The Protocols of the Elders of CTHULHU IV. Spiritual Demolition

by Smitty (INTRODUCTION)

He could infer that the figure, also an elderly man, though apparently of African extraction, was in Switzerland for the World Economic Forum.

Humans would not worship the Great Squid directly, if ever, he related. No, the tool of science, itself, would first be elevated to a belief system.
“Do you believe in global warming,” future media tools will ask candidates, as if intellectual acquiescense to any hypothesis is a form of belief.
For amusement, we will feign ambiguity about whether or not living cells are life. Once this cute little wedge is driven, state-sanctioned murder would prove a fascinating tool for breaking societies.
Emasculating manhood in support of this agenda would have been sadly trivial, if we had not hit on the idea of having men celebrate their debasement.

“There is too much commitment to beliefs in things other than our rule.

This is the reason why it is indispensible for us to undermine all faith, to tear the minds out of the [proles] the very principle of Godhead and the spirit, and to put in its place arithmetical calculations and material needs.

The systemic ontological assault, combined with the economic one mentioned in Protocol III

have already created disenchanted, cold and heartless communities.

When something as obvious as life itself, i.e., dividing cells, is rendered ambiguous, our eugenics program can move forward in its sub-goal of filtering out undesirables.
The demolition moves up from individuals to families, as books, advertising, songs and film portray a narrative of paternal failure and childish, narcissitic hedonism.
The denigration of the male is coupled with the acesnsion of Feminism, which is purely mysoginistic at heart, attempting to create some other vision of woman than the triumph of Proverbs 31.
Next up from the nuclear is the extended family, as welfare-state entitlements have a corrosive affect on traditional clans.
Those entitlements are a two-fer in the US case, as stem largely from the Federal Government.
Infants, man, woman, States: is there anything we cannot destroy?”

With ‘destroy’ he lifted his arm in a salute, wrist cocked, as if holding an invisible torch. This visible movement, the first in a couple of hours, startled the crowd into a silent blinking. The part that made the audience eyes bulge, however, was the forarm. The kimono had slid back below the elbow to reveal scaly, inhuman skin. The arm lowered, the face gradually assumed a grin. My mind, strained by the effort of writing all of this down, may have played a trick on me concerning his tongue.
I do not want to believe I saw a forked tongue flick out between those teeth, ever so briefly.

Navigation:

Sarah Palin Mobbed in Daytona

She’s more popular than Danica Patrick!

When NASCAR president Mike Helton acknowledged her as a special guest, she got the largest ovation from the room, packed from the front to the back with drivers, team members, support personnel and onlookers.
After sitting through the meeting, Palin could not get out the door. Fans mobbed her, asking for pictures and autographs. Her 12-person entourage, comprised of track security, a policeman, friends and spokespeople, tried to get her to the door and to her next appearance. But Palin could not help herself, and kept signing and posing for pictures.

Remember this, next time someone tells you Palin is a political liability for Republicans.

Speaking of hot chicks in Daytona, you should make plans to attend Bike Week Freedom Rally, organized by my friend Rhonda Welsch. It’s Feb. 27-28 at the Volusia County Fairgrounds. Lt. Col. Allen West will speak and “Take Our Country Back” singer Chris Cassone will perform.

A Tea Party rally in Daytona during Bike Week? Don’t you think I should be there for that?

The Protocols of the Elders of CTHULHU III. The Symbolic Squid

by Smitty (INTRODUCTION)

There were figures far ahead, a couple behind, and one he was catching up to, breath coming out in vast white puffs in the morning calm as they walked up the path to the castle.

Of course, the iconography and symbology of the movement was a lengthy topic, as it started with single-character nets to catch even the semi-literate, and moved up through various code words to ensare those who thought a couple of Master’s degrees were meaningful.
Then, above the academic mumbo jumbo, stripped of all the useless idealism, was the true symbol of what CTHULHU was about.
If people were water, the whole arrangement was a giant intellectual reverse-osmosis machine, meant to purify, over time, a very select quantity of brains.
For example, those at the table. There seemed to be an easing in the unspoken mood of the audience, as his careful tones describing a future, any future, seemed to imply they had a place in it.

“Our symbol is of course the Great Squid, who thrives under great pressure, has tentacles everywhere, sinks the largest dreadnought, and is immortal.

In order to incite seekers after power to a misuse of power we have to set all forces in opposition one to another, breaking up their [reasonable] tendencies to [cohesion].

We incubate false arguments, such as irrelevant squabbles concerning birth records, and launch them at the foe. We fund nominally independent or moderate voices, and use them to lure in the best minds that could oppose us.
Once we addict them to our funding, we can then use them as weapons against real foes committed to principles that would slow our advance.

When the hour strikes for our Sovereign Lord of all the World to be crowned it is these same hands which will sweep away everything that might be a hinderance thereto.

This apocalyptic moment will be precipitated by

a universal economic crisis whereby we shall throw upon the streets whole mobs of workers simultaneously in all the countries of Europe,

and elsewhere.”

Navigation:

Reinhold Neibuhr Was a Subversive Pinko (and Other Conservative Insights)

One of the more amusing tendencies of certain “conservative intellectuals” — the scare-quotes are necessaary, if you know the type of people I have in mind — is their habit of name-checking famous (dead) conservatives in pursuit of arguments about the unworthiness of famous (living) conservatives.

Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulter will say something that gets the liberals in a tizzy, and next thing you know, some ambitious parvenu will sniff that these allegedly obnoxious expressions by Limbaugh or Coulter are a betrayal of the conservative tradition of, say, William F. Buckley Jr.

What is wrong with these reverential invocations of Glorious Dead Famous Names is that Buckley and other now-respectable icons of conservatism were quite controversial in their own day, denounced as vociferously by their liberal contemporaries as Limbaugh and Coulter (or Mark Levin and Glenn Beck) are today.

Our latter-day “intellectuals” who repudiate Limbaugh et al. as being unworthy of the Buckley legacy are therefore guilty of  Continue reading Reinhold Neibuhr Was a Subversive Pinko (and Other Conservative Insights) →

Evan Bayh Announces Retirement

He was seen as a leading vice-presidential contender for the Democrats in 2008, but Joe Biden got that job, and now Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh has announced he won’t seek re-election.

Philip Klein at the American Spectator writes:

This is further indication that moderate Democrats running in red states are eager to jump ship in what they expect to be a rough November. 

Once again, President Obama keeps delivering on his campaign promise of Change We Can Believe In — if by “we,” you mean Republicans. But I’m curious as to the political explanation for Bayh’s decision:

Though political observers said the race has become more competitive given the current political climate, Bayh still appeared likely to win a third term.
Three recent polls all pegged his favorability rating among Hoosiers above 50 percent.
Late last week, Indiana Democratic Party Chairman Dan Parker said Bayh was returning to Indiana this week to film commercials for his re-election campaign. Bayh’s communication staff began scheduling interviews in his home state. . . .

Weird. Has the National Enquirer been snooping around or something?

The Protocols of the Elders of CTHULHU II. Economic Wars

by Smitty (INTRODUCTION)

The route to Schloss Braunschlag had been designed in such a way that, cut into the mountain above the road, the prevailing wind kept it clean, blowing snow into the now impassible road.

The shock of his ruthlessness quickly faded. The audience members cast their minds back to recent history. How quickly names were selected, granted 15 minutes of fame, then discarded.
The resemblance of the world stage to a school playground came into focus, as this speaker droned on, describing what marionettes all of the world leaders were.
He really didn’t move much appearing to glide at the head of the…disturbing table, which ratther a solid, slate-like stone obelisk on its side.
No one had anthing to drink. At their average age, I expect half should be unconscious listening to this. Yet they stare, with only the occasional tremor coursing their otherwise still flesh.

“We shall have wars both great and small: they are propaganda goldmines.
But we should ensure that real territory swaps are minimized, as they lead to lingering strife, e.g. the Golan.
No, we will drive further economic wars, in which opponents are pitted against each other, frittering away their strength, so that their States welcome our conquest.

The administrators, whom we shall choose from among the public, with strict regard for their capacities for servile obedience, will not be the perons trained in the arts of government, and will therefore easily become pawns in our game in the hands of men of learning and genius who will be their advisors, specialists bred and reared from early childhood to rule the affairs of the whole world.

Also, we’ve owned the press for some time.

The part played by the press is to keep pointing out requirements supposed to be indispensible, to give voice to the complaints of the people, to express and create discontent.

While they have been our lapdogs for some time, we cannot sit idly by while the Internet threatens to allow the formation of thought and rival organizations among the commoners, the mob, the proletariat. We cannot own all speech; therefore we must instead judiciously direct it in desirable directions over time.”

Navigation:

Quin Hillyer Argues the Alabama Governor’s Race IN ALL CAPS!

On Friday I began my American Spectator column this way:

Tim James was Tea Party before Tea Party was cool. Before the federal bailouts, before most Americans had heard of Barack Obama, before Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck became household names, James helped lead the 2003 effort to stop a tax increase proposed by Alabama’s Republican Gov. Bob Riley.
The battle over Amendment One, as Riley’s $1.3 billion tax measure was known, was a defining moment for the state’s conservatives. James, who had challenged Riley in the 2002 Republican gubernatorial primary, sided with the anti-tax activists who organized an opposition campaign that became known as the “Alabama Tea Party.”
Alabama voters rejected the proposal by more than a 2-to-1 margin in a September 2003 referendum and, if politics were logical, James would be the front-runner in this year’s GOP gubernatorial contest. Instead, one recent poll showed that the early leader is Bradley Byrne who, as a state senator in 2003, voted for Riley’s tax-hike plan. . . .

You can read the whole thing, if you haven’t already. My friend Qun Hillyer promised Friday to reply to that column, and has done so at the American Spectator today:

Anyway, overall, Riley’s tax plan raised far more money IN THE SHORT TERM than it would have “cost.” But it did so in the context of one of the smallest combined state-and-local government spending records in the country. Tim James’ father had cut the state budget to the bone, and then Democrat Don Siegelman’s spending hikes were largely taken back through a process called “proration” when the economy temporarily went bad. Meanwhile, among states that have property taxes, Alabama’s property taxes were something like the second-smallest in the nation. Its sales tax rates, though, were absurdly high, and its exemption threshold for paying income taxes started at an absurdly low $5,000 (well below the national average of about $16,000). Plus, huge swaths of land were effectively off the books because of what amounted to a huge exemption on taxes for lands used for timber — even if the timberland wasn’t actually being used in commerce, but just allowed to sit there as a nice big, untaxed private preserve.
What all this meant was that Alabama’s tax system was literally regressive — not regressive in the modern liberal sense of not being “progressive” enough for liberal tastes, but actually more burdensome on the poor than on the rich. . . .
But overall, in the short term, the Riley Plan raised more than a net $1 billion overall, mostly by raising the incredibly low property tax rates . . .
And this was exactly when the second round, i.e., the larger and more supply-side round, of the Bush tax cuts were going into effect, so that EVEN FOR THOSE WHOSE STATE/LOCAL TAXES WOULD GO UP OVERALL UNDER THE RILEY PLAN, THEIR COMBINED LOCAL/STATE AND FEDERAL TAX LOAD WOULD BE SMALLER THAN IT HAD BEEN JUST TWO YEARS BEFORE. In short, even for the 30% who would have been moderately “hurt” by the Riley plan, their overall financial situation, in terms of taxes, would be better than it had been in 2001. . . .

You can read the whole thing. The basic problem here seems to be this: In 2003, Quin committed himself as an advocate of the Riley Plan. Alabama voters rejected that plan by a 2-to-1 margin. And seven years later, Quin is still trying to win the argument.

Or WIN THE ARGUMENT, as it were.

Re-hashing the arguments of 2003 — the “regressive” nature of Alabama’s tax system, the putative benefits of the Riley plan, etc. — is a futile exercise, politically. The voters of Alabama rejected those arguments seven years ago, and I doubt they’re in a mood to hear them again now. If Quin Hillyer thinks Bradley Byrne can win the Republican primary by defending his vote for the Billion-Dollar Bob tax . . . well, good luck with that.

Or perhaps I should say, GOOD LUCK WITH THAT.

P.S.: How is having “huge swaths of land . . . effectively off the books” a bad thing?

I’m in favor of having the private sector “off the books” as much as possible. That’s why, even when I pay my restaurant bill with a credit card, I always leave the tip in cash. I have never advocated tax evasion (such advocacy can be prosecuted a federal crime), but if the waitress doesn’t report 100% of her cash income to the IRS, that’s none of my business.

Is Goldman Sachs Too Big to Fail?
Is Kevin Smith Too Fat to Fly?

Is the Clerks filmmaker too fat to fly? Southwest Airlines says so. I’m interested only because some people say Ace of Spades vaguely resembles “Silent Bob.” Not that Ace is fat or anything, but certainly Drew M. could stand to lose a few pounds, and maybe this news is kind of a warning. Watch those carbs, Ace.

On the other hand, Goldman Sachs could bring down the entire international financial system, which is a lot more serious issue than a couple of chubby bloggers:

We now learn – from Der Spiegel last week and today’s NYT – that Goldman Sachs has not only helped or encouraged some European governments to hide a large part of their debts, but it also endeavored to do so for Greece as recently as last November.  These actions are fundamentally destabilizing to the global financial system, as they undermine: the eurozone area; all attempts to bring greater transparency to government accounting; and the most basic principles that underlie well-functioning markets.

If Greece goes down and takes the Euro with it, maybe people will start re-thinking this “too big to fail” argument.

Exit question: If Kevin Smith is too fat to fly, how does Michael Moore get around?