Index (Alphabetized) To Videos

CLICK HERE or on the above title, "Index (Alphabetized) To Videos", to go straight to the ALPHABETIZED INDEX OF VIDEO LINKS section. 

CLICK HERE to go to my YouTube channel, where my screen name is "AbleGoodman". ShareThis

Obamacare — the mechanics of how it is evil, un-American and unconstitutional

Evil is a powerful word as used in the context of this essay, so, per Voltaire's famous "If you would converse with me, you must first define your terms" admonition, I will explain my definition of evil. But first, a small digression.

Culture's dividers, demonizers and destroyers are fond of using language to create imaginary political dichotomies, such as "secular" vs. "religious", "theist" vs. "atheist", "liberal" vs. "conservative", "communism" vs. "capitalism", "left" vs. "right", etc. Let me demonstrate the obfuscatory and intellectually useless nature of such deceptive garbage by proving that atheism itself is in fact a religion.

"World view" = how you believe the cause-and-effect material universe around us actually functions. "Atheism" = "world view". "Religion" = "world view". I submit that if a = c and b = c, logic dictates that a = b. When you look at it that way, all the wannabe-clever little talking points, jingoistic slogans and dogmas of the "atheism vs. religion" faux controversy are distilled down to the substantive essences of two competing world views or hypotheses. In other words, do you believe the Earth is round or flat, and what, precisely, is your empirically observable factual evidence which supports your opinion?


Energy technology is neither a "Left" nor "Right" issue — the troubled years before the deluge

Per the title of this blog post, energy technology is neither a "Left" nor "Right" issue. So it has always irritated me that the so-called "caring and altruistic" Left seems to think renewable (aka "sustainable") energy is their exclusive domain, while the "evil and greedy" Right seems to prefer centralized, government1-controlled energy sources such as oil, nuclear, coal, etc. My irritation is compounded by the fact it seems that so many, perhaps even most, of the actors and musicians whose work I admire most lean to the left politically2. So I thought it was time to clarify the propaganda-induced confusion and faux "controversy" a bit.

At the outset, the one thing I wanted to make sure I did not fail to emphasize is the great amount of credit that I believe is due to the role-modeling of "star3" environmental activists such as Ed Begley, Jr, Daryl Hannah, Jackson Browne, and many others. They put their money where their mouths are, and try very hard to be good examples of their "green" political gospel. Ed even has two shows, "Living With Ed" and "PlanetGreeen.com" where he tries to demonstrate for his audiences what is possible. Having said that, the bad news is that there is so much they don't talk about that their approach to the issue is so extremely simplistic that it borders on deception. And, the folks whose work I admire aside, there are plenty of fascist4 scumbags5 wanting to profit from the sale of deception and manipulation to the more naive, ignorant and intellectually lazy among us.


A Lèse Majesté Amendment and the grassroots restoration of the U.S. Constitution to full force and effect

According to Wikipedia, "lèse majesté" is the crime of violating majesty, an offence against the dignity of a reigning sovereign or against a state. Of course, in the minds of most tyrants, for example good old "L'Etat, c'est moi" (I am the state) Louis XIV, there is no difference between the state and the tyrant's person.

In the "old days", the offense was considered so serious, that the punishment was the most severe and torturous possible, such as skinning alive, or drawing and quartering. The obvious intent of lese majeste laws was to sufficiently terrorize the general populace that they would not dare entertain thoughts of changing the established social order — which is, in reality, merely a pecking order — with a revolution.

Since the advent of more modern theories of government, specifically since the implementation of the U.S. Constitution with its Bill of Rights and the constitutions of the various states, it is past time to reconsider the concept of lese majeste and reverse the roles of who is the state/majesty/rule and who is the subject. For example, the beginning of ARTICLE II of the Colorado Constitution, immediately followed by Section 1, says: "In order to assert our rights, acknowledge our duties, and proclaim the principles upon which our government is founded, we declare: SECTION I. That all political power is vested in and derived from the people; that all government, of right, originates from the people, is founded upon their will only, and is instituted solely for the good of the whole."


Why Janice Rogers Brown could help Ron Paul win the presidency

I think the reason it has been so long since my last post is that America's political1 processes have become disgusting, even repulsive. The politicians bashing away at each other is bad enough, but the cutesy and nasty ad hominem used by their wannabe-clever supporters against those who disagree with them on places like Twitter is enough to make a billy goat puke. Anyway, enough of the self-justification for procrastination and on with the point of this post.

Congressman Ron Paul is the GOP candidate I support for president in 2012. In stark contrast to the other candidates who give mere lip service to the U.S. Constitution, Ron Paul speaks and acts as if he truly believes the constitution is a binding specific-performance two-party contract which is not open to being unilaterally changed via strategic misinterpretation by one (the government) party to the contract. The other candidates act as if it's a corruption-friendly "living breathing" document amounting to little more than a shapeless pile of unintelligible socio-political economic manipulation and rhetorical B.S.


To be civil, or not to be civil: that is the question

(NOTE: The video linked to the thumbnail image of Bill Maher below has been taken down by YouTube. But you can still read the transcript of Maher's remarks if you CLICK HERE.

I forgot where I found this sentence, but I love it: "If Christianity is about anything it is about the fact that the awakened consciousness of one human heart can change the entire course of mankind." I sincerely believe that. The question of when to be "civil" (courteous and kind) and when to be "uncivil" (blunt and confrontational) in discussing politics and political strategies is not an easy one. It is true that people never improve out of hatred, contempt and/or scorn; they improve out of love. It is also true that there are adamantly "reprobate" (Jer 7:27-30, Ro 1:28, 2 Cor 13:5-7, 2 Tim 3:8, Tit 1:16) "many-there-be-who-choose-destruction" or "scumbag1" individuals who have no intellectual curiosity, no intellectual honesty, and who delight in trying to destroy all that is good in the world for their own selfish purposes. In such cases, the question arises: should one attempt to "overcome evil with good" (Ro 12:21), in such an ineffective "namby-pamby" way as to merely enable the evil, or, per such scriptures as Amos 5:15, Isa 5:20, Lu 17:3, Pr 28:23, Eph 5:6-7, Eph 5:11, Gal 6:7-9 and 1 Thes 5:21, should one rebuke the evil openly and bluntly so that it may be plainly seen and understood by those who have not yet made up their minds which path they want to follow (or align themselves with "politically2"?


Lying Gubmint Scumbaggery, Whistleblowing & Free Speech

I'm 100% fed up with wannabe-clever Goebbelsian propaganda scum1, whether "left" or "right". It's long past time to clarify a few things that should be self-evident to all individuals with an IQ greater than their finger-and-toe total. For one thing, by definition, "politician2" = professionally skilled deceiver (aka liar). For another thing, the term "national security", as used in any remotely intellectually honest context, means things such as the top-secret step-by-step detailed plans on exactly how to build a so-called "suitcase nuke", it does NOT mean merely embarrassing a few narcissistic fascist3 politicians2 by publicly exposing their arrogant scumbaggery and lies to the American people.


How the "Right's" thinking is haywire

I absolutely despise such misleading, manipulative and so-unspecific-as-to-be-useless words as "left", "right", "liberal", "conservative", etc, etc, as commonly used in reference to politics, economics and other human behavior.

I used to generally think of the Left as stupid and the Right as corrupt. The accurate truth is a lot more complicated than that. However, because of the constitutional illiteracy and Economics-101-challenged status of the Left, their stupidities are MUCH easier to recognize, criticize, and ridicule than those of the Right. Since the Right's errors, deceptions, and manipulations are much more subtle and difficult to describe and address, and since much of the Left is emotionally incapable of laughing at itself, it seemed logical to write the anti-Right essay before the anti-Left. For any members of the Right who have difficulty accepting constructive criticism, I assure you that the Left "gets theirs" in a separate essay.


Alex Jones' exposé of "Climate-Gate" as an international fraud to promote world gubmint

I thought the following information sufficiently important that it deserves its own blog.

Al Gore has made over $100M peddling fear to the naive and ignorant, all while hypocritically spewing out a gigantic "carbon footprint" himself. But his fear mongering of "global warming" (also marketed as "climate change", "climate crisis", and the ever-moronic "climate justice") has never really worked on me, because I learned in my 7th-grade science class that plants breathe in CO2 and exhale oxygen, while humans breathe in oxygen and exhale CO2, so there is a symbiosis between the plant and animal kingdoms. We need each other to survive. I also understand that the weather, or so-called "climate", has never done anything other than change. Climate/weather is in a constant state of change. That's what it does: change. So where is the common-sense rational basis for uncontrolled "Chicken Little"/"The Asteroid Is Coming" panic and paranoia? I don't get it. Neither do many millions of other people throughout the world. Nor do I understand the cult of the personality where a bunch of disordered lemming-like ignoramuses blindly follow a wannabe-clever charismatic money-grubbing con artist.


Join the "YOU INCREDIBLE P.C. IDIOT" revolution against political correctness!

That’s it. I’ve had it. I am TOTALLY fed up with the evil of the deception-based manipulation of language known as “political1 correctness”. So I’ve decided to do something about it.

The recent trendy phenomenon known as “political correctness” poses a hideously dangerous threat to free thought, free speech, and individual freedom, self-ownership and self-determination in general. In the words of comedian George Carlin, “Political correctness is America’s newest form of intolerance, and it is especially pernicious because it comes disguised as tolerance. It presents itself as fairness, yet attempts to restrict and control people’s language with strict [authoritarian] codes and rules…Political correctness cripples discourse, creates ugly language and is generally stupid.” I couldn't agree more. See also George Orwell’s 1946 essay, "Politics and the English Language".