Solutions Blog

The Conundrum as a Tactic

July 12, 2015 Comments off

….TakeThe Paranoid QuizWhat are you afraid of?


Purpose of the Quiz: To convert as many Americans as possible to freepleism.

Assuming that you are already an established freeple, or at least a new convert, your first and continuing task is to recruit as many people as possible to read The Paranoid Quiz.

Initial Contact: If a person is already a freeple to some extent – great. If a person is a sheeple or a creeple – even better (probably the vast majority of your family, friends and social media acquaintances are sheeple to some extent). If you aren’t sure what they are – no big deal.

How to describe The Paranoid Quiz:

1) That you have found an interesting website that provides new insights into how American society works

2) That it turns out that American society has a built in trap that most people have fallen into without even realizing it

3) That The Paranoid Quiz reveals if the reader is one of these people who has fallen into this trap

4) That The Paranoid Quiz can lead a person out of this trap in less than an hour

However, if they are still resistant tell them that the quiz warns that some people might be too afraid to take the quiz. Be careful about imply that they are acting like a coward. The idea is not to make an enemy out of them – you want them to take the quiz.

Secondary Contact: Later, ask them if their scoff reflex allowed them to complete the quiz. Keep their paranoia and the person separate at first. If they did not complete the quiz tell them that you are sad to hear that societal conditioning has triumphed over them. Only if they become defensive can you then make it personal. Explain that by failing to complete the quiz that they are actually fearful of freedom – tragic. Now you can call them paranoid and a coward.

Social Media Contact: Link to The Paranoid Quiz. Link to the issue pages in the Quiz Hub as counterarguments in your discussions with freeple, sheeple and creeple in social media or media site comments. Tell them to take the quiz. Dare them to, if need be.


[This page is from The Paranoid Quiz website. To understand the context take the quiz.]
Advertisements

Easy to Prove the Administration Lied about Benghazi Attack

November 17, 2012 Comments off

Congressional committees and hearings are not necessary to prove without doubt that the administration deliberately lied when it attributed the Benghazi consulate attack solely to demonstrators. A simple Google search for September 11-12 brings up dozens of media reports indicating that at the very least an organized attack took advantage of a possible demonstration as cover (we now know there was no demonstration). Experts from around the world were quoted as insisting that the attack was organized, with many naming names. Furthermore, evidence of an organized attack is multitudinous in these reports. For the administration to have claimed it had no information that indicated that organized terrorists might have been involved is to assert that the administration doesn’t read the media. Not even the Drudge Report, apparently. At 7:00 AM ET on September 12 Drudge had a main headline and link to a Reuters report that contained:

~U.S. government officials said the Benghazi attack may have been planned in advance and there were indications that members of a militant faction calling itself Ansar al Sharia – which translates as Supporters of Islamic Law – may have been involved. … They also said some reporting from the region suggested that members of Al-Qaeda’s north Africa-based affiliate, known as Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, may have been involved.~

For the Obama administration to adamantly insist for weeks afterwards that the Benghazi consulate attack was solely the result of a spontaneous demonstration can only be a result of a deliberate plan of propaganda to lie to the American people. Obama played stupid and expected his sycophantic press to play stupid as well and cover for him. Of course, they did, but not until after they got their talking points from the administration, which was a couple of days late. By then they had already let the cat out of the bag…

[Comments can be made at a thread for this post at Free Republic]

Update: Analysis of social media in Libya finds no reference to anti-Islam film on day of attack

• • • • • • • • • • • •
Liberals Are Drowning & Dragging America Down With Them
Throw Them A Lifeline: Nuclear Counterarguments
• • • • • • • • • • • •

October Surprise: The Barack Obama Scoundrels List

October 27, 2012 Comments off

Creepy people buzz around Barack Obama like a dog who rolls in his own crap attracts flies.

This post catalogues the many scoundrels (200) that Barack Obama has associated with throughout his life and career. Behind only Ted Kennedy, Barack Obama is probably the single greatest example of liberal principle number five (from the Nuclear Counterarguments Essay Series: #2 Contemporary American Liberalism = Paranoid Delusion): A contemporary liberal’s honorable motives and noble fight against contemporary conservatism excuses all liberal failures and indiscretions.

The people and organizations that Barack Obama has palled around with paint a very ugly picture of dozens of Marxist/socialist/communist sympathizers, dozens of Islamic radicals and sympathizers, dozens of liberals who just don’t like America, dozens of anti-Semites, dozens of anti-white radicals, dozens of domestic terrorists and sympathizers, and dozens of liberals who just can’t seem to pay their taxes.

Most liberals are aware of a handful of the people on this list, and are willing to overlook them because of the above mentioned liberal principle number five. Hardcore liberals can probably scoff off the whole list and still sleep peacefully every night. However, perhaps soft liberals, moderates, independents and undecideds might still be convinced of Barack Obama’s icky odor if they are made aware of the extent of this list.

Every American voter should be aware of Barack Obama’s “flies”. Pass this list on to your social network contacts so everyone can know:

Read more…

This Employment Number Smells So Bad My Nose Hurts

October 5, 2012 Comments off

The Bureau of Labor Statistics released it employment numbers for September, 2012 today. And believe me, they really stink of political corruption!

Supposedly, the official unemployment rate conveniently dropped below the politically important threshold of 8% down to 7.8%. The “official” unemployment rate itself is already a bogus piece of manipulated crap because of the way it is calculated. In Guess Which Country Is Fiscally Conservative? I illustrate that if the Canadian unemployment rate calculation was used in the States the unemployment rate would be close to 11%. In #11 Austerity Versus Stimulus – What Is the History? I illustrate that if the unemployment rate was calculated today the way it was calculated for the Roaring Twenties and the Dirty Thirties, it would be over 14%!

Read more…

President Obama’s Hockey Stick Graph

September 21, 2012 Comments off

Flat-out: Empirical evidence illustrates that President Obama is undeserving of re-election.

What do you think? Does Barack Obama deserve to be re-elected? Not based on what I see. (The following information was mostly gleaned from the Nuclear Counterarguments 22-Essay Series.)

Obama was elected to steer the economy toward recovery and he has not done so. Instead of learning from history where the Roaring Twenties teach us that austerity brings about a quick, robust and lasting recovery, he instead has followed FDRHoover’s Dirty Thirties strategy of stimulus spending, with the same failed results of a malaise without foreseeable end. (See #11 Austerity Versus Stimulus – What Is the History? for a comparison between the Roaring Twenties and the Dirty Thirties.)

When Obama took over the presidency and immediately implemented his FDRHoover-style stimulus plan in February of 2009, there were a total of 132.8M (million) jobs in America. His Chair of Economic Advisers, Christina Romer projected that there would be 133.9M jobs by the fourth quarter of 2010 if his stimulus plan was not implemented (defined by him as a “second depression” – dealt with One Out of Four Ain’t Bad – for a Psychogump). But with the stimulus plan, she projected a total of 137.6M jobs by Q4 2010. See for yourself what happened:

Read more…

Guess Which Country Is Fiscally Conservative?

July 19, 2012 Comments off

Re: For the First Time, Canadians Now Richer Than Americans

Canada began turning fiscally conservative in the 1990s when the federal budget was first balanced by the Liberal Party. Since the Conservative Party has taken control of the government fiscal conservatism has been accelerated. Here are some lessons President Obama would do well to learn: Free Markets, Not Socialism, Has Enabled Canada To Surpass The U.S. In Wealth

Update Sept., 2012: I just heard the Prime Minister say something that I did not know. Apparently, the Canadian unemployment rate is closer to the American U6 than is the popular U3 used in the U.S. I did a search and found this: The gap between US and Canadian unemployment rates is bigger than it appears

Using the numbers from the right chart below, I calculated what the August rate for America would be if the Canadian method was used. The Canadian unemployment rate for August, 2012 was 7.3%. Using the Canadian measure, the American unemployment rate would currently be about 10.7%. So, in a direct comparison, President Obama’s fiscally liberal unemployment rate is 47% higher than Prime Minister Harper’s fiscally conservative rate!

This is confirmed by the first chart illustrating the stark difference of Total Employment between the two countries since 2006. Clearly, fiscal conservatism bests fiscal liberalism.

• • • • • • • • • • • •
Liberals Are Drowning & Dragging America Down With Them
Throw Them A Lifeline: Nuclear Counterarguments
• • • • • • • • • • • •

Better a Societal Outcast and Vote Democrat

July 15, 2012 Comments off

Re: The GOP’s crime against voters

Eugene Robinson     Washington Post

Mr. Robinson is upset that 758,939 registered Pennsylvania voters may be disenfranchised if they are required to supply photo ID to vote. There are a lot of other things these Pennsylvanians are probably disenfranchised from without photo ID:

~Taking the ACT/SAT exams for college; cashing a check; buying a gun; applying for a job; flying; getting a passport; getting married; seeing a doctor (The Laconia Clinic scans a photo ID); selling real estate; signing up for reward cards, e.g.,

Shaw’s; redeeming a large, winning lottery ticket; buying liquor at a restaurant (Meadowbrook requests a photo ID before serving alcohol); taking professional exams like CPA, law, etc.; buying a car; getting a hunting or fishing license; applying for food stamps or housing; applying for Social Security and Medicare.~ Letter Look where you need a photo ID

Mr. Robinson doesn’t seem to care a whit that these 758,939 Pennsylvanians appear to be complete outcasts from society. They could be the Beverley Hillbillies without varmint rifles or oil, but as long as they can be rounded up and bused in to vote Democrat, that’s all that matters. It seems to me the proper response would be to demand a way get these 758,939 Pennsylvanians legitimate photo ID so they do not remain societal pariahs living hand to mouth. I thought liberals supposedly cared about these sorts of things – I guess not…

I have been asked to present photo ID to vote here in Canada for some years, and I don’t recall any problems in the media about it.

Again, I have to ask why Mr Robinson is so callous about these people without IDs being so disenfranchised from society?

Update: Here are few more reasons a person requires a photo ID; opening a bank account and writing checks, buying medication at Walgreens, buying tobacco, renting an apartment. Voter ID: A Good Idea

Besides allowing a person to vote, having to show an ID protects that person’s vote as well – they don’t have to worry that someone may illegally vote in their name.

Update 2: Here’s some more things one needs an ID for: Driving, applying to school, store credit, a utilities account, outpatient testing, Medicaid, open a retirement account, vote in a union, donate blood, pawn shops, car insurance, train tickets, annual tickets for amusement parks, volunteering at a non-profit organization, library, and acquiring a professional licence. 71 % of Voters Favor Voter ID

Update 3: Here is some myth-busting about North Carolina’s Voter ID law: Daily Beast’s Bouie Repeats Faulty, Tired Talking Points About North Carolina’s Voter ID Law

Update 4: Oh, the irony: ID’s required to attend NAACP rally to protest voter ID requirements

Update 5: Democrats claim that there is no voter fraud. Again, North Carolina puts the lie to that claim. Over 35,000 cases of voter fraud have been discovered for the 2012 election. North Carolina answers Democrats’ question ‘What vote fraud?’ And Over 40,000 voters are registered in both Virginia and Maryland, group finds

Update 6: Voter Fraud: An Existential Threat to America

Update 7: 6.9 million multiple voters in 28 states, report finds

Update 8: Black voter turnout exceeds white voter turnout, even in states with strict ID laws, pundit claims

• • • • • • • • • • • •
Liberals Are Drowning & Dragging America Down With Them
Throw Them A Lifeline: Nuclear Counterarguments
• • • • • • • • • • • •

Liberal Double Standards Should be Perp Walked

July 8, 2012 Comments off

In  #1 Deprogramming Liberalism with Nuclear Counterarguments I illustrate the liberal double standards principle: Without irrational double standards contemporary liberalism cannot exist.

One of the illustrations is about the demands by liberals for President Bush and his administration to be held legally accountable for the Guantanamo detentions. I pointed out that liberals were outraged at Bush for detentions of enemy combatants without trials, but show no parallel outrage for President Obama’s assassinations without trials. Here we have a stark example of this principle.

In this video, after some wandering around in search of a thought, Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor and publisher of The Nation magazine finally gets around to calling for criminal trials against Bush administration officials: Katrina Vanden Heuvel On the Bush Administration

But then we have this column about President Obama’s “policy” of drone assassination: Obama’s ‘kill list’ is unchecked presidential power. While criticizing the “policy” there is nary a peep about criminal prosecutions against the administration. Again, the fourth principle of liberalism is: Without irrational double standards contemporary liberalism cannot exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • •
Liberals Are Drowning & Dragging America Down With Them
Throw Them A Lifeline: Nuclear Counterarguments
• • • • • • • • • • • •

The Liberal Double Standards Principle

June 22, 2012 Comments off

Re: Do Liberals Support Obama’s Kill List?

Ari Melber     Huffington Post

In #1 Deprogramming Liberalism with Nuclear Counterarguments I thoroughly deal with liberal principle number four: Without irrational double standards contemporary liberalism cannot exist. Surprise! I use the Guantanamo Bay detention facility, the alleged torture, and liberal demands for civilian trials of the detainees as some of my prime examples. Liberals were loud and outraged at President Bush, demanding that he be perp-walked straight to jail, of course, ignoring their own glaring double standards. The author of this column, obviously a liberal himself, couldn’t rise up to labeling the current liberal position on Obama’s kill list as a double standard, so I will. But I do give kudos to Mr. Melber for even approaching the subject in the first place. I just have a couple of questions for him: When will the liberal demonstrations begin to demand President Obama be charged with war crimes or crimes against humanity, and when does he expect the trial to begin? Oh – and can we expect a public perp-walk? Maybe Adidas still has a pair of their “shackle shoes” available…

Update: If Dick Cheney is Darth Vader, does this make Barack Obama, Emperor Palpatine? Dick Cheney’s revenge

• • • • • • • • • • • •
Liberals Are Drowning & Dragging America Down With Them
Throw Them A Lifeline: Nuclear Counterarguments
• • • • • • • • • • • •

Some Liberals Actually Think “a record comparable to Franklin

June 15, 2012 Comments off

Category: Liberal Column Dissections

Some Liberals Actually Think “a record comparable to Franklin Roosevelt’s” Is a Good Thing – Sheesh!

Liberal Column Dissections

Liberal Column Dissections

Re:  Could this time have been different?

Ezra Klein     Washington Post columnist

Ezra Klein: Some partisans offer a simple explanation for the depth and severity of the recession: It’s the stimulus’s fault. If we had done nothing, they say, unemployment would never have reached 10 percent.

This is the wrong way to look at it. The unemployment rate numbers are so skewed as to be virtually worthless. For instance, if all of the people that have given up searching for jobs were included in today’s unemployment rate it would be over 11%: Townhall Total employment is what really tells the tale.

Ezra Klein: A fairer assessment of the stimulus is that it did much more than its detractors admit, but much less than its advocates promised.

Obama’s stimulus package was worse than a monumental failure. Obama told us: “One year later it is largely thanks to the Recovery Act that a second depression is no longer a possibility.” Except that the “second depression” in American history started in 1815 – and no, Obama’s stimulus didn’t prevent it. Christina Romer projected that without her and Obama’s stimulus, total employment would go from 132.8M in the first quarter of 2009 to 133.9M in the fourth quarter of 2010, an increase of 1.1M jobs – Obama’s “second depression”. Alternatively, with the stimulus, she projected fourth quarter of 2010 employment of 137.6M, a gain of 4.8M jobs. Guess what the actual total was for the fourth quarter of 2010? 130.2M – a LOSS of 2.6M jobs! That’s a net difference of 7.4M jobs between Romer’s projection and the actual result. How Mr. Klein can get that the stimulus “did much more than its detractors admit” is beyond my understanding.

Read more…

Roundup of Liberal Apocalypses

June 13, 2012 Comments off

The Nuclear Counterarguments Essay Series painstakingly exposes and catalogues many different kinds of liberal paranoia. #20 Global Warming – Just Another Liberal Apocalypse Scenario (yawn) lists the large phantoms of the last fifty years that liberals have invented to scare society into making changes toward their utopian goals of safe collectivism:

Liberals are also terrified of all that threatens progress toward utopia in regard to health and the environment. This has led to many panicked responses to imaginary cataclysms and apocalypses, costing in both, vast amounts of wasted money and even human lives. [*422syw9] [123]

• 1960s – Early envirotheist, Rachel Carson wrote a book named Silent Spring claiming that the very effective pesticide, DDT was a cause of human cancer and bird population depletion. Neither turned out to be true, but her radical stance led to a ban on the use of DDT as a preventive measure against deadly mosquito-born Malaria which has resulted in literally tens of millions of needless human deaths throughout the world. Regardless, Carson is still upheld by liberals as a pioneering heroine of the environmental movement. [42lu2jy] [124]

Read more…

Broken Links

June 13, 2012 Comments off

Broken links are a constant threat on the internet, whether as references for this blog or in the accompanying  #1 Deprogramming Liberalism with Nuclear Counterarguments.

If you come across a link that takes you to the website, but not the desired page, try to copy and paste the title text of the link into their site search engine. The story is probably still there, but under a different address.

If that doesn’t work (I find site search engines often do not work well), try pasting the link text into Google and add a site identifier. For this you need the root web address for the site. So to find this page type in the search form: >site:deprogrammingliberalism.com Broken Links<.

If the original site does not have the page anymore, try a search without the site identifier, but add quotation marks: >“Broken Links”<, substituting the page title for broken links. Often other sites, especially blogs will have copies of other’s pages. If there is quoted text from the broken link, place that in quote marks and perform a search.

If those ideas are unsuccessful, you can see if Google has a cache of the page. Copy the full address of the link and add it to the Google search form with a cache identifier: >cache:https://deprogrammingliberalism.com/2011/11/06/broken-links/&lt;.

The Internet Archive is a last resort, but it will not have any pages less than six months old. Copy and paste the whole address into the Take Me Back form box and press enter. If it has been archived it will give you a list of links to the page based on the dates archived. (Videos and graphics are not included in the archive, however.)

If you do find a broken link in the books or elsewhere in the D.L. website, a short email notification would be appreciated.

• • • • • • • • • • • •
Liberals Are Drowning & Dragging America Down With Them
Throw Them A Lifeline: Nuclear Counterarguments
• • • • • • • • • • • •