…if each class perceives the situation ideologically — as a clash of fundamental principles and ideals, with the fate of society as a whole hanging in the balance — then the stage is set for a revolutionary fight to the finish.

A Problem For Collectivists, And A Prediction To Remember

Fracking is safe. Like cooking, eating, driving a car, and giving birth, it’s supposed to be done properly. It can be.

Unfortunately it will be bitterly attacked as inherently bad — as if it were misbehavior like rape. Deceitful, dishonest politicians will suddenly discover fracking and do what they can to prevent or reduce it to the point where it makes no impact on the economy. Their objective will be to maintain energy prices at high levels, thereby curtailing industry and commerce.

Why ever? Expanding industries and transportation systems reduce unemployment, increase prosperity, and encourage competition that militates against high prices. Those economic developments in turn favor free markets.

As a direct consequence of economic expansion, the dependence of people on governmental welfare systems declines. That hinders the power of governments. When the dependent class shrinks, statist ideologues lose status, influence, and power.

Expect, therefore, Obama and his familiars to have a lot of bad things to say about fracking. Eventually — and probably sooner rather than later — the eco-freaks will start the avalanche of propaganda by discovering the irreducible evils of fracking. The charlatans will produce copious alarmist nonsense, link fracking to anthropogenic global warming, make a number of untruthful claims, and demand that the governments of the world “regulate” fracking to death.

The “greens” — environmental activists afflicted with misanthropic myopia and confabulatory (in the psychiatric sense) rhetoric — are gullible recruits for the next Grate Crusade to Save Gaia From Capitalistic Devastation. Their cultic babble (recall this rubbish: scroll down to “Misanthropic Faith, Part Three”) will embrace the new imaginary horror with masochistic delight and missionary fervor.

The nutcases don’t care that cheap energy and genuinely free markets benefit the lower economic strata of society more than they improve the lot of the upper strata. They don’t often think beyond the narrow concepts of their current version of how the sky is falling.

Obama and his ilk, however — well, they are interested in power, control, and a restructuring of society. To them, the eco-freaks are useful idiots.

An Interesting Case Comes Before The US Supreme Court

Can authoritarian politicians and prosecutors make an end run around the constitution, adding to their power to control US citizens by resorting to international treaties? That’s a question raised in a case that will be heard by the supreme court (Bond vs US). Some Tea Party leaders have weighed in on the issue, citing Bond as a precedent-setting case that will, if wrongly decided, expose US persons to federal prosecution under laws that have never been passed by Congress.

“This case is definitely a blockbuster. It raises the question of whether a treaty can increase the legislative power of Congress,” said Georgetown University Law Professor Nicholas Rosenkranz.

“It is a constitutional axiom that Congress’s powers are limited and enumerated. But if those powers can be increased at will by treaty, then they really are no limits at all”, he said. “If the government wins this case, then Congress’s power is really potentially infinite.” (Source)

While the Tea Party might be responding to the case with overly alarmist speculation, the fact is that judicial misinterpretation of the commerce clause of the US federal constitution (see this video and NTG Number 181) has properly sensitized many to claims that the federal government has been guilty of self-aggrandizement at the expense of the individual’s Liberty.

In any event, “progressives” will doubtless cite Bond as an instance of Tea Party excess and paranoia. Isn’t it always true that any government’s power is “really potentially infinite”?

Of course. Then one should ask how wise is it to replace the legislative creation of legal codes with the ratification of treaties. Recall that international agreements are first signed by the president and may then be put through a ratification process that includes approval by the Senate.

Note well: this is not at all the same process that produces US federal laws — though as far as the individual is concerned, the result can be the same, in that he may be arrested, tried, convicted and imprisoned under a federal law.

The law-making process in the USA necessarily involves Congressional approval and can involve judicial review; treaties are subject to neither. That is why Bond was brought: appellant asserts that a law created by treaty may (i.e., is permitted to) be challenged in court (a point that appears uncontested), and further argues that such laws are unconstitutional by virtue of their extra-legislative origin.

On this issue, the Tea Partiers are solidly correct.

Given the Supremes’ mind-bending decision on Obamacare (no, a penalty is not a tax, no matter what Roberts claims he thinks!), the US citizen cannot be confident that this court will decide Bond properly.

Addendum: The Supremes don’t seem impressed by the government’s argument; remember, though, that basing predictions on perceptions and interpretations of initial reactions is still just guesswork.

Ramblings Of A Tramp Abroad

This just goes to show that, sooner or later, most secrets come to light.

Here’s yet another reason for the government to leave things to the private sector.

Giving is the best communication.

The Turkish religious authority, the Diyanet, declares a fatwa on tattoos. The Kurds have a different view of the practice. Without a doubt, in Sunni Islam tattoos are totally haram (forbidden) while in Shia Islam they seem to be tolerated if not condoned, especially among the Kurds. Temporary tattoos (done with henna), traditionally applied at “hen parties” before weddings, are allowed. Tattoo parlors are quite common in the metropolitan centers (Istanbul, Ankara, Izmir) of Turkey, which is probably the reason for the fatwa allegedly issued by the Diyanet.

Should I now have my root-canaled teeth yanked out? — Jeez, no medical procedure is safe any more!

Here’s an interesting speech in the German Parliament: Part One, Part Two, and Part Three. Putin was the Deputy Department Head in the KGB Residency in Dresden during the 1980s — information here and here — which is where he deepened his German language capabilities. Coincidentally, it is said that Angela Merkel also speaks fluent Russian, which begs the question: when Merkel and Putin meet, in which language do they converse?

Vietnam And Kennedy, Afghanistan And Obama: Domestic Politics As The Roots Of Disaster

An interesting column in a recent issue of The Wall Street Journal asserts that US involvement in Vietnam was triggered by John Kennedy’s partisanship in domestic politics. The author of the column, Mark Moyar, draws a disturbing parallel between that debacle and Obamoid foreign policy — if one may dignify what it is that the White House and Department of State are currently doing with and to that aspect of governance. Unfortunately Moyar’s entire argument is behind registration, but the part relating only to Vietnam may be read here. If you are concerned about US policy in the struggle with Islam, do read that portion and then return at once to this item.

As you now know, Kennedy did not rein Lodge in because he knew Lodge would make policy a partisan issue — when in fact that was exactly why Kennedy had appointed Lodge in the first place: so Lodge would fail and discredit himself as a political rival. Cynical? Yes, very much so. But no less cynical than Lodge’s unworkable, Byzantine, wildly optimistic plots.

Now consider the link between Kennedy-Lodge and Obama-today.

There is solid evidence that US policy is not entirely based on the national interest and security, but on how various options are assumed to resonate with those most likely to vote. What’s popular? What are the “social media” (hate the trendy, ignorant term!) saying, and how can The One make his amateurish administration look wise, good, and providential?

Quoting the unavailable column, “The withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, the abbreviation of the Afghan surge and the rapid downsizing of the US presence in Afghanistan rank among the most baleful consequences of this politicization”.

In Number 1 of this newsletter, the US failure in Vietnam was attributed to the press, as exemplified by Walter Cronkite. That was indeed the proximate cause of the disaster, but the full story begins in the USA, where Kennedy triggered deplorable events with his passion for power. As a consequence, the world — including most notably expansionist Islam — noted that the USA fights just so long, and then abandons the effort; the legacy of Iwo Jima had been discarded as irrational.

The failure to draw a twisted but distinct line from Kennedy’s zealous political instincts to current Obamite deeds and intentions is an egregious flaw in a rational critique of US foreign policy. Quoting Moyar again: “Unfortunately, today’s policy makers may be led astray by most of what they have read on Vietnam”. Indeed, the past is prologue, not a detached, irrelevant antique.

Now ask whether today’s policy makers are half as bright and well-educated as their predecessors in the Kennedy administration. Think of Hillary’s “Who painted it?” uttered at Mexico’s Shrine of The Virgin of Guadalupe… and shudder.

Collectivist Indiscretions

Giving a politician $400,000 in six days can’t be anything but a legal way of buying influence. But is it ethical? And do the Tea Party’s favorite Solons do things this way, too? If they don’t, is it just because they can’t?

It’s relatively easy to evaluate Hillary’s competence to hold high executive office. That will probably have to be done in days to come, but for now, think of other gross errors, miscalculations and embarrassments (one and two). Everybody makes mistakes; only vastly powerful political figures lacking in ethics and overburdened with egotism make mistakes that really, really count.

Chris Matthews blows a gasket, and it’s a rare treat to see why he is so upset this time. When this guy foolishly told the world that on hearing The One preach to the faithful, a thrill ran up his (Matthews’s) leg, it meant something. Yes, the world could have done without that report, but those were the days when Obama was still being discovered, so form trumped substance, and Matthews’s juvenile enthusiasm was not an indication that he was unhinged. Times have changed; people have died needlessly because of State Department and Pentagon incompetence, and Hillary will have to admit privately that she could have done without the virtual defection of Matthews. His anger could be an indication that the nomination is not Hillary’s to lose.

Links

Yes, of course you hate news and opinion regarding Obamacare — because you know what you know, and people who disagree with you are not just bores, but pestiferous scolds. Granted. This newsletter nags you about Obamacare because when the highest official in the land deliberately lies (yes, lies) to you in order to advance his program to dismantle the market for health insurance, you should recognize and acknowledge that fact. (Obama’s “…lie looks like the biggest lie about domestic policy ever uttered by a U.S. president”, says the author of the excellent Liberal Fascism.) How can he get away with shameless lies about his lies? The lap dog news media are parties to the crime. There is sufficient reason to believe deceit about insurance presages yet more dishonesty in a continuing campaign to restructure, often fundamentally, the production and distribution of all goods and services. Please remember that prediction.

Related: the more lies you tell, the more you have to make sure folks who know what you are up to keep their mouths shut.

Yet more that’s related: how long can Obama keep the press on a leash? The lies and hypocrisy increase, and some journalists are growing restive. Not nearly restive enough…. Meanwhile, read the short commentary at the link, and realize that the nation’s leader is a shameless rascal. That’s a claim that can be documented and proved.

Rational discourse on Iran. Recommended.

Big Daddy said it, and he was right: money is the mother’s milk of politics. (Puzzled? Google “big daddy unruh”.)

Quiz: which city has the second-largest number of speakers of the Czech language in the world? Prague is first, of course. No, don’t look it up! The answer will appear in the next NTG.

A weblogger suggests that if Sarah Palin had fluffed this video interview exactly as Debbie Schultz did, the press would have joyfully, repeatedly, and mercilessly hammered her with that word “mizzeled” (or whatever it was Debbie said). True. The mistake would have proved that Palin is a drooling moron, if not a slut.

This rumination on glasnost, power, propaganda and the deification of political leaders provides surprising facts and trenchant insights. Highly recommended.

Regarding the NSA fuss, an observer notes that “…what is peculiar about this turn of events is the appearance that the president and his top aides don’t quite appreciate the significance of it all”. Exactly. The Ruling Elite has scant regard for the dependent underclass, for it assumes the political support of the little people will never be withdrawn.

A devout and devoted father expresses his feelings for…well, for you, probably. Good luck.

As the pressure of Obamacare intensifies, the number of people in the USA who are anxious about the good faith and good will of their government will increase. Some will question whether the president plans to foment a crisis and impose a military dictatorship; might Obama claim that the nation is at risk from right-wing extremists and a resurrected Confederate rebellion? Accordingly, you will probably see more articles like this; it speaks to the fears of alienated citizens by alleging that Russian soldiers are already in the USA and will be used to “keep order”, because US soldiers might not fire on their countrymen. If claims of this sort lead you to wonder whether the horrid scenario might be genuine, the initial purpose of the propaganda will have been served. Then you will be left with the problems of figuring out what the actual purpose of the propaganda is, and determining whether its authors are decent folks. From that point on, anything is possible.

Creationists and “intelligent design” advocates claim that evolution cannot be a viable theory because it assumes a reliance on purposive structures arising by chance. Well, “chance” does not describe the operation of Nature, as is becoming increasingly clear. See also the book review in Number 301.

Advocates of firearms restrictions surround and try to mug (intellectually) a lady who wrote a book about the subject. They wind up looking like idiots because they are idiotically uninformed and idiotically ideological. Sometimes appearances are not deceiving.

This is a puzzle: according to some critics of the current administration (who might be wrong), Obama “…stalled on the investigation into Fast and Furious, Benghazi and ObamaCare. He’s intentionally weakening and gutting our military….” Source. Just how long does The One intend to remain in power?

You will like this, and that’s a promise. Highest recommendation.

It appears that one does not have to journey to another planet to find “life, but not as we know it”. This discovery might have implications for an understanding of the origin of life, and/or for the treatment of cancer.

Two things you can’t accuse Obamites of being: humane and classy. Consider some evidence for that contention. The White House has no worries, though, as incidents like this won’t be reported in the major media.

Related, sort of: ideologues know neither shame nor caution. Warned, they simply ignore the signals, and press on.

Quoting from a Tea Party money-raising message: “Dear Patriot, Do you know why the entire Republican establishment is attacking the Tea Party and leaders like Ted Cruz and Mike Lee? It’s because they are about to sell out to Barack Obama once again on government spending. They want to intimidate us into not fighting their latest back room deal!” Collectivism and political power are an intoxicating cocktail. The GOP is, even in “opposition”, part of the Ruling Elite. Is it time for voters who reject the suicidal Nanny State to impose reform from below? Once again: the principles and strategy described in Levin’s book are exemplary.

Here it is again — first mentioned in NTG Number 71, it has never received the press exposure it richly deserves. Yes, it could be mitigated, so the government should be preparing to fend off a truly Biblical catastrophe.

The masthead includes a quote from the works of Thomas Sowell.

The staff of The New Terrapin Gazette expresses its sincere gratitude to the many people who have gifted the world with Slackware Linux, Emacs, and Firefox.

Publisher: The Eagle Wing Palace of The Queen Chinee.