The History of Amerika’s Cartoon Government (part 1) (by ContraSuggest)

I’ve spent most of my life trying to convince people that there was an ideological difference between Democrats and Republicans; that the two major parties represented fundamentally different, competing theories on the subjects of government and culture.  On paper this is still true, but in practice it is most often not true.  By the 21^st century the lines have been so blurred between the practical application of Democratic and Republican principles that, in most cases, there is no discernable difference in the way the two parties govern.  Oh, the rhetoric often differs because the parties need to act as if they’re different; for how else could they convince you to vote for one over the other?  Unfortunately politics is all about getting elected and re-elected; unholy alliances must be forged; promises made and kept to special interests, while the ones made to the general public are most often broken.  Once in office, Remocrats and Depublicans often pursue near identical, wasteful and unconstitutional policies.  In so doing, they play right into the “they’re all crooks” stereotype; convincing an already cynical and apathetic public, that attempts to achieve honest government are simply futile.  Welcome to Cartoon Government.

So how did fundamentally sound government institutions undergo the transformation into Cartoon Government?  Well, it started a long time ago and the dynamics that brought it about are really rooted in our faulty and sinful human nature.  Ultimately, all of the blame for the current sorry state of our country can be traced back to the wholesale rejection of God, and the Amerikan culture’s denial that our secular laws come from the Judeo-Christian ethos.  There has been a simultaneous abandonment of timeless constitutional principles at all levels and branches of our government.  [For an excellent exposition on this problem and practical proposals for rectifying it, read Mark Levin’s outstanding new book The Liberty Amendments.]  Here, I plan to analyze the problem from a slightly different angle.  To answer the question about the transformation of our government institutions, we need to go back to America’s stellar beginnings and see how the theoretical was ruined by bad application. 

The American Founders distilled the most effective components from the great political

systems of history and enshrined them in a written constitution.  They dynamically balanced those elements against one another in a system of checks and balances, which provided the underpinnings of a country in which the largest number of people in all of history have been able to live in conditions of freedom and prosperity.  That is a singular historical achievement that cannot be understated. But how do these facts square with the modern-day dysfunction and catastrophic failure of a political system that was specifically designed to endure with changing times?  How did the political system in America become so hopelessly corrupt and broken?  How did so-called special interests gain so much currency in the centers of political power?  How did patronage and political quid pro quos come to characterize business as usual in our political system?

Most of the answers to these questions date back to the 1820s, to a pivotal flashpoint in our history, which has been accurately described by many historians, including Paul Johnson and Larry Schweikart.  It was a time when the modern-day, state political machine system was first created, primarily in New York State by Martin Van Buren, and then extended and expanded to the federal level.  Van Buren, one of the most successful politicians in history, held nearly every elected office in New York State and multiple offices on the federal level, culminating in the presidency (he was the 8^th president of the US).  He was the grandfather of political patronage, was responsible for the creation of the modern Democratic Party, the founder of the first state political machine (the notorious Albany Regency), and many other modern political innovations.  He saw Governor Dewitt Clinton’s spoils system (under political party control) as a way to dull the passions of the slavery issue that threatened to permanently balkanize the country.  Securing votes for party candidates by offering favors and jobs in return, was seen as an effective alternative to securing votes by taking a strong position for or against the tendentious issue of slavery.  This line of thinking cynically held that greed was a stronger motivating factor for political loyalty than the burning passions of sectional differences.  We know all too well that this system was ultimately incapable of avoiding a cataclysm over slavery, yet it left us with the corrupt cartoon government we have today.

Van Buren’s Albany Regency, run by his new Democrat Party, lavished patronage on newspapers that “shared” the party’s views, and upon loyal individuals and local organizations that would guarantee voter turnout.  The party machine was composed of operatives at every level, from local communities up to the federal echelons, each one a loyal devotee, responsible for securing votes.  Election victories were then rewarded with promotions, in which all operatives advanced up the chain until all possible job holders in the party organization were appointed to paid government positions.  The sleazy backroom deals engaged in by our state politicians today were firmly established in the 1820s by the Albany Regency; the network may have expanded, but it’s still the same old dirty game.

The corrupt system that began in earnest in the 1820s has been further codified today by those who euphemistically fashion themselves “community organizers.”  In our retrograde culture, the practice of community organizing is portrayed as morally laudable, like the search for a cancer cure; in reality it is morally equivalent to the slave trade.  The race-baiting, anti-capitalist shit-stirring and demagoguery in which these cockroaches engage has rotted away nearly all that was good and decent about this once great country.  These community organizers peddle their poisons to local communities in every part of the country, begin collectivist grass roots movements, establish seemingly innocuous local organizations designed to create loyal zombie-like voters, exercise free access to press and media outlets, run election campaigns for leftist candidates, and are imbedded like ticks in all government branches and departments.  In short, community organizers possess and regularly exercise the power to shape our culture into any twisted form their radical imaginations desire.  And just when you thought it couldn’t get any worse, Amerika twice elected a community organizer to the presidency.

End of part one.

Socio-economics and The Catholic Church (by ContraSuggest)

Many people, including many Catholics, continue to express confusion on what the Church’s position is on socio-economic issues.  Many believe that Church teaching stands against capitalism, while expressing tolerance for such evils as socialism and communism.  I can understand the confusion.  Various popes throughout the decades have expounded on these subjects, critiquing various economic systems and situations that negatively impact Christ’s children, and so the papacy has always opposed any roadblocks to human dignity.  Since poverty is chief among these roadblocks, any system of government, economic system, or variant economic system, seen to promote paucity and exploitation has been a target for papal criticism.  No economic system is perfect, and insofar as abuses of individual dignity have occurred in capitalist systems, capitalism at times has been subject to papal censure.  This does not mean that the Church is opposed to capitalism in toto.  At the same time the Church has consistently rejected the legacy of Marx.  Consider this quote from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, section 2425:

The Church has rejected the totalitarian and atheistic ideologies associated in modern times with “communism” or “socialism.”  She has likewise refused to accept, in the practice of “capitalism,” individualism and the absolute primacy of the law of the marketplace over human labor.

In the second sentence of the above passage, note the italics that I have added to accent the word “in.”  The Catechism is merely criticizing a sometimes abuse within capitalism, the brutal Darwinian notion of survival of the fittest that all Christians should deny.  Contrast this with the absolute rejection of totalitarian socialism and communism in the first sentence.  The Catechism continues:

Regulating the economy solely by centralized planning perverts the basis of social bonds; regulating it solely by the law of the marketplace fails social justice, for “there are many human needs which cannot be satisfied by the market.”  Reasonable regulation of the marketplace and economic initiatives, in keeping with a just hierarchy of values and a view to the common good, is to be commended.”

Again, rejecting centralized planning is a total rejection of communism and socialism because centralized planning is a feature only of those two systems, there is no ambiguity here.  Any government that sets itself above its citizens will ultimately set itself above God, and is thus atheistic and totalitarian.  Some people read the remainder of the passage as anti-capitalistic; I don’t believe that it is.  “Reasonable regulation of the marketplace” is something that the American Founders wouldn’t have disagreed with; after all, they created an orderly system of laws based upon human dignity and enshrined them in the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution.  The preamble to the Constitution talks about the new government promoting “the general welfare” by “securing the blessings of liberty.”  The Declaration talks about the inalienable natural rights of every person.  Only a closed mind could interpret the Church’s  total rejection of left-wing socio-economic ideologies, combined with criticism of Darwinian notions of survival of the fittest, and conclude they’re hearing a rejection of capitalism.  It’s my belief that the Church does not expressly embrace any one economic system because it recognizes that any system run by sinners will have abuses.  This is more a recognition of our fallen state than it is a critique of economic systems.    

What’s your opinion?  We’d like to know.

Cold War Parallels Within Obama’s America? (by ContraSuggest)

There are some obvious differences between the plight of constitutional conservatives fighting for freedom in the new USSA (Union of Socialist States of America), and those that fought for their freedoms during the Cold War in the captive Warsaw Pact nations of the USSR.  Yet there are many more notable similarities, and we can learn much in how to combat the evils of statism within our country, from studying the strategies employed by the anti-Soviet forces at the tail end of the last century. 

There is a distinction between hard tyranny (the kind imposed by the Soviets), and soft tyranny (the kind imposed by American statists, led by President Obama).  The former impute laws and rules that, above all else, require total obedience to a centralized government authority; ultimately enforceable by violent, jack-boot police and military tactics.  The latter, excluding the overt violence, cloaks itself in existing law and tradition (while at the same time violating them at every turn), offering up counterfeit panaceas; ultimately eroding our rights and freedoms through attrition.  The great danger of soft tyranny is that it will always yield to hard tyranny, unless derailed in its formative stages.  That hideous transformation is taking place right before the eyes of any American still paying attention.  That’s why it’s essential, despite our monumental setbacks that we fight against the statists at all costs.

During the dark days of the Cold War there were many notable civil protests and political movements from inside the Soviet prison house of nations that began to seriously challenge the opressive authority of the Soviet Empire.  Many of these protest movements were supported from without by the anti-Soviet strategies employed by NATO under US leadership.  The events that took place in East Germany in 1953, in Hungary (a great student protest) and Poland in 1956, the so-called Spring of Prague in Czechoslovakia in 1968 (during which time large groups of young men rose up to reform the Soviet-imposed system), and the Solidarity Movement in Poland thru the 1980s (an anti-Soviet labor movement), were watershed events in the slow death of the Soviet Empire, even though they were often answered with bloody crackdowns that tragically killed tens of thousands.  In the present day USSA we see first and second amendment violations being enshrined in law, the continued death march of abortion rights, and the continued collectivization of the economy, which are clearly the beginning of a systemic attack on our constitutional liberties that, if allowed to stand, can only end in abject tyranny.  We had all better wake up and start playing hardball now, if we do not, there will most certainly be blood in the streets in a few short years.   

Some of the former United States of America can continue to be effective incubators for movements (similar to those during the Cold War mentioned above) against Obama’s secular-socialist machine.  But we still face the same old problem: we have no leaders emerging that can effectively spearhead the fight.  The knockout blow against the Soviets during the last decade of the Cold War was delivered by Ronald Reagan, blessed Pope John Paul II, and Margaret Thatcher.  Three titans of history, who despite their relative differences, concentrated their moral authority and formidable political and rhetorical firepower against the bane of Soviet Communism.  Those three legends, and the loyal people who worked for and supported them, won the Cold War.  Where are such people now?  Not all Americans are stupid; if we properly explain the present dangers, there are those who will respond.  But who will rally them?  In too many ways the former United States have become a microcosm of the old Warsaw Pact nations; they’re becoming enslaved to the will of a malevolent central authority that is determined to erase our liberties.  America was the leader in defeating the communism that pledged to bury it; who will now save Amerika from the forces that would bury it from within?

Thought Excerpts from Inside the Head Of Paul Bardus (A Typical 21st Century Amerikan Guy) (by ContraSuggest)

Monday, 11:30 AM, Paul’s Bedroom

CNN Reporter: …new pope is Argentina's Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio, the former archbishop of Buenos Aires, who takes the name Pope Francis.  Francis, 76, is the first non-European pope in the modern era, the first South American pope and the first Pope Francis.  His election comes on the first full day of the cardinals' conclave in the Sistine Chapel.  The new pope, who succeeds Pope Benedict XVI, asked the crowd to pray for him.

Inside Paul Bardus’s Head:  Oh sh*t! What time is it?  Eleven-thirty already?  Slept through the alarm again; TV still on from last night. That had to be the best weed ever; still buzzed, head pounding though, must be the Jacks.  Back hurts; feels like a knot… oh, slept on the remote…  Hey, nice hat Francis, do you wear that because you lost a bet?  Wonder if he takes that thing off when he fondles little boys?  Sh*t, I hope Paul Jolley doesn’t get voted off of Idol.

Inside Paul’s Car, after leaving Wendy’s drive-through, 12:17 PM

Z-100 News Brief: …up to 73 weeks of total benefits is still the maximum available to unemployed workers in California. A regular claim provides up to 26 weeks of benefits and federal extension benefits provide up to another 47 weeks of benefits, provided by the federal government due to the length and severity of the economic downturn.  The White House has still not come to terms with the House of Representatives on a budget deal; the CBO now estimates the national debt to be in the $16 trillion range…

Paul’s Head: Obama is so cool, he really gets it.  F**king a**hole Republicans should stop busting his balls; mmm, fries are so good when they’re hot.  Gotta remember to call Bob about meeting his girlfriend’s friend next Saturday; can’t wait to lay into that!  We really beat the sh*t out of that rental last week, returned it after Bob puked in the trunk, and totally got away with it!  Bartender was awesome, drinks were so strong, can never remember what’s in a kamikaze, but they had some kick!  Need to find out by next month for the big ski trip.  F**k!  I’ll never get that pickle out from in between the seat and the console! 

Leaving Amanda’s house, 3:45 PM

Paul’s Head: This is really starting to piss me off, been seeing her for a week already and still haven’t nailed her.  What a pain in the balls; had to play it cool in front of her father; my God, what a tool that guy is!  Having to sit and pretend to be interested in his stupid sh*t is torture.  Your daughter is hot, but it’s not worth having to hear about what it was like when you grew up, how young people had more respect then.  Bitching about how union demands forced his company to close, and being out of work along with everybody else.  Well I’m out of work too, a**hole.  He was just breaking my balls; he knows I’m union.  My rep said he should have something for me soon, real soon.  I’m done with Amanda anyway, ain’t calling that bitch no more.              

In Front of Bob’s house, 5:05 PM

Headline, Yahoo’s home page on Paul’s I-Phone: Two teens arrested in baby shooting death.  A mom tries to shield her 13-month old son with her arms when a gunman and his young accomplice attack her.

Paul’s Head: Where the f**k is he?  Said he’s be here at 3:30; been jerking off here for 15 minutes already; not picking up his phone or answering texts; I’ll check my e-mail and see if he left anything.  Dead baby?  What the f**k?  After that Newton thing they should just get rid of all these f**king guns already, no one should be allowed to own one; at least then this sh*t will stop.  F**king rednecks and their guns, enough already!  Is that a cigarette burn on my leather?!  Sh*t, Bob is always smoking in here.  I’m gonna kick his ass, where the f**k is he anyway?  Did my phone just buzz?  Oh, it was just my stomach growling, I’m starved, where is he?!  Finally, a text!  OK, he’s late and will be here in 10 minutes, and we’re going to O’Malley’s tonight; very cool. 

Returning to Bob’s house, 3:20 AM

Evening news headlines AP, CNN, Fox, et al.: Death toll spikes in Iraq, new wave of suicide bombers kills 50 in Afghanistan, city of Detroit Bankrupt, Mexican drug cartels step-up violence on the border, Tenement fire kills 15 in the Bronx, Jerry Sandusky interview to air…       

Paul’s Head: I am so f**king drunk!  Holy sh*t, did Taylor Swift get implants?  That’s pretty cool!  After I sleep this off, me and Bob gotta talk about what we’re gonna do next month to celebrate my 30^th birthday.                     

On The Counterfactual Anti-Catholic Lies of Author Dan Brown (by ContraSuggest)

A few weeks ago, while at a Christmas party with some close friends, the subject of Dan Brown’s movies and novels came up in one of our conversations.  One friend said that she thought Brown was clever for having convinced readers and viewers that the things depicted in his movies were factual.  Another remarked that Angels and Demons wasn’t nearly as offensive to Catholics as The Davinci Code.  While strictly true, these opinions conceal the harmful effects of Brown’s foul anti-Catholic slander and malicious libel.  For no other phenomenon in our cultural milieu of filth has done more to sustain a false, hateful view of the Church than Brown’s books and movies; justifying the last respectable bigotry in Amerika: anti-Catholicism.

What exactly do Brown’s books and movies say about the Catholic Church that has me so upset?  Well here’s a sampling of some of the lies he proffers followed by brief responses to each:

Lie:

The Catholic Church has led a centuries-long and ruthless campaign against science and reason

Truth:

Church doctrine in no way contradicts science, but has always been supportive of it.  In fact, the physical sciences grew out of the unique Catholic doctrinal framework

Lie:

The Church murdered the great astronomical pioneer Copernicus

Truth:

Copernicus, a life-long, devout Catholic priest, was, at the end of his life, bed-ridden for several days and died of a cerebral hemorrhage at the age of 70; no historical source reflects that the Church had anything to do with his death

Lie:

Galileo was a member of the anti-Church secret society known as the Illuminati.  The Church nearly put Galileo to death for believing that man was not the center of the universe

Truth:

Galileo couldn’t have been a member of the Illuminati because he died in 1642, more than a century before the Illuminati was formed in Bavaria in 1776.  Galileo’s life was never in danger, even when he was found guilty by a Church court after advocating, what was then, the not provable heliocentric theory of the solar system, and brazenly insulted Church officials including the pope by caricaturizing them as simpletons in his book Dialog On The Two Great World Systems.  As punishment, he was placed under house arrest in his villa, was attended to by his daughter (who was a nun) went on to study and write unimpeded, completing his greatest astronomical work, and died a peaceful death at a ripe old age

Lie:

Many devout Catholic thinkers and artists were in reality closet atheists that hated the Church

Truth:

There is no historical source that backs up Brown’s claim about the great Catholic thinkers he disparages.  Myriad early pioneers in numerous scientific fields of inquiry were devout Catholic laypeople and priests

Lie:

Opus Dei is a murderous Church cult controlled by the pope

Truth:

Opus Dei is a legitimate, peaceful Catholic organization; made up mainly of laypeople.  The founder of Opus Dei is a canonized saint of the Catholic Church

Lie:

Jesus was not divine; he married and fathered children

Truth:

There is overwhelming historical evidence that points to Jesus Christ’s crucifixion; there is no credible evidence, from secular nor religious sources, that indicates he was not crucified and survived to father children

Lie:

Mary Magdalene was Jesus’ lover, and she, not Peter, was the true head of the early Church

Truth:

The only source that indicates Mary Magdalene may have been an intimate of Jesus, and had a lead role in the early Church is a 2^nd century, forged Gnostic gospel.  

Lie:

The early Church concocted a body of lies which became the canonical gospels.  The four gospels were declared canonical by Constantine at the Council of Nicaea

Truth:

The four official gospels, Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John, were unofficially considered canonical from a time earlier than the forged, Gnostic gospels were even written, and at least 150 years prior to Constantine and the council of Nicaea.  The Church eventually had to declare that the four gospels were canonical, in response to the heresies threatening to swallow the Church.  Constantine called for the council because there were secular instabilities as a result of heretical doctrinal challenges.  Constantine had no bearing on the council’s edicts

If every single Catholic on this planet is not outraged by these disgusting lies, then we all might as well turn in our rosary beads and convert to Scientology.  Although I didn’t take the time to point out in which book or movie the phony charges originate, rest assured that there are enough falsehoods to go around.  So if Angels and Demons is slightly less disgustingly heretical than The Davinci Code, I suppose we can all be slightly less outraged; but we should be outraged nonetheless.   

Let’s not forget that Brown has repeatedly declared himself to be a meticulous researcher; while the plots of his books are fictional he maintains that the historical and religious references are factual.  Must be nice to have your cake and eat it too.   

One final point, regarding the notion that Brown’s books and movies have not had a discernable influence on people due to the fact they’re merely “harmless works of fiction.”  I would remind readers that many works of fiction have had massive impact on the world; some for better, some for worse. Notable examples are Harriet Beecher Stowe’s Uncle Tom's Cabin and Upton Sinclair's The Jungle.  These works of fiction had a huge impact on people’s perceptions and on the events of history.  It’s particularly disturbing with Mr. Brown that works of fiction, containing pseudo-historical content, which claim to be well-researched, savage the Catholic Church with mean spirited lies and invented history.  Being a writer of fiction does not justify the waging of cultural warfare and the spreading of filthy lies about the one true Church.