Showing posts with label election. Show all posts
Showing posts with label election. Show all posts

Thursday, December 30, 2010

Alaska's Back Scratchers

In my view:

 By Clotilde Frazier (c) December 2010.  All rights reserved

Editors note:  This article was evolved from a long-term effort to develop a personality profile. Field tests suggest that it is a very useful theoretical forecasting tool.  Comments below were influenced by my findings.

Formerly brave 'n' bold, defanged independent Alaskans of old have largely faded away and have lost their voting rights franchise.  Predators didn't like the November election's outcomes and decided to change the rules (deconstruct the Republic).

Neighbors, friends and leaders appear to have been significantly out-strategized and replaced by Metro-tacticians who were transplanted from dark regions, where the bully's body politic rules in place of the "Power of One."  I am repulsed! 


Who ARE these bullies  who have absconded with my suffrage rights?  With only seventeen years residency, I feel more like a sourdough than the original, and that includes Lisa Murkowski.  Based on her conduct, she has identified herself as a back-scratching, spoiled  bully. Shame! 

Lisa's bullies, as I call them,  are the state of Alaska's elitist first generation spoiled brats. They reside in native villages and corporate offices, as well as established newcomer cities and towns. They believe that the world owes them a living and a certain level of empowerment.  Their reasoning? They were born in a certain place at a certain time in space. That's reason enough. 

They are often our national/ local politicians and bureaucrats.  They are legion and can charm or bully, depending on which side they awoke on any given day.  They are essentially an avaricious crowd of cowards and need to use each other to avoid detection.

They share a bully's level of moral development, which hinges on a cynical  value system of, "You scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours," and are  now known (for the fun of it) by the acronym: YS-MBA-ISY,  pronounced: (Yes'-maba-isy)  people.  It has an Obama inspired musical sense of rhythm to it.   

Unfortunately for mankind, many of us are predatorally compelled to  reside ensconed in the utilitarian level of moral reasoning. 

The back-scratchers live for "SELF," which makes them immoral and myopic troublemakers when they're are functioning from their dark side.

Unfortunately, they tend to hang with each other.  It makes sense. Who would scratch your back, they surmise, if not mutual user-predators and sellouts.  They can't trust power-of-one thinkers.

Math rules don't hold up with back-scratchers.   A negative times a negative doesn't yield a positive in a moral sense. They get along, but  time shows that mutual use wears thin, and becomes an itch in need of a scratch or rub-out; therefore, they need to blackmail each other, just to keep things from getting out of hand.

Speaking of users: the courts and, native corporation hacks have in effect told the rest of us that there is no room in their sandbox for the rest of us.  Why would we want to join them? Joe Miller tried to use logic, and we saw where that got him.  Those who ascribe to a Power-of-One philosophy, and voted in the primaries, in an effort to change the Alaskan sandbox's' "scratch" mentality, are enemies of the totalitarian state. Too bad we found  ourselves on the honest but losing side of the issue. God has His reasons.  

How badly are we affected by back-scratchers? Answer: immensely, even terminally.  Alaska's  recent November election has some aspects of a Greek Tragedy.  There is a difference though. Instead of the demise of a hero or heroine, the nation as a whole has been mortally wounded and even back-scratchers have been caught up in the post election mess. 

Amazingly, Lisa has the gall to tell Alaskans that we want her, while audaciously introducing a sense of the messianic to her troubled humanistic thought processes . Some might believe her, but I and thousands of others are appalled at her willingness to embrace leftist views, while expecting a similar brand of  dumb blindness  from us. In her faulty thinking, she is incompetent; In her unbridled rebelliousness, she is plain dangerous.

Lisa's  view  of party politics in the false name (red herring) of bipartisanship is irritating.  Does she really think we are blind to her subtrafuge? Her indifference to fraud in the election process is alarming, and we are not forgetting her unwillingness to accept honest Republican primary results. 

Who willingly corrupts Native power and an election, then declares her so-called "election" a "miracle?"  Answer: a troubled totalitarian underling who has sold her soul.  She has demonstrated that her need  for power is boundless and without conscience.  She is untrustworthy!What can be said of this election-injustice?  Clear-sighted individuals coming together to hopefully form a "[m]ore perfect union" have been unfortunately overcome by myopic types, like Murkowski, who endanger the election process' power-of-one. Her brand of bipartisanship is built on shifting sand. Not good!

Murkowski is badly mistaken. In the face of leftist dishonesty, we can't come together. Can oil mix with water? This is spiritual and political warfare. We form unions first as knowledgeable, moral individuals, not as useful idiots. Murkowski and her cohorts demand idiots. Moreover, politicians, and we the people, need santifying grace to make our way out of this mess.. Christ uttered the following warning not only to Peter, but to us for our time: Luke 22:31 "And the Lord said,  'Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: ...'"

How did we get to the equivalent of third world elections?  Answer: We blundered into Satan's sphere in the early sixties and beyond. As he was busily sifting, some welcomed him into their lives. Finding him comely and familiar, many trustingly greeted and embraced  the Sifter  as they would a familiar friend, with whom they shared many commonalities. In the continuum, many rebellious risk-takers, like Lisa Murkowski, refused God's version of rule-driven freedom. She and others preferred Satan's free-for-all version in the form of anarchy. The rest is history.
.
God help Alaska and the United States of America.  God help us all!  May He give Joe Miller the insight and strength to take the Alaskan people's case to the U.S. Supreme Court. Pray for his success. Pray that the dawning of the age of heroes and the demise of back-scratchers is near. And pray that Lisa Murkowski will repent her attack on the people of Alaska. It is a good thing when the Sifter fails in his mission.


 1. Source: The Holy Bible Douay Rheims Version

Tuesday, January 19, 2010

MASSACHUSETTS CHOOSES LIBERTY

 God Bless America!


Click to enlarge


Massachusetts


New Jersey




Virginia

Massachusetts
Click to enlarge




This is but one battle.  The war still must be won. The two R's: Rejoice and Recoup (for another day).

Monday, January 18, 2010

MARTHA COAKLEY AND OBAMA'S GOONS WANT YOU MASSACHUSETS: CHOOSE FREEDOM

Massachusetts, kick the bums out.  How about the courage of that reporter?

Camera shot one:

Reporter John McCormack shows grit and stick-to-it courage as he pursues an answer to his question with the evasive Ms. Coakley.  But wait: look at the guy with the glasses, Michael Meehan.  He gives the high-sign to the guy standing next to him, then stands on tippy-toes to locate fellow Strums and performs a flanking position to bring up the rear with fellow stormtroopers.

Martha is turned in another direction to give Meehan a rear flanking advantage. McCormack has been ID'd by the goons who want to prevent him from asking unwanted questions.  They mean to shut him down, interferring with freedom of the press and free speech.  Intimidation!



Camera shot two:

Fox News brings in a woman commentator who says things are "heating up" in a competitive campaign. No sign from her that this kind of thuggery is plain wrong. 

In this shot, Martha looks on as her stormtroopers collaborate to prevent McCormack from proceeding with his questions. She makes no move to quell action that might bring injury. In my day a woman Democrat answered questions, and, unaided, faced down goons within the party.  

Note: the fellow that was first given the high-sign walks ahead of the tall bespeckled Strum, Michael Meehan, who knocks McCormack down, then in true thuggery style helps him up, askes him if he is OK, Corleone style, and proceeds to interfer with the marked man [McCormack]. 

The guy in the advance guard stops to observe how things are proceeding and throws his scarf around his neck.  Martha hurries away, the ruse succeeded.  Or did it?



Camera shot three:

Did you see Mr. bespeckled bully come from behind McCormack and shove him hard enough to rough him up and make him lose his balance? McCormack easily could have been injured, given the position of his arms, as he was trying to record events.

The attack was obviously played out as Martha's  stormtroopers planned. She never answered McCormack's question.  Nonetheless, Mr. McCormack, you were superb.  Your cool-headed acrobatics and determination brought a smile.  This nation might make it yet.    



CF

Wednesday, November 4, 2009

NEW YORK ELECTION: THE COLOR OF TRUE "RED"

By Clotilde Frazier


 The subtle use of color: How Did Republican(s) and States Come to Be Associated with the color RED?



                                           Pravda November 2009

                                                            

                                                           HUH?






Red States/Blue States: Origins of Current Color Scheme: Why We Should Care


"Before the 2000 presidential election, there was no universally recognized color scheme to represent political parties in the United States. In fact, the color scheme was often reversed, in line with historical European associations (red was used for left-leaning parties).[2][3]"   Emphasis mine. Wikipedia November 2009

Tim Russert, long-time Democrat and political operative popularized the color assignments: Republicans (Red), Democrats (Blue). Clever!

The leftist press happily spread the deception.  Mr. Russert obviously saw the association and cleverly avoided attaching it to the red-Dems when he created the Red vs Blue map for television audiences in 2000.

"According to The Washington Post, the phrases red states and blue states were coined by Tim Russert, although in that same article Russert states that he wasn't the first to use the terminology.[13][14] This term refers to those states of the United States of America whose residents predominantly vote for the Republican Party (red) or Democratic Party (blue) presidential candidates, respectively.

"John Chancellor, Russert's NBC colleague, is credited with using red and blue to represent the states on a US map for the 1976 presidential election. Mainstream political discussion following the 2000 presidential election used red state/blue state more frequently." Wikipedia November, 2009

The fact that Republican Party leadership failed to  attend to the misapplication told me that they were  limited in the art of warfare, or afraid to make enough waves to correct the misapplication: Or were they? Is the 'Red" enemy within the Republican Party and elsewhere?  Hmm?  Of course they are.  They are everywhere.

The art of war is waged using subtle deception.  Before Republicans and/or conservatives  associate themselves with "Red" city, county, state, country ( anything), they should consider the historic association.  The outed leftists, including our president are proudly "Red."

 I say: "paint them with their true primary color," "Red."

Republican's better crawl out from under the big deflated tent they carelessly erected by blindly buttressing it with hot-air, limp poles, and baby (marketable) Cadavers. 

The fact that they allowed a leftist-leaning democrat to paint the tent RED speaks badly about their political-warfare acumen. Republicans need to claim another primary color(s) and declare themselves to be the party of the people's platform, solidly pro-constitution and free from the tyranny of  social liberalism ("Reds").

 Did you hear the People, Newyt Gingrich? Your wimpy explanation as to how you came to support, Dede Scozzafava, a disguised Republican New York machine "Red,"  is unacceptable.

You accepted the diktat or party line, rather than oppose the moles in the "Red" New York Republican party apparatus.  Your past "conservative" credentials aren't going to hold up anymore. "Red" Republicans just will not do.