason and Thomas Jefferson and they beat the Republican politicians and the Republican media pundits to death with the bones of patriots past.

The moral of this story is: Beware of Socialists in Republican’s clothing.

- - - - - - - - - - - - -

Speaking of Thomas Jefferson, he wrote the following in the Declaration Of Independence. Perhaps you’ve heard of it… unless you’re an Airheadzona high school student:

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Hmmm… “when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism,” eh? Nope. Doesn’t ring a (Liberty) Bell, does it? No, not much it doesn’t.

Last August, I got into a bit of a snit when a friend of mine told me after hearing USAP’s speech at the Democratic National Convention that she had decided to vote for him. She told me that USAP “seems really sincere.”

I responded:

Yeah, so did Hitler, in the beginning. So did Karl Marx, Lenin, Mao and pretty much every other dictator we could name. So did Clinton and Bush. I wonder how many times over the five (?) years we’ve known each other I have said to you:

“IT’S NEVER, EVER WHAT A POLITICIAN SAYS THAT COUNTS, IT’S ONLY WHAT HE DOES THAT MATTERS. AND IF YOU WANT TO KNOW WHAT HE WILL DO IN THE FUTURE, JUST CONSIDER WHAT HE’S DONE IN THE PAST.”

And what has Obama done in the past? Well, if you’ve looked beyond the mainstream media at all, then you know that he is nothing more than a … Marxist; he doesn’t give a rat’s a## about the Constitution and the American tradition.

In April of this year, an intelligent, genuinely conservative and genuinely patriotic friend of mine wrote the following to me:

It is just that I like neocons better than undistilled, flat out red socialist radicals like Obama. I see neocons' glaring faults. They are maddening. Neocons ALMOST have principles... a few may even HAVE some. They just water them down and abandon them so that whatever good they could have done is usually lost. But, in at least STATING principles occasionally, they are closer to correct than libs, though most of the time almost indistinguishable. At least one might be able to have a conversation with them, which I find impossible with liberals.

I replied:

Yes, I know. My contention, however, is that the Neocons always intend to move in the opposite direction of their stated beliefs once they assume power. In short, it's not that they get confused or simply lose their way in the process; it's that they are lying from the outset. I couldn't even count the number of times I've said,

"It's not what a politician says he stands for and promises to do that counts, it's only what he does that matters. And if a person wants to know what a politician will do in the future, he or she only needs to look at what that politician has done in the past."

Someday I should write a brief Blog bit about this observation because, honestly, it's the single greatest truth that I have learned in my years of studying the political scene.

And recently I added:

I think this Blog Bit will explain where I'm essentially coming from in my dislike of Neocons such as Gingrich, Rush, Beck, and all the others. In a nutshell though, my contention is they are simply playing "Good Cop" to the Liberal's "Bad Cop." But you realize, of course, that when a police agency plays "Good Cop/Bad Cop" both sides actually represent the agency. It's a game to sucker the suspect. Well, I think it applies equally to politics. But hopefully I'll make my viewpoint more clear in the forthcoming Blog Bit.

Well, that forthcoming Blog Bit has arrived, and THIS is my #1 Rule Of Politics…

I’ll state it concisely first and then elaborate: The only true conservatives on the political scene today are “Constitutionalists.” To believe in a strict adherence to the Founding Fathers’ position on federal restrictions dictated by the Constitution and its Bill of Rights is the only genuine conservatism that exists. Today, nearly all Republican politicians referring to themselves as “conservatives” are lying about their conservatism to get your vote.

What is a real conservative trying to “conserve”? The form of Constitutionally limited Republican government designed by our Founding Dads! We certainly don’t desire to conserve the latter day socialism institutionalized by Liberals and Neoconservatives (read: Fakeconservatives).

There is a game being played on the Americonned People whereby socialists known as Democrats appear to war with socialists known as Republicans. The only difference is that the socialists calling themselves Republicans CLAIM to stand for conservative values in order to capture the vote of the Americonned People who identify with conservatism. In essence, it’s the Hegelian Dialectic played out by two political parties who are ever consciously moving the masses Leftward.

In order to quickly get my point across, I’m going to briefly throw a spotlight on the man who has falsely come to symbolize genuine conservatism today: Ronald Reagan.

Reagan is supposed to be the great representation of conservative political ideals, but a close examination will prove that he has been placed on his Republican Pedestal of History solely for what he said, not for what he actually did, because what Reagan did rarely matched his conservative rhetoric.

Any so-called conservative presenting Ronald Reagan as the epitome of their position is no conservative at all. If you tell me, “Ronald Reagan was a great conservative president”, my response to you is, “Get thee behind me, Liberal: for thou savourest not the things that be of Constitutionality, but the things that be of socialism.” (I’m sorry if this troubles those of you who think of Reagan as a great American hero, but when we know the truth, the truth will make us free.)

The evidence against Reagan’s conservative bona fides would swallow this Blog Bit, but to put a nugget of it in brief: Despite cutting tax rates, Reagan also “chalked up more government debt than all the Presidents before him combined.” A reduction in taxes without a reduction in government spending only adds to the deficit, and adding to the deficit does not a conservative make! [See: ‘The Shadows Of Power: The Council On Foreign Relations And The American Decline’ by Perloff.]

Ronald Reagan (along with George H. W. Bush) was a member of the World Federalist Association. “This group openly called for immediate world government.” It’s aim was to “create a world federal government with authority to enact, interpret and enforce world law adequate to maintain peace …. World law should be enforceable directly upon individuals.” Bye-bye Bill of Rights protection for American citizens!

At a 1983 economic summit, Ronald Reagan said: “An integrated world economy needs a common monetary standard … But, no national currency will do – only a world currency will work.” [See: ‘Treason: The New World Order’ by Gurudas.]

Asked on March 17, 1980, during the Florida primary, whether he would allow any Trilateral Commission members in his Cabinet, presidential hopeful, RONALD REAGAN, replied, “No, I don’t believe that the Trilateral Commission is a conspiratorial group, but I do think its interests are devoted to international banking, multinational corporations, and so forth. I don’t think that any administration of the U.S. government should have the top 19 positions filled by people from any one group or organization representing one viewpoint. No. I would go in a different direction.”

Just prior to the election, REAGAN was asked who really ran the country and he answered, “I think there is an elite in this country and they are the ones who run an elitist government. They want a government by a handful of people because they don’t believe the people themselves can run their lives … Are we going to have an elitist government that makes decisions for people’s lives or are we going to believe as we have for so many decades, that the people can make these decisions for themselves?”

And yet, after becoming president, Reagan assembled a “transition team” of 59 Elite people representing international bankers and multinational corporations to select, screen and recommend appointees for major administration posts. Of that 59 person team, 28 were Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) members, 10 were members of the secret and elite Bilderberg Group, and 10 were members of the Trilateral Commission. [See: ‘The Unseen Hand’ by Epperson.] There’s an incestuous relationship between all three of these conspiratorial groups. President Reagan ultimately named to his administration the following Council on Foreign Relations members (primarily Global Government-promoting Keynesian socialists). This is a partial list:

RONALD REAGAN’S CFR PALS
VICE PRESIDENT: Bush
SECRETARY OF STATE: Haig
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: Weinberger
CHAIRMAN JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF: Jones
C.I.A. DIRECTOR: Casey
TREASURY SECRETARY: Regan (former Trilateral Commission member)
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION: Washburn
SECRETARY OF COMMERCE: Baldridge
ASSISTANT TO SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR: West
POSTAL RATE COMMISSION: Duffy
DEPUTY DIRECTOR CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE: Inman
DEPARTMENT OF STATE: 21 CFR members
AMBASSADORS: 24 CFR members
MISCELLANEOUS POSTS: 46 CFR members

The bottom line is: Although he talked a good game, and although he may have truly desired to do right by his country, the fact is that Reagan sold out to The Secret Elite. He was just one more in a long line of pseudo-conservatives fooling the Americonned People in order to get votes. At best, Reagan was an enabler of traitors; at worst, he was a liar and a traitor to his country. One thing he certainly was not, however – he was NOT a conservative American patriot. That Ronald Reagan has come to symbolize the modern conservative movement perfectly illustrates just what a sham the Republican party really is! Like other presidents before and after him, Reagan was dishonest when he put his hand on The Holy Bible and swore to uphold and protect the U.S. Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic.

But this pattern of fake conservatives fooling the people hardly begins or ends with Reagan.

Remember when the Republicans destroyed the Democrats in 1994 based on a so-called conservative Contract With America? Did you notice how quickly and strikingly the federal government adapted to Constitutional limitations right after Newt Gingrich and his fellow "conservative" politicians took office? Yeah, me neither. Well, color me surprised! Promises, reneging; promises, reneging, ad infinitum. Has a pattern developed here, Thomas Jefferson? We won’t even discuss “W” and how he increased the cost and scope of government even beyond that of Bill Clinton And His Jolly Band Of Lying Liberals. A fairly strong argument could be made that the last president to remain true to his oath of office was Grover Cleveland. Yeah, that was a few years ago.

Nowadays we have pseudo-conservatives with their own TV stations and radio programs, continuing to brainwash the authentic conservatives in America into believing that they have a voice in the media. But these people are all frauds; they’re not really conservatives like you and I. They say the right things, but they avoid mentioning the meaningful issues.

Rush Limbaugh? I agree with most of what he says, but it’s what he DOESN’T say that disturbs me! He won’t address the real heart of the trouble. What are the two biggest political problems in America today?

1: Our complete disregard of Constitutional restrictions. (Important!: By definition, this would include our illegal Federal Reserve System. The Fed is illegal because it’s un-Constitutional! See: ‘The Creature From Jekyll Island: A Second Look At The Federal Reserve’ by Griffin.)

2: Foreign and domestic policy being dictated by nonelected Elites in nongovernmental organizations (e.g., the CFR, international bankers, corporate representatives, etc.) rather than by a Congress coerced only by The People it legitimately represents.

These are the 2 biggest problems in the U.S.A. today, and why aren’t Limboob, Bill O’Really?, Sean “You’re An
Un-American American” Hannity, and Michael “Trotskyite” Medved shouting about them every day on their programs? Why are they always just Yakking Around The Bush but never trying to drive a stake into the heart of the monster? Wanna know why? Because they’re all frauds; secret Keynesian socialists in Republican’s clothing, and they exist to speak just enough truth to convince you they represent your ideas and concerns, but they don’t fully ACT on the conservative Constitutional principles they claim to love. To borrow an appropriate tune title from Pat Metheny: (It’s Just) Talk.

The Republican media pundits serve one purpose, and that is to convince you to vote Republican again next time around. This way the One-World Fascist Agenda (“New World Order”) can continue unabated while you get the satisfaction of throwing the current crop of bastards out of office. Back and forth the political pendulum swings: Democrat-Republican, Democrat-Republican, Democrat-Republican, but the slide into statist tyranny deepens with each swing of the political pendulum.

Here’s a little test I’ve devised to help a person figure out whether or not a Republican is a real (Constitutional) conservative: If he has his own segment on Fox News, he’s not. If he broadcasts behind The Golden EIB Microphone or praises the man who does, he’s not.

A Rush Limboob can state the obvious all day long; he can Yak for hours about how wrong federal bailouts are (which of us conservatives don’t already agree with that?) But until he starts pointing his fat finger at the real cause behind the outrage – the Federal Reserve System - until Limboob starts criticizing the source of the trouble and calls for an audit of The Fed and then a discontinuation of that un-Constitutional Beelzebub, his “conservatism”?-- (It’s Just) Yak. And that goes for his every phony crony. Neocons all. The Federal Reserve System is our country’s single most egregious transgression against the U.S. Constitution. So, why is it not on the lips of “conservative” TV and radio commentators each and every single day? No! Answer the question, Reader. Answer it!

Pay attention! The whole point of this Blog Bit is to illustrate that anyone can say ANYTHING, but that doesn’t make it so. Ronald Reagan could call himself a conservative but that didn’t make it so. He could swear to uphold the Constitution, but that didn’t make it so. George W. Bush claimed to be a conservative but that didn’t make it so. He claimed to endorse smaller and less expensive government but he increased government’s size and cost even beyond his liberal predecessor, Bill Clinton. I guess it depends on what the meanings of the words “is” and “conservative” are.

Insincere Yakking doesn’t just apply to politics, of course; it can operate across-the-board. A woman can call herself “Christian” until the cows come home blue in the face, but saying she’s a Christian doesn’t make it so. Particularly if her beliefs are not in accord with the Biblical standard that defined original “Christianity.” I can say I’m a six-year-old Hindu girl from Dogbite Falls, Minnesota, but that doesn’t make it so.

In conclusion, I’ll reiterate what my years of study have proven to me is the #1 Rule Of Politics:

IT IS NOT WHAT A POLITICIAN SAYS THAT MATTERS MOST; IT’S WHAT HE OR SHE DOES THAT YOU NEED TO NOTICE.

Do you wish to understand a politician’s real beliefs? Then put aside the things he or she has said and examine the history of their actions. How have they voted? What organizations have they joined? Whom have they previously supported? This is where you’ll find the answer you seek. (Yes, it will require a little homework on your part. If that’s too much effort for you, then you shouldn’t be voting. Voting is a responsibility best left to the Big Boys and Girls.)

For the media, the rule gets a slight twist:

IT IS NOT WHAT A POLITICAL COMMENTATOR SAYS THAT MATTERS MOST; IT’S WHAT HE OR SHE LEAVES UNSAID THAT YOU NEED TO NOTICE.

Remember people, it is only your belief that mainstream politicians mean what they say that perpetuates the illusion of political options. Do your homework, investigate the background of your “conservative” politician of choice - or even your “liberal” politician of choice - and you will eventually wake up to see the reality behind the illusion. An illusion deliberately fabricated to keep you dreaming of “Change” without any real possibility of experiencing it.

Here’s the bumper sticker slogan:

The truth about a person ain’t in YAK, it’s in ACT!

Beware of Wolves in Sheep’s clothing. Beware of Democrats in Republican’s clothing. Beware of Socialists in Capitalist’s clothing. Beware of Liberals in Conservative’s clothing. But most of all, beware of Men in Women’s clothing!

~ Stephen T. McCarthy

Link To The Companion Piece:
#1 RULE OF SELFHOOD

Other Links:
What Is Neoconservatism? You NEED To Know THIS!
I Don’t Trust Glenn Beck
.

THE ANTIDOTE FOR FEMINISM (Or, "REAL WOMAN" DEFINED)

.
[*From the STMcC archive; 2006, July 31st.*]

*My grading scale is typical A through F, but with the very highest mark being an R, which is the equivalent of an A++. Why an R? Heck if I know. My Pa used to tell me that in high school he had a drafting teacher whose highest grade was an R. Pa never did learn what the R stood for, nor - sadly - did he ever achieve one.

Book: “THE PRIVILEGE OF BEING A WOMAN” by Alice von Hildebrand; 2002

Grade: R

In a recent E-mail exchange with a 43-year-old female friend of mine living on the East Coast, I asked her to give me her definitions of the terms "Real Man" and "Real Woman." She replied with a beautiful little one-sentence definition of a "Real Man", but then followed that up with this:

"A real woman? That's easy: a girl who rides a motorcycle in a skirt..."

I can't even begin to describe the depth of my disappointment in that definition, coming as it does from a generally spiritually-minded woman. But then I suppose I shouldn't have been surprised seeing as how she (and every other female of her generation) has been exposed to 40 years of Feminist indoctrination. I thought how sad it was that she - a woman herself - had less understanding of what makes a "Real Woman" than I had, and here I - being a man - am a supposedly insensitive brute of a thing ("a bear with furniture" to quote the very funny comedienne, Elaine Boosler). This only goes to emphasize the point that those extremist social engineers we call "Feminists" have been so effective in twisting and confusing the minds of the vast majority of the female gender that even "spiritual" women no longer recognize what they are and what they are supposed to do in support of the human society (as dictated by their Creator, The Lord God).

I do not read anything without having a yellow (yellow ONLY!) highlighter nearby. I highlight favorite sentences and passages in EVERYTHING I read, that includes fiction and even magazines. 'THE PRIVILEGE OF BEING A WOMAN' by Catholic writer and thinker Alice von Hildebrand is - at only 108 pages - not much more than a booklet, but don't let that fool you into thinking that she doesn't have much to say about the privileges of being a woman: my copy of her book is thoroughly filled with yellow highlighted sections. In fact, there are so many penetrating insights packed into each page that I have rarely highlighted so many sentences per page in any book other than The Holy Bible! When I first read 'THE PRIVILEGE OF BEING A WOMAN', I was blown away by how much of great value Hildebrand had to say on the subject. (And I finished the book sort of feeling that I had been cheated by being born "a bear with furniture.")

Hildebrand dedicated her excellent book "WITH LOVING GRATITUDE TO MY DEAR FRIENDS WHO ALL LOVE TO BE WOMEN." Following is just a very small sampling of the many profound and extraordinary observations Hildebrand shares with us about the privileges of being a woman:

* As sanctity is devalued in [Socialistic feminist, Simone de Beauvoir's] eyes (as a poor substitute for great achievements), the highest praise that can be given anyone, male or female - namely holiness - is, to her mind, only a left-handed compliment... What characterizes holiness is this limitless readiness to serve others. [pages 6 & 32]

* Yet it seems evident that even in the face of their physical vulnerability, given their greater sensitivity, their more subtle intuitions, their talent for feeling themselves into others, women have greater possibilities of uplifting or of hurting others than those usually granted to the opposite sex. [page 9]

* Unwittingly, the feminists acknowledge the superiority of the male sex by wishing to become like men. [page 10]

* The denigration of women is clearly a sad consequence of original sin which has subverted the hierarchy of values... Original sin was a sin of pride, of disobedience, of irreverence, and of metaphysical revolt that led to an inversion of the hierarchy of values... As women are weaker than men, and as they do not bask in the limelight as much as men do, as they are less "creative" than the strong sex, they are bound to be the victims of this distorted hierarchy of values... but that feminists have endorsed this inversion is still more pitiful. Imprisoned in the spiritual jail of secular categories, they fail to understand that their true mission is to swim against the tide and, with God's grace, help restore the proper hierarchy of values. By living up to their calling, women will succeed in guaranteeing a proper recognition of the unique value of femininity and its crucial mission in the world... [T]he "weakness" of the female sex, as far as accomplishments and productivity are concerned, can be more than compensated by her moral strength when she lives up to her calling... But feminists - blinded by secularism - do what, in fact, will lead to a worsening of women's situation. Feminists are women's great enemy. [pages 21, 26 & 29]

* Nietzsche perceived clearly that the emancipation of women is a symptom that their feminine instincts are weakening... The whole tragedy of contemporary feminism - which Cardinal Josef Ratzinger [now the Pope] considers one of the greatest threats menacing the Church - stems from a lack of faith and a loss of the sense of the supernatural. Feminism is inconceivable in a world rooted in Judeo-Christian values... The new age philosophy of feminism, in waging war on femininity, is in fact waging war on Christianity. For in the Divine plan both are intimately linked. Not Socialism, as Simone de Beauvoir believed, but Christ is the great ally of women. Modern ideology wages war on the Gospel which teaches humility and that those who lower themselves will be exalted. [pages 30 & 32]

(Let's not forget that Jesus Christ said that He "did not come to be served, but to serve." [Matthew 20:28] And after all is said and done, who would you prefer to be remembered in this world as being most like, Bill Clinton and Arnold Schwarzenegger, or Mother Teresa and even Jesus Christ Himself? ~STMcC)

* Here is a truth worth meditating upon: Women are more geared to piety because they have a keener awareness of their weaknesses. This is their true strength. [page 66]

(And lets not forget that Saint Paul was directly told by Jesus Christ that his strength would be "made perfect in weakness." See 2 Corinthians 12:9. ~STMcC)

* [Regarding the context of women and childbirth, the great Christian commentator, G.K. Chesterton (1874-1936) writes...] "No one staring at that frightful female privilege, can quite believe in the equality of the sexes." [page 87]

And in keeping with the spirit of that observation, I am about to reveal one of my secret inner beliefs; something that I - until now - have never told a single person, but a thought that I have entertained in my heart and mind for many years:

It seems to me that if all of the world's masterpieces of art, and all of its most uplifting and poetic writings, and all of its most emotionally moving musical compositions were gathered together in one place, they would still not come close to equalling the beauty in the simple God-created concept of a mother feeding her infant child from her own body. Maybe you wouldn't expect such an idea coming from an "old school" man like myself, but there it is! That's what I really think. And the world's most supreme beauty is something that I, being a male, will never experience! Now, try to imagine the revulsion I felt during that disgusting scene in that disgusting movie, 'Million Dollar Baby', when Clint Eastwood tells his female boxer: "I want you to jab, right in the tits, until they turn blue and fall off." (Incidentally, I saw that movie ONLY so that I would feel justified in posting a negative review of it.)

Never having been a Catholic, the only aspect of this book that I have less than glowing comments for are its few instances of Catholic dogma with which I do not concur. But these are rare occurrences and easily ignored. In light of the spiritually deep and worldview-altering insights that Alice von Hildebrand shares with us, lowering this publication's grade because of them would be an irresponsible act on my part.

It seems that God never intended me to marry and become the head of a family. One problem was that - in this feminist-dominated era - I could not find "Real Women" potential mates. One great, notable exception was (my ex-girlfriend) "The Countess", a Real Woman for sure! But evidently marriage was just never in the cards that God dealt to us.

At nearly 47, a "family" is now out of the question for me. But, if I'd gotten married and had children, there are maybe half a dozen books that I would have insisted that my children read and display a comprehensive understanding of. I assure you that 'THE PRIVILEGE OF BEING A WOMAN' by Alice von Hildebrand would have been one of those select books. And I don't mean just my girls would have had to read it; it would have been on the REQUIRED READING LIST for my boys as well. Why? Because once a man has understood the awesome privilege and responsibility that God has entrusted to the female gender, he would thereafter be perfectly incapable of sexually, physically or emotionally abusing women!

I now urge you to read 'THE PRIVILEGE OF BEING A WOMAN' and then to pass it on to your own daughters before "Real Women" become an even greater rarity in our culture than are "Honest Politicians.” And as it stands right now, I'd call that one a draw.

~ Stephen T. McCarthy
.