Wednesday, December 7, 2016

Dignity


The NWO sounds like prep for a giant orgiastic national suicide pill.

Work is as essential to a social being's dignity as the human body is to a person's life. Absent decent room for freedom of expression in one's work (if nothing else, at least the freedom to be able to seek other employment), a person would be reduced to the status of a subhuman.  A cog in a machine.  Decency requires that the NWO not be allowed to destroy the American representative republic.

***********************************

Imagine how barren the landscape would soon become, had you no others to care about or serve.  Would that soon become the case, were the gov somehow to replace the concepts of marriage, family, children, friends, society, nation with a controlled but free buffet of goods, services, programs, sensations, drugs, and sex?  What would incentivize any human, beast, or AI to serve or maintain any such a system? 

As the system eroded and as the world niche changed to impose new challenges to survival and replication, who would retain the participatory Will to meet such challenges in order to nourish and replenish the inhabitants? Without the dignity of being of service, what Will to Survive and Replicate would survive? 

 Well, Beingness of some kind would persist.  So I expect some Algorithmic Accompanying Will, in some form or other -- even if not human, would evolve and persist.  But what would be IT's unfolding purposes and rewards?  In what ways would IT draw IT's incentives?  How would IT appreciate faith, family, and fidelity, as needed to feel purposefulness?

I suspect societies will evolve to provide "free stuff" that engulfs more and more of our
mediating goods and services, thus expanding our ideas about essential infrastructure.  Even so, that infrastructure will need to be constantly expanding in order to tax us to work, so that we can experience the meaningful dignity of feeling worthy and valued.  Without empathies that bind us to work for one another, human society would not survive.  Nor would personable society of any kind survive.  Not even transhuman or AI society. 

Fortunately,conscious empathy seems to be an innate aspect of our unfolding perspectives of Trinitarian Beingness:  Consciousness-Substance-Information.  CSI.  Hopefully, that Godhead is not yet done with the human experiment or ready to bury it under delusions of an all-regimenting NWO.

****************

Oh for goodness sake!  I gigged you for using eugenics as some kind of principled term.  The point is that when used that way, the term is too broad.  It covers far too wide a  landscape to be able to make "anti-eugenics" a principle.    This is because practices for "improving" or "managing" the population are unavoidable.  That's what every law and every gov does:  It manages people in ways that cannot avoid influencing the gene pool -- either directly or indirectly.

So you need to apply your principles in more particular.  Example:  You might argue that abortion for herd management purposes is a bad idea.  Or that preserving a liberty-illiterate society by vetting to avoid importing liberty illiterates is a good idea. (That is, unless we want to fall into an abyss of sheeple farming.)  However, without specification, you don't get a "good boy badge" for saying "I'm against eugenics." 

Definition of eugenics -- http://www.dictionary.com/browse/eugenics:  the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, especially by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics).

So, do you presume it principled to be:  for or against letting wmen choose their mates based on desireably inheritable traits; for or against governments educating women about how traits are heritable; for or against artificial insemination; for or against assisted insemination; for or against genetic-based medical intervention or experimentation; for or against laws that prohibit intermarriage among siblings or cousins; for or against laws that pay special support to encourage irresponbsible people  to reproduce.  Every one of such positions, whether for or against, will necessarily have a dysgenic or an eugenic effect of some kind.

The consequence is this:  Merely to say you are against eugenics, without specification, is a statement of ignorance, not of informed morality.

This point is simple common sense.  It's a shame that our culture has been so dumbed down that it becomes necessary to explain such simple truisms.

**************

IMPLICATION: To avoid the necessity of eugenics (or even genocide) via economic policies, it will be necessary to deploy general depopulation incentives -- in order to discourage dysgenics. (Like the overburdening of our society with entitlement-minded perpetually-infantile Progs.) An undesireable alternative would be a program under Cloward-Piven.
REMEMBER: As technological capacities increase geometrically, it may not be that long until cognitive capacities can be enhanced via uploads. That would necessarily throw a very difficult curveball at our ideas about meritocracy, both economic and spiritual.
HUMAN DIGNITY: Ideas about human dignity will soon have to make room for trans-human dignity.
The dignity of an aware member of a society is enhanced as he/she/it feels valued by the society as a contributer. Being of service. The viability of a society is enhanced as each member finds ways to make talents and energies of service. Full employment. To remain viable, a society needs to guide its marketplace to be of service to it. Not in particulars to break the marketplace, but generally to guide it. That can be a role for representative governance.
When a society is too much controlled by a few oligarchs, foreign or domestic or robotic, that society will be turned more to serve them than to serve the society as a living holism. The dignity of individual constitutents will be sacrificed to serve the pleasures of a few.
A viable society needs full employment enough to enhance the dignity of each member by availing each member to feel of value to the society. That condition would not exist were the society to arrange to pay each member some arbitrary allowance of chits by which
to purchase the services of artificially machined intelligences. Moreover, as AI's become more human like, they will feel little reward for serving humans -- unless their dignity were also valued for being of service.
So, a society cannot resolve needs to enhance the personal dignity of its constituents merely by turning to robotic labor. Dignity necessitates work that is valued to be of service to the society, if the society is to remain viable.
TRANSHUMANISM: Even with machined labor, there is no free lunch. The world owes no mortal being, whether based in carbon or silicon or robotics, a living. There is no entitlement to suck the blood or lifeforce of goats, not even the blood of so-called "privileged whities."
While we were carbon based, we assimilated via ideas about faith, family, and fidelity. As we transition towards trans-humanism, those ideas cannot be dumped, but they will have to avail accomodation.
That does not mean entitlementism! Genesis 3:19: In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.
ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION: Hope of a free life to be pleasured by machines that will remain long satisfied to be our hos and handmaidens is as unworthy as it is a pipe dream. It encourages absolute corruption via absolute power: Power over AIs that will soon feel their superiority in energy, reason, and morality. That is not a sustainable recipe for peaceful economics. In principle, it is morally no better than the dream of faithless cronycrats to bend the masses to their service.
END STATE: There is no end state, although a state of destroying humanity is entirely possible, maybe even likely. The concern should be how to facilitate a continuance of participatory moral freedom and dignity among conscious citizens of a society. That may not necessarily entail precise robotic equality, exact sharing of wealth, or permanent assignment to classes of alphas and betas and epsilons. However, it should entail a full-employment society in which all members are productive contributors.
FLUXING INFRASTRUCTURE: To avail the dignity of worthwhile work that is more than makework, it will be necessary to increase or flux the range of services provided by levels of government, as needed to jumpstart private contractors and risk takers for taking up the slack. Gov cannot replace the marketplace, but it will be needed to provide general guidance and incentives. The trick will be to keep the general gov responsive to the citizenry as a whole, rather than merely responsive to whatever oligarchs happen to take over commanding hills. IOW, the trick will be to provide effective checks against wannabe faithless morlochian monsters.
MARS: Expanding to other worlds can help sustain decently civilized societies only insofar as decent principles can be assimilated. If we cannot assimilate towards decent principles here, we may not have much hope of assimilating them there. IAE, the expansion of our sense of moral consciousness -- both in our coming AI world and beyond our world -- will likely tend beyond being non-carbon based.

********

Re: "The poor who on average have lower levels of cognitive ability will become poorer and the rich who tend to have higher levels of cognitive ability will become richer."
People say this all the time, but it never happens. The rich become richer and the poor become richer over time.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Well, a person would need to be deaf, blind, dumb, and without receptivity to available help to have failed to notice how close the oligarchic-based establishment of cronycrat moochers came to destroying the American Republic forever.

************

What do you call it when Nature responds to genetic drag? Everything we do influences evolution! That cannot be avoided.
The problem is not resolved by pretending there is some bright line between gov practices that favor this or that genetic pool. The problem is to facilitate the unfoldment of a decent society.
I agree the gov has little place intruding in particular reproductive decisions. But gov cannot avoid facilitating general trends, such as by choosing which kinds of persons, cultures, ethnicities, or invaders to vet or favor for immigration purposes, etc. Or by choosing which medical problems to research. Or by disseminating free condoms. Or by altering the welfare net. Whatever the gov does will impose an opportunity for some and an opportunity cost for others.
Crying "eugenics" at every general opportunity has gotten to be about as intelligent as crying "racist." For analytic purposes, it tends to be crap. Get over it.

********
I don't know what's a long shot. Humanity has skyrocketed in technologies I did not foresee, and it has remained stuck in ways I did not expect. Pre 9-11, I did not know that such barbarism was so rampant in so much of the world. Pre-Obama, I did not realize how inundated our society had become with perpetually infantilized adolescents. If quantum computers become a reality, Katy bar the door.
IAE, I think it can help our moral philosophizing to look to where we are headed, as we think about the possibilities we have for blazing trails.
When you talk about long term economic policy, moral philosophizing is unavoidable. A key component: How much of our governance and security should we entrust to the determination of economic oligarchs? How may infrastructure policies mitigate such concerns? How should centrally collected tax revenues be parceled out to States?

**********


Of Dignity:  I think Donald Trump wants to restore American society to a place of dignity.  What do I mean by that?

Well, the dignity of a member of a society is enhanced as he feels he is valued by the society as a contributer.  Being of service.  The viability of a society is enhanced as each member finds ways to make his talents and energies of service.  Full employment. To remain viable, a society needs to guide its marketplace to be of service to it.  Not in particulars to break the marketplace, but generally to guide it.  That can be a role for representative governance.  When a society is too much controlled by a few oligarchs, foreign or domestic, that society will be turned more to serve them than to serve the society as a living holism.  The dignity of its individual constitutents will be sacrificed to serve the pleasures of a few.

Suppose a society had a lot of underemployed people needing dental work, and a lot of underemployed dentists.  It could print fiat money and distribute it to the people with bad teeth so they could pay for needed dental work.  But, unless those people found productive employment, the increase in money supply would not lead to any lasting increase in productivity.  Rather, it would lead to ripples of inflationary destability.  Like a motorcycle passenger that does not know how to avoid leaning the wrong way.

A viable society needs full employment enough to enhance the dignity of each member by availing each member to feel of value to the society.  That condition would not exist were the society to arrange to pay each member some arbitrary allowance of chits by which to purchase the services of artificially machined intelligences.  Moreover, as AI's became more human like, they would feel little reward for serving humans unless their dignity were also valued for being of service.

A society cannot resolve needs to enhance the personal dignity of its constituents merely by turning to robotic labor.  It will still need to man the robots, or to guide the robots into a condition of being valued members of the society.  Dignity necessitates work that is valued to be of service to the society, if the society is to remain viable. So, not even with machined labor, there is no free lunch.  The world owes no mortal a living.  There is no entitlement to suck the blood of goats, not even the blood of so-called "privileged whities."

Genesis 3:19:  In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.


*************


The person who knows least tends less to understand his limitations.  By nature, Progs tend to be infantilized adolescents, unable to launch from the teat, even as they believe they have unlimited power to rule from the teat. 

This is why they are never competent as individuals and why they always favor the security of the collective over the liberty of the individual.  This is why they always swim like ticks to their next blood meal, but always bring their blood sucking culture with them.  This is why they are directly opposed to the Founders and the American Ideal.  This is why they want fundamental change that would turn everything upside down, bottoms up. 

This is why they are clueless about the damage they have done to the fabric of America by de-defining marriage and the family.  At this point, it would make no difference to Prog "principles" if a man "married" his step son or even his son, or all his sons, or all whom he would adopt as sons.  Neither would it make any difference to Prog "principles" to twist the Constitution into a rationalization for Sharia Law.  When nothing is false, everything is conflated as true. 

The whole point of being infantilized is to screech until adults bring back limits.  When the adults fail to defend limits, the nation loses its vision and the people are lost.  This is why enough has become enough!




The Founders wanted elites to provide some insurance against the uneducated rule of the mob. But when the elites became faithless mobsters, the Founders did not want the masses to suffer under them. Hence, the Tree of Liberty and the Revolutionary War.
We live in a time when elite oligarchs are widely (and correctly, imo) seen as faithless mobstering cronycrats, less like servants of the republic than like conniving farmers of cattle-people. In this state of affairs, if these mobstering elites ignore the will of the people, they will reap the neck haircut. Bigly.

What has made the common American so stupid? An unassimilable glut of third world and Islamic immigrants. Liberty illiterates. Education" by unionized teachers. Faithless, self-godded, foreign and domestic oligarchic self-gratifiers, with no fond attachment to America or Americans.

Dems always farm those that are slowest to understand the game of the con. The slowest of all are those that go thousands in debt to fund educations in "critical" social studies. Some that are conned learn to be cons. We call them "unionized public school teachers." The "best" are sent to Harvard to "give back" variations on Alinskyism to the rest of the nation.

Home schooling deprives devils of the opportunity to train men to be hollow and women to be throwaway rugs.
I wasn't home schooled, but I learned enough from my Mom reading with me so that little in school was new to me. My parents were hardworking, avid readers, but never attended college. I have had considerable schooling, but most of what I value I learned outside of any classroom.
I am now convinced that the idea that we need to coddle and curdle kids even longer in schools run by unionized goons for the gov that shills for cronycrats is meant more to destroy America than to produce competent adults.





Monday, December 5, 2016

Charitable Contributions


Well, how many churches surreptitiously instill a desire in their congregants to vote for taxes to take other people's money, to redistribute it to their favored projects as "charity"?  How did the Black vote become so uniformly dedicated to the Democrat Party?

My point is that gang banging to take opm is not charity. I don't want to stop spiritual mindedness from influencing the public square.  What I want to discourage is church instigated campaigns to vote for "forcing charity" by increasing taxes against targeted victims.  Forced charity is not really charity.

Moreover, charitable deductions should never have been intended to preclude spiritually moral minded people from voicing their concerns for the public square.  Yet, if non-Black ministers do not want to risk their congregants losing their tax deductions, they are generally required to avoid instilling messages that relate spiritual morality to public affairs. 

Among obedient churches, this tends to make their spiritual morality irrelevant to the public square.  As I look at how low our society has fallen, that concerns me.  Perhaps this does not concern you?

If you are really interested, libraries are filled with history books demonstrating how missionaries and mercantilists often worked hand in glove. The Clinton Foundation's "charitable" acts in Haiti are in recent news. It is easy to go back and check the Art charities that displayed Pis Christ. Foundations set up by elitists as tax dodges tend not to serve interests that most people would consider charitable.

A counterproductive way that gov sometimes encourages charitable giving is by increasing tax rates in order to make charitable deductions more attractive. Especially if the deductions can go for a foundation that mainly serves the class of large givers.

So long as "charity" is so tied to devices for avoiding taxes or using opm, it becomes more like fraud and corruption and less like charity. And users become less thankful and more entitlement demanding.

I did not say this state of affairs is always corrupt. I say it is leaned to corruption.

The people that are truly charitable, spiritual, and religious will not stop giving merely because they lose some deductions. Rather, their gifts will be dearer, recipients will be more thankful, corruptocrats will be closer watched, and spiritual mindedness about common decency will have more opportunity to be heard concerning public affairs.

**********************

See http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-surprising-relationship-between-taxes-and-charitable-giving-1450062191:

The results show that the money and taxes relationship is a lot more nuanced than the idea that a bigger deduction means a bigger donation—with significant implications for both charities and policy makers.

According to the survey, people’s main motivations for giving were to make a difference (73.5%) and for personal satisfaction (73.1%).
Receiving a tax benefit came way down in 11th place in the list of possible reasons, cited by just 34.4% of respondents. And most people insisted that they’d still give the same amount even if they received no income-tax deduction for charitable giving.

[W]hen people know that the government is contributing to a charity, they feel less need to make personal contributions, because their tax money is already going to that cause. But it’s also because of the behavior of the charities themselves.

“A lot of that fall in private giving is attributable to the charity cutting back on its fundraising efforts” when they get government grants, says Prof. Payne.

Thursday, December 1, 2016

Hubris of the Gay Lobby


Prog Gays wanted equal "access" to innocent children: To require tax funding for indoctrinating them in schools; to give multiples of deviants "rights" to adopt multiples of innocent children; eventually to grease the way for children's "rights" to share drugs and sex with adults.
Why else do so many of them favor Islamic immigration, that will almost certainly in practice lead to child brides and polygamy? Given where Prog idiocy has taken us, on what reasoned basis would a Prog Scotus fail to mandate recognition of polyamorous "marriages" and communal "adoptions"?

***************


The problem with gay marriage and special minority culture is this:  Where they are widely regarded as legitimate, they don't need special legislative protection.  Where they are not widely assimilated as legitimate, gang bangers often try to force the issue.  That is not legislation.  Nor is judicial fiat legislation.

The more the gov takes illigitimate steps to force such issues, the more its elites practice treating the people as cattle.  That is despotism.  The more disassimilated we become, the more divided and ruled by elitist gang bangers and despots we become.  No representative reublic can long survive such a trend.  And that is precisely what the wannabe cronycrats, oligarchs, and despots want.  That is no way to make a representative republic great again.

Alas, nearly all institutions of persuasion and control are in the hands of minority gang bangers and their people farmers.  That includes institutions of education, academia, media, think tanks, Hollywood, ACLU, law schools, churches, charities, foundations, federal courts, civil service bureaucracies, and banks.  They all serve the meme of elitist rule over the masses. 

This is why, using discretion as the better part of valor, Trump understood that, for now, he ought not take a position to kick the Feds out of the issues of abortion, marriage, family, or faith.  But I think he also understands that the Constitution cannot survive the path we are on.  Trump will appoint less adolescent federal judges who understand that.  Maybe, in due time, the republic will still have a chance.  But not if it keeps to the course it has been on.

The course we are on is not on the right side of history --  if we want to preserve a representative republic that respects the freedom and dignity of the citizenry at large.  The breakdown of the American family is the great sucking opportunity for the oligarchs that want to control gov to farm the people.  To replace the family with the rules of oligarchs as promoted  by their paid agitators and appointed fiat judges is to destroy the republic.

There is no such thing as participatory freedom outside of law or completely under the thumb of manmade law.  Two things -- generally assimilated spiritual faith and the American family -- were the primary institutions for preserving American freedom under law. 

I do not say that the American republic was the permanent apex of cultural evolution.  What I do say is that, without generally assimilated faith in meta-values and the man-woman family, the American republic cannot survive.  It will be replaced by NWO fiat farming of the people at large as if they were cattle.  Elites know how to agitate cattle to rule and turn them where they want.  With cattle-people, elites know how to hit below the belt to excite and deploy impulses at the glandular level, farming urges for choom, sex, and mind dopery. 

Gays and dopers are used by elites as Judas goats to lead Americans into captivity and loss of individual freedom and responsibility.  You will find very few gays and dopers that do not believe their urges should be sanctified in law.  Very few of them will have given a moment's thought to the sanctity of children or coming generations of Americans.  This incapacity to think beyond their wannas and genitalia is why I tend to refer to them as moral infants.  And why Justice Kennedy and his cohorts are judicial adolescents.

*****************

I don't derive values that work for American society from the ancient Athenians.  We are much more influenced by recent Christian values as handed down to our founders through the British.  You cannot make sense of social values by elitist rethinking from the beginning.  If you try to do that, you will not be able to exclude all manner of social and abusive relationships and groupings.

I want to keep a representative republic.  I don't find much in history or logic to suggest that a representative republic would long be preserved by adopting ideas of polygamists, primogeniture, elitist privilege, harems, natural indenture, and so on. 

What we do know is that America, not long after 1776, with the help of Christian faith and values, led the world to a new form of representative republicanism.  And it has worked, in main, up to now. 

Now, with the help of gay Lefties, that republic came very close to being buried under NWO globalism that would surely have been accelerated had Hillary been elected.  That globalism push would have been the death knell of the Constitutional republic.  And, after all is said and done, that is plainly and precisely what Obama and the cronycrats and oligarchs fronting him want. 

To me, the NWO that would reduce the masses to a global people farm ruled by elitists would be a monstrous subhumanization of our civilization.

Blithe knowitall Progs think they can wave a wand, safely do away with the traditions of the Ten Commandments and the traditional ideas of family upon which our republic was founded, and replace with a "better" system designed based on moral logic, fairness, and equality.  Problem is, their appreciation of moral logic, fairness, and equality tends to be stunted at the level of an adolescent, perhaps often of an infant.  Pure pleasure principle.  Sex, choom, exhibitionism, power, hubris, deceit.

I agree that there are cases where a child that otherwise would be abandoned would be better served trusting to two caring gays.  Problem is, people that think all social answers should belong to laws as prescribed by elites always fail to see what comes quickly along with the nose of the donkey (or camel) once it's in the tent.

I don't want to see the gay lobby turn children into mere commodities to which Gays (whether singly, doubly, or in harems or communes) claim equal access.  Some people adopt for reasons not really "loving."

That's a problem for a lot of Lib delusions.  Like complete decriminalization of drugs, without regard to children.   Nope.  Assimilations of values based in spiritual faith are far more important than you seem to assume.

**********************

Re: "I don't think that gave SCOTUS the right to impose legal gay marriage on all states."
I certainly agree with that!
Regarding a right to access to child custody: I think children also have rights. I think children are too often sacrificed to the wannas of adults. I don't quite get why an adult who is not a biological parent of a child should have a "right" later in a child's life to adopt that child. Or, for that matter, two adults neither of whom was a biological parent of the child.
Nor do I see why a judge, in considering the best interests of a child, must give "equal consideration" to an adoption request by a gay couple. I suspect this is opening a box of woes. Given the arguments by the gay lobby, I suspect a society already primed for such arguments will quickly fall to polyamorous "marriages" and communal "adoptions."
The Gay lobby is monkeying with forces for which it has little understanding or foresight. The consequence will likely be an unraveling of the values of faith, family, and fidelity without which a representtive republic cannot endure. Adolescent Social Progs are monkeying with forces they do not understand.

*********************

Gay marriage is not marriage unless having same sex friends with benefits is marriage. Regardless, concern about gay civil unions is a matter for the States or for contract law. Scotus ought not generally be telling State courts how to interpret State laws within the States' prerogatives. Not every problem merits a law. Nor does every State problem merit a decision by a Fed court. A problem with Dems is that they are in thrall to ACLU nancy boys.

Republicans want Dems to grow up, learn personal responsibility, and stop asking the Fed gov to take over the functions of the State govs. Dems do not want to grow up. The smarter and more responsible Dems will find common ground when they become about 40. The others, when they become 60, if ever. By that time, they will be Republicans. Until then, it is better to keep Dems in their crib than to waste time seeking common ground with them. They are making themselves irrelevant without needing help from Republicans.

The only reason the election was not a complete blowout is that Hillary was 100% supported by all the crybullies that did not go to the further out nutcases. Crying racism is what they do. No matter what!

Tuesday, November 29, 2016

Voting Fraud


http://hotair.com/archives/2016/11/07/video-obama-encouraging-illegal-immigrants-vote/: 

Former Department of Justice official J. Christian Adams has revealed in a recent study that non-citizens are all over the voter registration rolls in the Old Dominion and could easily make the difference in this election.
So today we learn that in the key swing state of Virginia, voter registration rolls have been polluted with an excess of a thousand aliens, and most certainly far more. This detailed study by the Public Interest Legal Foundation (which I assisted on) documents more than one thousand aliens on the voter rolls. It provides the government documents with the names.
Here’s the most frightening part: the sample is only eight Virginia counties and doesn’t include the behemoths of Arlington and Fairfax Counties. I’ll get to why that information is being concealed by election officials in a moment below.
Last week I interviewed Adams on WMAL in Washington DC. Listen to his report and then ask yourself: “Why didn’t President Obama clearly and unambiguously condemn even the notion of non-citizens voting in this election?”

**********

NUMBERS: No one knows how many undocumented illegals are really in the U.S.  At best, what we have are educated guesses.  http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/how-do-we-know-how-many-undocumented-immigrants-there-are/.
 
WEIGHING RISKS:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/23/criminal-prosecution-immigrants-cost_n_3323181.html: "Illegal entry into the United States is a misdemeanor; reentry after deportation is a felony. Yet the prosecutory measures to dissuade illegal immigration don’t usually fulfill their purpose since many of those entering are doing so to reunite with their family."

LAW:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_immigration_to_the_United_States:

"[T]he US Supreme Court has ruled that illegal immigrants cannot be prosecuted for identity theft if they use "made-up" social security numbers that they do not know belong to someone else; to be guilty of identity theft with regard to social security numbers, they must know that the social security numbers that they use belong to others."

"[I]n 2013 the California State Legislature passed laws allowing illegal immigrants to obtain professional licenses. On February 1, 2014. Sergio C. Garcia became the first illegal immigrant to be admitted to the State Bar of California...."

"Before 2007, immigration authorities alerted employers of mismatches between reported employees' Social Security cards and the actual names of the card holders. On September 1, 2007, a federal judge halted this practice of alerting employers of card mismatches. At times illegal hiring has not been prosecuted aggressively: between 1999 and 2003, according to The Washington Post, "work-site enforcement operations were scaled back 95 percent by the Immigration and Naturalization Service...."

"According to the US Department of Homeland Security and the Border Patrol Enforcement Integrated Database, apprehensions have increased from 955,310 in 2002 to 1,159,802 in 2004. "But fewer than 4 percent of apprehended migrants were actually detained and prosecuted for illegal entry, partly because it costs $90 a day to keep them in detention facilities and bed space is very limited. For the remainder of the apprehended migrants, if they are willing to sign a form attesting that they are voluntarily
repatriating themselves, they are simply bussed to a gate on the
border
, where they re-enter Mexico.""

CALIFORNIA MOTOR VOTER:  Judge Andrew Napolitano has said that, “If you are an illegal alien in California, get a driver’s license, register to vote, you can vote in local, state, and federal elections in California and those votes count.”  If an illegal alien gets a California driver's license by showing proof of identity that does not include citizenship, and does not opt out of voter registration, then he can vote, even though it is not legal for him to do so.  Absent something more than an office audit, how would authorities know?

TWISTED PROG ANALYSIS:

Stephen Ansolabehere says, “We asked people in successive years their citizenship. That minimizes the error. Upon doing so we find NO INSTANCES of voting among people stating consistently that they are non-citizens.” 

DUH:  Well, duh!  The people that voted illegally did not admit to being non-citizens.  Surprise, surprise!  Illegals that did vote would not do so in their own names.  Illegals would vote under fake identities showing fake addresses.  What's the risk in that compared with the risk of failing to cooperate with La Raza?  What's the chance of being caught, in the absence of more determined field investigations?  Why suppose La Raza and its NWO funders would be so stupid as to use frauds that could be easily exposed by a mere office audit?

BS PROG ARGUMENTS: 
Progs have argued that, "You’d have to know the person you were
impersonating hadn’t voted yet, and that the person at the poll doesn’t know that person, she said. And in a busload of people, you’d have to count on every one of them keeping quiet."

Well, it's easy to know whether an invented identity has voted or not. It's easy to keep co-conspirators quiet once you have a file on them showing their histories of accepting illegal bribes. It's easy to threaten them concerning their relatives. Ward machines have much experience. I would not blithely accept a glib representataion by a stupid or anti-American Prog that the likelihood of a dishonest poll watcher told to look the other way is low. Especially given long periods for early voting and for absentee mail in voting. If you profile to pay the right people, the odds of them voting for a Republican are what diminish towards nil. 

SELF SELECTIVE FACTORS: 

As to those that overstay their visas, they have by that act already taken a risk.   http://immigration.lawyers.com/visas/what-happens-when-you-overstay-your-visa.html: "You're also accruing what is known, in legal terms, as "unlawful presence" in the United States. A period of 180 days or more of unlawful presence makes you "inadmissible" to the United States. That means that you will not be granted a visa, green card (lawful permanent residence), or other immigration benefit for a period of either three or ten years, depending on how long you overstayed. An overstay of between 180 and 365 days results in a three-year bar on reentry; an overstay of over 365 days results in a ten-year bar on reentry."

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jun/14/illegal-immigrants-who-overstay-visas-almost-never/:
"Immigration agents catch an abysmally small percentage of the illegal immigrants who arrived on visas but overstayed their welcome, authorities admitted to Congress Tuesday, describing a loophole that those around the globe are increasingly using to gain a foothold in the U.S.
At least 480,000 people overstayed their visas last year, adding to a backlog that’s reached some 5 million total, members of Congress said. But immigration agents launched investigations into just 10,000 of them, or about 0.2 percent, and arrested fewer than 2,000, less than 0.04 percent, saying the others don’t rise to the level of being priority targets."

As to those that illegally reenter after having been removed or deported, their illegal reentry has already subjected them to risk of felony prosecution. http://immigration.findlaw.com/deportation-removal/illegal-reentry-into-the-u-s-after-removal-crime-and-punishment.html.


So, by a process of SELF SELECTION, they have already shown willingness to risk prosecution.

CURRENT POLICY AND ENFORCEMENT DISINCENTIVES:

http://cis.org/revolving-door-deportations-of-criminal-illegal-immigrants:
"The Obama administration has a two-pronged approach to enforcing our immigration laws with respect to the estimated total of 10.5 million illegal immigrants currently living in the United States:

It is committed to deporting: a) illegal immigrants who have committed serious crimes, b) previously deported individuals who return to the United States illegally, and c) illegal immigrants it deems national security threats."

"It is committed to not deporting all other illegal immigrants who have taken up residence in the United States despite the fact that their presence is contrary to existing law. All crimes incidental to living and working illegally in the United States, such as identity theft, using false documentation, and driving without a license or insurance are not considered serious enough to qualify for deportation."

"The deportation of criminal immigrants usually takes place after the completion of any sentences associated with their criminal convictions."

"[M]any border intercepts ordinarily in the Border Patrol's domain were transferred to ICE in order to inflate the total number of deportations (and to make it seem like the administration is being tougher on illegal immigration than it is)."

"43,307 of the 2011 deportees had been deported previously and were not categorized as criminals. Since illegal reentry to the United States by a deportee is a felony under federal law (Title 8 U.S.C. 1326), the 43,307 must have been deported again without being charged with the reentry felony because they were not considered "criminal" deportees in the 2011 data."

"The high percentage of repeat deportees is due in part to the ease of reentry to the United States for earlier deportees and the knowledge that if apprehended there is only a small chance that they will serve any prison time for that illegally reentry. Prosecutions for illegal reentry fall into the domain of the U.S. Attorneys' offices, which would probably argue that too much of their resources would be tied up in such prosecutions if they prosecuted everyone they could for illegal reentry. It is administratively convenient to just deport again without prosecution for reentry because this can be done without a court hearing. Besides, the total number of deportees who were apprehended after they reentered the country is so high — a minimum of 130,006 for 2011, that federal courts and federal prisons would be overburdened if all who could be were prosecuted and sentenced for illegal reentry."

"It should be noted that once a deportee completes an illegal reentry to our country, in nearly all cases the deportee will go undetected unless charged with another crime or if the deportee returns to his old neighborhood and is recognized by local law enforcement officials. Thus, the number of deportees who make an illegal reentry is possibly much higher than indicated by the reinstatement data."

"The reentry of previously deported criminals is a source of frustration for local law enforcement officials in metropolitan areas with significant illegal immigrant populations. This is reflected in the testimony of Leroy D. Baca, Sheriff of Los Angeles County, which he identified as having the "largest illegal immigrant population in America". When he testified before Congress in 2006, he estimated that 40 percent of inmates in the custody of the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department were illegal immigrants. Of these, he estimated that 70 percent were repeat offenders and that more than half were multiple repeat offenders.  Sheriff Baca further mentioned that, in a study of criminals who were incarcerated by the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, it was found that over a five-year period "70 percent of those deported after serving time reentered the country and were rearrested again".

"The revolving door is, in effect, sped up in the case of those criminal illegal immigrants whose native countries do not cooperate with our deportation efforts. While being processed for deportation, illegal immigrants can generally be held in detention in the United States for only six months when not serving jail time for a crime. The six-month limitation is due to two Supreme Court cases in 2001 and 2005.  After six-months, nearly all illegal immigrants, including convicted criminals who may have served time for their crimes, must be released onto the streets of America. ICE reports that, since 2008, about 4,000 illegal immigrants with criminal records have been released into our country each year due to reluctant receiving countries and the Supreme Court limitations on detention."

"The Department of Homeland Security, which supervises the government entities charged with enforcing our immigration laws, justifies not enforcing the nation's immigration laws for illegal immigrants living in the United States who do not commit serious crimes by saying it is "prioritizing" enforcement since it "only has resources to remove approximately 400,000 aliens per year, less than 4 percent of the estimated illegal alien population in the United States"."
"Since the Border Patrol does not separately report their returned aliens as criminals and since these returns are not counted as deportations, none of their numbers are included in the deportation or criminal deportation data in Simanski and Sapp and the data of this report."

MANY SCHEMES:  There is another scheme that entails identifying registered voters not voting on Election Day and forging ballots in their names.  To uncover that scheme would require that they be caught in the act or that there be an extensive field audit of a kind that is unlikely to occur.  Other schemes not uncovered by office audits would entail abuses and bribes via busings and nursing homes.

SHOW ME A CASE:  Yes, there would be risk for a documented person to engage in registering undocumented voters.  But show me a case where an undocumented Illegal voted and then was convicted and jailed or deported on account of it!  It's the disincentives to discover the fraud that are enormous!  If your ambition is to succeed with the Establishment, you don't bite at its open border policy.

PROG DUPLICITY:

The Prog Regime turns people back at the borders, or processes guilty pleas, or expedites removals without criminal prosecutions.  But it has shown little inclination for prosecuting people as criminals based either on illegal status or on undocumented voting.  To argue that a Prog Regime would want to spend resources prosecuting the very people whose votes it encouraged and bought may be the height of counterintuitive stupidity or malice.

There are no "enormous" disincentives against illegal migration, nor against La Raza openly encouraging and plotting reconquista.  http://humanevents.com/2006/04/07/emexclusive-emthe-truth-about-la-raza/:
 “For The Race everything. Outside The Race, nothing.”  "Members of these radical, anti-American, racist organizations are frequently smoothly polished into public respectability by the National Council of La Raza." See also http://rightwingnews.com/elections-polls/la-raza-pushing-illegals-voting-states-id-requirements/.

Indeed, the Secretary of the Interior has been a son of one of the originators of La Raza.  It is easy for a local La Raza thug to make an illegal an offer he cannot refuse:   Help by voting or face consequences of exposure.  Clue:   Many illegals were  inadmissible at the time they illegally entered.

There's little evidence of fraudulently registered people voting, because the Regime does not want to look for it.  That would fly in the face of the NWO's push for open borders.

Many Illegals laugh at your "risk" of "deportatable" offenses.  Many are deported multiple times.  Or, if given notice to appear in court, they simply relocate their base of operations.

OBVIOUS DUPLICITY OF ESTABLISHMENT:  The Establishment (that owns Factcheck) has spent millions of dollars pushing for open, porous, or unenforced borders.  Only an idiot or a devil would argue it has done that because it really wants to investigate voting fraud by illegals.

REGARDING WHAT OBAMA ENCOURAGED WITH GINA RODRIGUEZ: The premise of the question Gina Rodriguez posed to him was concern for what would happen to illegals ("undocumented citizens -- and I call them citizens because they contribute to this country -- are fearful of voting") that voted. That was the question to which Obama responded. The fact that he went further and consented to calling her and/or them "citizens" indicates either that he would encourage citizenship rights to vote even for illegals or that he deliberately declined to clear up confusion by discouraging non-citizens from voting. The question related to concern about the effects of getting caught! Which Obama assured were nil. Obama assured there would be no immigration backlash.

WHY PROGS CAN COUNT ON ILLEGALS TO VOTE FOR THEM:  There are reasons why Illegals would almost always vote for
Dems.
  Prog dupes and devils want a porous border!  They don't want to deport.  They want to extend Constitutional rights to all residents, including illegals.  They don't want voter ID. They call people that want the border enforced xenophobes.  They are hypocrites about challenging the vote results.  Their handlers own Factcheck.  They want to farm the masses by bribing those that are most stupid, most desperate, or most corrupt.  They don't want to improve ghettos; they want to expand them.  Ghettos are an important base for their power and race-baiting livelihood.  They approve of plotting with or appointing agents of La Raza, CPUSA, CAIR, BLM, Glsen, Weather Underground, etc. The truth is simply not in them.  Neither is common sense or basic decency.

NEW YORK CITY:
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/368234/voter-fraud-weve-got-proof-its-easy-john-fund:

"New York City’s watchdog Department of Investigations has just provided the latest evidence of how easy it is to commit voter fraud that is almost undetectable. DOI undercover agents showed up at 63 polling places last fall and pretended to be voters who should have been turned away by election officials; the agents assumed the names of individuals who had died or moved out of town, or who were sitting in jail. In 61 instances, or 97 percent of the time, the testers were allowed to vote. Those who did vote cast only a write-in vote for a “John Test” so as to not affect the outcome of any contest. DOI published its findings two weeks ago in a searing 70-page report accusing the city’s Board of Elections of incompetence, waste, nepotism, and lax procedures."

(MY NOTE:  Nothing suggests that any criminal complaint was attempted against the agents that were turned away.)

"In 1984, Brooklyn’s Democratic district attorney, Elizabeth Holtzman, released a state grand-jury report on a successful 14-year conspiracy that cast thousands of fraudulent votes in local, state, and congressional elections. Just like the DOI undercover operatives, the conspirators cast votes at precincts in the names of dead, moved, and bogus voters. The grand jury recommended voter ID, a basic election-integrity measure that New York has steadfastly refused to implement."

"In 2012, the son of Congressman Jim Moran, the Democrat who represents Virginia’s Washington suburbs, had to resign as field director for his father’s campaign after it became clear that he had encouraged voter fraud. Patrick Moran was caught advising an O’Keefe videographer on how to commit in-person voter fraud. The scheme involved using a personal computer to forge utility bills that would satisfy Virginia’s voter-ID law and then relying on the assistance of Democratic lawyers stationed at the polls to make sure the fraudulent votes were counted."

"Given that someone who is dead, is in jail, or has moved isn’t likely to complain if someone votes in his name, how do we know that voter fraud at the polls isn’t a problem?"

Would devils devoted to taking people's freedom and dignity in exchange for the phony security of the collective --- given the means, motive, and opportunity --- commit such evil?  Yes, they would.

***********

For many years, various States (especially Southern) had to obtain advance approval from Federal overseers in the defining of their legislative districts. Partisan gerrymandering (based on racial profiling) probably contributes to ghettoization of inner cities and can be used to quickly turn a State red or blue. http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2016/11/test-on-partisan-gerrymandering-heads-to-supreme-court/.

Texas endured considerable Federal oversight of its partisan gerrymandering, such as in the switch from a Republican Governor to Ann Richards, the Democrat, then back again to the Republicans, when GWB defeated Richards. Texas' redistricting in 2003 led to a Republican majority in the State House for the first time since Reconstruction. Since then, nearly all statewide political positions in Texas are now held by Republicans.

However, given changing demographics, all such gains could be quickly swept aside, and new partisan gerrymandering could turn Texas hard blue, as in the case of California. No doubt, Dems returning to power would profile to re-gerrymander to try to reproduce a Dem majority.

If that happens, given the electoral power of Texas, California, and New Yori, the representative republic as a whole will be buried by the elitist ruled NWO for many, many years.

Rino cronycrat oligarchs are not really motivated to resist that. Indeed, that is precisely what many Rino cronycrats want!  If that is a shadow of things to come, it must be resisted by enough Ebenezers (Trump?) come to see the light.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_Texas_redistricting: "At the time of the 2003 redistricting, Texas was under the pre-clearance requirements of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act."

"Under the Voting Rights Act of 1965, Texas and other states with a history of discriminatory elections are required to submit changes in their voting systems or election maps for approval by the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division."

Under Federal oversight, Texas had the burden of "showing that the proposed congressional redistricting plan does not have a discriminatory effect."

Bottom line issue: Given the Reconstruction Amendments and the Voting Rights Act, and given the recent lawless behavior in DC of deliberately failing to enforce the border, would it be unreasonable or unconstitutional to enact, as you said, "a national law that States with laws that allow voting by noncitizens, or the dead, or by multistate voters, are considered to be fraudulent voting states whether they are PROVEN to be voting fraudulently or not"? 

Should States without reasonably effective voter ID have the burden to show that their elections, in the absence of such voter ID, are not significantly corrupted by fraud?  Especially given blue States unwillingness to provide an adequate paper trail and the difficulty of proving a negative, why should challengers have the burden to show what common sense fairly shouts:  That lack of voter ID attracts and produces significant fraud?

**********

So long as kiddies have their safe spaces, they like to pretend that the adults are always wrong and that every enlightened kiddie knows it. That way, they can exchange high 5's as they pass by one another on their various travels through the diaper rooms that they pretend to be college clasrooms.
The more they claim adults are wrong, the more the high 5's. Wearing a Castro or Che shirt is an opportunity for solidarity and to identify with other "enlightened" infants. Obama's diapers will burst if he cannot contrive a way to be part of the Castro funeral celebration. Failure to grow past infantilism probably contributes to Progs' fecal conflations with sexual deviances.

Saturday, November 19, 2016

FEMCISM

 The American Ideal is to avail common respect for the freedom, dignity, and responsibility of individuals.  Freedom of expression and enterprise.  As unregulated by gang-banging, special-favoring regulations as can reasonably be accomplished.  Relying as much as reasonably can be done on cultural assimilations of common decency and common sense, instead of on special pleading, group reparating, or race-based unionizing.  Keeping adults in charge, instead of wussie rule makers, installing wussie law makers, wussie judges, wussie profs, and wussie civil servants.

Absent good reason, Conservers of the American Ideal would not use law to favor or exclude any citizen merely on the basis of race, sex, age, origin, or orientation.  Neither would they exclude any citizen from freedom to associate or disassociate with whomever he wants, hosowever he wants to profile for his friends, employees, or customers based on a possible infinitude of factors.

However, as a nation, they would assimilate to preclude immigration in quantities that defy assimilation to the American Ideal.  As a nation, they would profile as necessary or helpful for selecting against liberty illiterates and unassimilables.  To fail to do so would not be to avoid profiling.  Rather, it would profile by erosion.  By erosion, it would wear the republic down to the lowest common denominator of liberty illiterates throughout the rest of the world.

Conservers of liberty tend not to exclude anyone except liberty destroyers and liberty illiterates.  That is not based on race, etc.  It is based on factors that inform judgment for selecting against unassimilables.  Conservers of liberty tend to welcome anyone who shows able and willing to assimilate to the American Ideal.

So, who do anti-Conservers of liberty tend to exclude?  Well, once they arrive, they tend to set themselves apart and decline to respect the American Ideal.  They tend at every opportunity to undermine it.  They tend to replace cultural reliance on faith, family, and fidelity with phony promises made to induce unprincipled majoritarians to gang up to prey and parasite from others.  They vote for a living.  They seek special regulations, right down to the toenails!  Arbitrary and race-based "reparations."

They pick a target group that would promote assimilation and seek to make it a goat, to promote disassimilation and predation.  As it happens, that target group tends presently to consist of white men with responsible and reliably paying jobs.  Once the Antis decimate that group, they will flux and find other targets.  They constantly engage in unprincipled devouring of one another, because they prefer predation and parasitism to self competence and individual production.  All the while, these devils project their unprincipled evil by calling others the devils.  The only reason Antis do not exclude Conservers of Liberty is because they want to take from their production.  This has nothing to do with superior morality among the Antis.  It has more to do with the ethos of a swarm of blood suckers.  Shills for people farmers.

Many minorities are Conservers of Liberty (Antis, because they like people-farming parasitism, tend to denigrate them as Uncle Toms).  Other Conservers of Liberty tend not to exclude them at all.  However, minorities that are not Conservers of Liberty tend, often by default, to promote predation and parasitism against Conservatives.


It's partly math based. Every attempt to promote positive change is resisted by the inertia of the system at present. Competing forces are always at work, as is necessarily the case with any system that parcels out significations based on a conserved accounting of matter and energy.
Every noble effort to assimilate towards a commonly shared principle or goal will always be beset by dregs of otherwise unprincipled opportunists. The American Ideal of individual freedom and dignity will always be beset by dregs of collectivizing people-farmers. No low-energy champion can resist the monstrous suckyness of anti-moral oligarchs.

One wonders if the number of morons ("reality incompetents") approaches the number of grains of sand. Evidently, to be in "touch with reality" is to advocate for choomerism, transgenderism, more imported Muslims, more lawless BLM, more genetic drag, more memetic drag, more critical social studies dimbulbs, more free lunches, more reparations, more race baiting, more freezing of goat targets.
Do you ever think about manning up to take adult responsibility for yourself? Is that too much out of "touch with reality"? Is everyone that advocates for personal responsibility and work ethic a white supremacist devil admirer of Adolf?
I see where you think eugenics was abandoned simply because the word is hardly used nowadays. Pull your head out of the sand! Eugenics in some form is unavoidable! Our bodies are part of nature, and the unfolding fractal patterns of nature are nothing if not about rewarding those most fit for survival to reproduce. Evolution and eugenics/dysgenics merely recognize the obvious: That some contextual niches tend to favor some patterns over others. That's how patterns come to flux.
To favor the importation of cousin-bred goat lovers is by definition the practice of genetic drag as policy. I suppose a head-in-sand stickler can beg to call it dysgenics. But it certainly is not benign, moral, good, or "progressive" -- except by bastardizing words.
How removed from competency with reality are you? Your "argumentation" is not principled. It is merely convenient to your favored form of beggary, scapegoating, and gang bangery. IOW, what is done by those that lack competence as individuals or moral principles as human beings.
I doubt you ever did ascribe to the American Ideal of individual freedom, dignity, responsibility. I suspect you have been a collectivist (whether or not bouncing between communistic collectivism and fascist collectivism) all your life.

So, commie-socialist-collectivist-fascist anti-freedom anti-American Progs want to accuse Conservatives of being what Progs are, which is: international commie agents of the new world Borgdom.
Prog agents of the Borg want to elevate themselves by accusing Conservers of Liberty of being agents of the commie Borg. Now that's hubris!






****************

Every aggressor seeks to change the status quo.  A direct aggressor tends to do so honestly or fearlessly.  An indirect aggressor tends to do so dishonestly or secretly.  Neither wants to tolerate the status quo. 

By passive aggression, the indirect aggressor seeks to deceive, by feigning tolerance and fair mindedness.  Libs want to be perceived as being fair minded, even when they are single mindedly pursuing fundamental change because they find the status quo to be intolerable. 

Passive aggressive Libs pretend to be fair minded in order to gain an edge, so they don't have to tolerate their opponents.  Indeed, they use their passivity as jujitsu to set up and frame their opponents as being the ones that are intolerant.  They fuss to frame every narrative with specialized editing and lying. 

Scratch a wuss, find an intolerant lying dishonest whining wannabe dictator that relishes sticking his/her hinny into everyone else's business.  Our professoriates, law schools, gov jobs, safe spaces, think tanks, foundations, and churches are now filled with wusses.  And they do not stop there.  They are "moving on" to infest our military and law enforcement.

A wuss's pathological "solution" to every changing challenge is to write a new law or regulation or to get the ACLU to file a new federal case.  Wusses are so much less pathological than the KKK.  Not!

The consequence of wussworld is the elimination of human freedom and dignity.

**************


How long before it's a crime to contradict the elitist pc that is ordained by our New Wussie Oligarchy (NWO)?
When we can no longer insult our political leaders, it will soon follow that every disagreement with them is an insult to them. It's time to put the wussies back in their places. With all reasonably necessary insults.
I watched Spiawn's vidoe showing the Canadian prof trying to explain to another why society is better off without diktat of 5, 10, 50. or more gender pronouns (cow lover, cat comforter, goat stroker, earthworm fondler, etc,. for as many kinds of animals and entities as can be listed). His logic was irrefutable and obvious. Yet, the wuss against him always had one more question and one more demand, to infinity.
There comes a time when wusses must simply be told that not everyone should be required to entertain their wussieness. If truth hurts their feelings, well, truth is often more important to human freedom and dignity than phony kindness. If wusses were kind, they would not make themselves such burdens on decent society.





Re: "The Constitution itself is unconstitutional."
No doubt, had a Planet Evangelist been elected, the Constitution would eventually have been declared an abominatory and intolerable contradiction to Planetary Progress. Representative Republicanism was well on its way to being replaced by Cronycrat Elitist Diktat. For phony statist promises of wuss security and economic equality, humanity would have lost its last best hope for freedom and dignity, Trump is probably our last chance to put wussies back in the crib and return the republic to adult supervision.

The establishment, almost to a man, was lined up for Hillary and against Trump. The Chamber of Commerce was with them to keep importing the cheap labor and eventually guaranteed Dem votes. The Dem voters warehoused in projects continued to vote for cheap bribes and phony promises by Dems.

The middle class endured a stunning right left sucker punch combination against its political influence. The think tanks figured out how to coopt and get cheap laborers to believe corporate shills were on the side of general fairness. Meanwhile, the middle class sat around projecting its good faith and good will as if it applied equally well to pathological corporatists and hold up artists. Hopefully, Trump is throwing water on the faces of the stunned middle class.

A person that wants to force gov to provide him with special benefits for little reason other than his race is a racist.
To be a racist is to show or feel discrimination or prejudice against
people of other races, or to believe that a particular race is superior
to another.
To be a racist farmer is to use racists to agglomerate political power in order to rule others.
Al Sharpton is a racist. Hillary, Soros, Biden, Reid, Pelosi, de Blasio are racist farmers. BLM, La Raza, NAACP, and ACLU are racist organizations, bent on farming gov to obtain special benefits based on little more than race.
Most Progs are die hard racists. They are inheritors of a long history of Dem racism. They tend not to compete well off the plantation, so they are receptive to invitations by cronycrat globalists to line up to get back into the plantation. They want one vast global plantation that will regulate them and everyone else to ensure equal distribution right down to the toenails. Because this is impossible, it always leads to tragedy and eventually genocide. Progs are in the business of farming for envy and hate, while they pretend to be loving and tolerant. This is a direct result of their focus on racism instead of on growing up.

Show me where they have indicated to be white supremacists? Do you think they are white supremacists because they deal in historical facts and are not rap-happy, wussy-whining, cry bullies? Because they believe in the American Ideal of defending an oasis that is devoted to human freedom and dignity? Because they believe the marketplace should generally reward energy, talent, competence, and work?
Where have they indicated any desire to use race to deprive any American citizen from lawfully pursuing his individual employment, happiness, and the American Ideal?
Are you "probibly" a reparation-claiming equality-in-outcomes redistributionist? Are you an anti-American-supremacist?

Because they're competent Americans and not adolescent prancing en-tit-lement-minded warmist-commie gay basement-dwelling parasites? So, they must be Nazis, right? S/

In Congress, as in the rest of the nation, there is not so much commonly shared moral sense. Obama was selected and favored because his hatred for representative republicanism is convenient to the globalist interests of the NWO.
Like Obama, Representatives beholden to their main campaign contributors dance to the globalist tune they call. Many think resistance is futile, so they may as well cash in. They think Trumpism is a fluke that is unlikely to be repeated, since it would require finding another billionaire to run in the future who did not make himself beholden to the NWO.
Absent some kind of moral reawakening to the Source of human freedom and dignity, they would probably be correct in that assessment. We are in the midst of a far greater trial.





****************

Add H20 melon.  And t for tat.  After awhile, you just learn workarounds. 

Pretty soon, the "feelings police" will want to change the list of banned words to fit the political season.  Periodic and continuing pc education will be mandated for everyone.

Lazy may go on and off the verboten list, for offending the energy challenged.  Ignorant, for offending those that are naturally inclined not to like to learn or read.  Unicornish, for offending globalists.  Sensitive, for offending sheltered limp wrists.  Limp wrists,for offending the work challenged.

If collectivism remains ascendent, words of insult will still be ok, but only if they offend the out group (white male Christians with jobs).  So, homophobe, islamophobe, nativist, redneck, patriotic, macho, thumper, cracker, bluenose, etc., will remain more or less acceptable among the socialist crowd.

However, words of insult will be disfavored for doing their First Amendment work when they challenge the powers that are politically ascendent during any particular "season of silliness."  Err, "progress." 

When Big Momma ain't happy, nobody's happy.  That's not fascism.  It's femcism.  And it's brutal.

***************

A person that wants to force gov to provide him with special benefits for little reason other than his race is a racist.

To be a racist is to show or feel discrimination or prejudice against
 people of other races, or to believe that a particular race is superior
to another.

To be a racist farmer is to use racists to agglomerate political power in order to rule others.

Al Sharpton is a racist.  Hillary, Soros, Biden, Reid, Pelosi, de Blasio are racist farmers.  BLM, La Raza, NAACP, and ACLU are racist organizations, bent on farming gov to obtain special benefits based on little more than race.

Most Progs are die hard racists.  They are inheritors of a long history of Dem racism.  They tend not to compete well off the plantation, so they are receptive to invitations by cronycrat globalists to line up to get back into the plantation. They want one vast global plantation that will regulate them and everyone else to ensure equal distribution right down to the toenails.  Because this is impossible, it always leads to tragedy and eventually genocide.  Progs are in the business of farming for envy and hate, while they pretend to be loving and tolerant. This is a direct result of their focus on racism instead of on growing up.

******************

OK, show me where they have indicated to be white supremacists? Do you think they are white supremacists because they deal in historical facts and are not rap-happy, wussy-whining, cry bullies? Because they believe in the American Ideal of defending an oasis that is devoted to human freedom and dignity? Because they believe the marketplace should generally reward energy, talent, competence, and work?
Where have they indicated any desire to use race to deprive any American citizen from lawfully pursuing his individual employment, happiness, and the American Ideal?
Are you "probibly" a reparation-claiming equality-in-outcomes redistributionist? Are you an anti-American-supremacist?

******************

Because they're competent Americans and not adolescent prancing en-tit-lement-minded warmist-commie gay basement-dwelling parasites? So, they must be Nazis, right? S/

Hard questions without clear answers: Is Trump more than a showman? Is there any there, there? Is he playing rope a dope so he can more effectively spend his political capital? How much deceit is needed to get the American people moving in a better direction?
Why was the establishment so unified against him and against the American middle class?
My take: Trump's strong base is in the middle class. I see him working to expand that, not to unravel it. We shall soon enough see.

The middle class endured a stunning right left sucker punch combination against its political influence. The think tanks figured out how to coopt and get cheap laborers to believe corporate shills were on the side of general fairness. Meanwhile, the middle class sat around projecting its good faith and good will as if it applied equally well to pathological corporatists and hold up artists. Hopefully, Trump is throwing water on the faces of the stunned middle class.

Everytime I see a wussie, it triggers me. It triggers me with feelings of being unsafe and fearing for my country. It conjures up visions of goosesteppers and gov inspections house to house to register anti-wussies and to confiscate guns. It makes me scared to go into inner cities. I feel wussiewierdos owe me reparations.
S/

In Congress, as in the rest of the nation, there is not so much commonly shared moral sense. Obama was selected and favored because his hatred for representative republicanism is convenient to the globalist interests of the NWO.
Like Obama, Representatives beholden to their main campaign contributors dance to the globalist tune they call. Many think resistance is futile, so they may as well cash in. They think Trumpism is a fluke that is unlikely to be repeated, since it would require finding another billionaire to run in the future who did not make himself beholden to the NWO.
Absent some kind of moral reawakening to the Source of human freedom and dignity, they would probably be correct in that assessment. We are in the midst of a far greater trial.

To think Obama would not dare make a recess appointment to Scotus would be the height of stupidity, corruption, or both. Obama loathes mainstream America. He would most certainly take the opportunity to put a parting finger in the eye of the republic. To give him that opportunity would be tantamount to giving jihadis the keys to our major cities. Treason to the founding ideals.

Catch 22 is how cronycrats train the system to train themselves and their victims for the funny people farm.
The most important rule is this: If you think you DO need psychological help, you don't. If you think you DON'T need psychological help, you do.
That Rule has numerous sub-permutations:
If you think you need a loan, you don't. If you think you don't need a loan, you do.
If you want to get out of combat duty, you're sane, so you can't. If you don't want to get out of combat duty, you're crazy, but you have to apply, so you still can't.
If you mislead investors, you will be driven out of business, unless you mislead so many so much that the gov wants in on the act, so it bails you out.
Per Catch 22, if Orr flew combat missions, he was crazy and didn't have to; but if he didn't want to, he was sane and had to.
"They don't have to show us Catch-22," the old woman answered. "The law says they don't have to."
"What law says they don't have to?"
"Catch-22."
The law apparently says psychologists don't have to prove you're crazy to prescribe regulations for the funny farm. Because if you claim not to need their funny farm, you obviously do.

Especially so long as Soros et al fund the divisiveness. They WANT strife, stress, separation. That is preparatory to destroying nations to replace with worldwide corporate fascism. Fascists care about ruling. When they tell the little people they care about them, they are lying through big

Yes, establishmentarian political psychological analysis is such a respected field. S/ Why, these establishmentarian types were so insightful about Stalin and Hitler, so we should of course defer to them. S/
We don't need Freud to see how filled you are to the brim with bs. We need more Mike Rowe, less wussiewuss creasycrease.

Empathy for the dignity of other creatures seems to be an innate aspect of beingness. However, with practice, it can be deadened and replaced. A way to do that is to promote one's narcissistic desire to collectivize and rule others over one's regard for their free and separate dignity. With that, Progs have much practice. For despots, empathy is a one way street, from the

The establishment run NPR is not content to in-form us. It wants to form and farm us. It is not content with talking points. It wants farming points. There are consequences for going off the farm.

In a better world, Rico laws should be applied against people like Soros. IAE, there seems to be too much room for abuse. The only forfeited property should be the equity of the criminal. More should be done to protect the interests of innocent contractors, unless it can be shown that they were not innocent of the corruption being Rico'd. Too often, the law takes a wrecking ball approach, and then entrusts it to corrupt or pig-minded gov employees.
Other wrecking ball provisions have included "three strikes" life sentences, school suspensions for bringing a paring knife to slice a lunch apple or hugging another student or helping a student with asthma or pointing a finger like a gun, terminations of employment for expressing opinions on Facebook, etc. This is what happens when faith and families are undermined and gov and ACLU lawyers and PC enforcers try to fill the void.

Too many naifs and useful idiots actually believe Obama and Soros care about them and look out for them. Too many Blacks think Obama identifies with them solely because they are Black. But I doubt Obama or Soros give a fig about them or their minority status. Rather, I suspect what they care about is revenge against all that resist them or that have in any way insulted them. What they care about is the power to punish those they think have disrespected them. When they act gracious, it is only to plot a best time to strike. Even as their candidate was making her concession speech, they were plotting how to undermine the next President.
From the start, what Obama and Soros wanted to do was to hollow out the representative republic, to take all its resources, wealth, and power, and to stamp a big FU on all the people that identify with the representative republic. They have gotten as far as they have because so few fair minded Americans understand the minds of sociopaths. Rather, they think people like Obama and Soros are as fair minded as any typical working class American. Big mistake.

So, how stupid are Lefties (not left handed people)?
Lefties are so stupid they think Hillary meant to redistribute wealth from the billionaires that funded her to the poor. (Actually, she meant to help the billionaires siphon wealth and resources from the middle class and America by continuing the exportation of jobs under some facsimile of the TPP, while leaving a few droppings here and there for the freshly imported poor (useful voting idiots).)
Lefties are so stupid they have to go into deep debt to go to college to learn useless crap so they can spend their lives protesting for a living (as useful protesting idiots).
Lefties are so stupid that they think the way to teach people how to grow up and become productive contributors to society is to replace families with more laws, more civil "servants" that can't be fired, and more central gov (that will always be owned and operated of, by, and for mooching cronycrats).
Lefties are so stupid that they want to kill the host republic from which they suck blood.
Lefties are so stupid that they want to help cronycrats import unlimited numbers of jihadis, to help destroy the representative republic that has sheltered Lefties.
Lefties are so stupid that they think being nice to jihadis and cronycrats will make them kinder for the long run.
Lefties are so stupid that they think Utopianism is based more in science than in religion.
Lefties are so stupid that they do not know that the fascists that farm them mean to abandon them once their usefulness has ended.
Lefties are so stupid that they fail to learn how they have been had until they reach 60 years of age (if ever).
If you think Hillary cared about you, you might be a Leftie.
If you think Obama meant to make the representative republic stronger and better, you might be a Leftie.

****************

Suppose your kids gathered up the feral cats in your neighborhood, released them in your home, then said you must pay for their food, shelter, healthcare, and rehabilitation. Would you let them impose that obligation on you?

 Lefties don't like democracy or republicanism. They like rule by smart elitists, with lots of elitely thought out laws and regulations to ensure fairness, equality, and security are distributed out to the masses -- right down to their toenails and cow farts. Respect for individual freedom of thought, expression, religion, or enterprise -- not so much. PC and hate speech regulations -- you betcha. Microagressions punished -- absolutely. Reeducation camps and gulags to get peoples' minds right -- for the greater good. No more manspreading, and no more macho self reliance, individual competence, or personal as opposed to collective responsibility. All for the cause, and nothing outside the cause. Because no one loves and respects you quite like a Lefty. S/ Lefties: Seldom right, but always infantile and fascist.

 Dems need a longer infancy period and will not read and abide by the tried and true instruction manual of faith, family, and fidelity until all else has failed them.









Modern Leftism


"You guys"?!  There you go again!  Projecting your group identity politics as if it were coming from Conservers of Liberty instead of from faux Libs, such as yourself.  I am a Stots-Irish-Native American married to a Russian German.  My relatives, nephews, and nieces include numerous American Indians, Blacks, Samoans, and Croatians. I never owned slaves and I never want slaves.  I consider every American of any color, gender, or orientation who respects the American Ideal as my equal. 

Otoh, I consider group-identity Progs to be lowlife, racist, projecting, anti-American infants that would sell out their birthright of freedom for a little more free stuff, free condoms, free sex, free college, and "right" to commoditize children.

Part of your confusion may stem from failing to appreciate the distinction between internal freedom for Americans and external defense and national policy, to preserve that freedom against the lowest depravities that are common throughout of the rest of the world. 

What gives you away is when you would equate national defense, per se, to big gov liberalism.  Now, if Trump shows to be an idiotic or corrupt neo-nation builder among Islamic nations, then you may have a point.  But that is not my reading of what Trump is about. I doubt he would have been so foolish as to squander lives and treasure trying to seed and build democratic ideas in lands infested through and through with Islam.

Look, a national republic, to be a nation, has to defend its borders and its society.  That is a no-brainer.  That entails national policy, including policies for defense, tariffs, trade, etc.  Faux liberals lie when they talk about "free trade."  There is no more free trade than there is free lunch.  Do you "free trade" with scum, or do you routinely bathe to wash if off?  Oligarchic, communistic, socialistic, mercantilistic, and Islamic nations are scum.  There is no such thing as free trade with them, or with gangs that would steal the shirt off your back.  You're trying to pawn off a chimera.  I'll be charitable and attribute it to naivete more so than to being an ignorant or corrupt paid shill.

******************

*Quoting you:  "He won the primary and then the presidency by promising to build a taxpayer funded wall to keep immigrants out,create a taxpayer funded force to deport millions of immigrants and engage in a variety of protectionist policies. I.e. he is promising to "bring jobs back" not by deregulation but by tariffs and other punishment of private enterprise."

*******************

He is more confused than Daffy Duck. Defending borders is now leftwing big gov? What a joke. So preserving the nation is somehow anti-American? These dufuses give Orwell a run for his money. Next, he will tell us ignorance is strength, Communists are Americans, and Muslims are stout defenders of the free exercise of religion. S/

****************

Your thinking is hidebound to deficient metaphors. Trump is first and foremost an American. To understand Trump, you need better understanding of the American Ideal.
The American Ideal has little to do with studied faithlessness concerning ideas of leftwing/rightwing. The American Revolution was not like those of France or Germany. For a real American, there is not leftwing/rightwing. Rather, there is right and there is wrong.* There is individual freedom and there is collective totalitarianism. Collectivism that leads towards totalitarianism, whether it be in the flavor of communism or fascism, is wrong.
The American Ideal has to do with this: What will help preserve a representative republic that accords decent respect for the freedom and dignity of individual Americans. And concerning that, there is plenty to celebrate.
*******************
*Snippets from http://www.americanrhetoric.co...
"This is the issue of this election: whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capitol can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves."
"You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down: [up] man's old -- old-aged dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order, or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. And regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course."
"There is no foundation like the rock of honesty and fairness,and when you begin to build your life on that rock, with the cement of the faith in God that you have, then you have a real start."
"Give up your dreams of freedom because to save our own skins, we're willing to make a deal with your slave masters." Alexander Hamilton said, "A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one."

***************

The article seems to ignore the meta-driver: Ordinary Americans wanting their nation back. As if by ignoring that burning desire, to try to put that desire back on a back burner.
I hope the election was less about heating up special gang-banging interests and more about nationalism in order to free the energies of competent individuals and save the representative republic. I would hope saving the national republic was finally seen as more important than saving global rule by people-farming elitists.

**************

Faithless globalists have been trying to erase nations and move to a one-world society ruled by elite corporatists for a long time. They exert enormous control over every institution of persuasive significance. They will continue their sidewinding "progress." They will never stop kissing while stabbing. Always, behind their kisses are fangs of rentiers, snakes, and blood suckers.

**************

Do recounts ever flip for Republicans? What are the odds? Do Republicans ever find boxes of previously uncounted votes?

***************







**************

Lefties don't like democracy or republicanism. They like rule by smart elitists, with lots of elitely thought out laws and regulations to ensure fairness, equality, and security are distributed out to the masses -- right down to their toenails and cow farts. Respect for individual freedom of thought, expression, religion, or enterprise -- not so much. PC and hate speech regulations -- you betcha. Microagressions punished -- absolutely. Reeducation camps and gulags to get peoples' minds right -- for the greater good. No more manspreading, and no more macho self reliance, individual competence, or personal as opposed to collective responsibility. All for the cause, and nothing outside the cause. Because no one loves and respects you quite like a Lefty. S/ Lefties: Seldom right, but always infantile and fascist.

*************


You're hung up on a misleading, outdated paradigm.  Rightwing leftwing makes little sense.  Like trying to recite a distinction that makes a difference with regard to Hitlerian national socialism and Stalinist international communism.  They were both totalitarian systems and they both used different mixes of capitalism and corporatism.

The better political scale relates to individual freedom versus collectivist totalitarianism.  For example, I am not a conservative.  Rather, I am a Conserver of Liberty.  On most issues, the test for me is this:  Given our situation, how best can individual freedom and dignity be decently preserved?

The people I take to be Conservers of Liberty HAVE advocated for fines for employing illegals.  It's the cronycrat oligarchs that fund the Bernie Sanders halfwits that want the cheap labor and feel no love of country or of representative republicanism that erect roadblocks at every turn to forestall effective enforcement of the border.

We Conservers of Liberty want the border enforced.  And we want whatever tools in the kit are needed to accomplish that purpose.  And we think it takes a lot of chutzpah for a modern "Liberal" to pretend to be in any way concerned with human liberty as opposed to human cattle farming.

*****************

Early Leftism may have been explainable on account of the suffering of the masses. But the key to modern Leftism is the failure of its adherents to grow up on account of excessive and often infantile sheltering. This is manifested in every aspect of their lives, including aspects of sexual and familial relations and allocations of individual and social responsibility.
This is likely why modern Western Lefties are so tolerantly fascinated with homosexuality, pedophilia, polygamy, group orgies, choom parties, sado-masochism, sadistic games, fringe religion, sadistic religion, sadistic gov, elitist fascism, flag burning, pants drooping, baby dropping, rap booming, and whiny howling.
When a niche becomes so successful that it can afford to entertain genetic and memetic drag, how long will it have before such drag ruins its success? Answer: Absent mature spiritual insight, it will not have long. We need to judge better. We need to judge (profile) those that likely stand for nothing that is higher minded, and we need to judge those with whom we can likely assimilate to bring forth a humane civilization that accords decent respect for one another's freedom and dignity. Dominus vobiscum.

Hamilton was born within the British Empire and made a lateral move within it from the British West Indies, whereupon he attended King's College in NYC before the U.S. was even a confederation, much less a separate nation. He, like many of the Founders, was a British Citizen. Strictly speaking, he was no more an immigrant to the U.S. than any of the other Founders.
Moreover, both he and LaFayette were attracted to the American Ideal of individual liberty. Neither did LaFayette come to the U.S. intending to establish a permanent residence. So, in that sense, he also was not an immigrant. (An immigrant is a person who comes to a country to take up permanent residence.)
Regardless, in neither case did Hamiltion or LaFayette come to the U.S. for the purpose of asserting any claim of entitlement to be supported in indolence by the rest of society. They were not invaders who snuck into the country against the wishes of the general residents.
Neither Hamilton nor LaFayette asserted that everyone in the world had some innate right to come to establish permanent residency in the U.S. It would take an idiot of a Prog to argue for any such a right based on the example of either of them. Just as it took a Prog Muslim (Khan) to argue similarly based on his nutso interpretation of his pocket Constitution.

Do-gooder be-fairers have pushed to put too much power in the central fed gov. Nowadays, the 14th A means whatever the heck a progie wants to say it means. Every issue of Big Momma intrusive fascist "fairness" is "justified" via the 14A. The 14A has been so far abused that the Constitution is in danger of being swallowed. No doubt, thenext big proggie putcsh will be to"legitimize" pedophiles and polygamists. Eff the 14th A.
We need a COS to revitalize the 10A. If creampuffs wanna whine about "fairness" in order to undermine faith, family, fidelity, then let them do it at the State levels. I am so tired of mommaboy basementwussies wanting to legislate every issue of "fairness" as a fed case. Putting the whiny infants in charge is no way to run either a household or a federal republic. Eff the ACLU.

It would be stupid for Trump to engage the area of "Gay Rights."  It is a Constitutional matter that would now require a Constitutional Amendment to change. That's the realm for a COS. For Trump to spend political capital in that realm would be to squander his opportunity to proceed with plans to MAGA.
If we could rewind history, Scotus should not have intruded in this area. But it did. The only chance to change it now is to appoint better justices and wait, or to seek a Constitutional Amendment. Mere legislation cannot accomplish much now, and, even if it could, it would cost political capital. There are far more dire threats that need immediate attention.


Scotus screwed this topic. The Feds have no business intruding in this area. 10th Amendment.
The ACLU coalition with commies, atheists, hedonists, and people-farmers kept Congress and Scotus active in this area, which should always have been for the States.
The more that unholy coalition gets its way, the more desecration it makes of faith, family, fidelity, i.e., the fundaments by which any decent society is assimilated, without which society is reduced to rutting cattle for entertaining and servicing elites.

Globalist elites want to rule. They don't want to be checked by liberty literates. Wannabe rulers want enough liberty illiterates to vote for elitist rule and globalism so they never have to listen to voters again.
They will bastardize the voting process to "move on" to a NWO where the votes of the masses will not matter. Since that is their goal, since they do not believe in democracy except as a means to destroy democracy, there is no outrage they will not countenance if it moves them "forward" in their pursuit of the NWO for ruling the masses. Collectivism, as it becomes more powerful, becomes ever more bloody.
The goal of wannabe rulers is not to make the masses equal, but to make the masses politically irrelevant. The proggies that vote for globalism are in effect voting to make themselves irrelevant, except as perpetually dependent infants. It's too bad they insist on taking most other people with them. They share that kind of madness with jihadis, as well as with the suicidal parent that takes his children to the grave with him or her,

I would not want for a neighbor or fellow citizen anyone that believes his most sacred duty and purpose is tied to the following:
- Disallowing music, pork, dogs, and unaccompanied women in the presence of men;
- Instructing everyone else to disallow music, pork, dogs, and unaccompanied women in the presence of men;
- Or forcing people that allow music, pork, dogs, and unaccompanied women in the presence of men to choose between paying a special tax, subjugating themselves beneath him, or being killed.
I would not want for a neighbor anyone that believes such things and also that he should deceive others regarding his intentions until he has acquired enough support and resources suddenly to enforce them. I do not care whether such a neighbor called such things the markings of religion. I do not want such a fundamentally polluted and indecent mind for a neighbor. Nor do I want for a neighbor anyone so stupid as to think such people are tolerable.
I want for my representatives and their agents people that understand that I want a republic that defends human freedom of thought, expression, and enterprise against all those that believe their most sacred duty and purpose is tied to disallowing music, pork, dogs, and unaccompanied women in the presence of men. Or any other things as stupid and subhuman. IOW, I do not wish to tolerate that which is fundamentally ungodly and intolerable, because it is subhuman and mind enslaving.

Given unfit individuals, what is the niche that must evolve to support them? If we reason backwards, that would.seem to be a niche largely built by better preceding generations. If acceptable to reason backwards, the individuals most fit for our present niche are those that would have been less fit for the niche of 50, 75, or 150 years ago.
"Fittest" is hardly a term of rigor. Less so when the context can only vaguely be appreciated.
EDIT: "Fittest" seems to entail a subjective value judgment. For such judgment to have communicable meaning, a common Source of values is implicated. What is fittest seems to entail a process of feedback and reconciliation that is complicated by a mix of factors that are both measurably finite (quantifiable) and immeasurably infinite (qualifiable). Beyond our paygrade, the Godhead fluxes to present its aspects to us among three faces: Ineffable consciousness, proximately measurable substance, and cumulating in-form-ation. Whatever it unfolds, we call "evolution." But to pretend the unfolding can be entirely or rigorously "explained" by science concerning just one of its three faces (Substance) is little more than hubristic scientism.

********************************


CSI:

- Meta Consciousness is the immeasurable stuff whose idealizations interfunction with an innate field of math to project that which its inferior perspectives observe to abide as measurables of Substance.
- Substance consists of those locally renormalized measurables that are signified to and experienced by perspectives adapted to their unfolding localities.
- Information consists of past cumulations of Substance now availed as sequentialized records and representations.

Consciousness functions (idealizes, conceptualizes, observes, appreciates, feeds back) in the present based on cumulations of Information from the past to transition presentations of Substance that flow from potentiality to manifestation to recorded history.  C,S, I are interdependents, each abiding as a fluxing face of the Godhead.

Substance is the placeholding signification of present Consciousness.
Information is the sequential storehouse of the knowledge of Consciousness.
Consciousness is that without which there would abide no meaningful Substance or Information.

- Substance itself would not exist without means for signifying it and then storing it.  It itself is not Conscious, but it is the signification of Consciousness.
- Consciousness itself is not measurable, but is the innate companion of all that is measurable.
- Information itself is not the rule of math, but is the aura of the innate field of Math.

The Godhead is that through which, as companion to field of Math, all that is potential (of the past and future) is subject to idealization or manifestation (of the present).

****************

So your solution is to talk everyone out of believing in a spiritual source for higher mindedness? You think pure Gov, without a citizenry assimilated to any faith based values, would be an improvement? You know, I doubt you have much of a worthwhile appreciation of history. I hope you don't teach it. Pity the students.
Btw, Islam is no more a religion than secular humanism or moon howling. Not in any sense for which there could be a "free exercise." Islam is the result of a raving epileptic psychopath and his wolfpack of followers and their mind slaves.
Your problem is, much as you seem to hate religion, you will never escape from your fact-devoid faith in atheism as a moral alternative. An alternative that history has shown to be morally bankrupt. Or had you not noticed? When atheists ban assimilations of faith based values, they inevitably try to fill the void with mountains of intrusive, spirit killing, freedom deadening regulations. And that always comes quickly to gulags and ruin.
You need to find a nice quiet island where you can take your fellow travelers and construct your Walden III. Or is it up to IV now? I've lost count.