A leader or a leader of a collective group with a thinking process similar to that of Neville Chamberlain who stated "We have achieved peace for our time." Unfortunately he did not, as the guns erupted again across Europe 1 September 1939. In clnclusion, a very dangerous and delusionary mindset.
The declaration of the current House Speaker that we can simply leave Iraq quickly and En Masse without paying for it down the road (a more massive war at a later date) is evidence that there is a serious issue regarding a Chamberlain Mentality.
by Ironbrand January 27, 2007
Background:
Despite the overall physical condition of Terry Schiavo, Randall Terry pro-life decided to stick his foot in the matter and screamed to the press how Terry was being murdered by the State. Even though the now politicized matter was punted to the judiciary, the damage had already been done; this bi-partisan slimy football will figure in the elections of '06 and '08. Therefore, the definition follows
Any attempt to subvert and negate base spousal rights through whatever means available, whether they are political or religion based, to further your own agenda, without regard to the person or persons so affected or the existence under which they presently dwell.
Insistence of accepting only the facts of a situation that fit your paradigm, ignoring any anomalies that may impugn the aforementioned so as to further the above.
Despite the overall physical condition of Terry Schiavo, Randall Terry pro-life decided to stick his foot in the matter and screamed to the press how Terry was being murdered by the State. Even though the now politicized matter was punted to the judiciary, the damage had already been done; this bi-partisan slimy football will figure in the elections of '06 and '08. Therefore, the definition follows
Any attempt to subvert and negate base spousal rights through whatever means available, whether they are political or religion based, to further your own agenda, without regard to the person or persons so affected or the existence under which they presently dwell.
Insistence of accepting only the facts of a situation that fit your paradigm, ignoring any anomalies that may impugn the aforementioned so as to further the above.
Senator, the 23 strokes have left the patient brain dead. What shall we do?
Find a way to schiavo them.......and make sure you can blame someone else....it will make for good press coverage so we can get more free name recognition for the next election!
Find a way to schiavo them.......and make sure you can blame someone else....it will make for good press coverage so we can get more free name recognition for the next election!
by IronBrand April 04, 2005
"In geo-politics, there are no real friends or enemies, only friendly enemies or hostile friends" - Unknown -
The very dynamic theory of politics not between people or peoples of a region, but of the regions themselves. They can be as relatively simple as the 50 States of the USA and the Federal Government of that same entity to the highly complicated, such as the oil-producing Gulf States or the former USSR's constituent countries. Geo-Political relationships can also range from the fully justified to what would appear to be morally repugnant, but the actions themselves are purely neutral; the results of the actions are what should be subject to judgement calls.
The very dynamic theory of politics not between people or peoples of a region, but of the regions themselves. They can be as relatively simple as the 50 States of the USA and the Federal Government of that same entity to the highly complicated, such as the oil-producing Gulf States or the former USSR's constituent countries. Geo-Political relationships can also range from the fully justified to what would appear to be morally repugnant, but the actions themselves are purely neutral; the results of the actions are what should be subject to judgement calls.
Geo-Politics is in a constant state of flux depending on a lot of factors, from who holds the power to who has the resources to support an action. Some noted examples:
The USA allying with the USSR in WW II ( Germany was at the time a far bigger menace. Needless to say, the USSR's ideology would be eternally at conflict with ours.)
The Cold War that followed WW II was classic Geo-Politics at its best. Due to MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction) ideology, there was no safe way the US and USSR could directly confront each other. So came the period of Tinpot Dictators supported by both sides and at least two major proxy wars ( Korea & Vietnam). The support to these oft times vicious and repressive regimes was concerned with controlling as much of the world as possible versus tending to the individuals needs in those countries.
With the fall of the Shah and the ascendancy of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, Iran posed a serious threat to Gulf stability. Though at no time would Saddam have been considered a friend, his military could serve to defuse the potential Iranian flashpoint. As such he was aided in his war with Iran (1981-1988). The two countries laid waste to each other, leaving the rest of the gulf in relative peace.
One of the most important geo-political happening in the present day is once again the Gulf states. By no means should the Shiekhs' of theose countries be called our friends; Islamic Shari'a law is in conflict with much of what the US Republic holds dear, and there are factions within those countries that would like to see the USA destoyed. But as long as they are in power though, they represent a stable supplier of a needed world economic commodity (Oil). As long as this is a needed commodity, do not expect too much change from that region. Iran also is once more a potential flashpoint in the region, nuclear ambitions aside.
Israel is not necessarily our friend either, though at least society-wise Christianity sprang from Judaism and politics-wise a Parliament ( Knesset) is closer to our Congress then Shari'a law. Even though that is the case, Israel still has its own agenda ( A safe haven for those of Hebraic descent), and at times they do not always work in the best interest of the USA. They have been overly heavy-handed at times, even if they also have made attempts to settle the mater using detente.
A full discourse on this topic would take up one book if not several; this is perhaps a basic definition of the term to perhaps invoke more independent research from the reader.
The USA allying with the USSR in WW II ( Germany was at the time a far bigger menace. Needless to say, the USSR's ideology would be eternally at conflict with ours.)
The Cold War that followed WW II was classic Geo-Politics at its best. Due to MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction) ideology, there was no safe way the US and USSR could directly confront each other. So came the period of Tinpot Dictators supported by both sides and at least two major proxy wars ( Korea & Vietnam). The support to these oft times vicious and repressive regimes was concerned with controlling as much of the world as possible versus tending to the individuals needs in those countries.
With the fall of the Shah and the ascendancy of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, Iran posed a serious threat to Gulf stability. Though at no time would Saddam have been considered a friend, his military could serve to defuse the potential Iranian flashpoint. As such he was aided in his war with Iran (1981-1988). The two countries laid waste to each other, leaving the rest of the gulf in relative peace.
One of the most important geo-political happening in the present day is once again the Gulf states. By no means should the Shiekhs' of theose countries be called our friends; Islamic Shari'a law is in conflict with much of what the US Republic holds dear, and there are factions within those countries that would like to see the USA destoyed. But as long as they are in power though, they represent a stable supplier of a needed world economic commodity (Oil). As long as this is a needed commodity, do not expect too much change from that region. Iran also is once more a potential flashpoint in the region, nuclear ambitions aside.
Israel is not necessarily our friend either, though at least society-wise Christianity sprang from Judaism and politics-wise a Parliament ( Knesset) is closer to our Congress then Shari'a law. Even though that is the case, Israel still has its own agenda ( A safe haven for those of Hebraic descent), and at times they do not always work in the best interest of the USA. They have been overly heavy-handed at times, even if they also have made attempts to settle the mater using detente.
A full discourse on this topic would take up one book if not several; this is perhaps a basic definition of the term to perhaps invoke more independent research from the reader.
by Ironbrand January 27, 2007
The opposite of the Illuminati, who take pride in their high level of knowledge and learning. An Illiterati takes pride in the fact that they are ignorant and refuse to learn (adjust their paradigm)often to the severe detriment of those around them.
Many examples abound, from the liberal screaming out News Media sound Bites to the clergy who says trust their judgment while molestation lawsuits rain upon them.
by Ironbrand April 24, 2005
In the political realm, an aspect of a candidate that will cost them votes no matter how they spin the situation. This is factually based on the Election of 1960 where John F. Kennedys's religion cost him votes. A woman running for president would have such a factor attached.
John F. Kennedy was a practicing Catholic and the first such Catholic running for president. Due to this fact of his religion, it cost him votes in the election. A number of Nixon votes were for the most part Anti-Kennedy, not Pro-Nixon. Since that time, such an unavoidable factor against a candidate was referred to as a Kennedy Factor.
by Ironbrand January 21, 2007
by Ironbrand August 06, 2006
A person that utilizes at most a microscopic portion of their brain when addressing issues, far less than even the average human being; this condition is pre-dominant in recent college graduates as well as Congress
by IronBrand April 04, 2005