Commies ... and "Christian Nationalism"

Someone whom I have known for most of my life sent me a video clip of an advertisement for the leftist mockumentary "God and Country" with the assessment "ominous".  Below is my response; pray that it reaches his heart.
=====
I watched the clip, and my previous response was based on only what I heard the commie pretending to be a Christian say.  However, I had no idea what you thought is "ominous".  

But, after googling "God and Country", I think I understand -- you watch too much MSDNC, and they have you in a tizzy over something they are calling "Christian Nationalism" (*).  To put it another way, they have you in a tizzy over ... me.

If you'd care to *learn* something about what "Christian Nationalists" *really* say and aim for, might I suggest paying attention to Douglas Wilson.  He's a Calvinist and a pedobaptist, both of which I believe to be erroneous, but other than that, he's sound. 

"Blog & Mablog" is him reading the text of posts he writes for his "old-fashioned" written blog (also called "Blog and Mablog") -- YouTube search "Blog and Mablog"

"Cannon Press" is more a podcast, with guests and so forth -- Cannon Press (YouTube)

Also, Voddie Baucham is in the "Christian Nationalism" orbit -- Voddie Baucham SPEAKS UP About Trump, Wokeism, Growing Up Fatherless

(*) As best I understand it, it was the leftists/atheists who came up with the term "Christian Nationalism" -- both of which are boo-words to commies, and so doubly scary when paired -- and the people whom they were seeking to smear thereby decided that one name is as good as another, and so adopted it.

Oh SNAP! Yes, the Food Stamps program is corrupt

At the linked video timestamp, Matt Walsh is talking about the food stamp program, and specifically the recent Trump administration proposal to no longer allow junk food to be purchased with food stamps.  I'll bet you didn't know, Mr/Mrs Taxpayer, that *you* were being forced to pay for the junk food of "poor" people.

Here is a comment left below the video; it's utterly credible to me --
===

I’m a Veteran, disabled and a SNAP recipient. I clip cyber coupons and pay close attention to sales to stretch my SNAP allotments. I no longer have full use of my arms and hands and can’t stand up unassisted. I can purchase all of the candy, cakes and sodas as I desire but I can’t purchase a Rotisserie chicken because it’s cooked.
===

Here is another comment, and it accords with my experience delivering pizzas after I retired --

====

Matt, I do DoorDash on the side while I’m working towards my housing inspector license, and the overwhelming majority of the orders are coming in from housing projects and just the most dilapidated trailers in West Virginia that you can imagine. I decided to look it up today into my shock and horror found out that DoorDash does except snap and EBT cards as forms of payment. It’s not as if these people are ordering from the grocery store and having me deliver them a rotisserie chicken and bags of vegetables. I am delivering to them KFC or Pizza Hut and just about every type of crap food you can imagine. I feel more like a drug dealer than a food delivery driver.

====

And here is a personal anecdote from me --

As I may have mentioned a time or two, for about a year and a half (until I couldn't take any more of the Covid-19[84] bullshit) after I retired from IT, I took a low-paying job driving a wheel-chair van for a "medical transportation" company.  Most of the trips I made were to take very old, or very fat, wheel-chair bound people to their medical appointments.  

However, depending on which organization or program was paying for the service, some of the people were allowed two (or even more) non-medical trips per month.  So, I also frequently took people to church or to the grocery store.

Now, on some of those grocery store runs, one time for sure, after I had loaded the fellow and his purchase into the van, he called someone to *sell* that person the remainder of his food stamps.  I expect this happened at other times, but I directly overheard it that time.

Girlbossing the Airline Industry… Straight Into the Ground | Ep. 1540

Surrendering to Inflation (i.e "Rehome The Dollar")

According to the internet, US inflation since 1793 is such that the 1793 dollar is worth $31.88 in today's dollars. Or, put the other way, today's dollar is worth $0.031367 in 1793 dollars.

Important Message: Inflation is always and everywhere caused by governments.  The inexorable rise in prices for all goods and services does not cause inflation, but rather is the inescapable effect of inflation. It is the money supply that inflates (i.e. swells), not the prices.  

Governments cause inflation by creating money from nothing.  In prior ages, this was done by diluting the purity of the precious metals coinage, while insisting by deadly force that the populace treat the new coins as having the same monetary value as the old coins. In the modern world, this is done by printing more fiat notes ... or by flipping digital/virtual switches.

The reason that governments cause inflation is that they want to "live above their means" ... and because they control lethal force, they are able to do it. For a time (Hint: inflation eventually undermines, and then destroys, the governments causing it.)

(I know of only one historical exception to inflation being intentionally caused by government. And that is the 17th century inflation in Spain, and eventually all or Europe, caused by the massive and sudden influx of New World gold and silver into the European economy.)

You young'uns won't have experienced this, but at one time, our dimes, quarters and silver dollars were actually made of solid silver.  And, get this: our pennies were actually made of solid copper.  

Ah, the good old days! But, now to the point of this post.

It's in the news recently that the DOGE team are recommending cessation of minting pennies, as now it costs more than two cents to mint each cent.  This sort of recommendation is not new: it has periodically been floated for most of my adult life. The reason that the penny is no longer made of copper was to put this day off, to "kick the can down the road."

Because -- due to the nature of governments -- inflation is inexorable, it is inevitable that all US coinage will eventually be eliminated.  And, truth be understood, the world-wide push by the globalists to implement CBDC (Central Bank Digital Currency) is aimed at eliminating all physical money... and, importantly, at better controlling the tax milch-cows.

But, I have a radically different suggestion: rather than eliminating the penny (and eventually all the coinage), why not "rehome" the dollar?  Since our US currency is decimal, rather than surrendering to inflation in the typical manner, why not manage the surrender in the opposite direction, by shifting the decimal point?  That is, why not spend 2025 preparing for January 1, 2026 (*), at which time all physical dollar bills and digital dollars will be re-valued as $0.10 in "new" dollars?  The way I envision this, we'll "save the coinage" by maintaining the current nominal value for all then existing coins. 

Yes, this would mean that if someone happened to have coins with a nominal of $1000 lying around the house, those coins would then be worth $10,000 in terms of today's money. But, remember that we have already surrendered to inflation: trying to "solve" the problem is going to be messy, and is going to benefit some people more than others, no matter what we do.  The "typical" way of dealing with inflation always benefits the politically-connected, intentionally.  If my suggestion benefits anyone, it's unintentional/undirected, and is generally a relatively minor benefit ... and mostly will go to the non-rich for a change. 

By the way, Israel did something similar in 1986, but at the ratio of 1000:1, rather than 10:1 as I suggest.

(*) Or, for the symbolic value of it, and to allow more time to prepare, on July 4, 2026.

There Is No "THE Supreme Court"

Sean Davis is off to a good start ... but hasn't yet freed his mind of the judicial supremacy (*) lies we all were taught in civic class.

1) There is no such thing as "THE Supreme Court" --

The Constitution uses the adjectives "supreme" and "inferior"(Note: capitalization as per the Constitution) to distinguish the singular highest-level court from the multiplicity of lower-level courts which the Congress may establish from time to time;

1a) That is, what we mistakenly call "THE Supreme Court" is "supreme" only with respect to the lower/inferior courts;

2) Except for some explicitly enumerated sorts of cases reserved to the high court, the jurisdiction of *all* the federal courts, including the high court, can be expanded, or curtailed, as the Congress sees fit;

2a) Far from establishing "3 co-equal branches of government" (*), the Constitution *actually* establishes the federal courts as creatures of Congress.

(*) The "3 co-equal branches of government" claim is a lie invented by lawyers to disguise their judicial supremacy power-grab.

There is a Fourth Metaphysic

 It's amazing, or at least amusing, the lengths to which people will go to try to hide from God, to avoid admitting: "God is god, and I am not."

Quoting the beginning of the video: "If you look at the three main metaphysical option on the table today, all three of them have a problem. In two of them, that problem is insoluble; in one of them, you can solve it, if you understand time. ..."

So, it seems to me that *his* "solution" to the "hard problem of consciousness" is to assert, "I am God."

Yet, there is at least a fourth "main metaphysical option", which he leaves unmentioned and unexamined, and it doesn't have the problems he needs to solve: it is commonly called "theism", and it is fundamental to Christianity and Judaism. Also, it does not require us to contradict our own direct experience. Under "theism", the "fundamental mind" creates other, distinct minds. Thus, under "theism": you are you and not I; I am I and not you; and neither of us is God.

EDIT:

Understand, there is no such thing as 'consciousness' unless there is at least one actually existing entity which is conscious. That is, there is no such thing as free-floating 'consciousness'.

Moreover, the 'consciousness' which is the "hard problem of consciousness" is *human* consciousness, that is, personhood. Consider: a banana slug is 'conscious', but the consciousness of banana slugs doesn't even begin to explain the reality of persons.

Materialism, Panpsychism and Idealism ALL Have a Problem

A Counterfactual: US Citizenship, according to the Democrats --

An alternate history thought-experiment:

On December 8, 1941, the Empire of Japan invaded and occupied the US territory of Hawaii. During the following months, Japan stationed 100,000 soldiers and sailors in the islands, along with 5,000 Japanese civilian administrators.

At the time of the hard-fought US Liberation of Hawaii on July 4, 1944, there were living in Hawaii:
- 33,000 Japanese POWs;
- 4,000 Japanese civilian former administrators;

- 6,000 dependents of those civilian former administrators;

- including 1,000 who had been born in Hawaii.

According to the logic of the Democrats concerning the 14th Amendment, those 1000 Japanese children born in Hawaii are US citizens, and are not merely US citizens, but are indeed natural born US citizens, and thus eligible to be US President in about 35 years. And, moreover, they and their parents cannot be repatriated to Japan, For, after all, they were born in the de jure territory of the USA, irrespective of the illegality of their mothers being in US territory at the times of their births.

Obviously, this is absurd.

Likewise, the Democrats' assertion about "birthright citizenship" for "anchor babies" is absurd.