If the polls and pundits are right, less than 48 hours from now, the United States of America will have the most historic election result in its history. No, not because we will have elected an African American as President, but because we will have elected someone with a paper thin resume who has, throughout his history, associated with those who view America in fundamentally different ways than the vast majority of Americans. Further, we will have elected a man who, by his very words and deeds, distrusts capitalism, believes in Marxist redistribution and considers small town and rural Americans to be bitter, clingy racists. Apparently, though none of this matters.
There's no question that Barack Obama said that small town and rural Americans were bitter because (he believes) government hasn't done enough to take care of us. This bitterness (he believes) has caused us to "...cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them...." That statement alone should guarantee that 90% of those who live in small towns or rural areas or take their religion seriously or believe in the Second Amendment would vote against him. Apparently, though, it doesn't matter.
Barack Obama spent twenty years in Reverend Wright's racist America hating church. He used Reverend Wright's words in his book title. After twenty years, he claimed that he didn't hear the incendiary remarks Wright made, and expressed shock after learning them. Of course, that's ridiculous. No one with even a single brain cell believes that. Apparently, though, it doesn't matter.
Barack Obama, as a youth, was mentored by admitted communist Frank Marshall Davis. Davis was important enough to young Obama to deserve mention in his memoirs. Apparently, though, it doesn't matter.
William Ayers is a Marxist. William Ayers is an unrepentant terrorist. William Ayers considered Barack Obama to be enough of a kindred spirit to have him dole out money to meet Ayers' education goals. Ayers has praised Hugo Chavez' education system and has never changed his belief in Marxism. There was something about Barack Obama that Ayers liked. Apparently, though, it doesn't matter.
Barack Obama believes that GOVERNMENT forcibly taking more money from those who earn more in order for the GOVERNMENT to redistribute it to those who earn less is no different than sharing a peanut butter sandwich. Never mind that sharing is a voluntary act and government force is actually a taking. Apparently, though, it doesn't matter.
Barack Obama demands that we help the poor by having our money forcibly taken from us, but he doesn't even GIVE to help his own family who is living in poverty. Apparently, though, it doesn't matter.
Barack Obama believes that wealth redistribution is a proper function of the tax code. "Spreading the wealth" he calls it. Apparently, though, it doesn't matter.
Barack Obama believes that bankrupting the coal industry to curb greenhouse gases is good for the nation. Apparently, though, it doesn't matter.
Barack Obama believes that our enemies will make nice with us if we talk to them and become more international in our thinking. Apparently, though, it doesn't matter.
Barack Obama is convinced that his presidency will "change the world". No one ever asks him how the world will be changed and if that change will benefit the United States of America. Apparently, though, it doesn't matter.
From his days in college, those who hear Barack Obama speak talk about how his vague eloquence leaves everyone with the impression that he agrees with them. This is a scary attribute that is more akin to Juan Peron or Benito Mussolini than it is a principled statesman. Apparently, though, it doesn't matter.
Repeatedly, throughout this election, Barack Obama and his team have taken steps to silence those who dare to criticize him. Joe the Plumber gets investigated. TV stations that ask tough questions get blackballed and newspapers that refuse to endorse him get thrown off the plane. Private citizens like Gianna Jessen, an abortion survivor who is openly critical of Obama's record on abortion, are subject to silencing efforts by Obama's campaign. Combined with the efforts of ACORN and you have a modern version of the Gestapo in action. Apparently, though, it doesn't matter.
If you poll the American people on each one of the issues I've raised, and leave out the names and political affiliations, you will find that most Americans would not support Politician X who has such connections and has made such statements. Somehow, though, when the politician is Barack Obama all can be excused or forgiven or ignored.
Regardless of your opinions of President Bush, or the wars, or the economy, it is hard to see America changing its fundamental nature the way an Obama presidency would with the help of huge Democrat majorities in Congress.
What kind of nation have we become, if it doesn't matter?
Showing posts with label election. Show all posts
Showing posts with label election. Show all posts
Monday, November 3, 2008
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Nancy Does Congress
Grover Norquist once said, "bipartisanship is like date rape." Many people find that statement offensive, but when dealing with liberals it tends to be true. Rush Limbaugh has stated that when Democrats talk about bipartisanship they actually mean when conservatives compromise their principles and do what the liberals want. Love him or hate him, Nancy Pelosi has proving El Rushbo correct. In a recent campaign stop, Speaker Pelosi made the following statement, "...if the Democrats win, and have substantial majorities, Congress of the United States will be more bipartisan...."
Saturday Night Live must be writing her material. First, the statement makes no sense. If the Democrats have bullet proof majorities in Congress, THEY, the Democrats, decide what legislation passes and there is nothing the Republicans can do about it. Of course, the more I think about it, in the eyes of Democrats, and especially leftist Democrats (is that a redundancy?)that is bipartisanship.
Leftists don't view conservatives as equals. In the eyes of liberals, liberalism isn't a belief system. It is THE belief system. In their eyes, anyone who doesn't agree with liberalism is no different than Al Qaeda, the Taliban or Nazi Germany. Libertarianism is fascism and conservatism is more dangerous fascism and social conservatism is a demand to return to the Dark Ages and the Inquisition.
That is why leftists don't debate ideology. Try to debate economic liberty and property rights with a liberal and they will either call you a nasty name or say something about economic liberty being an excuse to keep the poor people poor. In other words, leftists take the Scarlett O'Hara attitude about philosophies that challenge their prejudices. They dismiss them with a wave of the hand and a "Fiddle-dee-dee!"
If conservatives favor making the Bush tax cuts permanent, they aren't being "bipartisan". The philosophical arguments don't matter. If conservatives support a ban on partial birth abortion, they aren't being "bipartisan". The reasons why don't matter. The facts about the procedure don't matter.
If conservatives oppose raising the minimum wage on the grounds that it increases consumer prices, costs jobs etc.; Democrats scream about the need for "bipartisanship". If a Democrat president appoints judges, "bipartisanship" demands that Republicans vote to consent to the appointment of those judges. If a Republican president appoints judges, then "bipartisanship" means that half the moderate ones and none of the conservative ones are approved.
I'm sure Speaker Nancy means it when she says that with huge leftist majorities, Congress will be more bipartisan, as long as the Republicans lie there, take it without a fight and don't scream.
Yep, bipartisanship is like date rape.
Saturday Night Live must be writing her material. First, the statement makes no sense. If the Democrats have bullet proof majorities in Congress, THEY, the Democrats, decide what legislation passes and there is nothing the Republicans can do about it. Of course, the more I think about it, in the eyes of Democrats, and especially leftist Democrats (is that a redundancy?)that is bipartisanship.
Leftists don't view conservatives as equals. In the eyes of liberals, liberalism isn't a belief system. It is THE belief system. In their eyes, anyone who doesn't agree with liberalism is no different than Al Qaeda, the Taliban or Nazi Germany. Libertarianism is fascism and conservatism is more dangerous fascism and social conservatism is a demand to return to the Dark Ages and the Inquisition.
That is why leftists don't debate ideology. Try to debate economic liberty and property rights with a liberal and they will either call you a nasty name or say something about economic liberty being an excuse to keep the poor people poor. In other words, leftists take the Scarlett O'Hara attitude about philosophies that challenge their prejudices. They dismiss them with a wave of the hand and a "Fiddle-dee-dee!"
If conservatives favor making the Bush tax cuts permanent, they aren't being "bipartisan". The philosophical arguments don't matter. If conservatives support a ban on partial birth abortion, they aren't being "bipartisan". The reasons why don't matter. The facts about the procedure don't matter.
If conservatives oppose raising the minimum wage on the grounds that it increases consumer prices, costs jobs etc.; Democrats scream about the need for "bipartisanship". If a Democrat president appoints judges, "bipartisanship" demands that Republicans vote to consent to the appointment of those judges. If a Republican president appoints judges, then "bipartisanship" means that half the moderate ones and none of the conservative ones are approved.
I'm sure Speaker Nancy means it when she says that with huge leftist majorities, Congress will be more bipartisan, as long as the Republicans lie there, take it without a fight and don't scream.
Yep, bipartisanship is like date rape.
Friday, October 17, 2008
The Rise Of The Elites
For a long time, smart (in their own eyes) leftists and even some conservatives have said that my anti-elitist views are irrational and "paranoid". Leftists like elites. I understand that. There are only two reasons to be a leftist. Either your think you're smarter and more noble than everyone else and, thus, should make the benevolent rules for the masses to follow; or you think you're a powerless victim in need of a benevolent all powerful champion to save you from the excesses of capitalism.
Leftists have always viewed us in the Heartland as merely potential Jerry Springer guests, trying to decide whether to pay the rent on our trailer or pay for new dentures. They don't believe we're smart enough to live our own lives or to know what is good for us in terms of national policy. Well I take that back. Leftists do believe that our fourteen year old daughters are capable of deciding to kill their unborn children without telling their parents. Beyond that, though, they believe that we, in flyover country, are clueless.
This election, though, has seen the resurgence of Republican elitists. These are the people who never really liked Reagan, were always uncomfortable around pro-lifers and think the Religious Right is a bunch of snake handling inbred hypocrites. David Brooks, the "conservative" columnist for the New York Times (yeah right), absolutely detests Sarah Palin. He has said that she "represents a fatal cancer to the Republican Party". This is the same guy who said, "Goldwater and Reagan were important leaders, but they’re not models for the future".
The bottom line is that elitists, both left and right, want government by oligarchy, or should I say aristocracy. Both sides believe in a ruling class and that we shouldn't challenge that natural order of things. These elites believe that because of going to a particular school, having a certain degree of "sophistication" or traveling in the correct circles that they have been ordained to make policy for us, the great unwashed. They don't believe government is the problem. They simply believe that government needs to be run by their club. The masses, in their eyes, are incapable of living as free and independent individuals.
Take the current media and left wing attacks on Joe the Plumber. Compare that to the pony tail guy in the 1992 townhall debate between George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton. The pony tail guy was the one who asked, "how can we, as symbolically the children of the future president, expect the two of you, the three of you to meet our needs...?". The pony tail guy was hailed as someone who gets it. The media loved the question, loved Bill Clinton's response and loved the entire attitude. In the eyes of elitists, the masses should think of themselves as children who need a benevolent imperial government to meet their needs.
Joe, on the other hand, doesn't want his "needs" met. He simply wants government to take less. He'll achieve or fail on his own. Because his question didn't recognize the need for a ruling class he is pilloried. In twenty four hours, more investigation was done on his background than has EVER been done on either Barack Obama, Bill Ayers or ACORN.
We now know that Joe owes taxes, his first name isn't Joe, he's been divorced, he's been involved in various businesses, he doesn't currently having a license as a plumber, and horror of horrors; he voted in the Republican primary. The Chosen One being mentored by a pervert communist in Hawaii is irrelevant, but no detail is too small to be missed about Joe.
The reaction by the elites to Governor Palin and Joe should be a lesson for all of us. America has a ruling class that desires to protect its own. Left or right, Republican or Democrat, they all consider us to be "bitter, (clinging) to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them...."
The elites have no problem with a society where people like Barbra Streisand, Whoopi Goldberg and Madonna have "relevant" political opinions; but people like Sarah Palin and Joe the Plumber need to know their role and shut their mouths, unless they get invited to appear on Jerry Springer.
Leftists have always viewed us in the Heartland as merely potential Jerry Springer guests, trying to decide whether to pay the rent on our trailer or pay for new dentures. They don't believe we're smart enough to live our own lives or to know what is good for us in terms of national policy. Well I take that back. Leftists do believe that our fourteen year old daughters are capable of deciding to kill their unborn children without telling their parents. Beyond that, though, they believe that we, in flyover country, are clueless.
This election, though, has seen the resurgence of Republican elitists. These are the people who never really liked Reagan, were always uncomfortable around pro-lifers and think the Religious Right is a bunch of snake handling inbred hypocrites. David Brooks, the "conservative" columnist for the New York Times (yeah right), absolutely detests Sarah Palin. He has said that she "represents a fatal cancer to the Republican Party". This is the same guy who said, "Goldwater and Reagan were important leaders, but they’re not models for the future".
The bottom line is that elitists, both left and right, want government by oligarchy, or should I say aristocracy. Both sides believe in a ruling class and that we shouldn't challenge that natural order of things. These elites believe that because of going to a particular school, having a certain degree of "sophistication" or traveling in the correct circles that they have been ordained to make policy for us, the great unwashed. They don't believe government is the problem. They simply believe that government needs to be run by their club. The masses, in their eyes, are incapable of living as free and independent individuals.
Take the current media and left wing attacks on Joe the Plumber. Compare that to the pony tail guy in the 1992 townhall debate between George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton. The pony tail guy was the one who asked, "how can we, as symbolically the children of the future president, expect the two of you, the three of you to meet our needs...?". The pony tail guy was hailed as someone who gets it. The media loved the question, loved Bill Clinton's response and loved the entire attitude. In the eyes of elitists, the masses should think of themselves as children who need a benevolent imperial government to meet their needs.
Joe, on the other hand, doesn't want his "needs" met. He simply wants government to take less. He'll achieve or fail on his own. Because his question didn't recognize the need for a ruling class he is pilloried. In twenty four hours, more investigation was done on his background than has EVER been done on either Barack Obama, Bill Ayers or ACORN.
We now know that Joe owes taxes, his first name isn't Joe, he's been divorced, he's been involved in various businesses, he doesn't currently having a license as a plumber, and horror of horrors; he voted in the Republican primary. The Chosen One being mentored by a pervert communist in Hawaii is irrelevant, but no detail is too small to be missed about Joe.
The reaction by the elites to Governor Palin and Joe should be a lesson for all of us. America has a ruling class that desires to protect its own. Left or right, Republican or Democrat, they all consider us to be "bitter, (clinging) to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them...."
The elites have no problem with a society where people like Barbra Streisand, Whoopi Goldberg and Madonna have "relevant" political opinions; but people like Sarah Palin and Joe the Plumber need to know their role and shut their mouths, unless they get invited to appear on Jerry Springer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)