Saturday, January 2, 2016

Vote For the Candidate Both Sides Fear

Godfather Poitics ^ | 1/1/2016 | Common Constitutionalist 

Yes, Cruz is the real deal. No need to take my word for it. Just look and listen. It's as Limbaugh says: the left and the establishment right will always tell you who they fear the most.
Sure, they hate both Trump and Cruz. The hatred for Trump is understandable, from their standpoint. He makes Republicans look bad. He's intolerant and generally causes them embarrassment.
But the antipathy for Cruz is born of fear. They fear the end of the government gravy train if he gets elected. They fear that with Cruz at the helm, Americans may just discover they don’t actually need Washington involved in every facet of their lives. They fear an uncompromising constitutional standard bearer as head of the party.
So their strategy is to send out trusted surrogates to trash the candidate and place the seed of doubt in voters' minds (and big-money backers) that a Cruz nomination will surely equal a Hillary win.
Case in point: Moderate Republican shill and former George W. Bush communications director Nicolle Wallace said in an interview regarding Ted Cruz: "He is truly despised [by Republicans] - he is not a team player" and is apparently the king of "hubris and egomania." She, like almost all other establishment hacks, pundits, and politicians are just plain befuddled, as Wallace, with an uncomfortable laugh, tells the interviewer that Cruz is "at the top of the polls in Iowa, so I think voters are saying they just don't care."
The key here is not so much that Cruz is despised or is tops in hubris and egomania. No, it's that "he is not a team player." I'm reminded of the film Johnny Dangerously. A gangster boss known as Johnny Dangerously is actually Johnny Kelly. His younger brother Tommy Kelly has no idea he is the notorious mob boss Dangerously. Tommy is appointed assistant District Attorney and vows to bring down the infamous gangster. The D.A., who's on the mob's take, invites Tommy to his palatial estate, which is all courtesy of gangster payoffs. He tells Tommy, he too could have what the D.A. has, as he proclaims, "It's all yours Tommy, if you play ball! What do you say?" To which Tommy replies, "I'll see you in prison!"
With this unfortunate confirmation of the assistant D.A.'s lack of cooperation, the mob, unknown to Dangerously, attempts to "take out" his younger brother Tommy.
Ted Cruz is Tommy Kelly. He must be taken out.
Wallace explains that, "these are good Republicans who worked in the Bush administration and who clerked in the Supreme Court who say they would have a really hard time voting for Ted Cruz if he were the Republican standard bearer."
What can you say to an exclamation such as that, but WOW! I've been holding my nose and pulling the lever for progressive establishment Republicans since 1988, and these people have the nerve to cry over one conservative candidate? Look at who we’ve been conned and bullied into supporting - all for the good of the precious party - George H.W. Bush, the kinder/gentler progressive. Bob Dole's nomination was equivalent to a lifetime achievement award. And of course the other two loser establishment picks: McCain and Romney.
And we're not allowed one candidate? This inner circle of power and control is very exclusive and conservatives are not allowed a seat at the table, but they want our votes to pay for the table and chairs and fund their party and hire us as the wait staff.
What have we conservatives been saying all along? If someone like Cruz or Trump gets the nomination, the establishment would much prefer a Hillary presidency and this is the exact veiled threat the establishment kingmakers sent Wallace out to disseminate.
They are scared to death of Ted Cruz. It is a delight to see and I personally count it as a gift to finally be able to back someone I believe in - not someone we have to settle on, or like Romney, try to convince ourselves that he will be okay. We finally have someone for whom we don't have to constantly wonder, "Is he for real this time?"

Is the Alzheimer’s Pandemic Caused by Society’s Lack of Respect for the Elderly? ^ | Jan 1, 2016 

The Alzheimer’s pandemic has long been a dark riddle. What are its causes? Why has it apparently become much more widespread just in the last few generations? Why does it afflict some nations more aggressively than others? Why do twice as many women suffer from it than men? And what can we do to fight back against this terrible, incurable disease?
These crucial questions have long remained unanswered.
But a new study by Yale School of Public Health offers some possible answers—answers with implications for both the young and the old.
According to the study, the main cause of Alzheimer’s may be societies’ absence of respect for elderly people.
It basically says that individuals who are conditioned by society to believe that they will lose their mental acuity and health when they grow old most likely will. It says that people who succumb to worrying, negative thinking and feeling obsolete are under a great deal of stress, and this stress can actually change their brains in a way that leads to Alzheimer’s and other kinds of dementia.
The logic of the conclusion is easy to understand: When someone who is negative about aging begins growing old, they will put forth less effort. They will use fewer adaptive strategies, and will try to avoid challenging situations. And since the brain is a “use it or lose it” organ, avoiding challenges and reducing effort leads to physical deterioration.
The study, called “A Culture–Brain Link: Negative Age Stereotypes Predict Alzheimer’s Disease Biomarkers,” was published on December 7 in the journal Psychology and Aging. (You can read more about the methodology here.)
This study’s findings are important because they help explain why rates of dementia are so much higher in Western nations like the United States and Britain than in such countries as India, Cambodia and Greece—where aging is celebrated and elderly people are respected.
America’s ‘Forever 21′ Culture
The societies of America, the United Kingdom and most other Western nations today are not only obsessed with youth, but also openly hostile toward aging.
“Institutionalized prejudice against aging is condoned by our society,” wrote Todd D. Nelson, an associate professor of social psychology at California State University–Stanislaus. “Americans shun older people because they are obsessed with youth and beauty,” he said.
American sociologist Jean Potuchek said, “Our society seems to assume that youth is a time when we are developing and when our bodies and minds are sharp and capable. Age, by contrast, is seen as a time when we are declining and our bodies and minds are dull and losing their capabilities.”
Experts say the media plays a major role in these perceptions. The elderly are usually painted as irrelevant, slow-thinking, chronically ill, unable to work, and burdensome. Their wisdom—if they are shown to have any at all—is depicted as outdated and useless.
In Social Issues in America, author James Ciment said: “The media, in particular, emphasize the positive attributes of the young.” By contrast, “the elderly are generally excluded from the media, except as figures of amusement or ridicule.”
In Learning to Love Growing Old, Jere Daniel explains: “Influenced by the fairy tales we hear as children, and what we see on television and hear in everyday life, we develop negative stereotypes about aging by the time we are 6 years old .… These stereotypes persist as we grow up, completely unaware that we even acquired them or granted them our unconditional acceptance. With our understanding of the subject forever frozen, we grow into old age assuming the stereotypes to be true. And we live down to them.”
Far too many people in America, Britain and most other modern societies buy into the negativity about aging—with devastating results. But some cultures hold a far more positive view of aging and of elderly people.
Societies Esteeming the Elderly
In parts of India the elderly usually live with their children and grandchildren for life. And all members of the family hold them in high regard.
Achyut Bihani of the Institute of Management Calcutta explained: “In a typical Indian joint family … the eldest members head the household. Advice is always sought from them on a range of issues, from investment of family money to nitty-gritties of traditional wedding rituals and intra-family conflicts. And this is not just passive advice; their word is final in settling disputes.”
Bihani said that disrespecting the elders of the family or sending them to live in a nursing home has a strong social stigma.
The situation is similar in Cambodia, where elders live with their extended family for life and the younger members demonstrate great respect toward them. says, “Elders are respected by all age groups; they stay with the family for comfort and support. In many families, elders are expected to prepare meals and take care of grandchildren while wife and husband work.”
In India and Cambodia, the reported rate of Alzheimer’s deaths is 0.46 people per 100,000.
Compare that to a rate of 24.4 in the United Kingdom, 35.5 in Canada, and 45.6 in the United States.
This means a British person is 53 times more likely to die of Alzheimer’s or dementia than an Indian or Cambodian. A Canadian is 77 times more likely, and the life of an American is 100 times more likely to end in that tragic way.
What About Differences in Life Expectancy?
Some may say the only reason the U.S. and UK have higher Alzheimer’s rates than places like India and Cambodia is simply because people live longer in the Western nations. Since more Americans and Brits live to reach old age, more develop age-related diseases.
It’s true that life expectancy often plays a role in the differing rates of Alzheimer’s between nations. But the example of Greece shows that is not always the reason for the vast disparity.
The average Greek person lives to be 81 years old. That’s two years longer than the average American, and about the same as the average British person. Yet, the rate of Alzheimer’s/dementia in Greece is only 2.74 per 100,000 people. That is 8 times lower than in the UK and 17 times lower than in the United States!
The massive difference may well be because of the positive view Greeks have of aging and the aged. The 2006 book On Becoming Fearless says: “[I]n all of Greece … the idea of honoring old age, indeed identifying it with wisdom and closeness to God, is in startling contrast to the way we treat aging in America.”
Even still, the findings of this new study are not the last word on Alzheimer’s disease and dementia. From nation to nation, there are stark differences in diet, lifestyle and medical reporting methods. These and numerous other factors could contribute to the differing rates from nation to nation.
Nevertheless, the evidence saying that the main factor is societies’ attitude toward aging is strong.
And a look at the Bible makes clear that viewing aging and the aged negatively is contrary to God’s law.
The Young Should Honor the Aged
God says younger people should “rise up before the hoary head” and “honor the face of the old man” (Leviticus 19:32).
God sees gray hair on a person as a “crown of glory” (Proverbs 16:31). And He wants people of all ages to view elderly people as He does.
When young people fail to respect the aged members of society, they miss out on some invaluable resources: “With the very aged is wisdom, and with length of days understanding,” says Job 12:12 (Young’s Literal).
Numerous other Bible passages reiterate this same truth.
God’s plan allots most individuals about 70 years or so to live, to make decisions, and to learn about life. That doesn’t mean age always leads to wisdom (see Ecclesiastes 4:13 and Job 32:6-9). But in general, people who have lived longer will have acquired more wisdom. And younger people would benefit immensely from integrating that wisdom into their lives.
If younger people learn to respect old age, they will also benefit later in their lives when they themselves grow old. Rather than succumbing to feelings of negativity about aging, they’ll be grateful to live through the latter chapters of their lives. With a positive view of aging, they will be likely to retain their mental health and acuity for their entire lives.
If young people want to obey God and reap the benefits of living life the way He designed it, we will go out of our way to reverence our senior citizens. And we will rid our thinking of the toxic negativity about aging that society instills in us.
Wear Your ‘Crown of Glory’ Proudly!
The findings of the new Yale study also carry a clear message for older people: No good comes from believing the negativity about aging—no matter how deeply that negativity is entrenched into society.
Buying into such beliefs becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. View old age as a problem, and it will be a problem. Expect your memory to fade, and it will fade. See aging as an incurable disease, and it may well lead to incurable disease.
If a person puts forth less effort, uses fewer adaptive strategies, and avoids challenging situations, his brain will suffer. The quality of his thoughts will decline, his memory will dull, and his mental ability will wane. In some cases, Alzheimer’s will even set in.
The solution is to reject society’s negativity about aging and to wear the “crown of glory” proudly!
Do you want to believe the writers of The Simpsons or the Writer who inspired the book of Psalms?
Psalm 92:14 says that “even in old age,” people can “produce fruit” and “remain vital and green” (New Living).
An Inspiring Example
The Bible also shows us dozens of amazing examples of specific men and women who accomplished this. And it shows how they did it.
When Caleb, son of Jephunneh, was 85 years old, he was every bit as strong and sharp as he had been at age 40!
“I was forty years old when Moses the servant of the Lord sent me … to explore the land. … Here I am today, eighty-five years old! I am still as strong today as the day Moses sent me out; I’m just as vigorous to go out to battle now as I was then” (Joshua 14:7-11; New International).
That is an amazing statement. At age 85, Caleb felt no decline at all from how he had felt during his prime. In light of that, you could say, his prime was actually still happening at age 85!
Because of his confidence and strength, 85-year-old Caleb asked to be given a swath of land adjacent to a nation of powerful people who were hostile to the Israelites. He was not afraid to confront them to defend his inheritance. In fact, he was eager to do so! (verse 12).
How could an 85-year-old man be just as strong and sharp as he had been at age 40?
It was for three main reasons. First, it was because Caleb was highly active from age 40 to 85, wandering in the wilderness, fighting vigorous battles, walking many miles on most days, and pressing toward the goal of the Promise Land. He was pushing himself physically and mentally.
The second reason Caleb remained mentally and physically strong ties in in to the new Yale study: He lived in a society that respected its elders. The above-mentioned passage from Leviticus 19, in which God commanded younger people to “rise up” before their elders was a command given to the society Caleb lived in. And it was enforced in that society. The elders were respected.
In this one way—respecting elders—Ancient Israel was more like modern day India, Cambodia and Greece than it was like modern day American and Britain. Caleb was respected. His wisdom was valued. That contributed to the fact that he did not deteriorate from age 40 to age 85.
Both of these factors greatly contributed to Caleb’s vigor. But Caleb pointed to a third factor which he said was the major reason why he retained his vitality: I am still as strong today because “I wholly followed the eternal my God” (Joshua 14:8).
If we are following God with our whole hearts, we’ll never retire from spiritual labor. If we are following God with our whole hearts, we won’t buy the lies that media and society tell us about age. Instead we will continually push ourselves to be growing. Instead of trying to avoid challenges and stressful situations, we will seek them out! If we are following God with our whole hearts, we will wear our gray hair proudly, as a “crown of glory”!

Hillary Wants You to Know She Binge-Drinks on the Job

PJ Media ^ | January 1, 2016 | Scott Ott 

Hillary Clinton wants you to know that she’s just regular folk. That's right, she's like any other adult who, while representing her state and her country on government business, during a taxpayer-funded trip, engages in an alcoholic binge-drinking competition. Who hasn't?
I'm not unearthing dirt to smear the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, who hopes to command the world's most powerful military, tickle the nuclear trigger, and become the global face of these United States of America.
I'm merely passing along Hillary Clinton's latest campaign video [see below], in which an off-camera woman asks if Madame Secretary has "ever won a drinking competition."
She laughs, with that endearing husky tone so familiar to hard-drinking chain-smokers, as she brags of her vodka-shots showdown with fellow Sen. John McCain. Furthermore, Mrs. Clinton assures an American public concerned about a stagnant economy and the threat of terrorism, that the McCain-Rodham throwdown was not the only time she chugged copious quantities of non-prescription ethanol depressants to see who could knock back the most before blacking out or puking.
It is, however, in her words, the "most famous" episode.
Ah, let the renown of such fame ring from every ivied hall of academe, as an example for the women who should "deserve to be believed" when they allege sexual assault. Let it resonate from the blacktop of every urban elementary schoolyard for the children looking to escape the generational curse of poverty.
Before you judge, ask yourself: Who among us has not made a sport of alcohol poisoning while on "a Congressional delegation" in response to a colleague's dare? Look in the mirror, my friend. You've almost certainly engaged in amateur competitive intoxication with a work colleague, and then bragged about it during a job interview in hopes of becoming CEO of that same organization.
Keep in mind, Hillary Clinton's campaign WANTS you to know this. Therefore, it's a positive feature of her candidacy, not a liability.
Perhaps it's a bold attempt to identify Hillary with the middle-aged, binge-drinking base, most of whom are in residential treatment facilities, divorce court, or otherwise working toward becoming the subject of awkward eulogies by long-suffering family and friends. Or maybe she's angling to ingratiate herself with America's youth, who, she believes, are eager to elect the first woman president who can reenact the famous scene from "Raiders of the Lost Ark" where Marion successfully goes jigger-to-jigger with a Nepalese bullmoose -- a woman chief executive who can finally break the glass ceiling and join the Wolf Pack for "The Hangover Part IV."
However, her specific identification of “vodka" as the lubricant, tips the hand of the woman who loves to bend the elbow. Doubtless she just wants us to know that she can go kneecap-to-kneecap with Russian President Vladimir Putin -- on his turf with his sauce -- and leave him worshiping at the altar of the porcelain goddess, as she rises with dignity from her seat in the Oval Office, behind the Dissolute Desk.
"You wanna piece of this, Donald Trump?" she fairly bellows. "Line 'em up!"

Obama Administration Spies on Congress, Democrats Shrug

PJ Media ^ | January 1, 2016 | Michael Walsh 

The Obama administration's loathing of Benjamin Netanyahu knows no bounds; nor, apparently, does its contempt for Congress:

Top Democrats in Congress are brushing off a report that U.S. intelligence intercepted communications between Israeli government officials and lawmakers on Capitol Hill. Rep. Eliot Engel (N.Y.), the ranking Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said it is no secret that the U.S. and Israel spy on each other, even though they are allies.
"I'm not surprised," he told The Hill. "I kind of think the report is much to do about nothing."
Engel, a staunch supporter of Israel, said he met twice behind closed doors with Israeli Ambassador Ron Dermer during the heated debate over the nuclear agreement with Iran. He said Dermer presented the Israeli government's case against the deal.
The New York congressman indicated he decided to oppose the deal based on details he learned in briefings from U.S. officials, rather than arguments made by the Israelis. He said he wouldn't be concerned if his conversations with Dermer happened to be caught by American intelligence.
"I assume that everything I say someone is listening. I am careful that what I say in public is what I say in private," Engel said. "You just have to assume that when you're a public person, what you say [could be monitored] … I don't know what this really tells us."
What that really tells us is that Engel supports a near-lawless administration that will keep pushing the bounds of tradition, propriety and moral decency until it has smashed them completely.

Engel's comments come one day after The Wall Street Journal published a report saying the National Security Agency (NSA) spied on communications between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Israeli officials during the Obama administration's negotiations with Iran. Private conversations with congressmen and American Jewish groups were reportedly swept up by the agency as Israeli officials lobbied against the Iran deal, according to the Journal.
The report raised eyebrows because it revealed how the U.S. continues to spy on some allies despite Obama's pledge to reduce the scope of NSA snooping on friendly governments following disclosures made by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden in 2013. Republicans pointed to the surveillance as another example of Obama's poor treatment of Israel.
Not just of Israel, Republicans: of Congress as well. But nobody in Congress seems to care.

Donald Trump Winning Michigan Electorate – and With It, The Presidency

the conservative treehouse ^ | January 1, 2016 | sundance 

A Trump Conservative/Populist "Reagan Democrat" Candidacy Could Win In The Electoral College
Here is an analysis of the Electoral College victory possibilities for Donald Trump as the Republican nominee.
With a truly conservative/populist candidate such as Trump, there appears the ability to add to core base of Electoral College support which the Romney election of 2012 represents (Map 2).
Should the current economic, military (possible terrorist) and political situation continue as it is now President Obama, as did President Carter in 1980, will own the prevailing climate in November 2016 as will "Obama's third term" Clinton.The Republican base will be determined to vote in strength, whilst all those areas of support that Obama put together in 2008 with such enthusiasm-youth, anti-war proponents, Blacks, may not be so enthused next time.
Thus, as map 3 shows, if Michigan which has traditionally been Democratic is added to the 2012 base, plus marginal Florida and Ohio, then Trump has every chance to win. The GOP establishment has no credible argument for a middle of the road candidate as there are clear indications that the base would sit on their hands come November 2016, and in that case, there is a very strong possibility of significant down ticket losses.
Thus the GOP has everything to gain with a Trump candidacy, especially with a Republican congress, as he would ensure that genuinely conservative "Reagan Democrat” policies would be implemented without a veto and the country would be back on its traditional center-right path.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Bill Clinton May Backfire As Hillary’s ‘Secret Weapon’ ^ | January 1 

The presidential campaign has taken an ugly turn, with Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton exchanging pointed barbs about whether the Republican hopeful or her husband, the former president, is the bigger sexist.
And this may be only the beginning, as Bill Clinton's mixed record now becomes part of the campaign.
One of the keys to Trump's success in attracting support is that he refuses to follow the rules of political decorum, such as they are.
So when Hillary Clinton accused him of being sexist, he didn't blink an eye in citing Bill's reputation as a sexual predator as a reason for the Democratic frontrunner to avoid playing the sexist card. He ended one tweet with a warning to "BE CAREFUL."
It was naked intimidation typical of a bully, but it can be highly effective. It immediately reminded voters of all the baggage the Clintons carry, dating back to Gennifer Flowers and Paula Jones, through the lying and cheating that led to Bill Clinton's impeachment.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...