My Photo
I am retired from government, law enforcement, politics and all other pointless endeavors. I eat when I am hungry and sleep when I am tired.

Friday, October 23, 2015


As usual, Steve Sailor beat me to it.  He alerted us all to the impending flood of immigrants likely to be washed up on our shores due to Hurricane Patricia.  He goes into some detail about how natural disasters become our long term liability when nature, in the form of earthquakes and hurricanes amplify native latin infrastructural backwardness.  

The media is already playing up the magnitude of the approaching storm in apocalyptic tones.  We are being set up for another wave of the eternally needy who will never leave.  They will remain to subsist on our taxpayer funded social welfare system.  

Don't look to the GOP to defend your wallet.  They will fold in the face of all the usual images  of pitiable infants.  And just as in the case of the so called Syrian refugees the MSM will never even check to see if the border crossers are in any way victims of the hurricane.  

We will be able to judge the Obama administration's motives here by its reaction.  If they don't make it their business to provide relief ON SITE, in Mexico, at the earliest opportunity, we will know that Obama wants them to become part of the his new perpetual Democrat majority. 

Saturday, October 10, 2015


Add caption
I couldn't resist posting a comment on TAC again.  God knows if they will run it. 

They are on the so called Justice Reform bandwagon with all the other GOP dupes and opportunists.  Anyone familiar with criminals knows this farce.  We want to save money spent on prisons so lets let a bunch go... They won't be living in my neighborhood.  The Democrat version of this is, lets get the brothers out of jail and into the voting booths.  The children who write for The American Conservative have already declared their faith in the cause.  All I can say is the road to not being Pat Buchanan leads  to many funny and embarrassing places.

Senator Mike Lee from Utah wrote this about all of his fine plans.  I suspect the good Senator  is a true believer and holds what he writes.

My Comment:  

Perhaps the beginning of wisdom in any criminal justice reform would be to turn a skeptical eye on proposals from legislators from states like Utah or Hawaii, etc.  

I served the last eight years of my public employment career inspecting all the criminal halfway houses in the state of New Jersey.  Let me assure you that they have so little effect on recidivism that my superiors always had to hide or corrupt the statistics.  At one point we could only cite how few were rearrested within Six Months! This was also during a time when the number of such halfway houses, treatment centers, halfway back centers etc., were expanding like mushrooms.

I have some faith that the Senator is speaking in good faith.  He probably believes what he writes.  But I see nothing in this that gives me the slightest confidence that what he proposes will work.  

Note that the GOP has close financial ties with the private prison industry.  These are the same companies who will manage the alternatives to prison facilities the reform movement is pushing.  While Senator Lee may be an evangelist for inmate salvation, there are others licking their lips waiting to make a buck out of his efforts.

A most of the criminal offenders who have been sentenced to draconian terms are not hapless characters who stumbled into the net.  They have long records extending back into their juvenile past.  They are part of a permanent criminal underclass that is not going away.  There is a lot of talk about family disruption here but just how many of these offenders are either from stable traditional families or in such families?  Perhaps in Utah but surly not in urban states that breed the majority of criminals.  

Criminality is not a disease.  It is a choice.    

Monday, October 5, 2015


I've been meaning to write about the way academics of this time write with an obsessive vehemence about the long dead Confederacy.  It's obvious that they are anxious to conflate all the evils of slavery with the modern right.  They intend to weave it all together with an indictment of America in general and the need to embrace the new multi-cultural leftist polity they represent.  

To them, slavery is just one element in the saga of America, a racist, grasping, hypocritical monstrosity.  The South to them is a useful icon of all that was/is evil in our History.  

In view of this I am printing here the text of Jefferson Davis's address to his fellow Senators on his departure from that body.  I invite you dear reader, to consider if these are the words of a monster, or a patriot and a gentleman.

Jefferson Davis's final address to the Senate
I find in myself, perhaps, a type of the general feeling of my constituents towards yours. I am sure I feel no hostility to you, Senators from the North. I am sure there is not one of you, whatever sharp discussion there may have been between us, to whom I cannot now say, in the presence of my God, I wish you well; and such, I am sure, is the feeling of the people whom I represent towards those whom you represent. I therefore feel that I but express their desire when I say I hope, and they hope, for peaceful relations with you, though we must part. They may be mutually beneficial to us in the future, as they have been in the past, if you so will it. The reverse may bring disaster on every portion of the country; and if you will have it thus, we will invoke the God of our fathers, who delivered them from the power of the lion, to protect us from the ravages of the bear; and thus, putting our trust in God, and in our firm hearts and strong arms, we will vindicate the right as best we may.
In the course of my service here, associated at different times with a variety of Senators, I see now around me some with whom I have served long; there have been points of collision; but whatever of offense there has been to me, I leave here; I carry with me no hostile remembrance. Whatever offense I have given which has not been redressed, or for which satisfaction has not been demanded, I have, Senators, in this hour of our parting, to offer you my apology for any pain which, in the heat of discussion, I have inflicted. I go hence unencumbered by the remembrance of any injury received, and having discharged the duty of making the only reparation in my power for any injury offered.
Mr. President, and Senators, having made the announcement which the occasion seemed to me to require, it only remains for me to bid you a final adieu.


The Holy Father has come and gone.  He said exactly what we all expected and it wasn’t very helpful. 

It’s clear to me the Roman Catholic Church, as a Western institution is gone.  I’m going to have to get used to a whole new church.  The church’s membership growth is concentrated in the Third World, it’s leadership as well, and its views of how the world works are no longer those of traditional Euro-American sophistication. 

My Pope’s personal approach can be summed up by the following snippet from a Reuters post.  Pope Francis to reporters in Paraguay…”I have a great allergy to economic things.”

This is a great pity because while being allergic to economics the pope chooses to center much of his message to humanity in economic terms.

The pope uses the language of socialism to critique the universal human propensity toward greed and the maximization of advantage.  He wants an economics of cooperation and solidarity.  And to that end he is advancing the latest version of the old Catholic romance with cooperatives.  The church as been pushing this exercise in reviving medieval guilds for a century and apart from some limited success with farmers in poor countries, nothing much to show for it. 

Since the science of economics and modern management gives His Holiness a headache, the church must look somewhere to justify it’s impulses. 

At this point the trouble starts.  The modern Papacy, unlike the Papacy of old doesn’t really run anything or manage a society as such.  When the church seeks to speak with authority about processes that are beyond it’s direct knowledge, it relies on Bishops and Cardinals, who in tern, rely on expert counsel.   
So who are these experts? 

I might expect to see learned and obscure experts drafted in from the finest Roman Catholic Universities.  At least I could hope for self-effacing scholars with no public or private chips on the table.  And I would be wrong.  Here are some of the Popes expert advisors.

Jeffery Sachs.  Is described as “An American economist and director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University.  He is known as one of the worlds leading experts on economic development and the fight against poverty.”  He is the author of three New York Times best sellers on ending world poverty.  None of these is about how anyone actually ended poverty, but perhaps that’s not the point. 

He is the guru of “Sustainable Development,” movement within the academy, NGO’s and governments.  As an approach to self-promotion, sustainability is a useful concept, especially if your goal is to get lots of funding for your own little piece of academic turf and invitations to the Charley Rose show.      

Naomi Klein.  Naomi Klein is described as “A Canadian author, social activist and filmmaker known for her political analyses and criticism of corporate globalization and of corporate capitalism.”  She may be an even better self-promoter on the backs of the poor than Sachs.  She gets on the Charley Rose show, advises the Pope and plays the expert all while being a college dropout.  That’s an accomplishment.

Cardinal Andres Rodriguez Maradiaga.  Cardinal Maradiaga is a close advisor and confident of Pope Francis.  He is the Pope’s point man as it were, on immigration and international capitalism.  Unlike Naomi Klein or Jeffery Sachs, he does not aspire to be a TV celebrity.  He is even a Catholic.  He is highly educated, with multiple degrees in some things that actually exist. He seems to have been an effective force in cleaning up the Roman Curia, a real feat. 

Unfortunately he seems to have about the same understanding of free markets as the pope.  I believe this stems from his background in Honduras.  Central America is a poor place to learn about capitalism and functioning societies.  The corrupt, mercantilist version of markets in that part of the world can twist the perceptions of even the strongest intellect.  To top this off he was stuck as the Vatican spokesman at the World Bank and the International Monetary fund seeking third world debt relief. After dealing with these characters, it’s remarkable that he isn’t an avowed communist.  Suffice it to say that he views economics as a zero sum game where in order for Latin Americans to thrive, they have to come here and eat more of our pie.

An Article from the Catholic news sums up the quality and strange bedfellowness’ of the church’s search for expert advice. 

The author and two of the identified Papal advisors want us to know that the pope’s message rests on three equal legs. They see immigration, income inequality, and global warming as part of a triad of new initiates, all crucial to the Church’s plans.

Here is a bit of the flavor of the church’s wise counsels.

“Kalee Kreider, policy adviser for climate science at the United Nations Foundation, said the three issues -- hunger, the environment and immigration -- are connected and encouraged reporters for secular news organizations to read "Laudato Si', on Care for Our Common Home" to get a taste of the case the pope will make and how he touches on the three topics.” 

She went on to say;

“She described it as part of an "arc" that began Aug. 3, when U.S. President Barack Obama unveiled the "Clean Power Plan," a pledge by his administration to reduce the country's carbon dioxide emissions and combat climate change. It continues with the pope's message on the environment during his visit to the United States in September and whose influence may result, as environmentalists hope, in some form of global action during the U.N. Climate Change Conference in Paris in late 2015.”

So who are these people?

Kalee Kreider.  She is from the United Nations Foundation and an advisor to the bishops.  Before that she worked for Al Gore for six years in media management, especially on An Inconvenient Truth.  Previously worked at Fenton, a “Social Change communications company.” 

Yup, nobody here but us scholars!

Demetrios G. Papademetriou.  Demetrios is President Emeritus of MPI = Migration Policy Institute.  When not helping Europe do away with itself, he sits on the board of Geroge Soros’s Advisory Board of the Open Society Foundations’ (OSF) International Migration Initiative.

Who could have a more Catholic perspective than that?

So for a while we are in for a bumpy Papacy.  The Catholic Church gave the world St. Thomas Aquinas, Mendel, and Thomas More.  Now we go in search of  “experts” from the ranks of self-interested celebrity do-gooders from the New York Times. 

Saturday, October 3, 2015


Leave it to our teutonic cousins to invent the most ingenious and needed compliment to modern life.  I speak of our brothers at Volkswagen of course.  

How thoughtful of them to invent a software that lies to the authorities on our behalf so that we don't have to.  As the world becomes ever more complicated and the managerial state closes in, keeping track of all the little lies we have to tell  becomes almost impossible.  Since the Government insists on demanding information of us without the courtesy of face to face meeting, I see no reason to be frank with them.  Let my machine lie to my lying government's machine.  It seems fair.  


Monday, September 21, 2015


Obama’s spokesperson fell all over himself today trying to make sense of our policy toward boy abuse by Afghans.  It seems that for the sake of cultural sensitivity, our soldiers and trainers have turned a blind eye to the rape of boys by our savage Muslim allies.  This is actually an old story.  Everyone with even a slight acquaintance with Afghans knows that this goes on.  Men are regularly “Entertained” by dancing boys made up like females. 

We accept this practice as just another rich Islamic cultural tradition among many.  We are called upon to respect it as a whole. 

How does that play out when we accept Afghan refugees?  Who has that delicate conversation with them, and at what point?  John Kerry just said that we would be accepting more refugees from the current flood. Many of these are Afghans traveling with false papers as Syrians. 

Are we are about to welcome a whole new wave of unselfconscious child molesters for the sake of diversity?  It appears so. 


Wednesday, September 9, 2015


My  latest on  

I'm appalled at what my church is doing in the midst of this new surge of populations.  This article lays out some reasons why, my church's own history and a proper understanding of  charity suggest another course of action.
As an American Catholic and a patriot I have reason to be exasperated with my Church. That exasperation may well come to a head this month with the Pope’s visit to the U.S. The USA faces an invasion of illegal aliens. The Holy Father shows understandable concern for the migrants but a deaf ear to the claims of Catholics like me and others who work hard to make a successful life here, and to see that success endure.
My Church openly treats this crisis as an opportunity and amanageable challenge. We can expect the Pope to advocate the cause of the aliens during his visit. The Pope will in all likelihood exhort millions of blue collar Catholics to make way for people from failed, frequently Muslim countries. These newcomers will compete for scarce jobs while benefiting from Affirmative Action. The Pontiff is all too likely to address working American Catholics as if they were wealthy, and needing a lesson in humility and magnanimity.
This will set off all manner of political point-making and further aggravate patriotic Catholics. Leftists and enemies of Christianity will call upon us to heed the message of our pope, even as they work to destroy our faith in the public square.
While nominally affirming the right of sovereign states to control their borders, the Church enthusiastically supports what it calls “migrants” and their right to seek a better life in neighboring countries. Understandably, this comes across as contradictory at best and two-faced at worst. When Catholic clergy distribute the Blessed Sacrament through the fence with Mexico, Cardinal Sean O'Malley it enrages patriotic non-Catholics and embarrasses Catholics. [Cardinal O`Malley celebrates Mass along Mexico border By Brian Skoloff, The Associated Press, April 1, 2014] The majority of both legal and illegal aliens from south of the border are nominally Catholic and the Church’s outreach to them looks a lot like a self-serving betrayal of America. In the Who-Whom analysis, it looks likethe Catholic Church gets more parishioners while Democrat Party get more voters.
Why does the Roman Catholic Church do this? Can we make it stop? Is there a way to approach the Church on its own terms to make our case?
The fundamental problem we have in defending our American way of life and nation from the Church’s stands is that the Church is not concerned with nation-states as such. Perhaps it would be better to say that the Church sees nations, and cultures for that matter, as epiphenomena. The Church is an international organization with a single focus on spirituality and spiritually-derived qualities like charity and justice. Nations, kingdoms and empires come and go in the Church’s experience. The Church’s mission never changes. It’s spreading the word of Jesus Christ all day every day from now until the end of time. She’s been at it for about two thousand years, and we are not going to make her change.
That said, the Church is itself a sovereign state. For many centuries she has been deeply involved in temporal affairs. This is in the context of the peculiar nature of Western Civilization. Unlike Islam and Classical civilization, we have always managed to adhere to the idea that government and the Church are, and should be, two separate entities. (Except within the papal state itself.) Citizens or subjects answer to secular authority on secular matters but they are morally informed by the Church as the organ of God’s teaching on earth.
The Church literally brought about this state of affairs at the end of the Roman Empire. It’s good to remember this as the Western World as we know it is an outgrowth of a previous migration event. The collapse of Roman authority via theGermanic invasions put the Church in the position of mediating, guiding and sometimes adjudicating the transition from Roman to Medieval Europe.
On the whole the Church succeeded. But it’s important to note that the early Church was not an advocate for barbarian incursions. The bishop of Rome was under no illusion as to the damage the barbarian invaders were doing to Roman civil society.
We might ask current Church leaders why they seem to be so blind to the effects of migrants to our society. This is all the more pressing when we think of the fact that many of theGermanic barbarians were, like current migrants, hoping to prosper within the Roman Empire, not to destroy it. But destroy it they did.
Like it or not the Church has been influenced by, and taken sides in national causes. Isn’t Joan of Arc a French national saint? Doesn’t the Church elevate Saints as national saints? Isn’t St. George the national saint of England and St. Andrewthe national saint of Scotland? In our own lifetime Pope John Paul the Great, was the living embodiment of Polish Catholicismand resistance to atheistic Communism. The Catholic Church herself incorporates national Churches like the Ukrainian Ritewithin her umbrella.
One useful distinction here is that in European History in which the Church emerged, there is not only national states, but separate and distinct peoples. Pope Paul the Great was not just from Poland. He was a Pole. There is France and there are the French. Even when there was no independent Ireland, there were the Irish. These people have language, cultural norms and what we now call genetics in common. The Church seems to have understood this for a long time. Even recently bothPope John Paul II and Pope Benedict called on the European Union to acknowledge a common European Christian heritage in its constitution.
This leads us to at least one reason the Roman Catholic Church is so blind to our concern. The Catholic Bishops have bought into the Cultural Marxist “nation of immigrants” malarkey. For instance:
From the viewpoint of the U.S. Bishops, it has been apparent for several years that our immigration system is broken and badly in need of repair. The U.S. Bishops are united in the view thatmigration is beneficial to our national economy, socially and culturally. The strength of our nation comes from its diversity and from the hard work and contributions of immigrants who have come to our shores over the past two hundred years. It is identity and soul.
– The most Reverend Kevin Farrell, Auxiliary Bishop of Washington and member of the Catholic Conference of Bishops Committee on Migration. [Emphases added.]
This is taken from the definitive statement of American Catholic teaching on the subject, called “Welcoming the Stranger Among us: Unity in Diversity” [November 15, 2000]
This statement by the U.S. Catholic Bishops is a compendium of the Bishops’ deep thoughts on immigration, which of course they insist on calling …”Migration.” Most striking to me are the mutually contradictory assertions. For instance:
  1. Persons have the right to find opportunities in their homeland.”
  2. “Persons have the right to migrate to support themselves and their families.”
  3. “Sovereign nations have the right to control their borders.”
Strangers No Longer Together on the Journey of Hope | A Pastoral Letter Concerning Migration from the Catholic Bishops of Mexico and the United States, Issued by USCCB, January 22, 2003
It goes on, but the inherent contradiction between #2 and #3 is evident.
If the Bishops’ understood that “migrants” actually depress the wages of poorer American workers, who are also facing the robotic worker wave, might they might change their view? Perhaps, but the multicultural, anti-Western academics whom the Bishops rely on for economic advice aren’t going to help them understand.
What is to be done?
It’s clear that the Church does respect diverse cultures and national groupings. Otherwise why stress out need to accept such cultures and groupings when they show up, unbidden here? The Church’s problem seems to be with our American traditional culture. It seems to dismiss what we have developed here as a passing stage in an endless procession of immigrant invasions. If it didn’t think this way, it would understand how insulting its pronouncements are.
I have a suspicion. For many Bishops, the fact that America began and substantially still is a product of English and Scottish Protestant culture is problematic. I suspect that contemporary Bishops, with a poor understanding of our history, think that the rapacious Capitalism they see running amok today is the result of Protestant thinking.
We American Catholics must help them to see that a traditional American culture is not either anti-Christian or anti-Catholic. If the bishops want to combat consumerism they need look elsewhere for the culprits. Our job is to make the Bishops understand that, however distasteful they personally may find think our distinctive culture, it has a right to exist and prosper, here where it took hold.
We Catholics who adhere to that culture are not crypto-Protestants. We are members of the Anglosphere, a successful and respectable cultural tradition. To be a member of that culture is not to be anti-Catholic any more than is being Japanese is incompatible with being Catholic. We have a right to maintain our Anglo society—just as everyone from the Rio Grande to Tierra del Fuego has a right to remain Latin.
Apparently, the Church, like all elite institutions, is not immune to the Leftist spirit of the times. It certainly shows in the assumptions displayed in the Bishop’s statements. We can hope that like all generational things, it will pass eventually.
In the meantime, we need to expose the false guides the bishops employ when speaking on economics and other worldly matters.
The second thing we American Catholics must do is to point the Church in the right direction. Again from the Bishops:
“And we remind heads of government around the world that emigration of all kinds—but especially that of those fleeing war and persecution, famine and economic distress—is a sign of the failure of the whole international community to guarantee the security and welfare of all people in their homelands.”
The Bishops again and again call upon this mysterious “international community.” Surely even the Bishops know that this “community” doesn’t exist.
American Catholics must press upon the Church that it is Catholic countries to our south that press these migrations upon us. The Bishops ignore the failed Latin Catholic societies’ responsibility to manage themselves successfully. They need to be reminded of this. Their colleagues in the distant past did us all a service when they taught their barbarian converts to manage their affairs in the manner of the Romans. The U.S. Bishops would do well to spread a bit of Anglo know-how to the south—rather than spreading Latin poverty here in the north.