Thanks to our friends at Red Planet
Friday, November 27, 2009
I found this piece on Big Hollywood a while back and wanted to share it but wasn't able to find the time. So now that I have a few days off I dug it up from their archives. This article from John Nolte does the best job I've ever seen of explaining the Hollywood Left's love affair with tyrannical dictators.
Someone asked a great question the other day: Why is leftist Hollywood so enamored with dictators and socialism? You would think they would fear having their artistic expression stifled under a Castro or having all their wealth confiscated under Hugo’s socialist or communist regime. It seems counter-intuitive, no…? That’s a damn good question but erroneously based on the premise that we’re discussing normal people.
When you and I picture life under Obama’s vision for America, we see a dreary existence spent in breadlines, drab apartments and small jail cells with rat cages strapped to our face conditioning us to say “Herstory” instead of “History.” These Castro-lovers and Polanski-defenders see something completely different.
Watch “The Lives of Others.” Not only is it one of the best films of the decade, it also answers the opening question. You’ll see how life under fascism is the complete fulfillment of every narcissistic desire Susan Sarandon, Barbra Streisand, Oliver Stone, Sean Penn and the rest of their sorry lot has ever had.
Leftist Hollywood is not driven by wealth or artistic freedom, they’re driven by status and the insatiable need to be unconditionally adored. Unfortunately for them, as actors in America, status and adoration is tied to awards and the size of the paycheck – in other words competition and a free market – which they hate. But that’s the least of their worries. All this messy American capitalism forces our favorite artistes into the undignified position of having to beg for money in order to have the millions necessary to watch themselves be all artistic on the big screen, and all this messy American free expression allows people like you and me to criticize and ridicule their hard self-serving work.
Not so under a dictatorship.
The way they see it, with the right dictator, the State would hand them money for film projects and jail anyone who criticized them in print or elsewhere. Hugo Chavez shutting television stations down doesn’t horrify Leftist Hollywood, it makes them giddy.
Certainly the days of the $20 million pay check and multiple homes would be over, but that would come as a relief because status wouldn’t be tied to uncontrollable market forces. There would be no more stressing all weekend hoping those idiot hicks in Middle America make it a box office hit. As long as the State was happy with the product, the State would hand out status like welfare checks in the form of dinner parties, awards, nice apartments and “important” projects.
But what about artistic freedom, you might ask…
These Leftists enjoy complete artistic freedom now and what do they do with it? They flack for the state, undermine liberty and trash religion. All any fascist dictator would have to say is, “Carry on.”EXACTLY! Hollywood has complete artistic freedom now and they use it to make movies like Rendition, In The Valley Of Elah and Syrania. What would Saddam Hussein have made them do differently?
For all my loyal readers who are not out shopping on Black Friday, or for those of you who just got home, exhausted and bruised, from the malls and Wal Mart here is a tune to cheer the day. This is the Swiss Celtic Folk Metal group Eluveitie playing a something a little more traditional. This features a pair of electric bagpipes.
Thursday, November 26, 2009
There is a portion of Alicia Colon's interview with Michael Moriarty posted on Big Hollywood. Here is how Ms. Colon sets it up:
Recently I was sent an email complaining about the season premier of the TV Show, “Law & Order.” My correspondent asked what I thought about the plot in which the local Manhattan district attorney Jack McCoy prosecuted a former Justice Department lawyer for “depraved indifference murder” following the lawyer’s memo on the techniques which could be used on terrorists. An astonished “Executive Assistant DA Michael Cutter says, “Jack, you want to prosecute a member of the Bush administration for assaulting suspected terrorists?” To which, a cocksure “McCoy” declares: “The word is torturing. And, yes, it’s about time somebody did.”
The increasingly leftwing comments injected into the plots of this once fine show had turned me off many seasons ago and I answered my reader, “I haven’t watched that show much since they replaced Michael Moriarty as the lead in 1994.Mr. Moriarty has always been one of my favorite actors and given that he is an Irish American, I thought he’d be the perfect lead off to a series of interviews with notable Americans of Irish ancestry. I was thrilled to be able to connect with Mr. Moriarty, who now lives in Canada, and he graciously agreed to this Q&A interview.
I've been a fan of Moriatry's ever since he portrayed the character of SS officer Erik Dorff in the TV miniseries Holocaust back in 1978. I originally watched Law & Order mostly because he was on it. However I stopped watching L&O after a couple of seasons because the show seemed to follow the following formula: Someone does something odious, but not actually illegal. DA Stone is offended by this and decides to charge them with a crime and talk the jury into convicting them even though they didn't actually commit a crime.
That tendency to portray as noble and heroic district attorneys locking people up for things that weren't actually crimes left a very bad taste in my mouth but the thing that finally turned me off of L&O forever was the episode where a woman used an illegally possessed handgun to defend herself against a man who she claimed had attempted to rape her.
Stone did not believe that she had been in any real danger and prosecuted her for murder. While the trial was ongoing the police turned up conclusive evidence that the man the woman had shot was a serial rapist.
Stone immediately called a meeting in the judges office with the judge and the woman's lawyer where he laid out the facts and said that he could not go ahead with prosecuting a woman who obviously was defending herself. The woman's lawyer said that she was moving for dismissal of the charges against her client but Stone objected on the grounds that if it became known that the woman had used a handgun to defend herself that would encourage others to do so as well. He proposed that the murder charge be dropped and the woman plead guilty to illegal possession of a firearm and receive a one year sentence which could be suspended on time served. The woman's lawyer agreed to this (committing an ethics violation which could and should have seen her disbarred).
That was what put me off the show forever.
However when I heard that Moriarty was leaving L&O out of disgust at NBC's caving to government demands that the network censor itself I tuned in to watch his final episode. After all it isn't all that often you get to see someone in Hollywood being truly brave.
But enough of my reminiscence. Let's take a look at what Michael Moriarty had to say to Ms. Colon.
Alicia Colon (AC): If you were still with L&O would you have objected to the season opener trashing the Bush administration over torture? What is your opinion on Gitmo?
Michael Moriarty (MM): From your description of the L & O program which I DIDN’T see, it sounds typically classic NBC. A Variety magazine article years ago described NBC as the most obedient network to governmental demands. It is now embarrassingly sycophantic. I’m not a fan of either of the Bush Presidents … but this judicial assault upon Guantanamo in a time of war that is still going on is approaching treason. Leave the suspects in Gitmo until the Islamic extremists cease and desist. Welcoming them into our country is suicidal … but then so is the entire Progressive Program for a New World Order. …
AC: Do you think that your pro-life position on abortion makes it more difficult to find work in Hollywood?
MM: Obviously yes … so I’m completely retired.
AC: What made you want to run for president last year? What made you drop out?
MM: The same passionately common sense that drives Glenn Beck is what drove me to run for President. To inject a little OBVIOUS common sense into a profoundly corrupted, two-party system. If you knew how hard that is you would admire Beck’s strength even more than you might now. The title of his new book, ARGUING WITH IDIOTS, is immensely exhausting, particularly for an old man like me. I dropped out of the 2008 election in order to recommend another candidate, Mr. Fred Thompson, also an alumnus of Law and Order. Sarah Palin was then barely a political reality. However, when she hooked up with McCain I supported the Republican ticket entirely because of her.
AC: What is your assessment of the Obama administration?
MM: Beyond a disaster!! In light of what Obama swore to at the inauguration – “to uphold the Constitution of the United States” – it’s a grotesque charade, a lie, a black comedy of immensely ominous implications for individual freedom in the world. Obviously Obama will be obliged to claim that at the inauguration the Chief Justice was putting words in his mouth! He never had any real obligation to uphold the silly principles contained in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights! All the President’s so-called plans and achievements are as forbidding as Chamberlain’s concessions at Munich. But, as we “Drunks” say, “Let go, let God!”
AC: What do you think of Glenn Beck? Have you seen RedEye? What do you think of the grassroots tea parties?
MM: Glenn Beck? A Godsend to America!! The Tea Parties? Long overdue! Red Eye? Very New York! Very Manhattan “Chic”! Very welcome because of its point of view: looking down on those East Coast Progressives who look down on us!!
Damn, there's nothing in there that I couldn't have said.
Makes me wonder why he went along with that whole gun control thing.
Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor; and Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me to "recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness:"
Now, therefore, I do recommend and assign Thursday, the 26th day of November next, to be devoted by the people of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the signal and manifold mercies and the favorable interpositions of His providence in the course and conclusion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty which we have since enjoyed; for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enable to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national one now lately instituted for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and, in general, for all the great and various favors which He has been pleased to confer upon us.And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech Him to pardon our national and other transgressions; to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our National Government a blessing to all the people by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all sovereigns and nations (especially such as have shown kindness to us), and to bless them with good governments, peace, and concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increase of science among them and us; and, generally to grant unto all mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as He alone knows to be best.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Robin of Berkley has an excellent piece up on American Thinker today which shins the spotlight on one of the nastier aspects of the continuing plague of Palin Derangement Syndrome which is gripping the Left, especially its propaganda organs - otherwise known as the mainstream media. Robin's point here reminded me of Clarance Thomas' characterization of the attempt to sabotage his Supreme Court appointment with baseless charges of sexual misconduct as a "high-tech lynching".
The Wilding of Sarah Palin
By Robin of Berkeley
In these dark times, with spiritually bankrupt people at the helm, thank God we have bright lights like Sarah Palin to illuminate the darkness.Hatred paralyzes life; love releases it. Hatred confuses life; love harmonizes it. Hatred darkens life; love illuminates it.
Conservatives have long remarked on the hypocrisy of the left which supposedly champions women's rights yet can't think of any way to express disagreement with Michelle Malkin's political views other than to call her an "Asian whore".
I think that Robin is spot on in her analysis. As hysterical as the left could get in it's attacks on George W Bush there never was a sexual component in them. Yet with Gov. Palin they have enormous trouble coming off the sexual component of their attacks. And left-wing women seem just as eager to participate in this high-tech rape as left-wing men.
I looked at the comments to this on AT since I was curious to see how leftists would respond (and there are always leftists lurking on AT and other conservative sites) yet no one had the guts to weigh in on this issue.
It seems that Robin shined the light on a truth so ugly that even the most delusionaly committed leftist wackjob can't bring him/herself to engage with it directly.
However I did see this comment by someone identified as Mabelee:
You are right in saying that "rape" is aimed at men, too, to terrorize them by making them watch. Look at the number of prominent conservative men who have announced that Palin is not a serious contender for the presidency simply because of the bashing she's taken from the left. They see her as "spoiled goods". Wow! This is all making sense now. Sarah isn't letting the left define who she is and I won't let them define who she is either.This is an excellent observation. The Republican establishment hates Sarah Palin because she is not one of them. Their ideal Republican is someone like John McCain or Bob Dole. They hate Gov. Palin for the same reason they hated (and in their hearts continue to hate) Ronald Reagan.
But there are many more Republicans who distance themselves from Mrs. Palin because they figure that she has been so damaged by the attacks that she cannot recover politically or because they don't want to get a dose of what the left is dishing out against Sarah by publicly identifying with her.
To that first group I point out that Sarah Palin's poll numbers are moving up not just among Republicans but among Independents and even Democrats. As the people have more opportunities to get to know her they are finding out how wrong the media caricatures were. Eventually you are going to be in the embarrassing position of having to run along behind the Palin bandwagon shouting "me too, me too!".
To that second group of Republican "men" who are simply too gutless to come out in support of someone who is currently being slimed by the left and it's attack-dog media I have only this to say. You are utterly and absolutely beneath contempt. You are nothing but a worthless pack of geldings who should be stripped naked and whipped through the streets of your home towns then be clothed in burkas and sent to Somalia where you can live out your worthless lives as junior "wives" of Islamic warlords or pirates.
To the left I have this to say. What you say about Sarah Palin or anything else does not bother me in the least. It has been more than a decade since I have recognized any common humanity with you. Your words have no more power than the barking of a flea-bitten mange covered stray mongrel dog rooting around in the city dump. At best you can occasionally rise to the level of a pack of monkeys screaming and throwing feces at something that frightens them.
But under no circumstances do I consider any thought or opinion you might now or ever have to be of the slightest interest or import. Nothing you might ever have to say about anything can be of the slightest consequence to any civilized participant in the human race. The only reason that you can not be hunted down and exterminated like the malignant vermin you are is the unhappy fact that you possess DNA which identifies you as biologically "human" and so entitles you to ghe same protections under law which real people enjoy.
Conservatives, and other actual human beings, should take the left's hysterics about Palin as a sign that she is the best person to undo their evil, since if she really were nothing but a stupid c--t they would largely ignore her - after all when was the last time you heard a leftist rant against Peggy Noonan?
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Once upon a time there was a fox preparing to swim across a river when he was approached by a scorpion who said that he also needed to cross the river and asked if he might ride on the fox's back.
The fox refused, saying that if the scorpion stung him while he was in the water that he would become paralyzed and drown. The scorpion replied that he would do no such thing because if the fox drowned then he would drown along with him.
The fox considered this and agreed to allow the scorpion to ride on his back across the river.
Halfway across the river, where the water was at its deepest, the scorpion stung the fox.
The fox asked the scorpion why he had done this, since now they would both die.
The scorpion answered, "Because I'm a scorpion".
The lesson of the parable is that a thing will always act in accordance with its true nature. A snake is a snake, a spider is a spider, a scorpion is a scorpion and a Democrat is a Democrat.
That principle was placed on full view last night when the United States Senate passed a socialized medicine plan on a party line vote in which the supposed "conservative Democrat" holdouts like Mary Landrieu sold their votes (and sold out their nation) and actually bragged about how much swag they were able to take home.
Another "holdout" who wound up supporting the bill was "Independent" Senator Joe Lieberman who one time in his political career actually did show true independence and political courage by supporting the Bush administration in its war on terror and then endorsing John McCain for the same reason.
However when it came to a threat which will certainly do more long-term damage to the nation from within than al Qaeda could ever do from without Lieberman reverted to his true Democrat nature and cast a vote which sets the nation on the path to a full blown Marxist takeover of the health care industry with all the disastrous consequences that will follow.
Let me pause here to say I FRAKING TOLD YOU SO!
Back in 2006 when everyone was all pissed off at Bush and the Republicans in congress because they were spending money like Ted Kennedy at happy hour I told you that while the GOP absolutely did not deserve to win back control of the legislature that the nation absolutely did not deserve what would happen to it if they did not.
NOW do you believe me?
I understand that once upon a time the political landscape in this nation was different.
I know that there was once a time when the Democrat party's leadership and its most important core constituent groups did not reflexively hate America. I know that the first thing that Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn did after being exiled from the Soviet Union was address a joint session of congress (controlled by Democrats) and the next thing he did was address the annual meeting of the AFL-CIO (the nations largest labor union at the time).
I know that there were once Democrats like Henry "Scoop" Jackson who were strong supporters of liberal causes like civil rights but were also true patriots and strong supporters of things like defeating our enemies, supporting our allies and promoting our values overseas.
But the Democrat party of men like Henry Jackson, Harry Truman and Jack Kennedy is dead.
It died in the chaos and nihilism of the late Sixties and early Seventies when men who were the leaders of a radical Marxist "New Left" (men who are Barack Obama's heroes and role models) infiltrated the Democrat party, changed the way it nominates candidates and transformed it into the kind of party which chooses people like Nancy Pelosi, Howard Dean and Barack Obama to lead it.
Today the Democrat party is the party of Big Government worship and nothing else.
The modern Democrat party is nothing more than a secular version of radical Islam.
Just as the very word Islam means submission (to the will of Allah) the modern Democrat party is based on the concept of submission to an all-powerful central State.
In Islam Allah is called "merciful" and "benevolent" and held to be the source of every good thing while ordering his followers to spread the faith through jihad and offer "infidels" the choice of death, slavery or conversion.
The Democrat party believes that the government is, or should be, the source of every good thing - like health care, retirement income, housing and, give them time, food and clothing. All the while demonizing anyone who dissents. And we are seeing more and more that the Democrats are not content to simply demonize those who disagree but wish to criminalize them as well. We see this in everything from the Obama Justice Department's willingness to investigate CIA interrogators for using "torture" to the jail terms in the House health care legislation for those who refuse to participate in PelosiCare.
Islam requires that society be reordered so that the distinction between the religious and secular are abolished and the religious demands of the Koran (sharia law) are legally enforced by the State.
The Democrat party demands that the government impose it's faith based doctrines like Global Warming upon the nation by force.
Islam demands that government power be used to silence anyone who criticizes Islam or who would promote another religion.
The Democrat party is exploring ways (like bringing back the "Fairness Doctrine" or local ownership rules) to silence conservative talk radio. The Obama administration has been running a campaign to isolate and delegitimize Fox News.
I could go on with the comparison, but you get the point.
The United States of America is fighting two wars. Both are against radical religious extremists who wish to impose a tyrannical theocracy upon this nation.
One enemy is external (except for home-grown jihadists like Maj. Hasan) and one is internal.
At the end of the day it is the internal threat which is the deadliest.
Friday, November 20, 2009
From the Politico:
President Obama's job approval numbers will dip below 50% for the first time today in Gallup's daily tracking poll, according to a Gallup official.
"Gallup Daily tracking results just in. Obama will be below 50% for the first time when we update our numbers at 1:00 p.m.," wrote Gallup.com managing news editor Lymari Morales on Twitter.
His approval numbers have bounced down to the 50% mark several times, driven by weaker support from independents and Republicans, but hadn't crossed it.
The slide is worrying for the White House, but it's probably not yet panic time. Ronald Reagan's approval numbers dropped well below 40% during the depths of his first term recession. If Obama's bad stretch puts him in the high forties or low fifties, that's not a crippling political problem. If he languishes there or drops further, it may become one.The critical difference between Reagan and Obama is that Reagan's policies were rooted in conservative free-market principles which could not help but end the recession and usher in an era of unrivaled peacetime economic expansion.
Obama, on the other hand, is pursuing policies rooted in Marxism and cannot help but create an anemic, jobless recovery which will slide back into recession - probably before next Fall.
This 180 degree difference between the orientation of Reagan and Obama will guarantee a 180 degree difference in outcomes.
Reagan is, and will continue to be, venerated as the greatest president of the 20th century.
Obama, name will become an obscenity - literally. In future decades if someone on broadcast television is tasteless enough to utter the word "Obama" it will be bleeped out and the actor's mouth will be digitally blurred so that no one will be able to read his lips and write angry letters to the network.
Here is a video to celebrate Obama's political future.
Monday, November 16, 2009
I went to Amazon.com this morning to check on my pre-ordered copy of Sarah Palin's autobiography and while there I looked at some of the other Palin books.
All of the books that came up on the first page were, or seemed to be, positive except one. So I clicked on that one to see what they might have to say that was critical of Gov. Palin.
This is from the publisher's description of 101 Things You - and John McCain Didn't Know About Sarah Palin.
These are the four things the publisher considered most outrageous to hang out there and hook people into buying the book to see just what a wackjob Mrs. Palin is!
Hunter. Hockey mom. Live action figure.
Sarah Palin is living proof that politics does indeed make strange bedfellows. In 101 Things You--and John McCain--Didn't Know about Sarah Palin, readers learn the (alleged) truth about the (reputed) Republican darling from Alaska who's taken the nation by (ice) storm. In this hilarious, irreverent look at the world's most infamous Miss Congeniality, comedian and WTF? (ISBN 1605500313) author Gregory Bergman reveals more than one hundred bizarre, obscure facts about the bizarre, obscure governor from Wasilla, including:
#10 Sarah Palin supports funding for abstinence-only programs in schools. Just call her Grandma.
#22 "First Dude" Todd Palin, aka Sarah's husband, works for British Petroleum. Maybe he can bring gas prices down for good.
#55 Sarah Palin's future son-in-law Levi Johnston is a self-proclaimed "f-king redneck." "First Grandbaby" Billy Bob Johnston?
#100 In 2007, Sarah Palin offered $150 to every hunter who hacked off the left foreleg of a wolf shot from a plane. Talk about wolves being thrown, uh, to the wolves.
The author, Gregory Bergman has obviously never been outside the city limits of Manhattan, Washington DC or Los Angeles - unless you count the time he has spent in the air flying from one to the other.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
That means that YOU are listening!
MUSLIM SUFFERS BRUISED EGO IN FORT HOOD TRAGEDY
by Ann Coulter
November 11, 2009
The massacre at Fort Hood last week is the perfect apotheosis of the liberal victimology described in my book "Guilty: Liberal 'Victims' and Their Assault on America."
According to witnesses, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan entered a medical facility at Fort Hood, prayed briefly, then shouted "Allahu akbar" before he began gunning down American troops. Now I don't know which to be more afraid of: Muslims or government-run health care systems.
President Obama honored the victims by immediately warning Americans not to "jump to conclusions" -- namely, the obvious conclusion that the attack was an act of Islamic terrorism. As conclusions go, it wasn't much of a jump.
But the mainstream media waited for no information -- indeed actively avoided learning any information -- before leaping to the far less obvious conclusion that the suspect's mass murder was set off by "stress."
The day after the slaughter, The New York Times ran one editorial and two of three op-eds asserting as much -- which was at least one more than the Times usually runs about psycho-killer soldiers going on rampages.
Two days after the mass shooting, the Times' laughably predictable headlines about the Fort Hood bloodbath were:
-- "Preliminary Inquiry Finds No Link to Terror Plot"
-- "Painful Stories Take a Toll on Military Therapists"
-- "When Soldiers' Minds Snap"
The Los Angeles Times jumped to the exact same conclusion, running an article on the massacre titled: "Fort Hood Tragedy Rocks Military as It Grapples With Mental Health Issues." Time magazine followed suit, posting an article titled: "Stresses at Fort Hood Were Likely Intense for Hasan."
Inasmuch as Maj. Hasan had never been deployed overseas, much less seen combat, liberals seem to have discovered the first recorded case of "pre-traumatic stress syndrome."
Their point was: The real victim of Fort Hood was Maj. Hasan. Indeed, all Muslims were the victims that day.
The media quickly set to work assembling lachrymose accounts of taunts Hasan had been subjected to in the military for being a Muslim, the most harrowing of which seems to have been his car being keyed at his off-base apartment complex.
I suppose we should be relieved that liberals weren't claiming Hasan snapped because of the dimming prospects for a health care bill by the end of the year.
The evidence for the manifestly obvious conclusion we were supposed to avoid jumping to is rather more extensive.
According to numerous eyewitness accounts, Hasan denounced the "war on terror" as a war against Islam, said Muslims should attack Americans in retaliation for the war in Iraq, defended suicide bombers and said he was "happy" when a Muslim murdered a soldier at a military recruiting center in Arkansas earlier this year.
Stranger still, he wasn't auditioning for his own show on MSNBC when he made these statements.
Hasan shared a "spiritual adviser" with two of the Sept. 11 hijackers, Imam Anwar al-Awlaki, whose unseemly enthusiasm for jihad got him banned from speaking in Britain, even by video link.
A few years ago, Hasan delivered an hour-long PowerPoint lecture to an audience of doctors at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, arguing that non-Muslims should be beheaded and have burning oil poured down their throats.
He had tried to contact al-Qaida, and at least one U.S. intelligence official says the Army knew it.
Despite being well aware of Hasan's disturbing views and conduct, the Army did nothing.
Far less offensive speech has been grounds for discipline or even removal from duties in the military. In the aftermath of the Tailhook scandal, for example, two Navy officers were reprimanded and reassigned after putting up a sign with the words of a nursery rhyme altered to include a vulgar sexual reference to liberal congresswoman Patricia Schroeder.
But a Muslim Army doctor can go around a military installation somberly advocating the beheading of infidels, and the girls running the military treat him like he's Nicole Kidman and they're press junket reporters.
The Army's top brass, Gen. George Casey, responded to the military's shocking decision to keep a terrorist-sympathizing Muslim in the Army by announcing: "Our diversity ... is a strength." And I thought gays couldn't openly serve in the military.
On Sept. 11, 2001, Muslims moved to the top of liberals' victim pantheon on the basis of having slaughtered 3,000 Americans. Muslims were "victims" of Americans' displeasure with them for the biggest terrorist attack in world history. The only American deserving of more coddling than a Muslim is the first African-American president.
So, now any dyspeptic expression toward a Muslim is grounds for calling in a diversity coordinator. And when the "victim" attacks, as at Fort Hood, the rest of us are supposed to feel guilty because Hasan's car got keyed once. As with all liberal "victims," it is the victim who is massively guilty.
About the "taunts" that Hasan was on the recieving end of and the business about having his car keyed.
Perhaps the ill will was directed at him not because he was Muslim but because he was being outspoken in his opposition to the war that his fellow soldiers were currently fighting and dying in and because he said things like Muslims ought to attack American servicemen and so on.
Just maybe other soldiers didn't like him because he went so far out of his way to make himself obnoxious to them.
I'm just saying. . .
More bad news for the little tin messiah, from Rasmussen:
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows that 30% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty percent (40%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -10 (see trends). Republicans have opened a six-point lead on the Generic Congressional Ballot.
Sixty percent (60%) say that the Fort Hood shootings should be investigated by the military as a terrorist act. Just 27% prefer a criminal investigation by civilian authorities.
This Veterans Day, 81% of Americans have a favorable opinion of the U.S. military. Thirty-six percent (36%) had a close friend or relative who gave their life for our country. A Rasmussen video report notes that 69% say that military service is good for young people.
The Presidential Approval Index is calculated by subtracting the number who Strongly Disapprove from the number who Strongly Approve. It is updated daily at 9:30 a.m. Eastern (sign up for free daily e-mail update). Updates are also available on Twitter and Facebook.
Overall, 46% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President's performance. Fifty-three percent (53%) disapprove.[. . .]
Most Americans continue to oppose the health care plan working its way through Congress.
[. . .]
It is important to remember that the Rasmussen Reports job approval ratings are based upon a sample of likely voters. Some other firms base their approval ratings on samples of all adults. President Obama's numbers are always several points higher in a poll of adults rather than likely voters. That's because some of the President's most enthusiastic supporters, such as young adults, are less likely to turn out to vote.
I am greatly cheered by this. My greatest fear was that too many of the American people would have such an emotional investment is Obama and his "historic" nature that they would be unable to come to grips emotionally with what a failure he was bound to be.
I beleived that there was a strong possibility that they would simply ignore bad news or continue to blame Bush. However it seems that high unemployment numbers have a way of bringing people out of denial and making them face cold hard reality.
And the reality is very cold and very hard. When you add the official unemployment numbers to the "discouraged workers", that is people who are out of work and have given up trying to find a job, you see real unemployment at over 15%. Then add the numbers of "underemployed", those workers who want and need full time employment but are only able to find part time work that does not pay enough for them to make ends meet, and you have an unemployment rate of around 21%.
These are Great Depression numbers.
Then consider the fact that severe inflation is just around the corner as the effect of all the money Obama and congressional Democrats are printing to underwrite their profligate spending begins to hit home.
How will people react when the spending power of their savings and pay checks decreases dramatically?
Do you know what the only part of the economy (other than government) that is growing and adding jobs at a brisk rate is?
It is the health care industry.
What will happen if Obama gets his way and congress actually hands him a socialized medicine bill to sign. What will happen if one seventh of the economy suddenly stops growing and is thrown into reverse as the government starts cutting costs and rationing services?
I fear our worst times as a nation are ahead of us.
Monday, November 09, 2009
From the New York Post:
Not so fast.
President Obama's victory dance yesterday for the House-passed health-care bill came as Senate foes -- mainly Republicans with one key Democrat moderate -- pronounced the measure mortally wounded, if not outright DOA.
Speaking from the Rose Garden after the squeaker 220-215 Saturday-night vote, Obama urged senators to be like runners on a relay team and "take the baton and bring this effort to the finish line on behalf of the American people."
Instead, he met with immediate resistance.
If a government plan is part of the deal, "as a matter of conscience, I will not allow this bill to come to a final vote," Sen. Joe Lieberman, the Connecticut independent whose vote Democrats need to overcome a GOP filibusters, told "Fox News Sunday."
Lieberman said he was concerned about new government spending the health-care legislation would entail, saying deficits have gotten gargantuan.
"I don't want to do that to our children and grandchildren," he said.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), on CBS's "Face the Nation," declared, "The House bill is dead on arrival in the Senate."
"It was bill written by liberals for liberals, and people like Joe Lieberman are not going to get anywhere near the House bill . . . It is a nonstarter in the Senate."
He said he firmly believes "the public option will destroy private health care."
Go read the rest.
You know you are in trouble getting a left-wing bill passed in the Senate when you can't even get liberal Joe Lieberman or RINO Lindsey Graham on board.
Like I said last night that whole dog and pony show in the House was most likely a bit of political theater intended to let Pelosi run a victory lap - and get Obama off her back - while kicking the whole matter over to the Senate where Reid can cite the independent nature of the upper house to explain why nothing comes of it.
That way the left can console themselves with the knowledge that they came closer than they have ever come before while still preserving some faint hope of electoral viability in 2010.
It is necessary to add one caveat here. This abomination could pass the Senate and be signed into law by the little tin messiah if we let our guard down.
The expected failure of this mess is contingent upon the public continuing to keep up the pressure on their Senators.
So keep up the pressure.
Sunday, November 08, 2009
Our friend Patrick, who blogs at the Pagan Temple left a comment to my post None So Blind as Those Who Will Not See which included this:
I don't know if you'll remember what I'm talking about, Lem, but I'm ready to join you by that open fire with that bottle of wine.
Of course I remember what he is talking about.
The July 22, 2007 post titled The Moonbats Cultural Death Wish, in which I made this statement:
Ladies and gentlemen I give you exhibit 9,854,541,336,874,599,476 why I hate the left with every fiber of my being. Why I would gladly throw every last one of them alive and screaming into a giant bonfire. Then drink wine, dance and play the bagpipes while they burned.That comment set the left-wing blogs into paroxysms of foaming madness and inspired one to them to create the picture you see above.
All I can say is you bring the marshmallows and weenies and I'll bring the Boone's Farm.
And for tonight's music here is The Swiss Death Metal Group Eluveitie with a pair of electric bagpipes.
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Democratic-controlled House has narrowly passed landmark health care reform legislation, handing President Barack Obama a hard won victory on his signature domestic priority.
Republicans were nearly unanimous in opposing the plan that would expand coverage to tens of millions of Americans who lack it and place tough new restrictions on the insurance industry.
The 220-215 vote late Saturday cleared the way for the Senate to begin a long-delayed debate on the issue that has come to overshadow all others in Congress.
When I heard this morning that the House had passed this with a narrow margin under the cover of darkness I had the strong impression that it was nothing more than a bit of political theater. The impression was strongly reinforced by this article on the Financial Times website.
Many Senate watchers are predicting that the measure will die a quiet death in the upper chamber.
When I heard that the House approved the bill I figured that a deal had been cut with enough of the 80+ Democrats who were planning to vote no on the bill to let it pass. They change their vote to yea and and give the little tin messiah and San Fran Nan their little cockadoodle of victory and in exchange it goes nowhere in the Senate.
The thinking is that by next November the voters will have forgotten who voted for a socialized medicine bill that never became law.
I doubt that it will work. The electorate has been too angered by this latest attempt to deprive them of their liberty and their wealth. Add the shear arrogance of the legislators defying such clearly expressed disapproval from the voters and you have a recipe for another 1994 style bloodletting in 2010.
But there will be one important difference. While Bill Clinton had as his number one priority being reelected so that he could continue to enjoy the perks of the office Obama actually believes his own propaganda about being a messianic figure and will redouble his efforts to transform the nation if he senses that he is losing the public.
How this will play out against a Republican dominated congress (or at least a GOP dominated House) will be interesting to see.
Given that Obama is a Marxist whose heroes are people like Arafat, Castro, Che and Chavez it is not impossible that he could attempt some kind of end run around congress by some kind of declaration of martial law. This could set the United States up for the kind of constitutional crisis that Honduras is currently weathering.
Would it not be amusing to see Obama hold up in the Venezuelan embassy issuing manifestos and calls for his supporters to arm themselves and descend on Washington to return him to power.
You know, the more I think about this the more possible it seems. . .
Can you imagine what a lunatic asylum it would be sealed in with Obama and his loyalists, sort of like the fuhrer bunker under Berlin, but less mature and more delusional.
Saturday, November 07, 2009
Here are details that have emerged about Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan and his shooting rampage at Ft. Hood.
Hasan is a lifelong Muslim. At the mosque in Maryland where he worshiped he listed his nationality as "Palestinian" even though he was a natural born citizen of the United States.
Hasan was an opponent of the United States' warn in Iraq and Afghanistan and frequently argued with other soldiers who supported the war. Hasan had been heard to make the statement that Muslims had the right to rise up and attack the US military in those nations.
Apparently Hasan had posted comments on the Internet praising Muslim suicide bombers.
Hasan stated that America's war on terror was actually a war against Islam.
Hasan was due to be deployed to either Iraq or Afghanistan and was unwilling to go. Perhaps he did not wish to be part of the "occupation forces" in a Muslim country.
Witnesses to Hasan's attack on his fellow soldiers report that he shouted "Allahu Akbar" (Arabic for "God is great") before opening fire.
There is only one reason why someone whose behavior sent up as many red flags as Maj. Hasan's was allowed to remain in the Army.
The fact that he was a Muslim of Middle Eastern descent.
Only the politically correct desire not to appear "racist" or "anti-Muslim" caused Hasan's superiors to turn a blind eye to his statements and the underlying beliefs they exposed.
No where is it more clear than in this case that the entire complex of ideas and attitudes, and the thought processes which generate those ideas and attitudes, of the political left are nothing more than an expression of self-loathing hatred of the Western Culture.
Listen to the official statements of the Pentagon and the White House and read the coverage of this incident in the mainstream media. The self-imposed ideological blinders required by adherence to the principles of political correctness and multiculturalism force the liberal political establishment and the press which serves as its propaganda organ to willfully ignore the breathtakingly obvious fact that Hasan acted out of a belief that his Islamic religious faith required him to do what he did.
To choose to ignore this fact and to absolutely refuse to change our behavior toward Islam and those who adhere to it, except to possibly become more "open" and "inclusive" toward them, can come only from a strong internal desire to commit cultural suicide.
In fact the whole structure of political correctness and multiculturalism are nothing more than a form of slow motion cultural suicide. They are like alcohol to a man who is drinking himself to death.
Why the left despises the culture that made them safe and prosperous and has given the world as much as the West has is a mystery which I doubt will ever be solved. Much like the child of wealthy parents who is born into security and comfort with a bright future laid out before him and responds not with gratitude but bitter resentment, the leftist spits on what he should fall to his knees and thank God for.
It is long past time for the sane adults in this nation to stop indulging the spoiled brats on the left. We must rise up and take control of this nation and this culture from the simpering "elites" who currently dominate and restore sanity - while we still have a nation and a culture to rescue.
Friday, November 06, 2009
FORT HOOD, Texas – Soldiers who witnessed the shooting rampage at Fort Hood that left 13 people dead reported that the gunman shouted "!" — an Arabic phrase for "God is great!" — before opening fire, the said Friday.
Lt. Gen. Robert Cone said officials had not yet confirmed that the suspected shooter, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, made the comment before the rampage Thursday. Hasan was among 30 people wounded in theand remained hospitalized on a ventilator.
If this is true then it will be much harder for the mainstream media and the government to deny or downplay the Islamic terrorism connection to this incident.
MADISON, Wis. (Reuters) - A year after his historic election, President Barack Obama sought to remind Americans on Wednesday the biggest problems he is grappling with -- from the economy to the war in Afghanistan -- are the legacy of his predecessor, George W. Bush.
With his approval ratings down from once-lofty levels and Tuesday's Democratic election losses raising questions about his political clout, Obama held no special ceremony to mark the anniversary of his election as America's first black president.
He instead traveled to Wisconsin to appear before a friendly audience in a school gymnasium and promote education as a pillar of his economic recovery efforts.
Obama was elected on a promise of sweeping change after eight years under Bush, but many Americans are increasingly expressing impatience that his pledge has yet to bear fruit.
He used the preamble of his speech to insist his administration had indeed had important successes and also to remind Americans of the litany of daunting challenges he inherited when he took office in January.
"One year ago, Americans all across this country went to the polls and cast ballots for the future they wanted to see," Obama said.
But he said his administration was also confronted with a "financial crisis that threatened to plunge our economy into a Great Depression, the worst that we've seen in generations.""We had record deficits, two wars, frayed alliances around the world," Obama added.
President Obama, or the manchild as Rush calls him, is emotionally incapable of accepting responsibility. Credit he will claim even when it is not due him, but responsibility is alien to him.
This is why Mr. Obama's crybaby whinging about the mess the previous president left him with has to be examined closely.
The Financial Mess. It is true that exercised almost no restraint on a Republican congress that was determined to spend like Democrats. It is also true that Bush authored some big spending programs of his own. But here are some facts.
One, while it is true that the first big budget-busting chunk of money to be spent by the government to help the financial markets recover (TARP) was a Bush administration program it enjoyed more support among Democrats than Republicans. Then Senator Obama supported and voted for TARP, as did the entire House and Senate Democrat leadership.
Two, the meltdown in the mortgage lending industry which triggered the current financial crisis was caused by government policies which were authored by Democrats. The idea that people should be given home loans that they have almost no chance of being able to pay back because everybody has a "right" to a house was something so stupid that not even a RINO like Lindsey Graham could have come up with it. Ultra-left legislators like Barny Frank acted as human shields to protect Fannie Mae and Fredie Mac from the kind of regulation (which George W Bush wanted to impose on them) which might have prevented the current crisis.
Three, Obama complains about Bush's deficit but he has increased that deficit by orders of magnitude and is seeking to increase it even more. If the problem is that Bush spent too much isn't the answer to spend LESS?
Two Wars. Yes we are fighting two wars in response to an attack on American soil which killed more Americans than the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Afghanistan was not simply sheltering Osama bin Laden he was acting as an unofficial participant in the Taliban government of that nation. And Saddam Hussein was writing large checks to the families of suicide bombers, giving more and more young men - and women - incentive to strap on an explosive belt and murder innocent people.
Frayed Alliances. If Mr. Obama is so worried about our relationship with our allies then why is he offering a series of calculated insults to those same allies? Obama has insulted the British people as a whole and both the Prime Minister and Queen individually. The French have been so disappointed with Obama that they have largely given up on trying to forge a closer relationship with the US and are now looking to do military and nuclear deals in Asia and the Middle East. And in the latest flipping off of a European ally Obama is boycotting the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall.
The reasons for Obama's refusal to acknowledge the significance of the event which symbolizes the end of the Cold War, the fall of the Soviet Union and the reunification of Germany are not entirely clear but among them are probably these.
The defeat of the Soviet Empire was done before Obama became president and in Obama's world the USA only became capable of doing anything good when he was elected president.
Ronald Reagan was responsible for the final victory over the Soviets and Obama hates Reagan because Reagan, as a free market capitalist and enemy of big-brother nanny state government, is the exact opposite of Obama.
The celebrations will be held at the Brandenburg Gate which is where Ronald Reagan made his "tear down this wall" speech. The Gate's reopening is a symbol of German reunification which was only possible because of the fall of the USSR. As a Marxist Obama resents the fact that the world's first communist nation was beaten by the capitalist West.
And finally, and with what we know about Obama's massive narcissism perhaps the most likely reason for Obama's refusal to attend the festivities in Germany is that Obama had wanted to address the German people from the Brandenburg Gate during the campaign but had to back off after too many objections were raised about his plan to use such a potent German symbol as a prop in a campaign speech. Having had his whim denied Obama is still in a snit and he won't go unless they beg him.
And we won't even talk about how Obama has alienated the Israelis (one of our strongest allies in the world and the only true friend we have in the region).
For a president who was supposed to heal the damage allegedly caused by the Bush administration in our international relationships seems to be doing little more than driving away our closest friends.
I like the fact that Obama keeps trying to play the "Bush card". Every time he does he simply makes himself look smaller and less to be taken seriously. In the short term this is bad for America because as our enemies take the measure of the insignificant little punk that sits in the Oval Office they will be emboldened. However in the long run this is good for the country because it will pave the way for an easy GOP victory in 2012 as Sarah Palin, or any other conservative Republican, will win simply by demonstrating to the nation that they are a fully functioning adult.
An Army psychiatrist who opened fire at Fort Hood, Texas, killing 12 people and wounding 31 others, was shot but captured alive, military officials said late Thursday.
The gunman, identified as Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, was wounded at the scene but was captured alive and was in stable condition, Lt. Gen. Robert W. Cone, commanding general of the Army’s III Corps, said at a press conference late Thursday.
Eleven of the victims died at the scene, military officials said. A 12th died later at a hospital, NBC station KCEN-TV of Waco reported. Cone said that most of those who were shot were military but two were civilians.
Cone also said that a female officer who was thought to be the first responder shot Hasan and was herself wounded and had undergone surgery at a hospital. It was not clear if the officer was a military policewoman or a civilian officer.
Col. Ben Danner said the suspect was shot at least four times. "I would say his death is not imminent," Cone said, adding that Hasan was in custody at a hospital.
First of all our prayers go out to the wounded and the families of the dead.
I find it interesting that the shooter was a Muslim who had apparently been very critical of America's military involvement in the Middle East. *
I also note that the Army does not allow soldiers to go armed while on base. This meant that Ft. Hood was a giant Disarmed Victim Zone, just like our schools.
* We need to remember that first reports after something like this are frequently inaccurate so take everything you hear about this man's personal life and military career with a grain of salt for at least the first few days.
Thursday, November 05, 2009
That means that YOU are listening!
ELECTION 2009: CHANGE I CAN BELIEVE IN!
by Ann Coulter
November 4, 2009
-- MSNBC, Aug. 31, 2009, Keith Olbermann on Robert F. McDonnell, Republican candidate for governor of Virginia:
"In [McDonnell's master's thesis], he described women having jobs as detrimental to the family, called legalized use of contraception illogical, pushed to make divorce more difficult, and insisted government should favor married couples over, quote, 'cohabitators, homosexuals or fornicators.' Wow. When did he write this? 1875? No, 1989. Wow, 1989.
"Goodbye, Mr. McDonnell."
-- MSNBC, Sept. 22, 2009, Rachel Maddow also on McDonnell:
"And here's where the conservative movement and the Republican establishment smash into each other like bumper cars without bumpers. Here's where Republican electoral chances stop being separate from the wild-eyed excesses of the conservative movement.
"Part of watching Republicans try to return to power is watching ... the conservative movement eat the Republican Party, eat their electoral chances over and over and over again."
On election night, conservatives-eating-Republicans resulted in an 18-point landslide for McDonnell, who beat his Democratic opponent 59 percent to 41 percent -- winning two-thirds of all independent voters and ending the Democrats' eight-year reign in the Virginia governor's office.
Republicans swept all statewide offices for the first time in 12 years, winning the races for lieutenant governor and attorney general, as well as assembly seats, garbage inspector, dog catcher and anything else Virginians could vote for.
To paraphrase a pompous blowhard: Goodbye, Mr. Democrat.
And that's not the most exciting news from election night! Astoundingly, Jon Corzine, the incumbent governor of heavily Democratic New Jersey -- a state that Barack Obama won by 16 points just a year ago -- lost by 5 points.
At 49 percent for Republican Chris Christie versus 44 percent for Corzine, the election wasn't even close enough to be stolen by ACORN. (Although Corzine did extremely well among underaged Salvadoran prostitutes living in government housing.)
The biggest winner election night was pollster Scott Rasmussen, who -- once again -- produced the most accurate poll results. New York Times poll: Corzine 40, Christie 37; Quinnipiac poll: Corzine 43, Christie 38; Rasmussen poll: Christie 46, Corzine 43.
The biggest loser was President Obama, who campaigned tirelessly for Corzine, even giving up golf on several occasions and skipping a quarter-million-dollar "date night" with Michelle to stump for the Democrat.
Just two days before the election, Obama was at a rally in New Jersey assuring voters that Corzine was "one of the best partners I have in the White House. We work together. ... Jon Corzine helped get this done."
Except the problem is that voting for Obama a year ago was a fashion statement, much like it was once a fad to buy Beanie Babies, pet rocks and Cabbage Patch Kids. But instead of ending up with a ridiculous dust-collector at the bottom of your closet, the Obama fad leaves you with higher taxes, a reduced retirement fund, no job and a one-year wait for an MRI.
That is why Corzine's defeat sounded the death knell for national health care.
The good news: Next time Corzine is in a major car accident after speeding on the New Jersey Turnpike, he'll be able to see a doctor right away.
The media will try to rescue health care by talking about nothing but the 23rd district of New York, where the Democrat won Tuesday night. Congratulations, Democrats -- you won a congressional seat in New York! Next up: A Catholic elected pope!
Far from an upset, the Democrats' winning the 23rd district was a long-term plan of the Obama White House. That's why Obama made John McHugh, the moderate Republican congressman representing the 23rd district, his Secretary of the Army earlier this year. The Democrats thought McHugh's seat would be easy pickings.
Only in the last week has everyone acted as if a Democratic victory in the 23rd district would be a shocking surprise -- an upset victory caused by puritanical Republicans staging inquisitions against "mainstream" Republican candidates like Dede Scozzafava, the designated "Republican" candidate in the special election.
This is preposterous -- there was absolutely nothing Republican about Scozzafava. As a supporter of partial-birth abortion, card-check union schemes and massive government spending programs, she was less Republican than John McCain.
Even Markos Moulitsas of Daily Kos called Scozzafava the most liberal candidate in the race -- which may explain why she was the choice of George Soros' Working Families Party and why she promptly endorsed the Democrat after withdrawing from the race last weekend.
Conservative opposition to Scozzafava hardly suggests that they plan to impose litmus tests on every Republican candidate in the 2010 elections.
Speaking of litmus tests, on MSNBC recently, liberal blogger Jane Hamsher said of the possibility that a blue dog Democrat would oppose national health care: "I dare Blanche Lincoln -- I dare Blanche Lincoln to join a filibuster. She'll draw primary opponents so fast it would make your head spin."
While I'm sure an out-of-touch liberal blogger from Hollywood knows more about Arkansas than an elected senator from that state, Hamsher's threat sounds more like an intra-party civil war than conservatives opposing a George Soros-supported Republican candidate in a New York congressional race.
Not only do conservatives not pick insane fights -- such as staging a 2006 primary fight against a recent vice presidential candidate because he supported the war in Iraq -- but conservatives are more popular than Republicans.
By contrast, liberals are less popular than Democrats. When conservatives take control of the Republican Party, Republicans win. When liberals take control of the Democratic Party, Democrats end up out of power for eight to 12 years.
To really put in perspective how big a deal this business in New Jersey was you have to realize that Osama bin Laden could run for governor of that state and campaign from one end of the state to the other holding the severed head of a five-year-old girl in one hand and the bloody knife in the other and still get 40% of the vote - as long as he were running as a Democrat.
Wednesday, November 04, 2009
Thomas Lifson writes:
Rep. Michele Bachman is leading an effort to bring citizen-lobbyists to Capitol Hill, starting noon Thursday, in anticipation of a possible vote Friday on ObamaCare, Judi McLeod of Canada Free Press reports. Within hours of Rep. Bachman's call for citizens to travel to DC to lobby against ObamaCare, which could come to a vote Friday, The Tea Party Express, the doctors of Take Back America and the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, the patriots of Tea Party Patriots Live and Resistnet all stepped up.
Mark Levin, author of the important book Liberty & Tyranny (and major talk show host) will there. Readers who able to get to DC Thursday should be there too.
An aroused citizenry is much harder for legislators to ignore when the citizens turn out for face-to-face interaction. This was the great lesson of Town Hall August. Having citizens come to DC for lobbying was a brilliant move on Bachman’s part, and demonstrates the difference between old-line pols, and the new breed of conservative that the era demands.
This is an excellent idea. But it is unfortunate that our elected representatives are incapable of working without close supervision.
How long do you think it will take some Democrat politician to run to a micorphone and start squeaking about how he fees "threatened" by all the common rabble invading the Capitol building?
Senior Congressional Democrats told ABC News today it is highly unlikely that a health care reform bill will be completed this year, just a week after President Barack Obama declared he was "absolutely confident" he'll be able to sign one by then.
"Getting this done by the by the end of the year is a no-go," a senior Democratic leadership aide told ABC News. Two other key Congressional Democrats also told ABC News the same thing.
This may come as an unwelcome surprise for the White House, where officials from the president on down have repeatedly said the health care bill would be signed into law by the end of the year.
"I am absolutely confident that we are going to get health care done by the end of this year, and Nancy Pelosi is just as confident," Obama said Oct. 27 at a fundraiser for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi may still be confident -- and her spokesman Brendan Daly said today, "We are going to get our part done" -- but the reason for the delay can be found in the Senate.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has yet to release the bill he eventually plans to bring to the Senate floor. Reid is still waiting for the Congressional Budget Office to come up with an estimated cost of several possible variations of his bill before deciding which one to introduce in the Senate.
That cost estimate, Democrats tell ABC News, is not expected until next week.
Asked directly by ABC News, "Will you pass health care reform this year?" Reid pointedly did not answer "yes."
Elections have consequences and Washington was watching yesterday's elections closely. They were especially watching Virginia where the race was a straight-up head to head contest between a conservative Republican and a liberal Democrat in a state which swung for Obama just last year.
The handwriting is on the wall and Harry Reid, who is currently favored to lose his bid for reelection in Nevada next year, is not going to fall on his sword for B. Hussein Obama - not when Obama's job approval numbers have fallen below 50% among likely voters and his endorsement of Jon Corzine in New Jersey and Creigh Deeds in Virginia were clearly harmful to those candidates.
Also reading the handwriting will be the House's "Blue-Dog" Democrats, who were elected in 2006 from conservative districts, and who now have to choose between ending their careers by supporting the extreme left-wing agenda of Nancy Pelosi and her leadership team or giving themselves a fighting chance of reelection by distancing themselves from the White House and their own leadership.
This is a difficult problem for these Democrats since their party does not tolerate "mavericks" (compare the fates of John McCain and Joe Lieberman) but it is a problem they are all going to have to grapple with in the days ahead.
Yesterday voters in Virginia and New Jersey elected Republican governors. The margin of victory in New Jersey where the Democrat, Jon Corzine, was the incumbent - and spent around 40 million dollars of his own money and had Barack Obama visiting the state several times to campaign for him - was 5%. The New Jersey race also saw the participation of an independent candidate, Chris Daggett, who pretended to be a conservative but was actually running with the financial backing of the state's Democrat party in an attempt to siphon off votes from the Republican Chris Christy.
The margin of victory in Virginia where the seat was open was 18%. The Virginia race was also marked by repeated appearances by Barack Obama campaigning for the Democrat candidate, Creigh Deeds, and by the Washington Post's endorsement of the Democrat candidate. This race meant so much to president Obama, who wanted to hold onto Virginia for his party after it went for him in last year's presidential election - voting Democrat in a national election for the first time since the early 1960's - that he even sent his own political operatives to manage the Deeds campaign.
The Virginia race is extremely important because it cast a genuinely conservative Republican, Bob McDonnell, against a liberal Democrat in a one-to-one matchup with no independent or third party candidate acting as a stalking horse for the Democrat.
In the House race in New York's 23 congressional district Democrat Bill Owens was able to defeat Conservative party candidate Doug Hoffman with a plurality of the vote of 49% against Mr. Hoffman's 46% and nominal Republican Dede Scozzafava, who had endorsed the Democrat and remained in the race to act as a spoiler sabotaging the Hoffman bid, netting 6% of the vote.
It is unfortunate that there were enough blind party-loyalists in NY23 who were unable to see that their district and party and nation would be better served by not voting for the Republican candidate in this race. However this was only a special election to fill the seat until next year's midterm elections and Mr. Owens is going to join a Democrat majority which is deeply unpopular and under the leadership of Nancy Pelosi has little prospect of improving its standing with the American people.
All in all it was a good night for the nation.
Now on to 2010!
Tuesday, November 03, 2009
If you live in New York's 23rd district, New Jersey or Virginia it is critically important that you vote today.
These elections will be seen (and, in fact are) a referendum on the Obama presidency. They are being closely watched by all elected officials, especially by members of the House or Representatives, who all must stand for election next November.
Republican victories in these three races will send a loud message to House Democrats that their political futures are in danger if they continue to carry this administration's water on issues like socialized medicine.
GOP victories in these races could literally spell the defeat of the current socialist health care takeover and if it dies this time it will probably be at least ten years before any serious attempt is made to resurrect it.
This will buy Republicans a decade in which to bring about market based reforms like health savings accounts, tort reform and insurance deregulation which will begin to reduce health care costs and greatly lessen the pressure for any renewed attempt at a government takeover.
Another positive effect of Republican victories today will be the way in which Obama will react to them.
Obama is a narcissist who has never been forced to cope with defeat and failure. His response to what he cannot fail to see as a personal rejection will be to fly into a rage and start seeking scapegoats. This will further diminish him in the public's eyes as they see him acting like a punk rather than a president and it will further divide and destabilize the Democrat party.
As Democrats wishing to win reelection come to the full realization that Obama is a liability rather than an asset they will seek to distance themselves from him and his policies.
This will further enrage him and as we have seen in his foolish vendettas against Fox News and Rush Limbaugh he will strike out at what he sees as his new enemies, within his own party.
This will further divide and destabilize the Democrats, setting them up for a historic defeat in 2010.
So even if you looked at the polls and figures that our guys were ahead so you didn't need to make the effort to go to the voting place and stand in line. Even if you are in New Jersey and think that the Republican is too liberal suck it up and go vote.
Because a vote in any of these races is a vote against Obama.