At WtPotUS, the true horrors of the current regime are put into perspective. What should we do about it?
A Terrorist Government
6 minutes ago
“In what could be the most extreme and influential crowdsourcing project ever, Democrats are beginning to organize to purposely vote for Palin in the 2012 Republican primaries. Their theory is by having Palin as an opponent, Obama will have the best odds at winning reelection. Recent polls have shown that Obama comfortably leads Palin by 10-20 points, but Obama is statistically tied with Romney and barely ahead of Huckabee. They even have a state-by-state primary voting guide to help Democrats navigate various states’ rules for voting Palin in Republican primaries.”
To begin with, Palin is by no means poorly educated; she merely did not graduate with a degree from an Ivy League institution, which by any reasonable account in today’s academic milieu should stand decidedly in her favor...Go RTWT. That's how the President of the United States is supposed to roll, and the sooner we correct our current disastrous mistake, the better off America--and the world--will be.
As for the absence of foreign policy experience, David Jenkins reminds us in an article for PJM that, with the exception of the elder Bush (who, incidentally, was no presidential cynosure), “it is not common for presidents to enter office with foreign policy experience.” In this respect, Palin is no different from the vast majority of her predecessors and certainly not from the present incumbent. What is needed in this domain is precisely what Palin would bring to the highest office in the land: insight and principle...
...the truth is that frowning on Palin’s wilderness skills is nothing but class snobbery on the part of those who would be utterly lost were they stripped of the “civilized” amenities they thoughtlessly take for granted. It is their mincing pretentiousness and fashionable outrage, not Palin’s honest hardiness, that is deplorable...
Further, Palin is by no means politically unnuanced. Quite the contrary, she is as politically savvy as they come, whether on the domestic or international front. Her speeches during the recent congressional elections were not only unteleprompted barnburners in the best populist tradition, but revealed a meticulous command of the domestic issues currently bedeviling the nation as well as a finely nuanced understanding of America’s pancreatic failures in international diplomacy...
Palin does not believe in tax and spend, in fiat printing, in redistributive economics, in ObamaCare, in the AGW nonsense that is only an opaque wealth transfer scheme, in making purses out of sows’ ears (aka pork and earmarks), in pressing reset buttons, in blaming Israel for the Palestinians, or in a degrading and unproductive “outreach” to the Islamic umma. These are policies she would reverse, as indeed would anyone with a nuanced understanding of the economic and political worlds. There is little doubt that Palin would be a strong, resolute, and effective president should she ever accede to the White House.
It is not only members of Congress or the administration who treat "we the people" and the Constitution as nuisances to do an end run around. Judges, including justices of the Supreme Court, have been doing this increasingly over the past hundred years.
During the Progressive era of the early 20th century, the denigration of the Constitution began, led by such luminaries as Princeton scholar and future President of the United States Woodrow Wilson, future Harvard Law School Dean Roscoe Pound, and future Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis.
As a professor at Princeton University, Woodrow Wilson wrote condescendingly of "the simple days of 1787" when the Constitution was written and how, in our presumably more complex times, "each generation of statesmen looks to the Supreme Court to supply the interpretation which will serve the needs of the day."
This kind of argument would be repeated for generations, with no more evidence that 1787 was any less complicated than later years than Woodrow Wilson presented -- which was none -- and with no more reasons why the need for "change" meant that unelected judges should be the ones making those changes, as if there were no elected representatives of the people.
There would still be problems in a libertarian society. There would still be crime, income inequality, acne, nu metal, and reality TV. Most libertarians merely believe that in a libertarian society, most people would be better off than they are now—that being free to make more of your own choices is preferable to having politicians make them for you. Most conservatives and liberals also believe that most people would be better off if their own policy preferences were implemented. That isn’t in the same ballpark as promising utopia. People will still make bad decisions. They should be free to do so.Emphasis mine.
If anything is utopian, it’s the idea that the world would be much better off if only we put more of society in the hands of a few very smart people who somehow know all the answers. And that somehow the political process will ensure that those all-knowing people always end up in a position to make all the decisions.
In just under 2 years as president, Obama has ushered in the government takeover of the healthcare, college loan, banking, and internet industries, in addition to extending the extensive government involvement in the auto industry that he supported during President Bush’s administration. President Obama has given further regulatory control to unelected agencies like the EPA, FCC, and FDA. He has added more to the national deficit in 2 years than his predecessors did in more than 200 years. His stimulus package led to over 10% unemployment, when it was promised to prevent unemployment from going over 8%. President Obama kowtowed (or as I like to call it, bowtowed) to both America’s enemies and union bosses. He pushed for a treaty with Russia that allows Russia to continue to produce nuclear weapons while America must halt weapon production; all the while reducing funding for missile defense. He mishandled America’s most destructive environmental disaster in history by blaming the previous administration for his own appointees’ failures. He is joined with foreign nations in suing the state of Arizona for desiring to enforce federal border security and immigration laws.Mr. Williams...will you ever learn to refrain from sticking your foot in your mouth? You ought to be grateful that FOX is far more tolerant than your former employers at NPR.
As Governor, Sarah Palin put $5 billion in state savings and decreased state spending by more than 9%. She reduced earmark requests by 80%. She stands for smaller government and reduced intervention by unelected, appointed bureaucrats. She stood firmly against the stimulus package and called for President Obama to veto the bill. She stood against cuts to missile defense and called for the Senate to not verify the START treaty. She called for the President to turn away from his “enemy centric” foreign policy. She stood for oversight of the oil industry and federal responsibility in cleaning up the oil spill, rather than burdensome, job killing regulations and drilling moratoriums. She stood with Governor Brewer in a desire to secure the border.
Governor Palin has private sector experience as a journalist, fisherwoman, and small business owner in addition to nearly twenty years of political experience between the city council, mayor’s office, Oil and Gas Regulator, and Governor. President Obama has experience as a community organizer, state senator, and US Senator. By the time President Obama was elected to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Governor Palin already had three times as much executive experience as President Obama currently has. She has had to balance a budget as a small business owner and a governor, and she has understood the importance of handling both prudently and responsibility. President Obama established a deficit commission after he signed legislation that added more than a trillion dollars to the deficit–willfully oblivious to the effects of his lack of executive experience.
If you juxtapose President Obama’s experience, policies, and record against Governor Palin’s experience, stances and record, then I suppose Williams is right. Governor Palin cannot stand on the “intellectual” stage with Obama, and rightfully so. While President Obama’ s supposed intellect has made us a less secure nation in every sense of the word, Governor Palin’s gubernatorial record and stances would lead America to a more financially stable and a more secure nation.
On 1 January 1804, Dessalines, the new leader under the dictatorial 1801 constitution, declared Haiti a free republic. Haiti was the first independent nation in Latin America, the first post-colonial independent black-led nation in the world, and the only nation whose independence was gained as part of a successful slave rebellion. The country was crippled by years of war, its agriculture devastated, its formal commerce nonexistent.And now, after years of enforced poverty and ignorance, they're pummeled by a major earthquake...and a cholera epidemic on top of that.
Haiti was forced to make reparations to French slaveholders in 1825 in the amount of 150 million francs, reduced in 1838 to 60 million francs, in exchange for French recognition of its independence and to achieve freedom from French aggression. This indemnity bankrupted the Haitian treasury. It mortgaged Haiti's future to the French banks that provided the funds for the large first installment, permanently affecting Haiti's ability to be prosperous.
In your heart of hearts, you know, like I do, that 2010 was the easier fight. You know that the next two years (and beyond) are going to require greater actions, greater coordination and greater sacrifice, if we are going to save this nation for your children and my children.
In a week, we need to start 2011, hopefully, refreshed and renewed, but start we must. The fight over the next few years will be more brutal, as the stakes for them and for us are so high. But, it is a fight that must continue until either they lose, or we lose and America is lost forever.
Our nation is far from secure, our childrens’ futures far from certain. We are the generation on whose shoulders this falls. No one else will do it for us, or for our children. We must do it—all of us.
Today, after all the toys have been unwrapped, take a moment to pause and look at your children. Do you think that in 10 years they’ll still appreciate that new X-box or doll house more than a free nation? In 20 years, do you think they’ll still be squealing in delight over unwrapping that toy made in China, or will they be crying in anguish over a nation lost?November 2nd was the opening salvo. The war is still on. We keep fighting, tooth and nail, to take America back...or liberty is lost.
No part of this argument should be misconstrued as an endorsement of political correctness or the left’s agenda to grant positive rights to their own special interest groups for political purposes. If we are truly a free country and we meant what we said in the first amendment to our Constitution, then every individual, whether the most fundamentalist Christian or the most libertine atheist, should have the right to speak freely, even if what they say offends another person. For many devout Christians, it is their sacred duty to try to persuade their fellow man to repent of his sins and embrace Jesus as his savior.
However, there is an ocean of difference between persuasion and coercion. The minute that we say, “there ought to be a law,” we are picking up the sword. If we do so in defense of the inalienable human rights of life, liberty, and property, we are within our rightful authority. If we do so to supplant the authority of God, we become the very type of people that Jesus spent his life fighting against. To truly be Christian, we must recognize the need for “a wall of separation between church and state.”
Jesus was very clear about his views on what would lead to salvation and what would not. Jesus condemned many behaviors, like adultery, that social conservatives likewise condemn. He also said that “no one comes to the Father except through me.” (John 14:6) However, he does not go on to say, “Therefore, if your brother does not come to me willingly, then draw your sword and force him.” Salvation must be chosen; God did not create a race of slaves.
Many non-Muslims are obviously very well-meaning with regard to Islam, but they are also extremely naïve and ignorant of the facts. They seem to think that Islam is just another religion of love and peace and Muslims should be given full freedom to practice their religion. Do they also believe that thieves, misogynists, rapists, child-molesters and any and all manner of practicing evils should be given complete carte blanche to carry on with what they value and believe? These well-meaning simpletons are just as deluded as the fanatic jihadists by refusing to acknowledge the fact that one cannot be a Muslim and not abide by the dictates of the Quran.
There is no such thing as moderate Islam. There is no such thing as secular Islam or a secular Muslim. How can you possibly secularize a shark or a snake? You can’t. It’s the nature of the beast. There are numerous sects within Islam. One and all are extremes and not in the least amenable to change. Keep in mind that Islam claims that it is the perfect eternal faith for mankind. Splits have occurred and will continue to occur in Islam. Yet, reformation has not happened in nearly 1400 years and is not going to happen. Islam is carved in granite, just the way it is. No change. Allah's book is sealed.
There are indeed some Muslims who are moderate in the way they practice their religion. These people, for the most part, are culturally Muslims. They don't practice Islam the way it is mandated. They pick and choose. Therefore, "moderate Islam," is no Islam at all. It is not possible. The only way to deal with the menace of real Islam, the Islamofascist varieties, is to fully dismantle it and relegate it to the confines of museums.
Men in this situation see no hope in living. So they give up, and take their own life.
It's not because they don't have enough friends, or meaningful social networks.
It's because they are cut off from that which they value more than their own lives: their flesh and blood offspring.
That is why divorced men are far more likely to kill themselves than divorced women.
I've seen this up close and real personal this past week.
My long time high school buddy is now just another statistic.
A statistic that is casually dismissed by gyno-centric researchers as the man's fault for not building up strong enough social networks and the male's inability to "communicate."
Sorkin is out of touch and narrow-minded about how past civilizations, our pioneer settlements, and even current societies get their food. Sorkin hates people who hunt for food and who celebrate success because it brings food to the table. Again, he hates people who hunt—he hates Africans—well, tribes in Africa—indigenous Australians, Asians, Indians, and many other cultures that live off the land. I’m saddened that this white man is so elitist and racist! Sorkin, stand by your supposed moral conviction—we are waiting for you to rail against how the Jews and Muslims, Africans, Australians and Asians kill animals for food.
Sorkin admitted to buying meat and using leather. Those animals originated from animal farms, where animals are fenced in confined spaces, branded, and raised unnaturally. There, the animals’ sole purpose in life was to be fattened and killed. By contrast, the Alaskan caribous live and roam freely. Some do get killed for food by humans or other predators, but they can run away, too. The wild caribous have a better chance of surviving than do the farm animals that are herded into holding pens at slaughterhouses without escape before they are stunned then exsanguinated.
Fact: Palin hunted and killed an animal for food. Aaron’s entire premise, entire argument is INCORRECT. The hunt was not done with malice and it was not purposeless. It is one way Alaskans have caribou meat to eat. People eat, therefore they hunt. He may be unfamiliar with this because his favorite thing to consume is snorted off some surface.
King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia "frequently exhorted the U.S. to attack Iran to put an end to its nuclear weapons program," according to these communications. Officials from Jordan said the Iranian nuclear program should be stopped by any means necessary. Officials from the United Arab Emirates and Egypt saw Iran as evil, an "existential threat" and a sponsor of terrorism. If Iran isn't stopped from obtaining nuclear weapons, it could trigger a regional nuclear arms race in which these countries would seek their own nuclear weapons to protect themselves.You might want to pay a little more attention.
That wouldn't be the only catastrophic consequence for American interests in the Middle East. Our credibility and reputation would suffer a serious blow if Iran succeeds in producing its own nuclear weapons after we've been claiming for years that such an event could not and would not be tolerated. A nuclear-armed and violently anti-American Iran would be an enormous threat to us and to our allies. Israel in particular would face the gravest threat to its existence since its creation. Iran's leaders have repeatedly called for Israel's destruction, and Iran already possesses missiles that can reach Israel. Once these missiles are armed with nuclear warheads, nothing could stop the mullahs from launching a second Holocaust. It's only a matter of time before Iran develops missiles that could reach U.S. territory.
Without notice and in a matter of minutes Sunday evening, the Senate approved the bill by unanimous consent, sending it to the House, where passage is expected. President Obama has said he would sign the legislation, which would give the government far-reaching authority to set and enforce safety standards for farmers and food processors.I have a new slogan for 2011: REPEAL. And when people ask, "Repeal what?" I will answer, "YES."
In a nutshell, whenever you read Rand and she is talking about “reason” or “logic”, she is actually (unwittingly) talking about Christ. John 1:1 specifically identifies Christ as “the Word”, which is “Logos” in Greek. Logos is the Greek word for “logic” and “reason”. God is, in Himself, logic and reason, and we are made in His image. The fact that humans possess the capability to reason and think logically is the attribute that makes us “made in the image of God”. Rand was so close. She knew that our ability to reason lifted us to infinite dignity, but she missed that it was Christ indwelling in our minds and giving us that “spark” of reason. She thought that human minds self-generated reason and that there was no outside Source.And another Christian libertarian, Don't Tread On Mike, brings us evidence that even according to the Bible, the Earth is not 6000 years old.
Re-read Atlas making that substitution and it will knock you on the floor.
Whatever you choose to believe, if you don’t take anything else away from this article, understand this: The theories that some Young-Earth Creationists come up with are flat out stupid. Not only are the completely unscientific, they aren’t even grounded in the Bible. Where do the Biblical authors mention a giant ice canopy that melted and fell to earth and caused a flood?As I said, I'll be putting forth my own thoughts on the subject when I have time--things are a little busy right now. But just as Christians need to quit dismissing science out of hand, so do secularists of all stripes need to quit slamming their minds shut at the mention of faith. That's the only way we can ever have any form of civilized debate.
So before you go making scientific claims, make sure you understand basic high school science…if you want to be taken seriously that is. And don’t believe Young-Earth Creationists just because they’re Christians. A lot of them have no idea what they’re talking about, even in terms of scientific theories that everyone knows are facts.
Jurors – well, potential jurors – staged a revolt.It's about damn time.
They took the law into their own hands, as it were, and made it clear they weren’t about to convict anybody for having a couple of buds of marijuana. Never mind that the defendant in question also faced a felony charge of criminal distribution of dangerous drugs.
The tiny amount of marijuana police found while searching Touray Cornell’s home on April 23 became a huge issue for some members of the jury panel.
No, they said, one after the other. No way would they convict somebody for having a 16th of an ounce.
In fact, one juror wondered why the county was wasting time and money prosecuting the case at all, said a flummoxed Deputy Missoula County Attorney Andrew Paul.
[Congress] should have to pass a bill comprehension test before voting. Like college finals. Flunk the test, abstain. Flunk too many tests, get ousted. How's that for progressive government?Now, there's a great mind at work! RTWT here.
Like a teenager to his parent, the "free" liberal reacts strongly against any effort to channel, upgrade, or improve his choices or behavior. From this rebellion, Lefty gets a very short-lived free "feeling" on which no lasting value can be built. The personal cost of this pursuit of disordered freedom is irresponsibility, frustration, and a lack of peace.
Unfortunately, today's left has a ways to grow before achieving maturity, lasting fulfillment, or personal excellence. At this point, these people are neither calm, cool game theorists nor consistent political wizards. Dr. Evil is safe and will be unchallenged for some time to come. For now, the ranting teenager analogy is the best fit.
Finally, I must apologize to mature teenagers everywhere. Let me be clear: ranting adolescents and rabid progressives are very similar. You, on the other hand, share nothing with the left.
And to you ranting teenagers, buck up! You will most certainly outgrow it well before Lefty does.
Indeed, Sarah Palin rose from humble origins eventually to win the office of governor of Alaska and take the number-two spot on the Republican presidential ticket. She overcame all obstacles without any connections, entirely by dint of talent, hard work, and perseverance. She fearlessly took on the GOP establishment and the oil interests that had dominated Alaska for decades, and she beat them all at their own game. She achieved great success and popularity in all public offices she ever held. And on top of all that, she efficiently juggled public service with homemaking duties, married an Eskimo (the left should be particularly ecstatic on this point -- a minority!), and gave her husband a hand in his business undertakings. She raised a large family and does everything a full-blooded Alaskan male is supposed to do, including killing her dinner.And another.
A woman who can successfully challenge and beat any man, climb any mountain, ford any stream, shatter any glass ceiling -- a feminist dream come true, don't you think? And yet, the feminist leaders seethe with boundless hatred for that "upstart." Why?
Why do they hate her? Lewis hits the nail on the head. Sarah Palin is quintessentially American. She is a throwback to the days of the founders, when citizens became politicians because the common good demanded service -- not because political office offered wealth, power, and a pool of Beltway interns ripe for sexual exploitation -- and followed their tenure with a return to private life. But we now live in the age of professional politicians, the self-proclaimed best and brightest who make decisions for an electorate too simple to understand "the facts or the truth." Or so says Senator John Kerry, the Massachusetts politician who is to "haughty" what Paris Hilton is to "self-involved."
And so anger and angst bubble over, spilling out as the grandees realize Sarah Palin is just so darned...normal! Lewis describes her as a "beautiful, strong, intelligent, articulate, healthy-looking, truth-telling...gun-totin', sports-lovin', all-American woman." And that "sunny disposition" sets them off, for Sarah Palin is a fiery red poker plunged into the pasty white of the collective metrosexual gut.
CROSSPOST UPDATE: A dude has started linking to some of my stuff on his blog. He calls me "Hottie With An Evil Pink Rifle". He has done so tonight with this post. Click over and read it. Let me just say that in this context I appreciate his . . . flowery prose and colorful metaphors. If things get hot, I want dudes like this right behind me as we storm the beach. Oooh-Rah.Seriously...thanks for that. :D And if things get hot, I will have your back.
Every time we elect a Romney or McCain or allow the virus of doubt insinuated by the likes of a Karl Rove or the legacy media to occupy our better judgment we compromise something. We surrender, we expose our soft underbellies to elitism. All above and so much more are people who are essentially of the elitist class. They all have something to loose, POWER, and by consequence wealth.
See it is time to make the choice. Right now; and I believe this is the last time you and I will have choices. You have to choose not what these morally entitled elitists are telling you is right for you, which is them telling you what is right because it benefits them or their agenda, but what is not right and right for you. You still have this instrument of Liberty, your instrument of independence and freedom.
There so many of them, they are all really the same, left right middle, it don’t matter, they hold all the power and wealth, they are omnipotent and full of arrogance, they are not our friends or our allies, they are of an entirely separate class beholden to none of us but try everything to make us believe we are one of them, they are our best friends. Think about the lies and bullshit they all feed us with their silver spoons, but never allow that spoon to leave their grasp.
As the four recent examples, along with others occurring all over the world illustrate, a group of like-minded "thinkers" is emerging. It is a group composed in equal parts of economic illiteracy and pathological self-entitlement. Only an utter fool—or a dedicated progressive—would riot or strike because someone else can no longer afford to underwrite your lifestyle.RTWT @ Human Events.
What part of "running out of other people's money" don't the complainers understand?
Such a complete disconnect from reality doesn't happen on its own.
It is where moral relativism, the cornerstone of progressive thinking, inevitably leads. Decades of teaching people that the state is their bottomless benefactor hasn't just ruined economies around the globe. It has ruined the people themselves. Economies eventually recover.
Can people recover their dignity and character?