Wednesday, January 31, 2007

Rantings of the Heart

One good way to explore the nuances of the Leftist agenda is to listen to their rants. It is there they speak from the depths of their heart.

It must be understood that these dark recesses were formed in their early college years when absolute fear of something larger than themselves led them to burn bras, draft-cards, the flag, and what ever else could be ignited with a Molotov cocktail. Taught by their rich parents that they were the future hope of America, these children took it completely to heart, devoutly believing America was ready for a complete overhaul. Why else would their parents have placed so much emphasis on America’s need for their ideas? So, they, like their Russian nihilist compatriots, shared the belief that in order for new hope, everything must be destroyed. As Laugh-In’s Arte Johnson documented, it was all “veery interesting, but stupid.”

How better to explain Al Gore’s 2000 campaign rant, “Everything that should be up is down, and everything that’s down should be up”? Those that who did not participate in The Revolution, who went on about their lives, growing up, getting a job, marrying, and having families, are having trouble following the fluid dogmatism that passes as political debate. Looking through the eyeglass in reverse is hard work for people that are accustomed to taking people at their word and believing that deep down everyone is a good person. A good person just doesn’t want to contemplate the horrors that lie in the depths of the human heart, unless they have personally experienced the trauma of the results of those deeds. Just as the latest convert to 2nd Amendment Rights is a liberal that was mugged the night before, there are many of us that have experienced the gulag treatment when we innocently ran into the intolerance of Political Correctness.

I wonder if the Duke lacrosse players accused of rape are comforted that D.A. Mike Nifong founded his sense of ethics by becoming a conscientious objector of the Viet Nam war? Such are the ethics founded on self-preservation rather than transcendent laws of God. Why should normal America be surprised at the lengths Nifong would go in order to preserve his elected position? Or for that matter, any self-serving politician, journalist, or government worker? What else should we expect from a revolutionary generation steeped in the childish virtues of selfishness and lack of personal responsibility?

The success of The Revolution means that the barbarians who burned their bras, spit on veterans, trolled through trailer parks in their astro-turfed el Camino and ultimately drove their car off a bridge while in a drunken stupor causing the drowning death of a girlfriend are now the leaders. Down with the Establishment— the Revolution made such behavior moral. Or as Dostoevsky mused, “All things are legal in the absence of God.”

When we view things thusly, Al Gore’s rant about everything being backwards is completely logical. When you gaze in a mirror darkly, silliness and depravity begins to make sense. Not every person is a good person when you have the courage to examine the results of his deeds. But only a culture accepting of profound truths can realize bad ends for what they are and how they were formed. A revolutionary culture will brook no evidence of an overwhelming truth if it comes to revealing the fallen nature of man because the facts begin to cut to the quick.

They have railed against the norm so long that it comes naturally to oppose anything coming from normal Americans, regardless of how insane it makes them sound. Consider Senator Clinton’s nails on the blackboard screech:
“I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration, somehow you’re not patriotic!
And we should stand up and say we are Americans, and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration!”

The entire rant can be explained as the continued assault on The Establishment, the unjust Constitution of the United States of America, and anything that smacks of Western Civilization and its morality. Therefore, it is dangerous to take these words at face value. In the looking-backwards uber-reality, patriotism is what normal Americans would call national self-loathing.

It is to normal America’s chagrin that the War on Terror is causing a national mass flashback. The original revolutionaries operate today’s hysteria, aided by: a) sleepers in areas of government intelligence, b) those that missed out on the Big Event the first time around, and then fleshed out with c) the deluded masses of the “useful idiots”. Just as Patty Hearst was turned into “Tania” by her SLA “tutors”, everyday Americans become the revolution’s Stockholm victims through nightly newsreaders presenting misinformation as fact.

As exhibited by the Cindy Sheehan crowd, the chants are the same but the rants are ratcheted up with the steroid pumping of the MSM. Thinking otherwise has become almost impossible, as if your brain is overwhelmed by the bass bumping ‘ride’ sitting next to you at a signal light. If normal Americans aren’t in the minority, you sure couldn’t tell it by the loudness of what passes for debate. Dissembling has become the method of answering a direct question. “It all depends on what the definition of is, is.” You can almost hear as the group joint passes around: “Like, man… it’s that whole east/west thing, man.”

A good nihilist motto of today would be: Something into nothing, and nothing into something. This explains why the Sandy Berger affair is a B-story and the Scooter Libby non-story is the main deal. Both stories are misinterpreted by our thumpin’ MSM until the true facts are destroyed into a nihilistic pabulum. All this serves in keeping the “useful idiots” both idiots and useful. They never think to question the shifting political machinations of their handlers, such as in the various stances the Left has postulated on Iraq. Today’s sound bites’ escalating volume effectively drowns out yesterday’s news.

Another effective tool of the sleeper nihilists is when endless cable news coverage ends up talking about what people said about what the newsmaker said, rather than in what the original source actually said. Pretty soon, the actual quotes are changed in the people’s minds as in those that now believe President Bush actually said we must go into Iraq because of weapons of mass destruction.

But all the above is just sideshow hucksterism to keep everyone guessing under which shell the marble hides. Rational political debate is impossible if one side operates entirely on emotionalism. These bad children acting out in public hold Normal America hostage. Compound that by fear of what others will think if we were to give them the spanking they so desperately deserve. Which in some way explains why the Capital Hill Police were ordered to stand down and not interfere as anti-war protesters spray painted anarchists graffiti on the Capital steps after being stoked up by revolutionary re-treads like Jane Fonda and Susan Sarandon. When will we truly grow tired of cleaning up their messes?

Adult Americans are caught flat-footed every time by the bizarre meanderings of reasoning when they attempt to engage in civil discourse. Name-calling enters the debate and the tangent begins discussing how George W. Bush really does have beliefs in common with Hitler and the debate of ideas devolves into the intended chaos. But the method to the madness is to discredit anyone daring to question revolutionary rule. If normal America is akin to Hitler, then everything thing the Left proposes is good and beneficial to the continuity of the nation rather than all that establishment stuff that has stood the test of time.

These 60’s radicals never grew up by having to face the results of their deeds, never met a value that they couldn’t subvert and undermine, or lived under the restrictions they so glibly force on everyone else. They stuck their tongues out at their fathers, at their ministers and priests, and at everything that made this nation different among all the nations of the world. For them, the real prize is the total redefining of normal American ideals. Real America had better realize that these revolutionaries are serious and playing for keeps. Just listen carefully to the rantings of their heart and all is completely clear.

Wednesday, January 24, 2007

A Letter from the President's Congressman

Well folks, it’s “Darkness at Noon” when constituents receive a letter from the President’s Congressman down here in Texas. Chet Edwards (D) is now a 9-term incumbent and luckily 13th most powerful Congressman in D.C. Chet is perfectly conversant in the dialectical nuances of political double speak and intrigue as brilliantly described in the Arthur Koestler novel. In this letter the reader must be astute in recognizing that definitions are blurred and skewed by a fluid dogmatism, flush with rushing currents of emotionally nuanced meanings yet devoid of sense and substance, all delivered by the bracing smile of a glittering bear trap.

In the election of 2006, voters across the country exercised their right to change the culture in Washington*. The American people are sick and tired* of the partisan* bickering* and desperately want to see more bipartisan* cooperation in Washington. I agree. What members of Congress often forget is that the American people are in charge of this democracy and understand that no political party has a monopoly on wisdom. When they do forget, responsive citizens* make their voices heard and their demands clear through elections, voters across the country exercised their right to change the culture in Washington*.



*change the culture of Washington – the effective elimination of opposition forces by The Revolution*.

*sick and tired – a reference to Senator Hilary Clinton’s rebellious rant (see below+) against The Establishment.

* bickering – the inability of The Party* to declare victory through logical debate thereby causing outbursts of emotional duress which travels to responsive citizens* via sound-bites that then disturbs the peace of mind of the mind-numbed causing further outbursts of emotional duress and tension.

* partisan – the opposition forces that must be destroyed by The Revolution
* bipartisan –total adherence to the rules of The Party.

* responsive citizens - voters whose minds have been shaped by The Party; these citizens have no memory of the past making them unquestioning advocates of The Revolution and The Party it established through endless policy shifts and political positioning, their minds are fed through sound-bites, news headlines, political cartoons, and propaganda movies from Hollywood or documentaries produced by ex-Vice-Presidents or members of The Revolution.

*unresponsive citizens – those that resist The Revolution and The Party it established; those still operating under the values of The Establishment; thought criminals; also see obstructionists*.

* obstructionist – anyone not active in The Revolution either through passivity or ignorance; some obstructionists are cultural terrorists because of actions in their fields that do not promote the success of The Revolution; a cultural terrorist is considered a high danger to The Revolution because their work and thoughts either reveal the unworkable processes of The Revolution or provide enlightenment to the passive citizenry of the glory of the unjust Constitution* and the tenants of faith and values of The Establishment.

*Unjust Constitution - the Constitution of the United States of America.

* The Revolution – the social chaos that began in the 1960’s that sought the overthrow and eliminate of The Establishment*and overthrow the unjust Constitution and the government.

*The Party – The righteous government replacing the unjust Constitutional government of The United States of America.

* The Establishment – the moral and intellectual values of corrupt businessmen, certain religious leaders espousing belief in one God, His Holy Word, sin and redemption, and citizens that pay homage to an unjust Constitution and government; also when the Revolutionaries were young 20-somethings their motto creed was “Don’t trust anyone over 30!”; The Establishment is also recognized as the Republican Party, the Party of Nixon who was believed to be evil incarnate, until Ronald Regan came on the scene and epitomized the father figure the revolutionaries despised from their youth for his success and character.

*independence – the euphoria felt when one has thrown down the shackles of moral slavery to The Establishment and the Unjust Constitution; total acceptance of The Revolution and The Party it established.

* patriot, patriotic, patriotism – those citizens and the ideals declaring that this nation, founded on an unjust Constitution, is the source of all turmoil and injustice in the world because of our success as a republic and because of our success through capitalism, an ideology that deprives all workers of paradise.
[Lexicon notes - my own]

Well, there you have it, The Party* has spoken and its mandate is clear: republican wisdom was overthrown by responsive citizens*. The partisan* bickering* caused by The Party having to constantly screech about the previously mandated Republicans wanting to do things according to their establishment* values will now be controlled under the rule of bipartisan* cooperation. Those unresponsive citizens* that remember the blackboard screeching of:

“I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration, somehow you’re not patriotic*!
And we should stand up and say we are Americans, and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration!”+

don’t understand the voice of The Revolution* and its war against The Establishment* properly. We must learn that The Party simply is, and the 60’s Revolution has achieved its goal and the opposition will learn this through the rigid doctrine of conformity perfected by #2 in the Great Revolution. The citizens of responsive flexibility voted for change, which was not really a change because there only is and only will be, The Revolution and The Party it established. The Party will not tolerate the speech of obstructionists* because the emotions of the Revolution cannot control or triumph through the logic of civil debate.

So, when a Party member talks of independence*, this must not be confused with the historic definition of American independence. Therefore, when Chet tells his constituents of his independent leadership, the newest version of The Party’s lexicon must be consulted.

Though the majority party in Congress has changed, my number one priority has not and that is to continue to provide effective, independent leadership for the people of the 17th district.

We must understand that Chet’s independence means that he is not a representative of the people of District-17; he is a leading standard bearer of the rules of the Revolution and a prime director in The Party. He will not bow when he discusses the Iraq War with his constituent, The President and Commander in Chief. Like William the Conqueror, Chet sallies forth to dialogue with his vassal in a strange indirect dialect built upon blocks of words whose ends don’t coincide. Note how the shape-shifting Congressman slides away from the connection that the troop surge’s effort should be to win the war to a non sequitur referendum on the President’s support in the polls.

Edwards said, he told the president he hoped the new strategy in Iraq wouldn't include an increase in troops. “But if you are going to make that decision, you should send whatever number you believe is right - not a watered-down compromise number - because this could be the last real chance to win Americans' support for a strategy to stabilize Iraq."

Bryan-College Station Eagle Staff Writer

Chet can speak dialectical nihilism with the best of Party operatives Over There. Chet’s sense of independence is total allegiance to The Party. But, as the Revolution revealed, choosing The Party is evidence of complete freedom from every moral structure of what used to be referred to as civil society. The success of The Revolution means that the barbarians who burned their bras, spit on veterans, trolled through trailer parks in their astro-turfed el Camino and ultimately drove their car off a bridge while in a drunken stupor and drowning their girlfriend are now the established Directors in The Party. Down with the Establishment, the Revolution made such behavior moral. Or as Dostoevsky mused, “All things are legal in the absence of God.” These 60’s radicals shout and sing joyously, “Long live The Revolution and The Party it established!”

So, don’t be confused when Chet tell us, “[w] hile I will respect those who disagree, I believe the first 100 hours agenda reflects bipartisan, mainstream values shared by a majority of citizens across our district and the country.” Understand that Chet is speaking in terms of his revolutionary values as dictated by The Party lexicon which declares that mainstream values are not the past values of the now defeated Establishment but are instead the make love not war and separation of church and state values of The Revolution. Chet and his responsive citizenry believe partial birth abortion is a mainstream value and that all references of God in the former unjust Constitutional government must be eradicated. Such are the rules established by The Revolution.

The Party believes that those who assisted in destroying The Establishment through The Revolution deserve the spoils of war as the barbarians pull down the very foundation of the former values of the unjust Constitution and its ideals of the pursuit of individual happiness. Even though every government run bureaucracy is a study of inefficiency, every piece of legislation produced in the 110th Congress will establish new bureaucracies in order to provide permanent jobs for Responsive Citizens. For those challenging the Revolution’s Rules through the archaic belief of individual freedom and pursuit of happiness there will be endless taxation to pay the salary of the bureaucracy. Everyone knows those operating outside The Party rules deserve punishment, possibly even mental torture as thought criminal obstructionists try to make ends meet on the leftovers of the fruit of their labor.

Individualists, tremble in fear when you read the President’s Congressman’s plans for the future.

I also believe it will be well-received if the new Congress ultimately sends legislation to the president that protects America from terrorism by implementing the 9-11 Commission recommendations; reduces federal deficits by returning “pay as you go” rules that led to federal surpluses in the 1990’s; sets higher standards for congressional ethics, bipartisanship and civility; cuts college student loan costs in half; increases the minimum wage; saves lives by expanding stem cell research and invests more in alternative energy production.

True free thinkers note there is no reference to defeating the terrorists so they won’t be able to attack us. Implementing the 9-11 Commission recommendations would only seek to make terrorist attacks a mere nuisance while providing permanent jobs for Responsive Citizens. Free Thinkers, the rebels against The Revolution, know that the federal surpluses of the 1990’s were as phony as Enron stock options during the same decade.

The same phoniness goes for the “pay as you go” response to budgeting where bureaucracies prudent to the pursuit of The Revolution have written rules of percentage increases, while those areas that are destructive to The Revolution such as national defense must show just cause for every tax dollar received. Rebels against The Revolution understand that The Party was established on the destruction of establishment morals, so the declaration of setting higher standards for congressional ethics means that those found with bricks of cold cash stashed in their freezer will maintain their seat of power in Congress.

Also, according to the lexicon of The Party, we rebels understand that civility is no longer based upon the defeated ideals of honesty and integrity, but rather is defined as an absence of logical debate because such debates disrupt the emotions of the Responsive Citizen. Unresponsive rebels realize that cutting student loans will cause banks to raise loan rates on everyone else needing a bank loan and that raising the minimum wage is an unnecessary encroachment of government into private business. The Party has perfected the art of spending other people's money in a way that shows them to be charitable and magnanimous. So feel really good about yourself as you pay that extra dollar for your super-sized burger combo deal and realize that Congress is requiring you pay your burger chef more, because they care.

The truly devout thought criminals, those daring to doggedly adhere to religious beliefs and tenants find the idea of saving lives by growing embryos in laboratories for harvest more than a little bit creepy. The new thinking radicals wonder about the government pursuing a course in embryonic stem cell research when private investment in the research is stalled because there has been no real evidence of success. It’s the classic Tom Foley thought pattern: “Because there is no evidence is the reason we must investigate.”

And finally, concerning the energy problem, the absolute rebellious citizens wonder why the hell we haven’t dropped a Hughes Tool drill bit into the frozen ground of ANWAR or begun building new refineries for oil production. Shouldn't energy production provide for the near future and then the distant future?

This is the letter from the President’s Congressman concerning his seat of power in The Party and the future direction of the revolutionized America. It’s twilight in the middle of the day. I see the iron bars settling around me, so where’s the front for the counter-insurgency? Because as a great leader in a Central American Revolution said, “One man’s freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist” and Republicans must recognize on what side of that phrase they fall.

Friday, January 05, 2007

Promoting the Culture of Learning

To continue the discussion began by Russell Eisenman at American Thinker concerning education and teaching all kinds of students, I begin my topic where Mr. Eisenman left off: understanding the culture of students. In offering my ideas, I readily admit that I was not a university teacher, but rather a mere, but very successful remedial reading teacher in a small town’s middle school. I agree with Dr. Eisenman’s view that having a sense of humor as you teach helps when you are trying to maintain control while surfing the wild waves of the reluctant to learn adolescent heart. With a sense of humor I was able to taunt my students with declarations like: “Reluctant to learn? What are you? Stupid?” or “Why don’t you just gnaw off your arm so you can really be handicapped?” and actually make a point with my loveable little knot heads. However, Dr. Eisenman left off just as he began to discuss culture and learning and I believe that topic needs redirection in education today.

Our present education system is caught in the culture trap. A generation ago, culture was roughly singing and dancing. Before that, we worried about culture; meaning knowing what fork to use in case the boss invited you out to dinner. Today, culture has come to mean simply race and all the accoutrements ascribed to race. In a radical manner, I would like to return to the Miss Manners/Emily Post definition of culture in the subject of education and propose that common decency and good manners is more relevant to the culture of learning than in understanding the culture of race. Good manners and treating others in a fair and gentle way trump racial profiling every time when it comes to establishing a culture of learning in our public schools.

Children have a great sense of justice and when a wise instructor wields this tool effectively even a discipline problem child willingly accepts punishment for disregarding a well-stated campus or classroom rule. In fact, having a just response for infractions is the bedrock in promoting a culture of self-discipline, which in itself is the foundation for the building blocks that comprise a culture of learning. My favorite years of teaching came when working for a principal that promoted a universal discipline program for the entire campus. Each teacher adhered to the disciplines of the program and I never taught at a campus that worked better. The hierarchy of authority was clear and understood by all, which allowed teachers and students alike to thrive in the liberty that existed.

Personal achievement in self-discipline sets a pattern for achievement in learning. As the Shakespeare line states: “This above all: to thine ownself be true, And it must follow, as the night the day, Thou canst not then be false to any man.” Success is simply building upon achievement and setting a pattern that promotes success. Through the establishment of a campus culture built upon self-discipline the turmoil that describes many public school campuses becomes a non-issue. Our campus culture was a casual quietness that allowed for the development and revelation of the uniqueness of the individual for both students and teachers. With discipline under control, the joy of teaching flourishes and the students are introduced to the joy and success of learning.

Our classrooms were a culture of learning because it was enhanced by the culture of Miss Manners. Learning the rules of civil conduct is of great value in the culture of education. As Voltaire sardonically quipped, “To succeed in the world it is not enough to be stupid, you must also be well-mannered.” Good manners are a great equalizer regardless of race, home-life, or even intelligence. Knowing how to interact with others in a proper manner is the basis for civil society and to ignore this fact is to do disservice to our children and the future of our civil society in political terms. A classroom operating in this manner produces safety. For students living in a volatile home life the campus and classroom becomes an orderly and safe environment where individuals operate in an understandable and systematic manner. For students struggling to grasp the lesson being taught, there is patience without ridicule. For the achiever there is respect along with development of humility.

There was something wonderful that happened in these classrooms. The students opened up and participated in discussions about the lessons that revealed that they were not only learning and processing the information, but were internalizing the material into their own personal experiences. Now, that is the holy grail of learning. Because I observed that my remedial reading students failed geography, Texas history, and American History, I developed a curriculum of novels and biographies to enhance their historical context. (I should also note that this curriculum also naturally reinforced American ethics rather than the social anarchy being taught in many schools.)

Everything had a bigger purpose as we practiced their reading skills. Development of reading skills such as the main idea, vocabulary and context clues were mixed in with education in historical perspective sprinkled with discussion of character development both of the novel’s characters and that of the students. The program was very successful in real educational terms even in light of the absolute reluctance of some students when it came to standardized tests. The culture of kindness in the classroom allowed me to humorously joke with those that I knew were Christmas tree patterning as they filled in the dots of their scorecard. The reluctant to learn young man is a hard nut to crack and humor is a much better hammer than a screeching woman. The point is that having a principal that promoted a campus culture of self-discipline established the healthy environment for the fragile commodity of the culture of learning.

I would advise all educational experts to resist the sociological drift of the culture of racial profiling and instead study methods of establishing the culture of self-discipline and order in our public schools. It is plain sophistry to believe that race plays a part in learning as if parents of differing races want their children to be ignorant. When discipline is presented as a student’s responsibility, administrators are freed from the culture of political correctness and are able to effectively silence any silliness a parent may use to explain away their child’s bad behavior. (And believe me, silly parents exist.) This idea also effectively reveals incompetent administrators (who exist in alarming numbers), which alert school boards can effectively remedy. An effective community of parents can then hold school board members accountable for their inaction through the ballet box. This idyllic world’s only requirement is a culture of self-discipline: in the community, by the parents and administrators/staff, and ultimately imparted effectively to the students. The culture of education happens when an aura of administrative competence on a campus fosters development of student self-discipline, which in turn establishes order, which engenders the culture of manners, which in turn protects and allows the fragile culture of learning. It sounds so simple that we find we must complicate the absolute simplicity of the truth with educational and sociological scatology. Self-discipline, everyone, self-discipline.