A few weeks ago -- before the release of his new book -- Newt Gingrich was on a couple talk shows. In discussing the primary elections and such, and possible Republican strategies, Newt said that whoever wins office in the next elections will have to do something about "the wreckage that they leave behind." He was referring to the Comrade, Pelosi, Reid, and the rest of the merry marxists.
The phrase caught my attention. I picture Pearl Harbor at about noon, Hawaiian time, on December 7, 1941. Smoldering hulls and conning towers sticking up out of oil-slicked waters, the bodies of countless sailors amidst the debris, a stunned citizenry facing the task of assessing the damage, trying to recover and move on.
Or, perhaps more relevant, Manhattan at about noon on September 11, 2001. And those images are still very fresh.
Every day, the Comrade's regime takes on more and more features of a frat house out of control. And that's being kind to them, calling them merely reckless and irresponsible rather than deliberately toxic to the USA and dedicated to its destruction -- which comes to look like the true situation here.
Take the Arizona immigration law for example. It's entirely in line with federal law, and actually provides more protections to prevent racial profiling than the federal law. It has the support of just about 70% of the US population generally and the same level of support inside of Arizona. However, the Comrade apparently doesn't like it. He sends idiots like Holder and Napolitano to make fools of themselves at congressional hearings, claiming that although they're agin' it, No, they haven't read it.
So what are they? Just knee-jerk Obama-istas? Kinda like the "Good Germans" of the 1930s and 1940s.
If that isn't vile enough, the Comrade then gets a marionette called somebody Morton, who heads up ICE, the agency in charge of doing nothing about illegal immigration, to make a public announcement that his agency will not process any illegals turned over to them by Arizona.
Just like if you can't pass crap-n-tax, get the EPA to start breaking heads with no law at all.
Putting the concept of our republic aside for the moment, what the hell ever happened to democracy in America?
It's beginning to look an awful lot like a dictatorship, isn't it?
Just think about it.
Those elected in November and in 2012 will have a large job in front of them. But we can do it. We're Americans.
Friday, May 21, 2010
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Politicizing Wall Street
Comrade Osama is on TV right now -- or he was a minute ago. I had to turn it off. I can't even look at him anymore without retching.
Apparently the bill to nationalize the credit industry has gained closure in the Senate.
The stock market dropped 900+ points. Those irresponsible, greedy hate-mongers and capitalist pigs. Imagine, trying to salvage your income! What's wrong with those people?
Unemployment went up two-tenths of a point, and new applications for unemployment increased. Although Comrade Osama announced that as "good news" and as a sign of economic recovery. Yeah. And "Arbeit Mach Frei." ("Work Makes You Free." It was a slogan hanging over the entrance to Auschwitz.)
So the Comrade is out there selling what a fantastic job he and his merry marxists are doing with the economy. Flying directly in the face of real, known, measurable facts.
That takes an awful lot of nerve. Or an awful lot of lying to yourself. Which do you think it is?
Either that, or he's so stupid he can't add and subtract.
He blabs about bringing "accountability and responsibility" to Wall Street. This from a blockhead who's sunk the USA $14 TRILLION in debt? And is sitting up nights cooking up new schemes to destroy American prosperity. I mean really. How stupid does he think we are?
Do you believe him or your own perceptions?
No legislation will "fix" Wall Street or make it any better or any safer, and it shouldn't. Wall Street is a crap shoot. That's all it ever was. Traders bet on who they think will succeed or fail. Most regulatory efforts have only made the stock market more unpredictable, due to "unintended consequences." Which means most legislators are blockheads when it comes to economics and financials. They haven't got a clue. All they have are opportunistic, power-mad intentions.
For one thing, if you take no risk, you don't get much in the way of rewards. That's the name of the game. In a free market, only the traders take the risk. If they win, THEY win; if they lose, THEY lose. They carry the burden and rake in the rewards. In a socialist economy, like Greece or the USA under this regime, the people and the government carry and pay for the risk. And there's really no way for them to win when traders are hamstrung by regulations.
So what kind of a crock is the Comrade pushing, huh? I think he was just never exposed to American traditions, American values, American institutions. He just doesn't know any better. He has absolutely no relevant standard to use to judge the issues, let alone attempt to influence these issues. The Framers were right in insisting that any president be a natural-born citizen, though they should have added "raised in the USA."
And Senator Greg Judd was on a while ago, saying he introduced a bill that would refuse the feds bailing out California and other blockhead spendthrift states. The bill was defeated.
Why not let them go down in flames? (And my state, Illinois, is apparently a good candidate for the fire.) The alternative is not a federal "rescue," but rather them taking the rest of the nation down with them.
You know what? Screw them. They blew it. Let them pay for their mistakes themselves one way or another. Look at this all as a "teachable moment." Maybe they'll learn something. Maybe.... but I doubt it. Can't teach a pig to sing.
I want the free market. I want the rationality and order of people taking care of themselves and their own interests, not the daily crash-and-burn chaos of socialism -- of each of us shouldering the burdens of those too stupid and irresponsible to take care of themselves.
I want the Comrade to go quickly to hell and burn very slowly on a spit flanked by Reid and Pelosi. Anthony Weiner and Dick(head) Durbin can be the hors d'oeuvres. (Or "horse doovers," which may be the more appropriate term.)
That's all for now.
Apparently the bill to nationalize the credit industry has gained closure in the Senate.
The stock market dropped 900+ points. Those irresponsible, greedy hate-mongers and capitalist pigs. Imagine, trying to salvage your income! What's wrong with those people?
Unemployment went up two-tenths of a point, and new applications for unemployment increased. Although Comrade Osama announced that as "good news" and as a sign of economic recovery. Yeah. And "Arbeit Mach Frei." ("Work Makes You Free." It was a slogan hanging over the entrance to Auschwitz.)
So the Comrade is out there selling what a fantastic job he and his merry marxists are doing with the economy. Flying directly in the face of real, known, measurable facts.
That takes an awful lot of nerve. Or an awful lot of lying to yourself. Which do you think it is?
Either that, or he's so stupid he can't add and subtract.
He blabs about bringing "accountability and responsibility" to Wall Street. This from a blockhead who's sunk the USA $14 TRILLION in debt? And is sitting up nights cooking up new schemes to destroy American prosperity. I mean really. How stupid does he think we are?
Do you believe him or your own perceptions?
No legislation will "fix" Wall Street or make it any better or any safer, and it shouldn't. Wall Street is a crap shoot. That's all it ever was. Traders bet on who they think will succeed or fail. Most regulatory efforts have only made the stock market more unpredictable, due to "unintended consequences." Which means most legislators are blockheads when it comes to economics and financials. They haven't got a clue. All they have are opportunistic, power-mad intentions.
For one thing, if you take no risk, you don't get much in the way of rewards. That's the name of the game. In a free market, only the traders take the risk. If they win, THEY win; if they lose, THEY lose. They carry the burden and rake in the rewards. In a socialist economy, like Greece or the USA under this regime, the people and the government carry and pay for the risk. And there's really no way for them to win when traders are hamstrung by regulations.
So what kind of a crock is the Comrade pushing, huh? I think he was just never exposed to American traditions, American values, American institutions. He just doesn't know any better. He has absolutely no relevant standard to use to judge the issues, let alone attempt to influence these issues. The Framers were right in insisting that any president be a natural-born citizen, though they should have added "raised in the USA."
And Senator Greg Judd was on a while ago, saying he introduced a bill that would refuse the feds bailing out California and other blockhead spendthrift states. The bill was defeated.
Why not let them go down in flames? (And my state, Illinois, is apparently a good candidate for the fire.) The alternative is not a federal "rescue," but rather them taking the rest of the nation down with them.
You know what? Screw them. They blew it. Let them pay for their mistakes themselves one way or another. Look at this all as a "teachable moment." Maybe they'll learn something. Maybe.... but I doubt it. Can't teach a pig to sing.
I want the free market. I want the rationality and order of people taking care of themselves and their own interests, not the daily crash-and-burn chaos of socialism -- of each of us shouldering the burdens of those too stupid and irresponsible to take care of themselves.
I want the Comrade to go quickly to hell and burn very slowly on a spit flanked by Reid and Pelosi. Anthony Weiner and Dick(head) Durbin can be the hors d'oeuvres. (Or "horse doovers," which may be the more appropriate term.)
That's all for now.
Dems find a use for all those illlegals
This has got to be one of the stupidest issues to come along in a while.
I've been looking for information on the costs of illegal immigration. Interesting, as recently as February 2, according to the LA Times, the state of California was begging the feds for money to help defray the costs of incarcerating illegal immigrants who have broken the law -- or other laws apart from the immigration laws. And according to the same story, the Comrade wanted to eliminate federal payments for this incarceration:
Maybe the Comrade believes that illegal immigrants who break additional laws shouldn't be put in jail. What the hell? They get free health care. The Comrade doesn't seem to want to do anything about their law-breaking as it relates to immigration law. Apparently, he just didn't want to pay for it last year.
But wait! Maybe now he's found another use for defending illegal immigrants! Whaddaya think?
Clearly, the Comrade and his minions -- Napolitano, Holder -- are hoping to inspire anger over this issue. For one thing, their knee-jerk response is to threaten to sue Arizona. For another thing, they both claim they haven't read the bill, which is probably just a lame cop-out so they don't have to debate the issue. They just want to see fireworks.
Exactly what are the benefits of inflaming the illegal population? They can't vote.... yet.... but San Francisco legislators are looking at giving illegals voting rights. (One way to keep their jobs?)
Perhaps the Comrade and the democrats in general are running out of abused and disaffected and disenfranchised American citizens to exalt to Victim Status, so now they're searching off-shore for people to feel sorry for, spend money on, and use as pawns to fan liberal guilt.
I don't know. However, it is patently absurd to claim that any nation has "no right" to protect its borders and control the influx of immigrants. It's insane to claim that, conversely, non-citizens have "a right" to come and go across the border as they please.
For Mexico's President Calderon to stand up beside the Butthead-in-Chief at a press conference and whine that Mexican citizens are being abused by Arizonans is actually laughable.
Looking for statistics, found a study done by Pew in 2008 about Hispanics in the USA. Pew says there were 11.9 million Mexican illegals here that year, and also that 11% of the Mexicans born in Mexico now live in the USA.
Rather than complain about how badly the USA might conceivably treat illegal aliens, President Calderon might more profitably spend his time figuring out ways to keep his people at home. But I suspect that having the USA next door is something of a safety valve for Mexico. When life gets too grim and hopeless under the yoke and cost of unbridled political corruption, those who would otherwise revolt and try to correct Mexico can simply slip across the border.
And while Calderon's indignation may be laughable, the real, genuine disgrace is some jerk from the State Department actually commiserating with representatives from Red China about the possibility that Arizona police might inconvenience illegal immigrants in the US. I'm sure Red China has absolutely no grip at all on the problem of people clamoring to enter its borders. I suppose that guy from Red China was secretly wondering why the USA doesn't force the illegals into dumping melamine into pet food products, or spray-painting infant toys with lead-based paint. I mean, what the heck? If you've got all these people flooding across the border, take advantage. Put them to work in your Peoples' Factories.
And the brainless bobble-head from the US State Department smiles and agrees.
My God, this regime is lame. And embarrassing. Not for exposing the alleged "faults" of the USA, but for its inability to even grasp the issues. It's so quick to sell-out the USA. None of the Comrade's merry marxists are worthy of being street sweepers, let alone policy-makers.
All the Comrade really cares about is promoting the Communist Manifesto. Breaking eggs to make omelets, as it were. And he has no qualms whatsoever about recruiting illegal immigrants to help him do this.
The real question is -- Why do illegal Mexican immigrants go along with that program? They won't gain anything from it. The Comrade is collapsing the US economy. Smaller pie, smaller pieces for everyone. In 10 years, the Mexicans will be much better off at home.
Save the republic.
I've been looking for information on the costs of illegal immigration. Interesting, as recently as February 2, according to the LA Times, the state of California was begging the feds for money to help defray the costs of incarcerating illegal immigrants who have broken the law -- or other laws apart from the immigration laws. And according to the same story, the Comrade wanted to eliminate federal payments for this incarceration:
LA TimesI don't know. Does "bizarre" kinda cover it?
February 01, 2010
By Richard Simon
Reporting from Washington — California stands to receive more than $1 billion from President Obama's budget plan to help cover healthcare for the poor and the cost of jailing illegal immigrants.
The budget proposal includes $25 billion in additional Medicaid funds for states, of which California is projected to receive $1.5 billion. States received a funding boost in the economic stimulus bill that Congress passed one year ago. Obama's budget plan would extend the funding through mid-2011.
A spokesman for Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) said a bipartisan group of senators would be working to increase that funding.
Still, the White House's inclusion of the money is an acknowledgment of the bipartisan support in Congress for the prison funding; last year, lawmakers rejected Obama's effort to eliminate the payments.
Maybe the Comrade believes that illegal immigrants who break additional laws shouldn't be put in jail. What the hell? They get free health care. The Comrade doesn't seem to want to do anything about their law-breaking as it relates to immigration law. Apparently, he just didn't want to pay for it last year.
But wait! Maybe now he's found another use for defending illegal immigrants! Whaddaya think?
Clearly, the Comrade and his minions -- Napolitano, Holder -- are hoping to inspire anger over this issue. For one thing, their knee-jerk response is to threaten to sue Arizona. For another thing, they both claim they haven't read the bill, which is probably just a lame cop-out so they don't have to debate the issue. They just want to see fireworks.
Exactly what are the benefits of inflaming the illegal population? They can't vote.... yet.... but San Francisco legislators are looking at giving illegals voting rights. (One way to keep their jobs?)
Perhaps the Comrade and the democrats in general are running out of abused and disaffected and disenfranchised American citizens to exalt to Victim Status, so now they're searching off-shore for people to feel sorry for, spend money on, and use as pawns to fan liberal guilt.
I don't know. However, it is patently absurd to claim that any nation has "no right" to protect its borders and control the influx of immigrants. It's insane to claim that, conversely, non-citizens have "a right" to come and go across the border as they please.
For Mexico's President Calderon to stand up beside the Butthead-in-Chief at a press conference and whine that Mexican citizens are being abused by Arizonans is actually laughable.
Looking for statistics, found a study done by Pew in 2008 about Hispanics in the USA. Pew says there were 11.9 million Mexican illegals here that year, and also that 11% of the Mexicans born in Mexico now live in the USA.
Rather than complain about how badly the USA might conceivably treat illegal aliens, President Calderon might more profitably spend his time figuring out ways to keep his people at home. But I suspect that having the USA next door is something of a safety valve for Mexico. When life gets too grim and hopeless under the yoke and cost of unbridled political corruption, those who would otherwise revolt and try to correct Mexico can simply slip across the border.
And while Calderon's indignation may be laughable, the real, genuine disgrace is some jerk from the State Department actually commiserating with representatives from Red China about the possibility that Arizona police might inconvenience illegal immigrants in the US. I'm sure Red China has absolutely no grip at all on the problem of people clamoring to enter its borders. I suppose that guy from Red China was secretly wondering why the USA doesn't force the illegals into dumping melamine into pet food products, or spray-painting infant toys with lead-based paint. I mean, what the heck? If you've got all these people flooding across the border, take advantage. Put them to work in your Peoples' Factories.
And the brainless bobble-head from the US State Department smiles and agrees.
My God, this regime is lame. And embarrassing. Not for exposing the alleged "faults" of the USA, but for its inability to even grasp the issues. It's so quick to sell-out the USA. None of the Comrade's merry marxists are worthy of being street sweepers, let alone policy-makers.
All the Comrade really cares about is promoting the Communist Manifesto. Breaking eggs to make omelets, as it were. And he has no qualms whatsoever about recruiting illegal immigrants to help him do this.
The real question is -- Why do illegal Mexican immigrants go along with that program? They won't gain anything from it. The Comrade is collapsing the US economy. Smaller pie, smaller pieces for everyone. In 10 years, the Mexicans will be much better off at home.
Save the republic.
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Got to get around the "political class"
Today is Election Day in several states. Mostly primaries, but also a special election to replace John (the oaf) Murtha, who just might be second only to Harry Byrd of West Virginia when it comes to piling up pork. Sorry, though most legislators seem to think that's a noble pursuit, I find it a disgusting abuse of the US government.
At any rate, just today got around to reading the Rasmussen Report from yesterday. You can subscribe to it free, you know, if you're interested in keeping up with the polls.
Found this interesting:
You know what? Socialized medicine is not yet a reality. It's something we can all discuss in a somewhat leisurely way.
Wait until 2014 when this particular pile of shit hits the fan.
Then it will be too late?
No. I don't think so. But it will be much easier to dump it now before the Comrade and merry marxists have hired 300,000 more federal employees to advise us on how many jumping jacks we need to do every morning.
So please, let's not forgot the horror of this bill going into today's and any other upcoming primaries, and surely not in November.
We need to get rid of this crappy socialist legislation before it drags the nation into the black hole of unsustainable debt, slavery to the state, and last but not least -- Death panels, rationing, and the demise of quaity medical care in the USA. Remember -- there will be no place else to go for that surgery or cancer treatment.
If the "political class" is unwilling to commit to this, we can always find a different set of legislators. And I'm so happy to see that that is already happening.
Save the republic.
At any rate, just today got around to reading the Rasmussen Report from yesterday. You can subscribe to it free, you know, if you're interested in keeping up with the polls.
Found this interesting:
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 56% favor repeal of the [socialized medicine] law, while 39% are opposed. Support for repeal is unchanged from a week ago. That support is also proving to be just as consistent as opposition to the health care plan before it was passed into law....So what does this mean? Exactly who is the "political class"? All the buttheads in Washington? Do they actually believe Dick(head) Durbin, that since citizens have socialized medicine now, we'll never let it go?
The health care bill produces an enormous perception gap between the Political Class and the rest of the country. While most voters nationwide favor repeal, the Political Class is opposed to repeal by an 88% to eight percent (8%) margin.
Overall, 39% of voters believe the law will be good for the country, and 50% say it will be bad. Among the Political Class, 97% see the law as good, while 64% of Mainstream voters say it will be bad.
You know what? Socialized medicine is not yet a reality. It's something we can all discuss in a somewhat leisurely way.
Wait until 2014 when this particular pile of shit hits the fan.
Then it will be too late?
No. I don't think so. But it will be much easier to dump it now before the Comrade and merry marxists have hired 300,000 more federal employees to advise us on how many jumping jacks we need to do every morning.
So please, let's not forgot the horror of this bill going into today's and any other upcoming primaries, and surely not in November.
We need to get rid of this crappy socialist legislation before it drags the nation into the black hole of unsustainable debt, slavery to the state, and last but not least -- Death panels, rationing, and the demise of quaity medical care in the USA. Remember -- there will be no place else to go for that surgery or cancer treatment.
If the "political class" is unwilling to commit to this, we can always find a different set of legislators. And I'm so happy to see that that is already happening.
Save the republic.
Monday, May 17, 2010
Pazzo Pelosi underwriting your dreams
Pazzo Pelosi has apprently been catching up on her reading -- of Marx's Kapital, that is.
She made (another) idiot statement the other day: "You can leave your work and pursue creative work as a musician... or whatever... knowing that your health insurance will be covered."
First of all -- the socialized medicine legislation doesn't allow for someone else to cover your insurance. It forces you to buy it -- and not just any ol' policy, but some kind of cadillac model with a whole lot of coverage you probably don't need. It will certainly push me further into debt, and heaven only knows what impact it will have on the republic. We can only imagine.
And suppose Pazzo had actually read the legislation, which it seems she hasn't. OK. Where would I send the rent bill? Would I qualify for food stamps? I'm going to need a rather generous fund for Internet services, subscriptions, utilities, entertainment, and I'd like to get another cat to engage my playful side to help keep my dreams alive. Should I just address these funding requirement to Pazzo Pelosi, Capitol, DC? Or perhaps to her taxpayer-funded jumbo jet, where she and her staff spend so much time and money?
Blockhead Karl Marx had a similar dream. He'll sit on his ass developing boils and scribble out his fantasies of a dream life where he sits on his ass scribbling out his fantasies, and the State pays for it. Actually, it was Engels who funded Marx, but that was before the glorious revolution.
Marx was dreaming of a world where Engels' burden would be carried by those thousands of happy workers who, like the Seven Dwarves, march happily to work every day, whistling and shouldering shovels, to support other peoples' lives and dreams. "Heigh-ho! Heigh-ho! It's off to work I go...."
Sort of brings to mind all those antebellum happy darkies gamboling on the plantation lawn in the gloaming -- after a personally satisfying day of picking cotton and boiling cane -- admidst the heady scent of magnolia blossoms, strumming their banjos while the beloved ol' Massa and saintly Missus look on...
And compare the Marx-Pelosi vision against how communism actually worked in the USSR, how it functions now in Red China, Cuba, Venezuela, or any other place on earth that has been saddled with that hideous wreck of social and economic oppression.
The real, visible, and painful result is brutal and violent political repression, slave labor, and dire poverty, except for the very few at the top of the food-chain, such as the White House and congressional leadership. I'm quite sure Pazzo places herself among that pampered elite; not likely she'll volunteer to work the night shift at a laundry, a job that is probably more in keeping with her capabilities than the job she has now.
Pazzo, surely with your admittedly insane imagination, you can do better than borrowing a stale and discredited fantasy from a twisted wannabe messiah who refused to take a day job. (And I mean Marx, not the Comrade, though the Comrade qualfies.)
Save the republic. Dump this assholette in the next election. Or at least render her a two-bit back-bencher in the minority party. And that's way more than she can handle.
She made (another) idiot statement the other day: "You can leave your work and pursue creative work as a musician... or whatever... knowing that your health insurance will be covered."
First of all -- the socialized medicine legislation doesn't allow for someone else to cover your insurance. It forces you to buy it -- and not just any ol' policy, but some kind of cadillac model with a whole lot of coverage you probably don't need. It will certainly push me further into debt, and heaven only knows what impact it will have on the republic. We can only imagine.
And suppose Pazzo had actually read the legislation, which it seems she hasn't. OK. Where would I send the rent bill? Would I qualify for food stamps? I'm going to need a rather generous fund for Internet services, subscriptions, utilities, entertainment, and I'd like to get another cat to engage my playful side to help keep my dreams alive. Should I just address these funding requirement to Pazzo Pelosi, Capitol, DC? Or perhaps to her taxpayer-funded jumbo jet, where she and her staff spend so much time and money?
Blockhead Karl Marx had a similar dream. He'll sit on his ass developing boils and scribble out his fantasies of a dream life where he sits on his ass scribbling out his fantasies, and the State pays for it. Actually, it was Engels who funded Marx, but that was before the glorious revolution.
Marx was dreaming of a world where Engels' burden would be carried by those thousands of happy workers who, like the Seven Dwarves, march happily to work every day, whistling and shouldering shovels, to support other peoples' lives and dreams. "Heigh-ho! Heigh-ho! It's off to work I go...."
Sort of brings to mind all those antebellum happy darkies gamboling on the plantation lawn in the gloaming -- after a personally satisfying day of picking cotton and boiling cane -- admidst the heady scent of magnolia blossoms, strumming their banjos while the beloved ol' Massa and saintly Missus look on...
And compare the Marx-Pelosi vision against how communism actually worked in the USSR, how it functions now in Red China, Cuba, Venezuela, or any other place on earth that has been saddled with that hideous wreck of social and economic oppression.
The real, visible, and painful result is brutal and violent political repression, slave labor, and dire poverty, except for the very few at the top of the food-chain, such as the White House and congressional leadership. I'm quite sure Pazzo places herself among that pampered elite; not likely she'll volunteer to work the night shift at a laundry, a job that is probably more in keeping with her capabilities than the job she has now.
Pazzo, surely with your admittedly insane imagination, you can do better than borrowing a stale and discredited fantasy from a twisted wannabe messiah who refused to take a day job. (And I mean Marx, not the Comrade, though the Comrade qualfies.)
Save the republic. Dump this assholette in the next election. Or at least render her a two-bit back-bencher in the minority party. And that's way more than she can handle.
Friday, May 14, 2010
Eric Holder: Emblematic idiot
Anyone else see Eric Holder 1.) admitting that he's never read the Arizona immigration law, even though he's claimed it's unconstitutional; and 2.) bending over backwards to pretend that terrorism is unrelated to "radical islam," which he apparently believes does not exist.
Can I add anything to this to make him look more buffoonish? This person is a numbskull. Point One speaks for itself. Holder is just hopping on the Comrade's bandwagon, trying to inspire riots and divisions based on "racism." Apparently they believe it gives them an "issue" that justifies totalitarian control dressed up as "social justice."
Yet while this blockhead is so quick to charge American citizens with racism -- and without reading the law -- he's comically reluctant to conclude that Jihad has anything at all to with islam. Seems he hasn't read the Koran, either. Or even listened to what terrorists themselves claim as a motive. Ever hear of Jihad or even Shar'ria, Blockhead? But that's just one version of blah-blah-blah-blah-blah.....
Holder is emblematic of this whole travesty of an administration. Kinda like Bill Clinton having so much trouble figuring out what "is" is.
We all know they're lying and dissembling. They seem to believe they don't need to defend themselves, or even provide a reasonable explanation for their actions to American citizens. They won the election. They seem to be confusing the USA with Ancient Athens, where elected tyrants were absolute dictators.
Apparently they haven't read the Constitution, either. Rule by law, not by man, buttheads.
And decent people, like Colmes a few mnutes ago on Fox, still carry the water for these fools.
At what point are reasonable liberals (if, in fact there is such a thing) going to refuse to be made figures of fun for the buttheads in the White House and the leadership in congress? Have they no self-respect, either? No brains. Their job is only to stand and applaud?
Idiots on parade.
And what the hell is with Elena Kagan? She has no background as a judge, and the White House has barred any contact with the press. So we get things like Diane Sawyer (or was that Leslie Stahl?) gushing things like: "She's a 5'3" powerhouse, loves baseball and poker!"
Yeah, I guess that qualifies her to be a Supreme Court Justice. Look no further! But based on that, one would suspect that at least 60% of the population has better credentials.
Just now watching one of the last launches -- perhaps the last -- of the space shuttle. Kind of like watching the USA retreat into history.
"Don't let it be forgot
That once there was a spot
For one brief shining moment....."
Save the republic.
Can I add anything to this to make him look more buffoonish? This person is a numbskull. Point One speaks for itself. Holder is just hopping on the Comrade's bandwagon, trying to inspire riots and divisions based on "racism." Apparently they believe it gives them an "issue" that justifies totalitarian control dressed up as "social justice."
Yet while this blockhead is so quick to charge American citizens with racism -- and without reading the law -- he's comically reluctant to conclude that Jihad has anything at all to with islam. Seems he hasn't read the Koran, either. Or even listened to what terrorists themselves claim as a motive. Ever hear of Jihad or even Shar'ria, Blockhead? But that's just one version of blah-blah-blah-blah-blah.....
Holder is emblematic of this whole travesty of an administration. Kinda like Bill Clinton having so much trouble figuring out what "is" is.
We all know they're lying and dissembling. They seem to believe they don't need to defend themselves, or even provide a reasonable explanation for their actions to American citizens. They won the election. They seem to be confusing the USA with Ancient Athens, where elected tyrants were absolute dictators.
Apparently they haven't read the Constitution, either. Rule by law, not by man, buttheads.
And decent people, like Colmes a few mnutes ago on Fox, still carry the water for these fools.
At what point are reasonable liberals (if, in fact there is such a thing) going to refuse to be made figures of fun for the buttheads in the White House and the leadership in congress? Have they no self-respect, either? No brains. Their job is only to stand and applaud?
Idiots on parade.
And what the hell is with Elena Kagan? She has no background as a judge, and the White House has barred any contact with the press. So we get things like Diane Sawyer (or was that Leslie Stahl?) gushing things like: "She's a 5'3" powerhouse, loves baseball and poker!"
Yeah, I guess that qualifies her to be a Supreme Court Justice. Look no further! But based on that, one would suspect that at least 60% of the population has better credentials.
Just now watching one of the last launches -- perhaps the last -- of the space shuttle. Kind of like watching the USA retreat into history.
"Don't let it be forgot
That once there was a spot
For one brief shining moment....."
Save the republic.
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Who owns the truth?
I'm becoming increasingly alarmed about the Comrade and his regime's attacks on the First Amendment. This is truly enough to make your hair stand up on end, given that for many years, things like Radio Free Europe kept the human race alive inside the Communist Bloc, and things like that. 'Course, we wouldn't expect the Comrade to regard that as anything positive.
A couple weeks ago, Glenn Beck did a show all about Sam Adams. Beck presents Sam Adams as a religious figure, a man of deep faith. OK, maybe he was. Adams had been educated at Hahvahd when it was a Methodist (I believe) seminary. He was qualified to be a religious minister, but I don't believe he ever was. He did work as a tax collector for time. He refused to collect the taxes. The Brits fired him. Boston re-elected him as Tax Collector. Apparently Bostonians liked the way he handled the job. Sam Adams was one cool dude.
Curiously, Glenn Beck shied away from the notion that Sam Adams was a propagandist -- which Adams surely was. Adams constructed and worked diligently to sustain the Committees of Correspondence, which eventually evolved into the Continental Congress. Some people claim he organized the Sons of Liberty, though I don't know that that's proven. He definitely had a finger in the radical political pies in Boston and encouraged their efforts.
Adams was the first to get the word out about the Boston Massacree -- through the Committees of Correspondence -- and picked and harped at it as cause for... maybe armed revolt? He did the same for events at Lexington and Concord. He was a relentless rabble-rouser, the "rabble" being 12 other colonies hundreds of miles distant from each other.
After the American Revolution, the French, who were quite pleased to see the wild colonials give Britain a big black eye, elevated Ben Franklin and Sam Adams to legendary fame as the two men most responsible for putting the United States together.
About 30 years ago, I did a term paper on propaganda during the American Revolution. That's how I met Sam Adams. The term paper was supposed to be something like 12 to 15 pages. I wrote 39 pages. It was fascinating. Imagine, no telephone, TV, radio, and barely a post office (until Ben Franklin), and Sam Adams managed to get 13 very disparate colonies with varying interests to hang together and defeat British rule.
That is mind-boggling. Sam Adams -- helped greatly by George Washington, Patrick Henry, John Hancock, and numerous others whom he recruited -- managed to persuade four million skeptical British subjects to cast off the authority of the Crown. He convinced them that they didn't need British law, British trade, or British protection -- in a wilderness that had yet to be mapped and was still prey to every naval power in the world.
I ended that term paper with the thought that the men who created the USA enshrined their rhetorical and propagandist efforts into one simple legal provision: The First Amendment.
They understood the power of speech, the power of ideas. They had created the American Revolution through speech and propaganda, and they ended up advocating free speech as one of the most indispensable elements of a just and righteous government, one dedicated to exalting the human race rather than enslaving it.
The cure for bad arguments and lies, they said, or for "bad" speech -- the cure for that was MORE speech -- to defend or counteract, correct, or refine every idea. It all gets milled and ground down to the basics, considered and reconsidered, built up or knocked down, amplified or forgotten, allowing each of us to make the best decisions possible to control our own lives to achieve our own goals.
There is no such thing as "too much information." There's only a vicious and anti-humanitarian concern about who should "control" information.
No one controls it. No one ever SHOULD control it. Anyone who wants to control it is, without any doubt at all, looking to take away your liberty and control you. There is NO DOUBT about that whatsoever, no other explanation or rationale for that position.
This goes directly to the issue of living by your own lights. Giving however much time and effort you want to a particular issue, you listen to the various sides of the argument, you research the background, you review and assess your own situation, and you make up your own mind about what makes sense to you and what you believe in. This is applies to everything from, "Should I buy hot dogs or hamburgers?" to "Who should I vote for?" or "Which church should I attend, if any?"
Without any information -- or only limited information -- to make a decision, you're hamstrung and completely at the mercy of the guys with the guns.
But then, the whole idea behind government control is taking away citizens' ability to make their own decisions. The totalitarian government does all the decision-making for you. You just roll up in a ball and suck your thumb and hope you're not the one who gets the beating today. This is exactly the way the slave-owners managed their "dependencies." This is exactly why it was illegal in most states to teach slaves how to read and right. And the slave states also censored the mail.... "Uncle Tom's Cabin" and The New York Tribune was not allowed in the slave states.
This regime's concerns about the unhampered dissemination of information over the Internet, through radio, and other media is the most serious kind of bullshit I've ever heard -- and to hear it coming from a US president is a shocking disgrace. Comrade Butthead announced that the unfettered and chaotic information available to Americans today via a wide range of media, is a "distraction" and a "diversion, rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than a means of emancipation."
So now he's telling us what information "should" be and how we "should" use it? And how do you suggest we get it, Mr. Wonderful? And from whom? I'm waiting for that shoe to drop. Possibly exclusively from this Liar-in-Chief? And his tireless propaganda machine? Half-grown 18-year-olds in red shirts displaying the hammer and sickle? Weary and stale old hippies -- those who managed to survive the Reagan Administration in spider-holes in Canada -- or at the University of Illinois? The Comrade's voter base?
Whatever goes around usually comes around, know what I mean? This jerk in the White House can dish it out, but he can't take it. And the answer?
MORE INFORMATION!!!! Crank up those Tea Parties another notch. More signs and bumper-stickers. Why not burn a few people in effigy while we're at it? That's how Sam Adama and the Sons of Liberty went about it. And it worked. Free speech has always worked. And it will again. Truth will out.
Save the republic.
A couple weeks ago, Glenn Beck did a show all about Sam Adams. Beck presents Sam Adams as a religious figure, a man of deep faith. OK, maybe he was. Adams had been educated at Hahvahd when it was a Methodist (I believe) seminary. He was qualified to be a religious minister, but I don't believe he ever was. He did work as a tax collector for time. He refused to collect the taxes. The Brits fired him. Boston re-elected him as Tax Collector. Apparently Bostonians liked the way he handled the job. Sam Adams was one cool dude.
Curiously, Glenn Beck shied away from the notion that Sam Adams was a propagandist -- which Adams surely was. Adams constructed and worked diligently to sustain the Committees of Correspondence, which eventually evolved into the Continental Congress. Some people claim he organized the Sons of Liberty, though I don't know that that's proven. He definitely had a finger in the radical political pies in Boston and encouraged their efforts.
Adams was the first to get the word out about the Boston Massacree -- through the Committees of Correspondence -- and picked and harped at it as cause for... maybe armed revolt? He did the same for events at Lexington and Concord. He was a relentless rabble-rouser, the "rabble" being 12 other colonies hundreds of miles distant from each other.
After the American Revolution, the French, who were quite pleased to see the wild colonials give Britain a big black eye, elevated Ben Franklin and Sam Adams to legendary fame as the two men most responsible for putting the United States together.
About 30 years ago, I did a term paper on propaganda during the American Revolution. That's how I met Sam Adams. The term paper was supposed to be something like 12 to 15 pages. I wrote 39 pages. It was fascinating. Imagine, no telephone, TV, radio, and barely a post office (until Ben Franklin), and Sam Adams managed to get 13 very disparate colonies with varying interests to hang together and defeat British rule.
That is mind-boggling. Sam Adams -- helped greatly by George Washington, Patrick Henry, John Hancock, and numerous others whom he recruited -- managed to persuade four million skeptical British subjects to cast off the authority of the Crown. He convinced them that they didn't need British law, British trade, or British protection -- in a wilderness that had yet to be mapped and was still prey to every naval power in the world.
I ended that term paper with the thought that the men who created the USA enshrined their rhetorical and propagandist efforts into one simple legal provision: The First Amendment.
They understood the power of speech, the power of ideas. They had created the American Revolution through speech and propaganda, and they ended up advocating free speech as one of the most indispensable elements of a just and righteous government, one dedicated to exalting the human race rather than enslaving it.
The cure for bad arguments and lies, they said, or for "bad" speech -- the cure for that was MORE speech -- to defend or counteract, correct, or refine every idea. It all gets milled and ground down to the basics, considered and reconsidered, built up or knocked down, amplified or forgotten, allowing each of us to make the best decisions possible to control our own lives to achieve our own goals.
There is no such thing as "too much information." There's only a vicious and anti-humanitarian concern about who should "control" information.
No one controls it. No one ever SHOULD control it. Anyone who wants to control it is, without any doubt at all, looking to take away your liberty and control you. There is NO DOUBT about that whatsoever, no other explanation or rationale for that position.
This goes directly to the issue of living by your own lights. Giving however much time and effort you want to a particular issue, you listen to the various sides of the argument, you research the background, you review and assess your own situation, and you make up your own mind about what makes sense to you and what you believe in. This is applies to everything from, "Should I buy hot dogs or hamburgers?" to "Who should I vote for?" or "Which church should I attend, if any?"
Without any information -- or only limited information -- to make a decision, you're hamstrung and completely at the mercy of the guys with the guns.
But then, the whole idea behind government control is taking away citizens' ability to make their own decisions. The totalitarian government does all the decision-making for you. You just roll up in a ball and suck your thumb and hope you're not the one who gets the beating today. This is exactly the way the slave-owners managed their "dependencies." This is exactly why it was illegal in most states to teach slaves how to read and right. And the slave states also censored the mail.... "Uncle Tom's Cabin" and The New York Tribune was not allowed in the slave states.
This regime's concerns about the unhampered dissemination of information over the Internet, through radio, and other media is the most serious kind of bullshit I've ever heard -- and to hear it coming from a US president is a shocking disgrace. Comrade Butthead announced that the unfettered and chaotic information available to Americans today via a wide range of media, is a "distraction" and a "diversion, rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than a means of emancipation."
So now he's telling us what information "should" be and how we "should" use it? And how do you suggest we get it, Mr. Wonderful? And from whom? I'm waiting for that shoe to drop. Possibly exclusively from this Liar-in-Chief? And his tireless propaganda machine? Half-grown 18-year-olds in red shirts displaying the hammer and sickle? Weary and stale old hippies -- those who managed to survive the Reagan Administration in spider-holes in Canada -- or at the University of Illinois? The Comrade's voter base?
Whatever goes around usually comes around, know what I mean? This jerk in the White House can dish it out, but he can't take it. And the answer?
MORE INFORMATION!!!! Crank up those Tea Parties another notch. More signs and bumper-stickers. Why not burn a few people in effigy while we're at it? That's how Sam Adama and the Sons of Liberty went about it. And it worked. Free speech has always worked. And it will again. Truth will out.
Save the republic.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)