the leftist leviathan ... its origins explained by angelo codevilla ... the "not so" benevolent totalitarianism of barack obama ...

the leftist leviathan  ... its origins explained by angelo codevilla  ... the "not so" benevolent totalitarianism of barack obama ...  ("not so" sorta sounds like "nat si," doesn't it?)

 

 

read these links as well as the article & other links at george roper’sblog:

1.)  my own writing, on the principles of the modern bureaucratic state as espoused by two of its creators, harold lasswell and harold laski --  http://wintersoldier2008.typepad.com/summer_patriot_winter_sol/2009/07/libwuhls-aint-the-new-aristocracy.html 

 

2.)  you doubt mr. codevilla's analysis.  this, on the mainstream media.  http://dailycaller.com/2010/07/20/documents-show-media-plotting-to-kill-stories-about-rev-jeremiah-wright/

the below essay introduces an article by angelo m. codevilla in the july/august 2010 issue of the "american spectator," entitled “america’s ruling class—and the perils of revolution.” 

it is linked at gmsplace, a blog run by friend george m. roper.  it is also linked at the july 19, 2010 issue of instapundit.

 

“america’s ruling class—and the perils of revolution” is a brilliant essay describing and explaining the origins of america’s ruling elites and the things which they believe, and why those beliefs are diametrically apposite of most of the ideals you and i cherish.  the essay explains how the ruling classes have become entrenched in, do in fact constitute, america’s governmental bureaucracy and academia.

 

and, it explains how the democratic party has become the vehicle of this class, and exerts its power by patronage and dolling out the spoils of the ruling classes dominance.  this is not so surprising, as all ruling classes have done the same.  but, this article explains why this particular ruling class is so inimical to your values, and why it threatens their very existence and preservation.

 

and, why it threatens our very existence.

 

if you are to understand anything of this, you must read this essay.  or, you don’t have to if you don’t want to.  just don’t blame angelo m. codevilla for your “discomfort” as you are being ground into meal by the treads of an armored personnel carrier.

 

my little introductory essay: you may skip it it you want.  that’s why I put the links up front.

 

many years ago, and several lives, i was an up & coming young politico, and the general consensus was that i could make a successful career of it.  i ran with a group to include a fellow named jim waldo, a one-time gubernatorial candidate in the republican party, and stewart elway, now washingtonstate’s preeminent political pollster.  i watched a gubernatorial election return, tagging along w/ jim waldo, at the washington athletic club with governor dan evan’s staffers, who had escorted him once again into office.  i worked with former g.o.p. chairman c. montgomery johnson on a referendum campaign called “washington futures”, which to this day contributes to capital expenditures on various things in washington state.

 

i was president of the college young republicans, on the same campus as contributed ryan crocker to the state department and sally mathiasen to foggy bottom as well.

 

i had pretty free run of the secretary of state’s office, and the governor’s office, and even pooped in the governor’s toilet on an after hours lark w/ friends through the capital building.  i missed going up to the dome and looking at olympia and environs only because of some scheduling omission or another, probably drinking beer instead.  it would have been fun, the washington capital building is still, it seems ot me, the world’s 4th largest single dome building.

 

and, then a “perception” or “realization,” if you will, derailed all that.  and, a resultant & probably the most ethics bound decision i ever made, stepped in.

 

no, it wasn’t the realization that most politicians are assholes, driven mostly by ambition.  and, in this perception i exclude the people named, as they were and are, to a man and woman, people who are not in the general run of the mill of the political class.  they are fine people, and they have retained their humanity and ideals.

 

no, the realization was that as a person, i did not possess their virtues, and that if i got into politics as a profession or if i sought and obtained elective office, there was not the quality within me that could successfully resist becoming the same asshole as those whom i despised.

 

i knew it would change me.  no, it was not that i was sexually deviant like bill clinton, or even that i was corruptible to the interests of power like hillary clinton.  it was just that i perceived, and with some certain accuracy, that i would become an asshole like the majority of the political classes, … , egocentric, and oblivious to reality, and ultimately, just crass.

 

but, i have always retained an interest in politics (hey, i was a poli sci major, receiving my b.a. in 1971 for same), and its workings, and especially the structure of rule.

 

so, it was with some interest that i read the following post, and linked post at george roper’s shop this morning.  this essay explains the growing chasm of the divide between we the people and those who deign to “rule” us.  the essay is brilliant in its scope, and just about flawless in its execution.  in my estimation.

 

let me just say, that it is the most accurate analysis of what ails this country in terms of its political leadership as i have ever read.  and, why we must excise this elite from our governance, if we are to maintain our own governance from among our own fellows: you want to be a serf, then keep your head up your butt, and you probably won't even notice.

 

it is not just because it accurately depicts america’s ruling class as smug, self satisfied, ideological assholes, but it discusses why they are so removed from the rest of us in terms of their assumptions about what proper governance of the country should constitute.

 

the author of the article linked by george makes the telling observation that this particular group of assholes is largely estranged from us, and exists as a ruling class of foreigners, as surely as though they were french aristocrats.   which status, i suspect, most of them aspire to.

 

while in college i had the distinct privilege to be mentored by a history professor name of fred breit, a graduate of the university of chicago.  he taught russian history, and 20th century history, whose dominant themes are dictated by the soviet communist version of total rule, or, totalitarianism, if you wish to gussy it up.  in the 19th century, as the socialists were giving expression to their fledging desire to govern, some of them thought it would be nice to become “one” with the downtrodden peasant class.  so, they determined that they would learn “russian” as a language, and dress as peasants, and mix with the under classes, so better to “understand” and “be one” with them.

 

so, they dressed as they imagine peasants dressed.

 

and so, they spoke as they imagine peasants spoke.

 

and, in muscovy and petersburg, they “mixed” with them, and went about and “mingled.”

 

much to the terror of the peasants, and the kulaks, and the russian merchants, who thought they were being occupied by cossacks and mongols.

 

so much for “solidarity” with the peeps.

 

i think of these things, whenever janet napolitano utters one of her infamous lines about right wing extremist terrorists, in the forms of our mothers, fathers, grandpa’s and grandma’s in attendance at tea parties.

 

this divide we suffer between ourselves and our rulers, as described in the link posted at george’s shop, is not less profound than the divide existing between the russian population and the socialists and communists who came to “lead” them after the soviet revolution of 1917.  and, I think this divide, if allowed to perpetuate itself in the institutions of our government, shall lead to the same tragedy as befell soviet russia when the revolution “solidified” its hold on institutional power.

 

we have lots of basements in this country, and lots of people who dream of placing a 9mm pill right behind our collective ears, if only someone will hold us tight for the marksman.

 

 

read “smolensk under soviet rule” by merle fainsod, for some elucidation on this point.

 

thank you, fred breit, for what you taught me.  than you, oh heavenly father and host of hosts, for the grant of your insights, as well.

 

in short, i decided that i did not want to become those persons, that foreign people, described in angelo m. codevilla’s essays, those foreigners who preside over us as an occupying army.  they do not rule from having come from among us, they rule as occupiers, they rule by conquest.  if you understand this, you understand the role of blank panthers and the s.i.e.u. at polling places, and you understand how the left intends to maintain its rule.

 

you have taken the first rudimentary step towards recognizing what you must do.

 

john jay @ 07.19.2010

 

p.s.  and, this final observation.  “you realize, of course, that this means war? …” if we are to preserve those rights and liberties which the ruling classes mean to usurp, to swallow whole and destroy as they work to “perfect” us into their image.

 

friends, if you wish to retain and preserve individual virtue, you are going to have to kill in order to do so.

 

if we are to excise the ruling class, it will be with violence.  they used violence to attain their privilege, they use it nakedly in the form of the s.i.e.u. and black panther thugs in elective politics to maintain it, they contemplate relocation camps to preserve it, and they will violently resist and suppress any and all efforts to be removed from their privilege.

 

buy guns.  buy ammo.  be jealous of your liberties.  and, understand, you are going to have to kill folks, your uncles, your sons and daughters, to preserve those liberties.

 

http://spectator.org/archives/2010/07/16/americas-ruling-class-and-the/print--  angelo m. codevilla, july/august 2010, the american spectator.

on how to wage the counter revolution.  http://wintersoldier2008.typepad.com/summer_patriot_winter_sol/2008/01/towards-a-coher.html

Comments

[Davin]

Last night I was at the town hall budget meeting the governor here had for us in Washington state with the 40daysforlife pro-life crowd helping to hand out stuff...anyhow seiu, teamsters, and various unions were there as the usual brownshirt minions of this ruling class. I was there to protest the 340million they have for 'preventive health care' which I assume counts more then just abortion funding but likely flu shots etc but still funding on the abortion end I do not want to see. let the damn eugenics era of our country end already.

What were the leftist up in arms about mostly there? closing a coal fire plant and a 'progressive tax' whatever the hell that means though I assume that is higher taxes for the 'rich' or some such..and of course the liberal love of pie-charts where they attempt to 'superspeak' to us commoners how they are being loving overlords. 3 townhalls with one in Spokane...my impression was they the 'overlords' had already made their choices and just were going through the motions.

[john jay]

davin:

i expect that your expectations are just pretty much spot on.

i come from the common folk, and i am "back" among the common folk after retirement. and, i have something of a "surprise" for the "smart" folk.

the smart "folk" are pretty much just as smart as the "smart" folk. now, i was one of those "bright lads that should do something with himself" as a child, so i got steered into the professions by teachers and professors.

but, my friends now are just who they were when i practiced law, ... , an electrician, a machinist, a gunsmith, a truck driver and a lawyer or two. all of them, exceedingly bright, and not one iota of that brightness having anything to do with position or profession. a formal education used to confer some order and discipline onto one's thought process, but, as codevilla points out, quite rightly i think, that is not the case any more.

as bill buckely once said of the boston phone book, i will take my friends over the harvard faculty any day of the week.

and, i will give you clue. they shoot one hell of a lot straighter as well. guns, talk, palaver, ... , you name it.

davin, as per usual, thank you for your comment.

john jay

[john jay]

correction on the letter to davin:

"... the common folk are pretty much just as smart as the smart folk ... ."

that is what i was trying to say. laughing.

[Davin]

Just finished reading Angelo M. Codevilla's work you linked and I have to say he communicated the scope of the problem that America faces with adroit effectiveness. The problem is how does a bread and circus society by and large in many regards change bloodlessly? I'm not convinced just having more clear minded people that are not in the progressive tank in charge of school boards or elected to form some 'country party' etc at this point can reverse enough. Still a very good read and food for the mind. What I believe is you can only change yourself through God's power so I'm at a loss on how our country could change in collective will without another revolution.

jj great ideas from your mind as always. At this point I attempt to get just the people around me clued in. Quite the fog of war on the American battle map right now.

[joshua]

the man is clearly a nutcase.

[jan de wild]

I love you brother...you are totally right in this blog.

A dutchman, concerning bout his country

[john jay]

jan:

thank you for your kind remarks.

your comment makes my day a absolute success.

i wish you the best of luck in preserving the netherlands/holland, and retaining and protecting your national identity. it is a proud nation with a proud history, and i hate to watch what is happening there.

i hope that you will help mr. wilders preserve the dutch identity.

the best of luck to you, and g_d's speed, my friend.

john jay

[Carl]

"friends, if you wish to retain and preserve individual virtue, you are going to have to kill in order to do so...

buy guns. buy ammo. be jealous of your liberties. and, understand, you are going to have to kill folks, your uncles, your sons and daughters, to preserve those liberties"

So you're an American neo-fascist killer that advocates people murdering their liberal relatives?

Wouldn't that be called terrorism?

[john jay]

carl:

no, i am not a fascist nor a neo-fascist. i am, as a matter of fact, rather a federalist along the lines of the original federalists, bordering on jefferson's agrarianism.

i haven't killed anyone.

i do not advocate murder. murder is a rather well defined species of homicide, which is criminal because without justification legally and becomes murder with a necessary element of malice aforethought to the non-excusable homicide.

kapish?

what i do advocate, and quite plainly, is that a person is justified in taking life in order to protect himself. it is a species of homicide which is, in hte proper cases, ruled excusable under the law when a person perceives, as would any rational man, that someone else's conduct places his own life in danger, and when the act of killing is both proportional to the threat posed to himself, and based upon a reasonable & rational perception of danger.

my writings in this field are premised upon those circumstances, and they search in a rather legalistic and philosophical manner to find a basis for the proper excercise of self defense, in defense of self and in defense of one's liberties, in the face of leftist and muslim attacks upon both or persons and the persons of others.

as against the attacks of jihad terrorism, for instance.

and, that is the context of my writings, in spite of what your rather hysterical rhetoric would attempt to suggest.

so, no, my writings are not terrorism, and they threaten no one, ... , except perhaps, for those who might attempt to threaten my person or encroach upon my liberties.

i am not a terrorist.

i am a patriot, who will not stand for any attack or encroachment upon those ancient liberties enshrined in the bill of rights, and our constitution.

i am a retired lawyer, and a prosecutor for a goodly portion of that, and i am jealous of my liberties and my life & person.

i will give neither up lightly to either islamic or leftist attack.

no, i am not a terrorist.

and, as phillip marlowe said to the lady with the nice gams, i am not a sap, either.

you sir, are hysterical. and, since you seem capable of little besides hysterical rant, not much to contend with.

but, i had not much to do this morning.

before you accuse someone of advocating "murder," it is best that you at least learn a rudiment of what the term/accusation mean. your ignorance is palpable on the subject, as is your ignorance of self defense.

john adams, benjamin franklin, john jay, alexander hamilton, james madison, george washington, lighthorse henry lee, thomas paine, nathan hale, ... , patriots all, who advocated and who in fact killed to preserve their ancient liberties under the magna carta and under their natural law rights and liberties ... .

would you call them terorists? murderers? i suppose you would, and in a little shrill high pitched voice at that. laughing.

go play stick ball in the street. it's where you belong, with the rest of the children.

john jay

[Carl]

"i do not advocate murder"

But it's not murder if your uncle, son, or daughter, are a "liberal", eh? Need I requote you?

"you are going to have to kill folks, your uncles, your sons and daughters"

You sir are what is commonly called "a homegrown terrorist". You may not like it, but advocating murdering relatives (or "killing" if you prefer), because they have different political views makes you a killer.

Advocating "killing" them because of the reason above, PLUS because of some ridiculous (and mistaken) presumption that "liberals" are unarmed, and thus somehow weaker than you, makes you a fascist.

Consider crashing any planes into buildings lately, say the IRS?

Have a nice day, and like all murderous thugs, I hope you die before you kill. And please don't take that as threat. More like a sincere hope.

[Robert]

"This particular group of assholes is largely estranged from us, and exists as a ruling class of foreigners, as surely as though they were French aristocrats. Which status, I suspect, most of them aspire to."

How appropriate if they were also to meet the same, sticky end as the French aristocrats. Having learned about socionomics and patterned human herding (a.k.a.social mood), and its predictive power about the character of events, we should see a MAJOR war around the bottom of Supercycle wave (c). If the progress of Supercycle wave (a) is any guide, looking like it will run about 15 years or so in all, the low of Supercycle (c) should come in about 35 years or so. I don't know what form that major war will take, whether it comes as a breakup of the United States, a civil war (perhaps with the humanity of the U.S. fighting to eradicate the "ruling class" as suggested in the article), World War III, probably involving the use of nuclear weapons, or possibly even a world-wide religious war (Islamic world vs. non-Islamic world, anyone?), probably also involving offensive use of nuclear weaponry. Another interesting bit of information I remember from socionomics - the tensions that surface in wave (a) tend to become the fracture lines in wave (c). Abolition and states rights were big issues during the first decline, from 1837-1842. They became the fracture lines in the second decline in the late 1850's. Today we see the tensions rising between Americans and the "ruling class" on multiple fronts, and a federal judge using his personal preferences to make up a non-existent "right" to declare California's constitutional amendment "unconstitutional", ditto with interfering with Arizona's law for dealing with hostile invaders to its territory, etc. Secession is starting to look like a solution to end federal interference with state matters. When social mood is going negative, such as now, the people get rid of the political leaders associated with the bad mood. Wave (a) should end shortly after most of the Democrats are thrown out of office, and we'll have somewhere from 10 to 20 years during wave (b) to try to correct things politically, abolishing as much of the "ruling class"'s structure of tyranny as possible, before the dreaded wave (c) starts, during which they may return to power. That's what we'll need to prepare for.

[john jay]

carl:

killing in defense of self or in defense of one's liberty, if someone else tries to usurp it, while it is homicide is not murder.

murder is a species of homicide defined as being without legal justification and with malice of foresight.

self defense, justifiable homicide, or excusable homicide are not murder.

look at any justifiable homicide statute in any state of the union. try reading it repeatedly, you may fathom the distinction, eventually.

read jefferson. read paine. read jay, hamilton and madison. and, once more, read jefferson. and, washington and the adams boys, pater & kid. all advocated killing as a legitimate means of preserving one's liberty, and they even carried on a war to prove their views: they prevailed, and lent their views some currency and vitality. they put the matter, in john locke's terminology, to g_d for a decision by the absolute magistrate.

i do not recall advocating killing anyone simply because they have differing views: point that out in any text i have written, if you will.

i do, however, advocate killing those (if necessary) who would usurp my rights and freedoms and liberties, or those who by acts of violence threaten my life, or by their idiocy aid or abet or encourage others to do so in advancing their notions on how to curtail my liberties. or take my life.

i think it likely that our society is so divergent on what individual rights and liberties are, and what the proper limits of government are, and who press for the intrusion of government into those areas that trample individual liberties, that it is quite likely that elements of our society will come into conflict with each other. not at the ballot box, and not rhetorically, but in the streets in civil strife. and, you know, if you get worked up into a sufficient lather, i think it likely you might find it within yourself to try and kill me. what do you think, carl, you think that you have that in you? if you scratch it deep enough?

do i irritate you sufficiently?

if you can bring yourself to acknowledge that capacity within yourself carl, do you not see how it is legitimate that i should regard it as appropriate that i protect myself from you, if necessary?

and, as in all social conflicts of that nature, the dividing lines will include members of family on either side of the lines.

you figure it out.

you are a bit of a blatherer.

you call me a terrorist, of the domestic type. (trumpets, for the janet napolitan entrance, stage right, if she can get her shoes on in time). you call me a killer. you equate the two.

yet, you still have not made a central argument for any of your assertions, and that is, you have not shown in any way how my arguments in defense of self either against islam or the usurping radical left are legally or philosophically infirm.

you just hurl "names" ineffectually, as in the "sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me" variety.

you just get all lathered up, and vent, and prove or disprove nothing, and in a terminology so lacking in consistency as to be unintelligible.

in short, you have not made the case that i have not made the case establishing my right to defend myself from islam or the left and/or both. you haven't even demonstrated that you comprehend in the slightest what i am saying, let alone demonstrated that you have even a superficial notion of how to attack it.

you know why that is, carl?

because of two reasons. you don't read. and, you just don't understand.

perhaps you cannot.

carl, i practiced criminal law for nearly all my 25 years of law practice. in that time, i believe that i have learned how to express myself with either comitting or recommending to other that they comitt, illegality.

show me where i have crossed that line.

john jay

p.s. try writing in all caps. you know, showing passion. that might do it, show some passion. perhaps you make more sense if you yell. it will probably make you feel better.

and, do try and pick up some basic understanding of what fascism is, or was. try benito croce, if i remember the name correctly. he was an italian social theorist and fascist. he won the nobel prize between wwi and wwii, if i have the name right. you can look it up. you can read him. and, if you are capable of understanding him, you will understand that i am not a fascist.

now, you may not like me. you may not be capable of understanding me. but, those issues which pertain solely to you, do not make me a fascist. they make you something of a dolt for saying so, but, again, that is your problem.

not mine.

[john jay]

p.s. but, first, try reading what i have written.

i have indexed all my writing on self defense at this blog.

try reading the articles.

[john jay]

p.s. learn something, if you have become to resistant to it.

[john jay]

carl:

i thought that you might be interested in this post at atlas shrugs, relating to ibrahim hooper a spokesperson for CAIR.

this post describes a real life full blown terrorist in the person of ibrahim hooper, a fund raiser for hamas and other iranian proxies. http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2010/08/i-was-sitting-right-there-with-a-microphone-on-hearing-the-whole-thing-and-they-wouldnt-let-me-rebut-the-false-charges-and.html#comments .

carl, i am curious.

do you write hooper accusing him of being a killer, murderer and terrorist?

of course you don't. you and your daily kos brethren would never think of doing such a thing.

that's because you are either a radical leftist in the mold of marcuse and alinsky, or the tool of the same. and, it is also because while hooper is a terrorist in fact, in fact he is "your terrorist," your little point man in the assault upon america.

well, come on carl, you don't like people who rise up to defend themselves because they espouse the use of righteous self defense in order to do so, why don't you turn your distaste for such things upon hooper, who is a genuine terrorist and associates with people who have graduated from CAIR to become real life terrorists in the middle east, upon their expulsion from the united states?

it is, old friend, because you are a tool. plain and simple.

john jay

[Dr J Atherton]

jesus fucking wept you're a waste of organs.

[john jay]

doc:

nice to make your acquaintance, too.

come on by any time. i leave the porch light on, and coffee on the boil, and you can explain to me this conferral of divinity upon liberals, who just from on high issue edicts & opinions instead of "eh'splainin'" themselves.

it's very convenient for you that you marshall truth in your own little self contained assertion, instead of having to work your way by reason, logic and persuasion to it. far "easier" on the thought process.

you are, of course, a fucking pompous twit, but you do toss a pretty good insult. i believe i may use it from time to time.

john jay

p.s. "dr." sociology, or education? modern dance?

[john jay]

p.s. far "easier" on the thought process, for both you, and your comitted little compatriots.

you don't even have to think. you just agree.

one might say of you, were one so inclined, ... , jesus fucking wept, but you are all a waste of organs, and to think that i am forced to share the same air with you.

[Carl]

"i do not recall advocating killing anyone simply because they have differing views: point that out in any text i have written, if you will"

Oh really? Are you so far gone that you don't remember this:

"buy guns. buy ammo. be jealous of your liberties. and, understand, you are going to have to kill folks, your uncles, your sons and daughters, to preserve those liberties"

I'm a liberal. I would like to see the US healthcare system patterned after the one in Canada, where the govt is the insurance writer, and doctors run their practices as private businesses.

There you go. I'm sure that fits you description of someone trying to "take your liberty away". Come for me or my family first. I'd be more than happy to put a 12 gauge pumpkin ball through your head. I'd love to show you what PA liberals feel about homegrown terrorists.

Of course the difference is that I would do you no harm unless you were brandishing a weapon. You would call for my murder for supporting a different political idea than you.

Of course you didn't mind when habeas was suspended, you didn't mind the torture, you didn't mind the claims of the unitary executive, of but health care? You don't want to pull the plug on grandma, you are calling on people to blow her brains out.

Well, here I am.

[john jay]

carl:

oh, my, if i were chris matthews you would make my leg tingle, you elemental savage, you.

you love killing.

habeas was suspended? during the civil war, by lincoln? the unitary executive?

now, wipe the flecks of spittle from your chin, and explain yourself, in a coherent manner.

my oh my, but you can work yourself up into a froth, can't you.

john jay

[john jay]

carl:

let me see now.--

you would be willing to put a 12 gauge pumpkin ball through my head.

ah, familiarity with weapons, nonemclature and short range lethality.

hmm, ... , gun nut w/ weapons.

ah, would love to shoot me, if i came to his porch.

hmm, ... , homicidal maniac with delusions of persecution.

ah, he posits a difference between us, that being that he would do me no harm unless i were brandishing a weapon.

hmm, ... , actually, he is very dangerous, because in most states the crime of "brandishing" is a lessor crime, not usually a felony, and if i were only "brandishing" he would have no legitimate basis for perceiving that i meant to do him lethal or homicidal harm.

so, he is positing a situation, ... , hey, i didn't make it up, my learned friend carl posed the hypothetical, that if i comitted a misdemeanor offense in his presence, he would put a 12 gauge pumpkin ball through my head, likely a lethal event, even for me.

hmm, ... , that friends, is what we call first degree murder. a homicide, that cannot be justified, and malice aforethought. well, that element is established by the statement, that he would love to show a homegrown terrorist such as myself how a loyal & native son of the great state of pennsylvania would deal with same.

intent. malice. before the event.

that is, carl has just said he would love to murder me.

ah, ... , he proposes to murder me because i oppose obama's health care plan, or the one that canada follows, ... , it probably makes no difference.

i am the homegrown terrorist in carl's scheme of things?

i think the boyo's over at daily kos better look at carl's kumbaya credentials again, and may want him to submit to some anger management therapy. he's got an anger problem and fixation upon weapons. maybe daily kos might want to consider yanking his password, until he can get some of these issues worked out. kingcranky may be able to find him room in his group therapy sessions.

john jay

[john jay]

p.s. torture? you mean having to watch diane keaton movie festivals? old charlie sheen movies? what are you talking about?

[john jay]

carl:

i think that i probably owe you an apology.--

when you said that you would like to blow the heads off homegrown domestic terrorists, i just naturally assumed you were speaking of me. well, you had just said that you would like to shoot me in the head with a 12 gauge "pumpkin ball."

i should not have jumped to a conclusion that you meant me and "my ilk."

sober reflection convinces me that you in fact mean to redress grievances we all hold against 60's leftist radical's, such as bill ayers who led the bombing contingent of the weather underground, and whose companions were killed building bombs, and whose compatriots were involved in the robbery of armored cars and the murder of police officers. or, perhaps angela davis, hip deep in the court room escapade wherein a judge had a shot gun taped to his neck, and whose head was in fact later blown to little bits and chunks.

it is not right that these two hoodlums have escaped justice, and are instead tenured professors at major universities.

or, perhaps you meant the newly resurgent black panthers, who pick on old people as they enter polling booths.

given your announced reverence for old grandma ladies, i cannot believe that you would mean the grandma's and grandpa's who prayer for the country, and for the president, prior to the beginning of tea parties and the like. the old rascals.

poor old dears. if they escape my machinations, g_d forbid they have to run the gauntlet in from of your pumpkin balled 12 gauge.

how's it going with daily kos and the kumbaya cert?

john jay

[Ayn rand scholarship essay]

Excellent posting here people will get lot of information with the help of posted information & topics from this blog. nice work keep it going.