Anatomy of an argument or What my rabbit thought

See my rabbit over there?

A fool once called poor bun a hare.

All those about within ear shot

Were placed in a state of near total shock.

On hearing such folly there arose a great roar

From border to border and shore to shore,

From common souls to lofty fools

To children dozing off in schools.

Sticklers such a faux pas rejected.

Scientists, growing apoplectic,

Wagged their heads in disbelief.

‘You’ve caused," they raged, “this rabbit grief!

You surely suffer from deep delusion

To be in such profound confusion.

Have you lost all your sight and senses

And missed their glaring differences?

No matter, sir, how you split the hare

In shape, form and fashion he’s dissimilar.

They’re so unlike in mood and mien

Once seen one need not look again.

They’re so diverse in taste and habit

How dare you confuse a hare for a rabbit?!

Or perhaps it's that you simply don't care

About the vast differences twixt rabbit and hare?

The contrast, we claim, is plain and prosaic

You’ll be amazed when we display it.

Just lend an ear and listen to us

As we intone our litany.

Listen in moods both deep and pensive

For the list I read is quite extensive.

Open your eyes and open your heart

And observe now our Grand Anatomical Chart!

Their legs, we believe, are a good first instance.

Note the rabbit’s have the greater distance,

It’s also true and easy to see

Their unsame length from toe to knee.

Next, stare true and please don’t blink

And then you will see their out of sync wink!

Claims of sameness we easily trump

By noting the timing and tone of their thumps.

The difference, we claim, is truly endemic.

Logicians claim it is quite logarithmic.

Yet, it takes no machine to easily tell

The chasmic difference in their decibel.

Nor do we need a modern computer

To prove this rabbit is a much better rooter.

Also we’re sure you don’t know the fact

They're hardly the same in their sacoriliac.

Concerning our next point, we’ll just give the nexus

These creatures do not have the same solar plexus!

Next, follow our pointer as it exposes

The various movements of each of their noses.

Only one blind could ever maintain

Such gyrations to be remotely the same.

And maybe we’re wrong, but we certainly think,

Of the two, only one has a nose that is pink!

One need draw neither too close nor too near

To see their long, sleek and contrastive ears.

Now please the wits to be found in your braniums

And note the great difference to be seen in their craniums.

Note, too, that God saw it good to bequeath

A very great difference in the shapes of their teeth.

And there’s sadly no time to summarize

All the differences found in the flab of their thighs.

Now that with thoroughness we have discussed

Disparities, some subtle and some obvious!

Confess with your lips their great variations

Behold and admit their differentiations.

We hope now that all are in happy accord

Over the use and abuse of this word.

It should not take an act of a full legislature

To enforce proper use of such clear nomenclature!

Repent, now, your dolefully daft vocal habit

To you, sir, his Moniker is “Mr. Rabbit”!"

While stickers fumed and scientists fussed

And others like-minded stomped and cussed,

While pedants proclaimed

And explainers explained

I asked them, “Is Bun also perturbed,

And raging over misuse of this word?”

Aroused from slumber by the pedants' screams

Awoke Mr. Bun from his deep Tantric dreams

And revealed to me all with a nod and a wink.

“What,” they asked, “does Bunbun think?!?”

"He told me", said I, "so I need not guess,

In gestures free of all duress,

I heard him loud and heard him clear,

Though he spake no word mortal ear can hear."

“Grass I like and carrots too,

And running through green grassy dew.

I like sweet fruits and escarole

And hiding in my warm, dark hole.

Alfalfa's my fave of all things edible,

Its taste is just simply quite unforgettable.

I also like jumping and then pirouetting

And growing hair and then that hair shedding.

And running through halls, hiding under the bed,

And leaping high over the lazy cat’s head.

I like going nose to nose with the dog,

Or pretending he's a fat, furry forest log.

I even like chewing electrical wire,

Despite potentialities grave, drear and dire.

Some times I even like when I am petted,

After, of course, the petter’s been vetted.

Only then am I sure that I shall not

End up in the unvetted’s steaming stew pot.

That is all, for now, that I have to say,

So I bid one and all a very Good day.”

Saying no more he fell into

His own very deep meditational stew.

"And what," scholars asked, "of our great controversy

Argued sans grace and debated sans mercy?

Pray, did he give us his firm approbation

Did he our vast labors reward with ovation?"

When I saw how they shimmied, and shook, and did worry,

I hastened to respond in more than a hurry.

As their brows furrowed deeply and faces grew red,

I turned with a flourish, and here's what I said:

"Worry not today, neither fume more or fret,

For what Bunbun said to me you shall know yet.

For I shall arise and boldly orate

And share all Black Bunny intended to state.

Tis true, he made no reference

Nor gave the slightest deference

When I pled with him to make it said

That which he thought within his wee head."

“How, then,” asked the pedants, “shall you embark

To clarify that rabbit's remark?”

The scientists too began to chime in

Until all together they made a great din.

But raising my hands high over my head,

I calmed them down and the following said:

"A fair query, dear friends, you pose to me here,

And I have the answer, so be of good cheer:

Assume not silence is always consent,

Trust me, I know just what he meant.

Even though it's true his thoughts went unsaid

I know quite well what Bun had in his head.

There's no further need for your noisy onslaught,

So sit simply in silence while I tell you his thought.

Now listen to me and please pay mind.

For here’s what, in brief, Bunbun opined:

See my rabbit over there,

Put sweet, short and simple; he doesn’t care."

An observation on the Single-Payer System

Similar to the single-payer system you end up with when the government usurps private sector healthcare institutions, you eventually end up with a single "Massa" system when the government takes over the nation's "peculiar institution."

It follows then that all a big government liberal is doing in taking the side of the Federal Government is supporting and defending slavery as a public rather than a private sector institution?

Freedom Watch and Professor Heldman

Judge,

I just had an epiphany tonight watching Prof. Heldman. It helped me finally, at long last, understand her and her positions better.

In modern parlance, she's suffering from Stockholm syndrome.

Or (as you say) stated another way, in terms a poor ignorant Southerner like me can understand, she (and other big government liberals like her) are the uncle Tom's of our time--saying and doing all she can to justify the every move, every action, every confiscation scheme, every tax, every moral and social burden, every abuse, every intrustion and every regulation the Leviathan state she loves so much lays upon We the People as heavy fetters, binding us more and more to Uncle Sam's Plantation.

She's as pathetic and parasitical as the politicians she dotes on and adores.

You include her among the "freedom fighters." But the truth is she has no taste for liberty or freedom--for she has willfully made herself a slave in her own mind. The only freedom she believes in is the freedom of the Leviathan state to exercise absolute power over it subjects, We, the once Sovereign People.

She needs no chains from the wardens in DC; she has imposed them adequately of her own will and seeks actively and energetically to bind others.

She as a person reminds me of Frodo after he had escaped from Mount Doom and was laying prostrate on a rock in the midst of volcanic heat and flowing lava: She, like he, cannot remember the taste of fresh vegetables, cannot remember what a blue sky looks like, cannot remember the colour green--cannot remember the Shire. She cannot remember a moment she was not a subject of Mordor and was not the protagonist and defending of every machination of Sauron. She cannot recall when she was not his willing accomplice in his plundering of We the People.

with my deepest respect and admiration for defending Liberty regardless of the cost,

wm. ridenour

duncanville, tx

The Truth about Madison

I am a coal miner's son. I know the value of unions from personal experience. But a distinction must be made between private and public sector unions and how they serve or harm the best interests of We the People.

When I was growing up in the 1950-60s there was a common understanding about government work. If you were a government employee you could not expect an equivalent salary to those in the private sector––after all, you were a "public servant."

But there was a trade-off. For less money in salary you got good benefits, better job security and a more secure retirement than workers in the private sector.

This was the common understanding, and with that understanding the people slept. And as they slept the unions entered, stage left.

Once the unions were well established in the public sector they, in the dark of night, changed the reality we were all so familiar with in the 1950 and 60s.

When we awoke in the 1990s and the first decade of the 21st century public sector jobs paid as well or better than private sector jobs for the same work. But the real story came in the retirement benefits, healthcare and unheard of job protections the unions had engineered. What's more, unions had gained such control they could strong arm states and local communities to the point that had to continue paying salaries and full retirement to those who would otherwise have been put in prison for child molestation. And firing union teachers and other employees was harder than getting a bill through congress--all this and more came to "We the Tax Payers" compliments of the quid pro quo corrupt unions negotiated with corrupt politicians in smoke filled back rooms in the dark of night.

This is the fact that We the Tax Payers are now facing and the consequence is the immanent fiscal collapse of our state and municipal governments.

Don't be deceived. This is not about the Governor of Wisconsin fighting the Democrats or the unions or the teachers. This is about the Governor of Wisconsin doing what politicians before him failed to do when faced with the unsustainable debt caused by ridiculous union demands: take the side of We the Tax Payers instead of sell us out for union support next election cycle.

Many will try to cast the matter in all sorts of different lights, present all sorts of half truths and an array of other scenarios and considerations to muddy the waters in Wisconsin--but what has been stated above is the cruel and barefaced reality, and to deny it is to send Wisconsin and other states in analogous condition hurtling towards bankruptcy with no means of reversal.

Why Ron Paul must enter GOP 2012 presidential primary

Ron Paul has now won two CPAC presidential polls in a row. Yet, Donald Trump, media hound, showed up (after he supported Obama last election) to announce to CPAC that Dr. Paul cannot win in 2012. This, of course, outraged many Paulites. But just for a moment let's consider that Trump is right...

Okay, are you considering it? Good. Now consider this: even if Paul can't win in 2012 it doesn't change a thing in regard to whether he should or should not run: He must run, and here's why:

Even if Dr. Paul can't win consider the potential effect of his prospective 2012 campaign in the light of the changes we've experienced since Dr. Paul threw his hat in ring in 2008.

1. Dr. Paul, as we've said, has won 2 CPAC straw polls in a row.

2. The consciousness of more and more Americans is now fixed on the economy, the Fed and the massive debt hanging over the nation because of out of control government spending.

3. The Tea Party movement is now a fixture in American political life--and has shown not a little staying power--even to the point of establishing or supporting a real third party should the Republicans betray the promises that put them back in power in 2010.

These things and much more have all served to focus Americans on the very issues that Dr. Paul has been talking and warning about for over two decades--to a populace and a political class that has not only been deaf to his message––it has often been contemptuous and derisive at times. In fact, Dr. Paul has often suffered ridicule and humiliation for his principled defense of the Constitution.

But recent economic and social events have changed all that. No longer can the press disrespect Dr. Paul like they did in 2008. No longer can they shut him out of the process and refuse him entry to nationally televised presidential primary debates.

If Dr. Paul makes the sacrifice to run, he will, no doubt, be a dark horse in many ways. But running in the primaries for 2012 will allow him to be heard like he has never been heard before by more and more people who are open to his message.

I contend that if Dr. Paul enters the primary he will, at the very least, be able to influence both the substance and direction of the debate in the most positive of ways. He will be able to use this national stage to better fix many critical issues in the minds of Americans that appertain to our economic health and personal liberty that will be of enduring benefit to We the People. Running will give him a much better opportunity in 2012 than he had in 2008 to draw attention to many realities that most candidates would rather ignore and sweep under the rug. In short, nothing but good can come from Dr. Paul entering. Whether he wins, loses or draws--it will be a win for Libertarian conservatism, for the Constitution and for the American people.

Run Ron, run!

Charity

Obama, in his new budget, has recommended reducing tax deductions for charity donations.

Where is this going? I think my little photoshop says it all:

The Question

When confronted with so-called liberal "achievements" Dr. Thomas Sowell said he asks a few simple questions that almost always serve to deflate liberal claims on moral superiority. One is, "At what cost?"

The Empire has sought to justify the unspeakable evils of the War for Southern Independence with one thing only: it brought the end of slavery.

Now, any Southron who knows the least bit about history knows an objective reading of what actually transpired then puts the lie to even that piece of the Yankee mythology. The truth is both southrons and northerners were reconciled to the eventual end of slavery--but there was no clear idea on how best to do it and how it might best happen.

Virginia, not Massachusetts, was the first state to propose manumission, and the proposition failed by only a few votes. It failed, not because Virginians thought slavery should not end, but because they could not agree upon how to do so. This was the prevailing opinion of many prominent soutrons, including Thomas Jefferson, Jefferson Davis, R. E. Lee and countless others. Hindsight shows us clearly that with the rise of technology slavery would have soon become unprofitable in the south--and manumission would have gradually taken place, just as it did in the north and other places.

This largely peaceful process was denied to the Southern people, both black and white, slave and free.

When one considers the events of this most tragic of American eras, the least debatable issue is this: Of all the possible ways slavery might have ended the way it did, the War, was the worst conceivable––the worst in every way and worst for every one--except for the imperialist, the statist and the banker.

When I say "the worst" I am not thinking of just the cost of blood and treasure in the actual shooting phase of the war. That is comparatively minor when one considers the whole. I am thinking of all the events, acts and policies that have ensued since the war which can be directly or indirectly attributable to the war, up to and including the present day. More precisely, I am thinking of how the war and so-called reconstruction that followed have eternally poisoned the waters in our country. It has infused enmity, hatred, distrust and malice between racial and social groups. It has bitterly divided us with no means of repair or reconciliation. It has destroyed the voluntary nature of the Compact, and indeed, our original Federalism itself. It has brought liberty to an end and turned our history into a web of government generated propaganda and lies––and that is only the short list.

The War was carried on as an unconstitutional tyranny, and it has born the fruit of tyranny, demagoguery and the enslavement of us all to a Unitary, authoritarian state.

THESE and many other horrors, not Emancipation, are the real and enduring consequences of the war––THESE, not liberty, are the PRIMARY effects and sorry fruit of the Linconian, Jacobin, liberal, revolutionary madness.

It is not our statements or arguments to counter Yankee propaganda that will really change hearts and minds, or make the Yankee hang his head in shame as he should. Rather, it is that searching question, offered in the Socratic spirit, that challenges him in his arrogant self-righteousness for an honest answer. Do the Yankees have enough self-honesty to respond as they should? My guess is only a precious few do. But I ask the rest, if only rhetorically:
"At what cost?"