by baldilocksbaldilocks

With so many posts out there on the latest fruit born of Leftism—the University of Missouri situation—I think that it’s necessary to pull back the “camera” to look at the larger destruction going on around us. The following is an excerpt from yet another old post of mine–with edits and more.

Around the right side of the political blogosphere, one can read the posts and comments of many who excoriate President Obama for his “stupidity.” These people don’t get it. Those who look at the Obama Administration’s policies and programs and observe President Obama’s obliviousness and lack of empathy in the face of on-going national crises and, as a result, make a summary low judgment of the president’s intellect do so with the premise that the man really is trying to improve the economy, social and racial conditions in the USA.

That premise is wrong.

This is what people need to realize about destruction: it is the total opposite from building/improving. This seems like an obvious truth, but when comparing the concepts, we must take it further. Construction of anything requires carefully ordered planning and implementation. For example, when constructing a solid, stable building, the architect recommends proven construction methods, using the right materials, and on a solid foundation. But before doing these things, the builder gains certain knowledge of future purpose(s) of the building and, from there, makes his decisions on how to proceed.

Destruction, however, is not only opposite in purpose; it is so in methodology. (We’re talking malicious destruction here.) Using the building analogy again, think of what happens when someone blows up a building—or flies an aircraft into it. Are any orders or rules to be followed for the goal to be achieved? No. In fact, the more chaos perpetrated by malicious destruction, the faster a building disintegrates. The same is true for a nation.

President Obama, the Democrat Party, and whoever sits behind the scenes sow method after method of chaos—and, in some cases, inaction is the chaos sowed. They stab the giant repeatedly, hoping it will finally fall, hoping for utter destruction. And remember this: President Obama is the wrecking-ball, not the wrecker. This began way before he came on the scene. He is merely doing what a century of Gramscian infiltration designed him to do.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. (Her older blog is located here.) Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2012. Her second novel, tentatively titled, Arlen’s Harem, will be done in 2016. Follow her on Twitter.

Please contribute to Juliette’s Projects JOB: HER TRIP TO KENYA!!! Her new novel, her blog, her Internet to keep the latter going and COFFEE to keep her going!

Or contribute to Da Tech Guy’s Tip Jar in the name of Independent Journalism—->>>>baldilocks

by Steve and Timothy Imholt (mainly Steve, Tim was too angry, as he is an adult with autism and has an autistic son he pays out of pocket to cover.)

Do you remember the debate about why Obamacare was going to be so very good or so very evil (depending on who was hogging the microphone)? Regardless of where you fell on the scale from progressive to arch conservative, one area which had very little argument was over what healthcare should cover regarding children. Yes, there was argument about the role of government, about government over reach, about fiscal consequences, but about kids?

Nope, I don’t remember it.

I bet you don’t either.

I can remember the discussions about orphan drugs. I remember comments from both sides about catastrophic coverage. Even discussions about pre-existing conditions. These were things that most people thought the ACA would/should (depending on party affiliation) cover. Even the insurance companies and the Republicans in a last ditch effort to stop the ACA talked about other legislation, in place of the ACA, that would cover pre-existing and catastrophic situations.

But what they didn’t do was talk about situations that were fixable when the fix was expensive. Talk about donut holes. There is donut hole in coverage the size of the Holland Tunnel if you work for most companies. You see, the way things are today, some kinds of illnesses actually ARE covered by the ACA marketplace and public aid, but NOT through employer plans precisely because they are so expensive, and the employers had good lobbyists to get wording in there for an exemption for employer based plans.

Still others aren’t covered by the ACA market place OR the employer because get this… they are too expensive. It’s like finding a Ho Chi Minh tunnel at the bottom of a Florida sized sinkhole. You take the tunnel because you have to.

Is there a poster child for this hole? Autism.

You see, when you catch autism early it is treatable. But the treatment needs to be aggressive. And even better, its effects can be truly managed and even called cured. But the current costs are somewhere higher than $30,000 and in some cases even $50,000 per year for several years. Most employers would rather not have to deal with that kind of cost. And (please use a Gomer Pyle voice when reading this), Surprise, Surprise, Surpirse, state and federal laws say they don’t have to cover it.

Think about this. The employed person has to pay out of pocket to get his kids treated. That same person has to pay taxes that, in turn, pay for subsidized coverage for other people, some of whom don’t have a job, so that their kids can get this treatment because the ACA says that they can. So one guy gets to fork out the money twice, or if he can’t afford for his kids to get these treatments out of his own pocket has real problems.

That is assuming the guy who has a job can find a way to afford it. How many people have that kind of money leftover from the rest of their budget in their after tax salary? Especially with all the new tax rates, hikes in grocery store prices, and stagnant wages in the middle class.

It is a nutty situation, but that is just one prime example. We are SURE there are others. We will be on the lookout. Just follow bankruptcy filings and some will likely be found.

The ACA act itself provides a partial loophole as well. Turns out the Fed doesn’t always cover it because it’s a congenital condition. Those plans which do cover it are a lot more expensive. Currently, the only real option left for a family with an average income is for the kid to get put on public aid. On public aid, the kid can get covered. Except that like a Ho Chi Minh tunnel, the hole can collapse at any moment.

Now for those readers who don’t have to deal with this every day, getting on public aid is NOT like switching cable companies. You need to get qualified again, and again, and again. It takes a lot of effort by parents to pull it off. And each time they have to requalify, treatment gets impacted either because docs won’t accept it, or they can’t actually deliver until approved (again and again and again).

Remember that comment about catching it early, and being aggressive? Let’s be blunt. Being aggressive is not compatible with government paperwork.

So, as a country, we end up actually causing kids to not get the treatment they need, exactly when it would do the most good. All because companies didn’t want to have this really large cost, and the Feds on ACA didn’t want the premiums to go up even more than they are going up next year.

How did it get this way? From my perspective, it was because from the progressive standpoint, it had to be covered, so sticking it to the states was a good idea. (Actually for some of the progressives, anything that eventually will lead to a single payer system is a good thing, no matter how many kids get trampled in the meantime). But the conservatives aren’t off the hook either. Again, from my standpoint, allowing companies to exclude this kind of thing, is the direct equivalent of being Pontius Pilate, washing their hands. Why? Because for conservatives, anything that shows how bad the ACA is must be good, no matter how many kids are trampled.

From my perspective, political autism has eradicated public oughtism.

The saddest part of all? It’s not those kids knowing that they won’t be treated today. You see, none of them will notice it today because they are too young, and they really do have issues. And it probably won’t be those kids when they are grown, because at the speed they won’t get treatment, they will have challenges, at a much higher rate than they should. And the annual cost of that will be paid by everyone, just as the ineffectual treatment they will get because of a defective public aid system.

Yet keep sending these yahoos back to Washington, again, and again. Perhaps it’s the public who is more autistic than we would ever want to admit.

I wrote about reverse mortgage a bit ago and it hit me it’s a perfect analogy for what is going on demographically in Europe, borrowing for the present and letting someone else pay the bill later.  A great example of this is happening now in Germany.

The German government expects to receive 1.5 million asylum seekers in 2015, and possibly even more in 2016. After factoring in family reunifications — based on the assumption that individuals whose asylum applications are approved will subsequently bring an average of four additional family members to Germany — that number will swell exponentially. This is in addition to the 5.8 million Muslims already living in Germany.

What does that mean?  Well Mark Steyn has done the math based on the german birthrate (1.3) and the European Muslim birthrate (3.5) and computes that even if no other Muslim comes to Germany they will outnumber ethnic Germans 2-1 in German in just two generations.

Now if they were assimilating it would be no big deal but as Doug Ross reminds us :

Virtually none, and I do mean none, of these people have any intention of assimilating into the cultures where they “migrated” to. They have every intention of planting their culture in those places and demographically guaranteeing its survival.

Now you would think that a large migration of people whose culture embraces throwing gays off of roof, punishing their women for the crime of being raped and comes from nations with  legal systems where a non-muslim’s testimony is worth as much as a believer might provoke a unified national response.  You’d be wrong:

According to the president of the Bavarian Association of Municipalities (Bayerische Gemeindetag), Uwe Brandl, Germany is now on track to have “20 million Muslims by 2020.” The surge in Germany’s Muslim population represents a demographic shift of epic proportions, one that will change the face of Germany forever, “but we are just standing by, watching it happen.”

Well of COURSE you’re doing nothing, you’ve chosen a secular progressive society and the primary rule of secular progressivism is the now trumps the future. It’s the reverse mortgage principle applied to demographic change.

Consider:  Enforcing the secular progressive culture on the muslim “immigrants” involves risk both physical and legal. If the new “immigrants” are not willing to obey the laws and respect the customs of the nation is the policeman willing to risk life and limb to enforce those laws, is the teacher willing to risk assault? Is the alderman willing to risk the slashed tire or the schoolyard kid willing to risk the beating?  Or even if it’s not a physical issue, what about the lawsuits? Is an employer willing to risk a discrimination suit that could ruin him? A co-worker willing to face the wrath of the EU rules?

Why would the current Secular progressivism German generation take any of these risks to their current comfort or safety when all the problems it will lead to come in a future they might not even be alive for or will be in retirement perhaps in another country?  Let the future generations handle it, it’s not my problem

It’s an old Napoleonic tactic Europe has seen before:

You know his tactics; Your Excellency; A demand for concessions and when the concessions are granted then new demands each one more weakening than the one before, until the object of his attention is either too weak to oppose him further or is at least so weakened as to make armed resistance fatal.

C. S. Forester Commodore Hornblower p 167 1945

In a reverse Mortgage the borrower builds up not equity but debt and when it comes due at death his heirs have choice, keep the home at an incredible cost, or abandon it to the debtors

Germany’s elites have taken out a reverse mortgage on their country’s future.  They’re willing to trade peace and quiet now and will be happy to let future generations either pay off the debt or leave the house to the new owners.

The surprise isn’t that Germany is doing this, the surprise is that given its post Christian culture that anyone expected otherwise.

If you really want to understand how media Bias works you can’t do much better than this

Let’s start with this story at NBC news that has the headline:

Hundreds Protest Donald Trump’s Hosting Gig on ‘Saturday Night Live’

It turns out however at the number of hundreds NBC is talking is …two

An estimated 200 protesters, many of whom were representing Latino groups, marched seven New York City blocks from Trump Tower to NBC’s headquarters, where they joined protesters who were already outside of the building holding signs that said things like “#racismisntfunny” and “Dump Trump.”

200? cripes I’ve been to tea party events in Leominster that drew better, and remember 200 is an estimate.

Via Sundance at the conservative treehouse who does the math:

Protest organizers had two weeks advance notice to coordinate activity. New York City is a centerpiece of liberalism and liberal policy implementation. An entire MSM construct would gleefully assist the advancement and promotion of the protesting group.

New York City has a population of 8.5 million people. According to census figures 27.5% of those residents are Latino. All of the ingredients needed for a anti-Trump narrative were in place…. and 200 protesters showed up.

That’s 200 protesters from a Latino population of 2,337,500, or .0085%

And that of course assume they were only drawing protesters from New York City.

Yet to NBC News that protest was worth 502 words. That works out to about 2.5 words per protester. By contrast look at this video from last years march for life

How many words per protester do you think NBC gave them?

And of course that’s just the NBC article, think about how many news stories both in print and on TV took place both about the protest and promoting it for the last week. That’s got to be thousands of words and hundreds of minutes per protester from the MSM to sell you the story. “Donald Trump will draw Hispanics to vote against him in droves.”

The real story that an anti-trump protest with a chance to be on TV drew 200 people in a city of 8,491,079 but a better question is this: If the media won’t tell you that story, what other stories on election 2016 aren’t they telling you?


The only pay I get for this work comes from you. My goal for 2015 is $22,000 and to date we’re only at $4400

Given that fact I would I ask you to please consider hitting DaTipJar.

Olimometer 2.52

That gets all the bills paid. Consider Subscribing 100 Subscribers at $20 a month will get the job done and then some.

Choose a Subscription level

Additionally our subscribers get our podcast emailed directly to them before it show up anywhere else.

I know you can get the MSM for nothing, but that’s pretty much what most of them are worth.