Pondering the Scene

Free-fall time. On all sides of the aisles. This usually indicates a re-alignment. "Gonzo" kills himself. (I never liked Hunter Thompson, and because I saw far too many high school kids emulating his "fear and loathing" diatribes. Could I personally get inside the diatribe? Of course. I understood the "oomph" of his core message. But, alas, I found it self-serving; albeit given to providing an ether buzz ("contact high") to fellow travelers, and interested readers. He didn't shoot himself in the foot; he shot himself in the head. The final "buzz". May his soul rest in peace, Anguished Man.

He reminded me much too much of "Mikey" the cereal boy who didn't like much of anything. There was something about his own self he didn't like. I think he had the heart of a poet; wishing he were not so constrained by his mortal limits. I can remember feeling this way -- I was 12. The problem is, once you start down this road of making public an "event" you hold yourself always, perforce, to having to. Austin Ruse has shared a memory piece about Hunter S Thompson.

My own take in dealing with people like Hunter S Thompson is that the "event" driven person is a psyche drain. When young, however, the feeling is a buzz -- it provides a temporal meaning, a high, to one's own sense of being alive. Having known numerous souls like Hunter Thompson in my life, quite frankly, they just wore me out. It was usually "all about their own trip" with you just getting to play the hapless, doltish fan and follower: the sidekick. The straight man. There was no "we" in an event on the footing of shared equals. You got to be an equal as long as you played your consigned role as defined by the "event" master. You were the bit player on the stage wherein he was Center and scriptwriter.

While some people are comfortable with that kind of consigned role; I was not. And because of the directions I wished to take my own life. More often than not, I found these people to intrude upon my plans, rather than respect my plans. Ergo, I tended to make nice but avoid this type of personna. They were too much work. Constantly, engaging in Catch-22 rhetoric should you be "independent" of their designs. Like I say: More work than worth dealing with.

In other news, I'm catching as much as I can about President Bush's dealings on the European continent. He's sounding strong, and confident, and I get the impression he is finding concordance. My own two cents here.. Chirac is conceding but only because he's getting to play the role of "bit player" in the NWO as designed by those who are determined to destroy borders, and maximize an insurgency rage via new media venues. He is willing, as long as his beloved EU goes the way he demands, and with help from the NWO that is in the offering, I glean. (I'm using NWO as buzzword to toss at the "newer agenda-driven eventists".)

That, dear friends, is what I've been posting about lately: the tracks.

And how the newer left is working to undermine America through ressurrecting the same old "stuff" but via newer communications means. And this, IMHO, is why they shriek so silly about the Patriot Act.

President Bush is right: Now more than ever must we stand firm on the Patriot Act. Mr. Soros believes he can work around the act via bloggers (worldwide), market manipulations, and the crowing of followers through mass links and networks. This has already been tried in past. It is the same old network of anti-Americans but now using newer communications models, laws, technology, newer countries.

I hear and read a great many things. I do listen to the rumors, and I watch to see which direction those rumors go to, or not at all.

President Bush, from what LITTLE DANGED coverage I've been able to read (oh boy, Gannon-gate, oh boy- this or that stupid obnoxious titillating piece of interventionist news brought to us by MSM and their usual pals, the whining about the "evils" of blogging -- it's all crapola). President Bush is fully aware of the large picture, by my assessment. Countries being visited by President Bush are fully aware of how readily their markets can and might be manipulated by anti-American "prowess", and President Bush is USING these matters to drive home "freedom" and "democracy".

This is good.

Okay. Some rumor sharing here. I hear that google is a bit partial in how it posts search results. More for the left than for the right. Also that if one downloads the toolbar, one is subject to spider crawls from google. I studied "technorati". Aha. Technorati, a powerful tool, allows the left to view from the Mt of Olympus which direction the right bloggers are going, and to assess the impact and/or direction of left bloggers.

What else? McCain has called for "regulations" to force local news media to broadcast/allocate time for "poor" (not as well funded) candidates at the local level. Sounds fine on its face? No. News media is not a governmental entity. And here is McCain's bill to intrude upon private enterprise. Furthermore, those at the local levels who are in on McCain's deal have their candidates lined up. Purportedly, these candidates "should" get funding via our taxpayer dollars -- JUST TO RUN ON "EQUAL TIME".

Preferential "quotas" by another name.

The bedpartners of this bill go way back to the early 90s. And yes, John McCain is on those lists.

I maintain here, as I have throughout, the Eason Jordan flap was a redherring. It was far too convenient and tantilizing. Yesh. David Geffen turning to Barney Franks "Whaddya think, ole Patriot Franks?". And the tapes not available. This garnered near all the public attention, and away from what all else was going on at that conference. Lots of very interesting, well connected people were there. Tsunami. Hmm. Okay.. we all agreed after the Tsunami that the location of the world needed to get upgraded closer to the current century in re technology. Who do you suppose would like to be the prime overlord of MSM broadcasts? Could it be Mr. Jordan, Mr. Turner -- of the "we love Castro" sonata? Yep.

Now, why would Greenlining and Sierra club get into a snit? Aren't they usually best pals? Yes. Greenlining wishes to advance "more affordable housing" in CA. Sierra club wants the area to be "not-human-designated". Common Cause and other groups are in support of redistricting. Doesn't this suggest CA dems might be in fear losing its usual "voting" base in re Democrats? Common cause supports redistricting; oh! But not until 2010. Oh! lol. Why that year? Why not now! (Yeah, I'm snarkin'.)

And then there's former CA (now Oakland Mayor) Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown. He's got his own blog now. Rumor has it that he is "pondering" a run for the governorship of CA. Or would that be Attorney General. Certainly would be better than CA AG Lockyer, Mister-I-select-the-laws-I-wanna-obey. Sure, sure, "let's redistrict but make sure we don't have all that criminal activity to deal with because people really don't like it! Why... they might vote REPUBLICAN instead!" natter natter

In re Jeff Gannon. Yea, I saw the flick "Sex, Lies, and Videotape". Puts me so in mind of what is going on via internet, now. Boring!

The stripes on the tiger do not change; the tiger merely gets older.

I'm watching. Oh yes, I'm watching to see what comes out of the McCain "newer law" and the newer Turner/Soros Agenda for "partisan" mediumship.

Lefties are encouraging the opting out of using Technorati in favor of "Del-ici-ous". Go to any of the blogs which pumps Del-ici-ous, and you'll find links to Soros, and or links which link to Soros.

European countries are not very fond of America's Mr. Soros. And with good cause. He manipulates markets and tells everyone they are stupid for not doing the same.

He sounds soo, Aryan, to me. And well I should posit such. There are whitest movements in this country who adore money as much as Mr. Soros. Facist and Communism/Socialism are at different ends of the spectrum, but ultimately arrive at the same goals.

I've read mostly negative reports of what went on at CPAC. Tamar Jacoby is a thoughful person. I was dismayed to hear she was boo'ed.

Oh yea, there are infiltrators within the conservative movement. No two ways about it. Years and years back I observed this.

So. Does all the above depress you? Make you feel that Conservatism is ... failing? It shouldn't.

If you focus upon only a select set of news, you might lament. There's far more going on.

A truism is that Liberalism ultimately always fails. And why does it fail? Because it is about the self. What this means strategy-wise, is that the best laid plans to ensnare others, for gratification of self purposes, always boomarangs - it returns to the sender.

Part of the problem within the discourse upon "blogging and MSM" is that those in the MSM have usually (not always) worked very hard to get to the positions they are at. They perceive "bloggers" as "stealing". Of course there is resentment. But the larger question needs to be asked of those in the MSM: Which part of your soul did you give up in order to have that position, that house, that car, those lunches with those buddies?

About that time, you hear hysterical screaming and cursing: How Dare YOU! How DARE you ask!

Interesting. The same MSM who'll bash any conservative Large Corporation as being "evil", does not question their own inner "metabolism". And of course, they never question any liberal Large Corporation as being "evil". No. They prate the same "working man's" rhetoric, as a right to succeed. What they don't realize is they've fallen in line with the "Workers Party" platform, no matter how much they protest their "independence". They cannot see.

Joe Farah features "U.N. to control use of Internet". Might be worth your while to check that one out. Especially as rumor suggests the Clintons will be involved with the "new crew" UN.

How would a "control use of the Internet" by UN support the Turner/Soros media? For one, it wouldn't be control but support. And with using their newer "partisan" internet tools, a newer attempt at global domination via "world order". No, no.. not tinfoil hatting -- rest assured -- it IS all about money. The rhetoric is about "reducing poverty". I'm not falling for it. I haven't seen "poverty in America" reduced by anything liberals have legislated. I've seen problems and grotesqueness and incivility and inhumanity GROW, instead.

Can you imagine the newer "via Al Gore" internet programs being broadcast in public schools?

It won't happen. But there is hope by the investors that it might. The little people hope that it might; the big people are hoping you'll send them money, vote for their preferential laws, and make them reaps of money. You can then sit at home and blame Republicans for poverty in your own livingroom. And thereby demand newer laws and newer taxes to support your lifestyle, which the big guys on the left will happily give you, as long as you give up your money, your independence, and your voice, as well.

Some conservatives believe the Nuclear Bomb to enter the US will come through Mexico via "uncontrolled borders". And that's their stand.

It is certainly a possibility. But it's kinda like playing whacka-mole. When the whole word sees we are focused on arming the border between Mexico and US -- how ripe it will be for a terrorist -- to gain admittance everywhere else around the US.

Sometimes, the best hand to play is a deft one. This doesn't mean "shutting up"; it just means being a bit more inclusive.

But then again, some folks will never understand a "quiet voice". Or a velvet glove.

No bones about it: In the sphere of the "global community" I'm watching the snake shedding its skin. And when that happens the scales are removed from all sides of the aisle.

My two cents, on the passing scene at moment.

Top of the Day to you, and Lift Up Your Hearts!