The all-Ted, all the time coverage is becoming sickening. Edward "Ted" Kennedy's death is a sad time for his friends and family. It is not a tragedy as he lived to age 77, slightly past average life expectancy.
The over-the-top Big Media coverage has passed disgraceful and is heading full steam for macabre. From listening to the dim-witted news readers, it would seem no American would possess a band-aid, a loaf or bread, or have a government school to send their children to without the incredible legislative talents of Ted Kennedy. He has single-handedly fed children, cured their chicken pox and taught them to read "My Two Daddies."
Bill Bennett said something to the effect of "I agree you should not speak ill of the dead, but you should not lie about them either." We are hearing what a wonderful statesman Kennedy was. We are told that he was a tough partisan, but never mean-spirited or vicious. Sorry, but tell that to Robert Bork. Tell that to Samuel Alito. Kennedy's most significant legacy is his role in assassinating the characters of good Conservative judges because of his radical Leftist ideology. Kennedy was the key player in turning any judicial nomination into a full-throttle attack on individuals who want to uphold the law rather than legislate from the bench. Sickening.
Kennedy was in the middle of the constant personal attacks on George W. Bush. He, like most of his party, was never satisfied to express a dissenting policy opinion. Teddy could never resist the urge to impugn the motives or the humanity of his political opponents. Honestly, I don't give a fig if he told jokes and yukked it up with Republicans in the cloak room. In order to advance his political ideology, he was willing to say and do anything.
Kennedy's hyper-partisanship was fully confirmed after the fall of the Soviet Union. It was discovered that Ted Kennedy negotiated with Soviet officials in an attempt to undermine President Ronald Reagan's Cold War policy and hopefully facilitate a Democrat victory in the 1984 election. In other words, Ted Kennedy was such a "great Patriot" that he tried to undermine his own country's foreign policy with its biggest enemy. This sort of behavior doesn't deserve medals. If anything, it deserves a rope (or whatever punishment traitors get these days).
Now, the Big Media jackals and soulless Democrat politicians are attempting to push their beloved nationalized health care scheme through in memory of Teddy. His dying wish was to force socialized medicine on all Americans and, by golly, it would be an insult to deny a dead man's desire. Can they be more cynical and opportunistic?
Last week, as Kennedy begged for a change in Massachusetts' laws for replacing a Senator, I predicted the behavior that would follow. Democrats and Big Media have been ghoulish in their naked attempts to turn the tide of the nationalized health care debate by attaching Kennedy's name to the bill. Republicans have bent over backwards to ignore Kennedy's history as a mean-spirited and dishonest partisan who consistently put party ahead of the Constitution. I fully expect that sleazy political hacks will turn a memorial service into an anti-Conservative hatefest a la the Paul Wellstone Memorial Service in 2002. Democrats behaved so contemptibly that Jesse Ventura was so disgusted he had to walk out.
Ted Kennedy is dead. Hopefully, he was right with God and is taking his place in heaven. However, he was who he was. Lying about his political behavior and his political tactics only cheapens his memory. Big Media and Leftists Democrats need to dial back and show a little class. Of course, that may be akin to asking a turtle to fly.
Showing posts with label liberals. Show all posts
Showing posts with label liberals. Show all posts
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Friday, August 21, 2009
Ted Kennedy Wants To Change Election Laws...Again
It is certainly sad that Massachusetts Senator Edward "Ted" Kennedy seems to be failing fast in his fight against cancer. All signs point to a deteriorating physical condition. However, Kennedy found the strength to do what he does best one last time: cloak a self-serving, hyper-partisan demand in a shroud of sacrifice and service. Kennedy has asked the Massachusetts legislature to change the procedure for selecting replacement upon his death. Interestingly, the current state law concerning the replacement of a U.S. Senator was demanded by Senator Kennedy when he thought the state's junior senator, John Kerry, might become President in 2004.
Big Media swooned at word of Kennedy's "dying request." In their eyes, he is making one last push to ensure passage of the health care for all people he has pined for during his entire Senate career. Who can possibly reject the dying request of a self-less public servant?
In fact, this is typical Kennedy and Democrat hypocrisy. The rules do not apply to them. In 2004, they sought to change the law to keep a Republican governor from replacing Senator Lurch. Now, the governor is a Democrat so they want him to name a quick replacement. If course, this essentially summarizes his career. He was not old enough to replace brother John in 1961, so a Kennedy family sycophant agreed to hold the seat for two years and not run for re-election to clear the way for little Teddy, who had no accomplishments but the right name. Less than a decade later, he found that manslaughter laws do not apply to a rich and powerful Senator from the Camelot family. This set up a pattern that continues with his arrogant plea.
Tragedy does not faze Democrats. This isn't about Kennedy or his deadly disease. It is about partisan politics. When Kennedy does pass, I expect that Republicans will bend over backwards to be complimentary to a man who has worked hard to change America from a land of liberty to one of mass dependence. However, I have little doubt that the Paul Wellstone memorial service and hatefest will be re-enacted by the lunatic Left. If you don't remember that detestable gathering of psychotic loons, it was so vile that Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura walked out. If an event is too tasteless for Jesse Ventura, sleaze has been taken to historic levels.
Senator Ted Kennedy, who is gravely ill with brain cancer, has sent a
letter to Massachusetts lawmakers requesting a change in the state law that determines how his Senate seat would be filled if it became vacant before his
eighth full term ends in 2012. Current law mandates that a special election be held at least 145 days after the seat becomes available. Mr. Kennedy is concerned that such a delay could leave his fellow Democrats in the Senate one vote short of a filibuster-proof majority for months while a special election takes place.
"I therefore am writing to urge you to work together to amend the law through the normal legislative process to provide for a temporary gubernatorial appointment until the special election occurs," writes the Senator.
What Mr. Kennedy doesn't volunteer is that he orchestrated the 2004 succession law revision that now requires a special election, and for similarly partisan reasons. John Kerry, the other Senator from the state, was running for President in 2004, and Mr. Kennedy wanted the law changed so the Republican Governor at the time, Mitt Romney, could not name Mr. Kerry's replacement. "Prodded by a personal appeal from Senator Edward M. Kennedy," reported the Boston Globe in 2004, "Democratic legislative leaders have agreed to take up a stalled bill creating a special election process to replace U.S. Senator John F.Kerry if he wins the presidency." Now that the state has a Democratic Governor, Mr. Kennedy wants to revert to gubernatorial appointments.
Big Media swooned at word of Kennedy's "dying request." In their eyes, he is making one last push to ensure passage of the health care for all people he has pined for during his entire Senate career. Who can possibly reject the dying request of a self-less public servant?
In fact, this is typical Kennedy and Democrat hypocrisy. The rules do not apply to them. In 2004, they sought to change the law to keep a Republican governor from replacing Senator Lurch. Now, the governor is a Democrat so they want him to name a quick replacement. If course, this essentially summarizes his career. He was not old enough to replace brother John in 1961, so a Kennedy family sycophant agreed to hold the seat for two years and not run for re-election to clear the way for little Teddy, who had no accomplishments but the right name. Less than a decade later, he found that manslaughter laws do not apply to a rich and powerful Senator from the Camelot family. This set up a pattern that continues with his arrogant plea.
Tragedy does not faze Democrats. This isn't about Kennedy or his deadly disease. It is about partisan politics. When Kennedy does pass, I expect that Republicans will bend over backwards to be complimentary to a man who has worked hard to change America from a land of liberty to one of mass dependence. However, I have little doubt that the Paul Wellstone memorial service and hatefest will be re-enacted by the lunatic Left. If you don't remember that detestable gathering of psychotic loons, it was so vile that Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura walked out. If an event is too tasteless for Jesse Ventura, sleaze has been taken to historic levels.
Friday, August 14, 2009
Camille Paglia Smacks Obama and Leftist Thugs With A Reality Check
The modern liberal has become a hyper-partisan animal that is largely devoid of any capacity for rational discussion. Camille Paglia is an exception. If I sat down with Ms. Paglia, I have a feeling we would not find a lot of common ground on most issues. However, she has the capacity to admonish thuggish Progressives when they cross the line. This week, she wrote a great piece admonishing Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama and his gang of thieves for their tactics in the health care debate.
Paglia remains an Obama fan, but she had some strong words for the administration's behavior in the current debate over nationalized health care:
Paglia went on to blast Obama's "spy on your neighbor" email address and to endorse Sarah Palin's concern about "death panels"...
Paglia showed a deeper understanding of the practical problems with the various versions of ObamaCare floating around Capitol Hill than the President, Nancy Pelosi or any of the feckless Congressman bumbling through town hall meetings across the country.
The blind trust in government displayed by so many people is the scariest part of the current discussion. Public opinion is definitely against the bills currently being debated, but there are still 30-40% of Americans who are willing to sign off on this turdburger, no questions asked. Obama and Democrat congressmen do not want to discuss specifics. They want the 85% of Americans who are happy with their health care to believe the rest of the population is facing death and pestilence at the hands of an unfeeling system. America isn't buying it.
Paglia remains an Obama fan, but she had some strong words for the administration's behavior in the current debate over nationalized health care:
But who would have thought that the sober, deliberative Barack Obama would have nothing to propose but vague and slippery promises -- or that he would so
easily cede the leadership clout of the executive branch to a chaotic, rapacious, solipsistic Congress? House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, whom I used to admire for her smooth aplomb under pressure, has clearly gone off the deep end with her bizarre rants about legitimate town-hall protests by American citizens. She is doing grievous damage to the party and should immediately step down.
There is plenty of blame to go around. Obama's aggressive endorsement of a healthcare plan that does not even exist yet, except in five competing, fluctuating drafts, makes Washington seem like Cloud Cuckoo Land. The president is promoting the most colossal, brazen bait-and-switch operation since the Bush administration snookered the country into invading Iraq with apocalyptic visions of mushroom clouds over American cities.
You can keep your doctor; you can keep your insurance, if you're happy with it, Obama keeps assuring us in soothing, lullaby tones. Oh, really? And what if my doctor is not the one appointed by the new government medical boards for ruling on my access to tests and specialists? And what if my insurance company goes belly up because of undercutting by its government-bankrolled competitor? Face it: Virtually all nationalized health systems, neither nourished nor updated by profit-driven private investment, eventually lead to rationing.
I just don't get it. Why the insane rush to pass a bill, any bill, in three weeks? And why such an abject failure by the Obama administration to present the issues to the public in a rational, detailed, informational way? The U.S. is gigantic; many of our states are bigger than whole European nations. The bureaucracy required to institute and manage a nationalized health system here would be Byzantine beyond belief and would vampirically absorb whatever savings Obama thinks could be made. And the transition period would be a nightmare of red tape and mammoth screw-ups, which we can ill afford with a faltering economy.
As with the massive boondoggle of the stimulus package, which Obama foolishly let Congress turn into a pork rut, too much has been attempted all at once; focused, targeted initiatives would, instead, have won wide public support. How is it possible that Democrats, through their own clumsiness and arrogance, have sabotaged healthcare reform yet again? Blaming obstructionist Republicans is nonsensical, because Democrats control the White House and both Houses of Congress. It isn't conservative rumors or lies that are stopping healthcare legislation; it's the justifiable alarm of an electorate that has been cut out of the loop and is watching its representatives construct a tangled labyrinth for others but not for themselves. No, the airheads of Congress will keep their own plush healthcare plan -- it's the rest of us guinea pigs who will be thrown to the wolves...
Paglia went on to blast Obama's "spy on your neighbor" email address and to endorse Sarah Palin's concern about "death panels"...
But somehow liberals have drifted into a strange servility toward big government, which they revere as a godlike foster father-mother who can dispense all bounty and magically heal all ills. The ethical collapse of the left was nowhere more evident than in the near total silence of liberal media and Web sites at the Obama administration's outrageous solicitation to private citizens to report unacceptable "casual conversations" to the White House. If Republicans had done this, there would have been an angry explosion by Democrats from coast to coast. I was stunned at the failure of liberals to see the blatant totalitarianism in this incident, which the president should have immediately denounced. His failure to do so implicates him in it.
As a libertarian and refugee from the authoritarian Roman Catholic church of my youth, I simply do not understand the drift of my party toward a soulless collectivism. This is in fact what Sarah Palin hit on in her shocking image of a "death panel" under Obamacare that would make irrevocable decisions about the disabled and elderly. When I first saw that phrase, headlined on the Drudge Report, I burst out laughing. It seemed so over the top! But on reflection, I realized that Palin's shrewdly timed metaphor spoke directly to the electorate's unease with the prospect of shadowy, unelected government figures controlling our lives. A death panel not only has the power of life and death but is itself a symptom of a Kafkaesque brave new world where authority has become remote, arbitrary and spectral. And as in the Spanish Inquisition, dissidence is heresy, persecuted and punished.
Surely, the basic rule in comprehensive legislation should be: First, do no harm. The present proposals are full of noble aims, but the biggest danger always comes from unforeseen and unintended consequences. Example: the American incursion into Iraq, which destabilized the region by neutralizing Iran's rival and thus enormously enhancing Iran's power and nuclear ambitions.
What was needed for reform was an in-depth analysis, buttressed by documentary evidence, of waste, fraud and profiteering in the healthcare, pharmaceutical and insurance industries. Instead what we've gotten is a series of facile, vulgar innuendos about how doctors conduct their practice, as if their primary motive is money. Quite frankly, the president gives little sense of direct knowledge of medical protocols; it's as if his views are a tissue of hearsay and scattershot worst-case scenarios.
Paglia showed a deeper understanding of the practical problems with the various versions of ObamaCare floating around Capitol Hill than the President, Nancy Pelosi or any of the feckless Congressman bumbling through town hall meetings across the country.
The blind trust in government displayed by so many people is the scariest part of the current discussion. Public opinion is definitely against the bills currently being debated, but there are still 30-40% of Americans who are willing to sign off on this turdburger, no questions asked. Obama and Democrat congressmen do not want to discuss specifics. They want the 85% of Americans who are happy with their health care to believe the rest of the population is facing death and pestilence at the hands of an unfeeling system. America isn't buying it.
Thursday, August 13, 2009
Professor Carolina Heldman Denigrates Real Americans on "The O'Reilly Factor"
In the first segment of tonight's "O'Reilly Factor", Bill O'Reilly attempted to hold a discussion concerning President Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama's sinking popularity numbers. The guests were pollster Scott Rasmussen and Professorette Caroline Heldman from Occidental College. Rasmussen opened with an analysis of the numbers and what they may mean down the road.
Professorette Heldman's well-reasoned evaluation of Obama's approval ratings? "Those idiots out in Flyover Country are stifling democratic debate and don't know anything about health care. If they weren't so stupid they would jump aboard the O-Train. " Ok, that isn't a direct quote, but it is a pretty accurate summary of her soliloquy. However, this alleged expert in the field of political science did not even attempt to participate in a discussion of the issue at hand. Instead, she conducted a filibuster on how horrible American health care is and how socialized medicine is the answer. If possible, I will add the video later. The "expert" simply dismissed the opposition as being too ignorant to understand the issue.
Whether the Obama supporter is a media hack, a sleazy politician, or an arrogant academic the theme is the same: Real America is a cesspool of imbeciles and idiots who don't understand that they would be better served if they turned their lives over to the government. We know that members of Congress laugh at the idea of actually reading bills; I would wager that Dr. Heldman has much less familiarity with the contents of the bills floating around Congress than the housewives, contractors, and restaurant owners who are standing up for themselves.
The professorette made another statement that was totally asinine. She accused the folks who are attending town hall meetings to express their displeasure with the attempted government encroachment of suppressing democratic debate. This is one of those cases where arrogance smothers intellect. Slobbering Leftists and Obama sycophants suffer from such severe tunnel vision as they seek Utopia that they do not recognize that the protesters ARE the democracy.
They ARE the debate. Remember, Nancy Pelosi sent her flying monkeys back to their home districts to "educate" the dumb masses on the wonders on socialized medicine. They did not anticipate or welcome the idea of their constituents expressing their own ideas. And, now we are finding out just what they think of the people they represent.
Professorette Heldman's well-reasoned evaluation of Obama's approval ratings? "Those idiots out in Flyover Country are stifling democratic debate and don't know anything about health care. If they weren't so stupid they would jump aboard the O-Train. " Ok, that isn't a direct quote, but it is a pretty accurate summary of her soliloquy. However, this alleged expert in the field of political science did not even attempt to participate in a discussion of the issue at hand. Instead, she conducted a filibuster on how horrible American health care is and how socialized medicine is the answer. If possible, I will add the video later. The "expert" simply dismissed the opposition as being too ignorant to understand the issue.
Whether the Obama supporter is a media hack, a sleazy politician, or an arrogant academic the theme is the same: Real America is a cesspool of imbeciles and idiots who don't understand that they would be better served if they turned their lives over to the government. We know that members of Congress laugh at the idea of actually reading bills; I would wager that Dr. Heldman has much less familiarity with the contents of the bills floating around Congress than the housewives, contractors, and restaurant owners who are standing up for themselves.
The professorette made another statement that was totally asinine. She accused the folks who are attending town hall meetings to express their displeasure with the attempted government encroachment of suppressing democratic debate. This is one of those cases where arrogance smothers intellect. Slobbering Leftists and Obama sycophants suffer from such severe tunnel vision as they seek Utopia that they do not recognize that the protesters ARE the democracy.
They ARE the debate. Remember, Nancy Pelosi sent her flying monkeys back to their home districts to "educate" the dumb masses on the wonders on socialized medicine. They did not anticipate or welcome the idea of their constituents expressing their own ideas. And, now we are finding out just what they think of the people they represent.
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
John Dingell, the Ku Klux Klan and Civilized Debate
Michigan congressman John Dingell, who has been in the Congress so long he called Henry Clay "whippersnapper," demonstrated the calm and reasonable debate we expect from the Liberal-Leftist-Progressive-Socialist-Democrat party.
The Statists are executing a classic game plan of divide and conquer. Half of them are pleading for rational debate and professing ignorance at what has Real America pissed off while the President tells the opposition to sit down and shut up, Nancy Pelosi calls them "un-American" and "Nazis" and John Dingell compares opponents of nationalized healthcare to the Ku Klux Klan. Ahhhh, civilized debate, Democrat-style. The Leftist base and airheads like David Frum and David Brooks will absorb this nonsense, but Real America will have none of it.
Don't tell me to be civil while you are telling me to keep my opinions to myself, President Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama!
Don't accuse me of spreading hate while you call me a Nazi, Nancy Pelosi!
Don't tell me to calm down while you call me "un-American", Steny Hoyer!
And don't tell me to dress up the tone of the debate, while you are comparing me to the Ku Klux Klan, John Dingell!
If you want reasonable debate, don't threaten to pass the bill through backdoor channels, Chuckie Schumer!
The Democrats don't want to debate this issue. They have demonized insurance companies and doctors and scared people to death that, while they currently have adequate care, they won't if this health care scheme does not become law. Then, they accuse those who want answers to difficult questions of spreading hate.
They can play their 1984 "Newspeak" language games for their kook base. But, Real America is much smarter than they realize. Democrat leaders are trying to intimidate ordinary Americans. This tactic is rapidly blowing up in their face. We are not afraid of them.
The Statists are executing a classic game plan of divide and conquer. Half of them are pleading for rational debate and professing ignorance at what has Real America pissed off while the President tells the opposition to sit down and shut up, Nancy Pelosi calls them "un-American" and "Nazis" and John Dingell compares opponents of nationalized healthcare to the Ku Klux Klan. Ahhhh, civilized debate, Democrat-style. The Leftist base and airheads like David Frum and David Brooks will absorb this nonsense, but Real America will have none of it.
Don't tell me to be civil while you are telling me to keep my opinions to myself, President Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama!
Don't accuse me of spreading hate while you call me a Nazi, Nancy Pelosi!
Don't tell me to calm down while you call me "un-American", Steny Hoyer!
And don't tell me to dress up the tone of the debate, while you are comparing me to the Ku Klux Klan, John Dingell!
If you want reasonable debate, don't threaten to pass the bill through backdoor channels, Chuckie Schumer!
The Democrats don't want to debate this issue. They have demonized insurance companies and doctors and scared people to death that, while they currently have adequate care, they won't if this health care scheme does not become law. Then, they accuse those who want answers to difficult questions of spreading hate.
They can play their 1984 "Newspeak" language games for their kook base. But, Real America is much smarter than they realize. Democrat leaders are trying to intimidate ordinary Americans. This tactic is rapidly blowing up in their face. We are not afraid of them.
Monday, August 10, 2009
Linda Douglas Helps You Identify The Angry Mobster In Your Neighborhood.
Ok, its really a blogger named Iowahawk at Breitbart's Big Hollywood, but his "Know Your Town Hall Agitators" piece is a spot on description of how the Leftist-Socialist elites see Real America. No American President has ever been this blatant in attempting to squash free political speech. Douglas was a Leftwing hack as a journalist, so it is appropriate she cut out the middle man and began collecting a paycheck from Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama. With the recent tirades by various Democrat congressmen, Big Media Obamatrons, Nancy Pelosi, and the Big B-O himself, this piece of satire could easily be mistaken as an actual press release from the Office of Anti-Amerikan Disinformation.
Saturday, August 8, 2009
100% of Journalists Named Cynthia Tucker Are Race-Baiting Nitwits
Appearing on PMSNBC's "Chrissy Matthews Show," Atlanta-Journal Constitution "journalist" Cynthia Tucker accused the protests over nationalized healthcare to be the fruit of racist reaction to a black President. Here is the exchange between Democrat cheerleader Matthews and race-mongering airhead Tucker:
There you have it. If a white guy was threatening to fine people who don't buy health insurance, force older Americans in front of a death planning committee to advise them of their options, ration care, limit choices, and diminish the quality of the world's best health care system these ignorant crackers and misguided Uncle Tom's would be shouting "hallelujah, guvmint, please take over my life!"
Cynthia Tucker is a lightweight airhead, so her comments are ultimately pointless. However, this line of attack is being used by Democrats and Big Media across the country. This is further proof of the cynical way in which Liberal-Leftist-Progressive-Socialist-Democrats manipulate the issue of race and truly do not have the interests of Blacks, or any other group of Real Americans, in mind. They put socialist ideology ahead of individual liberty. Fomenting racial divisions where none exist demonstrates they will say and do anything for power. Considering it was a Black man who was beaten down by SEIU thugs outside a town hall in St. Louis and a Black man who challenged Maryland Senator Ben Carden over fining citizens for not carrying insurance.
This is ultimately about freedom and liberty. The same jackals who have cried "keep your hands off my uterus" when it comes to abortion now want to turn every American's body over to the government at all stages of life. The government will pay for your abortion. They will pay for Chaz/Chastity Bono's addadichtomy. Criminal illegal aliens will have get free health care from the U.S. taxpayer, but those same taxpayers will be considered criminals if they pursue care outside of a government mandated program.
The word "racist" now has about as much sting as "doodoo head." The word once had power when segregation and discrimination were a part of daily life. Now, its just a cheap insult used to score political points or a trump card to cover a losing argument. I don't care if the President is a Lynyrd Skynyrd-listening, baseball-loving, truck-driving, white guy who lends me his lawn mower and his condo at Hilton Head. If he supports socialized medicine, I will oppose him.
CHRIS MATTHEWS: Put 100 of these people in a room. Strap them into gurneys. Inject them with sodium pentathol. How many of them would say "I don't like the idea of having a black president"? What percentage?
CYNTHIA TUCKER: Oh, I'm just guessing. This is just off the cuff. I think 45 to 65% of the people who appear at these groups are people who will never be comfortable with the idea of a black president.
There you have it. If a white guy was threatening to fine people who don't buy health insurance, force older Americans in front of a death planning committee to advise them of their options, ration care, limit choices, and diminish the quality of the world's best health care system these ignorant crackers and misguided Uncle Tom's would be shouting "hallelujah, guvmint, please take over my life!"
Cynthia Tucker is a lightweight airhead, so her comments are ultimately pointless. However, this line of attack is being used by Democrats and Big Media across the country. This is further proof of the cynical way in which Liberal-Leftist-Progressive-Socialist-Democrats manipulate the issue of race and truly do not have the interests of Blacks, or any other group of Real Americans, in mind. They put socialist ideology ahead of individual liberty. Fomenting racial divisions where none exist demonstrates they will say and do anything for power. Considering it was a Black man who was beaten down by SEIU thugs outside a town hall in St. Louis and a Black man who challenged Maryland Senator Ben Carden over fining citizens for not carrying insurance.
This is ultimately about freedom and liberty. The same jackals who have cried "keep your hands off my uterus" when it comes to abortion now want to turn every American's body over to the government at all stages of life. The government will pay for your abortion. They will pay for Chaz/Chastity Bono's addadichtomy. Criminal illegal aliens will have get free health care from the U.S. taxpayer, but those same taxpayers will be considered criminals if they pursue care outside of a government mandated program.
The word "racist" now has about as much sting as "doodoo head." The word once had power when segregation and discrimination were a part of daily life. Now, its just a cheap insult used to score political points or a trump card to cover a losing argument. I don't care if the President is a Lynyrd Skynyrd-listening, baseball-loving, truck-driving, white guy who lends me his lawn mower and his condo at Hilton Head. If he supports socialized medicine, I will oppose him.
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Town Halls Turn Ugly For Members of Congress; Get Ready For the Recess Rally!
This should put Big Media into a tizzy. On August 22, Patriots across the country will rally outside the district offices of every member of Congress. The Recess Rally is another chance for Real America to stand up to the imperial federal government and say "NO!" Big Media hates Real America and you can bet they will run every possible negative story about the opposition to nationalized health care.
Various members of Congress have already gotten smacked around by their constituents in their own townhall meetings. Texas Congressman Lloyd Doggett referred to angry protesters as a "mob." This arrogant clown seems to believe that no one should object to the federal government usurping power from individuals. The Liberal-Leftist-Progressive-Socialist-Democrats employ their own version of Newspeak. Despite the protests, Doggett said, "I am more committed than ever to win approval of legislation to offer more individual choice to access affordable health care." Choice? This bill accomplishes the opposite of "individual choice." It is designed to take away all choice and turn them over to the government. Look, I don't know if Doggett is a liar or an idiot or both, but he and his gang of thieves in the House are looking to subjugate the American people.
Other Congressmen who have heard the will of the people include Russ Carnahan, Keith Ellison, Claire McCaskill, Kathleen Sebelius and Arlen Specter. The videos of these outbursts of patriotic citizenship should steel us all in our resolve to fight to maintain a free health care industry.
Big Media is apoplectic that Real America actually has the temerity to challenge their status as subjects of the United Socialist States of America. They are shocked at the tone and animosity. Get used to it! The U.S. Constitution is a very simple and clear document. This nation was built by hard-working individuals who wanted nothing from the government except protection from foreign invasion. Across America, over 80% of people are happy with their own healthcare and their own insurance. But, they are being told that they must sacrifice their personal security so that the government can control everyone's life.
The government should fear the people, not the other way around. The government works for us, not the other way around. They have limited powers, not limitless powers. When these jackholes exceed their charge and attempt to enslave the incomes and well-being of the citizens, they should fear the outcome. None of these people have a right to their seat in Congress. If they continue to ignore the Constitution and rule at their personal whim, it is the DUTY of the people to throw their sorry carcasses out on the street. Right now, Real America is striking back on issues like cap-and-tax, nationalized health care and judges who believe they are independent of the Constitution. Soon, the next big fight will begin to take shape: the November 2010 mid-term elections. Be afraid Congress, be very afraid.
Monday, August 3, 2009
Sotomayor, Judicial Activism and the Cult of Stare Decisis
Stare decisis is an imposing term. It sounds like it carries great authority. Literally, it means "to stand by that which is decided." Now, if we applied it to the U.S. Constitution and the duly passed amendments to that document, stare decisis would be an instrument of maintaining order in a democratic republic. However, the term as used by Liberal-Leftist-Progressive-Socialist-Democrats, has come to mean "a previous group of arrogant oligarchs ignored the Constitution and ruled according to their Leftist philosophy, therefore any attempt to correct that wrong is "judicial activism."
Today, during a radio newscast about John McCain's decision to vote against Sonia Sotomayor's nomination to the Supreme Court, a pro-Sotomayor senator was quoted who disputed the accusations that she is a judicial activist. No, Sotomayor is NOT an activist. The senator assured us that Sotomayor is a big believer in state decisis. Well, I feel sooooo much better! Of course, the Senator did not claim the justice-in-waiting would be a champion of the Constitution.
Judicial activism is a meaningless term without context. At one time, this term was applied to those who sought to create their own law without the Constitution's approval. Think the majority in the laughable Roe v Wade decision. They made up a constitutional right to kill a baby.
Many Conservatives still use the term "judicial activism" as a general statement of what is wrong with the federal courts. The problem is that they are several decades too late. The Supreme Court has been activist in an anti-Constitution sense for so long they have taken over the meaning of the term. Now, judicial activism is used to describe those who want to RETURN to the Constitution. Yes, in the Bizarro world that is the mind of the modern Liberal-Leftist-Progressive-Socialist-Democrat preserving the U.S. Constitution is judicial activism.
In the year of our Lord 2009, it is time Conservatives embrace judicial activism and make it a goal for future federal judges. The math is simple: in terms of legal importance, stare decisis is less valid than the U.S. Constitution. The language needs to be clear. Any nominee to the federal courts should be asked to define judicial activism. That does not require them to discuss issues that might be heard in a case. It does require a would-be federal judge to publicly state whether they put the decisions of previous courts ahead of the U.S. Constitution.
I tend to agree with the senator who said Sotomayor will be faithful to stare decisis. However, during her hearings, Sonia Sotomayor stated that the Constitution should come first. Stare decisis and the Constitution are often polar opposites. She will be confirmed. However, it will be interesting to see if she will be honest when she takes an oath to uphold the Constitution or if her liberal ideology will be her judicial beacon.
Today, during a radio newscast about John McCain's decision to vote against Sonia Sotomayor's nomination to the Supreme Court, a pro-Sotomayor senator was quoted who disputed the accusations that she is a judicial activist. No, Sotomayor is NOT an activist. The senator assured us that Sotomayor is a big believer in state decisis. Well, I feel sooooo much better! Of course, the Senator did not claim the justice-in-waiting would be a champion of the Constitution.
Judicial activism is a meaningless term without context. At one time, this term was applied to those who sought to create their own law without the Constitution's approval. Think the majority in the laughable Roe v Wade decision. They made up a constitutional right to kill a baby.
Many Conservatives still use the term "judicial activism" as a general statement of what is wrong with the federal courts. The problem is that they are several decades too late. The Supreme Court has been activist in an anti-Constitution sense for so long they have taken over the meaning of the term. Now, judicial activism is used to describe those who want to RETURN to the Constitution. Yes, in the Bizarro world that is the mind of the modern Liberal-Leftist-Progressive-Socialist-Democrat preserving the U.S. Constitution is judicial activism.
In the year of our Lord 2009, it is time Conservatives embrace judicial activism and make it a goal for future federal judges. The math is simple: in terms of legal importance, stare decisis is less valid than the U.S. Constitution. The language needs to be clear. Any nominee to the federal courts should be asked to define judicial activism. That does not require them to discuss issues that might be heard in a case. It does require a would-be federal judge to publicly state whether they put the decisions of previous courts ahead of the U.S. Constitution.
I tend to agree with the senator who said Sotomayor will be faithful to stare decisis. However, during her hearings, Sonia Sotomayor stated that the Constitution should come first. Stare decisis and the Constitution are often polar opposites. She will be confirmed. However, it will be interesting to see if she will be honest when she takes an oath to uphold the Constitution or if her liberal ideology will be her judicial beacon.
Cash For Clunkers Should Be The Symbol of Statist Economics
Big Media has been giddy for several days over the popularity of Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama's "Cash for Clunkers" boondoggle. In fact, it has been such a "success" that it blew through $1 billion like Amy Winehouse through a hotel liquor cabinet. It doesn't exactly take the ghost of Billy Mays to convince folks to take a fistful of free money and run with it. Of course, ecstatic with ""success" and void of responsibility, Congress wants to plunk down another $2 billion to buy junk cars. Now, that these jackholes are comfortable discussing spending you and your children's wealth in terms of trillions, $2 billion is couch change.
Let's break down the program for what it is: Congress is stealing your future earnings, but offering you the golden opportunity to cash in an old gas guzzler for $4,500 toward a new car that likely costs $25,000-$35,000. One of the mitigating factors in the current recession is the insane debt that Americans have bought. Now, in order to "boost the economy," the government is offering folks a little up-front cash to drive themselves FURTHER into debt. Yeah, that's a winning plan.
The Kremlin on the Potomac believes that only they can stimulate the economy. Well, in a sense they are right at this point. They could cut taxes on all Americans, especially the ones specifically targeted at the job creating segments of our society. But, that might give folks the idea they can solve their own problems. This way we can keep the country in crisis, but feel sure that our imperial federal government is working on a new solution.
In a matter of a couple days, Congress is wanting to triple the spending on a program they didn't understand in the first place. Something as straightforward as giving a $4,500 voucher for a junk car has created mayhem and a tripling of the budget. Now, do you really want to put these buffoons in charge of your health care? It is often said that any government program's announced cost can be at least tripled. In the case of Medicare, I don't think there is a word to describe how far off the numbers were except "arrrrggghhhhh!!!"
Cash for Clunkers is the quintessential Beltway boondoggle. Sell a program as a "gift" to the American people (paid for out of their own pockets, of course, and adding to their personal debt). Create mounds of paperwork and bureaucratic confusion. Underestimate the cost of the program. Then demand even more money be spent on the program because it is vital to the nation's interests.
The great Ronaldus Maximus was correct about the Liberal-Leftist-Progressive-Democrat-Statist's philosophy: "If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it. "
Let's break down the program for what it is: Congress is stealing your future earnings, but offering you the golden opportunity to cash in an old gas guzzler for $4,500 toward a new car that likely costs $25,000-$35,000. One of the mitigating factors in the current recession is the insane debt that Americans have bought. Now, in order to "boost the economy," the government is offering folks a little up-front cash to drive themselves FURTHER into debt. Yeah, that's a winning plan.
The Kremlin on the Potomac believes that only they can stimulate the economy. Well, in a sense they are right at this point. They could cut taxes on all Americans, especially the ones specifically targeted at the job creating segments of our society. But, that might give folks the idea they can solve their own problems. This way we can keep the country in crisis, but feel sure that our imperial federal government is working on a new solution.
In a matter of a couple days, Congress is wanting to triple the spending on a program they didn't understand in the first place. Something as straightforward as giving a $4,500 voucher for a junk car has created mayhem and a tripling of the budget. Now, do you really want to put these buffoons in charge of your health care? It is often said that any government program's announced cost can be at least tripled. In the case of Medicare, I don't think there is a word to describe how far off the numbers were except "arrrrggghhhhh!!!"
Cash for Clunkers is the quintessential Beltway boondoggle. Sell a program as a "gift" to the American people (paid for out of their own pockets, of course, and adding to their personal debt). Create mounds of paperwork and bureaucratic confusion. Underestimate the cost of the program. Then demand even more money be spent on the program because it is vital to the nation's interests.
The great Ronaldus Maximus was correct about the Liberal-Leftist-Progressive-Democrat-Statist's philosophy: "If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it. "
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Salon's Joan Walsh: Liberal Racism's Exhibit A
Joan Walsh, editrix of Leftist rag Salon, is feeling her oats as she brands Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and every other breathing Conservative as racists. This all stems from Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama's CHOICE to insert himself into the situation brought about by the misunderstanding between police and radical Leftist professor Henry Gates. Limbaugh, Beck and others have questioned Obama's motives and they are right to do so. It was an unplanned moment and the community organizer in him came out. Obama is no different than Al Sharpton and Je$$e Jackson at heart. Everything is seen through a prism of race. Unlike the Justice Brothers, Obama has learned to soft-medal his racial focus for political gain. In fact, he portrays himself as just the opposite--a "post-racial" healer.
The facts say something different. Obama's personal history is not one of interracial brotherhood. Start with his twenty year membership in Reverend Jeremiah Wright's Trinity Church. The Reverend is a vicious racist and anti-Semite. Obama sat in the pews. He referred to the man as spiritual advisor to him and his family. This is a church that openly aligns itself with the bigoted loon Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam. Obama didn't notice that? Defend him all you want, but Obama gave a dozen explanations for his relationship with Reverend Wright during the course of last year's campaign. The answers seemed to change daily for a while. It is hard to know the actual truth, but with so many contradictory versions it was obvious BHO was lying. There is no way he didn't know he was part of a racist church.
Obama's first book, Dreams From My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance, provides the author's pre-occupation with race in the title. The book returns again and again to themes of race with Obama repeatedly blanketing Whites with accusations of various wrongdoing. This book sounded the ramblings of an angry Black man, not a man trying to shape a post-racial world.
Of course, Obama's obsession with race is also linked to being a Liberal-Leftist-Progressive-Socialist-Democrat. These people reject the existence of the individual. There are only group identities. Obama never ceases playing one group of Americans off against another on the basis of some demographic characteristic. He is filled with the double-whammy of racial angst (though his life experience is not that of the civil rights movement) and Leftist identity politics which requires that all life is a fight between competing demographic groups.
Joan Walsh is a great example of the hateful Leftist who projects her own vile worldview on others. If you didn't click onto her editorial attack on Conservatives, click here. This maven of Marxism seems to be shooting for the record of liberal cliches and phony assertions.
Can Ms. Walsh cite one mainstream Conservative who attacked Sotomayor on her ethnic heritage? She cannot. However, Sotomayor is Hispanic AND a Leftist so any attack on her is racist. Did Ms. Walsh accuse Democrats of racism when they filibustered Miguel Estrada to keep him off a federal circuit court? She did not, even though in internal memos Democrats cited his ethnicity as a reason to keep him off the court. Sotomayor's belief that federal courts are legitimate policy makers and that she does not feel constrained by the Constitution were the reasons her nomination was challenged.
This is Lib speak for: "if you oppose the President's policies, you are racist." Its a very convenient tactic, but outside of Salon's typical readership most Americans are too smart for this nonsense. Identity politics plus a Black President equals four years of unabated manipulation of white guilt in the eyes of soulless Socialists.
What "beat" is Joan speaking of? Well, dear reader, you are supposed to assume he has been attacking Obama as a Black man. The only people who claim Limbaugh is a racist are the Leftist thugs who do not listen to him, but claim to be experts on every word he utters. As for Rush's words about BHO's attack on Officer Crowley, what did he get wrong? The President of the United States, the most powerful individual in the world, used his bully pulpit to decide the right-and-wrong of the situation for the American people. Does any reasonable person believe race was NOT the primary factor in him doing that? As is his usual schtick, Obama did not apologize for what he said, but for how people may have heard it. A non-apology apology. When the heat is turned on him, he invites them to the White House for a photo-op. His instinct was racial division, but his political survival skills say play the peacemaker. Smooth.
And the piece de resistance:
"Projection?" Ms. Pot meet Madame Kettle. Notice she just calls Beck and Limbaugh "racists" with no reference to any statement or action. You see, they are Conservatives therefore it is an article of faith in the Church of Liberalism that they are racists. Obama's words cannot be held up as improper because he is Black AND a Statist. But, notice Joanie's own words: Obama's modest moves -- appointing a Latina justice, using the Gates case to speak out against racial profiling. Ask yourself this question: how many times have you heard Democrats defending specific aspects of Sonia Sotomayor's qualifications and how many times have they trotted out her ethnicity? You see, Sotomayor is not to be evaluated on her decisions, her speeches, or her judical philosophy. She is a "Latina justice" and that is all that matters. Opposition equals racism. As for the Gates blowup, it had nothing to do with racial profiling. I'm assuming Joanie Walsh isn't stupid, so she should know the definition of racial profiling. Obama is playing CYA because he openly played the race card and knew he was caught. But, again, Obama is above criticism. We must accept his ridiculous rationalizations lest we be the collective reincarnations of Bull Conner.
Ahhhh, projection. Conservatives do not give a whit about race. The only people who claim otherwise are Leftwing hacks who do not listen to the talk shows they criticize or read the columnists or authors they slander. Ms. Walsh, the operative color in the Obama backlash is red not black. He is a Marxist. The federal government is shredding the Constitution and promising to destroy even more liberty. That is what is being challenged by the "broadcast fuhrers." The obligatory Nazi reference demonstrates the historical ignorance of the modern Liberal. The National German Socialist Workers Party was a LEFTIST movement. It is NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, MSNBC, Salon, The New York Times, etc., who refuse to treat people as individuals and foment racial identity politics. Conservatives will lambast anti-liberty, socialistic, fascistic public policy all day long. Leftists do not want to engage in an honest debate so they invoke the racist, sexist, homophobic tags. Who is divisive, Ms. Walsh?
Kweisi Mfume appeared with Joan Walsh on "Hardball" and both managed to attack "divisive" conservatives with a straight face. Mfume has made a living off calling political opponents racists. Did he profess outrage when House Democrats accused Republicans of racism for wanting to investigate Fannie Mae? Did he defend the falsely accused Duke lacrosse players? Mfume is a phony and his mock-outrage is pathetic.
Walsh uttered this classic on "Hardball": "He loves white people. Obama got to where he is, in my opinion, largely because he makes white people feel like he knows we're all trying really hard and we really like it when black people make us feel that way." What condescending drivel! Obama is where he is because he played to divisive stereotypes cultivated by the Left over the years. Obama is an individual as am I. His mixed race heritage and my whiteness are irrelevant. He doesn't need me for validation nor do I need him. He doesn't make me feel good. He makes me feel like Vladimir Lenin and Norman Thomas were right about how the U.S. would embrace socialism gradually and without realizing what is going on. What this airhead saw as an "up with people" clincher was really added proof that she and her Leftist lemmings see everything in terms of identity politics.
Personally, I am sick and tired of political positions being viewed through a filter of race. It is not the conservative end of the spectrum that does this. They do not need to do so because Conservatives can stand on facts and win the argument. As is clear in Joan Walsh's psychotic ramblings, the Left sees demographics not individuals. Their world view does not allow for the singular citizen. It is time that Democrats take ownership of their radical socialism and be honest about who they are. They won't do that because they know they must pretend to uphold American values in order to win elections. That is why they must "project" their insipid hatred on the thinking population. They can't be honest AND win.
The facts say something different. Obama's personal history is not one of interracial brotherhood. Start with his twenty year membership in Reverend Jeremiah Wright's Trinity Church. The Reverend is a vicious racist and anti-Semite. Obama sat in the pews. He referred to the man as spiritual advisor to him and his family. This is a church that openly aligns itself with the bigoted loon Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam. Obama didn't notice that? Defend him all you want, but Obama gave a dozen explanations for his relationship with Reverend Wright during the course of last year's campaign. The answers seemed to change daily for a while. It is hard to know the actual truth, but with so many contradictory versions it was obvious BHO was lying. There is no way he didn't know he was part of a racist church.
Obama's first book, Dreams From My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance, provides the author's pre-occupation with race in the title. The book returns again and again to themes of race with Obama repeatedly blanketing Whites with accusations of various wrongdoing. This book sounded the ramblings of an angry Black man, not a man trying to shape a post-racial world.
Of course, Obama's obsession with race is also linked to being a Liberal-Leftist-Progressive-Socialist-Democrat. These people reject the existence of the individual. There are only group identities. Obama never ceases playing one group of Americans off against another on the basis of some demographic characteristic. He is filled with the double-whammy of racial angst (though his life experience is not that of the civil rights movement) and Leftist identity politics which requires that all life is a fight between competing demographic groups.
Joan Walsh is a great example of the hateful Leftist who projects her own vile worldview on others. If you didn't click onto her editorial attack on Conservatives, click here. This maven of Marxism seems to be shooting for the record of liberal cliches and phony assertions.
A few lonely Republican leaders are belatedly trying to clean up the party's mess of crazy, from the racially tinged character attacks on Sonia Sotomayor...
Can Ms. Walsh cite one mainstream Conservative who attacked Sotomayor on her ethnic heritage? She cannot. However, Sotomayor is Hispanic AND a Leftist so any attack on her is racist. Did Ms. Walsh accuse Democrats of racism when they filibustered Miguel Estrada to keep him off a federal circuit court? She did not, even though in internal memos Democrats cited his ethnicity as a reason to keep him off the court. Sotomayor's belief that federal courts are legitimate policy makers and that she does not feel constrained by the Constitution were the reasons her nomination was challenged.
Still, Limbaugh and Beck continue to ratchet up their alarming and increasingly racist hatred for the president.
This is Lib speak for: "if you oppose the President's policies, you are racist." Its a very convenient tactic, but outside of Salon's typical readership most Americans are too smart for this nonsense. Identity politics plus a Black President equals four years of unabated manipulation of white guilt in the eyes of soulless Socialists.
Limbaugh's been on this beat for a long time, but the complicated Gates case inspired him to a whole new level of fiction. "Here you have a black president trying to destroy a white policeman," the radio bully told his audience last Friday, the day Obama expressed regret over his quick judgment in the matter and invited Skip Gates and Officer James Crowley to the White House for a beer.
What "beat" is Joan speaking of? Well, dear reader, you are supposed to assume he has been attacking Obama as a Black man. The only people who claim Limbaugh is a racist are the Leftist thugs who do not listen to him, but claim to be experts on every word he utters. As for Rush's words about BHO's attack on Officer Crowley, what did he get wrong? The President of the United States, the most powerful individual in the world, used his bully pulpit to decide the right-and-wrong of the situation for the American people. Does any reasonable person believe race was NOT the primary factor in him doing that? As is his usual schtick, Obama did not apologize for what he said, but for how people may have heard it. A non-apology apology. When the heat is turned on him, he invites them to the White House for a photo-op. His instinct was racial division, but his political survival skills say play the peacemaker. Smooth.
And the piece de resistance:
There's a psychological term for this kind of unhinged behavior, and it's called "projection." These two racists are projecting their own racial feelings onto Obama. Increasingly, the ranks of the racially blinkered (and I include MSNBC's Pat Buchanan here) are playing victim, insisting Obama's modest moves -- appointing a Latina justice, using the Gates case to speak out against racial profiling -- are reversing the racial order wholesale, and putting white men on the bottom of the pile.
"Projection?" Ms. Pot meet Madame Kettle. Notice she just calls Beck and Limbaugh "racists" with no reference to any statement or action. You see, they are Conservatives therefore it is an article of faith in the Church of Liberalism that they are racists. Obama's words cannot be held up as improper because he is Black AND a Statist. But, notice Joanie's own words: Obama's modest moves -- appointing a Latina justice, using the Gates case to speak out against racial profiling. Ask yourself this question: how many times have you heard Democrats defending specific aspects of Sonia Sotomayor's qualifications and how many times have they trotted out her ethnicity? You see, Sotomayor is not to be evaluated on her decisions, her speeches, or her judical philosophy. She is a "Latina justice" and that is all that matters. Opposition equals racism. As for the Gates blowup, it had nothing to do with racial profiling. I'm assuming Joanie Walsh isn't stupid, so she should know the definition of racial profiling. Obama is playing CYA because he openly played the race card and knew he was caught. But, again, Obama is above criticism. We must accept his ridiculous rationalizations lest we be the collective reincarnations of Bull Conner.
It's time for more decent Republicans to take a stand against the vicious anti-Obama racism of the party fringe and their broadcast fuhrers. On Monday Ohio Sen. George Voinovich blasted the dominance of his party's Southern fringe, and its outdated Southern Strategy with its emphasis on racial division.
Ahhhh, projection. Conservatives do not give a whit about race. The only people who claim otherwise are Leftwing hacks who do not listen to the talk shows they criticize or read the columnists or authors they slander. Ms. Walsh, the operative color in the Obama backlash is red not black. He is a Marxist. The federal government is shredding the Constitution and promising to destroy even more liberty. That is what is being challenged by the "broadcast fuhrers." The obligatory Nazi reference demonstrates the historical ignorance of the modern Liberal. The National German Socialist Workers Party was a LEFTIST movement. It is NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, MSNBC, Salon, The New York Times, etc., who refuse to treat people as individuals and foment racial identity politics. Conservatives will lambast anti-liberty, socialistic, fascistic public policy all day long. Leftists do not want to engage in an honest debate so they invoke the racist, sexist, homophobic tags. Who is divisive, Ms. Walsh?
Kweisi Mfume appeared with Joan Walsh on "Hardball" and both managed to attack "divisive" conservatives with a straight face. Mfume has made a living off calling political opponents racists. Did he profess outrage when House Democrats accused Republicans of racism for wanting to investigate Fannie Mae? Did he defend the falsely accused Duke lacrosse players? Mfume is a phony and his mock-outrage is pathetic.
Walsh uttered this classic on "Hardball": "He loves white people. Obama got to where he is, in my opinion, largely because he makes white people feel like he knows we're all trying really hard and we really like it when black people make us feel that way." What condescending drivel! Obama is where he is because he played to divisive stereotypes cultivated by the Left over the years. Obama is an individual as am I. His mixed race heritage and my whiteness are irrelevant. He doesn't need me for validation nor do I need him. He doesn't make me feel good. He makes me feel like Vladimir Lenin and Norman Thomas were right about how the U.S. would embrace socialism gradually and without realizing what is going on. What this airhead saw as an "up with people" clincher was really added proof that she and her Leftist lemmings see everything in terms of identity politics.
Personally, I am sick and tired of political positions being viewed through a filter of race. It is not the conservative end of the spectrum that does this. They do not need to do so because Conservatives can stand on facts and win the argument. As is clear in Joan Walsh's psychotic ramblings, the Left sees demographics not individuals. Their world view does not allow for the singular citizen. It is time that Democrats take ownership of their radical socialism and be honest about who they are. They won't do that because they know they must pretend to uphold American values in order to win elections. That is why they must "project" their insipid hatred on the thinking population. They can't be honest AND win.
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
The Sarah Palin Farewell Speech Big Media Missed: On Liberty and Self-Reliance
The media uproar after Sarah Palin's Sunday farewell address as Alaska's governor focused on two things: her "wacky behavior" and her attack on the media. In other words, the coverage had nothing to do with Palin. It was a group therapy session for the Big Media elites and Democrat partisans (I guess that is redundant).
What Big Media calls "instability" is acting like a regular person. That is one of Palin's characteristics that drives these blow-dried blowhards batty. She is always unedited. She doesn't test her words in front of focus groups. Most politicians sounds like they are reading from the same script. Palin connects with Flyover America because she is outraged and irritated by the same things that peeve regular folks.
As for her attacks on the press, Big Media needs to check the polls. Even most Democrats realize that the media is slanted in their direction. Their reporting is sloppy and their evaluation of public figures is hyper-partisan. The "experience" canard during the campaign was a great example. Big Media belittled Sarah Palin's preparatory experience to be vice-president while fawning like a gaggle of teenage girls over Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama who possessed zero executive experience and an undistinguished legislative record which included half a term in the U.S. Senate, most of which was spent running for President. Palin was a nobody from nowhere and he was the greatest leader to ever walk on planet Earth.
Big Media left out the best parts of Palin's farewell speech. She spoke of liberty and self-reliance. Nooooooooooo! Those concepts are so dangerous to the goals of Leftist-Liberal-Progressive-Socialists and Big Media that they are taboo for coverage. But, a lot of Americans still prefer liberty to totalitarianism, even if the freedom is curtailed "for our own good." These words were from a person who is grounded in the Founders, not Marx and Alinsky.
Yeah, what a kook. Rugged individualism. Development of natural resources. Liberty from government control. State sovereignty (i.e., the U.S. Constitution s written). Government can't solve your problems. Prosperity comes from hard work. In other words, she spoke of all the things Big Media and Leftist Democrats despise. Here is the speech in its entirety.
Sarah Palin may not be the right candidate to defeat Amerika's favorite son Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama in 2012. However, she gets it. Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, Tim Pawlenty or whoever else may have designs on the GOP nomination should read Palin's farewell speech and understand that Real America responds to those ideas. They don't want another stiff suit debating the manner in which our freedoms will be usurped. Real Americans want leaders with courage and conviction who will say "no" to evil and totalitarianism rather than negotiate the extent of freedom's loss. In other words, we need somebody who has a pair--even if that someone is a woman.
What Big Media calls "instability" is acting like a regular person. That is one of Palin's characteristics that drives these blow-dried blowhards batty. She is always unedited. She doesn't test her words in front of focus groups. Most politicians sounds like they are reading from the same script. Palin connects with Flyover America because she is outraged and irritated by the same things that peeve regular folks.
As for her attacks on the press, Big Media needs to check the polls. Even most Democrats realize that the media is slanted in their direction. Their reporting is sloppy and their evaluation of public figures is hyper-partisan. The "experience" canard during the campaign was a great example. Big Media belittled Sarah Palin's preparatory experience to be vice-president while fawning like a gaggle of teenage girls over Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama who possessed zero executive experience and an undistinguished legislative record which included half a term in the U.S. Senate, most of which was spent running for President. Palin was a nobody from nowhere and he was the greatest leader to ever walk on planet Earth.
Big Media left out the best parts of Palin's farewell speech. She spoke of liberty and self-reliance. Nooooooooooo! Those concepts are so dangerous to the goals of Leftist-Liberal-Progressive-Socialists and Big Media that they are taboo for coverage. But, a lot of Americans still prefer liberty to totalitarianism, even if the freedom is curtailed "for our own good." These words were from a person who is grounded in the Founders, not Marx and Alinsky.
So much success, and Alaska there is much good in store further down the road, but to reach it we must value and live the optimistic pioneering spirit that made this state proud and free, and we can resist enslavement to big central government that crushes hope and opportunity. Be wary of accepting government largess. It doesn't come free and often, accepting it takes away everything that is free, melting into Washington's powerful "care-taking" arms will just suck incentive to work hard and chart our own course right out of us, and that not only contributes to an unstable economy and dizzying national debt, but it does make us less free.
I resisted the stimulus package. I resisted the stimulus package and we have championed earmark reform, slashing earmark requests by 85% to break the cycle of dependency on a stifling, unsustainable federal agenda, and other states should follow this for their and for America's stability. We don't have to feel that we must beg an allowance from Washington, except to beg the allowance to be self-determined. See, to be self-sufficient, Alaska must be allowed to develop - to drill and build and climb, to fulfill statehood's promise. At statehood we knew this. At statehood we knew this, that we are responsible for ourselves and our families and our future, and fifty years later, please let's not start believing that government is the answer. It can't make you happy or healthy or wealthy or wise. What can? It is the wisdom of the people and our families and our small businesses, and industrious individuals, and it is God's grace, helping those who help themselves, and then this allows that very generous voluntary hand up that we're known for, enthusiastically providing for those who need it.
Alaskans will remember that years ago, remember we sported the old bumper sticker that said, "Alaska. We Don't Give a Darn How They Do It Outside?" Do you remember that? I remember that, and remember it was because we would be different. We'd roll up our sleeves, and we would diligently sow and reap, and we can still do this to carve wealth out of the wilderness and make our living on the water, with strong hands and innovative minds, now with smarter technology. It is what our first people and our parents did. It worked, because they worked. We must be prudent and persistent and press for the people's right to responsibly develop God-given resources for the maximum benefit of the people.
Yeah, what a kook. Rugged individualism. Development of natural resources. Liberty from government control. State sovereignty (i.e., the U.S. Constitution s written). Government can't solve your problems. Prosperity comes from hard work. In other words, she spoke of all the things Big Media and Leftist Democrats despise. Here is the speech in its entirety.
Sarah Palin may not be the right candidate to defeat Amerika's favorite son Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama in 2012. However, she gets it. Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, Tim Pawlenty or whoever else may have designs on the GOP nomination should read Palin's farewell speech and understand that Real America responds to those ideas. They don't want another stiff suit debating the manner in which our freedoms will be usurped. Real Americans want leaders with courage and conviction who will say "no" to evil and totalitarianism rather than negotiate the extent of freedom's loss. In other words, we need somebody who has a pair--even if that someone is a woman.
Monday, July 27, 2009
Democrats Censor Republican Mail
The Democrats have lost all sense of reality. Congressman John Carter of Texas has gone public with communication he received from the Franking Commission. Representative Carter wanted to let his constituents know he is working to protect them from government-run health care. It seems that phrase is not allowed by Nancy Pelosi's Kommissars.
This is not bipartisanship. In fact, this isn't even American. The Democrats seem to believe that victory in a couple elections gives them the authority to establish a one-party regime. It is amazing that the same people who accused George W. Bush of threatening free speech for eight years (and none spent a day in jail, were fined a single penny or prevented from writing or saying anything) now are party to the suppression of political speech. I guess that is the kind of "change" the Leftist-Liberal-Progressives had in mind.
“I received the script back from the majority, and there are a couple of changes that need to be made to make it compliant,” the Franking Commission e-mail said. “In the first paragraph change ‘House Democrats unveiled a government run health care plan’ to either ‘the house majority (sic) unveiled a public option health care plan’ or 'Just this past week the House majority (sic) unveiled a health care plan which I believe will cost taxpayers ….’”
“Change this on both scripts and send it back to me,” the e-mail concluded.
This is not bipartisanship. In fact, this isn't even American. The Democrats seem to believe that victory in a couple elections gives them the authority to establish a one-party regime. It is amazing that the same people who accused George W. Bush of threatening free speech for eight years (and none spent a day in jail, were fined a single penny or prevented from writing or saying anything) now are party to the suppression of political speech. I guess that is the kind of "change" the Leftist-Liberal-Progressives had in mind.
Saturday, July 25, 2009
States May Flex Their 10th Amendment Muscles on ObamaCare
Finally. After a century of constant usurpations of state authority by the greedy three-headed monster known as the legislative, executive and judicial branches of the federal government, it seems some states may be poised to stand up to the tyrants. In an interview with talk show host Mark Davis, Texas Governor Rick Perry threw down the gauntlet. Perry had earlier supported a pro-10th Amendment which failed in the Texas legislature. At some point, states need to tell the President, the Congress, and the Supreme Court to pound sand when they attempt to rule as an autonomous national government rather than function as the limited government DEMANDED by the United States Constitution.
The Constitution says what it says and doesn't say what it doesn't say. Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas have tried to point this out to their colleagues over the years. Arizona Congressman John Shadegg has introduced The Enumerated Powers Act (HR450 in the current Congress) for many years which would require that any bill introduced in Congress include a specific reference to where the Constitution allows for the legislation. Much of the on-going Tea Party movement is focused on the general notion that the federal government has exceeded its legitimate functions and has become a tyranny.
One step American Patriots can take against ObamaCare and much of the other nonsense emanating from the Beltway is to let their legislators know that they expect them to follow the Constitution. Tell them to support Shadegg's bill. Emphasize the Constitution's limit on the federal government when you email or call your legislator. Fill letters-to-the-editor and op-ed pages with commentaries about the Constitution. Challenge Leftists-Liberal-Socialist-Democrats to cite the Constitutional legitimacy of their Marxist ideas. The times they are a changin' for the the arrogant Leftists who thought 2008's election was a mandate for socialism. They were wrong and we need to keep the pressure on.
The Constitution says what it says and doesn't say what it doesn't say. Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas have tried to point this out to their colleagues over the years. Arizona Congressman John Shadegg has introduced The Enumerated Powers Act (HR450 in the current Congress) for many years which would require that any bill introduced in Congress include a specific reference to where the Constitution allows for the legislation. Much of the on-going Tea Party movement is focused on the general notion that the federal government has exceeded its legitimate functions and has become a tyranny.
One step American Patriots can take against ObamaCare and much of the other nonsense emanating from the Beltway is to let their legislators know that they expect them to follow the Constitution. Tell them to support Shadegg's bill. Emphasize the Constitution's limit on the federal government when you email or call your legislator. Fill letters-to-the-editor and op-ed pages with commentaries about the Constitution. Challenge Leftists-Liberal-Socialist-Democrats to cite the Constitutional legitimacy of their Marxist ideas. The times they are a changin' for the the arrogant Leftists who thought 2008's election was a mandate for socialism. They were wrong and we need to keep the pressure on.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Bill O'Reilly Defends Barbara Boxer and Proves He Doesn't Understand Liberal Racism
Bill O'Reilly interviewed Harry Alford on "The O'Reilly Factor" and Bill again showed why he is on the margins of the Conservative movement. He just doesn't get it. He actually defended Kalifornia Senator Barbara Boxer's racist confrontation with Mr. Alford during a Senate committee hearing. O'Reilly said Boxer didn't intentionally insert race. He is probably right, but that is the problem. Racism is so endemic to Liberal-Leftist-Progressive-Socialist thought that they have absolutely no self-awareness.
Just like a child who is brought up by bigots to dislike people because of their race, Leftists are raised and nurtured on the notion of inherent differences between people. They develop a paternalistic notion that "those people" cannot function without the help of so-called "liberals." They are sub-citizens who must always be defined with an asterisk and managed as a group rather than treated as individuals.
That is why Boxer, as empty a head as exists in the Senate, was genuinely shocked that Harry Alford was indignant at her belittling of the Black Chamber of Commerce's climate change position. The BCC has been involved in studies of the issue for over a decade and has built a position based on scientific data. Boxer confronted a Black professional group's data analysis with a resolution of the NAACP, which is a partisan political organization. She could have dug up a different professional group's stance, but that never occurred to her. This was a Black group, so they must be countered with a Black group.
This should also be a message to the Republican losers who are constantly looking for a way to pander to Blacks or single women or Hispanics or homosexuals. DON'T DO IT! Democrats own the copyright on identity politics, so it is futile to compete. Besides, it is degrading to those who are members of those groups, but who actually see themselves as distinct individuals.
The media and racist Democrats have pulled the same non-sense with the Sonia Sotomayor nomination. "Republicans risk alienating Hispanics." "Republicans have a Hispanic problem." "Oppose her at your own risk." None of that has anything to do with deciphering whether or not she will be lying when she promises to uphold the Constitution. The opposition to Sotomayor had nothing to do with ethnicity; it was mostly about her own words and decisions standing in opposition to the Constitution and the role of the federal courts.
Leftists in the media and the Democrat party do not give one hoot about Hispanics (or any other minority) as individuals. They do revel in their ability to exploit race and ethnicity for political and ideological gain. When President Bush appointed Miguel Estrada to the D.C. Appellate Court, Democrats fought tooth and nail to defeat his nomination. In fact, they attacked his ethnicity calling him "unauthentic." Did the up-with-people media come to Estrada's defense and attack the Democrat filibuster? Did they accuse Democrats of denying an opportunity to an accomplished Hispanic man? Yeah, right!
Conservatives need to get their message out to people in these demographics. High taxes, intrusive government, heavy regulation, federal power grabs and creeping Big Brotherism is a threat to Americans regardless of race, gender or sexual preference. The Alford incident should be used to expose the racial superiority that under girds the politics of many White Liberal-Leftist-Progressive-Socialists.
Just like a child who is brought up by bigots to dislike people because of their race, Leftists are raised and nurtured on the notion of inherent differences between people. They develop a paternalistic notion that "those people" cannot function without the help of so-called "liberals." They are sub-citizens who must always be defined with an asterisk and managed as a group rather than treated as individuals.
That is why Boxer, as empty a head as exists in the Senate, was genuinely shocked that Harry Alford was indignant at her belittling of the Black Chamber of Commerce's climate change position. The BCC has been involved in studies of the issue for over a decade and has built a position based on scientific data. Boxer confronted a Black professional group's data analysis with a resolution of the NAACP, which is a partisan political organization. She could have dug up a different professional group's stance, but that never occurred to her. This was a Black group, so they must be countered with a Black group.
This should also be a message to the Republican losers who are constantly looking for a way to pander to Blacks or single women or Hispanics or homosexuals. DON'T DO IT! Democrats own the copyright on identity politics, so it is futile to compete. Besides, it is degrading to those who are members of those groups, but who actually see themselves as distinct individuals.
The media and racist Democrats have pulled the same non-sense with the Sonia Sotomayor nomination. "Republicans risk alienating Hispanics." "Republicans have a Hispanic problem." "Oppose her at your own risk." None of that has anything to do with deciphering whether or not she will be lying when she promises to uphold the Constitution. The opposition to Sotomayor had nothing to do with ethnicity; it was mostly about her own words and decisions standing in opposition to the Constitution and the role of the federal courts.
Leftists in the media and the Democrat party do not give one hoot about Hispanics (or any other minority) as individuals. They do revel in their ability to exploit race and ethnicity for political and ideological gain. When President Bush appointed Miguel Estrada to the D.C. Appellate Court, Democrats fought tooth and nail to defeat his nomination. In fact, they attacked his ethnicity calling him "unauthentic." Did the up-with-people media come to Estrada's defense and attack the Democrat filibuster? Did they accuse Democrats of denying an opportunity to an accomplished Hispanic man? Yeah, right!
Conservatives need to get their message out to people in these demographics. High taxes, intrusive government, heavy regulation, federal power grabs and creeping Big Brotherism is a threat to Americans regardless of race, gender or sexual preference. The Alford incident should be used to expose the racial superiority that under girds the politics of many White Liberal-Leftist-Progressive-Socialists.
Is It a He or a She? Only Your Imperial Federal Government Knows For Sure
I would like to make a motion that all satire within Amerika's borders be eliminated. It is no longer necessary as the reality of the United Socialist States of Amerika has become so ridiculous that it defies all logic. Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal" might be seen as a serious reform pamphlet today rather than a scathing satire.
The Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee has included this juicy little nugget in their version of health care "reform": the Secretary of Health and Human Services (currently space ranger Kathleen Sebelius) would have the authority and responsibility to develop criteria for defining gender. Yep, Amerika is now so brain dead and helpless that we cannot tell Adam from Eve. We need Big Brother to define the most basic distinctive characteristic of human beings (or any animal lifeform).
We have mainstreamed Amerika's growing freakshow. We do not need to change the understandings of thousands of years of human existence to accomodate the confused, the metally ill, and the bizarre. They may be befuzzled about their identity, but I am not.
Edgycater has a little hint for anyone confused about their gender: pull down your La Cage Aux Folles underoos and hold in your jelly roll: if you see an outie you are a buck and if you see an innie you are a doe. Any questions? You are welcome. Feel free to share this wisdom with your confused Leftist-Liberal-Progressive-Socialist friends if they are experiencing gender confusion.
The Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee has included this juicy little nugget in their version of health care "reform": the Secretary of Health and Human Services (currently space ranger Kathleen Sebelius) would have the authority and responsibility to develop criteria for defining gender. Yep, Amerika is now so brain dead and helpless that we cannot tell Adam from Eve. We need Big Brother to define the most basic distinctive characteristic of human beings (or any animal lifeform).
We have mainstreamed Amerika's growing freakshow. We do not need to change the understandings of thousands of years of human existence to accomodate the confused, the metally ill, and the bizarre. They may be befuzzled about their identity, but I am not.
Edgycater has a little hint for anyone confused about their gender: pull down your La Cage Aux Folles underoos and hold in your jelly roll: if you see an outie you are a buck and if you see an innie you are a doe. Any questions? You are welcome. Feel free to share this wisdom with your confused Leftist-Liberal-Progressive-Socialist friends if they are experiencing gender confusion.
Monday, July 20, 2009
ObamaCare Includes Committee To Tell Folks How To Die
In Friday's New York Post, Betsy McCaughey exposed some of the lies in the health care "reform" bills that are currently being pushed through Congress. The promises of President Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama and the Democrat party do not jibe with some of the frightening provisions in the bills. The biggest lie involves the idea that people can keep their current policies. That is nearly impossible under the current bill.
No one with any political sense believed Obama about that anyway. Government is not a "free market competitor" as ObamAlinsky claimed. It is an instrument of force and that is how it functions.
One of the more sinister passages of this bill involves bureaucrats "advising" older folks on life and death decisions:
Are you starting to see where some of the cost savings may occur? The bill shows no other potential for reducing costs, so isn't if fair to assume that pushing our senior citizens toward the light more quickly could be the "cash cow" for reducing health costs? Rationing of care is implemented in most every country with national health care. In most cases, it involves a pecking order in which the elderly (and sometimes middle-aged) are denied or placed at the end of the line until treatment becomes a moot point.
So, Mr. or Mrs. Leftist-Liberal-Progressive, are you comfortable with a committee of federal bureaucrats deciding when your parents or grandparents have lived long enough? When that someday comes and D.C. pencil pushers decide that your loved one is a year past their treatment being a sound public investment, think back to the "bad old days" when we had the freedom to make our own health care choices.
Eighty-three percent of folks are satisfied, but we have a "health care" crisis that requires throwing that away for a government program? We have the most responsive health care system in the world and we need to gut it and turn it over to Barry Obama and the radical Left? These people are insane, but they are powerful and well-financed by folks that understand controlling people's health is a huge step toward controlling the people.
Two main bills are being rushed through Congress with the goal of combining them into a finished product by August. Under either, a new government bureaucracy will select health plans that it considers in your best interest, and you will have to enroll in one of these "qualified plans." If you now get your plan through work, your employer has a five-year "grace period" to switch you into a qualified plan. If you buy your own insurance, you'll have less time.
And as soon as anything changes in your contract -- such as a change in copays or deductibles, which many insurers change every year -- you'll have to move into a qualified plan instead (House bill, p. 16-17).
When you file your taxes, if you can't prove to the IRS that you are in a qualified plan, you'll be fined thousands of dollars -- as much as the average cost of a health plan for your family size -- and then automatically enrolled in a randomly selected plan (House bill, p. 167-168).
No one with any political sense believed Obama about that anyway. Government is not a "free market competitor" as ObamAlinsky claimed. It is an instrument of force and that is how it functions.
One of the more sinister passages of this bill involves bureaucrats "advising" older folks on life and death decisions:
One troubling provision of the House bill compels seniors to submit to a counseling session every five years (and more often if they become sick or go into a nursing home) about alternatives for end-of-life care (House bill, p. 425-430). The sessions cover highly sensitive matters such as whether to receive antibiotics and "the use of artificially administered nutrition and hydration."
This mandate invites abuse, and seniors could easily be pushed to refuse care. Do we really want government involved in such deeply personal issues?
Are you starting to see where some of the cost savings may occur? The bill shows no other potential for reducing costs, so isn't if fair to assume that pushing our senior citizens toward the light more quickly could be the "cash cow" for reducing health costs? Rationing of care is implemented in most every country with national health care. In most cases, it involves a pecking order in which the elderly (and sometimes middle-aged) are denied or placed at the end of the line until treatment becomes a moot point.
So, Mr. or Mrs. Leftist-Liberal-Progressive, are you comfortable with a committee of federal bureaucrats deciding when your parents or grandparents have lived long enough? When that someday comes and D.C. pencil pushers decide that your loved one is a year past their treatment being a sound public investment, think back to the "bad old days" when we had the freedom to make our own health care choices.
The most recent ABC News/Washington Post poll (June 21) finds that 83 percent of Americans are very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with the quality of their health care, and 81 percent are similarly satisfied with their health insurance.
They have good reason to be. If you're diagnosed with cancer, you have a better chance of surviving it in the United States than anywhere else, according to the Concord Five Continent Study. And the World Health Organization ranked the United States No. 1 out of 191 countries for being responsive to patients' needs, including providing timely treatments and a choice of doctors.
Eighty-three percent of folks are satisfied, but we have a "health care" crisis that requires throwing that away for a government program? We have the most responsive health care system in the world and we need to gut it and turn it over to Barry Obama and the radical Left? These people are insane, but they are powerful and well-financed by folks that understand controlling people's health is a huge step toward controlling the people.
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Barbara Boxer and Democrat Racism Exposed By Black Chamber of Commerce CEO
Kalifornia Senator Barbara Boxer is one dumb broad. Really, no pretense of respect for the person or her position is necessary. She is one ignorant, simple-minded bubblehead. Today, she was humiliated (though she is likely too stupid to realize it) by Harry Alford, President and CEO of the National Black Chamber of Commerce. During a Senate hearing, she did what comes naturally to Statist-Leftist-Liberals: she condescended to a Black man because, well, racial identity is the only thing that matters to "those people." Or at least she thought.
Oh my! Mr. Alford wants to be treated like an intelligent, accomplished HUMAN BEING rather than just a representative of "some Black group." You see, Democrats, who claim to have the high ground on issues of race, do not entertain the possibility that a Black man could debate an issue unless he focuses on race. Not all Blacks are Je$$e Jackson or Al Sharpton. Most Blacks folks are, well, just regular people. In whatever profession they occupy they are capable of discussing concepts, ideas, data, and analysis independently of their skin color. What, Senator Airhead, does being Black have to do with "green technology?"
Alford's response shocked Boxer. Many Black leaders accept the condescension and belittlement in return for a place at the table. They gain from their relationship with the Democrat party, so they do not quibble with being treated as a sub-class of Americans. I don't know Harry Alford's politics, but it was great to see a Black man sit in the U.S. Senate and tell an arrogant buffoonette that she was playing race games rather than dealing with the issue at hand. Let's hope more folks of color begin standing up to this nonsense.
Oh my! Mr. Alford wants to be treated like an intelligent, accomplished HUMAN BEING rather than just a representative of "some Black group." You see, Democrats, who claim to have the high ground on issues of race, do not entertain the possibility that a Black man could debate an issue unless he focuses on race. Not all Blacks are Je$$e Jackson or Al Sharpton. Most Blacks folks are, well, just regular people. In whatever profession they occupy they are capable of discussing concepts, ideas, data, and analysis independently of their skin color. What, Senator Airhead, does being Black have to do with "green technology?"
Alford's response shocked Boxer. Many Black leaders accept the condescension and belittlement in return for a place at the table. They gain from their relationship with the Democrat party, so they do not quibble with being treated as a sub-class of Americans. I don't know Harry Alford's politics, but it was great to see a Black man sit in the U.S. Senate and tell an arrogant buffoonette that she was playing race games rather than dealing with the issue at hand. Let's hope more folks of color begin standing up to this nonsense.
Monday, July 13, 2009
Roanoke Times Lauds Leftist Virginia Organizing Project
The Left-leaning Roanoke Times kicked off the week with a front-page, feel-good story about two girls working locally for the Virginia Organizing Project. Back on June 3, I wrote about my visit from the VOP. The Roanoke Times, being loyal members of the State media, did not bother to point out that the "community organizers" are part of a Leftist coalition that pretends to be non-partisan while promoting issues like nationalized health care and the religion of global warming. If they come to your door, ask them who funds their organization. They are "trained" to simply say private donations (you know, ACORN, Media Matters, George Soros, etc.).
Subtle propaganda is so much fun. From the Roanoke Times article:
I wonder if the VOP canvassers are asking folks if they are comfortable with their older relatives being denied care by the government because they are a waste of resources. I wonder if they know doctors will be treated as criminals if they administer treatment outside of government approval. I wonder if they even know the problems with health care rationing and long waits for care in Canada, Great Britain, France, and other countries with socialized medicine. I wonder if they have even thought about the big picture.
Subtle propaganda is so much fun. From the Roanoke Times article:
So far this year, canvassers have found that 78 percent of people say health care is a very important or the most important issue in their lives.Now, that can mean a lot of things. For instance, I told them it is important that health care remain a free market concern and that Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama does not Chief Doctor. Of course, health care is important. However, this group uses an overly simplified question to claim that 78% of their interviewees want the federal government to make their medical choices. Check out the list of groups affiliated with VOP:
ACLU Of Virginia
Advancement Project
BoatPeople SOS
Central Virginia APRI
Chesapeake Climate Action Network
Clean Water Fund
Democracy South
Equality Virginia Education Fund
Environment Virginia Policy and Research Center
Fair Elections Legal Network
Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law
Project Vote
Tenants and WorkersUnited
Virginia AFL-CIO
Virginia Association of Personal Care Assistants
Virginia Conservation Network
Virginia Education Association
Virginia Interfaith Center For Public Policy
Virginia League of Conservation Voters Education Fund
Virginia Organizing Project
Virginia Poverty Law Center
Virginia Sierra Club
Voice of Vietnamese Americans
Women's Voice, Women's Vote
Working America
Some are well known proponents of every Leftist ideology around. The ones that are lesser known are often even more Marxist in their goals.
The amount of money that has been spent and that is being spent around the country to create a government mandated health care trap could have been used to create a corporation that provides insurance to those who fall through the cracks. Instead, the plight of 15% of the population is being used to destroy the health care enjoyed by the other 85%. For young, bright-eyed college kids "giving" health care to everyone sounds like something only a soul-less cretin would oppose. The reality is that the health care issue is much more complicated. In fact, like banking, credit, housing, and automobiles, health care is already heavily regulated. Government, through regulation and judicial abuse, is a prime culprit in the high prices of medical care. The HMO system that is now the great villain was the creation of Congress in the 1970s with Senator Teddy Kennedy being the primary architect.
Plenty of Leftists have the means to create a privately-funded corporation to market low-cost health care. But, that isn't their goal. Statists like Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and the Virginia Organizing Project are anti-liberty and want the State to literally determine who lives and who dies.
The non-scientific statistics in this article are indicative of the VOP's functioning as a propaganda tool.
During last year's canvass, Virginia Organizing Project found that 64 percent ofReally? In a November AP-GfK poll it was reported that national health care ranked seventh among the priorities for the new President. A USA Today/Gallup poll from November 7-9 asked which of five issues should be President Obama's top priority. Health care ranked 5th out of 5, just ahead of the category "something else." A September Newsweek poll ranked health care seventh out of seven listed issues.
people they talked to identified health care as the most important issue.
I wonder if the VOP canvassers are asking folks if they are comfortable with their older relatives being denied care by the government because they are a waste of resources. I wonder if they know doctors will be treated as criminals if they administer treatment outside of government approval. I wonder if they even know the problems with health care rationing and long waits for care in Canada, Great Britain, France, and other countries with socialized medicine. I wonder if they have even thought about the big picture.
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Sane Leftist Camille Paglia Explains The Palin Haters
Camille Paglia is an unapologetic Leftist, but she doesn't allow her ideology to diminish her humanity. That makes her the exception among Democrats and Leftists whose motto is "we hate therefore we are." Newsbusters highlights Paglia's attempt to explain the psychology of Palin Derangement Syndrome. Give Camille Paglia credit; her political ideology may be too far leftward, but she is a thoughtful and decent individual in terms of political debate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
