Wednesday, November 07, 2007

Future Shock

There are a lot of reasons to be pessimistic should the democrats take the White House, especially if they continue to hold Congress. Hold on to your wallets because it is going to be expensive, very damned expensive!

First, gasoline, natural gas, coal, (all fuels), electricity, will all go up be at least, at the very least 30%, maybe as much as double in 8 years! (The MIT paper said by 2015, oh, so actually seven years) due largely to implementation of taxes and other restrictions to try and cool the sun. (By that of course I mean the climate but we all know that’s driven by the sun, so…)

We’ll have 20 million or more new citizens, many or most of which will be on Welfare and/or Social Security (for which they have not contributed a dime). That should see FICA payments double as well, especially as the Baby-Boomer generation have started to retire).

The Nanny-State will grow at an alarming rate with Health Care and the government dictating how you can live your lives to get it. More and more horror stories are pouring out of England and Canada on how well single payer Health Care doesn’t work. People are dying waiting for services and many services are not even available as fewer and fewer students are opting for medical degrees (and going into law instead). Even those students who do go for medical degrees leave England or Canada to practice their craft where they can do so without the over-burdening government regulations that hamper them in their countries. A significant number of Dr.s in those countries are being imported from the Middle-East (and lots of them turned out to be terrorists and/or supporters of terrorists). How will you deal with a surgeon who is trying to convert you to Islam when you need a heart bypass from him? Have you thought about that angle? Isn’t that type of extortion also terrorism? With the new middle-man of government bureaucracy between you and health care, that should double in price while halving in service too.

Meanwhile, developing countries, especially in Africa, are being deprived of every civilized advancement to improve their lives. Power plants of any type are being withheld from these wretched people so our rich-cats can keep their beach front properties. Global warming my ass, this is about Eugenics, pure and simple. It is a backhanded way to eliminate the population of Africa, a continent rich in natural resources. The abject poverty there perpetuate continuous states of war among the tribal leaders while the world mostly looks on, waiting for the end so their resources can be exploited; keeping technology away from them perpetuates that situation as well. Under Algore’s leadership, genocide is rampant in Africa. Those who exploit the situation can claim innocents, though, as the Africans are killing themselves; but make no mistake, by perpetuating the poverty and depriving those people of technology, it is on their heads. Think that’s exaggerating? Think why we’re using food to make ethanol instead of shipping that food to Africa? Who is it that’s making such an uproar about the situation in Dafur? Who’s responsible for turning food (corn) into ethanol? In both cases it’s the democrats. Making a problem then complaining about it (and thereby deflecting blame) is their modus operandi in case you never noticed. Starvation and dismal living conditions are the primary causes of war throughout history. Any more questions?

Meanwhile back here, pursuit of happiness and freedom of choice are going away with liberties of all kinds. At some point, should the situation continue unabated, there will be a One-World-Government with the elitists ruling all of us with an iron fist. Hitler and Tojo didn’t live to see it but their dream, or rather our nightmare, is moving ahead full steam, eugenics included. Once it comes to be it will be a long dark time in human history, too, because who will there be to end it? With the weapons available to the super-government, how could the enslaved peoples of the world have any chance at all to stage a successful revolt? We won’t even have basic guns here because surely, once empowered, disarming the people will be a top priority.

I am afraid that this scenario is inevitable, too. All we can do is postpone it. Incrementally, this horror has been coming to be for nearly a century and it’s steps are coming faster and faster with every obstacle that falls to them.

In the end, it is said, we get the government we deserve. Do we really deserve this? We’ll see in a year, at least for a while…


Ichabod Crane said...

I regret to inform that I have rejected a couple of comments here, not for their content as such but because all they were were ads for a candidate and/or commercial advertisements.
Everyone is welcome to comment on the content of my blogs but nobody is welcome to hawk a candidate (of any party) or outright commercialism. Sorry, that's not what I made this blog-site for.
One individual, with whom I have exchanged thoughts did leave a rather nice comment on another of my blogs and sneaked in an endorsement at the end. I allowed it but added a disclaimed after his comment about that.
Please stick to the point; we are bombarded constantly with political ads for candidates in the longest election cycle in history via every venue available. This one isn't; just stick to the issue on the blogs, OK? Thank you.
I am sure your candidate is the one you'd like to see elected; for me, I'm more interested in seeing a couple of them not elected: Billary and Edwards on the left and a couple on the right. I'll be posting a blog about the ones on the right that I don't feel would make a good president soon. People can comment on them at that time, if they like; but just stick to the points covered. All candidates, except the two mentioned here, have good points; we'll discuss their bad points, the things that the democrats will massacre them on, allowing the democrat's candidate to get into the White House. Soon, OK?

Anonymous said...

A major goal of Neo-conservatism is
"to make criticism from the Right acceptable in the intellectual, artistic, and journalistic circles where conservatives had long been regarded with suspicion."
you, my dear ichabod crane, have written an ill-informed and decidedly lacking little piece her. Artistically and in journalistic terms you ostracize anyone who holds any less wild and unwarranted beliefs as yourself.
Good work though, you send a clear message about the striking impotence of neo-conservatism to anyone who perseveres to the dreary end of your tirades.
and, because i am curious...Ichabod Crane?

Ichabod Crane said...

About Mr. "Anonymous" and his diatribe - First I find it a tad cowardly to post anonymously, if you're posting your convictions why hide from them? Then of course there is the content of his comment...
This would-be intellectual writes with little knowledge of basic grammar or ability to spell; I assume that's because his (or her?) rage is such that they takes little time to asses what's been written; the point here is just to rant against what I see as truth. Then wildly prejudges all so-called neo-conservatives (whatever they are) into some category he’d like to see go away. So much for tolerance.
Your definition of Neo-conservatism is in quotes but you credit nobody for it…
Proper names, sir, are capitalized in proper English; perhaps this is your second language and are unaware of that?
Sentences begin with capitals, too.
Your reference to “… lacking little piece her.” I should assume you mean ‘here’ but I hesitate to make assumptions?
The first person singular pronoun is also capitalized; but maybe that’s also a window into the soul of an anonymous poster?
As to my Nom de Plume, Wikipedia sums it up well in their description of the Jonny Depp character in the movie adaptation of Sleepy Hollow, “Ichabod's most notable traits in the movie include an ahead-of-his-time liking for post-mortem examinations and scientific methods as well as being very quirky.” A vanity of mine, if you must know; but a shameless one.
It would be better, I think, if anyone wishes to post a comment, if they would be a bit more specific when denigrating my ill-formed opinions. I do research and do not simply grab words and phrases out of the air. If there are errors in my assumptions or opinions, please highlight those specifically so that I might investigate further. Upon rereading what I wrote here, however, I stand by what I said as factual and informed. Perhaps you should reevaluate your opinions?
I do moderate comments here and decided that this one was so indicative of what I’ve been saying about liberals that it is worth having as an example. Please, if someone finds some coherence in it, by all means post a comment on it and enlighten us all; I’ll surely allow it (as long as it does not include a political endorsement for any particular candidate.) My blog is not intended for that purpose. So far, those are the only ones that I’ve blocked; blockheads have a right to be heard, too!