The Left's End Times, American Thinker
As the informed know, science isn't science unless theories -- if they are that -- are subject to rigorous examination and criticism. Theories stand or fall through a relentless process of challenge and elimination. Call the method scientific musical chairs. The last to have a seat wins...for a while, anyway.
The scientific priesthood that surrounds global warming theory seems far more determined to protect the theory from the rigors of scientific method than to open it up to challenge. This bespeaks a couple of important things: 1) that so jealously guarding global warming theory from scrutiny and challenge means that its advocates have little confidence in it; 2) that it reduces the theory to an article of faith, which anyone is entitled to hold, but not to impose on the rest of us.
It must strike those who are stridently secular as peculiar for anyone to suggest that global warming science is nothing more than a faith, and that their deep need for faith -- as there's a deep need for faith in all human beings -- is being satisfied and expressed through pseudo-science.
Global warming adherents are simply replacing God -- Christian or otherwise -- with constructs of their own. It's quite remarkable that socialism or Marxism -- which are generally hostile to religion or faith, which lay claims to objectivity and reality, and which most global warming adherents are in sympathy with -- should fall into the hands of those who, despite their protestations, are decidedly antagonistic to the openness and dissent that in large part makes science science.
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Heckuva Job, Barry
If we can’t catch a Nigerian with a powerful explosive powder in his oddly feminine-looking underpants and a syringe full of acid, a man whose own father had alerted the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria, a traveler whose ticket was paid for in cash and who didn’t check bags, whose visa renewal had been denied by the British, who had studied Arabic in Al Qaeda sanctuary Yemen, whose name was on a counterterrorism watch list, who can we catch?
by Maureen Dowd in the NYT
Top Ten reasons it took Obama 3 days to respond to terror attempt
by William Tate on American Thinker
Barack Obama has received considerable criticism for waiting three days to address the attempted Christmas Day bombing of Northwest Flight 253. In the holiday spirit of giving, I would like to offer Obama ... the Top 10 excuses Obama can use for why it took him so long to speak up.
10. My teleprompter was on vacation last week.
9. Polishing a Nobel Prize takes longer than you think.
8. It was Bush's fault. (Hey, it worked last year.)
7. The waves here in Hawaii are bitchen, dude.
6. Janet Napolitano said the system worked great, even if I couldn't get email on my Blackberry for a while there.
5. This sort of thing just ain't supposed to happen on my watch.
4. It was Bush's fault.
3. Axelrod never told me I'd have to work holidays.
2. I was busy celebrating Festivus.
And the Number One excuse Obama can give for taking so long to respond to the attempted attack on Northwest Flight 253:
I was busy looking for my birth certificate.
Barack Obama has received considerable criticism for waiting three days to address the attempted Christmas Day bombing of Northwest Flight 253. In the holiday spirit of giving, I would like to offer Obama ... the Top 10 excuses Obama can use for why it took him so long to speak up.
10. My teleprompter was on vacation last week.
9. Polishing a Nobel Prize takes longer than you think.
8. It was Bush's fault. (Hey, it worked last year.)
7. The waves here in Hawaii are bitchen, dude.
6. Janet Napolitano said the system worked great, even if I couldn't get email on my Blackberry for a while there.
5. This sort of thing just ain't supposed to happen on my watch.
4. It was Bush's fault.
3. Axelrod never told me I'd have to work holidays.
2. I was busy celebrating Festivus.
And the Number One excuse Obama can give for taking so long to respond to the attempted attack on Northwest Flight 253:
I was busy looking for my birth certificate.
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
What Recession? Michelle Obama Wears $635 Shoes on $4,000 Per Night Vacation
Barack Obama enjoys living like a king, so why shouldn't Michelle Obama live like a queen?
The First Lady was photographed last night in Hawaii wearing $635 per pair designer shoes by Maison Martin Margiela.
The shoe style is called "Leather open toe flat pumps." It features a "thin nude leather strap across the top of the toe."
A woman lucky enough to have a job in this economy and working for the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour would have to work 88 hours (without taxes taken out) to make enough to pay for Michelle Obama's shoes. If she can get them on sale, they would only set her back $445 for 62 hours work.
The Obamas are staying at an $8.9 million estate for an estimated $4000 per night. To cover the Obama's ten night stay, the minimum wage worker would have to work two-and-a-half years (before taxes) to come up with the $40,000 Obama is reportedly laying out.
Obama has lectured Americans about how they can not expect to live their lives as indulgently as they have in the past. He has lectured businesses about their travel and pay. Yet Obama and his wife live like kings and queens.
The news media has yet to call him out on his extravagance when there is 10% unemployment with no sign of the employment picture improving this coming year.
H/T maggief
Unhealthy Arrogance
What does calling this medical care legislation "historic" mean? It means that previous administrations gave up the idea when it became clear that the voting public did not want government control of medical care. What is "historic" is that this will be the first administration to show that it doesn't care one bit what the public wants or doesn't want.
In short, this is not about the public's health. It is about Obama's ego and his chance to impose his will and leave a legacy.
This is not the only massive legislation to be rushed to passage in Congress and then left to go into effect slowly. The same political formula was used earlier, to pass the "stimulus" bill to spend hundreds of billions of dollars that the government doesn't have-- and that may well amount to more than a trillion dollars when the interest on the debt it creates is added, for this and the next generation to pay off.
Legislation is not the only sign of this administration's contempt for the intelligence of the public and for the safeguards of democratic government.
The appointment of White House "czars" to make policy across a wide spectrum of issues-- unknown people who get around the Constitution's requirement of Senate confirmation for Cabinet members-- is yet another sign of the mindset that sees the fundamental laws and values of this country as just something to get around, in order to impose the will of an arrogant elite.
That some of these "czars" have already revealed their own contempt for the values of American society in the things they have said and done only reinforces the point.
In a sense, this administration is only the end result of a long social process that includes raising successive generations with dumbed-down education in schools and colleges that have become indoctrination centers for the visions of the left. Our education system has turned out many people who have never heard any other vision and who can only learn what is wrong with the prevailing vision from bitter experience.
That bitter experience now awaits them, at home and abroad.
Read the entire article here
In short, this is not about the public's health. It is about Obama's ego and his chance to impose his will and leave a legacy.
This is not the only massive legislation to be rushed to passage in Congress and then left to go into effect slowly. The same political formula was used earlier, to pass the "stimulus" bill to spend hundreds of billions of dollars that the government doesn't have-- and that may well amount to more than a trillion dollars when the interest on the debt it creates is added, for this and the next generation to pay off.
Legislation is not the only sign of this administration's contempt for the intelligence of the public and for the safeguards of democratic government.
The appointment of White House "czars" to make policy across a wide spectrum of issues-- unknown people who get around the Constitution's requirement of Senate confirmation for Cabinet members-- is yet another sign of the mindset that sees the fundamental laws and values of this country as just something to get around, in order to impose the will of an arrogant elite.
That some of these "czars" have already revealed their own contempt for the values of American society in the things they have said and done only reinforces the point.
In a sense, this administration is only the end result of a long social process that includes raising successive generations with dumbed-down education in schools and colleges that have become indoctrination centers for the visions of the left. Our education system has turned out many people who have never heard any other vision and who can only learn what is wrong with the prevailing vision from bitter experience.
That bitter experience now awaits them, at home and abroad.
Read the entire article here
Healthcare explained..
We were told we had to do it because of the however many millions of uninsured, yet this bill will leave about 25 million Americans uninsured. On the other hand, millions of young, healthy Americans in their first jobs who take the entirely reasonable view that they do not require health insurance at this stage in their lives will be forced to pay for coverage they neither want nor need. On the other other hand, those Americans who have done the boring, responsible, grown-up thing and have health plans Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid determines to be excessively "generous" will be subject to punitive taxes up to 40 percent.
On the other other other hand, if you're the member of a union that enjoys privileged relations with commissar Reid, you'll be exempt from that 40 percent shakedown.
On the other other other other hand, if you're already enjoying government health care, well, you're 83 years old and, let's face it, it's hardly worth us giving you that surgery for the minimal contribution you make to society, so in the cause of extending government health care to millions of people who don't currently get it, we're going to ration it for those currently entitled to it.
Looking at the millions of Americans it leaves uninsured and the millions it leaves with worse treatment and reduced access and the millions it makes pay significantly more for their current health care, one can only marvel at Mr. Reid's genius: Government health care turns out to be all government and no health care. Adding up the zillions of new taxes and bureaucracies and regulations it imposes on the citizenry, one might almost think that was the only point of the exercise.
by Mark Steyn read it here.
On the other other other hand, if you're the member of a union that enjoys privileged relations with commissar Reid, you'll be exempt from that 40 percent shakedown.
On the other other other other hand, if you're already enjoying government health care, well, you're 83 years old and, let's face it, it's hardly worth us giving you that surgery for the minimal contribution you make to society, so in the cause of extending government health care to millions of people who don't currently get it, we're going to ration it for those currently entitled to it.
Looking at the millions of Americans it leaves uninsured and the millions it leaves with worse treatment and reduced access and the millions it makes pay significantly more for their current health care, one can only marvel at Mr. Reid's genius: Government health care turns out to be all government and no health care. Adding up the zillions of new taxes and bureaucracies and regulations it imposes on the citizenry, one might almost think that was the only point of the exercise.
by Mark Steyn read it here.
The Big Lie
The Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard once defended the proposition that every statement suggests its opposite. Others have expressed a similar skepticism concerning the trustworthiness of words, especially when those words are not backed by action. From Shakespeare ("The lady doth protest too much, methinks") to Emily Dickinson ("A word is dead/When it is said"), our great writers have always been suspicious of flowery words.
Modern political history offers plenty of examples of words that suggest their opposite. For many who watched the speech, Richard Nixon's insistence that he was "not a crook" immediately heightened the suspicion that he was. Bill Clinton's finger-wagging denial of ever having had "sex with that woman" only whetted public curiosity to find out what he had been doing with that woman.
Taxing and spending may not be sexy, but in fact they are far more scandalous activities than those engaged in by Presidents Nixon and Clinton. They are scandalous because unlike the foibles of his predecessors, Obama's bad judgment will affect the life of every American, including those yet unborn. Unlike the failings of his predecessors, Obama's fiscal recklessness affects what we are and what we shall be for generations. Shall we be a rich and powerful nation with a strong and trusted currency and prosperous markets -- or an unproductive nation dependent on the fiscal dictates of others? Shall we be a nation of affluence and opportunity, or a nation of beggars housed in public shelter, fed with food stamps, heated and clothed with vouchers, educated in dysfunctional schools, and treated within an overcrowded, government-regulated medical system? The choice depends on whether government is able to restrain its spending.
Certainly, Obama wishes to appear to be a fiscally responsible president who will both lower the deficit and hold the line on taxes. He is loud and insistent, even to the point of browbeating opponents, about controlling spending and not raising taxes. But as Kierkegaard, Shakespeare, and Dickinson understood, "not one penny" is one of those phrases meant to disguise the speaker's intention. It is a classic example "the big lie," a falsehood so outrageous that it cannot easily be challenged. It is, in fact, a rhetorical trick to which Obama frequently resorts.
"Raising taxes next year," says the president, "would be the wrong thing to do." Why would it be the wrong thing to do next year if it is necessary in future years? Does it have anything to do with the November election? What about every year after 2010? The American people recognize lawyerly speech when they hear it. As the American people grow weary of Obama's deception, the moment of truth may finally catch up with him. That is the moment when bluster, deception, and denial no longer work.
With each week that passes, the president's assurances that "spending is saving" ring more hollow. At some future press conference, during some tense interview or angry speech, the moment will surely arrive when the president glowers angrily at the camera and insists that "I am not a wastrel." And at that point, everyone in America will know that he is.
From the American Thinker
Modern political history offers plenty of examples of words that suggest their opposite. For many who watched the speech, Richard Nixon's insistence that he was "not a crook" immediately heightened the suspicion that he was. Bill Clinton's finger-wagging denial of ever having had "sex with that woman" only whetted public curiosity to find out what he had been doing with that woman.
Taxing and spending may not be sexy, but in fact they are far more scandalous activities than those engaged in by Presidents Nixon and Clinton. They are scandalous because unlike the foibles of his predecessors, Obama's bad judgment will affect the life of every American, including those yet unborn. Unlike the failings of his predecessors, Obama's fiscal recklessness affects what we are and what we shall be for generations. Shall we be a rich and powerful nation with a strong and trusted currency and prosperous markets -- or an unproductive nation dependent on the fiscal dictates of others? Shall we be a nation of affluence and opportunity, or a nation of beggars housed in public shelter, fed with food stamps, heated and clothed with vouchers, educated in dysfunctional schools, and treated within an overcrowded, government-regulated medical system? The choice depends on whether government is able to restrain its spending.
Certainly, Obama wishes to appear to be a fiscally responsible president who will both lower the deficit and hold the line on taxes. He is loud and insistent, even to the point of browbeating opponents, about controlling spending and not raising taxes. But as Kierkegaard, Shakespeare, and Dickinson understood, "not one penny" is one of those phrases meant to disguise the speaker's intention. It is a classic example "the big lie," a falsehood so outrageous that it cannot easily be challenged. It is, in fact, a rhetorical trick to which Obama frequently resorts.
"Raising taxes next year," says the president, "would be the wrong thing to do." Why would it be the wrong thing to do next year if it is necessary in future years? Does it have anything to do with the November election? What about every year after 2010? The American people recognize lawyerly speech when they hear it. As the American people grow weary of Obama's deception, the moment of truth may finally catch up with him. That is the moment when bluster, deception, and denial no longer work.
With each week that passes, the president's assurances that "spending is saving" ring more hollow. At some future press conference, during some tense interview or angry speech, the moment will surely arrive when the president glowers angrily at the camera and insists that "I am not a wastrel." And at that point, everyone in America will know that he is.
From the American Thinker
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Healthcare reform? In the not too distant future we are going to be paying 'filet' prices, and eating cat food.
Richard Foster, Chief Actuary for Medicare, issued a report on November 13 documenting the severe impact the bill would have on hospitals.
Americans today enjoy the best, most advanced health care in the world. That is why people come here from socialized medicine systems all over the world, when they are really sick and need the most advanced care. And that is why these other health care systems copy our health care innovations and breakthroughs. This is a key component of the high standard of living Americans have enjoyed.
But that will be gone under this Democrat socialized medicine bill. Instead you will suffer the equal sharing of misery that the Democrats mistake for social justice, as our current system is looted and sacked, with the resources redistributed to where the Democrats think they can buy more votes than by spending huge sums on seriously ill people that need truly advanced medical care to save their lives.
President Obama continues trying to sell his government takeover of health care with the counterintuitive claim that it will reduce health costs. "Anybody who says otherwise simply hasn't read the bills," he said last weekend, a shockingly ridiculous statement given how Congressional Democrats have been hiding the various versions of the bill until springing them just before a vote.
Many other studies now have accumulated to show the same thing. As indicated, younger workers will be hurt the most with their premiums, which they will be required by law to pay, increasing 2 to 3 times. That is because today their health insurance is relatively inexpensive due to their low health costs on average. But the bill would prohibit insurers from continuing to provide this benefit to younger workers, with the increased money from the young, already paying so much for Social Security and Medicare, redistributed elsewhere.
During last year's campaign, President Obama pledged a health reform plan that would reduce health insurance costs by $2,500 per year per family. If health insurance costs soar under his plan instead, wouldn't it be reasonable to ask him to resign for defrauding his way into office?
Notice also that you do not hear President Obama say anymore that if you like your health insurance plan you can keep it. That is because in the face of these soaring costs, employers will have powerful incentives to save substantial costs by dropping their coverage and paying the fines for doing so. The Chief Actuary of Medicare also estimates that 9-10 million seniors will lose their Medicare Advantage plans because of the steep cuts for those plans under the legislation. Would it not be reasonable for those who lose their health coverage under his health plan, contrary to his promises, to ask him to resign?
You can read the whole sad truth here.. most choose not to believe it though. When we all have miserable health care in the future, remember who got us there.
Americans today enjoy the best, most advanced health care in the world. That is why people come here from socialized medicine systems all over the world, when they are really sick and need the most advanced care. And that is why these other health care systems copy our health care innovations and breakthroughs. This is a key component of the high standard of living Americans have enjoyed.
But that will be gone under this Democrat socialized medicine bill. Instead you will suffer the equal sharing of misery that the Democrats mistake for social justice, as our current system is looted and sacked, with the resources redistributed to where the Democrats think they can buy more votes than by spending huge sums on seriously ill people that need truly advanced medical care to save their lives.
President Obama continues trying to sell his government takeover of health care with the counterintuitive claim that it will reduce health costs. "Anybody who says otherwise simply hasn't read the bills," he said last weekend, a shockingly ridiculous statement given how Congressional Democrats have been hiding the various versions of the bill until springing them just before a vote.
Many other studies now have accumulated to show the same thing. As indicated, younger workers will be hurt the most with their premiums, which they will be required by law to pay, increasing 2 to 3 times. That is because today their health insurance is relatively inexpensive due to their low health costs on average. But the bill would prohibit insurers from continuing to provide this benefit to younger workers, with the increased money from the young, already paying so much for Social Security and Medicare, redistributed elsewhere.
During last year's campaign, President Obama pledged a health reform plan that would reduce health insurance costs by $2,500 per year per family. If health insurance costs soar under his plan instead, wouldn't it be reasonable to ask him to resign for defrauding his way into office?
Notice also that you do not hear President Obama say anymore that if you like your health insurance plan you can keep it. That is because in the face of these soaring costs, employers will have powerful incentives to save substantial costs by dropping their coverage and paying the fines for doing so. The Chief Actuary of Medicare also estimates that 9-10 million seniors will lose their Medicare Advantage plans because of the steep cuts for those plans under the legislation. Would it not be reasonable for those who lose their health coverage under his health plan, contrary to his promises, to ask him to resign?
You can read the whole sad truth here.. most choose not to believe it though. When we all have miserable health care in the future, remember who got us there.
Monday, December 21, 2009
Obama’s ‘Cash for Cardigans’ to Cut Carbon Emissions
Posted By Scott Ott On December 15, 2009
(2009-12-15) — President Barack Obama has acknowledged that his new $23 billion weatherization subsidy program will merely slow the leakage of heat from homes.
So today the president introduced what the White House calls “phase II” of an overall program to completely eliminate carbon emissions from residential buildings.
The $37 billion “cash for cardigans” program will help homeowners to pay for sweaters, cardigans, housecoats, even Snuggies (the blanket with sleeves, As Seen on TV), so that they can dial back the thermostat to a setting that would require combustion of fossil fuels “only during the most frigid episodes of global cooling.”
According to experts at the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia, widespread “bundling up” in the U.S. and U.K. will “unquestionably save island nations from seawater inundation, African nations from utter dessication and polar bears from spontaneous combustion.”
“The data, which we recently misplaced, is irrefutable,” said CRU director Phil Jones, currently on involuntary sabbatical. “By combining carbon-credit trading with weather stripping, vegetarianism, cardigan-wearing, alternate-day respiration, and other simple lifestyle changes, we can stave off the destruction of billions of acres of wildlife habitat, and perhaps save humanity as well.”
Under the Obama “cash for cardigans” program, citizens would receive a one dollar credit toward woolen wear for each degree they reduce their thermostat. The White House said this means a senior citizen, living on a fixed income, could receive a $45 cardigan at no charge, simply by turning the thermostat back to 27 degrees Fahrenheit.
(2009-12-15) — President Barack Obama has acknowledged that his new $23 billion weatherization subsidy program will merely slow the leakage of heat from homes.
So today the president introduced what the White House calls “phase II” of an overall program to completely eliminate carbon emissions from residential buildings.
The $37 billion “cash for cardigans” program will help homeowners to pay for sweaters, cardigans, housecoats, even Snuggies (the blanket with sleeves, As Seen on TV), so that they can dial back the thermostat to a setting that would require combustion of fossil fuels “only during the most frigid episodes of global cooling.”
According to experts at the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia, widespread “bundling up” in the U.S. and U.K. will “unquestionably save island nations from seawater inundation, African nations from utter dessication and polar bears from spontaneous combustion.”
“The data, which we recently misplaced, is irrefutable,” said CRU director Phil Jones, currently on involuntary sabbatical. “By combining carbon-credit trading with weather stripping, vegetarianism, cardigan-wearing, alternate-day respiration, and other simple lifestyle changes, we can stave off the destruction of billions of acres of wildlife habitat, and perhaps save humanity as well.”
Under the Obama “cash for cardigans” program, citizens would receive a one dollar credit toward woolen wear for each degree they reduce their thermostat. The White House said this means a senior citizen, living on a fixed income, could receive a $45 cardigan at no charge, simply by turning the thermostat back to 27 degrees Fahrenheit.
I laughed so hard when I saw this I thought I was having an appendicitis
Honest Leadership??.. Open Government?? oh puleeze.
I thought Obama was going to make the world love us again
HAVANA (AP) - Cuba's foreign minister called President Barack Obama an "imperial and arrogant" liar Monday for his conduct at the U.N. climate conference, a reflection of the communist island's increasingly fiery verbal attacks on the U.S. government.
Bruno Rodriguez spent an hour and a half lambasting Obama's behavior in Copenhagen, telling a news conference, "at this summit, there was only imperial, arrogant Obama, who does not listen, who imposes his positions and even threatens developing countries."
He called the summit "a fallacy, a farce" and said Washington used back-room deals and strong-arm tactics to foist on the world a deal that he labeled "undemocratic" and "suicidal" because it urges - but does not require - major polluters to make deeper emissions cuts.
Read it here.
Bruno Rodriguez spent an hour and a half lambasting Obama's behavior in Copenhagen, telling a news conference, "at this summit, there was only imperial, arrogant Obama, who does not listen, who imposes his positions and even threatens developing countries."
He called the summit "a fallacy, a farce" and said Washington used back-room deals and strong-arm tactics to foist on the world a deal that he labeled "undemocratic" and "suicidal" because it urges - but does not require - major polluters to make deeper emissions cuts.
Read it here.
Obama agrees to 'cap' the global temperature rise
Anyone possessing a personality syndrome which renders capable a belief that world leaders have the power to “cap” the earth’s temperature should not be allowed to serve as president of anything. The U.S. Constitution should be amended to read: “Anyone who believes that he has the ability to cap the earth’s temperature in conjunction with global leaders shall not be eligible to serve as President of the United States. Instead, he shall be remanded immediately for mandatory psychiatric evaluation.”
Nice... read the entire article.
Nice... read the entire article.
A bill so reckless that it has to be rammed through on a partisan vote on Christmas eve.
60 Democrats are creating a future of epic increases in spending, taxes and command-and-control regulation, in which bureaucracy trumps innovation and transfer payments are more important than private investment and individual decisions. In short, the Obama Democrats have chosen change nobody believes in—outside of themselves—and when it passes America will be paying for it for decades to come.
Change Nobody Believes In from the WSJ.
Change Nobody Believes In from the WSJ.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
American Buffoon-in-Chief - Obama showing his best side
President Bush supposedly offended the rest of the world with his cowboy chauvinism, but at least he followed proper etiquette while telling the leaders of other countries that America was going to go its own way. Obama doesn't even know to invite the Prime Minister of Great Britain to a state dinner. He doesn't even bother to learn the proper way to greet kings and emperors.
For all of George W. Bush's swagger, it is Barack Obama who has systematically offended three major allies -- Britain, Germany and Japan -- in the span of nine months, needlessly straining important relationships and making his country look simultaneously backward and arrogant.
The reason for this is simple and obvious: Obama's singular arrogance. Only arrogance can explain the way Obama has treated Gordon Brown. Only arrogance can explain the president's snubbing of Germany and repeated refusal to learn the proper protocol for greeting other world leaders.
Obama might be cultivating world opinion by insulting his own country in speech after speech and undermining its interests with his foreign policy, but the joke is on him. For his transparent disdain for other world leaders and customs is making him every bit the image of the buffoonish American president he tries so hard to convince the world he is not.
For all of George W. Bush's swagger, it is Barack Obama who has systematically offended three major allies -- Britain, Germany and Japan -- in the span of nine months, needlessly straining important relationships and making his country look simultaneously backward and arrogant.
The reason for this is simple and obvious: Obama's singular arrogance. Only arrogance can explain the way Obama has treated Gordon Brown. Only arrogance can explain the president's snubbing of Germany and repeated refusal to learn the proper protocol for greeting other world leaders.
Obama might be cultivating world opinion by insulting his own country in speech after speech and undermining its interests with his foreign policy, but the joke is on him. For his transparent disdain for other world leaders and customs is making him every bit the image of the buffoonish American president he tries so hard to convince the world he is not.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
This is for all those anti-gun nuts!
If you think 'gun control' is the answer, and disarming the law abiding citizens of this country is going to result in less crime; I have a proposition for you.
You post a sign on your lawn that says:
You post a sign on your lawn that says:
'This is a gun free zone, no violent act of self defense will be used in the protection of this home'
And I will post a sign on my lawn that says:
'Criminals, killers, rapists and violent intruders that violate the sanctity this home will be shot, shot again, and shot a third and final time; with the intent of dispatching you (the intruder) to the next life by multiple handgun, shotgun and large caliber rifle rounds'
And we will see which method proves to be a better defense. The best defense is still a good offense, even in life. Criminals are never going to be disarmed, no matter how 'illegal' it may be. That is why they are criminals.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
I'm back!
After taking a break for several months from 'Dyed in the Wool Conservative', I think I might be able to make a comeback. After the election of our 'Frat-boy-in-Chief' (the one who is more concerned about his golf handicap and his hoop score, than what is happening in Afganistan), I just could not continue reading and posting what was happening in our country. I would just get so upset and it started to affect my homelife and my relationships. So I quit. But I think I might be ready to make a comeback... I'm going to try. At this time I'm unemployed, thanks Wamu, although I did get a fairly sizeable severance. So I do have a few moments of spare time from Daddy-day-care of my adorable almost 2 year old daughter, Nora.. who is absolutely the love of my life (almost as much as my wife Amy!) So just to wrap up.. I'm going to try to start posting again. So for the two followers of my blog... I'm back!
Monday, June 8, 2009
No Energy from this Executive
Watch what Obama does, not what he says. by Fred Barnes 06/15/2009, Volume 014, Issue 37
"As I've often said, in the short term, as we transition to renewable energy," President Obama stated in April, "we can and should increase our domestic production of oil and natural gas. . . . We still need more oil, we still need more gas. If we've got some here in the United States that we can use, we should find it and do so in an environmentally sustainable way."
Does anyone believe Obama was serious about this? Given his practice of misdirection--saying one thing, doing another--no one should have. Now, nearly five months into the Obama presidency, it's clear he didn't mean a word of it. His administration is impeding, not promoting, increased production of oil and gas, as it is of coal and nuclear power.
This is a crazy policy. It's likely to drive up gasoline and electricity prices while making America more dependent than ever on foreign oil--three bad trends. Energy independence becomes still another of Obama's stated policies being championed in words but not deeds.
Higher prices on oil and gas may make wind and solar power, the renewable sources of energy the Obama administration is promoting, more competitive, but only slightly. They would still be heavily reliant on large subsidies from the federal government, face severe technical problems, and produce energy only intermittently.
At the moment, demand for oil and gas is down and so is our capacity to produce them. As the economy improves, demand is bound to rise quickly. But capacity can be increased only gradually, and that's if more production is being encouraged rather than prevented.
To think that wind and solar or other alternative fuels can fill the energy gap requires a belief in what Adriel Bettelheim of Congressional Quarterly has called the "Tinkerbell effect," as in Peter Pan. It consists of believing something will happen just because you wish it would.
Wind and solar now provide less than 1 percent of America's energy needs. Obama has called for doubling this in three years, still leaving them as marginal sources of energy. The likelihood, based on projections by experts, is that oil and gas must be relied on overwhelmingly to meet the country's energy needs for at least two more decades.
But amazingly enough, the Obama administration is worried about domestic "overproduction" of oil and gas. According to its budgetary "green book," that would be "detrimental to longterm energy security and is also inconsistent with the administration's policy of reducing carbon emissions and encouraging the use of renewable energy sources."
So Obama has proposed removing all tax incentives to produce oil and gas, slapping a 13 percent excise tax on all energy derived from the Gulf of Mexico, and increasing the corporate tax rate by 3 percent on all companies that produce or process oil and gas.
Then there's what he's already done, starting with a delay for 180 days (and maybe more) in the five-year, outer continental shelf leasing plan.
Interior Secretary Ken Salazar isn't excited about exploring and drilling for oil and gas. He boasted instead last week to Politico about finalizing "the rules for the development of offshore wind [power] here in the United States."
Salazar has cancelled 77 oil and gas leases that had been issued in Utah. He halted plans to lease the oil shale region in five states after a Shell Oil study concluded there are 1 to 2 trillion barrels there of recoverable oil. He declared the listing of the yellow-billed loon as an endangered species justified, which could limit the development of a huge oil-rich region off the west coast of Alaska.
But that's not all. The Obama administration has decided not to issue leases for gas well drilling on the Roan Plateau in Colorado and has shown little interest in developing the "Chukchi" region offshore north Alaska. (It is bogged down in the permitting process.)
Nuclear power? Obama has often said he's for it, but not until a way to deal with waste from nuclear power plants is found. In fact, one has been found and so designated by Washington at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Obama, however, has proposed to eliminate all federal funds for building a waste site there.
Coal? A Bush administration rule covering mountaintop coal mining was thrown out by the Obama administration as "legally defective."
One way to reduce the use of coal for electricity (thus limiting greenhouse gas emissions) is conversion of power plants to natural gas. For that to happen, the logical policy would be to spur more gas production. But that's not the Obama policy. On the contrary, the Obama policy is to make gas, oil, and coal more difficult to produce and more expensive for consumers. As for more nuclear power, the policy is, in effect: Forget it.
True, this isn't the way Obama describes his energy policies. With Obama, the trick is to watch what he does, not what he says.
Fred Barnes is executive editor of THE WEEKLY STANDARD.
"As I've often said, in the short term, as we transition to renewable energy," President Obama stated in April, "we can and should increase our domestic production of oil and natural gas. . . . We still need more oil, we still need more gas. If we've got some here in the United States that we can use, we should find it and do so in an environmentally sustainable way."
Does anyone believe Obama was serious about this? Given his practice of misdirection--saying one thing, doing another--no one should have. Now, nearly five months into the Obama presidency, it's clear he didn't mean a word of it. His administration is impeding, not promoting, increased production of oil and gas, as it is of coal and nuclear power.
This is a crazy policy. It's likely to drive up gasoline and electricity prices while making America more dependent than ever on foreign oil--three bad trends. Energy independence becomes still another of Obama's stated policies being championed in words but not deeds.
Higher prices on oil and gas may make wind and solar power, the renewable sources of energy the Obama administration is promoting, more competitive, but only slightly. They would still be heavily reliant on large subsidies from the federal government, face severe technical problems, and produce energy only intermittently.
At the moment, demand for oil and gas is down and so is our capacity to produce them. As the economy improves, demand is bound to rise quickly. But capacity can be increased only gradually, and that's if more production is being encouraged rather than prevented.
To think that wind and solar or other alternative fuels can fill the energy gap requires a belief in what Adriel Bettelheim of Congressional Quarterly has called the "Tinkerbell effect," as in Peter Pan. It consists of believing something will happen just because you wish it would.
Wind and solar now provide less than 1 percent of America's energy needs. Obama has called for doubling this in three years, still leaving them as marginal sources of energy. The likelihood, based on projections by experts, is that oil and gas must be relied on overwhelmingly to meet the country's energy needs for at least two more decades.
But amazingly enough, the Obama administration is worried about domestic "overproduction" of oil and gas. According to its budgetary "green book," that would be "detrimental to longterm energy security and is also inconsistent with the administration's policy of reducing carbon emissions and encouraging the use of renewable energy sources."
So Obama has proposed removing all tax incentives to produce oil and gas, slapping a 13 percent excise tax on all energy derived from the Gulf of Mexico, and increasing the corporate tax rate by 3 percent on all companies that produce or process oil and gas.
Then there's what he's already done, starting with a delay for 180 days (and maybe more) in the five-year, outer continental shelf leasing plan.
Interior Secretary Ken Salazar isn't excited about exploring and drilling for oil and gas. He boasted instead last week to Politico about finalizing "the rules for the development of offshore wind [power] here in the United States."
Salazar has cancelled 77 oil and gas leases that had been issued in Utah. He halted plans to lease the oil shale region in five states after a Shell Oil study concluded there are 1 to 2 trillion barrels there of recoverable oil. He declared the listing of the yellow-billed loon as an endangered species justified, which could limit the development of a huge oil-rich region off the west coast of Alaska.
But that's not all. The Obama administration has decided not to issue leases for gas well drilling on the Roan Plateau in Colorado and has shown little interest in developing the "Chukchi" region offshore north Alaska. (It is bogged down in the permitting process.)
Nuclear power? Obama has often said he's for it, but not until a way to deal with waste from nuclear power plants is found. In fact, one has been found and so designated by Washington at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Obama, however, has proposed to eliminate all federal funds for building a waste site there.
Coal? A Bush administration rule covering mountaintop coal mining was thrown out by the Obama administration as "legally defective."
One way to reduce the use of coal for electricity (thus limiting greenhouse gas emissions) is conversion of power plants to natural gas. For that to happen, the logical policy would be to spur more gas production. But that's not the Obama policy. On the contrary, the Obama policy is to make gas, oil, and coal more difficult to produce and more expensive for consumers. As for more nuclear power, the policy is, in effect: Forget it.
True, this isn't the way Obama describes his energy policies. With Obama, the trick is to watch what he does, not what he says.
Fred Barnes is executive editor of THE WEEKLY STANDARD.
Saturday, June 6, 2009
Charles Krauthammer!
'women beaten in the street in Saudi Arabia who show an ankle or stoned for audultery in Iran'
Truth is spoken here
Truth is spoken here
Obama figures out that Bush was right, AGAIN!
But we hear nothing of it from the Obama Media..
Last Friday night, the Department of Justice filed a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court stating that the Uighurs have no legal basis to be released into the United States.
Let that sink in. That’s the same position the Bush administration was defending for years.
And where is the outrage that greeted the Bush administration’s identical position? Where are the editorials in The Washington Post and The New York Times decrying the Obama administration’s “abandonment” of the rule of law? Keith Olbermann and other liberals have been suspiciously silent on this issue.
But don’t hold your breath. This is, after all, the Obama administration.
Read it here.
Last Friday night, the Department of Justice filed a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court stating that the Uighurs have no legal basis to be released into the United States.
Let that sink in. That’s the same position the Bush administration was defending for years.
And where is the outrage that greeted the Bush administration’s identical position? Where are the editorials in The Washington Post and The New York Times decrying the Obama administration’s “abandonment” of the rule of law? Keith Olbermann and other liberals have been suspiciously silent on this issue.
But don’t hold your breath. This is, after all, the Obama administration.
Read it here.
Never Forget D-Day
July 4, 1776. December 7, 1941. September 11, 2001. These dates that were seared into hearts and minds of the collective American consciousness now seem -- to some -- distant, faded, even unimportant. But those who care to learn from history will always remember them, and teach their children.There remains one other date in American -- no, world history -- that signifies good over evil, freedom over tyranny, liberty over oppression. That date is June 6, 1944. For as long as the world shall exist, June 6, 1944 will be forever known as D-Day.As you read this, 65 years ago almost to the exact day, tens of thousands of scared young American soldiers were crammed together on landing craft in the English Channel heading for the beaches of Normandy, France. Their mission: save the world. Though they surely didn't know it, these young men in all those landing craft would be forever known in American history as the Greatest Generation.Just prior to the invasion that would ultimately liberate Europe and save civilization from the dark evil of Nazism, General Eisenhower, Supreme Allied Commander, transmitted a message to the young men who would fight and die in the coming hours. It read in part: You are about to embark upon the Great Crusade, toward which we have striven these many months. The eyes of the world are upon you. The hopes and prayers of liberty-loving people everywhere march with you.As their landing craft pitched in the waves of the English Channel, in front of them on the high ground above the beaches known as Sword, Utah, Juno, Gold and Omaha was the Nazi war machine. Omaha beach was the most heavily fortified by Hitler's war machine, and Omaha beach was the objective of the American military.As the landing craft full of the Greatest Generation warriors came closer to Omaha beach, the Nazis aimed their machineguns, artillery, rifles and mortars at the landing craft full of 19, 20, and 21-year-old young American infantry soldiers. As the gates of the landing crafts fell, the Nazis unleashed Hell upon the Greatest Generation. In mere minutes, hundreds had been killed or wounded. By day's end the American military would suffer 5,000 casualties on Omaha beach, all in the name of freedom. Know it.The American dead and wounded on Omaha beach was so severe that American commanders considered abandoning the beach. But what our commanders had not counted on was the tenacity and fighting spirit of the Greatest Generation. Just as the firemen on 9/11 kept rushing up the stairs of the burning Twin Towers into the hands of God, the landing craft full of American infantry kept coming.Under withering Nazi machine gun fire, the Greatest Generation slowly inched forward silencing the Nazi war machine on the bluffs above Omaha beach. By the end of June 6, Omaha beach would be largely secured. In less than a year the Nazi war machine would be crushed, Hitler dead.Those young Americans who stormed Omaha beach on that morning 65 years ago on June 6th accomplished their mission: they saved the world.June 6 is D-Day. Do not ever forget this day. Teach your children, make sure no one forgets how good wins over evil and the price that is paid. God bless the warriors.
Since I 'borrowed' the Star Wars theme..
I figured I better link to a Harrison Ford video.
The Casablanca reference is fantastic. "I'm shocked, shocked!"
Watch it here
The Casablanca reference is fantastic. "I'm shocked, shocked!"
Watch it here
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Obama declares Gitmo detainees to be 'fetuses'
By: Scott Ott ScrapppleFace.com
In an effort to shut down the U.S. Naval Detention Center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, thereby restoring America's moral standing in the world, President Barack Obama today declared some 240 enemy combatants held at Gitmo to be 'human fetuses'.
In an executive order, the president said, "Since I ordered Gitmo shut down, and people don't want us to bring the inmates here, the only way to extract them from the facility is to change their legal status to one that offers us more choices."
While accused terrorists have access to attorneys, and nearly-limitless legal appeals, a fetus has no legal standing, cannot speak for itself, and is subject to the death penalty without regard to guilt or innocence.
Civil rights advocates have pressured Obama to follow through on campaign promises to shutter Gitmo, but even Democrats in Congress have resisted bringing the inmates to U.S. soil for trials and incarceration.
"We can debate whether enemy combatants have access to protections under the U.S. Constitution," said Obama. "However, no serious person would grant such protection to an embryo or fetus. The loss of 240 fetuses wouldn't raise an eyebrow in a nation where more than 3,000 of them hit the Dumpster daily."
The president noted that America's global reputation has been devastated by U.S. treatment of terror suspects, but that "our treatment of a million fetuses each year earns us nothing but admiration, and requests for clinic-funding from those who aspire to be like us."
Sources acknowledged continuing White House debate about whether a terrorist who escapes from Gitmo alive can still be treated as a fetus.
In an effort to shut down the U.S. Naval Detention Center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, thereby restoring America's moral standing in the world, President Barack Obama today declared some 240 enemy combatants held at Gitmo to be 'human fetuses'.
In an executive order, the president said, "Since I ordered Gitmo shut down, and people don't want us to bring the inmates here, the only way to extract them from the facility is to change their legal status to one that offers us more choices."
While accused terrorists have access to attorneys, and nearly-limitless legal appeals, a fetus has no legal standing, cannot speak for itself, and is subject to the death penalty without regard to guilt or innocence.
Civil rights advocates have pressured Obama to follow through on campaign promises to shutter Gitmo, but even Democrats in Congress have resisted bringing the inmates to U.S. soil for trials and incarceration.
"We can debate whether enemy combatants have access to protections under the U.S. Constitution," said Obama. "However, no serious person would grant such protection to an embryo or fetus. The loss of 240 fetuses wouldn't raise an eyebrow in a nation where more than 3,000 of them hit the Dumpster daily."
The president noted that America's global reputation has been devastated by U.S. treatment of terror suspects, but that "our treatment of a million fetuses each year earns us nothing but admiration, and requests for clinic-funding from those who aspire to be like us."
Sources acknowledged continuing White House debate about whether a terrorist who escapes from Gitmo alive can still be treated as a fetus.
Answering Peggy Noonan: Why Sotomayor Should Withdraw
By Jeffrey Lord in TheAmericanSpectator.org WOW, what an article! Read the entire article here.
When one takes a good long look at the arc of the Democratic Party from its founding by Thomas Jefferson in 1800 (historians generally credit, as you know, both Jefferson and Andrew Jackson as co-founders of the modern-day Democrats) up until today there is one very, very disturbing constant. The politics of race.
Beginning with slavery, moving on to segregation, lynching, racial quotas and what today is called "identity politics," the one straight line through each and connecting each is racial politics. Clustered along that line are all manner of people with varying historical reputations. The clusters begin with slave-owners Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson -- the latter appointing his friend, fellow slave-owner, decided racist and ex-Attorney General Roger Taney as Chief Justice. There are people like Woodrow Wilson (who segregated the federal government) and Josephus Daniels (FDR's boss at the Wilson Navy Department). Then the FDR Supreme Court picks of segregationists Black and James Byrnes. Keep moving along the line and you find George Wallace and eventually Al Sharpton, and Obama allies like Jeremiah Wright and Father Michael Pfleger. The skin color may change, but the core of the message does not.
What all of these people (and so many, many more) have in common is their political party -- the Democrats. A party with an unbelievably vivid history of the most brutal racism imaginable and its obsession to one degree or another with race. An obsession they have, with devastating consequence, practiced from no less a place than the Supreme Court of the United States. Judge Sotomayor, she who believes a "wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male" is only the latest in this line. Racism, as I also learned long ago, is not only blind to geography, it can be found festering among all races and both genders as well.
Do I feel I am an "idiot" as you say of those who believe Sotomayor should be vigorously opposed based on her racial sentiments? Sorry, Peggy, I just can't agree. I am absolutely agog at those who speak of moderation on this subject, who speak of tone. Tone? Tone?!!!! This judge has expressed her views in such a way as to make it crystal clear she is the lineal descendant of those who have acted on the beliefs behind one of the worst traits in American life -- racism. A trait that glistens from the breast of identity politics with a scarlet "R." Racism has more than had its day on the Supreme Court, and from Dred Scott to Plessy --to Korematsu the results have been absolutely little short of traumatic for the country. It should never, ever see the light of day on a federal bench -- or any judicial bench -- again. Much less the bench that sits the Supreme Court of the United States.
If you don't believe in God, then I guess you must believe in Government!
Do Liberals Crave A Master?
By Andrew Thomas in AmericanThinker.com
Contemporary liberals, having abandoned the belief in God-given inalienable rights, masochistically crave a worldly master. This master is a sadistic god-substitute who will provide the stern discipline needed to force economic equality and "fairness" by requiring painful sacrifices and bestowing government-created rights onto obedient and acquiescent groups of left-leaning masochists.
Of course, I am not referring to the sexual variety of masochism, but rather the recognized psychosis of moral masochism. Large segments of the population, and even entire nations can suffer from this illness as described in Daniel Rancour-Laferriere's book, "The Slave Soul of Russia: Moral Masochism and the Cult of Suffering".
First, some re-definitions: In the same derogatory fashion liberals refer to contemporary Conservatives as "neocons", I will label this group as "neolibs" going forward. I feel this is appropriate, as the Liberal movement has taken a decidedly leftward leap and become more radicalized in their outward behavior in the last few years, and is therefore a new phenomenon.
In most conservative writing (Thomas Sowell, Ayn Rand, and more recently Mark Levin) the common theme is the sanctity of individual freedom and liberty. The conservative is an individualist and an independent thinker, as opposed to those who primarily identify themselves as members of a group. The term "conservative" is a misnomer for this philosophy, as it connotes a preservation of the status quo, or even a "regressive" yin to the "Progressive" yang. This is why I believe a more appropriate label for conservative philosophy is "individualist", and I will refer to it in this manner for the remainder of this article.
Next, a pop-psychology primer: individualists gravitate toward existential thinking, or a view of the world where individuals have complete freedom of choice and take full responsibility for the results of those choices. This mandates that choices must be made with a logical evaluation to determine the potential consequences. The impartial evaluation of phenomena to determine the truth is an offshoot of existentialism known as phenomenology. The phenomenologist is rational and emotionally detached from the subject of analysis, eliminating judgment and perception. Once the perceptions of reality are stripped away as much as possible, the phenomenologist then attempts to perform an insightful analysis of the object to determine what is real or "true". I believe that many individualists tend to be effective phenomenologists due to their ability to separate themselves from group-think and emotional judgment. Therefore, let's use the phenomenological process to analyze the "Neolib as masochist" theory.
In our first analysis, we will impartially examine Neolib behavior. Objectively listen to Janeane Garofalo in the Youtube video linked to her name. In listening to neolibs such as Janeane speak, it is evident that they appear to be driven predominantly by emotion rather than logic. Just reviewing an alphabetical list of emotions, as extracted from a list in Wikipedia, lends itself to describing neolib behavior:
Anger,
Angst,
Anxiety,
Compassion,
Contempt,
Despair,
Disgust,
Empathy,
Envy,
Guilt,
Hatred,
Hope,
Hostility,
Hysteria,
Rage,
Shame,
Suffering,
Worry.
Anyone who views the world through these emotions would naturally feel threatened when interpreting individualists' behavior. The neolib typically projects hatred, bigotry, selfishness, and greed onto the individualist when there is no physical evidence to support the interpretation. The strong passions exhibited by neolibs, coupled with delusions of persecution, foster these masochistic tendencies.
Now let's objectively review the initiatives in the neolib agenda: Environmentalism, global passivism, overpopulation, socialized healthcare, and promoting government intervention into all aspects of life. All of these priorities require individuals to sacrifice their lifestyles, their income, and/or their basic comforts.
This past week, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi exhorted, "Every aspect of our lives must be subjected to an inventory..." in order to sacrifice ourselves to the gods of global warming. As presidential candidate Obama said, "We can't drive our SUVs and, you know, eat as much as we want and keep our homes on, you know, 72 degrees at all times..." He seems to indicate that he wants us to starve and freeze.
Most of these initiatives involve the inflicting of pain and misery. Tom Daschle, in his book "Critical: What We Can Do About The Health Care Crisis" says health-care reform "will not be pain free" and that seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of having them treated. In other words, you will suffer a slow agonizing death under government mandate.
As a final phenomenological exercise, impassively observe the level of neolib support for this agenda. It has not appeared to wane. In fact, neolib fervor continues to increase as the promised level of suffering increases.
According to Rancour-Laferriere, increasing Russian masochism coincided with the rise of the Soviet Union and Communism, although it was pervasive in the soul of Russia prior to that. The conclusion to this analysis is that as neolib moral masochism increases, so does the emotional need for an all-powerful master to govern them. As the governing master becomes more dominant and disciplinarian, the masochism is reinforced and the spiral continues.
Is there a cure? Self-destructive behavior is very difficult to overcome. Many years ago in an Abnormal Psychology class, I studied the case of a group of young adults who would continually pound their heads against a wall until they became bloody pulps. Psychologists found that the only thing that would interrupt their behavior was a 9,000 volt shock from a cattle prod.
This is probably an impractical solution. Since 45% of the nation thinks we are going in the right direction, there are too many neolibs and too few cattle prods.
Andrew Thomas blogs at Darkangelpolitics.com.
By Andrew Thomas in AmericanThinker.com
Everybody's looking for something...
Some of them want to abuse you
Some of them want to be abused
Sweet dreams are made of these
Who am I to disagree? - Eurythmics
Contemporary liberals, having abandoned the belief in God-given inalienable rights, masochistically crave a worldly master. This master is a sadistic god-substitute who will provide the stern discipline needed to force economic equality and "fairness" by requiring painful sacrifices and bestowing government-created rights onto obedient and acquiescent groups of left-leaning masochists.
Of course, I am not referring to the sexual variety of masochism, but rather the recognized psychosis of moral masochism. Large segments of the population, and even entire nations can suffer from this illness as described in Daniel Rancour-Laferriere's book, "The Slave Soul of Russia: Moral Masochism and the Cult of Suffering".
First, some re-definitions: In the same derogatory fashion liberals refer to contemporary Conservatives as "neocons", I will label this group as "neolibs" going forward. I feel this is appropriate, as the Liberal movement has taken a decidedly leftward leap and become more radicalized in their outward behavior in the last few years, and is therefore a new phenomenon.
In most conservative writing (Thomas Sowell, Ayn Rand, and more recently Mark Levin) the common theme is the sanctity of individual freedom and liberty. The conservative is an individualist and an independent thinker, as opposed to those who primarily identify themselves as members of a group. The term "conservative" is a misnomer for this philosophy, as it connotes a preservation of the status quo, or even a "regressive" yin to the "Progressive" yang. This is why I believe a more appropriate label for conservative philosophy is "individualist", and I will refer to it in this manner for the remainder of this article.
Next, a pop-psychology primer: individualists gravitate toward existential thinking, or a view of the world where individuals have complete freedom of choice and take full responsibility for the results of those choices. This mandates that choices must be made with a logical evaluation to determine the potential consequences. The impartial evaluation of phenomena to determine the truth is an offshoot of existentialism known as phenomenology. The phenomenologist is rational and emotionally detached from the subject of analysis, eliminating judgment and perception. Once the perceptions of reality are stripped away as much as possible, the phenomenologist then attempts to perform an insightful analysis of the object to determine what is real or "true". I believe that many individualists tend to be effective phenomenologists due to their ability to separate themselves from group-think and emotional judgment. Therefore, let's use the phenomenological process to analyze the "Neolib as masochist" theory.
In our first analysis, we will impartially examine Neolib behavior. Objectively listen to Janeane Garofalo in the Youtube video linked to her name. In listening to neolibs such as Janeane speak, it is evident that they appear to be driven predominantly by emotion rather than logic. Just reviewing an alphabetical list of emotions, as extracted from a list in Wikipedia, lends itself to describing neolib behavior:
Anger,
Angst,
Anxiety,
Compassion,
Contempt,
Despair,
Disgust,
Empathy,
Envy,
Guilt,
Hatred,
Hope,
Hostility,
Hysteria,
Rage,
Shame,
Suffering,
Worry.
Anyone who views the world through these emotions would naturally feel threatened when interpreting individualists' behavior. The neolib typically projects hatred, bigotry, selfishness, and greed onto the individualist when there is no physical evidence to support the interpretation. The strong passions exhibited by neolibs, coupled with delusions of persecution, foster these masochistic tendencies.
Now let's objectively review the initiatives in the neolib agenda: Environmentalism, global passivism, overpopulation, socialized healthcare, and promoting government intervention into all aspects of life. All of these priorities require individuals to sacrifice their lifestyles, their income, and/or their basic comforts.
This past week, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi exhorted, "Every aspect of our lives must be subjected to an inventory..." in order to sacrifice ourselves to the gods of global warming. As presidential candidate Obama said, "We can't drive our SUVs and, you know, eat as much as we want and keep our homes on, you know, 72 degrees at all times..." He seems to indicate that he wants us to starve and freeze.
Most of these initiatives involve the inflicting of pain and misery. Tom Daschle, in his book "Critical: What We Can Do About The Health Care Crisis" says health-care reform "will not be pain free" and that seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of having them treated. In other words, you will suffer a slow agonizing death under government mandate.
As a final phenomenological exercise, impassively observe the level of neolib support for this agenda. It has not appeared to wane. In fact, neolib fervor continues to increase as the promised level of suffering increases.
According to Rancour-Laferriere, increasing Russian masochism coincided with the rise of the Soviet Union and Communism, although it was pervasive in the soul of Russia prior to that. The conclusion to this analysis is that as neolib moral masochism increases, so does the emotional need for an all-powerful master to govern them. As the governing master becomes more dominant and disciplinarian, the masochism is reinforced and the spiral continues.
Is there a cure? Self-destructive behavior is very difficult to overcome. Many years ago in an Abnormal Psychology class, I studied the case of a group of young adults who would continually pound their heads against a wall until they became bloody pulps. Psychologists found that the only thing that would interrupt their behavior was a 9,000 volt shock from a cattle prod.
This is probably an impractical solution. Since 45% of the nation thinks we are going in the right direction, there are too many neolibs and too few cattle prods.
Andrew Thomas blogs at Darkangelpolitics.com.
Monday, June 1, 2009
Why is it you only see these stories published in the UK?
How Obamas' romantic £120 trip to Broadway racked up a £45,000 bill...that's for three private jets, two helicopter rides, extra planes for security and closing roads for motorcade.
Read it here.
UPDATE:
Because I'm Entitled
I did it because I'm entitled to burn a jet-load full of fuel, even though:
- I plan to cap industry's production of carbon emissions regardless of whether it destroys our global competitiveness
- My carbon emission caps will cost consumers thousands of dollars per family in higher energy costs
- I have made independence from foreign oil our nation's top priority
- I took over the auto industry and will force you to buy itsy-bitsy cars
- I hated it when auto executives took private planes to Washington, those pigs
- We all need to cut back in these hard times
You see, I'm just like that. And there's nothing you can do about it.
Correction: I'm sorry. I made a mistake. I actually burned three jet-loads of fuel. I forgot about the two planes full of commoners with things in their ears who talk into their sleeves, who follow me everywhere I go.
The Obama flip-flops you don't know
by Alex Conant
Since winning the election, President Barack Obama has famously flip-flopped on many of the major issues that he championed on the campaign trail. But did you know he’s also flip-flopped on a myriad of less publicized issues? This much everybody knows: Even before taking office, Obama broke his promise to not appoint lobbyists to his administration. Since then, he’s abandoned his promises to pay for every dollar of new government spending and bring home all combat troops from Iraq within 18 months. And in recent days, he’s outraged his political base by reversing his earlier commitments to eliminate military tribunals and release photos depicting prisoner abuse. All those well-publicized reversals have overshadowed the administration’s flip-flops on a host of additional positions. Here are just some of the biggest flip-flops that you may not have noticed: Osama bin Laden: During the presidential debates last year, Obama declared that capturing or killing Osama bin Laden “has to be our biggest national security priority.” In his first TV interview after winning the election, he said the terrorist leader was “not just a symbol. He’s also the operational leader of an organization that is planning attacks against U.S. targets,” and that the additional troops being sent to Afghanistan would hunt him down because “capturing or killing bin Laden is a critical aspect of stamping out Al Qaeda.”
Bin Laden’s significance to Obama dissipated during the transition. By the time Obama gave another interview in early January, he said killing or capturing bin Laden was not necessary to “meet our goal of protecting America.” A few months later, when he announced his Afghanistan troop surge, he made no reference to the hunt for bin Laden. On human space exploration: Early in his presidential campaign, Obama had great reservations about the costs and risks of human space flight. He said he would delay NASA’s plans to send humans to the moon and, eventually, Mars and, instead, spend that money on education. But, as Florida, Ohio and Texas became more politically important, Obama began to walk back his proposed NASA cuts, promising to fund unmanned space exploration and some other scientific missions. Now that he’s in office, Obama’s reversal is complete: The White House budget, released earlier this month, provides a healthy increase in NASA funding and explicitly endorses the “goal of returning Americans to the moon and exploring other destinations.” On the Armenian genocide: In the U.S. Senate and on the campaign trail, Obama firmly declared that the death of 1.5 million Armenians during World War I was “genocide” — a touchy topic between Turks and Armenians and a political priority for Armenian-Americans — and promised that “as president, I will recognize the Armenian genocide.”
Nonetheless, during his recent trip to Turkey as president, Obama broke his promise. Instead, he tried to muddy the waters, announcing that “my views are on the record and I have not changed views” but refusing to state what those views actually are. On business tax cuts: Even though he unapologetically promised to raise taxes on entrepreneurs (and everybody else) making more than $250,000 per year, Obama offered small businesses some solace by promising several specific tax cuts. One, which became a cornerstone of his campaign’s jobs plan, would eliminate capital gains taxes for small businesses. Another, which he proposed as the economy crashed in the waning days of the campaign, would offer businesses a $3,000 tax credit for every employee they hired. The economy has not improved since Obama’s election, but he nevertheless shelved both proposals: His budget puts off the capital gains tax cut until after his term in office ends and makes no mention of his new-job tax credit. These four examples only scratch the surface of Obama’s reversals since taking office. Other flip-flops include everything from federally funding needle-exchange programs (which he supported in the campaign but his budget does not), allowing five days of public review before bill signings (he broke the promise with his first bill signing) and ordering the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Obama’s senior adviser, David Axelrod, recently told POLITICO that “Obama’s governing is completely consistent with the way he campaigned.” A cursory comparison between his campaign promises and administration policies shows that’s not true. Alex Conant is a communications consultant who served as the Republican National Committee’s national press secretary during the 2008 presidential campaign. Previously, he was a spokesman at the White House and in the U.S. Senate.
Since winning the election, President Barack Obama has famously flip-flopped on many of the major issues that he championed on the campaign trail. But did you know he’s also flip-flopped on a myriad of less publicized issues? This much everybody knows: Even before taking office, Obama broke his promise to not appoint lobbyists to his administration. Since then, he’s abandoned his promises to pay for every dollar of new government spending and bring home all combat troops from Iraq within 18 months. And in recent days, he’s outraged his political base by reversing his earlier commitments to eliminate military tribunals and release photos depicting prisoner abuse. All those well-publicized reversals have overshadowed the administration’s flip-flops on a host of additional positions. Here are just some of the biggest flip-flops that you may not have noticed: Osama bin Laden: During the presidential debates last year, Obama declared that capturing or killing Osama bin Laden “has to be our biggest national security priority.” In his first TV interview after winning the election, he said the terrorist leader was “not just a symbol. He’s also the operational leader of an organization that is planning attacks against U.S. targets,” and that the additional troops being sent to Afghanistan would hunt him down because “capturing or killing bin Laden is a critical aspect of stamping out Al Qaeda.”
Bin Laden’s significance to Obama dissipated during the transition. By the time Obama gave another interview in early January, he said killing or capturing bin Laden was not necessary to “meet our goal of protecting America.” A few months later, when he announced his Afghanistan troop surge, he made no reference to the hunt for bin Laden. On human space exploration: Early in his presidential campaign, Obama had great reservations about the costs and risks of human space flight. He said he would delay NASA’s plans to send humans to the moon and, eventually, Mars and, instead, spend that money on education. But, as Florida, Ohio and Texas became more politically important, Obama began to walk back his proposed NASA cuts, promising to fund unmanned space exploration and some other scientific missions. Now that he’s in office, Obama’s reversal is complete: The White House budget, released earlier this month, provides a healthy increase in NASA funding and explicitly endorses the “goal of returning Americans to the moon and exploring other destinations.” On the Armenian genocide: In the U.S. Senate and on the campaign trail, Obama firmly declared that the death of 1.5 million Armenians during World War I was “genocide” — a touchy topic between Turks and Armenians and a political priority for Armenian-Americans — and promised that “as president, I will recognize the Armenian genocide.”
Nonetheless, during his recent trip to Turkey as president, Obama broke his promise. Instead, he tried to muddy the waters, announcing that “my views are on the record and I have not changed views” but refusing to state what those views actually are. On business tax cuts: Even though he unapologetically promised to raise taxes on entrepreneurs (and everybody else) making more than $250,000 per year, Obama offered small businesses some solace by promising several specific tax cuts. One, which became a cornerstone of his campaign’s jobs plan, would eliminate capital gains taxes for small businesses. Another, which he proposed as the economy crashed in the waning days of the campaign, would offer businesses a $3,000 tax credit for every employee they hired. The economy has not improved since Obama’s election, but he nevertheless shelved both proposals: His budget puts off the capital gains tax cut until after his term in office ends and makes no mention of his new-job tax credit. These four examples only scratch the surface of Obama’s reversals since taking office. Other flip-flops include everything from federally funding needle-exchange programs (which he supported in the campaign but his budget does not), allowing five days of public review before bill signings (he broke the promise with his first bill signing) and ordering the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Obama’s senior adviser, David Axelrod, recently told POLITICO that “Obama’s governing is completely consistent with the way he campaigned.” A cursory comparison between his campaign promises and administration policies shows that’s not true. Alex Conant is a communications consultant who served as the Republican National Committee’s national press secretary during the 2008 presidential campaign. Previously, he was a spokesman at the White House and in the U.S. Senate.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
More Obama hypocrisy
In "freeing herself" from the poverty of her childhood, Sonia Sotomayor had the benefit of attending private, not public schools.
The next time an official in the Obama Administration advances efforts to disenfranchise school vouchers or hails the virtues of public education even as he sends his children to a posh private one; the next time a federal court takes up a similar education-related issue; perhaps they should call to mind the personal story of U.S. Supreme Court nominee, current Court of Appeals Court Judge, Sonia Sotomayor, who, it is asserted, bootstrapped her way to her currently and swiftly opening door to life-long celebrity.
Lost in the liberal tumult of ecstasy over her nomination is the simple fact that Judge Sotomayor had the undoubted blessing of attending private schools. All her life.
From American Thinker
The next time an official in the Obama Administration advances efforts to disenfranchise school vouchers or hails the virtues of public education even as he sends his children to a posh private one; the next time a federal court takes up a similar education-related issue; perhaps they should call to mind the personal story of U.S. Supreme Court nominee, current Court of Appeals Court Judge, Sonia Sotomayor, who, it is asserted, bootstrapped her way to her currently and swiftly opening door to life-long celebrity.
Lost in the liberal tumult of ecstasy over her nomination is the simple fact that Judge Sotomayor had the undoubted blessing of attending private schools. All her life.
From American Thinker
Medicare for All Is a Killer
If the health policy reforms favored by Obama and the Left are passed, the only alternative for the American people to protect themselves and their families is to buy health insurance covering health care provided overseas. Since such insurance will be outside the jurisdiction of the U.S., it will not be regulated for fairness, which means it will be low cost and affordable. Of course, you will have to travel to the Caribbean or elsewhere to get care for serious illnesses like heart disease or cancer. But that is where you will find all the smart doctors and surgeons, living in Caribbean villas, and driving hot rod sports cars with old-fashioned gas combustion engines.
From The American Spectator
From The American Spectator
Barack Obama is just a lying sack of shit!
It has been four months. In that time, President Obama has made it clear that he believes in transparency only when it serves his own interest. His administration has used the Freedom of Information Act as a shield, and in important ways his agencies are operating under a strong presumption in favor of secrecy.
From the Weekly Standard, read it here
From the Weekly Standard, read it here
Does Obama understand that the office of the presidency is bigger--much bigger--than he is?
by William Kristol 06/01/2009
The Weekly Standard, read it here
Doesn't Obama's self-regard sometimes seem greater than his regard for the position he occupies? Does he understand that the office of the presidency is bigger--much bigger--than he is? Or does Obama think of the presidency primarily as a vessel through which to exercise his political gifts and pursue his personal achievements?
Does Obama grasp that his task is to advance U.S. interests in a lasting way, not his own personal approval rating in the world? As we saw on his earlier apology tour through Europe and his attendance at the Summit of the Americas, the attempt to advance his own standing can come at the expense of standing up for the nation he represents.
Barack Obama happens temporarily to occupy the White House. He is entitled to pride in his own achievement and confidence in his own abilities. But it would be good if he showed that he understood that he is now president of the United States first, and Barack Obama, admirer of his own journey, second.
The Weekly Standard, read it here
Doesn't Obama's self-regard sometimes seem greater than his regard for the position he occupies? Does he understand that the office of the presidency is bigger--much bigger--than he is? Or does Obama think of the presidency primarily as a vessel through which to exercise his political gifts and pursue his personal achievements?
Does Obama grasp that his task is to advance U.S. interests in a lasting way, not his own personal approval rating in the world? As we saw on his earlier apology tour through Europe and his attendance at the Summit of the Americas, the attempt to advance his own standing can come at the expense of standing up for the nation he represents.
Barack Obama happens temporarily to occupy the White House. He is entitled to pride in his own achievement and confidence in his own abilities. But it would be good if he showed that he understood that he is now president of the United States first, and Barack Obama, admirer of his own journey, second.
Monday, May 25, 2009
Obama: We are out of money..
Obama has been pouring money down a crony-statist rathole at absolutely astronomical and unprecedented rates. When will he give up on the "financial crisis that he has inherited"? How about the financial crisis that he is creating?
“I’ve bankrupted the nation, so now your only hope is to pass my healthcare plan.” That goes beyond chutzpah to the edge of pathological dishonesty. Except, I guess, that it’s not pathological if you get away with it. And so far, he has.
Instapundit
When will Barack Obama stop fudging it?
Barack Obama's reluctance to begin confronting difficult decisions is creating the impression that his administration is simply hoping for the best, says Simon Heffer.
From the UK, read here
From the UK, read here
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Hitler designed cars too! (just like BO)
“Sitting at a restaurant table in Munich in the summer of 1932, Hitler designed the prototype for what would become the immensely successful Beetle design for Volkswagen (literally, the "car of the people"),” says the Hitler Historical Museum’s website. He then said to the head of Daimler-Benz: “Take it with you and speak with people who understand more about it than I do. But don't forget it. I want to hear from you soon, about the technical details."
This week, Obama imposed on American car manufacturers strict fuel efficiency and emissions standards, to be introduced in 2012. Manufacturers will reportedly get extra pats on the head for cranking out electric cars like General Motors’ Chevy Volt -- which will soak American consumers for about $40,000. In other words, they’re going to make cars only hippies want, at prices only CEOs can afford. Don’t like it? Then ride a bike or take the bus.
These aren’t going to be Hummers or 4x4s, because the simple laws of physics dictate that the heavier something is, the more energy it takes to move it. These are going to be little bitty cars like the ones I see in Paris, none of which are physically capable of hauling both me and my luggage to the airport. Sure, there are hybrid electric buses around the world that run partly on electricity and can do that -- but when they have to keep up with traffic on the highway, that’s when the diesel fuel kicks in and starts drowning polar bears all over again.
Read here
May 19, 2009
Letter from a Dodge dealer...
On Thursday, May 14, 2009 I was notified that my Dodge franchise, that we purchased, will be taken away from my family on June 9, 2009 without compensation and given to another dealer at no cost to them....
HOW IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CAN THIS HAPPEN? THIS IS A PRIVATE BUSINESS NOT A GOVERNMENT ENTITY
This is beyond imagination! My business is being stolen from me through NO FAULT OF OUR OWN. We did NOTHING wrong.
This atrocity will most likely force my family into bankruptcy. This will also cause our 50+ employees to be unemployed. How will they provide for their families? This is a total economic disaster.
HOW CAN THIS HAPPEN IN A FREE MARKET ECONOMY IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA?
I beseech your help, and look forward to your reply.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
George C. Joseph
President & OwnerSunshine Dodge-Isuzu http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/200 ... ealer.html
I would say, this person (& all of his employee's) have standing to question Barry's eligibility status.
Hopefully, people in these situations will become educated in our Constitutional Crisis and get involved (or more involved) in getting the truth known about the faux POTUS that is at the head of this monstrosity
Here is an article on the dealership from last year (the nostalgic pre-Soetoro days) that verifies the dealership info. At the bottom is contact information for the dealership. It is worth introducing him to the Soetoro ineligibility issue if he is not already aware of it, and mentioning the lawsuit idea as he would have standing.http://www.floridatoday.com/content/adsections/buyersguide/Articles/2008/SunshineDodge_NicePlace.shtml
This week, Obama imposed on American car manufacturers strict fuel efficiency and emissions standards, to be introduced in 2012. Manufacturers will reportedly get extra pats on the head for cranking out electric cars like General Motors’ Chevy Volt -- which will soak American consumers for about $40,000. In other words, they’re going to make cars only hippies want, at prices only CEOs can afford. Don’t like it? Then ride a bike or take the bus.
These aren’t going to be Hummers or 4x4s, because the simple laws of physics dictate that the heavier something is, the more energy it takes to move it. These are going to be little bitty cars like the ones I see in Paris, none of which are physically capable of hauling both me and my luggage to the airport. Sure, there are hybrid electric buses around the world that run partly on electricity and can do that -- but when they have to keep up with traffic on the highway, that’s when the diesel fuel kicks in and starts drowning polar bears all over again.
Read here
May 19, 2009
Letter from a Dodge dealer...
On Thursday, May 14, 2009 I was notified that my Dodge franchise, that we purchased, will be taken away from my family on June 9, 2009 without compensation and given to another dealer at no cost to them....
HOW IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CAN THIS HAPPEN? THIS IS A PRIVATE BUSINESS NOT A GOVERNMENT ENTITY
This is beyond imagination! My business is being stolen from me through NO FAULT OF OUR OWN. We did NOTHING wrong.
This atrocity will most likely force my family into bankruptcy. This will also cause our 50+ employees to be unemployed. How will they provide for their families? This is a total economic disaster.
HOW CAN THIS HAPPEN IN A FREE MARKET ECONOMY IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA?
I beseech your help, and look forward to your reply.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
George C. Joseph
President & OwnerSunshine Dodge-Isuzu http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/200 ... ealer.html
I would say, this person (& all of his employee's) have standing to question Barry's eligibility status.
Hopefully, people in these situations will become educated in our Constitutional Crisis and get involved (or more involved) in getting the truth known about the faux POTUS that is at the head of this monstrosity
Here is an article on the dealership from last year (the nostalgic pre-Soetoro days) that verifies the dealership info. At the bottom is contact information for the dealership. It is worth introducing him to the Soetoro ineligibility issue if he is not already aware of it, and mentioning the lawsuit idea as he would have standing.http://www.floridatoday.com/content/adsections/buyersguide/Articles/2008/SunshineDodge_NicePlace.shtml
Obama, The Ungrateful
Before President Obama stands supinely before the G-20 again and engages in a form of national self-flagellation, I would urge him to stand amid the crosses and stars in Normandy cemetery and recall the sacrifices made by those youngsters so that he could be president of the United States and breathe an unadorned version of freedom.
read here
read here
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
A Better Plan for Health Care Reform
Now that these Republican sponsors have provided this leadership, those who have been complaining about the lack of Republican alternatives should help promote the plan, interview the sponsors on their shows, and promote debates with the retro Democrats who are stuck promoting outdated ideas that were getting stale 50 years ago. Moreover, it is past time for grassroots conservatives to organize and become active on this issue, pressuring their Representatives and Senators fiercely to oppose the completely unnecessary government takeover bills that would ultimately deprive us of essential health care when we need it most, and to support the alternative patient power approach instead.
Read here from AmericanSpectator.org
Read here from AmericanSpectator.org
I had to post this article..
It is a must read.
What exactly is a revolution?
From AmericanThinker.com, read it here.
Universal Truth Depends on What Universe You Live In.
Another must read, here.
What exactly is a revolution?
From AmericanThinker.com, read it here.
Universal Truth Depends on What Universe You Live In.
Another must read, here.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Step Down NOW!
Nixonian. "I am not a crook!"
Pelosi. "We were misled" , oh please.
Otis A. Glazebrook IV
Nancy Pelosi apparently has not learned the first lesson of Washington, D.C.: When you are in a hole, stop digging.
At her press conference this morning the Speaker accused the CIA of lying to Congress on the subject of Enhanced Interrogation Techniques.
Of course this means that the CIA will go from a defensive mode into a full offense mode. Expect all sorts of documents exculpatory to the CIA and more proof Pelosi's incompetence.
What is worse? Knowing that something you are morally offended by is about to happen and doing nothing to stop it, or people properly charged with America's security going too far?
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Democrats: CIA is out to get us!
WAAAAA!!!! (f'ing crybabies)
Democrats weep crocodile tears about the immorality of torture while failing to mention they knew all about it and approved of it at the time.
"Rush Limbaugh, I hope the country fails, I hope his kidneys fail, how about that? He needs a good waterboarding, that’s what he needs.”
Obama is the man who promised to cast aside what he has called the “partisanship and pettiness and immaturity that has poisoned our politics for so long.” He was going to be the voice of civility and for high-minded public discourse. Is this what Obama had in mind? Granted, Sykes’s words were not Obama’s. Still, his reaction to the ugly things said about Limbaugh tells us something about him. It may also help explain why Obama was so comfortable in the pew of the Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s church for almost 20 years. Perhaps Obama, upon reflection, is willing to condemn the Sykes’s remarks. It would be the appropriate thing to do, especially for a man who wants to usher in a new age of civility.
CommentaryMagazine.com, read here
Telegraph.co.uk
CommentaryMagazine.com, read here
Telegraph.co.uk
Sunday, May 10, 2009
Michael Savage banned in UK, responds
"Darn! And I was just planning a trip to England for their superior dental work and cuisine,"
Truth to Power
"Despite how the conflict has been portrayed by our glorious media, if you gave any U.S. soldier a gun with two bullets in it, and he found himself in an elevator with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Osama bin Laden, there's a good chance that Nancy Pelosi would get shot twice, and Harry Reid and bin Laden would be strangled to death."
CBS Sports golf analyst David Feherty
CBS Sports golf analyst David Feherty
Friday, May 8, 2009
Obama Knows How to Buy Votes
Hands Off Big Labor
The Obama administration has delivered a strong message to crooked union bosses everywhere: happy days are here again.
On Thursday President Obama, who has pledged to usher in a new era of fiscal responsibility, touted $17 billion in proposed cuts to his $3.4 trillion budget. The media noted that about half of the reductions came out of the defense budget, but lost in most reports is the fact that the administration also slashed funding for the only entity in government tasked with policing unions.
The Obama administration has delivered a strong message to crooked union bosses everywhere: happy days are here again.
On Thursday President Obama, who has pledged to usher in a new era of fiscal responsibility, touted $17 billion in proposed cuts to his $3.4 trillion budget. The media noted that about half of the reductions came out of the defense budget, but lost in most reports is the fact that the administration also slashed funding for the only entity in government tasked with policing unions.
Unafraid In Greenwich Connecticut
StumblingOnTruth
The President screaming that the hedge funds are looking for an unjustified taxpayer-funded bailout is the big lie writ large. Find me a hedge fund that has been bailed out. Find me a hedge fund, even a failed one, that has asked for one. In fact, it was only because hedge funds have not taken government funds that they could stand up to this bullying. The TARP recipients had no choice but to go along. The hedge funds were singled out only because they are unpopular, not because they behaved any differently from any other ethical manager of other people's money. The President’s comments here are backwards and libelous. Yet, somehow I don’t think the hedge funds will be following ACORN’s lead and trucking in a bunch of paid professional protestors soon. Hedge funds really need a community organizer.
The President screaming that the hedge funds are looking for an unjustified taxpayer-funded bailout is the big lie writ large. Find me a hedge fund that has been bailed out. Find me a hedge fund, even a failed one, that has asked for one. In fact, it was only because hedge funds have not taken government funds that they could stand up to this bullying. The TARP recipients had no choice but to go along. The hedge funds were singled out only because they are unpopular, not because they behaved any differently from any other ethical manager of other people's money. The President’s comments here are backwards and libelous. Yet, somehow I don’t think the hedge funds will be following ACORN’s lead and trucking in a bunch of paid professional protestors soon. Hedge funds really need a community organizer.
CIA Says Pelosi Was Briefed on Use of 'Enhanced Interrogations'
Intelligence officials released documents this evening saying that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was briefed in September 2002 about the use of harsh interrogation tactics against al-Qaeda prisoners, seemingly contradicting her repeated statements over the past 18 months that she was never told that these techniques were actually being used.
THAT'S BECAUSE SHE'S A BIG FAT LIAR!
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Obama's Gitmo Mess
Oh Mr. Obama, you are so naive.. read WSJ article here.
If only looking good in a suit really did solve the world's problems.
If only looking good in a suit really did solve the world's problems.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Treas.gov
I see someone from Treas.gov was browsing my website today.
So.. if it goes away, you know the Obamunists got me. Do I hear a helicopter outside?
BTW: My wife and I went to the gun range last night. She's a better shot than me, so be forewarned.
So.. if it goes away, you know the Obamunists got me. Do I hear a helicopter outside?
BTW: My wife and I went to the gun range last night. She's a better shot than me, so be forewarned.
Governor Brian Schweitzer (D), signs revolutionary new gun law in Montana
From the AP:
The state of Montana has signed into power a revolutionary gun law. The State of Montana has defied the federal government and their gun laws. This will prompt a showdown between the federal government and the State of Montana. The federal government fears citizens owning guns. They try to curtail what types of guns they can own. The gun control laws all have one common goal, confiscation of privately owned firearms.
Montana has gone beyond drawing a line in the sand. They have challenged the Federal Government. The fed now either takes them on and risks them saying the federal agents have no right to violate their state gun laws and arrest the federal agents that try to enforce the federal firearms acts. This will be a world-class event to watch. Montana could go to voting for secession from the union, which is really throwing the gauntlet in Obama’s face. If the federal government does nothing they lose face.
If you don't exercise your 2nd amendment right, you risk losing it.
When seconds count, the police are only minutes away!
Self Defense is a right that people better start taking seriously, Watch here.
In other news:
The Oklahoma House defied a veto from Democratic Governor Brad Henry to approve a resolution asserting its sovereignty under the Constitution. The Senate had approved the initial resolution 29-18, just shy of the two-thirds needed to sustain an override, but this new bill does not require his signature. Backers are optimistic that they will succeed in sending a message to Washington DC to start limiting themselves to truly federal tasks.
The state of Montana has signed into power a revolutionary gun law. The State of Montana has defied the federal government and their gun laws. This will prompt a showdown between the federal government and the State of Montana. The federal government fears citizens owning guns. They try to curtail what types of guns they can own. The gun control laws all have one common goal, confiscation of privately owned firearms.
Montana has gone beyond drawing a line in the sand. They have challenged the Federal Government. The fed now either takes them on and risks them saying the federal agents have no right to violate their state gun laws and arrest the federal agents that try to enforce the federal firearms acts. This will be a world-class event to watch. Montana could go to voting for secession from the union, which is really throwing the gauntlet in Obama’s face. If the federal government does nothing they lose face.
If you don't exercise your 2nd amendment right, you risk losing it.
When seconds count, the police are only minutes away!
Self Defense is a right that people better start taking seriously, Watch here.
In other news:
The Oklahoma House defied a veto from Democratic Governor Brad Henry to approve a resolution asserting its sovereignty under the Constitution. The Senate had approved the initial resolution 29-18, just shy of the two-thirds needed to sustain an override, but this new bill does not require his signature. Backers are optimistic that they will succeed in sending a message to Washington DC to start limiting themselves to truly federal tasks.
The Democrats Lied?! Shocking!
Despite promises from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) that Sen. Arlen Specter (Pa.) would retain his seniority after switching parties, Specter will be put at the end of the seniority line on all his committees but one under a resolution approved on the floor late Tuesday.
Under the modified organizing resolution, Specter will not keep his committee seniority on any of the five committees that he serves on and will be the junior Democrat on all but one — the chamber’s Special Committee on Aging. On that committee, he will be next to last in seniority.
As a result, Specter — who as a Republican was ranking member on the Judiciary Committee and a senior member of the Appropriations Committee, as well as ranking member of the panel’s Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education — will now rank behind all the other Democrats, at least until the end of this Congress.
Under the modified organizing resolution, Specter will not keep his committee seniority on any of the five committees that he serves on and will be the junior Democrat on all but one — the chamber’s Special Committee on Aging. On that committee, he will be next to last in seniority.
As a result, Specter — who as a Republican was ranking member on the Judiciary Committee and a senior member of the Appropriations Committee, as well as ranking member of the panel’s Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education — will now rank behind all the other Democrats, at least until the end of this Congress.
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
A lot of talk, too little clarity
from MiamiHerald.com
You know what they say about monkeys, typewriters and Shakespeare. My question is, if you sat an infinite number of Joe Bidens at an infinite number of microphones, would any of them ever say anything that wasn't infinitely stupid? From his reminiscences about Franklin Roosevelt's famous White House television address on the day of the 1929 stock market crash (that is, three years before Roosevelt was president and 20 years before Americans bought TVs) to his campaign-rally exhortation to Missouri state Sen. Chuck Graham to ''Stand up, Chuck, let 'em see ya!'' (Graham's in a wheelchair), Biden's serial stupidities have become a national mortification.
Listening to Biden's gaffeprompter running full speed ahead on the subject of swine flu last week -- he warned Americans that airplanes, subways and classrooms are microbiologic deathtraps, then promptly took a train to Delaware -- my first thought was, who in the world made this guy vice president? My second was, oh, right. And my third was, no wonder people are always calling Barack Obama the smartest guy in the room. At most White House meetings, it's probably literally -- if dishearteningly -- true.
You know what they say about monkeys, typewriters and Shakespeare. My question is, if you sat an infinite number of Joe Bidens at an infinite number of microphones, would any of them ever say anything that wasn't infinitely stupid? From his reminiscences about Franklin Roosevelt's famous White House television address on the day of the 1929 stock market crash (that is, three years before Roosevelt was president and 20 years before Americans bought TVs) to his campaign-rally exhortation to Missouri state Sen. Chuck Graham to ''Stand up, Chuck, let 'em see ya!'' (Graham's in a wheelchair), Biden's serial stupidities have become a national mortification.
Listening to Biden's gaffeprompter running full speed ahead on the subject of swine flu last week -- he warned Americans that airplanes, subways and classrooms are microbiologic deathtraps, then promptly took a train to Delaware -- my first thought was, who in the world made this guy vice president? My second was, oh, right. And my third was, no wonder people are always calling Barack Obama the smartest guy in the room. At most White House meetings, it's probably literally -- if dishearteningly -- true.
Monday, May 4, 2009
Obama’s transparency is clear as mud
by Mark Tapscott in the Washingtonexaminer.com
Three and a half months into the Obama era and Sunlight’s Real-Time Investigations team recently found that “some of the most elementary details about the [TARP] program - like who is actually managing distribution of the bailout money to financial institutions - is still shrouded in secrecy.”
Good luck trying to find out where those billions are going. Obama promised the public would have unprecedented access to stimulus spending information, saying “our goal must be to spend these precious dollars with unprecedented accountability, responsibility, and transparency.”
Obama is uncommonly good at saying the right words. The new government web site, recovery.gov., is unprecedented alright, but not the way Obama promised.
There has been some improvement in recent weeks, but recovery.gov remains chock full of colorful charts, links to official PR babble, and mildly interesting summary statistics. Mostly, the site is a tax-paid propaganda tool to persuade the gullible that Obama is doing a wonderful job.
Three and a half months into the Obama era and Sunlight’s Real-Time Investigations team recently found that “some of the most elementary details about the [TARP] program - like who is actually managing distribution of the bailout money to financial institutions - is still shrouded in secrecy.”
Good luck trying to find out where those billions are going. Obama promised the public would have unprecedented access to stimulus spending information, saying “our goal must be to spend these precious dollars with unprecedented accountability, responsibility, and transparency.”
Obama is uncommonly good at saying the right words. The new government web site, recovery.gov., is unprecedented alright, but not the way Obama promised.
There has been some improvement in recent weeks, but recovery.gov remains chock full of colorful charts, links to official PR babble, and mildly interesting summary statistics. Mostly, the site is a tax-paid propaganda tool to persuade the gullible that Obama is doing a wonderful job.
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Obama's Whack-A-Mole Politics
by Michael Gabor in AmericanThinker.com
The Whack-a-Mole was a large box-like contraption with multiple holes, through which a plastic mole would pop in and out of, in rapid and random fashion. The object was to hit the moles on the head with a rubber mallet as they emerged from their holes. Of course, just as you were in the process of hitting one, another would pop out somewhere else, and there was no way to keep pace for very long. Ultimately, you would lose. Drained of our money and our dignity, our only option was to find our parents and plead for a small bailout. If they wanted to continue eating their gyros in peace, they were forced to fork over enough of an economic stimulus to at least allow us to go buy some curly fries.
Fast forward to the frenzied first 100 days in office of our Carney Pitchman in Chief: the sheer volume and frequency of gaffes, cons, misguided solutions, outrageous abuses of executive power, and repeated episodes of bad judgment, make it difficult for a rational individual to come to grips with any specific untoward development before they are assailed by yet another one. Today’s vast left wing Whack-a-Mole machine doesn’t even have the decency to let you catch your breath between games: while you are on your hands and knees trying to figure out exactly where on the floor your jaw last fell in response to, say, the President of the United States subserviently bowing to a foreign prince, you might miss a panic-inducing New York City fly-by, the firing of a CEO of a private company by the President, or the President shamelessly marketing our purported national shame to the rest of the world.
The Whack-a-Mole was a large box-like contraption with multiple holes, through which a plastic mole would pop in and out of, in rapid and random fashion. The object was to hit the moles on the head with a rubber mallet as they emerged from their holes. Of course, just as you were in the process of hitting one, another would pop out somewhere else, and there was no way to keep pace for very long. Ultimately, you would lose. Drained of our money and our dignity, our only option was to find our parents and plead for a small bailout. If they wanted to continue eating their gyros in peace, they were forced to fork over enough of an economic stimulus to at least allow us to go buy some curly fries.
Fast forward to the frenzied first 100 days in office of our Carney Pitchman in Chief: the sheer volume and frequency of gaffes, cons, misguided solutions, outrageous abuses of executive power, and repeated episodes of bad judgment, make it difficult for a rational individual to come to grips with any specific untoward development before they are assailed by yet another one. Today’s vast left wing Whack-a-Mole machine doesn’t even have the decency to let you catch your breath between games: while you are on your hands and knees trying to figure out exactly where on the floor your jaw last fell in response to, say, the President of the United States subserviently bowing to a foreign prince, you might miss a panic-inducing New York City fly-by, the firing of a CEO of a private company by the President, or the President shamelessly marketing our purported national shame to the rest of the world.
Saturday, May 2, 2009
Friday, May 1, 2009
Worse than Jimmy Carter (times 10)
by Nile Gardiner
Obama’s speech in Strasbourg, where he condemned America’s “arrogance”, has to rank as one of the most damaging, if not the most damaging speech by a U.S. president on foreign soil in modern times. It is impossible to imagine the leader of any European nation, with the unique exception of Germany’s contrition over its Nazi past, launching an attack like this upon his or her own country on foreign land. It was the humbling of a superpower in front of a largely French and German audience, who cheered every word the president spoke trashing his own nation’s record.
There was no mention by Obama in his speech of the sacrifice of tens of thousands of American GIs who died liberating France from fascist occupation, and no recognition of the huge role the United States played in keeping Europe free. It was a speech that quite easily could have been written in parts by Jacques Chirac or Dominique de Villepin, railing against the American “hyper-power”.
Barack Obama has launched a new era of self-flagellation for America that serves only to humiliate the American people, and embolden Washington’s enemies. From Tehran to Pyongyang, Moscow to Caracas, dictatorial regimes have been given a new lease of life by a U.S. administration that threatens little and barely talks about the advancement of freedom. The spread of individual liberty and human rights are hardly priority goals for a White House that is struggling to find a dictator it isn’t willing to talk to in the name of its weak-kneed new policy of “engagement”.
Obama’s speech in Strasbourg, where he condemned America’s “arrogance”, has to rank as one of the most damaging, if not the most damaging speech by a U.S. president on foreign soil in modern times. It is impossible to imagine the leader of any European nation, with the unique exception of Germany’s contrition over its Nazi past, launching an attack like this upon his or her own country on foreign land. It was the humbling of a superpower in front of a largely French and German audience, who cheered every word the president spoke trashing his own nation’s record.
There was no mention by Obama in his speech of the sacrifice of tens of thousands of American GIs who died liberating France from fascist occupation, and no recognition of the huge role the United States played in keeping Europe free. It was a speech that quite easily could have been written in parts by Jacques Chirac or Dominique de Villepin, railing against the American “hyper-power”.
Barack Obama has launched a new era of self-flagellation for America that serves only to humiliate the American people, and embolden Washington’s enemies. From Tehran to Pyongyang, Moscow to Caracas, dictatorial regimes have been given a new lease of life by a U.S. administration that threatens little and barely talks about the advancement of freedom. The spread of individual liberty and human rights are hardly priority goals for a White House that is struggling to find a dictator it isn’t willing to talk to in the name of its weak-kneed new policy of “engagement”.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
TOTUS
POTUS, has always referred to the President Of The United States.
I have seen several references recently to TOTUS, Telepromter Of The United States! FUNNY!!!
I have seen several references recently to TOTUS, Telepromter Of The United States! FUNNY!!!
The Fight for the Survival of Free Speech
Most Americans are sleepwalking right now through the early reign of Obama the Magnificant. He tells them he is cutting spending, cutting taxes, and cutting the deficit, and they believe him. When they find in 2010 and 2011 that he deliberately misled them and has been doing just the opposite, and they are deep in the soup as a result, public opinion will turn decisively against him.
Next is to target the remaining holdouts, primarily conservative talk radio and the Christian broadcasters. Then the Internet. And if Fox News doesn't stop airing independent voices, and learn to toe the party line, the Obaman Left will further browbeat them.
Now is the time for true patriots to stand up and fight for the survival of free speech in America. Grassroots activism is needed here. If the Left shuts down free speech, we will no longer have a free country.
Read more here
Next is to target the remaining holdouts, primarily conservative talk radio and the Christian broadcasters. Then the Internet. And if Fox News doesn't stop airing independent voices, and learn to toe the party line, the Obaman Left will further browbeat them.
Now is the time for true patriots to stand up and fight for the survival of free speech in America. Grassroots activism is needed here. If the Left shuts down free speech, we will no longer have a free country.
Read more here
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
