Thursday, February 27, 2014

The Department of Health and Human Services Needs To Be Stopped

DHHS is not only out of it's mind with it's intent for the peoples of this country, but almost surely acting unconstitutionally and nearly of an instinctually pathological mindset as an institution.  This department, which Domestic Democracy United feels should be defunded as soon as possible, has no care for everyday ordinary citizens whatsoever.  The irony is, it's unconstitutional actions and reformations are all sold on the basis of this 'care' for people - yet DHHS is merely another bloated wet dream of those fanatics in D.C.  The Department of Health and Human Services needs to be stopped.

Obviously, there is something far more sinister behind it's decision to attempt to mandate prophylactics' dissemination in institutions of the religious variety.  What could it be?

One word: Eugenics.

We as North Carolinians need to tell the DHHS to "go home", as in our state Eugenics is explicitly forbidden.  And as far as I remember, certain religious organizations are forbidden by doctrine to have anything to do with contraception.

It reminds me of one of the texts I saw in my short attempt at taking the current farce that is Big Education seriously for brief time: A BIO 110 textbook which stated that "the world is overpopulated and needs to be depopulated due to environmental concerns".
They, the higher ups in the DHHS, can claim that sexual concerns require sexual education and free condoms and subsidized abortions if they like; but we, the citizens of North Carolina, know for a fact that the only thing that makes a substantive difference is promotion of Abstinence before marriage.
They, the social engineers who have run amok in our country for the last 6 years, can claim that contraception is promoted to prevent disease and unwanted pregnancy, but I - founder of DDU - know the awful truth behind this practice of eugenics...

That is, that more condoms being given out at places of employment etc. is actually a 'population control' procedure; which amounts, unequivocally, to eugenics.

Everyone knows that teaching abstinence is the only correct policy.  Sex Ed and other DHHS wet dreams that I won't bother mentioning at the moment by virtue of the fact that it would be far too controversial, are not only stupidly created, not only inappropriate for workplaces and schools, but actually detrimental to society's morals, standards and well being; a sentiment the viciously wicked cartel known as the Department of Health and Human Services claims to have in mind when forcing normal godfearing Christians to take part in their almost humorously vacuous 'condom campaign'.
I'm reticent to mention eugenics, as it can be a touchy issue; especially for those who actively believe in the very existent 'academic eugenics' ideology.  But the fact is, it's a touchy issue not by virtue of it's existence in schools, workplaces and philosophy - but because of the fact that some higher ups on the Left believe that promoting eugenics secretly is so important that those who speak out against it should be marginalized.

Just as per collectivism, any attempt to indict someone implicitly in agreement with eugenics is met with denial, obfuscation and the kind of bobbing and weaving one expects from a boxer!

Take for example noted Hegel scholar and aussie extraordinaire Peter Singer.

His ideology is a perfect example of eugenics:

He believes that animals are actually more important than humans (save the trees etc), that live human babies should be allowed to be murdered after they're born, and that - of all things - Hegel's dialectic is one of historical evolution.

I'm kidding of course...

But the fact is, every so often one of these elite intellectuals are discovered as holding similarly eugenicist views - Why let these eggheads run our government?

Why let some sick freak make our Churches into little public institutions?

Why let the DHHS have any more of our tax money?


DDU 2014 - Brendan O'Connell
Founder and Member of Domestic Democracy United

Wednesday, February 19, 2014

A Letter to a Ukrainian Dissident

Dear Ukrainian dissident,

I've been flattered by people in your country frequenting my blog page, presumably due to the protest movement in your country's need for an authentic philosophy of the west.   I wish I could offer anything substantive, but what I've coined "Domestic Democracy United" is just that - a domestic organization.  I rarely address the tumult of the overseas world, precisely because of the fact that all I know for sure are the long stretches of the U.S. interstate, the legacy of our founding fathers, and my own inadequately educated understanding of what I intuit democracy to be in-and-for-itself.  However, it bequeaths me to address these deadly clashes that have been escalating in your country, of which I know little beyond the fires, tear gas, and relation to the former U.S.S.R. - Russia.  It is not only a bold decision to ardently oppose seeming annexation by "mother Russia", but a wise one politically.  It can be hard to stand in contrary poise to such an overwhelming enemy, perhaps deadly - but you can stand as such with the truth of your convictions, the philosophy of the right and correct, and the will of the Almighty decidedly on your side.  However, perhaps the Che flags are, how do I put it, a terrible choice.  This sort of protest, with the liberalism and communism that it entails, is far from what is needed in what is essentially a fledgling democracy movement and I condemn the use of such communism as a hypocritical and self defeating tactic.  However, one must note that there are certain "fringe elements" in any protest movement, and you would do well to distance your own movement from that of the international communist conspiracy, that uses any opportunity to advance it's cause.  What seems most touching about your practically suicidal struggle is that you stand in opposition to Russia.  Why?  Is it due to some long standing grudge?  A history of conflict with said nation?  A need for opposition to the Goliath of the east?  I would simply note that you are right to oppose such a needless use of the former U.S.S.R.'s iron fist - which is far from just, righteous or even remotely capable of anything approaching sovereignty.   Take a key from the Tea Party!  Throw Russian products into a river or some such thing!  And I'm still very interested in why exactly Russia-as-such feels the need to dictate over a country that it has no dominion over...  Stinks to high heaven in my book, and Domestic Democracy United stands by your principled stance.  With a little good luck and the will of the Lord of Hosts on your side, you may yet achieve victory for your cause, albeit a limited one that has almost no hope of a peaceful outcome.  Camus once said, "The only philosophical question of any importance is that of suicide."  You'd do well to take this seriously, if only as an ontology.  Russia has always been an inherently communist country.  It's claim to having gotten over that period of it's history is the equivalent of enemy propaganda rolling over the picket line.  The cold war isn't over, and despite the left's inability to stand up to or admit of Russia's "Commie Problem", DDU 2014 stands with you in your struggle.  The American right had made a commitment to helping nation's like yours stand in opposition to Russia, and while the current administration may founder in this instance, I'm sure you can take some solace that portion's of the American Republican Party stand with you and believe, in the absence of those ridiculous Che Guevara flags, that you are 'in the right'.


Brendan O'Connell, Domestic Democracy United: Founder and Member

Suggested reading:
GWF Hegel "Philosophy of Right"
Joseph Farrah "The Tea Party Manifesto"
Heidegger "Zein und Zeit"
Rush Limbaugh "Rush Revere"

Tuesday, February 11, 2014

Unions: Raw Facts

Some facts about public/private sector labor unions:

"Nationwide, unions collect some $14 billion a year in dues, more than half of which comes from government employees."

"I think that one of the reasons Gray Davis was recalled in 2003 was his cave in to unions.  He accepted a $500,000 contribution from the prison gaurds' union immediately before he signed a bill massively increasing their benefits."

- Jon Coupal

"Dues money and union power were the real issue in" the effort to recall me. 'After it became clear we were serious about our union reforms... the union leaders couldn't wait to throw their members under the bus by saying they could live with higher contributions for health and pension benefits, but they would not bend on collective bargaining or dues deductions"

- Scott Walker

" is well recognized that if you take away the mechanism of payroll deduction, you won't collect a penny from these people, and it has nothing to do with the nature of the beast, and the beasts who are our teachers...simply don't come up with money regardless of purpose."

- Robert Chanin

The unions collect "more revenue than 65 percent of the Fortune 500 companies, giving unions huge money to spend on politics-almost all of which goes to Democrats."

- Mallory Factor

"...under current law, the unions have a guaranteed income stream that can threaten political leaders and bring them to heel."

- John Fund

Unions are the number one problem in the U.S. domestically when viewed in terms of their disproportionate influence on public-sector employees.  One would have to wonder, what are the real effects of public-sector unions when it comes to homeland security?  Do unions make their influence known in the NSA?  Do government workers, both small and large, really have to bend to their overwhelming presence in the workplace?

We generally think of unions in cliche'd ways - at the docks, down by the waterfront...

But compare that nostalgia with the NEA!

That is the National Education Association.

Do we really allow the NEA to control our children's education?
If so, for the love of god WHY?
It's not as if unions have any accountability!

They were guilty of all kinds of misappropriation of justice during the 2008 POTUS election; bussing in dispassionate voters in union vans...  even forcing workers who were members of the labor union to drive the busses and round them up!

Forget that unions have one thing in mind: money, and you forget where real corruption layeth.
We're always told by the left about the travesty of ethics that is the free market and the much demonized and vilified "corporation" - they make the claim that they are unethical.  Yet is not business ethics a mandatory class in business administration education?  Are we really to believe that the management and administration of a corporation is - honestly - particularly unethical?

I don't buy it.

But unions, public and private sector, are intrinsically unethical - de facto!

with unions, it's "all about the money" according to NR columnist John Fund...

"After his victory in the recall election, Governor Shwarzenegger resurrected Wilson's ballot initiative to end automatic dues deduction, a move he said would break the stranglehold unions have over legislature and the budget.  But he was too outspent..."

- John Fund

I remind the reader that unions are so prevalent in government that even our own "right to work" state of North Carolina has a union office right downtown Raleigh - The AFL-CIO.
What is the real influence of unions in our fair state?

I say, the repub party should look at fighting unions' influence through massive legislation after the immigration issue subsides - I mean after all, the real danger of Obamacare is implicitly related to the unionization of healthcare!

Thanks for reading!

DDU 2014

DDU 2014

Saturday, February 1, 2014

Dirty Laundry: Collectivism?

Collectivism as defined by Webster, psychological and sociological disciplines and critics of the mere mention of an anti-collectivist philosophy-as-such has little relevant meaning to the dire, and dear to me, dangers incurred to Western Civilization by virtue of Collectivism as an ideological fixture-in-itself.

Collectivism simply means group-mind over individual-spirit.

How is this problematic and, indeed, definitively dangerous for Citizens of the U.S.?

I'll answer this, bearing my recent article "What Is Psychical Energy and How Is It Inherently Evil?" in mind, with a short list of Collectivism-as-such's DIRTY LAUNDRY:

Collectivists, along with many adherents to the false god of ideology-in-itself, deny the positions of the heart-as-such and characteristic being-alongside-others, the intention of their circumstance, their own genuine beliefs and morays not to mention anything that could be deemed questionable in-itself.  If questioned on authentic platform positions and posturing regarding their politik, a Collectivist will inevitably seek to obfuscate rather than shine a light upon their intents, a priori moral equivocations, and - not to be too trite and brutish with language - their "ends-as-such".  What are the ends of Collectivism?  One thing, in-and-of-itself...  heaven on earth.

Collectivism, by seeking to eliminate all opposition, clearly reveals what makes the "means-as-such" of ideology-in-itself and collectivism in-and-of-itself so devastatingly destructive to any opposition in the U.S.

That is - the alpha character-as-such and how collectivism's ramifications engender this character upon unwilling participants in a schemata which knowingly places it's adherents in bondage-for-itself.

Collectivism, unlike Individualism-in-itself, is not only loathe to take any role in a society other than that of the Alpha and Omega; but, in fact is incapable of it.  When put in a subordinate position, Collectivists thrash about like wounded bears on LSD.

It leads to many personal problems for MANY people!

Think of shootings, merciless and destructive and cruel as they are...

Shootings are, more often than not, the result of frustrated, annoyed and uncontrollably tumultuous collectivism in-itself and for-itself, or in-and-of-itself!  It's a fact.

Let's move on to the next central swatch of soiled linen - I won't take a minute of your time...

Collectivism engenders group-think, which is - in lue of my "What Is Psychical Energy..." piece - not only inappropriate for workplaces, a degenerative force on children's fragile Freedom, abused subversively much too frequently in informing and gossip-for-itself - but it is a dangerously 'unsecured channel' so to speak.
Who's to say that this same 'mind' of-and-for-itself is of the same paradigm as manners, etiquette...
Western Civilization proper?
That is to say, psychical energy and it's systematization may be susceptible to possible encroachment by terrorists.

Group-mind is dangerous and, not to be too glib, an insufficiently examined security risk for the U.S.

Further, to continue with this dreadful grasping of straws, group-think requires people to give their rights, as guaranteed by the Constitution of America, to the sweaty palms and clenched fists of a Regime; to the whims and notional inclination of whatever reigning "ethic" happens to result from Collectivism-as-such's barbarity or neurosis.
Trusting in collectivism-as-such is of kin to trusting in a pack of subdued wildebeests - untamed by anything other than the reigning order inherent in the oft-enjoyed "Natural Plane".
To trust in the Natural Plane-as-such is to trust that god resides in the woods.

Collectivism leads us, inevitably to this conclusion.
The state of nature as order.

It's a crying lie.  In fact, notable theologian R.C. Sproul has made a great case for the conceptualization of the "Natural Plane-in-itself" as the locale of lucifer!

But I digress...

Collectivism gives to all an inheritance of profane obedience, in direct opposition to individual duty.
Honor, repentance, tradition all degenerate under collectivist rule!
Think of how a, say, multi-culturalist/universalist thinker regards concessions to obedience in opposition to the directly apposite conceptualization of duty towards Honor in-and-of-itself.
Bring to the fore how one might be led to give away the true meaning of repentance.  The whole 'turning from sin' as cessation of bad behavior theory regarding what many consider to be the most central and important aspect of redemption-in-actuality.
No offense to the sober and church-going;
But the "Turning from Sin" interpretation of repentance is, more often than not, overwhelmingly inadequate as representative of it's original meaning.
My personal opinion?
Repentance is far more of kin to, say, a formal apology to Hosana on High than the odd notional/episcopalian framing of 'turning from sin' being a kind of repentance-as-change.

Collectivism, for the sake of a kind of diluted and meaningless pragmatism, must of necessity make the authentic and time-honored traditions of the Bible as a very fierce and, to put it mildly, grave work into a kind of farce-in-itself.  For-the-sake-of-which the only lesson is one of learning to transform. Transfer into the jackass who repeats, by virtue of repetition, the repetitions of what was repeated - an holy 'friendlier and more compatible' interpretation of the original works of the Bible.

I mean, that really IS the main garment, soaked in urine which stinks to high heaven - and everyone smells it who sits calmly, patiently in the white walled room in which the garment lay:

That little sweet stench is not only the result of collectivism, but is part and parcel with the maneuverings and deceptions resulting from ideological rather than philosophical priority.

Ideology is the means of collectivism.

R.T. Stillwell of Domestic Democracy United