Invisible but unmistakable,
The air is thick with them.
Mere words are suppressed.
That pressure immense,
It hasn’t been like this since ’73.
↑
↓
I walked out the front door and down the block.
Driven
Like a stranger through “familiar” neighborhoods,
A suburban American bedroom community servicing
The urban machinery.
And was almost run down by paranormal traffic
Whole trains of spiritual forces
Dispatched, focused, urgent.
They left signs on fences, the Shire’s residents choosing sides.
For the lynchings.
This isn’t going to be pretty.
↓
I saw the “greatest generation’s” culture clear-cut like timber in ten years.
This will be like that.
I read of the reorganization of Europe’s mindset in the wake of the first “Big One.”
This will be like that.
This will be like nothing anyone has ever seen.
↓
If America will fall upon the Rock it will be broken.
If not, ground to powder,
Between the gaps in regular programming.
↓
The long-planned falling,
In sequence,
Of men and institutions
In chains too fast to recall, in
Reactions omnidirectional,
Transformations unpredictable:
Surrealistic festival.
↓
Happy new year.
And it won’t be pretty.
I hold no hope for myself.
But we do, friend.
“They” can’t do anything to what they think is “us.” We inhabit these vessels but are not the vessels.
But the change will occur between our ears.
Isaiah 54 17 No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper; and every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt condemn. This is the heritage of the servants of the LORD, and their righteousness is of me, saith the LORD.
“We are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of Nature has placed in our power… the battle, sir, is not to the strong alone – it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave.” –Patrick Henry
We, the Liberty generation,
have that gold and are not lost;
we did not wither,
are untouched by frost.
In us the fire has awakened,
from our hearts a light has sprung.
Thus guided, we’ve, our pen and sword re-taken,
and having taken, That Generation’s freedom won!
Interesting breakdown:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/102967.html
Gregory’s “breakdown” on LRC is both “interesting” and myopic, in my opinion; the kind of analysis of the GOP frequently done by inexperienced or uninvolved outsiders. Like the observer of a sporting contest that begins with the asumption that the game is rigged, he only watches the match to find ways to confirm his preconceptions.
The RNC is dominated by internal forces hostile to their own base and the pragmatic elite maintain their power by the mechanisms of totalitarian manipulation. Gregory sees only that they have succeeded and takes it as evidence that the base actually WANTS to be duped, WANTS to be cheated, WANTS big government and WANTS a police state.
It is my suspicion that his perception is probably distorted, at least in part, because Gregory, himself, WANTS legalized drugs and prostitution, WANTS gay marriage and WANTS the abortion that facilitates casual sex.
That there is no possible definition that can be applied to his use of the terms “conservative” and “Right” goes without saying.
But I said it anyway.
Larkin Rose on “Part Time Libertarians”
Larkin Rose: “Libertarianism… is the only moral political philosophy…”
Mr. Rose is arrogant, self-absorbed and incorrect. He recognizes the “morality” of property, but that, alone, and unilaterally gives himself the “authority” to be the judge (God) of morality.
How do you reason so ? Doug, blind condemnation does not support your statism.
Mr. Rose is the promulgator of blind condemnation and your charge of “statism” replicates it.
Leviticus, chapter 24, verses 10-23 descibes the execution of a man in direct obedience to God. Mr. Rose blindly condemns that obedience to God, replacing his morality for that of the Creator.
In your hand, above, Strat, is the verdict that that particular
obedience to God was “statism.”
“Libertarian Party 2010 Platform
Adopted in Convention, May 2010, St. Louis, Missouri
*************************
1.4 Abortion
Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration.”
So murder is a matter of “choice” if it is a “sensitive issue” and there are “views” on all sides.
This is NOT an aberration. This is the Libertarian mindset, historically. Personal “choice” to the EXCLUSION of morality.
Old testament law Doug ?, yikes that is as unjust as the Muslim religion, and as to abortion, the baby is not considered a human life until it draws breath , still the parents choice.
James,
In the past your rejection of Christian orthodoxy seemed to be based on your unilateral rejection of “translations” of the Scriptures, but this most recent assertion includes the inescapable conclusion that you find the text of the Old Testament to be false in ANY translation.
You are quite free, of course, to believe what you will.
You may assert, as you do above, that God has been unjust (or is it that the Scriptures tell us lies about His story?). No matter.
Or that people may be deemed non-persons by law, or philosophy, and thereby stripped of their right to life, as you do above.
But do not attempt any condescending bovine excrement about “morality.”
Morality is the appeal to a “higher” authority. It is the assertion that some principle or principles are authoritative–that is, that they impose obligations on the acts of men regardless of the preference of men. I may want government to protect property and you may want it to redistribute wealth, but the idea that one or the other of those personal preferences is morally superior to the other is the assertion of a law higher than the ballot box.
God is the author of law higher than the ballot box. No alternative structure, logical or philosophical–even one claiming (humorously enough) to be “self-evident” – can be much more than one side attempting to shout louder than the other.
He is the only foundation of OBJECTIVE reality and hence, objective truth.
Rejecting God, or the idea of God, eliminates then, all talk of the existence of MORALITY.
Asserting (as your statements over time seem to do, at least to me, and I’m being sincere here) that you may substitute your personal judgment or philosophy about God for any objective source of his Word, accomplishes the same thing.
It replaces HIM with YOU.
The whole of all law is contained in one word Love. The golden rule.