12/22/2012
12/21/2012
Notable Quotes
"Think about it: The media is entering a new year attempting to convince parents that their children will be less safe with a policeman in their school."
JOHN NOLTE
Liberal Obsession With Race is Growing Old
Via-Chicago Tribune
Jonah Goldberg
When will liberals stop living in the past? Specifically, when will they accept that they aren't all that stands between a wonderful, tolerant America and Jim Crow?
I was in the room when, during the Democratic convention, civil rights hero John Lewis suggested that Republicans wanted to "go back" to the days when black men like him could be beaten in the street by the enforcers of Jim Crow. I thought it an outrageous and disgusting bit of demagoguery. The audience of Democratic delegates cheered in a riot of self-congratulation.
It's bizarre. I spend most of my time talking or listening to fellow conservatives, and I never hear anybody talk about wanting anything of the sort. But to listen to liberals, that's all we care about.
Toward the end of the presidential campaign, various liberal pundits -- a great many of them born after the signing of the Civil Rights Act -- thought it a brilliant and damning indictment to note that Mitt Romney ran strong in states that once comprised the Confederacy. When Barack Obama won, Jon Stewart conceded that at least Romney won "most of the Confederacy."
These states committed the obvious sin of voting Republican while the president was black.
Jonah Goldberg
When will liberals stop living in the past? Specifically, when will they accept that they aren't all that stands between a wonderful, tolerant America and Jim Crow?
I was in the room when, during the Democratic convention, civil rights hero John Lewis suggested that Republicans wanted to "go back" to the days when black men like him could be beaten in the street by the enforcers of Jim Crow. I thought it an outrageous and disgusting bit of demagoguery. The audience of Democratic delegates cheered in a riot of self-congratulation.
It's bizarre. I spend most of my time talking or listening to fellow conservatives, and I never hear anybody talk about wanting anything of the sort. But to listen to liberals, that's all we care about.
Toward the end of the presidential campaign, various liberal pundits -- a great many of them born after the signing of the Civil Rights Act -- thought it a brilliant and damning indictment to note that Mitt Romney ran strong in states that once comprised the Confederacy. When Barack Obama won, Jon Stewart conceded that at least Romney won "most of the Confederacy."
These states committed the obvious sin of voting Republican while the president was black.
A Brief History of American Prosperity
Via-CITY
An entrepreneurial culture and the rule of law have nourished the nation’s economic dynamism.
GUY SORMAN
Worry over America’s recent economic stagnation, however justified, shouldn’t obscure the fact that the American economy remains Number One in the world. The United States holds 4.5 percent of the world’s population but produces a staggering 22 percent of the world’s output—a fraction that has remained fairly stable for two decades, despite growing competition from emerging countries. Not only is the American economy the biggest in absolute terms, with a GDP twice the size of China’s; it’s also near the top in per-capita income, currently a bit over $48,000 per year. Only a few small countries blessed with abundant natural resources or a concentration of financial services, such as Norway and Luxembourg, can claim higher averages.
America’s predominance isn’t new; indeed, it has existed since the early nineteenth century. But where did it come from? And is it in danger of disappearing?
Read entire article
GUY SORMAN
Worry over America’s recent economic stagnation, however justified, shouldn’t obscure the fact that the American economy remains Number One in the world. The United States holds 4.5 percent of the world’s population but produces a staggering 22 percent of the world’s output—a fraction that has remained fairly stable for two decades, despite growing competition from emerging countries. Not only is the American economy the biggest in absolute terms, with a GDP twice the size of China’s; it’s also near the top in per-capita income, currently a bit over $48,000 per year. Only a few small countries blessed with abundant natural resources or a concentration of financial services, such as Norway and Luxembourg, can claim higher averages.
America’s predominance isn’t new; indeed, it has existed since the early nineteenth century. But where did it come from? And is it in danger of disappearing?
Read entire article
Notable Quotes
"[T]urns out the Mayan calendar wasn’t wrong. It was just their John Boehner horoscope".
Erick Erickson
Whittling Away our Freedoms
Via-American Thinker
By Jeannie DeAngelis
In the aftermath of the tragic murders at Sandy Hook Elementary School, Barack Obama, together with a supportive left-wing media, has called for "meaningful action" to address the problem of mass shootings. Since that heartbreaking episode, the president has been publicly weeping, praying, pontificating, quoting Scripture, and poetically sharing verbal vignettes on the responsibilities of fatherhood. He's been so convincing that pro-gun Democrats are abandoning their former commitment to the Second Amendment, crossing over, and siding with liberals on gun laws.
Meanwhile, despite all the passionate rhetoric, except for passing blame, Obama has yet to fully acknowledge his administration's participation in the failed gun-walking operation called "Operation Fast and Furious."
Read entire article
By Jeannie DeAngelis
In the aftermath of the tragic murders at Sandy Hook Elementary School, Barack Obama, together with a supportive left-wing media, has called for "meaningful action" to address the problem of mass shootings. Since that heartbreaking episode, the president has been publicly weeping, praying, pontificating, quoting Scripture, and poetically sharing verbal vignettes on the responsibilities of fatherhood. He's been so convincing that pro-gun Democrats are abandoning their former commitment to the Second Amendment, crossing over, and siding with liberals on gun laws.
Meanwhile, despite all the passionate rhetoric, except for passing blame, Obama has yet to fully acknowledge his administration's participation in the failed gun-walking operation called "Operation Fast and Furious."
Read entire article
12/20/2012
Right of Revolution?
Via-American Spectator
By Joseph Shattan
Reflections on a senator and the Second Amendment.
About 15 years ago, I served on the staff of a Senator who was an ardent opponent of gun control. Once I asked him why he was so adamantly opposed to any restrictions on gun sales, when even the police favored banning sales of certain kinds of assault weapons.
The Senator dismissed these concerns with a wave of his hand. “The real purpose of the Second Amendment,” he explained, “is to guarantee the right of revolution. If the government ever becomes too oppressive, the American people will be able to rise up and overthrow it.”
“But Mr. Senator,” I objected, somewhat taken aback, “we are the government.”
“That’s right, Joe,” he replied, “but we might not always be.”
I have repeated this story many times over the years, and I never failed to include an ironic postscript: The only time in my life when I seriously discussed the possible overthrow of the U.S. government was in the course of a conversation with a U.S. Senator that took place in the Russell Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill.
In the wake of the awful events in Newtown, however, I find myself recalling this conversation — but without any trace of irony or amusement.
In his great book, Democracy in America, the incomparable Alexis de Tocqueville warned Americans against succumbing to an “immense tutelary power” that reduces us to “a herd of timid and industrious animals of which government is the shepherd.” Like many conservatives, I believe that the ultimate goal of American “progressivism” (although not, of course, its avowed intent) is to turn Tocqueville’s warning into a fact. And as we all know, it is the sad fate of sheep to end up in the slaughter-house.
Is the Second Amendment a way of protecting the American people against a sheepish fate, or is this entire way of thinking a prime example of what the historian Richard Hofstadter called “the paranoid style” in American politics?
read entire article
By Joseph Shattan
Reflections on a senator and the Second Amendment.
About 15 years ago, I served on the staff of a Senator who was an ardent opponent of gun control. Once I asked him why he was so adamantly opposed to any restrictions on gun sales, when even the police favored banning sales of certain kinds of assault weapons.
The Senator dismissed these concerns with a wave of his hand. “The real purpose of the Second Amendment,” he explained, “is to guarantee the right of revolution. If the government ever becomes too oppressive, the American people will be able to rise up and overthrow it.”
“But Mr. Senator,” I objected, somewhat taken aback, “we are the government.”
“That’s right, Joe,” he replied, “but we might not always be.”
I have repeated this story many times over the years, and I never failed to include an ironic postscript: The only time in my life when I seriously discussed the possible overthrow of the U.S. government was in the course of a conversation with a U.S. Senator that took place in the Russell Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill.
In the wake of the awful events in Newtown, however, I find myself recalling this conversation — but without any trace of irony or amusement.
In his great book, Democracy in America, the incomparable Alexis de Tocqueville warned Americans against succumbing to an “immense tutelary power” that reduces us to “a herd of timid and industrious animals of which government is the shepherd.” Like many conservatives, I believe that the ultimate goal of American “progressivism” (although not, of course, its avowed intent) is to turn Tocqueville’s warning into a fact. And as we all know, it is the sad fate of sheep to end up in the slaughter-house.
Is the Second Amendment a way of protecting the American people against a sheepish fate, or is this entire way of thinking a prime example of what the historian Richard Hofstadter called “the paranoid style” in American politics?
read entire article
Notable Quotes
" The incendiary witch hunt against law-abiding, peaceful gun owners is neither noble nor effective. It's just plain insane."
Michelle Malkin
The New Racial Derangement Syndrome
Via-Town Hall
Victor Davis Hanson
There is a different sort of racialist derangement spreading in the country -- and it is getting ugly.
Here is actor Jamie Foxx joking recently about his new movie role: "I kill all the white people in the movie. How great is that?" Reverse white and black in the relevant ways and even a comedian would hear national outrage. Instead, his hip "Saturday Night Live" audience even gave Foxx applause.
Race-obsessed comedian Chris Rock tweeted on the Fourth of July, "Happy white peoples (sic) independence day ..."
Actor Samuel L. Jackson, in a recent interview, sounded about as unapologetically reactionary as you can get: "I voted for Barack because he was black. ... I hope Obama gets scary in the next four years."
No one in Hollywood used to be more admired than Morgan Freeman, who once lectured interviewers on the need to transcend race. Not now, in the new age of racial regression. Freeman has accused Obama critics and the Tea Party of being racists. He went on to editorialize on Obama's racial bloodlines: "Barack had a mama, and she was white -- very white, American, Kansas, middle of America ... America's first black president hasn't arisen yet."
Freeman's racial-purity obsessions were echoed on the CNN website, where an ad for the network's recent special report on race included a crude quote from three teen poets: "Black enough to be a n-----. White enough to be a good one."
In the 21st century, are we returning to the racial labyrinth of the19th-century Old Confederacy, where we measure our supposed racial DNA to the nth degree? Apparently yes. ESPN sports commentator Rob Parker blasted Washington Redskins quarterback Robert Griffin III last week for admirably stating that he did not wish to be defined by his race rather than by his character: "He's black, he does his thing, but he's not really down with the cause." Parker added: "He's not one of us. He's kind of black, but he's not really like the kind of guy you really want to hang out with." (ESPN suspended Parker for his remarks.)
read entire article
Victor Davis Hanson
There is a different sort of racialist derangement spreading in the country -- and it is getting ugly.
Here is actor Jamie Foxx joking recently about his new movie role: "I kill all the white people in the movie. How great is that?" Reverse white and black in the relevant ways and even a comedian would hear national outrage. Instead, his hip "Saturday Night Live" audience even gave Foxx applause.
Race-obsessed comedian Chris Rock tweeted on the Fourth of July, "Happy white peoples (sic) independence day ..."
Actor Samuel L. Jackson, in a recent interview, sounded about as unapologetically reactionary as you can get: "I voted for Barack because he was black. ... I hope Obama gets scary in the next four years."
No one in Hollywood used to be more admired than Morgan Freeman, who once lectured interviewers on the need to transcend race. Not now, in the new age of racial regression. Freeman has accused Obama critics and the Tea Party of being racists. He went on to editorialize on Obama's racial bloodlines: "Barack had a mama, and she was white -- very white, American, Kansas, middle of America ... America's first black president hasn't arisen yet."
Freeman's racial-purity obsessions were echoed on the CNN website, where an ad for the network's recent special report on race included a crude quote from three teen poets: "Black enough to be a n-----. White enough to be a good one."
In the 21st century, are we returning to the racial labyrinth of the19th-century Old Confederacy, where we measure our supposed racial DNA to the nth degree? Apparently yes. ESPN sports commentator Rob Parker blasted Washington Redskins quarterback Robert Griffin III last week for admirably stating that he did not wish to be defined by his race rather than by his character: "He's black, he does his thing, but he's not really down with the cause." Parker added: "He's not one of us. He's kind of black, but he's not really like the kind of guy you really want to hang out with." (ESPN suspended Parker for his remarks.)
read entire article
12/19/2012
Gun Culture and Gun-Control Culture
Via-Front Page Magazine
By Daniel Greenfield
Hardly had the blood been scrubbed off the floors in Newtown than everyone who was anyone had begun shifting the blame from Adam Lanza to some intangible social failure.
Back in 2002, Michael Moore trundled his bulk over to Colorado to exploit the Columbine massacre for a general rant about gun culture, American foreign policy and how hard it was to find a shop selling bacon grease by the ton at two in the morning.
In his film, which won an Oscar for Best Documentary, Moore gave his audience what they wanted, lots of scenes of “hicks and hillbillies” buying, selling and giving away guns all over the place to illustrate the murderous ravages of American gun culture. Some of those scenes were staged, but it didn’t matter since Moore was catering to an audience that had nothing but contempt for working class Americans and would believe any awful thing about them.
What did gun culture have to do with a plot by two disgruntled dorks with tastes in pop culture far afield from the rural gun-loving dystopia that Moore was doing his best to depict? About as much as gun culture has to do with headcases like Adam Lanza or Jared Loughner.
Read article here
By Daniel Greenfield
Hardly had the blood been scrubbed off the floors in Newtown than everyone who was anyone had begun shifting the blame from Adam Lanza to some intangible social failure.
Back in 2002, Michael Moore trundled his bulk over to Colorado to exploit the Columbine massacre for a general rant about gun culture, American foreign policy and how hard it was to find a shop selling bacon grease by the ton at two in the morning.
In his film, which won an Oscar for Best Documentary, Moore gave his audience what they wanted, lots of scenes of “hicks and hillbillies” buying, selling and giving away guns all over the place to illustrate the murderous ravages of American gun culture. Some of those scenes were staged, but it didn’t matter since Moore was catering to an audience that had nothing but contempt for working class Americans and would believe any awful thing about them.
What did gun culture have to do with a plot by two disgruntled dorks with tastes in pop culture far afield from the rural gun-loving dystopia that Moore was doing his best to depict? About as much as gun culture has to do with headcases like Adam Lanza or Jared Loughner.
Read article here
Notable Quotes
"For there to be a king there must be peasants. Peasants aren't defined by their wealth but by their belief that others should rule them"
Tom Trinko
Conservatives Rationalize as America Circles the Drain
Via-American Thinker
By Selwyn Duke
It's often hard to accept the truth, especially when that truth is scary -- when reality seems to offer you no solutions, only poison from which to pick.
It's as with a man I once knew who insisted that it couldn't be proven that smoking is bad for you. He knew better in his heart, but his available choices -- giving up cigarettes or accepting the danger of their use -- were both emotionally unpalatable to him. Enter the rationalization.
We're seeing the same thing with Republicans in the wake of Barack Obama's re-election. Radio host Sean Hannity, citing changing American demographics, stated a while back that his position on immigration has "evolved": we now must offer illegals some kind of pathway to citizenship (aka amnesty). Other conservatives are warning that we must dispense with social issues, or the Republican Party will be dispensed with.
Of course, this isn't always rationalization. Some conservatives, and Hannity is likely among them, may truly believe that we can avoid electoral hell if we have just one more dance with the Devil. Conservatives have always responded to seemingly inevitable political changes by, slowly but surely, compromising their way to tyranny. But rationalization is a huge factor, and what is the scary truth here that conservatives dare not contemplate?
They are losing the culture.
Read article here
By Selwyn Duke
It's often hard to accept the truth, especially when that truth is scary -- when reality seems to offer you no solutions, only poison from which to pick.
It's as with a man I once knew who insisted that it couldn't be proven that smoking is bad for you. He knew better in his heart, but his available choices -- giving up cigarettes or accepting the danger of their use -- were both emotionally unpalatable to him. Enter the rationalization.
We're seeing the same thing with Republicans in the wake of Barack Obama's re-election. Radio host Sean Hannity, citing changing American demographics, stated a while back that his position on immigration has "evolved": we now must offer illegals some kind of pathway to citizenship (aka amnesty). Other conservatives are warning that we must dispense with social issues, or the Republican Party will be dispensed with.
Of course, this isn't always rationalization. Some conservatives, and Hannity is likely among them, may truly believe that we can avoid electoral hell if we have just one more dance with the Devil. Conservatives have always responded to seemingly inevitable political changes by, slowly but surely, compromising their way to tyranny. But rationalization is a huge factor, and what is the scary truth here that conservatives dare not contemplate?
They are losing the culture.
Read article here
12/18/2012
Notable Quotes
"It stands as a remarkable achievement in the history of this nation that the city of Charleston, SC, to which one must travel to get to Ft. Sumter, would put Tim Scott in the United States House of Representatives. It is as remarkable that the State of South Carolina, so often painted as an unrepentant hotbed of secessionist bigots by the left, would elevate Tim Scott to the United States Senate"
Erick Erickson
Notable Quotes
“It used to be you worked because you had pride in yourself and you would support your family, you would take care of yourself, you would be part of building this America, and now, are we becoming too dependent on government to take care of us? Government can’t afford to take care of everybody. We don’t have the money.”
Rep. Sue Myrick
Invincible Ignorance
Via-Town Hall
Thomas Sowell
Must every tragic mass shooting bring out the shrill ignorance of "gun control" advocates?
The key fallacy of so-called gun control laws is that such laws do not in fact control guns. They simply disarm law-abiding citizens, while people bent on violence find firearms readily available.
If gun control zealots had any respect for facts, they would have discovered this long ago, because there have been too many factual studies over the years to leave any serious doubt about gun control laws being not merely futile but counterproductive.
Places and times with the strongest gun control laws have often been places and times with high murder rates. Washington, D.C., is a classic example, but just one among many.
When it comes to the rate of gun ownership, that is higher in rural areas than in urban areas, but the murder rate is higher in urban areas. The rate of gun ownership is higher among whites than among blacks, but the murder rate is higher among blacks. For the country as a whole, hand gun ownership doubled in the late 20th century, while the murder rate went down.
The few counter-examples offered by gun control zealots do not stand up under scrutiny. Perhaps their strongest talking point is that Britain has stronger gun control laws than the United States and lower murder rates.
Read article here
Thomas Sowell
Must every tragic mass shooting bring out the shrill ignorance of "gun control" advocates?
The key fallacy of so-called gun control laws is that such laws do not in fact control guns. They simply disarm law-abiding citizens, while people bent on violence find firearms readily available.
If gun control zealots had any respect for facts, they would have discovered this long ago, because there have been too many factual studies over the years to leave any serious doubt about gun control laws being not merely futile but counterproductive.
Places and times with the strongest gun control laws have often been places and times with high murder rates. Washington, D.C., is a classic example, but just one among many.
When it comes to the rate of gun ownership, that is higher in rural areas than in urban areas, but the murder rate is higher in urban areas. The rate of gun ownership is higher among whites than among blacks, but the murder rate is higher among blacks. For the country as a whole, hand gun ownership doubled in the late 20th century, while the murder rate went down.
The few counter-examples offered by gun control zealots do not stand up under scrutiny. Perhaps their strongest talking point is that Britain has stronger gun control laws than the United States and lower murder rates.
Read article here
Just A Thought
Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, the incoming chairwoman of the House Republican Conference, says she opposes House Speaker John Boehner’s offer to raise taxes on wealthier Americans to avoid the so-called fiscal cliff.For those who might not be aware of who Cathy McMorris is, this picture which you have seen the likes of a thousand times on TV should remind you.
“Raising those top two rates is really a straw man. It doesn’t solve the problem,” the Washington State congresswoman told C-Span on Sunday.
“We could raise the top rates to 100 percent and it would fund the government for 91 days.
“It’s a false promise.”
Republican Diversity Fueled by Tea Party
Via-National Journal
By Josh Kraushaar
For Republicans who believe the tea party is responsible for the GOP's struggles, South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley’s decision to choose Rep. Tim Scott to replace Jim DeMint in the Senate would have come as a stunner. The nation’s second Indian-American governor appointed the only African-American who will be serving in the Senate come 2013. And not only are they both Republicans, they are tea party-aligned conservatives who took on the party establishment and won.
It’s ironic that at a time when party strategists are publicly panicking over the party’s need to diversify or face extinction, they’re blind to the reality that if it wasn’t for the much-maligned tea party, the Republican Party would be even more homogeneous than it is today.
Haley, a little-known state senator before being elected governor, would never have had a chance at becoming governor against the state’s good ol’ boy network of statewide officeholders. Scott would have been a long shot in his Republican primary against none other than Strom Thurmond’s youngest son. Marco Rubio, now the hyped 2016 presidential favorite, would have stepped aside to see now-Democrat Charlie Crist become the next senator, depriving the party of one of its most talented stars. Ted Cruz, the other Hispanic Republican in the Senate, would have never chanced a seemingly futile bid against Texas’s 67-year-old lieutenant governor, seen as a lock to succeed Kay Bailey Hutchison.
But all those upset victories--all of which at the time seemed shocking--took place because of the conservative grassroots’ strong sentiment for outsiders who campaigned on their principles, and not over their past political or family connections. Even a decade ago, party officials would have been more successful in pushing these outsider candidates aside, persuading them to wait their turn. (In Rubio’s case, it almost worked.) Now, in an era where grassroots politicking is as easy as ever thanks to the proliferation of social media, more control is in the hands of voters. And contrary to the ugly stereotypes of conservative activists being right-wing to the point of racist, it’s been the tea party movement that’s been behind the political success of most prominent minority Republican officeholders.
read entire article
By Josh Kraushaar
For Republicans who believe the tea party is responsible for the GOP's struggles, South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley’s decision to choose Rep. Tim Scott to replace Jim DeMint in the Senate would have come as a stunner. The nation’s second Indian-American governor appointed the only African-American who will be serving in the Senate come 2013. And not only are they both Republicans, they are tea party-aligned conservatives who took on the party establishment and won.
It’s ironic that at a time when party strategists are publicly panicking over the party’s need to diversify or face extinction, they’re blind to the reality that if it wasn’t for the much-maligned tea party, the Republican Party would be even more homogeneous than it is today.
Haley, a little-known state senator before being elected governor, would never have had a chance at becoming governor against the state’s good ol’ boy network of statewide officeholders. Scott would have been a long shot in his Republican primary against none other than Strom Thurmond’s youngest son. Marco Rubio, now the hyped 2016 presidential favorite, would have stepped aside to see now-Democrat Charlie Crist become the next senator, depriving the party of one of its most talented stars. Ted Cruz, the other Hispanic Republican in the Senate, would have never chanced a seemingly futile bid against Texas’s 67-year-old lieutenant governor, seen as a lock to succeed Kay Bailey Hutchison.
But all those upset victories--all of which at the time seemed shocking--took place because of the conservative grassroots’ strong sentiment for outsiders who campaigned on their principles, and not over their past political or family connections. Even a decade ago, party officials would have been more successful in pushing these outsider candidates aside, persuading them to wait their turn. (In Rubio’s case, it almost worked.) Now, in an era where grassroots politicking is as easy as ever thanks to the proliferation of social media, more control is in the hands of voters. And contrary to the ugly stereotypes of conservative activists being right-wing to the point of racist, it’s been the tea party movement that’s been behind the political success of most prominent minority Republican officeholders.
read entire article
12/17/2012
Kathleen the Terrible
Via-American Spectator
By DAVID CATRON
Kathleen Sebelius is the most corrupt and arrogant HHS secretary in history.
Among the gifts Nancy Pelosi brings to the House of Representatives is her ability to draw a hearty guffaw from the most jaded observer of American politics. This talent for comedy was on display last Wednesday when she told a group of toadeaters disguised as journalists that she belongs to the anti-corruption party. The Orwellian absurdity of the claim, combined with her trademark vapid expression, was enough to make a cat laugh. I do, however, wish C-SPAN would flash some sort of warning on the screen when the former Speaker is about to deliver one of these howlers. That one caught me unawares with a mouth full of coffee and I had to spend the next ten minutes cleaning off my keyboard and monitor.
In reality, of course, Pelosi and the rest of the Democrats who infest Congress and the Obama administration constitute the most corrupt gang of grifters ever to have descended on Washington and the hapless American electorate. The only real question is: Who is the worst? Many would bestow this dubious honor on Pelosi herself. Others would favor her Senate counterpart, Harry Reid. More than a few would, of course, nominate Eric Holder. And still others would push the suit of President Obama for the “most corrupt” award. All are tough contenders, without a doubt, and each has certainly earned at least a dishonorable mention. Nonetheless, for my money, HHS secretary Kathleen Sebelius wins the prize.
read entire article
By DAVID CATRON
Kathleen Sebelius is the most corrupt and arrogant HHS secretary in history.
Among the gifts Nancy Pelosi brings to the House of Representatives is her ability to draw a hearty guffaw from the most jaded observer of American politics. This talent for comedy was on display last Wednesday when she told a group of toadeaters disguised as journalists that she belongs to the anti-corruption party. The Orwellian absurdity of the claim, combined with her trademark vapid expression, was enough to make a cat laugh. I do, however, wish C-SPAN would flash some sort of warning on the screen when the former Speaker is about to deliver one of these howlers. That one caught me unawares with a mouth full of coffee and I had to spend the next ten minutes cleaning off my keyboard and monitor.
In reality, of course, Pelosi and the rest of the Democrats who infest Congress and the Obama administration constitute the most corrupt gang of grifters ever to have descended on Washington and the hapless American electorate. The only real question is: Who is the worst? Many would bestow this dubious honor on Pelosi herself. Others would favor her Senate counterpart, Harry Reid. More than a few would, of course, nominate Eric Holder. And still others would push the suit of President Obama for the “most corrupt” award. All are tough contenders, without a doubt, and each has certainly earned at least a dishonorable mention. Nonetheless, for my money, HHS secretary Kathleen Sebelius wins the prize.
read entire article
Obama's Stealth Redistribution Strategy
Via-American Thinker
By Karl Ushanka
Resentment of the rich trumps all else in liberalism, and we are defending against a multi-front class war. President Obama is using a shotgun approach to redistribute your wealth, with multiple attacks on your income, property, savings, and cost of living. These coordinated attacks started after the 2008 election and are now set to hit critical mass in his second term.
You may be hearing about the automatic tax increases in the fiscal cliff, plus additional tax increases President Obama is negotiating with Speaker Boehner. But you won't hear much about liberalism's most powerful, and silent, redistribution tool: inflation.
How is inflation redistributive? While not actually taking from one and giving to another, inflation satisfies the first step of the two-step redistribution process:
Step One: Reduce the wealth of the bourgeoisie.
Step Two: Increase the wealth of the proletariat.
The liberals, progressives, communists (or whatever label you're using these days) never achieve their redistribution goals, as they often fail at or before Step Two. But for them, this is okay. In their zero-sum world, a dollar taken from one must have been given to another. Therefore, the redistribution effort is seen as a success, by them and in hindsight, if only Step One occurred.
read entire article
By Karl Ushanka
Resentment of the rich trumps all else in liberalism, and we are defending against a multi-front class war. President Obama is using a shotgun approach to redistribute your wealth, with multiple attacks on your income, property, savings, and cost of living. These coordinated attacks started after the 2008 election and are now set to hit critical mass in his second term.
You may be hearing about the automatic tax increases in the fiscal cliff, plus additional tax increases President Obama is negotiating with Speaker Boehner. But you won't hear much about liberalism's most powerful, and silent, redistribution tool: inflation.
How is inflation redistributive? While not actually taking from one and giving to another, inflation satisfies the first step of the two-step redistribution process:
Step One: Reduce the wealth of the bourgeoisie.
Step Two: Increase the wealth of the proletariat.
The liberals, progressives, communists (or whatever label you're using these days) never achieve their redistribution goals, as they often fail at or before Step Two. But for them, this is okay. In their zero-sum world, a dollar taken from one must have been given to another. Therefore, the redistribution effort is seen as a success, by them and in hindsight, if only Step One occurred.
read entire article
12/16/2012
Notable Quotes
"[T]he media is guilty of doing what they criticize big business of — putting money (in this case, ratings, newsstand sales, and web traffic) ahead of humanity and decency. Just as greedy businessmen put profit and personal gain ahead of ethics, so too do our media outlets."
Matt K. Lewis
Notable Quotes
"Recent polls suggest that most Americans agree with Obama that the rich should be taxed more than they are. No wonder. When an impassioned moral argument on one side -- even the wrong side -- is met with tepid utilitarian wish-wash on the other, it should not amaze us when the wrong side wins."
Cynthia V. Ward
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)