Our rights do not originate with government, but they are to be "secured" by government.
Formerly: Libertarian Party of Citrus county

Friday, July 8, 2016

Civil War is Here

By Tom Rhodes, 7/8/2016

Our government has just confirmed that we are no longer a nation of laws. Once we were a "nation of the people, by the people and for the people." Today we are a “nation of the elite, by the elite, and for the elite.”

It took less than a week for the people to respond. Not only seeing Clinton's get away with ignoring the law, but coupled with another example of the repeated problem of the police shooting innocent people and not being held accountable was demonstrated.

The results were seen in Dallas, 11 police shot, 5 dead. The people will not tolerate the continued different set of rules for the elite and their minions, than the ones they must follow or be killed.

I wrote about this coming for the past few years
(here’s one). Retaliation for the elite and their minions abandoning the rule of law was inevitable.

President Obama is aghast that the people would respond this way. Like any despot, the idea that people would retaliate against the government is inconceivable. Saying from Warsaw, “There’s no possible justification for these kinds of attacks or any attack on law enforcement.” When the elites minions (cops) can and do get away with murder routinely the outcome in a free society is clear. When the rule of law no longer applies, and there is no justice through the courts, the people are left with no recourse. When law enforcement can routinely shoot unarmed people with no accountability, they not only justify, but invite attack on law enforcement.

Obama made it clear today, that the idea that the people have powerful weapons that they can use to resist the minions of the elite is the problem. Clearly the reason for the Second Amendment was so that the people, even urban blacks, would have the means to combat a tyrannical unaccountable government.

This week when the government said, Yes, Hillary broke the law, but we’re going to let her get away with it. They clearly said, the laws are to control the little people and don’t apply to your betters. Because police (minions of the elite) can and do get away with murder, and our government has declared that the elite and their minions are exempt from the law. After such a clear declaration of oligarchic despotism, violent retaliation and rebellion is all that is left.

The police created the climate by constantly and systematically protecting their own. Every cop who has seen another officer abuse the rights of a citizen, and kept their mouth shut rather than cross the thin blue line, is an accomplice not a good cop. Everyone should be held accountable for their mistakes, even cops. Especially when it costs someone their life.

The problem isn’t people having guns, it is the actions of the elites minions (cops). If we don't fix the general problem of cops literally getting away with murder, people will be sniping them all over. It is obviously a systemic problem; everyone knows nothing is going to happen to a cop who kills someone. You can’t keep shooting little girls sleeping on their couch(Aiyana Jones), and claiming you were scared as an excuse, and expect the people to tolerate it.

Last year hundreds of unarmed people were killed by the police, over 1000 people in all, but if the dead body had a pocket knife, they were classified as “armed.” The people may be stupid, but not that stupid, and can easily recognize when for every cop shot there are 30 people shot, and see the disparity noting the fact of police being trained to lie, and not notice that the Evil Minions of the Elite (cops) obfuscate, and pretend that they are in danger when they are not.

Why should the people trust the police when the law says it’s legal for cops to lie to suspects and the people, but a crime for the people to lie to cops?

As long as the minions of the elite maintain their quasi-military attitude, their us vs them mentality, and their legal unaccountability, they will increasingly find themselves at war against the American people. It is a war they cannot win.

The shooting of 11 minions of the elite in Dallas is not remotely surprising. What is surprising is the sheer number of people who won’t sympathize with the Dallas police and their families. The police consider themselves above the law, but they are not beyond the reach of an justly outraged public.

Dallas is an unnecessary tragedy. The specific officers that were shot and killed, in all likelihood did nothing to deserve the violence inflicted upon them. The way for them to avoid future attacks is to stop pretending that being scared is sufficient reason to shoot a member of the public, to erase the thin blue line and hold their fellow officers accountable.

No sane person would celebrate the current situation, it has been predicted, but the repeated calls to hold the police and our government accountable have gone unheeded. When the FBI boldly proclaims that yes the elite did break the law, but we won’t prosecute, and cops routinely (hundreds of times a year) shoot the unarmed public without accountability, it clearly demonstrates to the people that the rule of law is dead, and the people cannot expect justice from the government. The people can, and will, seek justice through other means when the government refuses to enforce the rule of law.

Buckle up people, civil war is here, and things are going to get worse before it gets better.

Monday, July 4, 2016

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.


IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.


He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.


The 56 signatures on the Declaration appear in the positions indicated:

Column 1
Georgia:
Button Gwinnett
Lyman Hall
George Walton

Column 2
North Carolina:
William Hooper
Joseph Hewes
John Penn
South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge
Thomas Heyward, Jr.
Thomas Lynch, Jr.
Arthur Middleton

Column 3
Massachusetts:
John Hancock
Maryland:
Samuel Chase
William Paca
Thomas Stone
Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Virginia:
George Wythe
Richard Henry Lee
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Harrison
Thomas Nelson, Jr.
Francis Lightfoot Lee
Carter Braxton

Column 4
Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris
Benjamin Rush
Benjamin Franklin
John Morton
George Clymer
James Smith
George Taylor
James Wilson
George Ross
Delaware:
Caesar Rodney
George Read
Thomas McKean

Column 5
New York:
William Floyd
Philip Livingston
Francis Lewis
Lewis Morris
New Jersey:
Richard Stockton
John Witherspoon
Francis Hopkinson
John Hart
Abraham Clark

Column 6
New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett
William Whipple
Massachusetts:
Samuel Adams
John Adams
Robert Treat Paine
Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins
William Ellery
Connecticut:
Roger Sherman
Samuel Huntington
William Williams
Oliver Wolcott
New Hampshire:
Matthew Thornton



Thursday, June 30, 2016

Magic Dirt Theory

By Tom Rhodes, 6/30/2016

The dirt in the USA is not magical. Duh!!! By a person changing their geographic location to the USA the dirt under their feet won’t magically change that person into an American. Even if born in the USA, if their parents don’t embrace modern western civilization and the culture of America, that child won’t magically become American. The

There are certain cultural beliefs that simply do not mix in the West. If an American immigrant from Afghanistan believes in Sharia law (abusing women and killing gays for who they are - as an example) those cultural beliefs will never mix in our country. If we allow that individual to immigrate to our nation, they will be unassimilated, unsuccessful and will develop a great deal of resentment or even rage.

Is it unfair to consider if a potential immigrant plans on adopting it’s new countries culture or keep their old culture and work at changing the culture of their new geographic location to match their own?

If we look at places in the world where large numbers of Muslims have migrated, do those Muslims adopt their much if any new locations local culture, or do they maintain the culture from where they came and expect the locals to accept and/or adopt the foreign culture of the new immigrants?

The FACTS are clear but not politically correct. When large numbers of Muslims migrate to a new geographic location, they do not adopt the local culture, but keep their old culture and insist on it becoming the new culture. There is no evidence that the dirt under their feet magically transforms them into the local culture.

Countless dollars have been spent trying to create a predictor of a person becoming a terrorist. All the money and research spent is spent on the condition that the answer not point to Islam. The New York Times reported earlier this year:

"What turns people toward violence -- and whether they can be steered away from it -- are questions that have bedeviled governments around the world for generations. Those questions have taken on fresh urgency with the rise of the Islamic State and the string of attacks in Europe and the United States. Despite millions of dollars of government-sponsored research, and a much-publicized White House pledge to find answers, there is still nothing close to a consensus on why someone becomes a terrorist."

The most common trait of terrorists in the world today is that they are Muslim. That common trait is not allowed to be noted. The British MI5 undertook its own highly sophisticated study, after the July 7, 2005, London subway bombing by Muslim terrorists that killed 52 people. The study determined that terrorists are a very diverse group, and worshipped at a variety of different mosques. The only predictive factor MI5 found was being Muslim.

Muslim leaders have declared a war on western civilization, they openly state their goal is to end the decadence that is modern western civilization. We know from 8 to 15% of Muslims hold radical beliefs and will commit violence in the name of Islam if given the opportunity. We know fairly accurately that if we admit 1 Million Muslims into the country about 80,000 will hold radical beliefs and if given the opportunity will commit acts of violence. Just FACTS, not politically correct but true none the less. From rape to mass murder they will commit violence against infidels. We only need to look at Europe to see it. The government is telling it’s citizens if they don’t want to be raped or assaulted don’t go where the Muslims live. The amount of violent crime by Muslims against local cultures is massive wherever large numbers of Muslims Migrate. PERIOD!

Omar Mateen, was born in the USA to Afghan parents, who upon moving to the USA were not affected by our magical dirt and did everything they could to remain Afghan, and raise their sun as an Afghan Muslim. The US State Department led Overseas Security Advisory Council report reads that “martyrdom during the month of Ramadan may hold a special allure to some.” It noted that during Ramadan there is a “persistent threat of (ISIS) attacks, both inspired and directed.” The fact is Omar Mateen is a Radical Islamic Democrat, who during the month of Ramadan carried out the most effective Islamic Terrorist Act on US soil. He was not an American, the magic dirt of the USA did not make him one.

Leftists and political elite have only made themselves look like controlling manipulative liars, trying to blame guns in America as the root cause, when all the evidence clearly points to Islamic Terrorism. Only a blind idiot would think anything but Radical Islam is the cause of the 6/12 Orlando massacre. Only an idiot, or a manipulative liar, would declare Mateen as an American. The magic dirt he was born on does not make him an American. He overtly rejected everything, including the culture, that makes a person American. An African Lion (Panthera leo) born in an American zoo doesn't magically become an American lion (Puma concolor).

The dirt under the feet of the USA is not magical, it does not and will not change Muslims into Americans. Dumping a million Muslim immigrants on the country every year, some percentage of whom we know will commit mass murder, is insane. It will result in the same violent rape, assault, and mass murder that has accompanied every migration of Muslims in history.

Wednesday, June 22, 2016

Why are the Govt and MSM lying to us?

WHY - Are both the MSM and Govt trying to cover up 6/12 as an Islamic Terrorist Act?

Some facts are clear, enough facts are know so we can say that the Orlando 6/12 massacre meets all the criteria to be identified as an Act of Islamic Terrorism.

The mass murderer was a non-state actor (he was not acting on behalf of any government), he explicitly identified the United States government’s intrusions into the Islamic world as his reason for murdering en masse. He disclosed his motive: He wanted to affect changes in government policy. The mass murderer indiscriminately slaughtered non-combatant civilians in the private sector as the means by which he sought to retaliate against and to change American policy. This clearly meets all the requirements to identify 6/12 as terrorism.

The following are also known facts: The terrorist followed jihadi protocol and informed the police that he pledged his allegiance to the Islamic State (ISIS) and the terrorist shouted praises to Allah as he shed the blood of civilians. This clearly meets all the requirements to identify the act of terrorism on 6/12 as an Islamic Terrorist act.

The readily available facts are clearly know. Why is our government trying to make 6/12 about guns, homophobia, or America's fault? Why is the MSM supporting the government in making 6/12 something other than the largest Islamist Terrorist Attack on US soil since 9/11???

When the government publicly states it will edit the 911 tapes so that it doesn't point to Islamic Terrorism, says they don't know the motives, despite the clear declaration of motives by the terrorist, we have a problem. The MSM should have been screaming to get the truth, but it was pressure from everyday citizens and the new media of the Internet that forced the government to release the 911 tapes which clearly showed that 6/12 was an Islamic Terrorist Attack.

Guns, homophobia, etc. are all red herrings. 6/12 was Islamic Terrorism. Refusing to call it that, doesn't make it anything else. Refusing to recognize that a sizeable portion of the Islamic world has publicly declared war on the West, and specifically the USA, doesn't mean we are any less at war. It takes 2 sides o fight, but it only takes one side to declare and wage war. Choose not to fight or defend yourself, and you will lose the war.

Why are the Govt and MSM lying to us?

WHY - Are both the MSM and Govt trying to cover up 6/12 as an Islamic Terrorist Act?

Some facts are clear, enough facts are know so we can say that the Orlando 6/12 massacre meets all the criteria to be identified as an Act of Islamic Terrorism.

The mass murderer was a non-state actor (he was not acting on behalf of any government), he explicitly identified the United States government’s intrusions into the Islamic world as his reason for murdering en masse. He disclosed his motive: He wanted to affect changes in government policy. The mass murderer indiscriminately slaughtered non-combatant civilians in the private sector as the means by which he sought to retaliate against and to change American policy. This clearly meets all the requirements to identify 6/12 as terrorism.

The following are also known facts: The terrorist followed jihadi protocol and informed the police that he pledged his allegiance to the Islamic State (ISIS) and the terrorist shouted praises to Allah as he shed the blood of civilians. This clearly meets all the requirements to identify the act of terrorism on 6/12 as an Islamic Terrorist act.

The readily available facts are clearly know. Why is our government trying to make 6/12 about guns, homophobia, or America's fault? Why is the MSM supporting the government in making 6/12 something other than the largest Islamist Terrorist Attack on US soil since 9/11???

When the government publicly states it will edit the 911 tapes so that it doesn't point to Islamic Terrorism, says they don't know the motives, despite the clear declaration of motives by the terrorist, we have a problem. The MSM should have been screaming to get the truth, but it was pressure from everyday citizens and the new media of the Internet that forced the government to release the 911 tapes which clearly showed that 6/12 was an Islamic Terrorist Attack.

Guns, homophobia, etc. are all red herrings. 6/12 was Islamic Terrorism. Refusing to call it that, doesn't make it anything else. Refusing to recognize that a sizeable portion of the Islamic world has publicly declared war on the West, and specifically the USA, doesn't mean we are any less at war. It takes 2 sides o fight, but it only takes one side to declare and wage war. Choose not to fight or defend yourself, and you will lose the war.

Friday, January 8, 2016

Science says Multiculturalism is a Failure!

Science says Multiculturalism is a Failure!
By Tom Rhodes, 1/8/16

Liberals are so proud and arrogant about "science" be it global warming, or whatever. You probably haven't read or seen in the news the studies that look at the social aspects multiculturalism (diversity) have on societies. The science is clear, MULTICULTURALISM is bad for society. The reality is as mentioned in many non-PC sources is that not only is the observation by people who see large number of immigrants from dissimilar cultures lead to violence and social unrest, but the SCIENTIFIC CONCENSIS is that:
Diversity + Proximity = WAR



  • Social trust is negatively affected by ethnic diversity, case study in Denmark from 1979 to the present. Read Here.

  • Ethnic homogeneity and Protestant traditions positively impact individual and societal levels of social trust. Read Here.

  • "In longitudinal perspective, [across European regions], an increase in immigration is related to a decrease in social trust." Read Here.

  • Immigration undermines the moral imperative of those who most favor welfare benefits for the neediest. Read Here.

  • The negative effect of community diversity on social cohesion is likely causal. Read Here.

  • In Switzerland, social peace between diverse factions isn't maintained by integrated coexistence, but rather by strong topographic and political borders that separate groups and allow them autonomy. Read Here.

  • "Our analysis supports the hypothesis that violence between groups can be inhibited by both physical and political boundaries." Read Here.

  • Diversity hinders between-group cooperation at both the one-on-one and group levels. Read Here.

  • The best chance for peace in Syria is better borders (intrastate or through the creation of new states) "suited to current geocultural regions", and tribal autonomy. Read Here.

  • Using data from US states, study finds a negative relationship between ethnic polarization and trust. Read Here.

  • Diversity is associated with more White support for nationalist parties, except at the local level where large immigrant populations cut into vote totals for nationalist parties. Read Here.

  • In Australia, ethnic diversity lowers social cohesion and increases "hunkering", providing support for Putnam's thesis finding the same results in the US. Read Here.

  • After controlling for a self-selection bias, study finds that ethnic diversity in English schools reduces trust in same-age people and does not make White British students more inclusive in their attitudes towards immigrants. Read Here.

  • In Germany, residential diversity reduces natives' trust in neighbors, while it also reduces immigrants' trust but through a different pathway. Read Here.

  • Increasing social pluralism (diversity) is correlated with increased chance of collective violence. Read Here.

  • "[E]thnic heterogeneity [diversity] explains 55% of the variation in the scale of ethnic conflicts, and the results of regression analysis disclose that the same relationship more or less applies to all 187 countries.. . . [E]thnic nepotism is the common cross-cultural background factor which supports the persistence of ethnic conflicts in the world as long as there are ethnically divided societies." Read Here.

  • Genetic Similarity Theory (GST) could help explain why diverse groups in close proximity increases ethnic conflict and ethnic nepotism. Read Here.

  • Genetic diversity has contributed significantly to frequency of ethnic civil conflict, intensity of social unrest, growth of unshared policy preferences, and economic inequality over the last half-century. Read Here.

  • Using social science data and computer modeling, researchers found that policies that attempt to create neighborhoods that are both integrated and socially cohesive are "a lost cause". Read Here.

  • The numbers and the genetic distance matter. Minority groups that get above a certain critical mass, and that are culturally distant from the majority culture, begin to self-segregate from the majority, moving society toward division and away from cooperation. Read Here.

  • Using data from Copenhagen school registers, researchers found that native Danes opt out of public schools when the immigrant population concentration hits 35% or more. Read Here.

  • In the most liberal region in the US, San Francisco and surrounding suburbs, White parents are pulling their kids out of public schools that are becoming increasingly asian. Read Here.

    list stolen from CH's Diversity + Proximity = War: The Reference List and will be updated as new science is reported



    The science that says multiculturalism is a failure, Scientific studies illustrate the way the world is, not how leftist elites think it should be.

    The massive sexual assault happening to women in Europe (which the MSM is trying to ignore) is at the fault of those European leaders who have allowed massive migration from places with drastically dissimilar cultures.

    Much of the strife and violence in the USA (which the MSM is trying to ignore), is at the hands of those leaders who refuse to enforce our immigration laws, and insist that we must let large numbers of third world people invade our country.

    To the leftists that denounce Trump, Coulter, Savage, Voxday, etc. because they are stating how the world is, not how they think it should be, the question is: Where is the scientific studies supporting multiculturalism?

    Finland like Germany has experienced massive sexual assault on New Years Eve. The MSM are doing their best to cover it up. Just like they are doing their best to cover up rape and sexual assault by third world criminal aliens in the USA. Both Islamic culture, and the Machismo culture of Latin America use rape to subjugate and force their culture on others. The evidence is that massive third world immigration results in rape culture, there will be no peace as long as Western Civilization continues to allow massive numbers of third world migration.

    I'd like one example where massive migration of people didn't result in the destruction of the native culture. Japan recognizes this, look at their immigration laws and rules. Ask the American Indians how allowing the British to invade America worked out. Oh that's right, Europeans raped, slaughtered, and crushed that culture. What makes us think that other cultures won't do the same to ours?
  • Tuesday, December 22, 2015

    Star Wars: The Farce Awakens

    By Tom Rhodes, 12/22/2015

    I’ll start by saying I’m an old Star Wars fan and ‘The Force Awakens’ is entertaining and action packed but fails if you even attempt to think about it. The funny scenes and homage to the original Star Wars make it worth seeing. . . . . after it’s in the $5 DVD bin at Walmart. Stop reading if you haven’t seen it and don’t want any spoilers. The Farce Awakens is a feminized retelling of first Star Wars Episode IV, A New Hope.

    Let’s start with a great positive. TMZ and others have been trying to get Mark Hamill to reveal or hint at Star Wars participation. His dismissal of Star Wars as movies he doesn’t watch, and elusion to not being a part of ‘The Force Awakens‘ and other crap he’s thrown at the press , was acting for the paparazzi. Showing up in the last scene looking like Luke turned into Obi Wan, was a great ending to the movie. Hamill’s treatment of the press and paparazzi is arguably better acting than any of the acting by other characters in the movie except R2D2, and neither Luke or R2D2 speak. The only redeeming acting of a speaking part must be given to Harrison Ford, who pulled Hans Solo with style, and the Chewy-Solo relationship was still the best developed character relationship in the movie. It should be the last we’ll ever see of Hans Solo, unless they do the ghost thing like they did with Kenobi episodes V and VI.

    Droid aside, thank God there was no Yoda, Jar-Jar, Ewok, or other cutesy supporting character.

    Problems in no particular order:

  • Darth Vader, Luke, Kylo Ren, Obi Wan Kenobi, and all other force using experts in any previous Star Wars story, needed training based on years of apprenticeship with a 24/7 mentor to master the force. The entire premise of Jedi powers is that they must being “learned” and they develop over time with practice. Our heroine Rey, hinted heavily as being Luke’s daughter, instantly and without training or foreknowledge gets abilities with the force that took all other Jedi, Sith, decades to develop. So with no Jedi’s around, how does she even know the force can control weak minded storm troopers, much less use the old “you don’t need to see his papers” shtick.

  • How can Rey without any training best Kylo Ren, the emo Darth Vader, with a light saber, while Kylo Ren has had years of training with the force? Even though Vader, Anakin Skywalker, in his youth like Rey showed signs of mechanical genius and native ability with the force, to become proficient took years of training and a mentor? When Luke first picked up a light sabre, he couldn’t deflect a laser pointer from a training drone much less use it effectively. After training with both Kenobi and Yoda, Luke got his hand chopped off by Vader. The whole “force” in Rey defies the entire premise of the Jedi and use of the force in the previous 6 movies. How come the only character to get the ability and skill to use the force without putting in the work and effort is a girl? Rey’s abilities make a farce of the force.

  • Rey is the most developed character in the whole movie and she has virtually no character development. We have no idea about her past, motivations, anything. Who or what was support system that enabled her to survive on this planet? Why is she in such good health and obviously well fed when she can only scrounge up half rations daily? At least little Anakin was a slave with his mother and we have some idea how and why he survived and turned out the way he did. Who and why is she waiting on a junkers planet? No story, and no reason to actually care for or about her other than the hint she’s Luke’s daughter.

  • How many times can we see a movie blowing up the Death Star, with the Millennium Falcon flying out of the fiery explosion in the last second. Both in its size and scope, Starkiller Base makes the Death Star and it’s rebuild look like a Sunfish in the America’s Cup. There is a pathetically small Tie Fighter fleet to fleet to protect it? After 40 years both the good guys and the bad guys have made zero developments in fighters, Xwing’s and Tie fighters. Would be like the USA still flying F4 Phantoms instead of F35 Raptors. Hell our navy today has better anti-air guns than the ineffective turbolaser batteries on the Starkiller Base? If the rebel’s launched half their Xwing Fleet, why so few, it’s not like the computers at Lucas Light and Magic, couldn’t have added in a few hundred more fighters for both sides. Even the prequel had new fighters and cooler space ships. Even Jar-Jar had access to cooler underwater ships. The future seems to regress technologically not advance.

  • With no character development, Rey treats her aunts husband Hans Solo as like her missing father and is motivated by his death at the hands of her cousin Kylo Ren. At least there was some character development in episode IV to explain Obi Wan Kenobi and Luke’s relationship before the DarthVader/Kylo Ren kills the old mentor Kenobi/Solo.

  • Fin former storm trooper beats decades of brainwashing as a storm trooper and develops a conscience. This happens after his exposure in one battle, and why is a sanitation worker also an armed storm trooper? And why is the main supporting character and black guy, a garbage man, isn’t that racist? What happened to Storm Troopers being Clones? Why are all other Storm Troopers fearless and willing to run right into the fight and Fin runs away until he has a princess to serve?

  • Trained ever since taken as a child to be a fighting machine, or maybe sanitation worker, nothing Fin does is related to or congruent with Ray, but somehow devotes most of the film to trying to protect her. The bigger problem is this character is a typical feminization of an old male hero tale. ‘The Farce Awakens’ retells the original Star Wars with a woman in the man’s role, only the woman gets the farce without all the hard work, and the male despite his years of training is a bumbling shadow of a man obsessed with the female hero.

  • How did Rey know the history of the Millennium Falcon since it was stolen from Han Solo?

  • The emo Darth Vader, Kylo Ren, hates his dad Hans Solo. He hates him enough to kill him; Why? What happened? What turned him to the Dark Side? He is a flat, emo, undeveloped character with no rationale for why he is where he’s at. He’s just a cardboard cutout of an evil emo kid mad at his Dad.

  • Princess Lea, aka Carrie Fisher, has so much botox her face is a plastic shell and shows no emotion. Her acting is flatter and not even worse than her lame part in the “Blues Brothers.”

  • How can a mere Captain, Captain Phasma, know how to lower the Starkiller’s shields and be able to do it without any higher level of approval, or the immediate knowledge of General Hux and emo-Ren? What part of the “Don’t create a system where the shields can be lowered remotely by low level people, thus allowing the rebels to blow up our world killing weapon memo,” didn’t they get after two Deathstar screw ups. And how did the evil empire, now “First Order” end up allowing women to be captains? When did the entire evil empire become politically correct?

  • Storm Troopers go to the planet and run around, no walkers, no big turbo lasers, no presence on the backward planet, etc. Even the backwater Tatooine out on the outer rim had Storm Trooper’s around and heavy weapons. Etc.

  • Han and Lea breakup, no reasoning; Luke training Han’s son, Kylo Ren in the farce, why, where, etc; Luke abandoning his light sabre, and a bunch of other stuff are either bad writing or teasers for possible future movies, the problem is that there are so many holes and missing plot motivators that the follow up movies are going to be worse than ewoks.

  • Lea still a general in the Resistance after 40 years. Didn’t the Rebels defeated the Empire. Changing the name of the Empire to the First Order is kind of lame. How did the First Order/Empire get so powerful again, and regain control of the Storm Troopers? Since they have been raising Storm Troopers from children it’s obvious the Empire/First Order in control has been around again for a while. Why is Lea still general of the “Resistance” shouldn’t that be the Republic?

  • After 4o years as a general in the “resistance couldn’t the First Order/Empire have her assignated or blow up her planet? Look, even the USA got Osama Bin Laden, no way she could be active in the rebellion and not be targeted and destroyed. Boba Fet wasn’t the only assassin in the galaxy. I guess you could say she’s like Castro, he lasted about that long. The difference being Castro was pretty much contained and had no ability to actually hurt the USA. Her position as rebel general, unlike Han Solo returning to smuggling is unbelievable.

  • C3PO – has a red arm and quips about it being why Han Solo doesn’t recognize him. Who cares that over a period of 40 years a cyborg gets a new arm and whoever paid for that arm was too cheap to strip off the red paint. The entire C3PO character in ‘The Force Awakens’ is a cameo just to keep the pattern of him, R2D2 and Chewy being in every Star Wars movie. Here, unlike episodes IV and V, C3PO adds nothing to the story.

    Disney did “Guardians of the Galaxy,” a sci-fi movie with as much action, wit, and humor, with great special effects, and a ton of character development with an equal number of characters. JJ Abrams did better character development in his Star Trek rehashes. We know the studio, director, and other people involved have the skill and ability to tell good stories with great characters, why with such good material and a good base to use, did they create such a poor story and such cardboard characters? The overt effort to make a female centric retelling of the episode IV, detracts from and gets in the way of a good story.

    I only like Episode VII, The Force Awakens, as a homage to the first two Star Wars movies. Like Ewoks go wild (Episode VI), and the 3 movie Anakin is a spoiled brat (episodes I-III) prequel, episode VII, The Force Awakens, is not a good story. I think it’s just a hacked add for Disney’s StarWars rides and merchandising to further Disney investment and freshen up the StarWars brand and give Disney another princess. When episode VII comes out on BluRay, I won’t waste any money to it to my collection (maybe when it’s in the $5 Walmart video bin). I hope episode VIII tells and shows a better story, but I’m pretty sure I spent my last theater dollar for any Star Wars movie on ‘The Force Awakens,’ and I’ll wait for Episode VIII to be streamed, or the BlueRay costs less than a movie ticket.
  • Wednesday, November 25, 2015

    Thanksgiving - Celebrating Private Property's Triumph Over Collectivism

    By Tom Rhodes, 11/23/2015
    I doubt anybody will notice but this as a repeat of my 2010 Thanksgiving article


    As you know the original colony to Plymouth celebrated thanksgiving with the Indians in November of 1623. The Pilgrims arrived in December of 1621, and began their colony as a commune, and organized their farm economy along communal lines. The goal was to share the work and produce equally. This experiment again proved what the ancient Greeks observed eons before. As Aristotle wrote, "That which is common to the greatest number has the least care bestowed upon it."



    The Pilgrims faked illness rather than working the common property. Some even stole, despite their Puritan convictions. The result was as winter of 1622 set in, they did not have enough food and provisions set for the winter and famine and privation ran rampant by the spring of 1623 only 5 women had survived. Gov. William Bradford wrote in his diary, "So as it well appeared that famine must still ensue the next year also, if not some way prevented.

    The problem is that when people can get the same return with less effort, most people make less effort. This was an early harsh and historically repeated lesson that socialism and communism result in less production even to the point of starvation. Thus again proving that the rules set to us by God are best to live by. 2 Thessalonians 3:6-15

    Later of the colonists, Bradford said, they "began to think how they might raise as much corn as they could, and obtain a better crop than they had done, that they might not still thus languish in misery. At length after much debate of things, (I with the advice of the chiefest among them) gave way that they should set corn every man for his own particular, and in that regard trust to themselves. And so assigned to every family a parcel of land. . . This had very good success, for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been. By this time harvest was come, and instead of famine, now God gave them plenty, and the face of things was changed, to the rejoicing of the hearts of many."

    Because of the change, the first Thanksgiving could be held in November 1623. Because of the abundance the Pilgrims not only were able to feed themselves, but to take care of those among them who try as they might failed to do so. It was private charity that took care of those less fortunate.

    Thanksgiving is clear proof and evidence of the triumph of private property, connecting effort to reward, demonstrating that when everything is “shared equally” it incentivizes each person to contribute as little as possible to get their “equal” share. Whereas with every pilgrim given private property produced abundance which they could then trade with others for things they lacked. The free mutual exchange for mutual benefit makes the entire community richer.

    We should all be thankful that we do not have to learn the lessons of protecting private property in the same deadly way that the pilgrims. Thanksgiving is the quintessential American holiday, copied by many other countries; it is a polar opposite of May Day. On Thanksgiving, we celebrate the fall of communism and are thankful for the abundance God provides through the free market.

    Tuesday, November 3, 2015

    So Much for that Scientific Consensus

    by Tom Rhodes, 11/3/2015

    The scientific consensus on global warming simply doesn’t exist. NASA confirms Antarctic ice growing not shrinking. If global warming were a fact, and the science supported it, the Antarctic ice would not be growing and the papers and scientific research would confirm the facts.

    The published papers on Antarctic ice are conflicting and not in agreement. Jay Zwally, a NASA glaciologist and lead author of the NASA paper released Friday confirms there is not scientific consensus noting that their findings compared to others are not in agreement, saying, “Our main disagreement is for East Antarctica and the interior of West Antarctica – there, we see an ice gain that exceeds the losses in the other areas.”

    The so-called scientific consensus concerning global warming simply does not exist.

    Tuesday, October 20, 2015

    Evil of Wealth Disparity

    By Tom Rhodes, 10/20/2015

    Hearing the Democrat Debate, and the cry from progressives all over the social media, one thing is clear. They firmly believe that the inequality in wealth distribution in the USA is a moral evil. For some reason the left takes the idea that because “all men are created equal” that if they don’t share an equal portion of society’s wealth that somehow society is not treating them equally hence a society that does not have equal distribution of wealth is an evil society.

    The left’s solution is to make the wealthy more poor, except for themselves. Hillary make $200K per speech, if she chose she could give a poor family $100K every time she speaks and help lift that family out of poverty and still take home $100K per speech. She obviously doesn’t actually believe in redistribution of her wealth. The question is how does Hillary Clinton making $200,000 per speech hurt the poor? What is morally wrong about Hillary charging as much as others are voluntarily willing to pay for speaking hurt the poor.

    Obviously there is no moral problem with Hillary making mega bucks. What poor family can’t find a job because society choose to pay Hillary $200K for a few hours work? How did her highly paid speech writer, who earns a very good living, hurt the poor by voluntarily accepting a part of Hillary’s evil wealth in exchange for her labor hurt the poor? What moral dictum did Hillary violate earning millions of dollars from her political experience?

    If because all people being created in God’s image have equal worth, thus deserve an equal share of society’s wealth, they why doesn’t a murderer, or rapist, or child molester deserve an equal share of society’s wealth? If their actions and impact on society don’t determine what wealth society should give them, what does? If you believe that their actions (murder, rape, child molestation), should result in society’s punishment, and exclusion (to protect others in society who behave acceptably), then you don’t believe everybody should receive the wealth of society equally, rather people should be punished, banished, or rewarded based on their actions in society.

    If the poor have their basic material needs of food and shelter met, the existence of a big gap between the poorest and richest is not a moral problem. Once basic needs are met, any difference in what wealth individuals have or don’t have is based on their individual contributions to society, and how others voluntarily exchange their labor and capital with others for their labor and capital.

    There are economic factors that drive the largest wedge between the wealthy and poor. That factor is government getting in the middle and controlling who can and can’t freely exchange capital and labor. Compare income inequality from the 50’s to today. Compare government regulations from the 50’s to today. More government = more wealth inequality. Uber and Airbnb are prime examples of the problem with government. The government is trying to stop poor individuals from competing with big rich companies. You own a car or house and the government says that you can’t use your property to earn more wealth. The government is causing disproportionate wealth inequality. What business is it of the government if you let somebody use your spare bedroom for a night in exchange for $40. You and the person in your spare bedroom are voluntarily exchanging capital for use of private property, thus voluntarily transferring wealth. The government is saying that you must transfer that wealth to a big corporation that runs a hotel and cannot choose voluntarily to do so without government permission.

    The inequality of wealth and income are only a moral failure of society if the poorest’ s basic needs aren’t met. Morally what most matters is if the rich got that way honestly. If the wealthy got rich morally and legally then the income gap is not a moral problem. Because the government is hindering individuals from using their labor and property to garner wealth and forcing others to use government approved cabs or hotels, rich cab companies, hotels, etc. are wealthy immorally.

    Consider Uber, to drive a car you own you must have a license to drive, proving you can do so safely, and insurance to protect others in case you have an accident. So all uber drivers have proven to society that they can safely drive, and can cover the expenses if they do harm to others while driving. Why should there be any restrictions for that licensed and insured vehicle and person from offering their labor and property to another in exchange for their capital? One reason, to keep the poor, poor, and the rich, rich. The ruling elite want to control who has and doesn’t have wealth.

    What is evil about a little old lady renting her spare bedroom out for a night, how does that hurt the poor? What is evil about a college kid driving other students around for a fee, how does that hurt the poor? What is evil about Hillary charging $200K to talk, how does that hurt the poor?

    What the left refuses to do is recognize that the actions people take determine how others in society voluntarily reward them, or how society corporately punishes them. The biggest common factor in chronic poverty, persistent violent crime, and remaining impoverished is easily recognized. It is a common action (behavior) of those who are chronically impoverished in communities plagued with violent crime. It is not politically correct to speak it out loud.

    There are noneconomic factors that make being poor permanent. These factors include not having a father in one's life, growing up with no family, no social emphasis on education, women having children without a man, and men having children without committing to the mother of those children. It is exceedingly rare for a married man and woman with kids to be persistently poor. A man and woman marrying may start out poor, but rarely do they as they have and raise children remain poor. Those noneconomic factors exist in greater quantity now for the same reason as the economic factors which create inequality of wealth. Too much government which rewards broken families, and punishes through wealth confiscation intact families.

    The Evil of Wealth Disparity arises from the evil of Too Much Government. Freedom and Liberty in the past proved to be a fairer distributor of society’s wealth. However Freedom and Liberty have one basic problem that scare many. Liberty is not safe! With Liberty there is no guarantee that everything will turn out safe, that everybody will get a portion of what society offers based on their actions and contributions to society. As our society has become from feminized, the weaker, fairer sex, which values security over liberty, has continually traded liberty for security. As our Forefather Ben Franklin intoned, we now have neither liberty or security. The poor are not free to use their meager capital (a used car) to work their way from poverty, and as the tens of thousands of violent crime victims in Chicago can attest, they are no longer secure. All a result of Too Much Government. As polemist Thomas Paine so aptly put it, "Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one; for when we suffer or are exposed to the same miseries by a government, which we might expect in a country without government, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer."