There are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power

Since the general civilization of mankind, I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power, than by violent and sudden usurpations.

James Madison
Elliot's Debates
Friday, June 6, 1788.

"I don't worry about the Constitution." Phil Hare, Democrat (IL-17)

And you think the Tea Party and other small government types are crazy?



"Are you serious? Are you serious?" Nancy Pelosi, Democrat (CA-8)



"We have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out what is in it." Nancy Pelosi, Democrat (CA-8)

You still think we're crazy?

President Palin, The most terrifying words in the English Language

Funny, how promoting limited government equals a totalitarian state and that promoting more and more government control over ones life equals freedom.

And you think President Palin is stupid?

Olivia Wilde and MoveOn.org what is it about individuality that scares you so much?

Environmentalists are now part of Obama's Enemies List

If Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, "We’re going to punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us," if they don’t see that kind of upsurge in voting in this election, then I think it’s going to be harder, and that’s why I think it’s so important that people focus on voting on November 2.

Barack Obama on Univision, October 25, 2010

Oh, Obama certainly didn't mean it that way, and doesn't see it that way - that Environmentalists are "enemies to be punished", but a key component of the Democrat Coalition, the environmentalists, are largely against immigration. They're against immigration for a whole slew of reasons among them resource and habitat use; and belief that the ideal size for the United States is 150-200 million instead of the 300+ a growing population.

Quoted from the Negative Population Growth website:

Immigration, as it relates to population, is not a racial issue; it’s about numbers, not race, ethnicity or skin color. It is not racist to consider what doubling or tripling our population would require of our resources and environment.

Negative Population Growth

There are some Reds in Green clothing, analagous to the NAACP, who use environmentalist arguments as a way of promoting their cause, but environmentalists who want less immigration are now ... what? Inadvertently they have now joined the group that needs to be punished.

How about union members who don't want business to under cut them with cheap "imported" labor. Are they also "enemies;" or are they simply misguided and need to be re-educated? Of course the SEIU leadership, who are a national verision of yester-year's Tammany Hall Machine exchanging favorable contracts for providing a massed army of small-time thugs and loyalists who know they have to produce votes would beg to differ.

For you Obama supporters: Does Obama sound like a Ward Leader or someone who is going to heal the divides of this country? Does he sound like a community organizer, intent of dividing the country or a president of the entire country?

What would you say if Bush called his critics "enemies" that needed to be "punished"? I can hear the outrage - "divisive", "hateful", "fear mongering", "unpresidential", "Nixonian" - and yet how little of this is said about Obama.

For you environmentalists: why do you still support this President, why are you going to vote straight "D" this November?

Mexico, a Failed-State:but let's leave our borders wide-open.

And people still object to the US sealing it's borders? There's a lot we can can change regarding immigration but the first thing that must be done is to control the borders. Funny how the very people who are for regulating everything are against regulating borders. These same people who don't see limits on what government officials can do to regulate our lives: don't open new McDonalds, put on your seat belts, eat more vegetables, don't do this, don't do that think that we shouldn't know who enters our country.

What a load of nonsense.





What can we do about the narco state below our borders? One thing we can do is start legalizing drugs, take the power and money away from illegal entities and have them taxed and regulated. Notice how few gang killings we have over the sale of beer and whisky compared to the 1920s?

UPDATE: 10/28/2010

Entire police force in Los Ramones, Mexico quits after gunmen attack headquarters

The entire police force in a small Mexican town abruptly resigned Tuesday after its new headquarters was viciously attacked by suspected drug cartel gunmen.

All 14 police officers in Los Ramones, a rural town in northern Mexico, fled the force in terror after gunmen fired more than 1,000 bullets and flung six grenades at their headquarters on Monday night.

As the President of Mexico Felipe Calderón, who, in 2009, angrily denied that Mexico was becoming a "failed state," described the situation in February 2010 as a fight for "the very authority of the state."

Why I Love Allen West

Can you imagine this man in Congress? He NEEDS to be in Congress. Talk about speaking truth to power.

America you choose: Barack Obama or Allen West. I pick Allen West.









[Hat Tip: Just a Conservative Girl for the Videos.]

Kickback or Illegal Access

Too many people think that companies give money solely to influence and corrupt congressmen. All the rhetoric behind McCain-Feingold assumes that the congressman is getting rolled by big-bad businesses and special interests. Too many forget that kickbacks are involved as well as extortion.

God Bless a Congress that can do whatever it wants </sarc> and God Bless candidates who present this clearly to the voters.

I'm an Extremist

The left calls people like me "extremists." For the moment let's leave to another conversation how we determine and what we consider to be extreme. Let's look at the following statement:

"The bigger the majority, the easier it is to advance an agenda, especially if it includes some of the GOP's more divisive priorities such as school vouchers, court system changes or a constitutional spending lid."

Missouri House may gain more GOP members

You may be for or against school vouchers but is this truly an extreme position? How about passing a law saying that the state can't spend more than it takes in? These ideas are what some people consider to be extreme. If balancing the state's checkbook is extreme then I'm an extremist.

Just Call Me Senator, Barbara Boxer

This is a laugh-out-loud spoof of the event as it was "supposed to happen."

Call Me Senator from RightChange on Vimeo.

In case you haven't heard it -- here's the original version:

Islam in Paris. Worth Seeing

Defund NPR

NPR should never have been on the government teat. In paring down government it is one of the low-hanging fruit. It's disgusting that it wasn't done under Reagan or Bush 41 or Bush 43. I consider this to be one of the tests of the so-called new Republican leadership: "get rid of NPR, defund it." It is not the role of government to support a radio station.

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

Article I, Section 8

NPR repeatedly states that government funding is a small percentage of their budget. Well that's good, it won't be difficult to replace the funding.

As a "radical", "extremist" fascist   right-winger   tea-partier classical liberal I would also defund the CPB. It's not that I find fault with CPB or its politics it's that, as a proper extremist, I like to be consistent. IF it's not the government's role to fund TV stations then that applies to ALL publicly funded TV stations.

To clarify, it's not because of NPR's politics, or the firing of Juan Williams, or the idiotic statement of Vivian Schiller that Juan Williams should have kept his feelings about Muslims between himself and "his psychiatrist or his publicist:" it's because funding of radio stations is not the role of government.

The Juan Williams fiasco brings NPR to the forefront and makes this a convenient time to, once again, push for its defunding.

UPDATE: 10/25/2010

An interesting point is raised by Seth Lipsky in his article The Real Case for Defunding NPR

My quarrel with government subsidies to NPR—via grants from the federally funded Corporation for Public Broadcasting—is that they cast a chill over the markets in which private entrepreneurs seek to raise capital for what might be called highbrow journalism. It is hard to quantify this. But it is a conclusion that I have reached after more than two decades spent seeking to raise capital for privately-owned publications competing in this arena.

More than once I have been interrupted, while singing the song of quality journalism to a potential investor, to be asked, "Isn't this already being done by public broadcasting?"

This is one more of the many reasons that we shouldn't have government funding of NPR. But the core of the issue is that this isn't something that government should be doing.

Allen West (FL-22) has a lead.

There has been no public polling data on Allen West since August. The Sunshine State News/VSS poll -- unfortunately not a well-known polling outfit -- has Allen West up over incumbant Ron Klein 47-43.

I'm crossing my fingers that West wins. What a phenominal turnaround that will be for this district, exchanging a Health Care, Cap and Trade, statist for Allan West, a free-market, military hero; and another inductee to the Conservative Black Caucus, joining Tim Scott (SC-1) who is an almost guaranteed winner for his seat.

Donna Brazile, in yet another article, Brazile: Republicans Aren’t Enthusiastic, Just Mad shows the total lack of understanding by the left about their opposition.

But let’s dispose of some myths. The country is not “disgusted” with Democratic policies, as some media commentators wish we would believe. For instance, strong majorities favor a Medicare-style national health plan, even if they have to pay more for insurance, and even if the question is phrased with an insurance industry bias, according to a Harris Interactive poll.

And yet the unifying factor in the Tea Party movement, that which unites Social Conservatives and Libertarians is the overreaching of government involvement in society as epitomized by the Health Care bill. Are there pockets, or even large sections of Americans, who are in favor of socialized medicine? Yes. But they're not enthused by the bill that was passed and the opponents of the bill are demanding that this monstrous legislation be repealed. In my opinion, if the Republican Party, does not defund and work to its repeal there is a real possibility that the Republican Party, as we now know it, will be gone in one or two more election cycles.

Is there really an enthusiasm gap between Democratic and Republican voters this election cycle?

Well, that all depends on what you mean by “enthusiasm” and what you mean by “gap.”

...[Y]ou don’t draw the kinds of crowds President Barack Obama and former President Bill Clinton have been drawing if there’s a lack of enthusiasm.

Nobody says there isn't ANY enthusiasm on the left, only that it pales in comparison to the coalition that has formed to oppose the statist policies put forth by Obama and the Pelosi-Reid Congress.

“What about all those angry tea partiers, though?” you ask. The key word is “angry.” Angry people aren’t enthusiastic; they’re just angry. And once the object of that anger is gone, there’s not much left, except perhaps more undirected anger.

Tea-party anger is not enthusiasm for Republicans or Republican policies — the only folks more disliked than incumbents are those inside the tea-party movement itself. Polls show a majority of Americans don’t align themselves with the tea party. A late August CBS poll, for example, found that 54 percent did not support the movement.

You're right, once the object of their anger is gone: the health care bill, cap and trade, take-over of industries, excessive taxation is gone - then the anger will dissipate. You mention that 54 percent did not approve of the movement and forget that 46 percent do favor a strong movement that is very Libertarian, very much for limited government, very much for rolling back government excesses, very much for a re-reading of the constitution and limiting the Federal government to those stated powers.

This is an extraordinary shift and you're missing it.

Finally you quote an article from the Huffington Post and say that:

Democrats create jobs, the American way.

Which way is that Donna? Since when is creating government jobs, and having people live off of government largesse the American way?

Don't Party Like It's 1773, Yet!

Once again the Stupid TeaBaggers' hero Sarah Palin puts her foot in her mouth. As Markos Moulitsas puts it Sarah is "so smart." And, as Gwen Ifill so succinctly puts it "party like it 1773! ummm." How is it possible that this dolt, this Tea Party idiot, Sarah Palin, doesn't know that the Declaration of Independence took place in 1776!?

Maybe it's because the actual "Tea Party" took place on December 16th, 1773 and Sarah Palin was referring to that event and not the Declaration of Independence. Maybe, horror of horrors, Palin isn't as stupid as you portray her to be.

Weren't the left the ones that were mocking the Tea Party movement for not knowing their history and deprecating the very use of the phrase Tea Party? I've dealt with the appropriateness of the term, Tea Party, in an earlier post so I won't go over it again.

I'm not a Republican, but I am aligning myself with them in this election, and hope that come the night of November 2 we're partying as if it was 1894. (The election of November 6, 1894 saw a massive realignment in US politics. Interestingly enough, the Republicans of 1894 were for government intervention in the economy in ways that the somewhat free-market Democrats were not.)

You can see Sarah Palin's speech regarding "partying like it's 1773" at The Right Scoop

From Liberal to Socialist

It's time that people see the connection between Liberal/Socialist ideals and their results.

If we follow Nancy Pelosi and the Progressive Caucus with ideas such as is espoused below we will quickly turn into another failed European Socialist State.

These ideas by Nancy Pelosi:

"We're talking about addressing the disparity of income where the wealthy people continue to get wealthier and some other people are falling out of the middle class when we want to bring many more people into the middle class. But that disparity is not just about wages alone, that disparity is about ownership and equity. It's all about fairness in our country.

SEE VIDEO ON REAL CLEAR POLITICS

lead to a society that responds like this:




These riots are coming from a society that doesn't want to accept that there is no money for all the government give-aways. They come back with the standard retort: tax the rich and then everything will be alright. All this because the Sarkozy government plans to raise the minimum retirement age from 60 to 62 with full pension at becoming active at 67 instead of 65.

Or how about this from Greece, for just about the same reason:



And you have comments such as

Greek people are not attacking anyone, we are defending ourselves from poverty, slavery and free market. It's easy to condemn when you are sitting in a couch.

[youtube.com: shinobi1311991]

"Slavery and the Free Market." Wow!!!

Well, if freedom equals slavery and slavery equals Freedom, then certainly it's not a stretch to equate liberalism with socialism.

2010 Election Predictions

It's getting down to the wire and time to start firming up predictions. I find it hard to believe that labor is going to be more energized in this election than they were in 2008. I think it is ridiculous to imagine that the Rock the Vote crowd, and the general Black population is going to be anywhere as enthused this year as they were two years ago.

There was a scary cult-of-personality aspect to the Obama run; that cult has definately run its course and has not matched expectations. When expectations are set in close to Biblical terms all you can do is go down.

While I'm not a Republican, in this election I am rooting for a Tsunami, a clean wipe out of Obama-Pelosi-Reid Democrats. Unfortunately there will not be a rooting out of this Socialist plague from our shores. There are too many socialists in America and at the end of the day there will still be 60-70+ member of the Progressive Caucus still in power.

And yet I have hope that the Democrats have over-reached; that Obama's experience as a community organizer, while effective at getting into the Oval Office, has not proved sufficient in pursuading others to his cause. Further Obama's lack of political experience shows in his inability to gracefully deal with political opponents or even the mildest of criticism.

His political skills, or lack thereof, will determine if he is a one-term president or if, in 2012, he can triangulate by warning people against one-party rule and extol the virtues of a split government.

As far as predictions: I would put the floor at a gain of 55 seats by the Republicans in the House, 8 in the Senate and 8 Governor's Mansions. I have no estimate for State Houses and Senates but would be surprised if the Republicans did not get a clear majority of both.

I think it is most likely that Republicans will get 65+ seats in the House, 9 in the Senate and 10 Governors Mansions.

My hope is much, much more but I think there are too many committed socialists and fellow-travellers for that to happen.

Obama is in Over His Head

With the exception of core Obama Administration loyalists, most politically engaged elites have reached the same conclusions: the White House is in over its head, isolated, insular, arrogant and clueless about how to get along with or persuade members of Congress, the media, the business community or working-class voters.

Time Magazine

You think? What do you think happens when you hire a neophyte with little-to-no experience and a propensity for avoiding making decisions?

Breitbart, Acorn and the 2010 Elections

A year ago in an interview with Hannity Andrew Breitbart (see 3:50 in the above video) said the following:

Breitbart: There’s a lot of hypocrisy and the dust has settled for ACORN and at the end of the day they’ve recognized that Eric Holder, the Attorney General, has not initiated an investigation into ACORN after we now have seven tapes. There were five initially that came out, ACORN was defunded by the Senate, was defunded by the House, lost it’s link to the Census; while all that damage occurred, Congress didn’t come in to investigate them, obviously not the Attorney General’s office, and they’ve now realized let’s get back into business because they realized that the dust settled and they were not being investigated, it was Hannah, James, and me who were being investigated, that’s why we’ve been forced to offer this latest tape.

Hannity: Are you saying, Andrew, that there are more tapes?

Breitbart: Oh my goodness there are! Not only are there more tapes, it’s not just ACORN. And this message is to Attorney General Holder: I want you to know that we have more tapes, it’s not just ACORN, and we’re going to hold out until the next election cycle, or else if you want to do a clean investigation, we will give you the rest of what we have, we will comply with you, we will give you the documentation we have from countless ACORN whistleblowers who want to come forward but are fearful of this organization and the retribution that they fear that this is a dangerous organization. So if you get into an investigation, we will give you the tapes; if you don’t give us the tapes, we will revisit these tapes come election time.

Hannity: This is a blockbuster, what you’re saying here. You guys have more tapes, you’ll release them before the election, that could have a big impact on the election, obviously…

Well, the 2010 Elections are coming soon. Are all the October surprises coming from the left such as the Whitman Maid story, or shall ACORN and the others be brought in the game?

Do Jews Have a Double Loyalty?

Do Jews have a double loyalty to both Israel and The United States? And, if so, to which country does their loyalty truly lie? I always thought of this as a BS question asked by joo haters of all stripes. Ed Koch, the former mayor of NYC, in talking about the firing of Rick Sanchez, the dopey CNN commentator, answered it in this way:

I told them, you never ask that question of Italian, German or Polish-Americans (I should have also included Cuban-Americans) who treasure their ancestry, traditions and the countries from which their ancestors came; you only ask it of Jews. Let me tell you why the security of Israel means so much to many Jews.

We know that when Hitler offered in the 30s to allow the Jews to leave Germany, if any country would take them, few countries agreed to accept the Jews and then only in small numbers. Indeed, in 1939 the U.S. under F.D.R. turned away the 900 or so Jews on the SS St. Louis who had earlier been turned away by Cuba (from which country Mr. Sanchez hails; he was not born at the time). F.D.R. refused to allow them to land in the U.S., and even sent a Coast Guard cutter to make sure no one jumped overboard and tried to swim ashore. So the Jews were sent back to Europe, where the majority perished in concentration camps.

If Israel had existed then, it would have taken in every single Jewish refugee, no matter how sick or old or incapacitated or poor. Then I said to my fellow Congress members, raising my right hand, and this is literal, "I swear to you, if Israel ever invades the U.S., I shall stand with the U.S." My fellow members of Congress applauded.

On the Firing of Rick Sanchez by CNN

Of course, this doesn't answer those who think that we have unnecessarily made enemies in the Muslim World by supporting Israel.

October 2 Rally in Washington

Reuters portrays the rally as such:

(Reuters) - Tens of thousands of people rallied near the Lincoln Memorial in the U.S. capital on Saturday as liberal groups attempted to energize their base a month before pivotal congressional elections. ...

The rally was sponsored by unions, civil rights groups and liberal activists who have been struggling to get their messages heard during an election campaign in which media coverage has focused on voter anger over unemployment, a weak economy and government deficits.

Here are some photos from Director Blue

Why is it that the objective media always edit out the Socialist signs? Is it because these "liberal activists" are somewhat damaging to the image the media wants to put forth? After all, what's wrong with being a Socialist?

Isn't Keynesian "middle-of-the-road?"
Isn't higher taxes on the rich and ever more regulation "middle-of-the-road?"

What is the difference in policy objectives between those marching under the Socialist banner and progressives?

Islam and The Golden Mean

"PROOF" that Islam is the One True Religion. I found it interesting -- not convincing of course -- but I guess it proves that I'm a sucker for these Golden Mean arguments.

By "sucker" for Golden Mean arguments, I'm not suggesting that I am swayed by the argument, only that I enjoy hearing it.

Assuming that there were no "mistakes" in the Golden Mean calculations the key counter point to this "Mecca and the Golden Mean" argument is: "are there any other places, especially religious sites, on this planet by which the same argument could be made?"

Frazier Gives Obama Political Advice

I never particularly liked or watched Cheers but this video (Hat Tip: The Hedgehog Report) was funny and spot on.




Frazier: "Just tell us more of those farm stories. People seem to love those."
Frazier: "If that doesn't work just say the word change about 100 times."
...
Frazier: "Trust me Woody, with my brains and your smile who knows how high we can go, Congressman, Senator, who knows?"


Cheers: Woody Gets an Election
First Aired: April 22, 1993
Season: 11
Episode: 265