Of freebies, geeks & Ludwig von Mises...

Few things come free in this life, and I get one of them! My darling friend Sandy is the Editor for our local Republican Women's newletter. I'm not a member of said organization, but I get their newsletter (& membership applications) at each publication -- for FREE! Here's the latest "From the Editor" & man, is it good!

Once a geek, always a geek I guess. I admit it, I have been reading Ludwig von Mises. Doctor von Mises passed away in 1973, but for decades was the most prominent member of the Austrian school of economics.

An ardent capitalist, I think he does a very good job of explaining “the slippery slope” of government interference in the economy. [For example] Let’s just say that we all want the latest cell phone and none of us like paying $650 for it. The Occupy protestors decry that a smart phone is a necessity these days but most people can only afford to pay $100 for a device. They want the government to mandate that the phones be sold for $100. What’s wrong with that?

Well, if this arbitrary price does not cover the cost of production, then the merchants and manufacturers will not sell the phones. They will hold on to them, hoping that the legislation will be repealed and that the devices in inventory can then be sold at a profit rather than a loss.

So, socialist legislators with no understanding of economics, will then move on to not just fixing price, but mandating the sale of the devices. But… because the price is now artificially low, the demand will increase while the supply remains the same. This means that people who go to the electronics store prepared to pay $100 for their government-promised gizmo….go home empty-handed.

NOW, to avoid the anger of the Occupiers who STILL don’t have the latest phone, the legislators must implement rationing. One phone per household. (All the Occupiers are still on mom and dad’s cell plan anyway, right?)

But once all the inventory on hand is exhausted, what company is going to produce a product that they are forced to sell at a loss? No one will and you end up with a scenario where in its attempt to provide a coveted product to everyone, the government vaporizes the availability of the product for everyone.

Smart phones are a silly example, but the basic premise can be applied to any good or service. Think healthcare and be afraid. Be very, very afraid.

~~

Some freebies, like smarts, are -actually- free. And this 'geek' has got plenty.

I'm just glad she's my friend...

~~~

Republican Nominee for 2012??

NEWT!!

NEWT!!!

NEWT!!!

~~

That's all for today.

~~~

"The Roots of Obama's Rage"

So, I've begun in earnest to read a book that has been in my 'stack.' Man-o-man is it gonna be something else...

Dinesh D'Souza, President of King's College, author, speaker, political scholar, speaks about his book: The Roots of Obama's Rage.



Naturally, Mr. Obama's sycophants in the MSM have run to his aide, disputing Mr. D'Souza at every turn. Read them if you like...But first, take a listen to Mr. D'Souza himself, & get a gander at the end of Chapter 1:

"Clearly in Barack Obama we are dealing with a strange, complex man. Ironically we have ironed out that strangeness by making Obama the embodiment of American multiculturalism. Somehow we have taken this lonely, driven figure and turned him into an image of diversity. He is our Kumbayah man, our post-ideological president, an ultra-modern leader with a twenty-first century agenda. Obama recognizes this; he has himself commented that 'I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views' ...But whatever Obama is, he is not diverse or multicultural, at least not in his thinking or his fundamental values...He is fighting a private war that started far away and goes back to the middle of the last century, with roots that are even earlier. If we want to understand his actions in America and in the world, we have to understand Obama as he really is, not as we want him to be."

I'm intrigued. It was all I could do to put the book down and write this post. As we embark down yet another election trail, please do 'due diligence' and read this book; find out who this man is, before we risk placing him at the helm of our great Republic - again. In the end, what our MSMedia won't do for us, we must do for ourselves...

~~~

"Doorbell" (Cloward/Piven style...)

My wise friend Z, who made an excellent point about my last post:
"Let's just get Morris out of this equation if we must..." when another commenter insisted on arguing about the personality of Mr. Morris, rather than the REality of our problem: Government SPENDING.

Let us not chase rabbits into warrens...



STOP SPENDING!

STOP. SPENDING.

Just stop.

~~~
(Curtsy to Nancy)

Dick Morris' Crystal Ball~

I just love Dick Morris~

The next 16 months may not play out exactly as Mr. Morris 'predicts,' but his history with these matters is deep, & his searing ability to 'read the tea leaves' is proven enough for me. I say, "Hang on Tea Party & Fiscal Conservatives. Your time is coming!"

"Republicans proved they can govern by passing their one-house debt limit increase. Their fiscal conservative credentials are intact. And Obama looks, once more, like a weak and easily cowed incompetent to his backers and a big spending and borrowing liberal to the rest of us.

Game to Obama. Set and Match to the GOP."

Bravo, Mr. Morris!

~~

And to the liberal congressional leaders (& their prince BHO) I say,
"Read my lips: NO MORE SPENDING!"

~~~

GOP Nomination: 2012 Predictions

Intriguiging...

What do YOU think?

Is Mr. Morris correct? Off base?

Sound off...!

~~~

When Johnny met Harry

....so then John Boehner says to Harry Reid,

"Okay honey, I'm calling the credit card company to raise our limit. But in the future, we need to seriously cut down on our spending."

And Harry answers back, "I knew you'd see it my way, dear."

Disgusting.

~~~

People of WISCONSIN Must Win~

" 'Walker wants to end collective bargaining,' is the wail.

Actually, what the governor wants to end is the scandalous practice of powerful unions raising millions and running phone banks and get-out-the-vote operations for politicians who thank them with wages, benefits and job security no private employer can match."

Dovetailing into my most recent post, Patrick Buchanan's piece from Taki's Magazine:

"Why Scott Walker Must Win"
The anti-democratic methods President Obama’s union allies are using in Wisconsin testify to the crucial character of the battle being fought.

Teachers have walked off in wildcat strikes, taking pupils with them. Doctors have issued lying affidavits saying the teachers were sick, a good example of ethical conduct for the school kids.
Thousands of demonstrators have daily invaded the Capitol, chanting, hooting, banging drums. Hundreds have camped out there and refused to leave so the Capitol building can be cleaned.

Is this democracy in action? Is this what 9-year-old Christina-Taylor Green went out to see that Saturday morning in Tucson?

Picketers have carried placards with the face of Gov. Scott Walker in the cross hairs of a gun sight. He has been compared to Hitler, Mussolini, Mubarak. Democrats have fled the state to deny the elected Wisconsin Senate a quorum to vote.

Such tactics cannot be allowed to triumph in a republic.

Why is the Left behaving with desperation? Because it senses what this battle is all about. Not just about pay, but about power.

The Republicans are not only resolved to guarantee government workers pay a fair share of the cost of their pensions and health care. They are in a purposeful drive to disarm and demobilize the tax-subsidized armies of the Democratic Party and end sweetheart deals between unions and the poodle politicians they put into office.

“Walker wants to end collective bargaining,” is the wail.

“The senators who fled will come home heroes, and Walker will have broken the hearts of the people who put their faith in him.”

Actually, what the governor wants to end is the scandalous practice of powerful unions raising millions and running phone banks and get-out-the-vote operations for politicians who thank them with wages, benefits and job security no private employer can match.

Since the 1960s, government unions have been able to sit behind closed doors with the politicians they put in office and write contracts, the cost of which is borne by taxpayers who have no one at the table.

They call this collective bargaining. A more accurate term is collusive bargaining. And Walker means to put an end to the racket...

...When government unions sit down with the politicians they put into office, the relationship is not adversarial. It is not healthy. It is incestuous. And taxpayers must pay the cost of their cohabitation.

Gov. Walker also seeks to end the practice of having the state government collect union dues from state workers.

Indeed, why should a Republican administration collect dues for the benefit of union bosses who constantly labor to see to it those Republicans are not re-elected? Let the unions collect their own dues.

Walker would also require public service employee unions to hold annual elections by secret ballot to determine if state workers want the union to represent them, or if they would prefer to have their deducted union dues put back in their paychecks.

Legislators submit to voters every two years.

Why ought not unions to do the same?

In Wisconsin, the die is cast and Walker cannot yield.

For if he yields, the state and its 3,000 cities, counties, towns and school districts will be forever at the mercy of these unions.

If he yields, it will be a triumph for the tactics of intimidation, wildcat strikes and mass demonstrations to block legislative action.

The senators who fled will come home heroes, and Walker will have broken the hearts of the people who put their faith in him.

If Walker yields, governors and legislators across America will read the tea leaves and back away from taking on government unions. That means higher and higher taxes, as in Illinois, and eventual sinking of the states into unpayable debt and default.

The correlation of forces is in Walker’s favor. Time is on his side. When you are holding a winning hand, you do not offer to split the pot.

After his opponents invaded the Capitol, called him Hitler, fled the state, and tried to shout down and shut down the legislature with raucous demonstrations, what other cards do they have left to play?

Walker has recalled Ronald Reagan’s firing of the air traffic controllers as an example of how a strong leader must stand up even to a popular union when it is wrong.

There is an earlier example. When the Boston police went on strike and criminals ran amuck, and Sam Gompers came to the defense of the cops, Gov. Calvin Coolidge sent a telegram to that founding father of the American labor movement, “There is no right to strike against the public safety by anybody, anywhere, any time.”

Scott Walker cannot lose this fight, because his country cannot afford to have him lose it.

~~~

Stand with Gov. Scott Walker.

I stand with Governor Scott Walker. Do you?

Calling For A National Protest
Fellow Patriots,

American Majority is calling for a national demonstration of support for Scott Walker and leaders across the country who have the courage to fight the public sector union bosses - on Wednesday, February 23rd. This is the moment and opportunity for the tea partiers, and those who want limited government and support the free market, to stand firm against the greed and dangerous statist philosophy of the public sector unions. Help us fight this battle and win for America by doing one or more of the below:

1. A public show of support: a rally in your city showing your support for Governor Walker, the state legislators, and other governors and state legislators who want to do the right thing. Governor Walker is demonstrating responsible government in an era where government has been wasteful and irresponsible. He and other courageous leaders must understand that we completely support them in their decisions.

2. If you cannot conduct a rally, consider holding a candlelight vigil or march that night. Many will be offering up speeches, song, and prayers on behalf of our nation and its future.

3. If you are unable to attend an event in your area, please consider writing an op-ed or blog post concerning the issue. Every voice matters and deserves to be heard.

4. Lastly, we are asking that everyone update their Facebook statuses and tweet their support of Governor Walker's efforts. We must show our politicians that we can make just as much noise when they are doing the right things as well.

Now is the time to fight.

Ned Ryun
President
American Majority

~~

Game on.

~~~

Change We Can (really) Believe in

Wednesday, January 5th, 2011, newly elected Speaker of the House of Representatives, Rep. John Boehner, assumes the gavel, & delineates the principles that will animate his leadership:

"Hard work & tough decisions will be required of the 112th Congress. NO longer can we fall short. NO longer can we afford to 'kick the can down the road.' The People voted to end 'business as usual,' and today, we begin to carry out their instructions. (applause)

"In the Catholic Faith, we enter into a season of service by having ashes marked on our head. The ashes remind us that life in all of it's forms is very fragile; our time on this earth - fleeting. But as the ashes are delivered, we hear those humbling words, 'Remember you are dust, and to dust you shall return.' The American People have humbled us. They have refreshed our memories to just how temporary the privilege of serving is. They have reminded us that everything here is on loan from them; that includes this gavel, which I accept cheerfully & gratefully, knowing that I am but its caretaker. After all, this is the People's House. (applause) This is Their Congress. It's about Them, not about Us."



"What they want is a Government that's honest, accountable, and responsive to their needs; a government that respects individual liberty, honors our heritage, and bows to the People that it serves..." (applause)

"Welcome to the People's House. Welcome to the 112th Congress."

~~

Yes, Speaker Boehner, welcome indeed.

Now, let's see you (& your cohorts) put your money where your mouth is:

"For to whomsoever much is given, of him shall much be required: and to whom men have committed much, from him they will ask the more." (Luke 12:48)

"For if you remain silent at this time, relief and deliverance...will arise from another place...And who knows but that you have come to...position for such a time as this?" (Esther 4:14)

And when such time is through, "to dust you shall return." (Gen. 3:19)

~~~

What's Wrong With America?

Found this delightful Andrew Klavan piece @ my friend Euripides' blog.
(Thanks Eurip!)





I'm discovering some great new stuff by visiting other blogs lately...Guess that means I need to get out more! ;)

~~~

The Prattling Prince

How is it that one person can use so many words to say so little, & evade so much? Just a clip from the Prattling Prince, who used a span of 6.5 minutes NOT to answer this question (from the post-midterm press conference):

Reuters Reporter: "What do you say to the people that say 'the election outcome, at least in part, was voters saying that they see you as out of touch w/ their personal economic pain, & are you willing to make any changes in your personal leadership style?' "



Summary in 5 short points:

1) First minute-- Blame the voters, who "didn't have problem with my leadership style when I was running around Iowa..."

2) Up through 2:50-- 'You all just can't see how wonderful I am'

3) Up through 5:30-- 'I'm a Great Communicator, just like Reagan! The job is so big & important, you can't understand. When I 'get out of here' & make more speeches, I'll evolve to my Great Communicator status.' [hint: Reagan never referred to himself as a Great Communicator]

4) To the end-- ["Hmm...Maybe they'll love me in India..."]

5) From Nancy Pfotenhauer, Rep. Strategist, "This man is like a teenager resolutely not listening to their parents. I mean, he, the condescension is so rife within him, he doesn't even know he's doing it."

~~~

Prayer for Tuesday, Nov. 2

My friend Joe gave me permission to use this wonderful prayer. I offer it today as a means of supplication, as a path to meditation, as a way of finding peace in the midst of anxiety. Perhaps you'd like to join me?

Father, you have given us a great nation, a great land and a great responsibility.

As we prepare for Tuesday's elections, we ask for your guidance, your strength and your wisdom to select the people who will move this country in the direction intended by its founders, as revealed in their very writings.

Help us to seek Your will and Your way, to conduct ourselves with grace and aplomb so as to bear a great witness for you, even as we decide the direction our great land takes.

Whatever happens Tuesday, help us remember that You are in control, even when our finite minds cannot see You at work.

May we be submitted to You, grateful to You and committed to You without reservation.

It is Jesus' precious and wonderful Name that I pray.

Amen.

~~

...and amen.

~~~

Chinese Professor

Still sitting on the fence about voting on Tuesday?
Still don't think elections matter??

Maybe this will change your mind...

Go VOTE.
Take back your country.

~It really is now or never~

~~~

If you're not OUTRAGED, you're not paying attention.

Megyn Kelly, Monica Crowley:

"It's stunning."

"Just when you think you've heard it all in the age of Obama, some other outrageous-ness hits you...now we have 11 countries piling on, in addition to our own Federal Government, piling on the state of Arizona."

"I blame Pres. Obama & Atty. General Eric Holder for opening the door to this kind of offensive absurdity. They are waging war against the American people. They are waging war against one of our 50 states. And what they have done now is crack the door open for 11 other countries to weigh in against the American people...It is outrageous and it is a violation of American sovereignty."



"Why are we looking to Bolivia for its opinion on the constitutionality of an Arizona state law? How is it relevant or helpful to the 9th Circuit what Costa Rica thinks about our law?"

How do these 11 countries treat their OWN illegal immigrants? (Duh, automatic PRISON...)

"This is a concerted effort on Obama/Holder's part to have international law how sway [eventually to trump] over U.S. code of law."

(Obama et, al. are giving away our sovereignty to 2nd world, Latin American countries. Heaven help us.)

"Every day you wake up under this Admin, there is some new craziness coming at you, some new outrage. The fact that our Department of Justice, the one entity @ the Fed. level that is supposed to be the champion of the American people in terms of justice, the fact that they are weighing in on the side of foreign Governments is absolutely offensive & it is absurd."

These countries can't control the drug cartels on their own side of the border. They're sending undesirables across. It is ILLEGAL, yet in their interests to get rid of those people, therefore they want the borders open.

"They don't care that it is ILLEGAL, and our own fed. gov. under Obama & Holder? THEY DON'T CARE EITHER!!!"

~~~

Mark Levin & Greta V. slash Gloria Allred's case

Meg Whitman, gaining momentum in the CA gubernatorial race...then this...

Until Mark Levin & Greta Van Susteren rip Gloria Allred to pieces.
Good on 'em!


(ML is one of my new heroes!)
ML: "Is she an illegal alien?"
GA: "No...she's an undocumented worker...the Latino community finds that term very offensive..."
[Can't stand the heat? Stay out of the kitchen!]



GVS: 1) Placing client in legal jeopardy. 2) Btw, you're wrong: 'smoking gun' HELPS Meg Whitman 3) Eve of an election: subverting the electoral process for political gain.

Nice try Jerry Brown...I mean, Ms. Allred. Remind me to never pick up with a lawyer who sets me up w/ a spurious law suit, that actually exposes my lawlessness, that'll gain me nothing so that I can be trashed afterward as you go about your squat & grasping merry way...

I have a feeling there's enough 'October' left for this 'surprise' to backfire nicely...(Where can I send $$ to support Meg's campaign?)

~~~

Barack Obama Obsolete?

The Obsolescence of Barack Obama:
The magic of 2008 can't be recreated, and good riddance to it
By FOUAD AJAMI

Not long ago Barack Obama, for those who were spellbound by him, had the stylishness of JFK and the historic mission of FDR riding to the nation's rescue. Now it is to Lyndon B. Johnson's unhappy presidency that Democratic strategist Robert Shrum compares the stewardship of Mr. Obama. Johnson, wrote Mr. Shrum in the Week magazine last month, never "sustained an emotional link with the American people" and chose to escalate a war that "forced his abdication as president."

A broken link with the public, and a war in Afghanistan he neither embraces and sells to his party nor abandons—this is a time of puzzlement for President Obama. His fall from political grace has been as swift as his rise a handful of years ago. He had been hot political property in 2006 and, of course, in 2008. But now he will campaign for his party's 2010 candidates from afar, holding fund raisers but not hitting the campaign trail in most of the contested races. Those mass rallies of Obama frenzy are surely of the past.

Senior Economics Writer Steve Moore asks whether the President is finished as an agent of change. The vaunted Obama economic stimulus, at $862 billion, has failed. The "progressives" want to double down, and were they to have their way, would have pushed for a bigger stimulus still. But the American people are in open rebellion against an economic strategy of public debt, higher taxes and unending deficits. We're not all Keynesians, it turns out. The panic that propelled Mr. Obama to the presidency has waned. There is deep concern, to be sure. But the Obama strategy has lost the consent of the governed.

Mr. Obama could protest that his swift and sudden fall from grace is no fault of his. He had been a blank slate, and the devotees had projected onto him their hopes and dreams. His victory had not been the triumph of policies he had enunciated in great detail. He had never run anything in his entire life. He had a scant public record, but oddly this worked to his advantage. If he was going to begin the world anew, it was better that he knew little about the machinery of government.

He pronounced on the American condition with stark, unalloyed confidence. He had little if any regard for precedents. He could be forgiven the thought that America's faith in economic freedom had given way and that he had the popular writ to move the nation toward a super-regulated command economy. An "economic emergency" was upon us, and this would be the New New Deal.

There was no hesitation in the monumental changes Mr. Obama had in mind. The logic was Jacobin, the authority deriving from a perceived mandate to recast time-honored practices. It was veritably rule by emergency decrees. If public opinion displayed no enthusiasm for the overhaul of the nation's health-care system, the administration would push on. The public would adjust in due time.

The nation may be ill at ease with an immigration reform bill that would provide some 12 million illegal immigrants a path toward citizenship, but the administration would still insist on the primacy of its own judgment. It would take Arizona to court, even though the public let it be known that it understood Arizona's immigration law as an expression of that state's frustration with the federal government's abdication of its responsibility over border security.

It was clear as daylight that there was a built-in contradiction between opening the citizenship rolls to a vast flood of new petitioners and a political economy of redistribution favored by the Obama administration. The choice was stark: You could either "spread the wealth around" or open the gates for legalizing millions of immigrants of lower skills. You could not do both.

It was canonical to this administration and its functionaries that they were handed a broken nation, that it was theirs to repair, that it was theirs to tax and reshape to their preferences. Yet there was, in 1980, after another landmark election, a leader who had stepped forth in a time of "malaise" at home and weakness abroad: Ronald Reagan. His program was different from Mr. Obama's. His faith in the country was boundless. What he sought was to restore the nation's faith in itself, in its political and economic vitality.

Big as Reagan's mandate was, in two elections, the man was never bigger than his country. There was never narcissism or a bloated sense of personal destiny in him. He gloried in the country, and drew sustenance from its heroic deeds and its capacity for recovery. No political class rode with him to power anxious to lay its hands on the nation's treasure, eager to supplant the forces of the market with its own economic preferences.

To be sure, Reagan faltered midway through his second term—the arms-for-hostages trade, the Iran-Contra affair, nearly wrecked his presidency. But he recovered, the nation rallied around him and carried him across the finish line, his bond with the electorate deep and true. He had two years left of his stewardship, and his political recovery was so miraculous that he, and his first mate, Secretary of State George P. Shultz, would seal the nation's victory in the Cold War.

There is little evidence that the Obama presidency could yet find new vindication, another lease on life. Mr. Obama will mark time, but henceforth he will not define the national agenda. He will not be the repository of its hopes and sentiments. The ambition that his would be a "transformational" presidency—he rightly described Reagan's stewardship in these terms—is for naught.

There remains the fact of his biography, a man's journey. Personality is doubtless an obstacle to his recovery. The detachment of Mr. Obama need not be dwelled upon at great length, so obvious it is now even to the pundits who had a "tingling sensation" when they beheld him during his astonishing run for office. Nor does Mr. Obama have the suppleness of Bill Clinton, who rose out of the debris of his first two years in the presidency, dusted himself off, walked away from his spouse's radical attempt to remake the country's health-delivery system, and moved to the political center.

It is in the nature of charisma that it rises out of thin air, out of need and distress, and then dissipates when the magic fails. The country has had its fill with a scapegoating that knows no end from a president who had vowed to break with recriminations and partisanship. The magic of 2008 can't be recreated, and good riddance to it. Slowly, the nation has recovered its poise. There is a widespread sense of unstated embarrassment that a political majority, if only for a moment, fell for the promise of an untested redeemer—a belief alien to the temperament of this so practical and sober a nation.

Mr. Ajami is a professor at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution.

~~

Well...what do you think, folks? Is Mr. Ajami correct?
Is his analysis right-on, or do you find chinks in his story?

Obviously the Left disagrees. What does the Right think?

~~~

"Dhimmitude"

Did you know that Sharia law has been codified into United States Federal Law? Yes. Our President, along with Democrats - drunk on power & partisan pride - signed & secured it 6 months ago.

“What?!” you screech. “No way!”
“Yes…As sure as I live & breathe.”

There's a thing called “Dhimmitude,” & it’s buried deep in the bowels of Obamacare, like a tapeworm, preparing to mercilessly sap our society of its wealth, & render us into servitude of Islam.

You see, ObamaCare exempts Muslims (& other small, obscure groups) from purchasing mandatory health insurance, as well as the penalties for not purchasing it – due to ‘religious convictions.’ These groups will, however, enjoy the benefits of free health care.

Don’t believe me? Check out section 1402 (g)(1) of this behemoth bill. Even the left-leaning Snopes.com won't dispel the 'rumor.' (Curtsy to Jim for reminding me to source my claims.)

Now.

We must understand the context of the nature of my claim…

Consider the following:
"Dhimmitude is the Muslim system of controlling non-muslim populations conquered through jihad. Specifically, it is the TAXING of non-muslims in exchange for tolerating their presence, AND as a coercive means of converting conquered remnants to islam.

The ObamaCare bill is the establishment of 'Dhimmitude' and Sharia Muslim diktat in the United States. Muslims are exempted from the government mandate to purchase insurance, and also from the penalty tax for being uninsured.

Islam considers insurance to be 'gambling,' 'risk-taking' and 'usury' and is thus banned. Muslims are specifically granted exemption based on this. How convenient.

So I, Joe/Jane Christian, will have crippling IRS liens placed against all of my assets, including real estate, cattle, and even accounts receivables, and will face hard prison time because I refuse to buy insurance or pay the penalty tax.

Meanwhile, Louis Farrakhan [Nidal Hasan , and Feisal Abdul Rauf & his Ground Zero Mosque adherents] will have no such penalty, and will have 100% of health needs paid for by the de facto government insurance. Non-muslims will be paying a tax to subsidize Muslims. Period.

This is Dhimmitude.

Dhimmitude serves two purposes: it enriches the Muslim masters AND serves to drive conversions to Islam. In this case, the incentive to convert to Islam will be taken up by those in the inner-cities as well as the godless Generation X, Y and Z types who have no moral anchor. If you don't believe in Christ to begin with, it is no problem whatsoever to sell Him for 30 pieces of silver. 'Sure, I'll be a Muslim if it means free health insurance and no taxes. Where do I sign, bro?' "

This.
Is.
Serious.

(When Speaker Pelosi said, “We have to pass the bill in order to see what’s in it,” she wasn’t kidding.)

Makes me wonder, "How many other ruthless, invisible tapeworms are infecting my beloved country?"

Heaven, help us.

~~~

America Rising

An open letter to democrat politicians...



America Rising.

Indeed.
~~~

Wow: Charles Krauthammer. Really - wow!

The Last Refuge of a Liberal

By Charles KrauthammerFriday, August 27, 2010
*(all emphases mine)

Liberalism under siege is an ugly sight indeed. Just yesterday it was all hope and change and returning power to the people. But the people have proved so disappointing. Their recalcitrance has, in only 19 months, turned the predicted 40-year liberal ascendancy (James Carville) into a full retreat. Ah, the people, the little people, the small-town people, the "bitter" people, as Barack Obama in an unguarded moment once memorably called them, clinging "to guns or religion" or -- this part is less remembered -- "antipathy toward people who aren't like them."

That's a polite way of saying: clinging to bigotry. And promiscuous charges of bigotry are precisely how our current rulers and their vast media auxiliary react to an obstreperous citizenry that insists on incorrect thinking.

-- Resistance to the vast expansion of government power, intrusiveness and debt, as represented by the Tea Party movement? Why, racist resentment toward a black president.

-- Disgust and alarm with the federal government's unwillingness to curb illegal immigration, as crystallized in the Arizona law? Nativism.

-- Opposition to the most radical redefinition of marriage in human history, as expressed in Proposition 8 in California? Homophobia.

-- Opposition to a 15-story Islamic center and mosque near Ground Zero? Islamophobia.

Now we know why the country has become "ungovernable," last year's excuse for the Democrats' failure of governance: Who can possibly govern a nation of racist, nativist, homophobic Islamophobes?

Note what connects these issues. In every one, liberals have lost the argument in the court of public opinion. Majorities -- often lopsided majorities -- oppose President Obama's social-democratic agenda (e.g., the stimulus, Obamacare), support the Arizona law, oppose gay marriage and reject a mosque near Ground Zero.

What's a liberal to do? Pull out the bigotry charge, the trump that preempts debate and gives no credit to the seriousness and substance of the contrary argument. The most venerable of these trumps is, of course, the race card. When the Tea Party arose, a spontaneous, leaderless and perfectly natural (and traditionally American) reaction to the vast expansion of government intrinsic to the president's proudly proclaimed transformational agenda, the liberal commentariat cast it as a mob of angry white yahoos disguising their antipathy to a black president by cleverly speaking in economic terms.

Then came Arizona and S.B. 1070. It seems impossible for the left to believe that people of good will could hold that: (a) illegal immigration should be illegal, (b) the federal government should not hold border enforcement hostage to comprehensive reform, i.e., amnesty, (c) every country has the right to determine the composition of its immigrant population.

As for Proposition 8, is it so hard to see why people might believe that a single judge overturning the will of 7 million voters is an affront to democracy? And that seeing merit in retaining the structure of the most ancient and fundamental of all social institutions is something other than an alleged hatred of gays -- particularly since the opposite-gender requirement has characterized virtually every society in all the millennia until just a few years ago?

And now the mosque near Ground Zero. The intelligentsia is near unanimous that the only possible grounds for opposition is bigotry toward Muslims. This smug attribution of bigotry to two-thirds of the population hinges on the insistence on a complete lack of connection between Islam and radical Islam, a proposition that dovetails perfectly with the Obama administration's pretense that we are at war with nothing more than "violent extremists" of inscrutable motive and indiscernible belief. Those who reject this as both ridiculous and politically correct (an admitted redundancy) are declared Islamophobes, the ad hominem du jour.

It is a measure of the corruption of liberal thought and the collapse of its self-confidence that, finding itself so widely repudiated, it resorts reflexively to the cheapest race-baiting (in a colorful variety of forms). Indeed, how can one reason with a nation of pitchfork-wielding mobs brimming with "antipathy toward people who aren't like them" -- blacks, Hispanics, gays and Muslims -- a nation that is, as Michelle Obama once put it succinctly, "just downright mean"?

The Democrats are going to get beaten badly in November. Not just because the economy is ailing. And not just because Obama over-read his mandate in governing too far left. But because a comeuppance is due the arrogant elites whose undisguised contempt for the great unwashed prevents them from conceding a modicum of serious thought to those who dare oppose them.

~~

Ouch.

Perfect.

Thank you, God, for Charles Krauthammer!

~~~