Obama and Iran

Baffling. Obama refuses to stand up for the people of Iran against a tyrannical theocracy early in his Presidency, even as the people’s blood flowed in the streets. Now, in all practical reality, Obama is allowing this same tyranny to achieve its goal of acquiring the capacity to produce its own nuclear weapons. This as the Obama Presidency is by law quickly coming to a close. But then again, Obama has been making up the law as he goes. Do we seriously have to contemplate whether he will leave office or not? (It is a theme I have expounded upon in many of my previous posts since Obama first took office)

I have suggested in the past that a nuclear Iran could potentially be an ally in Obama’s intention to establish a life long reign. All revolutionaries have ruled for life. But has Obama inadvertently destroyed any role the tyrannical theocracy of Iran may play in creating the world according to Obama, with his speech to the Iranian people?

I hope, I believe that the people of Iran understand what Obama is incapable of understanding, or intentional hiding his understanding of; that Iran will annihilate Israel if they acquire nuclear weapons. What will the world do afterward? Will Iran attack Europe and beyond? These are valid questions. Iran has repeatedly made it clear they will wipe Israel from the face of the earth. They declare ‘death to America’ every day. They rule their people with an iron fist. They control terror networks throughout the world.

I believe the people of Iran understand what will happen to them when their country uses nuclear weapons against another sovereign nation, particularly Israel or any western nation. I believe they understand that their lives will come to an end, if not literally, in all practical terms. Nuclear retaliation, even if it is limited to military targets will devastate the entire nation of Iran.

And who ultimately makes up the military of Iran but its people? Who would be the first to face such hellish retaliation, if nuclear weapons are deployed, if not the military? Could even Obama protect them then?

When Obama spoke to the Iranian people he proclaimed to them the absoluteness of a coming nuclear war. Where Obama failed to support, or to give any encouragement to, the Iranian uprising early in his presidency, here he has provided the ultimate motivator for the people of Iran to overthrow their tyrannical theocracy. This as the Obama presidency is winding down. (if it is winding down)

The majority of the people of this world are incapable of denying the advantageous lives that they are living in this age. This is due to the great advancements of the last two-hundred years; or roughly since the United States was founded. In the last thirty years the whole world, with its diversity of cultures, has been brought closer together than anyone ever thought possible, through international commerce and travel, and possibly more so through television and the Internet. It has empowered the people of this world to believe in something better. As a global culture begins to emerge, that belief in something better implicitly includes something better for the entire world, not simply a single people or nation. If this were not true the entire Islamic world would be at war with the west at this point in history.

Look at China. China is a growing military threat to the United States. They are building up their military and propagating a military bravado and hawkish spirit amongst their people. Throughout history nations have vilified their enemies; war has been a natural course of events for all peoples and nations. Yet, reports indicate that the young recruits to the Chinese military are soft, pampered children from one child families who worry more about losing their girl friends while they are serving than fighting. Even the softest minds, perhaps especially the softest minds, are capable of being worked up into a nationalistic furor. But these same young people, soft minded or not, understand the advantages of learning English. They know that the boom in the Chinese economy is dependent upon an International system of trade. They have been exposed to the various cultures of the world through television and/or the Internet, and most of the educated among them have foreign friends and acquaintances. They travel the world.

Observing the world in this light, one must hope that the Iranian people, already having shown their willingness to rise up, will bring an end to this lunacy being orchestrated by the Obama administration. An increasing number of middle eastern nations share the interests of the people of Iran, that Iran not acquire nuclear weapons, as does Europe. Under Obama the United States is failing the world once again. Still, if his speech to the people of Iran is concluded to be the major factor in an overthrow of the Iranian Theocracy it may become his greatest legacy.

I would hope someone would ask Obama this question; “What will happen to you Mr. President if Iran does use nuclear weapons, nuclear weapons you allowed them to acquire, in an offensive action?” and, “What do you believe your legacy will be then?”

Will we look at Obama as another Chamberlain who is only remembered for playing the fool before Adolf Hitler. Or will the long litany of Obama’s lawless and incompetent deeds, including the growth of ISIS, and the Benghazi cover up, be recited throughout history as a lesson for the ages. Will the Obama presidency become a major volume in; “The Decline and Fall of the United States.”

What if Iran, or any terror organization, nukes a city in the United States? “Will there be anyone you can trust Obama? Will you continue to evade prosecution simply because your black?” Obama will only be able to trust the most ruthless radicals.

Common men like myself, who can understand what is at stake, can only speak out, appeal to prudence and common sense. We can vote. We can offer prayers before God.

Pray for Iran. Pray for the Christians under the threat of slaughter at the hands of Islamo-Facists. Pray for peace.

As The Internet Burns

Listening to the latest political debate over the Internet, and Net Neutrality, one question floats to the surface. What are all these supposedly unjustly denied youths doing with their lives, if buffering, suggesting low download speeds (at least too low for their needs), should bother them?

Take a walk. Share a good meal with friends. Build a piece of furniture. Join a sports league; baseball, softball, or even bowling. Have a significant conversation with your wife (but young people are not getting married). Spend some time with your children (young adults see children as a burden, that’s why abortion is so important). Do something to improve your life. If it includes studying over the Internet, I don’t believe there is any service provider with insufficient bandwidth to provide you with the appropriate text or video. The computer can be a great tool and the internet a great resource. So what are these naïve self consumed youth doing with their time? Playing games? Watching Netflix? Do they know how to use a compass when their smart phone (not a recommended brain substitute) has GPS?

Too many live life through the screen of a smart phone. They take videos and pictures and post them instantly via Instagram, Facebook or whatever app is the latest fad. Does it make you feel important, young people, to have your life on virtual parade? Here’s a tip. No one cares. If they do, those people are not a productive part of your life. You’re going nowhere.

Is it any wonder that the millennials are clueless to the dangers of government oppression, the dangers government control of the Internet suggests; dangers to our freedom of speech, and simply to the freedom to live the lives we choose. Of course we could do without the Internet. Man has lived and died, failed and prospered, lived free and as a slave for thousands of years without the Internet. The vast majority of these past individuals are remembered and honored only through the value they held to their family and close community; which points to what is truly central and defining in one’s life. Family, it is where values are learned and your personal value created. We can’t all be Thomas Edison’s, if anyone knows who he is anymore. A person’s value does not come from an Internet presence and certainly cannot be dictated by government.

The FCC was initially formed to keep private sector radio bands from encroaching on military bands. It wasn’t long before it began monitoring and controlling content. The government further attempted to dictate content with the Fairness Doctrine; it mandated equal time for contradictory views. The doctrine failed. Newspapers, hitting financial hard times, and politically aligned with the left, now call for government buy outs, handing over control and content, and protest not a peep when government observers take up posts in their offices.

What does equal time mean? Every view needs an equal voice. Every company an equal opportunity. Sounds good on the surface but, what if one, speaking of the public, judges certain views to be immoral? Certain concepts to be poorly formulated? What If one believes a view or business model holds no merit, that the results and consequences of such a view or concept is detrimental to the well being of society? What if one view or product is simply more popular than another? If morality, results, consequences, merit or popularity, credibility, competence, knowledge or ability, if it all doesn’t matter, one needs to ask why. But more importantly one needs to ask where it will all end.

Why? If all views are held as equally valuable, then no single view holds any value. If all views are held as equal, then anyone who opposes any particular view, or believes one view better than another, is turned into the enemy. Every tyranny needs an enemy to distract the attentions of its people from their plight; an enemy like big oil, the tea party, conservatives, just plain republicans or Internet service providers.

And if the public cannot make determinations on the validity or value, the truth behind any view or financial or business venture than who can? That would be government. Because we, the public, are simply too incapable, incompetent and ignorant to make such determinations. Remember it’s only because government exists that businesses can succeed; providing the roads and infrastructure. It is not poor morals that turn people into mass murdering shooters, it is guns. If the government doesn’t give you your pot, then you’ll just break the law to get it. Indulge yourself in any carnal desires possible. The government will be behind you.

This is the accepted viewpoint of government, that the public is incapable of knowing what’s right, and that only government can be the determinant of the correct view; that only government can solve our problems. “Wait!”, you all knowing techno savvy individuals are screaming, “You said government says there is no correct view, that we are all the same.” Yes, and if you like your doctor you can keep him (or her). Your insurance costs will drop on average $2,500 per family under Obamacare, and the economy is improving; just don’t look at the economic figures after we correct them some months after they come out. “What difference does it make?”

Maybe, if you believe yourself wiser than most, you should begin to listen to those who knew that you wouldn’t be able to keep your doctor, that your costs would go up and not down, that their will be death panels in Obamacare and the government will eventually takeover healthcare completely. Maybe you should believe those same prophetic voices who now claim the government will control content and traffic on the Internet. Believe them when they claim that the government will censor and/or requiring licensing and oversight of the members of sites such as Blogger. Believe those who know that your costs for Internet access will rise and that the government alone will ultimately decide what the next great idea will be.

I will tell you where this control grab will start. It will start with pornography. Why hasn’t the private sector been able to stop this evil that victimizes women and children? They don’t care. They don’t have the capability. But government does. Even if the government accomplishes nothing and makes the problem worse, just like with Obamacare, the government will still have succeeded where the private sector failed.

And where will it all end? Where indeed. Everything is now run through the internet; commerce, education, mail, news, advertising, music, movies and TV, finance (you don’t even need a living broker) and publishing are all facilitated by the Internet. Ultimately, after monitoring and dictating our daily transaction and consumption habits, the government will end its power grab with the figurative burning of books.

Anyone can publish a book via the Internet. I have published two. I will publish two more this summer. The argument will be that what is being published, without oversight, is harmful, dangerous fanaticism. racist, bigoted, anti-Islamic, against scientific consensus and hate speech. The argument will follow, and this can be applied to any action on the Internet, that in the past their were gatekeepers of the public good; in the case of books, publishers.

Not just anyone could publish a book before the Internet. Authors were vetted by the publishing process in the past. Responsible editors and publishers verified the educational pedigree of an author. They were there to confirm the validity and merit of their work. Now, anyone can publish without even an editor. It doesn’t matter if they don’t know how to write or even spell. How can such a person be allowed to publish and unwittingly rob the public of their money? Who will solve this great injustice? What more qualified body, capable of judging what is good and proper, is there than the government; a vast improvement over the old system that relied on a variety of private sector publishing houses.

The Internet has changed everything. Everything has been changed by the Internet. If you give government control over it, the government controls everything. The books will burn along with everything else. But heah! As long as nothing interferes with your Netfix…

Casinos, Arenas and Streetcars, Oh My!

I have a minority worldview that doesn’t conform to most religions. There is only one Creator and that is God. Satan cannot create anything and can only pervert what God has created in order to, first of all claim mankind as his, and then to ultimately destroy mankind completely. In that light gaming, wagering, a bit of bravado and putting one’s money where one’s mouth is, in an ideal world is not unheard of, in my view. Yet we can point to gambling as a great playground for Satan and his destructive objectives. There are moral considerations to be considered whenever a casino is proposed.

Here in Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker has rejected a proposed Menomonee Indian Casino in Kenosha. He is facing severe ridicule from local media, most of which would be considered conservative. I find these local talking heads extremely short sighted. The issue is much more complicated than it appears.

First of all, local talk shows have ridiculed Indian tribes for not supporting each other, sharing their casino winnings with less fortunate tribes. They point out the stingy nature with which the tribes support their local communities. The local Potawatomi tribe promised to support the larger community when they were given approval for their casino, yet most agree that they don’t give nearly as much as was expected, or as much as they suggest in their advertising that they are giving to worthy causes.

The Potawatomi stopped their payments to Wisconsin, payments that they believe would not be required if another casino were approved, even before the Kenosha casino decision came down. This corresponds to Scott Walker’s main reason for rejecting the Kenosha Casino; that it would be a fiscal burden on the tax payers. The governor is being harshly ridiculed for this reasoning, in light of the Menomonee and their partner, the Seminoles, promising to make up for any losses and even to pay for a new Arena for the Milwaukee Bucks, that would ensure the NBA stays in Milwaukee.

Well, is it a straight out open deal that the Kenosha casino prospective operators are promising or one yet to be worked out later (after approval) with potential strings and loopholes? The Potawatomi held back their payments in violation of the compact they have with Wisconsin. Further, the Potawatomi have promised to sue Wisconsin if the governor approves the Kenosha casino. Everyone says they could never win. Yet Scott Walker is public enemy number one in the eyes of government bureaucracy. I believe Wisconsin could easily lose the law suit, simply as a political attack against Scott Walker in his presidential aspirations. All the conservative talking heads rant that the law doesn’t matter anymore. They rant about how politically motivated liberal judges, ignoring established law, attack the Walker administration’s every proposal. They point to the wild and irrational opposition Scott Walker has had to endure. Would the bureau of Indian Affairs be any different?

Why do you, you local talking heads, see the casino as a giant economic boom, and not a Walker presidency that you may be jeopardizing by your irrational attacks? Can you not distinguish between a casino economy, and a booming private economy of manufacture and public service? How can you not see the potential, after all you’ve seen and reported on, for a trap, to not only make Scott Walker look like a flip-flopper but an incompetent? Have you been privy to the year of negotiations that preceded Scott Walker’s decision? Why are you being so blind?

You talking heads, is Scott Walker to take the stand that you appear to take, but are now ignoring; that the tribes are unreliable and that there is a political conspiracy to discredit him? Is that what you want him to say as you continually demand an explanation for his rejection of the proposed casino?

Consider the consolidation of political power, in the form of dollars, in regard to casinos. Everyone admits that a casino transfers entertainment dollars away from more traditional  entertainment venues. Those would be private sector, often small business, venues. To which party do the casino dollars generally go? To which party would small business dollars go? Are not Indian casinos dependent on government support, and in turn would they not be looking out for the interest of government, not the people?

In regards to the Arena, is not the NBA, and all professional sports leagues indebted to government on an ever growing scale, as arena deals are bought and sold with the public dollar? And what is the trend for arenas? Why does the NBA demand a new arena? Much like a casino, NBA franchises are consolidating all the entertainment venues, such as dining, under their personal umbrella. Again, taking economy away from independent small business owners and transferring it to a consortium the government can more easily manipulate.

The local streetcar project here in Milwaukee is another example of the consolidation of money under government, not to mention an assault on modes of personal transportation. Its unbelievable costs will deny the public of financial independence through an oppressive tax burden. Excessive engineering contracts are not required to repair a typical city street. Streetcar and other such projects, with their contracts running now into the billions, grow engineering and construction trades that then become dependent upon the government teat to survive in their bloated state. Their political contributions correspondingly support the party that puts forth the most succulent prospects. Better than a Union and on the surface more respectable than a phony green enterprise.

When no one can afford a car, when everyone must buy from shops along the streetcar route, shops government approved and subsidized, and we all gather at the casino, as our only source of entertainment, to watch the elite throw their money around, because we can’t afford tickets to the game and it’s not available on local broadcast television but only on paid TV, will we all be fighting for the approval of just one more casino?

An exaggeration? Or a trend? Is Scott Walker making a mistake or exercising extraordinary political understanding and prowess?

A Christmas Tale

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to any and all finding this blog. Yes, we are in the midst of the Christmas Season. Contemplate the Twelve Days and purge yourself of the binge materialism that led up to the Day of the Savior’s birth.

Earlier this December, taking a time of reflection after finally getting out our Christmas cards and putting up the tree, I was sitting in our family room listening to Christmas music when suddenly their was a loud pounding on our front door. I jumped up, looked out the window but saw no delivery truck. I ran downstairs, as now our dog was barking, and went to the front door.

Opening the door I found a man, shorter than myself, his clothes a bit worn more than most. In a humble voice he asked me, “Do you need a lawn mower? You can have it for $10.”

I looked and behind him on the sidewalk was an old lawn mower, “No.” I answered with a smile.

“It’s only $10. Do you have $10?”

“No.” I smiled. A few more similar exchanges and he walked away.

I headed back towards my chair and then thought ‘This is Christmas.’ I grabbed some Christmas cookies from the kitchen table, wrapped them in a napkin and headed out the front door. The man was already several houses down, the lawn mower in tow. I ran down the sidewalk and approaching the man asked, “Do you want some Christmas cookies?” as I handed him the cookies.

He didn’t answer me but continued to ask if I had $10 for the lawn mower. He eventually took the cookies and I wished him a Merry Christmas. Walking back to my house, our neighbor was on his porch speaking on his phone, most likely to the police.

Yes, most certainly the lawn mower was stolen. Absolutely certain was the fact that no police officer was going to reply to such a low priority call. Our Milwaukee Police officers are continually processing crime scenes of a more serious nature, including murder and robbery on a daily basis. They generally do not have time to patrol. Then I thought, ‘Maybe we could hire an officer like nightclubs and other places do to patrol our neighborhood; it’s small and enclosed.’ I was quickly hit with the reality. ‘Wait a minute,’ I thought, ‘That’s what we pay taxes for.’ Silly me.

But a neighborhood like ours gets little to no service from the police unless someone sets up a drug house. They are overwhelmed by the crime of the inner-city which is made up mostly of black people. But I am not intending to now write about runaway crime, or the recent police shootings that inflame a vocal few. I am writing about our Mayor Barrett’s trolley that he is planning to push through for our downtown.

I have described this trolley project on another blog of mine as robbery; Mayor Barrett and those who promote this trolley as thieves.

First of all, I would hope that my tale has demonstrated that the tax money our government takes is not theirs and we give it to them to provide services to the public to promote the common good. It is a contract that has long been broken by insider dealings.

Is it wrong for me to display all those involved in this trolley fiasco as thieves? Is it wrong to judge? I mean, even tens of millions in un-admitted cost per year would cost a citizen like myself only about $20. What does it matter if ultimately no one rides the trolley? It will stimulate tens of millions in investment in our downtown, is one justification. But that is tens of millions from my pocket and those of my fellow citizens. Redevelopment via tax dollars is what people such as Mayor Barrett call stimulus.

It has come to the point where that $20 per year does make a difference, though we may not consciously notice it. It is just one of many such irrational and unfounded $20 that are being piled upon the tax payer. The city’s most urgent and obvious needs suggest that that $20 go to hiring more police officers and in saving our failing schools, not to a trolley.

What of the business owners along the route that will be irreversibly disrupted if not destroyed. What of the dreams and hopes, desires and goals of all those, in those businesses; the cost of education and medical leaving no room for a head of family to be even temporarily unemployed. As their dreams are crushed by this useless project how does that differ from the feeling one may have when coming home to find that one’s house has been robbed? The financial set back and a violation of trust are real in either case. These business owners believed in and invested in our once great city and its’ downtown. Must the business owners grovel before government just to get by until the project is finished after years, only to find in the future that their customers, if they ever choose to come back, have no more parking?

The planners have yet to explain how the trolley will operate in the Winter snows. I have suggested to others that they would have to heat the trolley way, using the steam tunnels which run under many of our streets. Several articles on Milwaukee’s steam tunnels have come up on the Internet over the last few years. Of course heating exterior pavement has been illegal in Wisconsin since the energy crisis of the 1970’s.

The financial folly of the trolley or any other rail system has been well documented, though ignored by the elite class. Some want to package such rail systems as a quality of life issue worthy of the cost. I’m not sure how an empty train running in a circle, taking away parking, unable to negotiate a situation such as a fire hose stretched across its’ tracks or the trolley getting into an accident, shutting the whole system down, can be considered a quality of life improvement. It makes you wonder why cities got rid of their trolleys or street cars so many decades ago.

Support of the trolley is an immoral stand. It may be understandable to see a politician without morals, but what of all the professionals involved in these projects? Modern profession codes of ethics require only a technical proficiency. I am sure any company in the arena of civil engineering will due a highly professional and extremely competent job at present. But why do they agree to do the work in the first place? One may find companies who refuse to do such work on local rail because they believe, as I and others do, in its folly and financial unsustainability. It is not weakness to hold oneself morally responsible for how the publics money is spent. One would think it would be an easy decision to decline profit from the public till when one knows the public is against the project in question. I would not be surprised if many such companies exist; companies that would have rejected the work on the Milwaukee trolley. I would also not be surprised if no such companies exist.

This loss of a social moral compass, the inability for our leaders and professionals to hold themselves responsible for the consequences of their actions, to live lives of virtue, puts our future in jeopardy. The consequences of moral ambiguity and avarice will eventually influence the professions themselves. It is all a question of judgment, or rather its absence. Every decision in life is a judgment call.

Emperor Constantine coalesced the Roman Empire, with the city of Rome still considered the center of power, for the final time through great military victories against his adversaries. Many monuments, triumphal arches and such, were built. The state of the arts in the Roman Empire had degraded to such a degree that many of the monuments to Constantine were adorned with statuary scavenged from monuments to the Emperor Trajan and others.

Not to say that we should be living in the past, just that we shouldn’t repeat it..

Which Came First

Which came first; the turkey or the egg? Sorry …chicken. An age old question. What ever the answer, I would hope that this coming Thanksgiving we will all share a common gratitude that our nation is not being ravaged by the Ebola virus. Even if we are continually dogged with the virus, Nigeria had only a 40% death rate compared with up to 90% where medical care is less consistent or overburdened. Another question, far easier to answer and instructive to answering the first is: Which came first, godless socialism or complete and utter incompetence fueled by envy and an absolute intolerance for all those who think differently?

We as a people are flummoxed at the actions, or rather inactions, of the Obama administration in protecting this nation. When states show proper prudence in instigating forced quarantines, the Obama administration opposes them. Then there are those, as if standing in wait, ready to sue these states for their reckless acts of blatant responsibility in their efforts to protect their citizens.

As WHO (World Health Organization) and our own CDC ( Center for Disease Control) show themselves not up to the task, one must ask; why? Because healthcare has been politicized in pure socialist fashion. We are not allowed to protest the incompetence, in regards to protecting the public from Ebola. Who you know and what you believe is what matters, not what you do, not the results.

The BBC and others have already labeled such speculation as Fear-bola, and have further compared Ebola with the highly politicized AIDS. Yes, Ebola is a virus like AIDS and hopefully that is the end to the comparison. We now have laws, and for good reason, that make it a crime to intentionally spread AIDS. Of course I believe murder would be an obvious charge for spreading Ebola, considering it could possibly kill within weeks, rather than in decades as in the case of AIDS. And if we are to be so concerned about those with AIDS, whom with medications may lead a very long and otherwise healthy life, what is the survival rate for AIDS patients who contract Ebola?

So what do these socialist elites believe?

They believe we, in the first world, must be exposed to this horrid disease if a cure is to be found. We are uncaring, racist and too ignorant to matter if we think otherwise. This despite the fact that it appears there is a cure, just not enough of it. A cure that has been worked on for more than ten years here in the United States. There is also news of several long standing vaccine projects.

They are all also advocates of manmade global warming, along with their apostate media, despite the fact that the southern ice cap is thicker and more expansive now than anytime in known history. This radical environmental movement is why Obama still has not, and never will, approved the Keystone Pipeline.

What else do they believe? For over forty years, under the guise of environmentalism and love of planet, they have believed that the resources of the earth, most notably our food, will run out. They are actively promoting, along with the devoted media, laboratory produced beef and the consumption of insects as a necessity to feed the future world. Many of those who believe in such impending disaster believe the earth is capable of existing in harmony with a human population of only 250 million; we are soon to be thirty times that number. Others believe man should be driven into extinction. They call themselves the self-extinction movement, but, …why are they still around?

Let me put it this way. If I were writing a novel (I actually am, but not about the threat of Ebola) about a conspiracy to spread Ebola across the country I could not come up with a better plot line than what I have and am seeing play out. An infected individual jumping on an airliner, traveling up and down the country. Another individual goes on a cruise, and what says viral outbreak better then a cruise ship. (Yes the nurse tested negative for the virus, thank God). Then an infected doctor travels the New York subways and then goes to a bowling alley the next state over, supposedly the day before he became symptomatic.

So which came first; the ideology or envious incompetence? Like the chicken and the egg, the one does not exist without the other. A chicken would not be a chicken without the egg. A concept the godless hate; they relish in ambiguity. The reality is there is no haven for incompetence without a godless socialism.

Let’s take Stalin as an example. He held power over a vast communist regime; a godless socialism for those uneducated in the Cold War. The Ukrainians were an independent strong minded people with vast holdings of private land in opposition to the Soviet communist ideal of the commune. The ideology dictated that private ownership be annihilated. So Stalin sent in his henchmen. They took all the food they could find as Winter was approaching. The result was millions starved to death. But did Stalin really want to kill all those people? Has history got him wrong? Maybe it was just an example of envious incompetence. He wasn’t really a mass murderer. It wasn’t his fault. He was just sure those selfish uncaring Ukrainians were hording all the food and wealth for themselves. (the Ukraine was known as the bread basket of Europe) They were the evil 1%’ers who needed to be punished by confiscating their excessive lavish overabundance. All with the best intentions of course.

Or is it all part of the package? The godless ideology, the envious incompetence, along with the hate, a blatant disregard for life and murderous intent.