How Tyranny Came to AmericaThe rest can be found here.
Joseph Sobran
One of the great goals of education is to initiate the young into the conversation of their ancestors; to enable them to understand the language of that conversation, in all its subtlety, and maybe even, in their maturity, to add to it some wisdom of their own.
The modern American educational system no longer teaches us the political language of our ancestors. In fact our schooling helps widen the gulf of time between our ancestors and ourselves, because much of what we are taught in the name of civics, political science, or American history is really modern liberal propaganda. Sometimes this is deliberate. Worse yet, sometimes it isn’t. Our ancestral voices have come to sound alien to us, and therefore our own moral and political language is impoverished. It’s as if the people of England could no longer understand Shakespeare, or Germans couldn’t comprehend Mozart and Beethoven.
So to most Americans, even those who feel oppressed by what they call big government, it must sound strange to hear it said, in the past tense, that tyranny “came” to America. After all, we have a constitution, don’t we? We’ve abolished slavery and segregation. We won two world wars and the Cold War. We still congratulate ourselves before every ballgame on being the Land of the Free. And we aren’t ruled by some fanatic with a funny mustache who likes big parades with thousands of soldiers goose-stepping past huge pictures of himself.
For all that, we no longer fully have what our ancestors, who framed and ratified our Constitution, thought of as freedom — a careful division of power that prevents power from becoming concentrated and unlimited. The word they usually used for concentrated power was consolidated — a rough synonym for fascist. And the words they used for any excessive powers claimed or exercised by the state were usurped and tyrannical. They would consider the modern “liberal” state tyrannical in principle; they would see in it not the opposite of the fascist, communist, and socialist states, but their sister.
If Washington and Jefferson, Madison, and Hamilton could come back, the first thing they’d notice would be that the federal government now routinely assumes thousands of powers never assigned to it — powers never granted, never delegated, never enumerated. These were the words they used, and it’s a good idea for us to learn their language. They would say that we no longer live under the Constitution they wrote. And the Americans of a much later era — the period from Cleveland to Coolidge, for example — would say we no longer live even under the Constitution they inherited and amended.
I call the present system “Post–Constitutional America.” As I sometimes put it, the U.S. Constitution poses no serious threat to our form of government.
What’s worse is that our constitutional illiteracy cuts us off from our own national heritage. And so our politics degenerates into increasingly bitter and unprincipled quarrels about who is going to bear the burdens of war and welfare.
Monday, August 31, 2009
How Tyranny Came to America
This is, without a doubt, the best discussion of the history of the United States Constitution that I have ever read. It's lengthy, but should be required reading for every American citizen. Many thanks to Robert Lehnert for drawing it to my attention.
Sunday, August 30, 2009
The Polarization of a Nation
The "post-racial" President, the man who would take us beyond our divisions and foster a new era of bipartisanship in the country may, indeed, be on a course to unite the American people as never before in history. Unfortunately for him, though, we are uniting against him.
Rasmussen Reports reports today that the number of survey respondents who say they Strongly Disapprove of Barack Obama has reached a new record - 42%. Just 32% Strongly Approve, less than eight months into his presidency.
To put that in perspective, Rasmussen archives tell us that George W. Bush, in the final month of his second term, eight years into his presidency, hit a record high of 43% who said they Strongly Disapproved. It took eight years, two wars, countless "scandals" and relentless battering from an opposition press to achieve what Barack Obama has nearly equalled in less than 200 days, with the media in full cheerleader mode.
Coupled with the fact that 57% of all voters, and a whopping 70% of Independents, now say that they would like to replace the entire Congress, and 59% believe that members of Congress are overpaid, it's just not a good time to be part of the Washington crowd. It is telling that most of the support for Congress comes from Democrats; 69% of Republicans say that even members of their own party in Congress are out of touch with the party base.
This early in a new president's term, it is only natural for the party faithful to be stubbornly seeking out the silver lining in his many dark clouds, but there's a statute of limitations on causeless devotion. When it expires, we are going to see disapproval ratings unmatched in history.
How's that hope and change working out for you?
Rasmussen Reports reports today that the number of survey respondents who say they Strongly Disapprove of Barack Obama has reached a new record - 42%. Just 32% Strongly Approve, less than eight months into his presidency.
To put that in perspective, Rasmussen archives tell us that George W. Bush, in the final month of his second term, eight years into his presidency, hit a record high of 43% who said they Strongly Disapproved. It took eight years, two wars, countless "scandals" and relentless battering from an opposition press to achieve what Barack Obama has nearly equalled in less than 200 days, with the media in full cheerleader mode.
Coupled with the fact that 57% of all voters, and a whopping 70% of Independents, now say that they would like to replace the entire Congress, and 59% believe that members of Congress are overpaid, it's just not a good time to be part of the Washington crowd. It is telling that most of the support for Congress comes from Democrats; 69% of Republicans say that even members of their own party in Congress are out of touch with the party base.
This early in a new president's term, it is only natural for the party faithful to be stubbornly seeking out the silver lining in his many dark clouds, but there's a statute of limitations on causeless devotion. When it expires, we are going to see disapproval ratings unmatched in history.
How's that hope and change working out for you?
Saturday, August 29, 2009
Attention, Washington! The People have something to say
We are done.
The tax paying, hard-working, productive masses are finished. Game over. You will not do this to us anymore. Are you listening? Because we are heart and soul serious.
Both major political parties have completely lost their bearings. Somewhere along the way, whether through ignorance or evil intent, you lost your collective mind. You are like spoiled children, pampered and given your every wish, never scolded, never told "No." Your toys have grown too expensive, your behavior too outrageous. It's time for some discipline.
The Constitution of the United States makes it quite clear that the Federal government is to be the weakest branch of government. For decades you have grown the Federal government, from 6.8% of GDP in 1903 to a suffocating 45.19% this year! The weakest branch of the government is now spending (and borrowing) nearly half of everything that is produced in this country. NO MORE!
As of this writing, the U.S. Debt Clock shows that the Federal government has spent $8,522 for each and every citizen of this country so far this year. Each citizen holds $38,152 of the national debt. You have made promises that we cannot keep. You have contracted with us to provide certain services in exchange for the taxes we pay. But you have not funded your promises - rather you have wasted our forced contributions on frivolous pet projects, greasing palms and building monuments to your collective greatness. As of now, you have promised, for every citizen of this country, $191,893 in future entitlements that you don't have. Where do you think that is going to come from? The taxpayers are fed up with funding your vote buying programs. NO MORE!
When we first began to stand up and speak out you pretended we weren't there. We were told that the President was not aware of our protests.
After April 15th you said we were teabaggers - thought us foolish for protesting against taxes when taxes hadn't changed. You found us quite amusing and idiotic.
Then the racism accusations began to heat up - you said we were just angry because there was a black man in the White House. We were fools, thugs and angry mobs.
Throughout August, you have begun to realize just how serious we are, and how widespread is our anger. You have insulted us, shut us out of your town hall meetings and refused to listen to our message. You have belittled our righteous anger as "astroturf." You have implied that we are Nazis. You have forgotten for whom you work.
This movement isn't going to go away, it will only continue to grow. You have ignited the passion and unity of the American people as never before in history; this is not a passing fad. Like a California wildfire grown massively out of control, this is a wave that is sweeping this country, already much too farflung to be contained.
We, the good, decent and honest people of the United States of America, want our country back.
Yes, it's about taxes. And the healthcare bill. And Cap and Trade. And TARP, and the bailouts, and the phony stimulus package, and the corruption, and the cronyism, and the deficit and the debt, and so, so much more. It's about decades of watching a few hundred incompetent (or ill-intentioned) individuals systematically trample everything this country stands for. It's about being treated as irrelevant peasants - pawns in your power snatching game, as you fight for our votes with your lies and your bribes - all financed with our hard earned wages. Your partisan bickering and deceptive tactics do nothing for the good of the people or the nation - they serve only to exacerbate our problems and deepen the divisions among us. No more.
This is about putting the Federal government back in it's box.
This is about the greatest people in the greatest country in the history of the world. One country, one overarching theme: Liberty.
Game over.
We are done.
The tax paying, hard-working, productive masses are finished. Game over. You will not do this to us anymore. Are you listening? Because we are heart and soul serious.
Both major political parties have completely lost their bearings. Somewhere along the way, whether through ignorance or evil intent, you lost your collective mind. You are like spoiled children, pampered and given your every wish, never scolded, never told "No." Your toys have grown too expensive, your behavior too outrageous. It's time for some discipline.
The Constitution of the United States makes it quite clear that the Federal government is to be the weakest branch of government. For decades you have grown the Federal government, from 6.8% of GDP in 1903 to a suffocating 45.19% this year! The weakest branch of the government is now spending (and borrowing) nearly half of everything that is produced in this country. NO MORE!
As of this writing, the U.S. Debt Clock shows that the Federal government has spent $8,522 for each and every citizen of this country so far this year. Each citizen holds $38,152 of the national debt. You have made promises that we cannot keep. You have contracted with us to provide certain services in exchange for the taxes we pay. But you have not funded your promises - rather you have wasted our forced contributions on frivolous pet projects, greasing palms and building monuments to your collective greatness. As of now, you have promised, for every citizen of this country, $191,893 in future entitlements that you don't have. Where do you think that is going to come from? The taxpayers are fed up with funding your vote buying programs. NO MORE!
When we first began to stand up and speak out you pretended we weren't there. We were told that the President was not aware of our protests.
After April 15th you said we were teabaggers - thought us foolish for protesting against taxes when taxes hadn't changed. You found us quite amusing and idiotic.
Then the racism accusations began to heat up - you said we were just angry because there was a black man in the White House. We were fools, thugs and angry mobs.
Throughout August, you have begun to realize just how serious we are, and how widespread is our anger. You have insulted us, shut us out of your town hall meetings and refused to listen to our message. You have belittled our righteous anger as "astroturf." You have implied that we are Nazis. You have forgotten for whom you work.
This movement isn't going to go away, it will only continue to grow. You have ignited the passion and unity of the American people as never before in history; this is not a passing fad. Like a California wildfire grown massively out of control, this is a wave that is sweeping this country, already much too farflung to be contained.
We, the good, decent and honest people of the United States of America, want our country back.
Yes, it's about taxes. And the healthcare bill. And Cap and Trade. And TARP, and the bailouts, and the phony stimulus package, and the corruption, and the cronyism, and the deficit and the debt, and so, so much more. It's about decades of watching a few hundred incompetent (or ill-intentioned) individuals systematically trample everything this country stands for. It's about being treated as irrelevant peasants - pawns in your power snatching game, as you fight for our votes with your lies and your bribes - all financed with our hard earned wages. Your partisan bickering and deceptive tactics do nothing for the good of the people or the nation - they serve only to exacerbate our problems and deepen the divisions among us. No more.
This is about putting the Federal government back in it's box.
This is about the greatest people in the greatest country in the history of the world. One country, one overarching theme: Liberty.
Game over.
We are done.
America, are you listening?
The out of control lunatics in Washington, D.C., BOTH parties, are bankrupting our country. No new taxes? WRONG. We are looking at a future filled with taxes that will consume the lion's share of ALL our paychecks. Don't believe me...take it from the liberal's friend, CNN (via Yahoo finance):
Why the federal deficit will raise taxesIf you love your children and want them to have luxuries like food in the future, you need to put your foot down NOW and tell your Congressmen to kill this ridiculous healthcare bill and all the other new spending they have planned. It may already be too late...you just can't afford to remain blissfully ignorant anymore! SPEAK UP!
A $9 trillion federal deficit over 10 years may be too hard to comprehend. But this part is easy: Such unwieldy amounts of debt could have an impact on Americans' bottom line one way or the other -- if not tomorrow, then the day after.
The U.S. government has been spending a great deal more than it has been taking in, and it is on track to do so well beyond the next 10 years. It has been borrowing money to make all that spending possible and it has to pay the money back with interest. How, you ask? By borrowing more.
The solution is straightforward if unpleasant: Shy of finding a fairy willing to leave trillions under Uncle Sam's pillow, lawmakers will have to raise taxes and cut spending.
The more the country lives on a credit card, the more it makes itself beholden to the demands of its creditors -- many of which are overseas. The danger is that buyers of U.S. debt could become concerned that the country is running too high a balance. If so, they will demand higher interest rates -- thereby making the country's debt problem worse -- or they'll put their money elsewhere.
At that point, things would get ugly.
"Taxes would rise to levels that would make a Scandinavian revolt. And the government would not be able to provide anything but the most basic public services. We would no longer be a great power (or even a mediocre one), and the social safety net would evaporate," tax policy expert and Syracuse University professor Len Burman wrote in a recent op-ed cheerfully titled "Catastrophic Budget Failure."
That's why acting sooner rather than later makes sense. But acting too soon could cause its own set of problems since the economy is only beginning to lick its wounds from a punishing recession.
Economists and tax experts, no matter their ideological position, agree raising taxes when the economy is down is self-defeating.
But as the economy finds a solid footing, the hard choices will have to be made.
"We need to do this in stages at the right time," said David Walker, former U.S. comptroller general, in a CNNMoney.com video.
Right now there is a lot of talk, but not a lot of planning, about how to address the situation.
In fact, President Obama is pledging to keep taxes low for most people.
For example, Obama has proposed keeping in place the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for families making less than $250,000 (under $200,000 for individuals). The cuts are scheduled to expire in 2011.
A number of temporary tax relief measures, including the patch to protect the middle class from the Alternative Minimum Tax, are set to expire even sooner. And Obama has said he would like to keep many of those measures in place as well.
Experts say that's not going to cut it.
"Taxes are going up and they're going up for a lot more people than those making more than $250,000. Why? Math. The numbers don't come close to working," Walker said.
For instance, the president's proposal to raise taxes only on high-income families would raise an additional $600 billion over 10 years, said Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center.
That's not a lot when the government is staring at a 10-year deficit of $9 trillion. A 10-year deficit of that magnitude means the debt held by the public -- the accumulation of all annual deficits over the decades -- would reach 82% of gross domestic product come 2019. That's double the 41% recorded in 2008.
When lawmakers do decide to act, they will need to do more than just tinker with tax rates, according to Williams.
Tax experts have been calling for fundamental tax reform to make the system less complex. Plus, Williams said, Congress will likely need to seek out a new source of revenue beyond the income tax. One idea that has been talked about increasingly is a value-added tax, which is a tax on goods and services at every stage of production up to the point of sale.
A multi-pronged approach may work best because "no piece by itself is enough," Williams said. "There's a really big hole to fill and [lawmakers] are just talking about dollops."
One Great American
If you missed Glenn Beck this week, you missed the five most important hours of television in decades. Fortunately, thanks to some patriotic Americans, the entire week is available on YouTube. Here's the first part of the first day - it will link you to the next. Watch, learn and stand up! It's time to take our country back!
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Just Doodlin'
I wish no one an illness that brings about their death and I certainly am not gleeful about the death of Teddy Kennedy, but... I can not sit here and allow this glorification of a liar, cheater, and even murderer to go unchallenged.
This man was thrown out of Harvard for cheating, and after his father bought his way back in, was caught having another person take his test for him. This man was the most liberal man in the senate, this man drove drunk and caused the death of Mary Jo Kopeckney. If it were anyone else they'd still be serving time for that crime. He drowned her and went home and went to bed.
He attacked every conservative idea in the senate. I don't need to tell the informed what this man did, anyone who reads Uncle Sam's Tavern knows what I'm saying. To idolize him is a travesty. Let's get real... The senate has one less liberal in it. His last attempt was to have a law he was responsible for having written reversed so the Governor of Massachusetts could immediately appoint a replacement for him. When Mitt Romney was Governor of Mass. & the candidate for president looked like there might be a chance he'd get elected, Kennedy threw his weight around the Mass. state legislature to force a waiting period before a replacement could be named. That way, a republican governor would not have a chance to appoint a republican senator. With a democrat in the governor's seat, that law might adversely effect the naming of a replacement.
Justices who make up law from the bench and any other liberal leaning person was Teddy's friend and appoinment choice.
I'm not necessarily happy he's dead, but I'm happy he's no longet in the senate. JC
This man was thrown out of Harvard for cheating, and after his father bought his way back in, was caught having another person take his test for him. This man was the most liberal man in the senate, this man drove drunk and caused the death of Mary Jo Kopeckney. If it were anyone else they'd still be serving time for that crime. He drowned her and went home and went to bed.
He attacked every conservative idea in the senate. I don't need to tell the informed what this man did, anyone who reads Uncle Sam's Tavern knows what I'm saying. To idolize him is a travesty. Let's get real... The senate has one less liberal in it. His last attempt was to have a law he was responsible for having written reversed so the Governor of Massachusetts could immediately appoint a replacement for him. When Mitt Romney was Governor of Mass. & the candidate for president looked like there might be a chance he'd get elected, Kennedy threw his weight around the Mass. state legislature to force a waiting period before a replacement could be named. That way, a republican governor would not have a chance to appoint a republican senator. With a democrat in the governor's seat, that law might adversely effect the naming of a replacement.
Justices who make up law from the bench and any other liberal leaning person was Teddy's friend and appoinment choice.
I'm not necessarily happy he's dead, but I'm happy he's no longet in the senate. JC
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Hanson's Historical Perspective
Victor Davis Hanson is an extraordinary historian and brilliant voice for conservatism. He has a spectacular new column in the National Review today in which he discusses the historical parallels between oppressive regimes throughout history and today's American government. Here's a portion to whet your whistle. Read the whole thing - we don't have much time left to stop this freight train.
Seriously, read the rest. Your country needs you...don't let her down. Forewarned is forearmed.
Obama and ‘Redistributive Change’
Forget the recession and the “uninsured.” Obama has bigger fish to fry.
By Victor Davis Hanson
The first seven months of the Obama administration seemingly make no sense. Why squander public approval by running up astronomical deficits in a time of pre-existing staggering national debt?
Why polarize opponents after promising bipartisan transcendence?
Why create vast new programs when the efficacy of big government is already seen as dubious?
But that is exactly the wrong way to look at these first seven months of Obamist policy-making.
Take increased federal spending and the growing government absorption of GDP. Given the resiliency of the U.S. economy, it would have been easy to ride out the recession. In that case we would still have had to deal with a burgeoning and unsustainable annual federal deficit that would have approached $1 trillion.
Instead, Obama may nearly double that amount of annual indebtedness with more federal stimuli and bailouts, newly envisioned cap-and-trade legislation, and a variety of fresh entitlements. Was that fiscally irresponsible? Yes, of course.
But I think the key was not so much the spending excess or new entitlements. The point instead was the consequence of the resulting deficits, which will require radically new taxation for generations. If on April 15 the federal and state governments, local entities, the Social Security system, and the new health-care programs can claim 70 percent of the income of the top 5 percent of taxpayers, then that is considered a public good — every bit as valuable as funding new programs, and one worth risking insolvency.
Individual compensation is now seen as arbitrary and, by extension, inherently unfair. A high income is now rationalized as having less to do with market-driven needs, acquired skills, a higher level of education, innate intelligence, inheritance, hard work, or accepting risk. Rather income is seen more as luck-driven, cruelly capricious, unfair — even immoral, in that some are rewarded arbitrarily on the basis of race, class, and gender advantages, others for their overweening greed and ambition, and still more for their quasi-criminality.
“Patriotic” federal healers must then step in to “spread the wealth.” Through redistributive tax rates, they can “treat” the illness that the private sector has caused. After all, there is no intrinsic reason why an auto fabricator makes $60 in hourly wages and benefits, while a young investment banker finagles $500.
Or, in the president’s own language, the government must equalize the circumstances of the “waitress” with those of the “lucky.” It is thus a fitting and proper role of the new federal government to rectify imbalances of compensation — at least for those outside the anointed Guardian class. In a 2001 interview Obama in fact outlined the desirable political circumstances that would lead government to enforce equality of results when he elaborated on what he called an “actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change.”
Still, why would intelligent politicians try to ram through, in mere weeks, a thousand pages of health-care gibberish — its details outsourced to far-left elements in the Congress (and their staffers) — that few in the cabinet had ever read or even knew much about?
Once again, I don’t think health care per se was ever really the issue. When pressed, no one in the administration seemed to know whether illegal aliens were covered. Few cared why young people do not divert some of their entertainment expenditures to a modest investment in private catastrophic coverage.
Warnings that Canadians already have their health care rationed, wait in long lines, and are denied timely and critical procedures also did not seem to matter. And no attention was paid to statistics suggesting that, if we exclude homicides and auto accidents, Americans live as long on average as anyone in the industrial world, and have better chances of surviving longer with heart disease and cancer. That the average American did not wish to radically alter his existing plan, and that he understood that the uninsured really did have access to health care, albeit in a wasteful manner at the emergency room, was likewise of no concern.
The issue again was larger, and involved a vast reinterpretation of how America receives health care. Whether more or fewer Americans would get better or worse access and cheaper or more expensive care, or whether the government can or cannot afford such new entitlements, oddly seemed largely secondary to the crux of the debate.
Instead, the notion that the state will assume control, in Canada-like fashion, and level the health-care playing field was the real concern. “They” (the few) will now have the same care as “we” (the many). Whether the result is worse or better for everyone involved is extraneous, since sameness is the overarching principle.
We can discern this same mandated egalitarianism beneath many of the administration’s recent policy initiatives. Obama is not a pragmatist, as he insisted, nor even a liberal, as charged.
Rather, he is a statist. The president believes that a select group of affluent, highly educated technocrats — cosmopolitan, noble-minded, and properly progressive — supported by a phalanx of whiz-kids fresh out of blue-chip universities with little or no experience in the marketplace, can direct our lives far better than we can ourselves. By “better” I do not mean in a fashion that, measured by disinterested criteria, makes us necessarily wealthier, happier, more productive, or freer.
Instead, “better” means “fairer,” or more “equal.” We may “make” different amounts of money, but we will end up with more or less similar net incomes. We may know friendly doctors, be aware of the latest procedures, and have the capital to buy blue-chip health insurance, but no matter. Now we will all alike queue up with our government-issued insurance cards to wait our turn at the ubiquitous corner clinic.
None of this equality-of-results thinking is new.
Seriously, read the rest. Your country needs you...don't let her down. Forewarned is forearmed.
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Another Admission that the "Public Option" is Code for "Single Payer"
When writing to an audience of like-minded idiots, there's no need to pretend. From the liberal publication The American Prospect:
THE HISTORY OF THE PUBLIC OPTION.Nothing is accidental with these people. Every detail is plotted, planned and polled. Accept nothing at face value, and trust no one.
As progressives mourn the likely death of a public insurance option in health care reform, it's worthwhile to trace the history of exactly where this idea -- a compromise itself -- came from. The public option was part of a carefully thought out and deliberately funded effort to put all the pieces in place for health reform before the 2008 election -- a brilliant experiment, but one that at this particular moment, looks like it might turn out badly. (Which is not the same as saying it was a mistake.)
One key player was Roger Hickey of the Campaign for America's Future. Hickey took UC Berkley health care expert Jacob Hacker's idea for "a new public insurance pool modeled after Medicare" and went around to the community of single-payer advocates, making the case that this limited "public option" was the best they could hope for. Ideally, it would someday magically turn into single-payer. And then Hickey went to all the presidential candidates, acknowledging that politically, they couldn't support single-payer, but that the "public option" would attract a real progressive constituency. Here's Hickey from a speech to New Jersey Citizen Action in November 2007:The good news is that people are ready for big change. But the hard reality, from the point of view of all of us who understand the efficiency and simplicity of a single-payer system, is that our pollsters unanimously tell us that large numbers of Americans are not willing to give up the good private insurance they now have in order to be put into one big health plan run by the government.The rest is history. Following Edwards' lead, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton picked up on the public option compromise. So what we have is Jacob Hacker's policy idea, but largely Hickey and Health Care for America Now's political strategy. It was a real high-wire act -- to convince the single-payer advocates, who were the only engaged health care constituency on the left, that they could live with the public option as a kind of stealth single-payer, thus transferring their energy and enthusiasm to this alternative. It had a very positive political effect: It got all the candidates except Kucinich onto basically the same health reform structure, unlike in 1992, when every Democrat had his or her own gimmick. And the public option/insurance exchange structure was ambitious.
Pollster Celinda Lake looked at public backing for a single-payer plan - and then compared it with an approach that offers a choice between highly regulated private insurance and a public plan like Medicare. This alternative, called "guaranteed choice" wins 64 percent support to 22 percent for single-payer. And even the hard core progressive part of the population, which Celinda calls the "health justice" constituency, favors "guaranteed choice" over single-payer. ...
Starting in January, we began to take Jacob Hacker to see the presidential candidates. We started with John Edwards and his advisers -- who quickly understood the value of Hacker's public plan, and when he announced his health proposal on "Meet The Press," he was very clear that his public plan could become the dominant part of his new health care program, if enough people choose it.
But the downside is that the political process turns out to be as resistant to stealth single-payer as it is to plain-old single-payer. If there is a public plan, it certainly won't be the kind of deal that could "become the dominant player." So now this energetic, well-funded group of progressives is fired up to defend something fairly complex and not necessarily essential to health reform. (Or, put another way, there are plenty of bad versions of a public plan.) The symbolic intensity is hard for others to understand. But the intensity is understandable if you recognize that this is what they gave up single-payer for, so they want to win at least that much.
The alternative history question would be: What if they had pushed for single-payer all along? Could the political process then have sold them out and compromised by supporting the public option we now look likely to lose?
So...how's that Beck boycott working out?
Latest cable news ratings, courtesy of the Drudge Report:
CABLE NEWS RACEBest numbers ever for Mr. Beck. The more they fight him, the more we win.
MONDAY, AUG. 24, 2009
FOXNEWS O'REILLY 3,440,000
FOXNEWS HANNITY 2,937,000
FOXNEWS BECK 2,810,000
FOXNEWS GRETA 2,450,000
FOXNEWS BAIER 2,066,000
FOXNEWS SHEP 1,860,000
MSNBC OLBERMANN 1,114,000
CNN KING 1,063,000
MSNBC MADDOW 885,000
CNN COOPER 827,000
MSNBC HARDBALL 640,000
Unveiling the conspiracy
Combined with Beck's recent revelations, this article in The American Spectator is startling. These people will stop at nothing to destroy this country. Wake up, America!
Obama's Plan to Desecrate 9/11To these heartless fascist bastards, absolutely nothing is sacred. But we're racists if we dare to disagree. Read the rest at the link...if you can stomach it.
The Obama White House is behind a cynical, coldly calculated political effort to erase the meaning of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks from the American psyche and convert Sept. 11 into a day of leftist celebration and statist idolatry.
This effort to reshape the American psyche has nothing to do with healing the nation and everything to do with easing the nation along in the ongoing radical transformation of America that President Obama promised during last year's election campaign. The president signed into law a measure in April that designated Sept. 11 as a National Day of Service, but it's not likely many lawmakers thought this meant that day was going to be turned into a celebration of ethanol, carbon emission controls, and radical community organizing.
[snip]
The plan is to turn a "day of fear" that helps Republicans into a day of activism called the National Day of Service that helps the left. In other words, nihilistic liberals are planning to drain 9/11 of all meaning.
"They think it needs to be taken back from the right," said the source. "They're taking that day and they're breaking it because it gives Republicans an advantage. To them, that day is a fearful day."
A coalition including the unsavory left-wing pressure group Color of Change and about 60 far-left, environmentalist, labor, and corporate shakedown groups participated in the call. Groups on the call included: ACORN, AFL-CIO, Apollo Alliance, Community Action Partnership, Deep South Center for Environmental Justice, 80 Million Strong for Young American Jobs, Friends of the Earth, Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, Mobilize.org, National Black Police Association, National Coalition on Black Civic Participation, National Council of Negro Women, National Wildlife Federation, RainbowPUSH Coalition, Urban League, and Young Democrats of America.
Color of Change is the extremist racial grievance group that isn't happy that TV's Glenn Beck did several news packages on Van Jones, the self-described "communist" and "rowdy black nationalist" who became the president's green jobs czar after jumping on the environmentalist bandwagon. The White House may be behind a push to destroy Beck by convincing advertisers to stop buying time on his show. Jones was also on the board of the Apollo Alliance, a hard-left environmentalist group that is now running large chunks of the Obama administration. The group has acknowledged that it dictated parts of the February stimulus bill to Congress.
With the help of the Obama administration, the coalition is launching a public relations campaign under the radar of the mainstream media -- which remains almost uniformly terrified of criticizing the nation's first black president -- to try to change 9/11 from a day of reflection and remembrance to a day of activism, food banks, and community gardens.
"The organizing term is to 'go dark.' You don't tell the press, don't tell people you think will tell the press," said the source.
Of course, the annual commemoration of the 2001 terrorist attacks belongs to the entire nation, but President Obama and the activist left don't see it that way. They view the nationwide remembrance of the murder of 3,000 Americans by Islamic totalitarians as an obstacle to winning over the hearts and minds of the American people.
"When you criticize them, they are prepared to say, 'Did you want 9/11 to be another day of selling mattresses, like Presidents Day?" the source said. "They are truly trying to change the American mindset."
They view Sept. 11 as a "Republican" day because it focuses the public on supposedly "Republican" issues like patriotism, national security, and terrorism. According to liberals, 9/11 was long ago hijacked by Republicans and their enablers and unfairly used to bludgeon helpless Democrats at election time.
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Recess Rally Video
I'm not much of a videographer, but this will at least give you an idea of what today's rally was like. As always, it was a friendly, family-oriented crowd, passionate about their country and their Constitution. I've heard estimates from about 350 to 550 of "us," versus about 100 to 150 of "them."
It's not captured in the video, but when we first arrived we were greeted by a group of the counter protesters, shrieking at us and shaking their fists. The Overland Park Police escorted us past them and down to the group of like-minded souls. The counter protesters were booing the cars that honked, waved and cheered for us, and giving them the occasional obscene gesture. Worth noting...there were no children with the Obamabots, and only one flag which they dug up after some of our folks chided them for not having any.
Despite the rabble rousers, it was, as always, a very uplifting experience. Can't wait until September 12th in Washington!
It's not captured in the video, but when we first arrived we were greeted by a group of the counter protesters, shrieking at us and shaking their fists. The Overland Park Police escorted us past them and down to the group of like-minded souls. The counter protesters were booing the cars that honked, waved and cheered for us, and giving them the occasional obscene gesture. Worth noting...there were no children with the Obamabots, and only one flag which they dug up after some of our folks chided them for not having any.
Despite the rabble rousers, it was, as always, a very uplifting experience. Can't wait until September 12th in Washington!
Friday, August 21, 2009
Recess Rallies Tomorrow
I'm going to a recess rally outside Dennis Moore's local office tomorrow morning from 10:00 am to noon. Just learned that there will be a counter protest on the other side of the street. Should be interesting...will let you know tomorrow afternoon!
Hope you can make one at your congressman's office, too!
Hope you can make one at your congressman's office, too!
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Mighty Hoax from Little ACORN Grows
The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform released a report last month on the results of an investigation of Obama's brown shirts the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN). But of course you knew that...since it's been front page news on every major news publication in the country....or not. What is it with these reports? Congress finally does something right and uncovers at least a tiny sliver of the corruption that infests our government, and you never hear about the reports. Even Fox and the radio talkers have ignored it, as far as I know.
From the Executive Summary:
From the Executive Summary:
The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) has repeatedly and deliberately engaged in systemic fraud. Both structurally and operationally, ACORN hides behind a paper wall of nonprofit corporate protections to conceal a criminal conspiracy on the part of its directors, to launder federal money in order to pursue a partisan political agenda and to manipulate the American electorate.It's 88 pages of some of the best news you'll read this year. Check out the whole report, in pdf format, here.
Emerging accounts of widespread deceit and corruption raise the need for a criminal investigation of ACORN. By intentionally blurring the legal distinctions between 361 tax-exempt and non-exempt entities, ACORN diverts taxpayer and tax-exempt monies into partisan political activities. Since 1994, more than $53 million in federal funds have been pumped into ACORN, and under the Obama administration, ACORN stands to receive a whopping $8.5 billion in available stimulus funds.
Operationally, ACORN is a shell game played in 120 cities, 43 states and the District of Columbia through a complex structure designed to conceal illegal activities, to use taxpayer and tax-exempt dollars for partisan political purposes, and to distract investigators. Structurally, ACORN is a chess game in which senior management is shielded from accountability by multiple layers of volunteers and compensated employees who serve as pawns to take the fall for every bad act.
The report that follows presents evidence obtained from former ACORN insiders that completes the picture of a criminal enterprise.
Just Doodlin'
As I listen to the self agrandized men and women of DC on the hill offer their uninformed contributions to the atmosphere, I realize that they contribute a great deal to global warming. The BS that comes out of their mouths is enough to make all of us die of carbon monoxide poisoning. (That may be an overstatement since we're not all dead.) I bring this up today because a significant event happened this morning. Our daughter started her college career today. Think about it. I am 23 years older than my wonderful wife. Had never had a biological child before although I had adopted five. I was 53 and April 30 when Mackenzie was conceived. I have always said we were brought together to bring this child into the world. I expect great things of our daughter. I can't think of any other reason the God of my understanding would have brought April and I together. My almost 20 years with April have been the happiest years of my life. Mackenzie is a wonderful daughter. Please don't misunderstand I think all my children are wonderful, but I'm only addressing Mackenzie in this doodle.
As she starts her first day at a huge university, going to classes for the first time, going home for lunch for the first time in her educational experience... She is bound for special things. I'm fairly certain all parents have a special feeling when their offspring attends college, I've never experienced it before. I am sorry I probably won't be around to see the good she will do, but I know in my heart of hearts she will do it.
Someone has to bring these idiots in DC back to the constitution. Our protests are, so far, being ignored by the left. Because they pay for thugs to show up at town hall meetings, they think we do too. Astro turf uprisings? What the hell does that mean? Right wing radicals? Returning service men as possible terrorists? There must be a reason they refuse to accept the fact that real red blooded Americans are sick and tired of their blatherings. The old movie line... I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore, is very appropoe...
I guess what I'm trying to say is that someone is going to bring this country back to its greatness. They will dust off the original constitution and restore it to its righful place. I believe that Mackenzie and people like her will have a hand in that. I hope we can still find it in the ruins of our republic by the time she and her friends will be out of school and into the real world and able to do something about it. JC
As she starts her first day at a huge university, going to classes for the first time, going home for lunch for the first time in her educational experience... She is bound for special things. I'm fairly certain all parents have a special feeling when their offspring attends college, I've never experienced it before. I am sorry I probably won't be around to see the good she will do, but I know in my heart of hearts she will do it.
Someone has to bring these idiots in DC back to the constitution. Our protests are, so far, being ignored by the left. Because they pay for thugs to show up at town hall meetings, they think we do too. Astro turf uprisings? What the hell does that mean? Right wing radicals? Returning service men as possible terrorists? There must be a reason they refuse to accept the fact that real red blooded Americans are sick and tired of their blatherings. The old movie line... I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore, is very appropoe...
I guess what I'm trying to say is that someone is going to bring this country back to its greatness. They will dust off the original constitution and restore it to its righful place. I believe that Mackenzie and people like her will have a hand in that. I hope we can still find it in the ruins of our republic by the time she and her friends will be out of school and into the real world and able to do something about it. JC
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Town Hall Listening in Las Cruces
The gentleman serving as Congressman from New Mexico's 2d District, Democrat Harry Teague, held a Town Hall meeting in our city this morning. Several hundred attended.
It was pretty much a waste of time. Mr. Teague announced that the purpose of the meeting was to listen to 2d District voters express their feelings on matters before Congress - principally the Health Care legislation. That is what he did. If there was a question, he tried to give an answer.
The meeting was cordial. The meeting was boring. A few people expressed valid concerns. Several others took up much time with long-winded statements about their personal life. One woman talked at length about her husband's bout with cancer, and difficulties she experienced giving birth to her son who is, or was, in Iraq.
The comment that drew the most enthusiastic response from the crowd, was by a priest who said that while HR3200 may not contain specific language about abortion and rationed health care, it certainly opened the door to implementation of those policies by persons in power. And he expressed much concern about the current moral track of the nation.
Teague did state, unequivocally, that any health insurance he voted for would be the insurance he would use.
The event was well attended by Democrats, all of whom said they supported Obama and all were enthusiastic about free health care for everyone and punishment for those evil insurance companies.
The meeting lasted a little less than an hour, and while many persons still had their hand in the air, asking to be heard, the meeting was ended.
I appreciated the fact the the Congressman at least came out of hiding and faced a crowd - something our two Democrat Senators have not yet done this August.
I left the meeting feeling nothing had been accomplished.
The gentleman serving as Congressman from New Mexico's 2d District, Democrat Harry Teague, held a Town Hall meeting in our city this morning. Several hundred attended.
It was pretty much a waste of time. Mr. Teague announced that the purpose of the meeting was to listen to 2d District voters express their feelings on matters before Congress - principally the Health Care legislation. That is what he did. If there was a question, he tried to give an answer.
The meeting was cordial. The meeting was boring. A few people expressed valid concerns. Several others took up much time with long-winded statements about their personal life. One woman talked at length about her husband's bout with cancer, and difficulties she experienced giving birth to her son who is, or was, in Iraq.
The comment that drew the most enthusiastic response from the crowd, was by a priest who said that while HR3200 may not contain specific language about abortion and rationed health care, it certainly opened the door to implementation of those policies by persons in power. And he expressed much concern about the current moral track of the nation.
Teague did state, unequivocally, that any health insurance he voted for would be the insurance he would use.
The event was well attended by Democrats, all of whom said they supported Obama and all were enthusiastic about free health care for everyone and punishment for those evil insurance companies.
The meeting lasted a little less than an hour, and while many persons still had their hand in the air, asking to be heard, the meeting was ended.
I appreciated the fact the the Congressman at least came out of hiding and faced a crowd - something our two Democrat Senators have not yet done this August.
I left the meeting feeling nothing had been accomplished.
Sunday, August 16, 2009
Cash for clunkers.
Not all of the chickens have landed!
That great wise man from the east, Senator Charles Shumer, has declared Cash For Clunkers a great success. I say, not so fast, Senator... let's wait until all the chickens have landed!
Following the polio scare of the 1940s, there arose the drive-in theater craze of the 1950s. Advised to avoid close contact with strangers, people flocked to the drive-ins to see movies from their cars, somewhat insulated from their fellow patrons. The drive-ins became so popular, soon there were too many of them. Theater operators resorted to all sorts of promotions to generate more ticket sales.
One operator I knew came up with what seemed like a fun idea. "Catch a free chicken dinner" headlined his promotion. He acquired a number of healthy "fryers" and hoisted them in a crate to the roof of the concession stand. During intermission, the chickens were to be released into the air, one at a time. Catch one, and it was your free chicken dinner.
When the event began, the first chicken was launched into the air. The chicken could not fly well enough to escape, but could flutter safely to the ground. A number of hands awaited its descent. Suddenly a taller, more agile person leaped above the crowd, snatched the chicken from the air, and ran with it to his car.
Chicken #2 was launched. As before, several who thought the prize would be theirs were shoved aside and a more aggressive person stole the chicken.
We've seen the angry scramble among baseball fans when a home run ball is smacked into their midst. But for most fans, in most games, this rarely happens more than once. In our chicken event, some folks were pushed aside several times, and their anger grew.
Unlike a hard-to-hang-onto round baseball, every chicken has two wings, two legs and a neck. Soon chickens were being caught by several people at the same time, and a tug-of-war resulted. When someone with an iron grip on a chicken's leg suddenly realized that a bloody leg part was all they had, there was nothing left to them but to start beating the intruder with that part of the chicken.
Some non-participating bystanders, with no stomach for killing and dressing their own chicken dinner, found themselves smeared in blood and feathers and their anger mounted. They entered the fray. Not until the last chicken had landed did anyone realize the full extent of the disaster.
$3 billion has been allotted for Cash for Clunkers. With the maximum allowance at $4,500.00 each, that would mean 666,666.6 could participate. Since not all will receive the maximum, it is apparent that the program will exceed one million transactions. Already we have seen some fraud, with cars intended for destruction, slipped out the back gate and sold.
Of course, the cash allowances do not fully cover the cost of the new car, so even in a recession, people are scraping up additional money to buy cars. There are now complaints that, while stimulating auto sales, the clunkers program has seriously hurt other segments of the economy. Just last week, retail sales, excluding autos, were down .6%!
You know, as well as I, that there will be a lot more blood and feathers flying before it is all over.
Better stand back and be quiet, Senator, less you, too, get bloodied!
Not all of the chickens have landed!
That great wise man from the east, Senator Charles Shumer, has declared Cash For Clunkers a great success. I say, not so fast, Senator... let's wait until all the chickens have landed!
Following the polio scare of the 1940s, there arose the drive-in theater craze of the 1950s. Advised to avoid close contact with strangers, people flocked to the drive-ins to see movies from their cars, somewhat insulated from their fellow patrons. The drive-ins became so popular, soon there were too many of them. Theater operators resorted to all sorts of promotions to generate more ticket sales.
One operator I knew came up with what seemed like a fun idea. "Catch a free chicken dinner" headlined his promotion. He acquired a number of healthy "fryers" and hoisted them in a crate to the roof of the concession stand. During intermission, the chickens were to be released into the air, one at a time. Catch one, and it was your free chicken dinner.
When the event began, the first chicken was launched into the air. The chicken could not fly well enough to escape, but could flutter safely to the ground. A number of hands awaited its descent. Suddenly a taller, more agile person leaped above the crowd, snatched the chicken from the air, and ran with it to his car.
Chicken #2 was launched. As before, several who thought the prize would be theirs were shoved aside and a more aggressive person stole the chicken.
We've seen the angry scramble among baseball fans when a home run ball is smacked into their midst. But for most fans, in most games, this rarely happens more than once. In our chicken event, some folks were pushed aside several times, and their anger grew.
Unlike a hard-to-hang-onto round baseball, every chicken has two wings, two legs and a neck. Soon chickens were being caught by several people at the same time, and a tug-of-war resulted. When someone with an iron grip on a chicken's leg suddenly realized that a bloody leg part was all they had, there was nothing left to them but to start beating the intruder with that part of the chicken.
Some non-participating bystanders, with no stomach for killing and dressing their own chicken dinner, found themselves smeared in blood and feathers and their anger mounted. They entered the fray. Not until the last chicken had landed did anyone realize the full extent of the disaster.
$3 billion has been allotted for Cash for Clunkers. With the maximum allowance at $4,500.00 each, that would mean 666,666.6 could participate. Since not all will receive the maximum, it is apparent that the program will exceed one million transactions. Already we have seen some fraud, with cars intended for destruction, slipped out the back gate and sold.
Of course, the cash allowances do not fully cover the cost of the new car, so even in a recession, people are scraping up additional money to buy cars. There are now complaints that, while stimulating auto sales, the clunkers program has seriously hurt other segments of the economy. Just last week, retail sales, excluding autos, were down .6%!
You know, as well as I, that there will be a lot more blood and feathers flying before it is all over.
Better stand back and be quiet, Senator, less you, too, get bloodied!
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Silent No More
Every day, more and more patriotic Americans are getting off the couch and joining the movement to take our country back. Washington, are you listening?
Friday, August 14, 2009
What do doctors think?
A couple of weeks ago, during a routine checkup with my cardiologist, I asked one of his nurses what they thought of the proposed government health care program. She gave me a guarded answer, a politically correct answer, which only left me wondering what the medical community really thought of the plan.
This week, we received word that there would be a public forum on health care in our city, hosted by several highly regarded local medical professionals. We, along with a few hundred neighbors, attended.
The meeting was friendly and orderly. The doctors did not really promote any particular position. they told us a little about their practices. About their relationship with insurance companies and with the government.
One doctor, an OB-GYN, who also holds a law degree, told us of a patient who came to his office. His nurse spent about fifteen minutes with her. He spent about 30 minutes with her. He conducted a medical exam which he did not describe. Some time later the woman came back to his office. She had received an advisory from her insurance carrier (It may have been Medicare, I don't remember if he said) that the doctor had been reimbursed exactly $32 for her visit. She was so ashamed at this underpayment, she tried to give the doctor $100 cash. He had to inform her that accepting her payment would be against the law and could cause him to lose his license to practice medicine.
Eventually he also shared the fact that his individual annual medical malpractice insurance premium was $40,000. Imagine! Almost $110 a day, every day, as a hedge against being sued over some alleged mistake. Judged a mistake by whom?
We also learned that only a small per cent of doctors belong to the A.M.A., so we realized that positions taken by the A.M.A. should not necessarily be regarded as the position of all or even most doctors.
And, though no one said it, we came to believe that being a medical doctor is not necessarily always a lucrative career, often consisting of more sacrifice than reward.
Microphones were provided and a number of attendees offered comments or questions. A couple of people, one an elderly man who identified himself as a lawyer, defended the government plan. Everyone else expressed opposition.
The doctors didn't comment on policy - or politics - they just answered questions when they had answers, and let the people talk.
When pushed by questioners, however, they all admitted that House bill HR3200 would destroy their practice if fully implemented.
If you hear of such a forum in your area, I would urge you to attend. If we are going to change medical care, we should hear from the people providing that care.
A couple of weeks ago, during a routine checkup with my cardiologist, I asked one of his nurses what they thought of the proposed government health care program. She gave me a guarded answer, a politically correct answer, which only left me wondering what the medical community really thought of the plan.
This week, we received word that there would be a public forum on health care in our city, hosted by several highly regarded local medical professionals. We, along with a few hundred neighbors, attended.
The meeting was friendly and orderly. The doctors did not really promote any particular position. they told us a little about their practices. About their relationship with insurance companies and with the government.
One doctor, an OB-GYN, who also holds a law degree, told us of a patient who came to his office. His nurse spent about fifteen minutes with her. He spent about 30 minutes with her. He conducted a medical exam which he did not describe. Some time later the woman came back to his office. She had received an advisory from her insurance carrier (It may have been Medicare, I don't remember if he said) that the doctor had been reimbursed exactly $32 for her visit. She was so ashamed at this underpayment, she tried to give the doctor $100 cash. He had to inform her that accepting her payment would be against the law and could cause him to lose his license to practice medicine.
Eventually he also shared the fact that his individual annual medical malpractice insurance premium was $40,000. Imagine! Almost $110 a day, every day, as a hedge against being sued over some alleged mistake. Judged a mistake by whom?
We also learned that only a small per cent of doctors belong to the A.M.A., so we realized that positions taken by the A.M.A. should not necessarily be regarded as the position of all or even most doctors.
And, though no one said it, we came to believe that being a medical doctor is not necessarily always a lucrative career, often consisting of more sacrifice than reward.
Microphones were provided and a number of attendees offered comments or questions. A couple of people, one an elderly man who identified himself as a lawyer, defended the government plan. Everyone else expressed opposition.
The doctors didn't comment on policy - or politics - they just answered questions when they had answers, and let the people talk.
When pushed by questioners, however, they all admitted that House bill HR3200 would destroy their practice if fully implemented.
If you hear of such a forum in your area, I would urge you to attend. If we are going to change medical care, we should hear from the people providing that care.
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Born Again American
This video is just wonderful - I want the song on my iPod! Grab a tissue and prepare to fall in love with your country all over again!
Three Cheers for Whole Foods!
One of my daughters is an employee of Whole Foods Market. She has the best insurance coverage I have ever heard of - it pays virtually 100% of every expense, including glasses, and includes her fiance, even before marriage. Because much of the Whole Foods culture is "green" - organic foods, no preservatives, etc. - I had assumed that the management embraced liberal ideas and solutions. Apparently, I could not have been more incorrect.
Writing in the Wall Street Journal, John Mackey, co-founder and CEO of Whole Foods Market, explains the Whole Foods alternative to ObamaCare - and it's a winner.
Writing in the Wall Street Journal, John Mackey, co-founder and CEO of Whole Foods Market, explains the Whole Foods alternative to ObamaCare - and it's a winner.
With a projected $1.8 trillion deficit for 2009, several trillions more in deficits projected over the next decade, and with both Medicare and Social Security entitlement spending about to ratchet up several notches over the next 15 years as Baby Boomers become eligible for both, we are rapidly running out of other people's money. These deficits are simply not sustainable. They are either going to result in unprecedented new taxes and inflation, or they will bankrupt us.Click the link above to read the rest. Mr. Mackey's ideas would represent real healthcare reform for all of us, by empowering the individual and putting the federal government back where it belongs. Such wisdom deserves our support! Cast aside your doubts about their agenda, and visit a Whole Foods Market today!
While we clearly need health-care reform, the last thing our country needs is a massive new health-care entitlement that will create hundreds of billions of dollars of new unfunded deficits and move us much closer to a government takeover of our health-care system. Instead, we should be trying to achieve reforms by moving in the opposite direction—toward less government control and more individual empowerment. Here are eight reforms that would greatly lower the cost of health care for everyone:
Nan-Po's Amazing Embrace of Morality
This, apparently, is the image to which Nancy Pelosi was referring when she accused town hall protestors of carrying swastikas:
We should all embrace Ms. Pelosi's sudden turn to morality...you see, in recent years, she has allowed images such as these to go completely unnoticed.
Given another 20 years in office, who knows...she might even become a human being.
We should all embrace Ms. Pelosi's sudden turn to morality...you see, in recent years, she has allowed images such as these to go completely unnoticed.
Given another 20 years in office, who knows...she might even become a human being.
Just Doodlin'
I haven't had a chance to do this for a while and some pretty significant things have happened since my last doodle. Obowma'a popularity has dipped below the magic 50% mark, Congress has seen a new low, and the Senate has allowed a dysfunctional character from Minnesota to actually take a seat in the chamber and has seen fit to put this idiot in a meaningful committee. The female who is supposed to be speaker of the house, and that's for ALL Americans is an outright disgrace. I've lived through some tough times in this countries' history. World War II, Korea, Viet Nam, Grenada, Panama, Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq... It goes on... But... never in my life have I felt so threatened. And the feeling is coming from within--- this country!!!
Obama has still refused to show his birth certificate and prove that he is eligible to be elected to the office of president of the United States of America. His every action since taking over the office has been to the detriment of this once great country. If he gets his way with cap and trade and this ridiculous health program, he will have effectively reduced this proud nation to rubble. If you think it's bad here now, just wait until you have to pay through the nose just to have your lights turned on. If you think it's bad now, just wait until you have to stand in line to get your own personal lights turned off by a Kevorkian apostle. New hip? Your age? Over 65, forget about it. Knee replacement? Your age? Over 65, forget about it. Cerebral palsy? Your age? Under 2 years, forget about it. HERE'S YOUR PILL AMERICA!
We need to get involved no matter what Nancy Pelosi calls us. We are citizens of The USA. We have the right to protest that which is being foisted upon us by unelected czars appointed by one who hasn't proved to me that he has the right to appoint anyone. What must we do? Join April and me in DC on 9/12. Peacefully demonstrate with us. Show the color of your spirit by politely disagreeing with this blatant takeover of our country by leftist leaning officials. Kick them out in 2010 and show them that we still are in charge. We The People are still in charge.
Obama has still refused to show his birth certificate and prove that he is eligible to be elected to the office of president of the United States of America. His every action since taking over the office has been to the detriment of this once great country. If he gets his way with cap and trade and this ridiculous health program, he will have effectively reduced this proud nation to rubble. If you think it's bad here now, just wait until you have to pay through the nose just to have your lights turned on. If you think it's bad now, just wait until you have to stand in line to get your own personal lights turned off by a Kevorkian apostle. New hip? Your age? Over 65, forget about it. Knee replacement? Your age? Over 65, forget about it. Cerebral palsy? Your age? Under 2 years, forget about it. HERE'S YOUR PILL AMERICA!
We need to get involved no matter what Nancy Pelosi calls us. We are citizens of The USA. We have the right to protest that which is being foisted upon us by unelected czars appointed by one who hasn't proved to me that he has the right to appoint anyone. What must we do? Join April and me in DC on 9/12. Peacefully demonstrate with us. Show the color of your spirit by politely disagreeing with this blatant takeover of our country by leftist leaning officials. Kick them out in 2010 and show them that we still are in charge. We The People are still in charge.
The Audacity of Washington
While Americans were sleeping, their elected representatives were busy annointing themselves the "ruling class." Arlen Specter said it, but I can guarantee you most in D.C. believe it:
This is what's wrong with Washington, D.C. These power-hungry buffoons no longer see themselves as servants of the people. Rather, the people are but pawns in the game, to be manipulated for votes, to return the members of the ruling class to their ivory tower, then to be ignored until the next election season. On those rare occasions when they must actually associate with the undesirable public, they expect to be treated with prescribed respect, as kings and queens, regardless of whether they have done anything worthy of such courtesy.
It is time for the people of this country to remind Washington of its correct role as protector of the people. If you read nothing else from your country's founding documents, this single sentence, the Preamble to the Constitution, is enough:
America is not broken, nor is her healthcare system. The people of America are outstanding examples of hard work and dedication. Washington, D.C., on the other hand, is irreparably broken and completely out of touch with everything that matters in this country. The only "hope" we have of changing that situation lies in firing every single one of them. The only "change" America needs is to throw out the garbage that is engaged in fundamentally remaking this country into a third world nation.
This is what's wrong with Washington, D.C. These power-hungry buffoons no longer see themselves as servants of the people. Rather, the people are but pawns in the game, to be manipulated for votes, to return the members of the ruling class to their ivory tower, then to be ignored until the next election season. On those rare occasions when they must actually associate with the undesirable public, they expect to be treated with prescribed respect, as kings and queens, regardless of whether they have done anything worthy of such courtesy.
It is time for the people of this country to remind Washington of its correct role as protector of the people. If you read nothing else from your country's founding documents, this single sentence, the Preamble to the Constitution, is enough:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.Exactly how does this attitude accomplish any of those objectives? What has anyone in Washington, D.C. done lately to "form a more perfect Union"? Madame Pelosi accuses protestors of "carrying swastikas." Barbara Boxer dismisses our concerns because we're too well dressed and accuses us of trying to "hurt this President, hurt the Congress." It's all about them. Their fearless leader, The Messiah (peace be upon him), tells his party to "punch back twice as hard." Punch back? Punch back? Oddly, I thought it was his job to be the President of all the people, not to encourage punching those of us who dare to disagree with his infinite wisdom. When the President of the United States tells a large portion of the United States to shut up and get out of the way, it should be a red flag to everyone who loves this country, regardless of their ideology.
America is not broken, nor is her healthcare system. The people of America are outstanding examples of hard work and dedication. Washington, D.C., on the other hand, is irreparably broken and completely out of touch with everything that matters in this country. The only "hope" we have of changing that situation lies in firing every single one of them. The only "change" America needs is to throw out the garbage that is engaged in fundamentally remaking this country into a third world nation.
Speaking Truth to Power
I teared up watching this video. Pretty sorry state of affairs when a salty old broad like me gets emotional over hearing her fellow citizens tell their elected representatives what this country is supposed to be all about.
Pennsylvania, vote Toomey for Senate! Your country is counting on you!
Pennsylvania, vote Toomey for Senate! Your country is counting on you!
Monday, August 10, 2009
An open letter to
graduating
Mass Comm majors
Around the country, universities are graduating students who have spent the summer completing their studies. Some are graduating from Colleges of Mass Communications with graduate degrees, some of whom will go on to become college professors, teaching the next generation of news people.
It is those few I would like to address.
I spent 25 years in broadcasting - all of them before you were born. There was one very prevalent characteristic of news people when I was in the business, a characteristic which seems to have become scarce... something called integrity. I want to ask you to help restore it.
When I started in broadcasting, the most powerful credit reference was the simple fact that you had been employed by the local radio station. By virtue of having been accepted as part of the local broadcasting, news-gathering team, you had instant good credit.You were trusted. You were believed. You were respected. Understand, I didn't earn that trust or respect, it was earned by broadcasters before me who displayed, unwaveringly, that characteristic called integrity.
Toward the end of my career, I took a leave from broadcasting to work for a newspaper. The Wichita Eagle-Beacon in Wichita, Kansas. I was employed in the advertising department, considered unfit for the editorial department because I didn't have a journalism degree!
Imagine... 25 years on the streets didn't count as much as four years screwing off in college, spending a few hours a week listening to a professor who probably never stood in a police station at 4:00am on a cold winter day, reading a synopsis of the previous night's happenings, trying to decide if any stories appeared to be of enough interest and concern to your listening audience to request the full report. (When one did, you had to study the hand written report of an exhausted, overworked police officer who, at 2:00 a.m., had tried to unravel some sort of altercation. You take notes, carefully recording names, addresses and who said what, return to your studio and write up the stories as you will read them. Then you re-read them. And you try to be sure you got it right, before you go on the air with them.)
Anyway, when I joined the advertising staff at the Eagle-Beacon, we were given a tour of the editorial department. Henceforth, we were not permitted in that side of the building for any purpose. God forbid that we may try to influence a news reporter on behalf of an advertiser. The advertisers... the city's business community... had become the enemy!
Visiting politicians, after placing their ads with my department, were certainly welcome in the editorial department. There they were celebrities, surrounded by young reporters, eager to tell their story.
That was almost 40 years ago. It has gone downhill from there. Today, some reporters not only tell the politicians stories, they adopt their ideology and happily weave it into everything they write.
Now, students, you have completed this phase of your studies. I don't know what you were taught about honestly reporting the news, but at least you have learned to avoid the real sins of writing with those dreaded cliches. You have learned to use punctuation. You have learned to use spell-check.
So, here is my request to you young professors to be. First, get a job at a local newspaper or radio station. Discover first-hand what it takes to sort out the events around you and determine what is really happening, what is true and what is not, what is important and what is not. Write the news. Read the news. Study the news. And study history.
It is true that if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is probably a duck. Learn to look and listen for quacks and waddles, and learn to check them out to see what they really are. Then tell us the truth. Yes, you will have to contend with editors, bosses, who started their career with a clove of garlic hanging over their computer terminal to keep advertising salesmen away. But it you learn the truth and you write the truth, they cannot always defy you.
At the end of the day, when you turn out the lights and go home, satisfy yourself that you have been only a messenger, faithfully carrying the true message, not an ideologue trying to persuade the dumb public.
When you return to academia, teach what you have learned. Teach that integrity trumps all else.
graduating
Mass Comm majors
Around the country, universities are graduating students who have spent the summer completing their studies. Some are graduating from Colleges of Mass Communications with graduate degrees, some of whom will go on to become college professors, teaching the next generation of news people.
It is those few I would like to address.
I spent 25 years in broadcasting - all of them before you were born. There was one very prevalent characteristic of news people when I was in the business, a characteristic which seems to have become scarce... something called integrity. I want to ask you to help restore it.
When I started in broadcasting, the most powerful credit reference was the simple fact that you had been employed by the local radio station. By virtue of having been accepted as part of the local broadcasting, news-gathering team, you had instant good credit.You were trusted. You were believed. You were respected. Understand, I didn't earn that trust or respect, it was earned by broadcasters before me who displayed, unwaveringly, that characteristic called integrity.
Toward the end of my career, I took a leave from broadcasting to work for a newspaper. The Wichita Eagle-Beacon in Wichita, Kansas. I was employed in the advertising department, considered unfit for the editorial department because I didn't have a journalism degree!
Imagine... 25 years on the streets didn't count as much as four years screwing off in college, spending a few hours a week listening to a professor who probably never stood in a police station at 4:00am on a cold winter day, reading a synopsis of the previous night's happenings, trying to decide if any stories appeared to be of enough interest and concern to your listening audience to request the full report. (When one did, you had to study the hand written report of an exhausted, overworked police officer who, at 2:00 a.m., had tried to unravel some sort of altercation. You take notes, carefully recording names, addresses and who said what, return to your studio and write up the stories as you will read them. Then you re-read them. And you try to be sure you got it right, before you go on the air with them.)
Anyway, when I joined the advertising staff at the Eagle-Beacon, we were given a tour of the editorial department. Henceforth, we were not permitted in that side of the building for any purpose. God forbid that we may try to influence a news reporter on behalf of an advertiser. The advertisers... the city's business community... had become the enemy!
Visiting politicians, after placing their ads with my department, were certainly welcome in the editorial department. There they were celebrities, surrounded by young reporters, eager to tell their story.
That was almost 40 years ago. It has gone downhill from there. Today, some reporters not only tell the politicians stories, they adopt their ideology and happily weave it into everything they write.
Now, students, you have completed this phase of your studies. I don't know what you were taught about honestly reporting the news, but at least you have learned to avoid the real sins of writing with those dreaded cliches. You have learned to use punctuation. You have learned to use spell-check.
So, here is my request to you young professors to be. First, get a job at a local newspaper or radio station. Discover first-hand what it takes to sort out the events around you and determine what is really happening, what is true and what is not, what is important and what is not. Write the news. Read the news. Study the news. And study history.
It is true that if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is probably a duck. Learn to look and listen for quacks and waddles, and learn to check them out to see what they really are. Then tell us the truth. Yes, you will have to contend with editors, bosses, who started their career with a clove of garlic hanging over their computer terminal to keep advertising salesmen away. But it you learn the truth and you write the truth, they cannot always defy you.
At the end of the day, when you turn out the lights and go home, satisfy yourself that you have been only a messenger, faithfully carrying the true message, not an ideologue trying to persuade the dumb public.
When you return to academia, teach what you have learned. Teach that integrity trumps all else.
Saturday, August 8, 2009
You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it
Not a new quote, but one never more relevant than today.
“You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom.
What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation.
You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.”
~~ Dr. Adrian Rogers, 1931-2005
Friday, August 7, 2009
A Picture's Worth...
Maybe not a thousand words, but do you not find this image rather creepy?
There's just something about that look on his face. "Presidential" just doesn't fit...there's way too much hatred there.
There's just something about that look on his face. "Presidential" just doesn't fit...there's way too much hatred there.
A Direct Report TO Congress
There are some things you folks in Washington need to know about the "mobs" that are "storming" your town hall meetings. I proudly count myself among their number, and would like to take this opportunity to explain a few things. I hope you're listening.
Listening. So much would be different if you were better at that particular skill. For years we have written to you, respectfully voicing our concerns and opinions. In response, we get form letters, telling us what you, in your infinite wisdom, plan to do - regardless of our desires or opinions. I have gotten form letters from my representative that pertained to an entirely different subject than the one about which I had written. Clerical error? Sure, but also entirely indicative of just how much you care about satisfying those who hired you and pay your salaries. I have written, I have called, and I know dozens of others who have done the same. On cap and trade, I heard that the calls were 200 to 1 against the legislation - you passed it anyway. Do you know how that makes us feel? Do you have any idea what a slam that is?
You see, we, the people, still believe in the Constitution. We believe that this country is supposed to be all about us, not a few hundred disconnected, power hungry, pompous and self-righteous elected officials in Washington who long ago forgot what it's like to be a real American. We, the people, do not approve of your scorn and contempt for our opinions. We, the people, have spoken out every way we can, often and loudly, and you have brushed us aside. We, the people, will not be silenced.
For years you ignored our phone calls and letters, so we began gathering around the country to express our grievances. Our signs told the story clearly, but you, and your shills in the media, chose not to read them. You laughed at us and dismissed us as "tea baggers." All very amusing. We, the people, are not amused. Had you read the signs and given us five minutes of real consideration, you might have understood and stopped it all then. Instead you slapped us with your rhetoric.
Here is one more chance for you to get the message. This is not about taxes, at least not currently assessed taxes. This is about liberty. This is about your belief that you know better than we how to manage our lives. You do not. This is about a federal government that has spent more than two centuries making laws - layers upon layers upon layers of laws - and almost never repealing any law. This is about a federal government that has vastly overstepped its bounds as explicitly stated in the Constitution of this great nation. This is about the few seeking to control, manage and mandate the many.
We are Americans. Do you remember what that means? Do you even have a clue? Let me explain.
An American is free. Free to pursue his chosen course in life, free to succeed beyond his wildest dreams, and, importantly, free to fail.
An American is strong. Strong enough to work hard for what he wants out of life, and to fight and die, if necessary, to retain that right.
An American is proud. Proud of the accomplishments of his nation through the decades, and the millions of people in other lands who are free because of the efforts of this nation. Proud of our personal productivity and ingenuity, proud of our children and determined to leave them a country that affords them the same chances we ourselves were given.
An American is loyal. There is nothing we will not do for those we count among our own, and nothing we will not do to defend against those who would harm our people or our nation.
An American is self-sufficient. We do not wish to be taken care of by our government - we ask only for government to get out of our way and let us do what comes naturally: produce.
We are the most productive people in history. We have done more to improve the lives of people in every other nation than any people in history. Our innovations, our ingenuity, our generosity to those in need, are all unsurpassed in recorded time. We, the people, are the shining city on a hill. Our spirit is what has made this nation the envy of the world, the destination of the most immigrants, the engine that keeps the global economy humming along. All we ask is that we be allowed to keep some of what we produce. That is our incentive, and that is what you would take from us with your grand schemes of a utopian society where everyone is equal and poverty is no more.
Your intervention has done nothing to better our nation. Your entitlement programs are a curse to their recipients - when a person is handed a means of existence without having to expend any effort, he is stripped of any incentive to better himself. Hunger is a wonderful motivator.
We, the people, know how to live on a budget. Of course we want more than we have - that is the beauty of our system. If we want something badly enough, we will work, save and scrimp to obtain it. We can no longer tolerate your unwillingness to conduct yourselves likewise. You are running up ever larger debts, printing money, borrowing from questionable nations like China, mortgaging our futures and our children's futures for generations to come - all to enact legislation that goes against everything we, the people, stand for and believe in. Just think about that for a minute. Imagine someone telling you that they were taking out a loan in your name, a loan so large that there is no possible way you, personally, will ever be able to repay it, and the obligation will fall to your children when they are grown. You cannot refuse this debt, and you have no say in how the money will be spent. If you refuse to pay, you will go to jail. Is that liberty? Is that justice? Is that, in any way, logical, fair or reasonable? We believe it is not.
We have been in that exact situation since the day we were born. Each and every one of us has inherited debts owed by our ancestors, and those debts continue to grow, never to shrink, no matter how much we are taxed. The programs grow ever more numerous, the handouts ever more generous, the disregard for the impact of all of these programs on the productive ever more blatant. We have had enough.
We want only to live our lives unimpeded. We do not enjoy painting signs and taking time away from our jobs and our families to go to protests. We do not relish the thought of shouting down our elected representatives in government at town hall meetings. We are not right-wing extremists, potential terrorists, thugs or swastika carrying mobs. We are the American people, and we want our country back.
Each time you ignore us, we will have no choice but to escalate our attempts to communicate. The letters and phone calls led to tea parties. The tea parties led to noisy confrontations at town hall meetings. Those confrontations, rather than making you listen, are apparently being met by a mustering of troops to confront us and shout us down, by union thugs and ACORN members being called out to suppress our voices. Their presence is already resulting in minor violence at these formerly peaceful gatherings. What is your goal? Do you seek riots in the streets?
Hear me now: NO MORE!
You and your thugs will never silence the American people. We will continue to speak out, with our voices and our votes, until we purge our government of those who violate our Constitution. We seek only to return our country to its former greatness. We do not wish violence, but, rather than silence us, it will only make us more determined to prevail. You are gravely mistaken if you think that this is manufactured anger, or some kind of passing trend. We are not shills for any political party or special interest - that is your world, not ours. We have watched in silence for far too long as you have perverted everything that is great about this country. We will not be silent again. Hear us now or hear us later - but with each passing day the anger at your audacity grows. With each passing day our numbers grow and our conviction solidifies. Ignore us at your peril.
Listening. So much would be different if you were better at that particular skill. For years we have written to you, respectfully voicing our concerns and opinions. In response, we get form letters, telling us what you, in your infinite wisdom, plan to do - regardless of our desires or opinions. I have gotten form letters from my representative that pertained to an entirely different subject than the one about which I had written. Clerical error? Sure, but also entirely indicative of just how much you care about satisfying those who hired you and pay your salaries. I have written, I have called, and I know dozens of others who have done the same. On cap and trade, I heard that the calls were 200 to 1 against the legislation - you passed it anyway. Do you know how that makes us feel? Do you have any idea what a slam that is?
You see, we, the people, still believe in the Constitution. We believe that this country is supposed to be all about us, not a few hundred disconnected, power hungry, pompous and self-righteous elected officials in Washington who long ago forgot what it's like to be a real American. We, the people, do not approve of your scorn and contempt for our opinions. We, the people, have spoken out every way we can, often and loudly, and you have brushed us aside. We, the people, will not be silenced.
For years you ignored our phone calls and letters, so we began gathering around the country to express our grievances. Our signs told the story clearly, but you, and your shills in the media, chose not to read them. You laughed at us and dismissed us as "tea baggers." All very amusing. We, the people, are not amused. Had you read the signs and given us five minutes of real consideration, you might have understood and stopped it all then. Instead you slapped us with your rhetoric.
Here is one more chance for you to get the message. This is not about taxes, at least not currently assessed taxes. This is about liberty. This is about your belief that you know better than we how to manage our lives. You do not. This is about a federal government that has spent more than two centuries making laws - layers upon layers upon layers of laws - and almost never repealing any law. This is about a federal government that has vastly overstepped its bounds as explicitly stated in the Constitution of this great nation. This is about the few seeking to control, manage and mandate the many.
We are Americans. Do you remember what that means? Do you even have a clue? Let me explain.
An American is free. Free to pursue his chosen course in life, free to succeed beyond his wildest dreams, and, importantly, free to fail.
An American is strong. Strong enough to work hard for what he wants out of life, and to fight and die, if necessary, to retain that right.
An American is proud. Proud of the accomplishments of his nation through the decades, and the millions of people in other lands who are free because of the efforts of this nation. Proud of our personal productivity and ingenuity, proud of our children and determined to leave them a country that affords them the same chances we ourselves were given.
An American is loyal. There is nothing we will not do for those we count among our own, and nothing we will not do to defend against those who would harm our people or our nation.
An American is self-sufficient. We do not wish to be taken care of by our government - we ask only for government to get out of our way and let us do what comes naturally: produce.
We are the most productive people in history. We have done more to improve the lives of people in every other nation than any people in history. Our innovations, our ingenuity, our generosity to those in need, are all unsurpassed in recorded time. We, the people, are the shining city on a hill. Our spirit is what has made this nation the envy of the world, the destination of the most immigrants, the engine that keeps the global economy humming along. All we ask is that we be allowed to keep some of what we produce. That is our incentive, and that is what you would take from us with your grand schemes of a utopian society where everyone is equal and poverty is no more.
Your intervention has done nothing to better our nation. Your entitlement programs are a curse to their recipients - when a person is handed a means of existence without having to expend any effort, he is stripped of any incentive to better himself. Hunger is a wonderful motivator.
We, the people, know how to live on a budget. Of course we want more than we have - that is the beauty of our system. If we want something badly enough, we will work, save and scrimp to obtain it. We can no longer tolerate your unwillingness to conduct yourselves likewise. You are running up ever larger debts, printing money, borrowing from questionable nations like China, mortgaging our futures and our children's futures for generations to come - all to enact legislation that goes against everything we, the people, stand for and believe in. Just think about that for a minute. Imagine someone telling you that they were taking out a loan in your name, a loan so large that there is no possible way you, personally, will ever be able to repay it, and the obligation will fall to your children when they are grown. You cannot refuse this debt, and you have no say in how the money will be spent. If you refuse to pay, you will go to jail. Is that liberty? Is that justice? Is that, in any way, logical, fair or reasonable? We believe it is not.
We have been in that exact situation since the day we were born. Each and every one of us has inherited debts owed by our ancestors, and those debts continue to grow, never to shrink, no matter how much we are taxed. The programs grow ever more numerous, the handouts ever more generous, the disregard for the impact of all of these programs on the productive ever more blatant. We have had enough.
We want only to live our lives unimpeded. We do not enjoy painting signs and taking time away from our jobs and our families to go to protests. We do not relish the thought of shouting down our elected representatives in government at town hall meetings. We are not right-wing extremists, potential terrorists, thugs or swastika carrying mobs. We are the American people, and we want our country back.
Each time you ignore us, we will have no choice but to escalate our attempts to communicate. The letters and phone calls led to tea parties. The tea parties led to noisy confrontations at town hall meetings. Those confrontations, rather than making you listen, are apparently being met by a mustering of troops to confront us and shout us down, by union thugs and ACORN members being called out to suppress our voices. Their presence is already resulting in minor violence at these formerly peaceful gatherings. What is your goal? Do you seek riots in the streets?
Hear me now: NO MORE!
You and your thugs will never silence the American people. We will continue to speak out, with our voices and our votes, until we purge our government of those who violate our Constitution. We seek only to return our country to its former greatness. We do not wish violence, but, rather than silence us, it will only make us more determined to prevail. You are gravely mistaken if you think that this is manufactured anger, or some kind of passing trend. We are not shills for any political party or special interest - that is your world, not ours. We have watched in silence for far too long as you have perverted everything that is great about this country. We will not be silent again. Hear us now or hear us later - but with each passing day the anger at your audacity grows. With each passing day our numbers grow and our conviction solidifies. Ignore us at your peril.
Is it the people?
Is it the media?
Is it just me?
Our local paper carried a front page story yesterday, headlined "Fur To Fly At Shelter Meeting". It referenced a meeting scheduled last night re operation of the local animal shelter.
This morning, a front page story was headlined "Hackles Up At Shelter Meeting". The story reported "Frustration on all sides - evident by sometimes heated discussion and even a few tears..." It went on to detail that "The roughly 30-member audience seemed divided..." as to the operation of the animal shelter.
Back on page 2, middle of the page, an AP report headlined "Demos get advice on handling health-care protests". It explained that Democratic Senators were given talking points for use at town hall meetings, promised the party would respond with full force if any individual lawmaker is criticized in TV ads, and ended with a statement by Harry Reid that "These (protests) are nothing more than destructive efforts to interrupt a debate that we should have and are having".
The paper never mentioned that our own two Senators have chickened out and plan no town hall meetings.
Our local newspaper and at least some of our citizens are overwrought with concerns about STRAY DOGS!
They don't give a damn about the fact that people exercising their constitutional right to free speech, in matters of importance to PEOPLE, are being depicted as orchestrated mobs.
What the hell is going on in America? Have I just turned into a 'grumpy old man'? Are our people going brain dead? Are our newspapers, already on the brink of extinction, just shriveling up and dying?
Help!
Is it the media?
Is it just me?
Our local paper carried a front page story yesterday, headlined "Fur To Fly At Shelter Meeting". It referenced a meeting scheduled last night re operation of the local animal shelter.
This morning, a front page story was headlined "Hackles Up At Shelter Meeting". The story reported "Frustration on all sides - evident by sometimes heated discussion and even a few tears..." It went on to detail that "The roughly 30-member audience seemed divided..." as to the operation of the animal shelter.
Back on page 2, middle of the page, an AP report headlined "Demos get advice on handling health-care protests". It explained that Democratic Senators were given talking points for use at town hall meetings, promised the party would respond with full force if any individual lawmaker is criticized in TV ads, and ended with a statement by Harry Reid that "These (protests) are nothing more than destructive efforts to interrupt a debate that we should have and are having".
The paper never mentioned that our own two Senators have chickened out and plan no town hall meetings.
Our local newspaper and at least some of our citizens are overwrought with concerns about STRAY DOGS!
They don't give a damn about the fact that people exercising their constitutional right to free speech, in matters of importance to PEOPLE, are being depicted as orchestrated mobs.
What the hell is going on in America? Have I just turned into a 'grumpy old man'? Are our people going brain dead? Are our newspapers, already on the brink of extinction, just shriveling up and dying?
Help!
Thursday, August 6, 2009
Report from Congress? (Nope)
In July, I wrote about a "meeting" with (my) Congressman - Harry Teague. A non-meeting, actually. Since then I have written him, and the two New Mexico Senators, Bingaman and Tom Udall about legislative issues. The response has been form letters filled with spin about the great things the government is doing for our country.
So, we started calling the local offices of these distinguished gentlemen to see when they would next be in our city and give us a chance to debate these issues. Or, at least ask questions about them.
No luck. No meetings scheduled at this time.
We'll keep trying. Stand by for updates.
In July, I wrote about a "meeting" with (my) Congressman - Harry Teague. A non-meeting, actually. Since then I have written him, and the two New Mexico Senators, Bingaman and Tom Udall about legislative issues. The response has been form letters filled with spin about the great things the government is doing for our country.
So, we started calling the local offices of these distinguished gentlemen to see when they would next be in our city and give us a chance to debate these issues. Or, at least ask questions about them.
No luck. No meetings scheduled at this time.
We'll keep trying. Stand by for updates.
Sunday, August 2, 2009
Federalist No. 85
Concluding Remarks - Alexander Hamilton
To the People of the State of New York:
ACCORDING to the formal division of the subject of these papers, announced in my first number, there would appear still to remain for discussion two points: "the analogy of the proposed government to your own State constitution," and "the additional security which its adoption will afford to republican government, to liberty, and to property." But these heads have been so fully anticipated and exhausted in the progress of the work, that it would now scarcely be possible to do any thing more than repeat, in a more dilated form, what has been heretofore said, which the advanced stage of the question, and the time already spent upon it, conspire to forbid.
It is remarkable, that the resemblance of the plan of the convention to the act which organizes the government of this State holds, not less with regard to many of the supposed defects, than to the real excellences of the former. Among the pretended defects are the re-eligibility of the Executive, the want of a council, the omission of a formal bill of rights, the omission of a provision respecting the liberty of the press. These and several others which have been noted in the course of our inquiries are as much chargeable on the existing constitution of this State, as on the one proposed for the Union; and a man must have slender pretensions to consistency, who can rail at the latter for imperfections which he finds no difficulty in excusing in the former. Nor indeed can there be a better proof of the insincerity and affectation of some of the zealous adversaries of the plan of the convention among us, who profess to be the devoted admirers of the government under which they live, than the fury with which they have attacked that plan, for matters in regard to which our own constitution is equally or perhaps more vulnerable.
The additional securities to republican government, to liberty and to property, to be derived from the adoption of the plan under consideration, consist chiefly in the restraints which the preservation of the Union will impose on local factions and insurrections, and on the ambition of powerful individuals in single States, who may acquire credit and influence enough, from leaders and favorites, to become the despots of the people; in the diminution of the opportunities to foreign intrigue, which the dissolution of the Confederacy would invite and facilitate; in the prevention of extensive military establishments, which could not fail to grow out of wars between the States in a disunited situation; in the express guaranty of a republican form of government to each; in the absolute and universal exclusion of titles of nobility; and in the precautions against the repetition of those practices on the part of the State governments which have undermined the foundations of property and credit, have planted mutual distrust in the breasts of all classes of citizens, and have occasioned an almost universal prostration of morals.
Thus have I, fellow-citizens, executed the task I had assigned to myself; with what success, your conduct must determine. I trust at least you will admit that I have not failed in the assurance I gave you respecting the spirit with which my endeavors should be conducted. I have addressed myself purely to your judgments, and have studiously avoided those asperities which are too apt to disgrace political disputants of all parties, and which have been not a little provoked by the language and conduct of the opponents of the Constitution. The charge of a conspiracy against the liberties of the people, which has been indiscriminately brought against the advocates of the plan, has something in it too wanton and too malignant, not to excite the indignation of every man who feels in his own bosom a refutation of the calumny. The perpetual changes which have been rung upon the wealthy, the well-born, and the great, have been such as to inspire the disgust of all sensible men. And the unwarrantable concealments and misrepresentations which have been in various ways practiced to keep the truth from the public eye, have been of a nature to demand the reprobation of all honest men. It is not impossible that these circumstances may have occasionally betrayed me into intemperances of expression which I did not intend; it is certain that I have frequently felt a struggle between sensibility and moderation; and if the former has in some instances prevailed, it must be my excuse that it has been neither often nor much.
Let us now pause and ask ourselves whether, in the course of these papers, the proposed Constitution has not been satisfactorily vindicated from the aspersions thrown upon it; and whether it has not been shown to be worthy of the public approbation, and necessary to the public safety and prosperity. Every man is bound to answer these questions to himself, according to the best of his conscience and understanding, and to act agreeably to the genuine and sober dictates of his judgment. This is a duty from which nothing can give him a dispensation. 'T is one that he is called upon, nay, constrained by all the obligations that form the bands of society, to discharge sincerely and honestly. No partial motive, no particular interest, no pride of opinion, no temporary passion or prejudice, will justify to himself, to his country, or to his posterity, an improper election of the part he is to act. Let him beware of an obstinate adherence to party; let him reflect that the object upon which he is to decide is not a particular interest of the community, but the very existence of the nation; and let him remember that a majority of America has already given its sanction to the plan which he is to approve or reject.
I shall not dissemble that I feel an entire confidence in the arguments which recommend the proposed system to your adoption, and that I am unable to discern any real force in those by which it has been opposed. I am persuaded that it is the best which our political situation, habits, and opinions will admit, and superior to any the revolution has produced.
Concessions on the part of the friends of the plan, that it has not a claim to absolute perfection, have afforded matter of no small triumph to its enemies. "Why," say they, "should we adopt an imperfect thing? Why not amend it and make it perfect before it is irrevocably established?" This may be plausible enough, but it is only plausible. In the first place I remark, that the extent of these concessions has been greatly exaggerated. They have been stated as amounting to an admission that the plan is radically defective, and that without material alterations the rights and the interests of the community cannot be safely confided to it. This, as far as I have understood the meaning of those who make the concessions, is an entire perversion of their sense. No advocate of the measure can be found, who will not declare as his sentiment, that the system, though it may not be perfect in every part, is, upon the whole, a good one; is the best that the present views and circumstances of the country will permit; and is such an one as promises every species of security which a reasonable people can desire.
I answer in the next place, that I should esteem it the extreme of imprudence to prolong the precarious state of our national affairs, and to expose the Union to the jeopardy of successive experiments, in the chimerical pursuit of a perfect plan. I never expect to see a perfect work from imperfect man. The result of the deliberations of all collective bodies must necessarily be a compound, as well of the errors and prejudices, as of the good sense and wisdom, of the individuals of whom they are composed. The compacts which are to embrace thirteen distinct States in a common bond of amity and union, must as necessarily be a compromise of as many dissimilar interests and inclinations. How can perfection spring from such materials?
The reasons assigned in an excellent little pamphlet lately published in this city,1 are unanswerable to show the utter improbability of assembling a new convention, under circumstances in any degree so favorable to a happy issue, as those in which the late convention met, deliberated, and concluded. I will not repeat the arguments there used, as I presume the production itself has had an extensive circulation. It is certainly well worthy the perusal of every friend to his country. There is, however, one point of light in which the subject of amendments still remains to be considered, and in which it has not yet been exhibited to public view. I cannot resolve to conclude without first taking a survey of it in this aspect.
It appears to me susceptible of absolute demonstration, that it will be far more easy to obtain subsequent than previous amendments to the Constitution. The moment an alteration is made in the present plan, it becomes, to the purpose of adoption, a new one, and must undergo a new decision of each State. To its complete establishment throughout the Union, it will therefore require the concurrence of thirteen States. If, on the contrary, the Constitution proposed should once be ratified by all the States as it stands, alterations in it may at any time be effected by nine States. Here, then, the chances are as thirteen to nine2 in favor of subsequent amendment, rather than of the original adoption of an entire system.
This is not all. Every Constitution for the United States must inevitably consist of a great variety of particulars, in which thirteen independent States are to be accommodated in their interests or opinions of interest. We may of course expect to see, in any body of men charged with its original formation, very different combinations of the parts upon different points. Many of those who form a majority on one question, may become the minority on a second, and an association dissimilar to either may constitute the majority on a third. Hence the necessity of moulding and arranging all the particulars which are to compose the whole, in such a manner as to satisfy all the parties to the compact; and hence, also, an immense multiplication of difficulties and casualties in obtaining the collective assent to a final act. The degree of that multiplication must evidently be in a ratio to the number of particulars and the number of parties.
But every amendment to the Constitution, if once established, would be a single proposition, and might be brought forward singly. There would then be no necessity for management or compromise, in relation to any other point no giving nor taking. The will of the requisite number would at once bring the matter to a decisive issue. And consequently, whenever nine, or rather ten States, were united in the desire of a particular amendment, that amendment must infallibly take place. There can, therefore, be no comparison between the facility of affecting an amendment, and that of establishing in the first instance a complete Constitution.
In opposition to the probability of subsequent amendments, it has been urged that the persons delegated to the administration of the national government will always be disinclined to yield up any portion of the authority of which they were once possessed. For my own part I acknowledge a thorough conviction that any amendments which may, upon mature consideration, be thought useful, will be applicable to the organization of the government, not to the mass of its powers; and on this account alone, I think there is no weight in the observation just stated. I also think there is little weight in it on another account. The intrinsic difficulty of governing thirteen States at any rate, independent of calculations upon an ordinary degree of public spirit and integrity, will, in my opinion constantly impose on the national rulers the necessity of a spirit of accommodation to the reasonable expectations of their constituents. But there is yet a further consideration, which proves beyond the possibility of a doubt, that the observation is futile. It is this that the national rulers, whenever nine States concur, will have no option upon the subject. By the fifth article of the plan, the Congres will be obliged "on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the States Uwhich at present amount to ninee, to call a convention for proposing amendments, which shall be valid, to all intents and purposes, as part of the Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the States, or by conventions in three fourths thereof." The words of this article are peremptory. The Congress "shall call a convention." Nothing in this particular is left to the discretion of that body. And of consequence, all the declamation about the disinclination to a change vanishes in air. Nor however difficult it may be supposed to unite two thirds or three fourths of the State legislatures, in amendments which may affect local interests, can there be any room to apprehend any such difficulty in a union on points which are merely relative to the general liberty or security of the people. We may safely rely on the disposition of the State legislatures to erect barriers against the encroachments of the national authority. If the foregoing argument is a fallacy, certain it is that I am myself deceived by it, for it is, in my conception, one of those rare instances in which a political truth can be brought to the test of a mathematical demonstration. Those who see the matter in the same light with me, however zealous they may be for amendments, must agree in the propriety of a previous adoption, as the most direct road to their own object.
The zeal for attempts to amend, prior to the establishment of the Constitution, must abate in every man who is ready to accede to the truth of the following observations of a writer equally solid and ingenious: "To balance a large state or society Usays hee, whether monarchical or republican, on general laws, is a work of so great difficulty, that no human genius, however comprehensive, is able, by the mere dint of reason and reflection, to effect it. The judgments of many must unite in the work; experience must guide their labor; time must bring it to perfection, and the feeling of inconveniences must correct the mistakes which they INEVITABLY fall into in their first trials and experiments."3 These judicious reflections contain a lesson of moderation to all the sincere lovers of the Union, and ought to put them upon their guard against hazarding anarchy, civil war, a perpetual alienation of the States from each other, and perhaps the military despotism of a victorious demagogue, in the pursuit of what they are not likely to obtain, but from time and experience. It may be in me a defect of political fortitude, but I acknowledge that I cannot entertain an equal tranquillity with those who affect to treat the dangers of a longer continuance in our present situation as imaginary. A nation, without a national government, is, in my view, an awful spectacle. The establishment of a Constitution, in time of profound peace, by the voluntary ocnsent of a whole people, is a prodigy, to the completion of which I look forward with trembling anxiety. I can reconcile it to no rules of prudence to let go the hold we now have, in so arduous an enterprise, upon seven out of the thirteen States, and after having passed over so considerable a part of the ground, to recommence the course. I dread the more the consequences of new attempts, because I know that powerful individuals, in this and in other States, are enemies to a general national government in every possible shape.
PUBLIUS.
1. Entitled "An Address to the People of the State of New York."
2. It may rather be said TEN, for though two thirds may set on foot the measure, three fourths must ratify.
3. Hume's "Essays," vol. i., page 128: "The Rise of Arts and Sciences."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
