Memo to Kevin Drennan: If you want to make laws… run and get elected.

By Rubashov

Dr. Arnold Hutschnecker was born in 1898, served in the Austro-Hungarian Army during the Great War, and afterwards studied medicine, specializing in psychiatry. He practiced in Berlin and was an early, vocal critic of National Socialism. He got out, just in time, and made it to the United States in 1938, where he practiced internal medicine and psychiatry.

Dr. Hutschnecker advised both Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. Richard Nixon became his patient. Dr. Hutschnecker was an advocate of modern daycare for preschool children, advising President Nixon of its importance especially to children in lower socio-economic communities.

Dr. Hutschnecker wrote numerous professional articles and several books, many on the subject of power and the attractions of power. In 1974, he wrote The Drive for Power and became, for a time, a national figure for suggesting that politicians be required to take a psychiatric examination before running for office.

Dr. Hutschnecker warned against giving political power to those who are gratified through exercising power over others. He wrote of the almost sexual interplay between power and control on the one hand and fear and submission on the other. The act of breaking someone’s will, forcing someone to do something that runs counter to conscience, has some of the elements of rape in it.

Of course, the democratic process depends on consent. Instead of fear, agreement is reached. Submission is done willingly. More human but perhaps less gratifying for some.

Which brings us to Speaker Craig Coughlin’s behavior at the State House on Thursday. Would you want to turn him down for a date?

Late Friday afternoon, Kevin Drennan published a column in the New Jersey Globe that chastised the objects of Speaker Coughlin's demands. In his column, Drennan argues that he should get to make laws that elected legislators – the elected representatives of the people – must obey. Oh, and we mean obey… at the point of a gun.

Kevin Drennan is one of the eight unelected patronage jobholders on the State Capitol Joint Management Commission. In fact, he’s the Commission’s chairman.

Drennan isn’t a doctor – although he did lobby in Trenton for the health care industry – and neither are any of the other Commission members. Nevertheless, a few weeks back, they decided to restrict who could enter the State House – the nexus of the Legislative branch of what is still, on paper, a representative democracy.

Those restricted included the elected representatives of the people sent there by a vote of the people. Yep, no kidding, a direct challenge to democracy itself.

They claimed they did so in response to a pandemic that most people have come to accept and to live with. How many masks do you see at the supermarket – aside from the employees who are paid to wear them? People shake hands, they hug, they kiss. Perhaps they don’t where Kevin Drennan comes from, but we know that place and we’re pretty sure they do.

Those of us who can remember when the concept of nuclear war seemed real enough to send school children scurrying under their desks on regular exercises know that you cannot use fear to hold power over people forever. People get bored. Hey Kevin, there are more nukes around today than back then. More countries have them. Bigger ones and less secure, but people gave up being afraid, because being afraid is a shit way to go through life. Kevin, it’s time to crawl out from under that desk.

But is this all really a response to a pandemic? Is that the actual reason – or simply the given one.

There’s another, more logical reason, and it’s about power. The power to break the wills of all those suburban women – from Kennedy liberals to Trumpy populists – who showed up and invaded the State House in response to bill S-2173 during the 2018-19 legislative session. This was legislation to end religious exemptions for mandatory immunization. Yes Kevin, we remember. You called them “uncivil” too. Funny, you using that word so much in your column.

We remember the corruption done on behalf of the health care and pharmaceutical industries that want to make their products mandatory and their profits permanent. The attempts to fix the vote to get the bill passed. Playing musical chairs with elected legislators on key committees. Punishing those who refused to submit. And the threat to “go to war” with all those suburban women. It resulted in dozens of formal ethics complaints.

Well, on Thursday Speaker Coughlin took it a step further. He used men with guns. Was this what was meant by “go to war”?

It does seem like some could use the counsel of a Dr. Arnold Hutschnecker. Unfortunately, he’s been gone twenty years, but you can borrow his book if you like…

"It is safer for a politician to go to a whore house than to see a psychiatrist."
Dr. Arnold Hutschnecker

“In a time of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”

George Orwell

The Reparations Racket is an exercise in vote-buying

Most of those alive today are descendants of slaves. Wikipedia defines slavery as follows:

Slavery is any system in which principles of property law are applied to people, allowing individuals to own, buy and sell other individuals, as a de jure form of property. A slave is unable to withdraw unilaterally from such an arrangement and works without remuneration. Many scholars now use the term chattel slavery to refer to this specific sense of legalized, de jure slavery. In a broader sense, however, the word slavery may also refer to any situation in which an individual is de facto forced to work against their own will. Scholars also use the more generic terms such as unfree labour or forced labour to refer to such situations. However, and especially under slavery in broader senses of the word, slaves may have some rights and protections according to laws or customs.

Slavery existed in many cultures, dating back to early human civilizations. A person could become enslaved from the time of their birth, capture, or purchase.

Slavery was legal in most societies at some time in the past, but is now outlawed in all recognized countries. The last country to officially abolish slavery was Mauritania in 1981. Nevertheless, there are an estimated 40.3 million people worldwide subject to some form of modern slavery. The most common form of modern slave trade is commonly referred to as human trafficking. In other areas, slavery (or unfree labour) continues through practices such as debt bondage, the most widespread form of slavery today, serfdom, domestic servants kept in captivity, certain adoptions in which children are forced to work as slaves, child soldiers, and forced marriage.

Race doesn’t enter in to it, as all manner of human beings, all colors and creeds, have enslaved their fellow man since the beginning of time. If it is, as some suggest, our original sin (and it is high on the list of sins) then it is a sin shared by all mankind, one that in our humility we must all account for.

The Bible tells us that the Israelites often found themselves enslaved as a people – by the Egyptians, and later, by the Romans. Slavery existed in the Americas at the time of its first contact with Europe. At the start of the American Republic, there were two African-based slave trades. One, out of sub-Saharan Africa, provided human beings to slaveholders in the United States and European colonies in America. The other, based in North Africa, brought European slaves and others to Islamic markets. The United States fought two wars to end the latter (1801-05 and 1815) and a civil war (1861-65) to end the former.

Politically, the Democrat Party was the institutional face of the slavery in America. You need only read the Democrat Party platforms prior to the Civil War to recognize this. Long after the Democrats were forced to give up on slavery, they continued to commemorate their slave-holding heritage. Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Bernie Sanders… they all have attended Jefferson-Jackson Day dinners and have, by doing so, honored those two slave-owning Democrats.

Slavery in America ended with the advent of the Republican Party. Abraham Lincoln, the first Republican President, was elected in 1860 with 39.8% of the vote. Lincoln was sworn-in on March 4, 1861. The American Civil War began a month later, on April 12, 1861. By then seven Southern states had seceded from the Union.

At the 1860 census, it was recorded that those in slavery made up 13 percent of the United States’ population. Slavery existed in 14 of the then 33 states (by the end of the war there would be 36 states). 3.9 million people were enslaved, but only 8 percent of American families were slaveholders. Slaveholders did not constitute a majority in any of those 14 states in which slavery was tolerated. But though a minority, slaveholders were an exceedingly rich minority.

All the anti-slavery states (as well as some of the slaveholding ones) produced soldiers and sailors for the holy cause of abolition. New Jersey furnished 76,814 soldiers and sailors – 1,185 of whom were African-American. This was a smaller contribution than neighboring states like Pennsylvania (337,936) and New York (448,850). It was claimed that New Jersey was less enthusiastic than more Republican states. In 1864, in the middle of the war, New Jersey would field the Democrat candidate against Lincoln, who won the state’s 7 electoral votes and a 53% to 47% popular vote win.

Nevertheless, 5,754 New Jersey soldiers/sailors gave their lives in that war to end slavery. Again, neighboring states gave more to the cause. Pennsylvania lost 33,183 of its sons. New York lost 46,534. Regiments were segregated then, so we know that most of those who gave their lives were classified as “white”. But it should be noted that they fought alongside comrades who were classified as “colored” – 36,847 of whom died. In all 178,975 “colored” soldiers and sailors served in the war.

Some Democrats have come up with the ridiculous fable wherein they argue that the parties “switched” ideologies. No, you will not find support for slavery in any Republican Party platform. Unfortunately, the Democrats cannot make that claim. Slavery is the sin of their party. Burdened by such a sin, it is natural that the Democrats wish to deflect the blame for it onto a wider population. And so they have come up with the idea of “reparations”.

What the Democrats propose is a tax (it’s always about a tax with them, isn’t it) on some people – regardless of whether or not their ancestors had slaves, or fought and died to end slavery, or even were in the United States before 1865. Then the Democrats propose that they make a gift of this money to a different group of people.

This satisfies the Democrats’ need to publicly proclaim their “goodness”. It also absolves their party of its unique blame by vastly expanding that blame to others, regardless of whether they have any specific guilt at all or of the sacrifices made by their ancestors. And finally, the Democrats calculate that by taking from Peter and giving it to Paul, Peter will be silenced into submission and Paul will reward the Democrats with his vote. Yes, the Democrats are without shame.

Later today, you can catch this shameless performance at the Assembly Appropriations Committee, Committee Room 11, Fourth Floor, State House Annex, Trenton, New Jersey. The performance is for the benefit of the Democrat Party of Phil Murphy, Steve Sweeney, and Craig Coughlin.

Stay tuned…

There’s an accused rapist prowling the State House in Trenton. Why are the Democrats protecting him?

A couple days ago, the story broke.  It had been suppressed up until then.  A woman on the campaign of Democrat Governor Phil Murphy accused a senior staffer of rape.  He got a cushy job in the Democrat administration.  She didn’t get justice.  Here is the story from the Star-Ledger…

The woman who accused a senior staffer in Gov. Phil Murphy's administration of sexually assaulting her while he worked for Murphy's campaign last year is a state official who says she is now telling her story because she has "received no justice." 

Katie Brennan, who later volunteered for the campaign and is now the chief of staff at the New Jersey Housing and Mortgage Finance Agency, detailed her allegations against Albert J. Alvarez publicly for the first time in a story published by the Wall Street Journal on Sunday afternoon.  

After the report was published Sunday afternoon, Brennan said in a statement: "On April 8th, 2017, Al Alvarez raped me. On April 9th, 2017 I learned that the system is broken." 

"I have pursued every form of justice available," Brennan, 31, of Jersey City, continued. "But it has become clear that this system is not built for survivors."

Brennan said she "decided to come forward because I know that Al Alvarez, and all perpetrators, must be held accountable, must never rape again, and the justice system needs a complete change with regard to sexual violence." 

"It is clear that leadership from the Murphy administration is needed to create meaningful policy change on several levels to make sure future victims do not have to endure what I have," she said.

Multiple media outlets -- including NJ Advance Media -- published reports this week citing anonymous sources saying Alvarez faced allegations of sexual assault while he worked as director of Latin and Muslim outreach for Murphy's campaign in April 2017. Alvarez, 44, of Wood-Ridge, was never charged with a crime. 

The victim detailed to the newspaper how both the Governor and Democrat Party let her down… 

https://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2018/10/woman_accusing_murphy_staffer_of_sexual_assault_te.html 

We recall last year how the entire Democrat Party – leadership and minions – piled on to berate various Republicans for making jokes about the Women’s March organization (which turned out to be led by a racist Jihadist) or about Democrat candidates who happened to be women.  Jokes.  This is an accusation of rape we’re talking about.  There was plenty of outcry then.  Why is it muted now? 

Where is Jay Lassiter on this?  Why are his panties not in a twist?  There are dozens and dozens of Democrats who have remained silent.  You know who you are.  We’re going to start naming the names of the “Pro-Rape” wing of the NJ Democrats.

And then there’s Bob Menendez… doesn’t anybody in the Democrat Party care about the FBI’s findings that he was using underaged prostitutes in the Caribbean?  Don’t they care that he trafficked young women for his old-assed buddy to play with?  These are crimes against nature we’re talking about.  But the Democrats just wank on by and blithely ignore it all.

Next time they open their fat mouth we’ll have plenty to fill it with.

Memo to the Dems: Think... before using the "H" word.

You hear the word "hate" a lot these days.  It's the go-to jibe that the corporate Democrats and virtue-signaling liberals use to tar anyone who disagrees with them.  Expect to hear a lot of it at those upcoming "Women's Marches" planned for New Jersey -- and at the State House later this week -- and from the Murphy Administration (and its new First Lady).

The use of the word "hate" has a history -- having been used again and again by various governments and establishment elements in order to dehumanize opponents... in preparation for killing them.  A case in point is imperial Britain's reaction to the unofficial "Christmas truce" of 1914, early in the Great War (WWI). 

Large numbers of British soldiers freely fraternized with their German counterparts and it horrified the London establishment.  In some sectors, the unofficial "truce" lasted beyond the New Year.   The sentiment behind the truce was well expressed by the poet David Jones, who dedicated his book, In Parenthesis, in part "to the enemy front-fighters who shared our pains against whom we found ourselves by misadventure."  And by the French sobriquet:  "Nos amis les ennemis." (Our friends the enemy.)

The recognition that the other side are people too is never welcome for those who place ideology or cause before humanity.  As the well-worn pages of Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals attest, you must strip the humanity from your opponent and make him or her a caricature -- the better to hate them.  Of course, you do not admit to what you are doing but rather, as Josef Goebbels counseled, accuse them of hatred and absolve your actions as simply a defense against hate.

And so the British government got together the comics, the cartoonists, the writers of skits -- and asked them, for King & Country -- to cooperate by churning out propaganda that accused the other side of being "haters".  And not just the soldiers, but their wives and children and parents too.  The better to starve them when the time came.  "Hate" is a magic word.  It absolves the doer of all the hateful things one does against the "haters".  

Perhaps the Democrats, the Women's Marchers, and all the holier-than-thou people who readily absolve themselves of any human responsibility by assuring themselves that those they hate are "haters" unworthy of human consideration, can find it within themselves to start thinking of those who disagree with them as fellow human beings, who just happen to disagree with them.  Make it your New Year's resolution.  Try.

Beck & Doherty join left wingers to oppose tax cut for retirees

At yesterday's back to back press conferences at the State House in Trenton, GOP Senators Jennifer Beck and Mike Doherty joined with Democrat Senator Ray "Lord of Ass" Lesniak and Democrat Assemblyman John Wisniewski in opposing a plan that would give retirees an average $1,200 tax cut and phase out that destroyer of small businesses and family farms, the estate tax, while preventing an increase in property taxes to pay for local road and bridge repairs and maintenance. 

Beck and Doherty have their own plan, also supported by GOP Senator Gerald Cardinale, that freezes property tax relief to local governments for seven years and borrows heavily to run the state deeper into debt.  The Beck plan makes no tax cuts -- something the state teachers' union agrees with -- and leaves New Jersey's tax structure the worst in the region for retirees and the worst in the nation to grow a business and create jobs.

By refusing to fund roads and bridges through a petroleum-based user tax, the Beck plan gives out-of-state drivers a free ride while pushing the costs of maintenance and repair onto property taxpayers and future generations.  Groups  like AFP, which is funded by the petroleum industry, support Beck and Doherty, as do liberal organizations like the New Jersey Education Association and the Sierra Club.

When it comes to opposing the phase out of the Estate Tax, Liberal Assemblyman Wisniewski and talk show host Bill Spadea are both adamantly opposed.  They part company on a user tax on gasoline, with Wisniewski in support of an increase in the current tax, whereas Spadea would rather see no tax on gasoline at all and instead a substantial property tax increase to pay for roads and bridges.

All this is bound to have ramifications for the 2017 elections -- with the primaries now less than a year away.   How would retired voters behave if individual legislators voted against their $1,200 tax cut?  What would the effect be if it failed to become law and the state's retirees saw their $1,200 tax cut taken away?

In Jennifer Beck's District 11, 48 percent of all registered Republicans are aged 60 or over.  Just 20 percent are under age 45.  66 percent of Republican super voters (3 of 4 or above) are aged 60 or over.

42 percent of all registered Republicans in Mike Doherty's District 23 are aged 60 or over.  Just 21 percent are under age 45.  58 percent of Republican super voters (3 of 4 or above) are aged 60 or over.

In Senator Cardinale's District 39, 47 percent of all registered Republicans are aged 60 or over.  Just 18 percent are under age 45.  64 percent of Republican super voters (3 of 4 or above) are aged 60 or over.

Can these legislators afford to vote against a tax cut for retirees?

Don't let the Democrats "vote rig" redistricting

Led by Senate President Steve Sweeney (D-Norcross) the Democrats have proposed a constitutional amendment that will create legislative districts designed on purpose to elect members of a certain party, using a formula that will permanently elect more Democrats than Republicans.  Wow.  It isn't bad enough that in our so-called "democracy" we only get two choices (often bad and worse), now they are taking that away from most of us.  If we happen to live in all but a handful of districts we will be left with just one choice... only Democrat or only Republican.

Sweeney and the Democrats are proposing a model called "one party democracy" which, when you think about it, isn't really democracy at all.  It's an oligarchy that allows the bosses of political machines to do away with competitive elections in the vast majority of districts -- assigning them instead to one party or the other.

How is that fair?  Last time we checked, most New Jersey voters refused to belong to a political party.  If the bosses were going to be fair, then half of the legislative districts should be "swing" districts, belonging to no party.

But the idea of this seat or that "belonging" to some political party and the cretins who run it is revolting.  The process of choosing our elected representatives is the only thing that allows us to boast that we "live in a democracy!"  Hell, it's the reason we puff out our chests and chant "USA, USA" as we send sons and, increasingly, daughters to kill those who will not become "democratic" (of course, the elections we set up there have a dozen or more choices, while we -- back in the motherland -- are stuck at a 19th Century... two).

Sweeney and the bosses like to point to election results.  The idea that -- when given just two choices -- so many are forced to vote one way or the other.  What they ignore (and know only too well) is that they have made it so money controls the outcomes of elections and that they operate the conduits (political machines) to get the money from the bribe giver (sorry, "access" seeker) to the candidate or incumbent.  Third parties and independents are too idealistic to even understand what is taking place.  They don't stand a chance and won't until they can organize themselves along the lines of a criminal enterprise.  Only then will they be able to compete in the "democratic" process.

On Thursday, a committee dominated by those who would benefit from "one party democracy" will be meeting in Trenton to go through the motions of listening to "the people" who vote for them.  They are not to be confused with "the people" who actually put them in office by limiting the choices voters are given.  We urge you to attend and testify.  Let them know that you are on to them.  Nothing wipes the smile off a con's face faster.

Thursday, January 7, 2016

10 AM

Senate State Government, Wagering, Tourism & Historic Preservation

Committee Room 7, 2nd floor

State House Annex

SCR 188

Legislative Reapportionment Commission