SearchSearch using pMachine
Don't stay in bed, unless you can make money in bed. - George Burns
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Restoring Sanity? Or Restoring Liberalism?
Yesterday saw 200,000 people or more attend Jon Stewart’s and Stephen Colbert’s Rally to Restore Sanity.
I don’t think there’s any deep meaning to it—Allahpundit called it Irony-Stock, which seems as good a name as any. I find it disconcerting that they invited Cat Stevens, who supported that Fatwah against Salman Rushdie. I’m sure it was fun—certainly a lot more fun than listening to one of Rush’s or Hannity’s latest (and increasingly boring) rants about Obama destroying America. But let’s not confuse with it substance.
I did have a few scattered thoughts, however. Not so much on the rally itself but on the whole idea of “restoring sanity” to our politics
First of all, the idea “restoring” sanity seems a bit ignorant of political history. Politics has always been an ugly business, which is why conservatives and libertarians prefer that as much of our lives as possible is lived outside of its confines. When vast piles of money and power are controlled by words and influence, the fight over them gets unpleasant. It’s better than actual physical fighting, I suppose, but it’s the nature of the beast.
Politics has been nasty and unreasonable since Oogh ran for Cave King. Our own political history has included Thomas Jefferson calling John Adams a hermaphrodite and Adams calling Jefferson a coward. It has included the Trail of Tears, the Civil War, a senator beating another on the Senate floor, unnecessary wars, corruption, influence-peddling, state-sanctioned discrimination and the Red Scare. Right now, African Americans vote overwhelming for the party that supported slavery and segregation for over a century while Republicans vote for a party that crushed state rights and spawned the progressive era.
Restore sanity? How about injecting some for the first time? That’s something I could accept.
The Information Age did not create the insanity but it has exposed much of it for what it is. The days when people could claim, without criticism, that John F. Kennedy would take his orders from the Vatican (actual claim made in the South) are long gone. What is happening is not an increase in an unreason, but a pushback against it. It may seem that the extreme response to Obama—the drumbeat that he is a crypto-socialist who hates America—is something new. But Andrew Ferguson, in the process of destroying Dinesh D’Souza’s poorly-researched claim that Obama is a secret Kenyan anti-colonialist, reminds us of what was going on in politics just ten years ago:
I believed everything that was said about Clinton. That he was a child-of-the-60’s communist-sympathizing Far Left radical who was going to ruin America and murdered Vince Foster. In retrospect, I’m not sure what I was smoking. Clinton was liberal and made some whack-job appointments, but even before the Republicans won Congress, he got NAFTA passed and got spending cut. Indeed, this is why I refuse to embrace the idea that Obama hates America, that Obama wants us brought down, that Obama is “apologizing” for America, that Obama doesn’t think America is exceptional (based on one sentence of a speech that elides several pages of extolling American values). He’s more liberal than Clinton and, as we saw in his Daily Show interview, sees what he’s done as the first step toward more, especially on healthcare. He’s wrong, but I don’t think he’s evil. And the reason I don’t think so I went on the “Democrats Hate America” crazy train back in the 90’s. I’m not interested in another ride.
So the Rally to Restore Sanity is, in my opinion, not about restoring sanity but about injecting some. To be frank, this is long overdue. We need some sanity around here, especially when it comes to our fiscal situation.
However, before moving on, I should note that “being reasonable” is not, in of itself, virtuous. There are some issues we should be unreasonable about. It was Barry Goldwater who said, “I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!” We should not be reasonable to thing like free speech and due process of law. Torture is an issue on which I do not want to moderate and I suspect Stewart and Colbert wouldn’t want to either. If you fundamentally believe that abortion is murder, why should you moderate that view? (Indeed, this is why I rarely raise the abortion issue in this forum—because I think both sides have staked out incompatible but defensible views). If you believe that war is never justified, why should you be reasonable about it?
You can’t make fundamental differences go away by being reasonable about them. The best you can hope for is to keep them out of the public domain as much as possible.
In fact, I suspect that there are many issues that Stewart/Colbert would be unreasonable about if those issues were the ones of the day. And when seen in that light, their rally takes on a different tone. What they’re saying is that people should be reasonable about certain issues—issues on which they think there’s room for compromise, but issues other may not.
Frankly, I find that a bit arrogant. It’s easy to be “reasonable” on healthcare reform or cap-and-trade when you are wealthy and those issues are unlikely to affect you. It’s a bit different when you’re a doctor looking at shrinking Medicare payments or an academic looking at rising health insurance rates or a middle-class mom looking at rises heating bills.
To be blunt, unreason is sometimes a perfectly reasonable response. It’s not unreasonable to not want to be killed by a terrorist. It’s not unreasonable to be scared of losing your job and being unemployed for a long time. It’s not unreasonable to be worried about our debt. It’s not unreasonable to be angry that your industry is hurting. I’m not saying we should let people’s emotions over-ride necessary policy: people were nervous about integration too. But we should at least acknowledge that concerns, fear and even anger can be fully justified. And sometimes even right.
To sum up, the “Rally to Restore Sanity” is a misnomer. You can’t restore something hat has rarely been there. There are some issues which no amount of sanity is going to resolve. And there are many issues on which our fear and unreason are perfectly justified.
Despite this, however, I do feel some sympathy for the Rally because I do think there is a problem in our politics that we need to deal with. I just think they’ve identified the wrong problem. It’s not a new problem, but it’s one we can no longer put up with. What we need less of in our society is not really fear, partisanship, anger or passion—although certainly those should all be much smaller in a society as wealthy and safe as ours. No, what we need less of is bullshit.
Bullshit is the problem that is afflicting America right now. The debate over Obamacare should have been about the Law of Unintended Consequences, the impossibility of increasing care and cutting costs and the options of severing the job-insurance link or moving America toward major medical. Instead, it got side-tracked into bullshit about death panels and whether Obama is a socialist. And the irony is that this bullshit didn’t help. Not only did Obamacare pass, it passed with deep fundamental flaws like the 1099 requirement and the gaming of the CBO.
And to ping the Left: the debate over the War in Iraq should have been about the reality of the WMDs or the wisdom of invading a country as ethnically complex as Iraq. We should have been debating whether we had enough troops to control such a big country and whether we had the right people in place for the reconstruction. We should have talked about the duration being longer than the war. Instead, we got No Blood for Oil and Halliburton. And the irony is that this not only failed to stop the war, it allowed it to go forward with a game plan that would shame the Underpants Gnomes.
It’s perfectly reasonable to have a firm point of view that is opposed to others. It’s perfectly reasonable to be unreasonable when it comes to death and taxes and war and debt. What is unreasonable is to mischaracterize the opposition’s view, to prop them up into an easily beaten straw man, to make outrageous and frequently false claims about their point of view or their stance on the issues.
And it’s outraged even further by the meme of never admitting that you were wrong. Has Sarah Palin ever backed down from her death panels rhetoric? Has Christopher Monckton ever owned up to the flatly false claims he makes in his global warming “skepticism”? Have the Democrats ever backed off from the meme that civil rights would go backward with Republicans in charge? Will Mark Critz ever admit that he’s lying about the Fair Tax? No, no, no and no.
What we need is not a Rally to Restore Sanity. What we need to a Rally to Stop Bullshit.
Here’s my problem with Stewart/Colbert: they are very good at calling out the Right Wing for their bullshit. But they’ve taken a far easier stand on the Left Wing. Oh, they’ll occasionally hit Olbermann or Maddow or Code Pink. But do they call out Democrats when they say that Republicans want to “gut” Medicare and Social Security? Do they call out Democrats when they say Republicans want to ship our jobs to China? Do they call out anyone when slowing the growth in a program is referred to as a “draconian cut”? When Bush tried to eliminate a few wasteful and redundant programs, did they mock the defenders of those programs? Or did they mock Bush? Do they treat Charlie Crist with the same contempt with which they treated Joe Lieberman? Notice also the Medals of Reasonableness they gave out. The most prominent was to Velma Hart, who called out Obama ... for not being liberal enough.
So how about it, boys? The Republicans are about to retake Congress. And we can bet that, within months, the Left will be screaming that our water is dirtier, our air is dirtier, our people are poorer, our civil rights worse, our healthcare worse—whether these things are true or not. Are you going to slam them? Are you going to mock them? Are you going to ask them to be rational?
Because if you’re not, than all this rally is about is Left Wing smugness. It’s about a Left that thinks their views are “reasonable” and “rational” and that the only thing keeping us from a liberal paradise is the “extreme” rhetoric of the other side; their refusal to simply admit that liberal ideas are the best ones.
And that would make you the biggest cynics of all.
Update: Photos of signs here. Some are funny (#30) is my favorite) but notice how far they tilt to the Left. And notice also that one picture out of the hundred has 9/11 Truthers in it. According to the UCLA study, this would mean there was a similar percentage of Truther signs at the Sanity rally as there were racist signs at the Tea Party rally. I wonder if they will play an equally large role in the media coverage.
Update: The media backed off from covering the rally, probably because they were afraid to make the Left look as dumb as they’ve made the Right look. Reason, however, was there.Close this post...
Friday, October 29, 2010
Apparently, they were targeted at Chicago-area synagogues.
Updates as event warrant. Even if the material wasn’t explosive, I would think this was a test of our security.
Posted by Hal_10000 on 10/29/10 at 11:33 AM in War on Terror/Axis of Evil • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink •
Still in denial
The left is still in denial. They are not about to lose the coming election because the American people have seen what the left is about and have turned their back on that, nope, they are losing because the incredibly dominant propaganda from the republicans machine!
Kerry must be one of these people that believes ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, NPR, and all the other collectivist DNC propagandists really are right wing organizations. That and/or the American people are stupid know nothings because they don’t believe the propaganda from the MSM of how great the collectivist’s governance really is over the reality that things are dire that they experience daily.
After I got done laughing at this I ruminated. By truth he means whatever the left tells us is the truth, I guess. Because they have not really been very truthful about anything other than the fact that they believe our money really is theirs and we are too stupid to make any decisions on our own. And I am sure that his invocation of science is because nobody that isn’t a moron still believes the crap the consensus AGW cult shovels out of their manure truck. And the left reacts to facts the same way that vampires react to garlic, holy symbols, or holy water: they recoil in pain.
In fact, Kerry is really pissed that people don’t fall for the drivel his party is feeding us. How dare we serfs not accept what our betters tell us and bow down to their whims, huh? More please Mr. Kerry! More people need to see how you elitists think of us serfs. It will be a long time before your side can pretend they are about “hope and change” again, because the American people have had a harsh does of your hope and change first hand, and they are not inclined to take another bite of that shit sandwich. And I am all for you reminding us constantly how low your opinion of us really is!
Posted by AlexinCT on 10/29/10 at 06:46 AM in Deep Thoughts Elections Election 2010 Left Wing Idiocy Politics Law, & Economics Science and Technology The Press Machine • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink •
The Sleaziest Piece of Shit in Memory
That’s what David Weigel calls Gawker’s recent post from an anonymous person claiming he had a one-night encounter with Christine O’Donnell. I have read the piece but refuse to link to it. Weigel is absolutely right. It is a piece of shit. What’s more, it crosses me as a lying piece of shit. Every word of it rang false to me, especially because he boasts that he turned her down. O’Donnell is many things, but she’s not unattractive. Especially not to a single in his 20’s. The article breathlessly says it has pictures and it does—pictures of O’Donnell, fully dressed, smiling at the camera. You can find racier pictures of her on Google.
What’s amazing is how universal the disgust with this hit piece is. Even Charles Johnson—yes, Charles fucking Johnson—calls it “one of the creepiest smear jobs I’ve seen”. NOW—yes, NOW—has denounced it. So have Donna Brazille and Media Matters (Sullivan is observing a disturbing radio silence). Read a summary of disgust here from Malkin.
I will add one last note. Even if every single word of that piece of shit is true, I don’t care. It does not affect my opinion of O’Donnell one way or the other. Actually, no, it would make me more sympathetic to her since it’s very human to be unable to live up to our ideals. I don’t care if she’s a Religious Right Culture Warrior. An indiscretion by any single woman a decade ago is a matter of supreme indifference to me. Unless it actually involved me, in which case I’m sure it was awesome.
(While we’re on that note: a month ago, a similar minor scandal erupted when Gawker posted racy Halloween pictures of Congressional candidate Krystal Ball. What was interesting it that she and others responded with outrage and then ... nothing happened. No one cared. Well, some people cared because she’s kind of hot. But it had absolutely no effect on her minimal electoral chances.
The Ball incident was not quite as bad as this one. That was embarrassing pictures; this is an anonymous and frankly nasty slur. But I do wonder if we may be—at long last—moving to a point where no one gives a shit about what someone did in their wild single years. We’ve gotten to the point where every stupid/fun thing we do is immortalized in all its digital glory. That’s forcing us to come to the inevitable conclusion: nobody’s perfect. We muddle along as best we can and try to have some fun along the way. And if it means an embarrassing picture or two turns up down the road ... well, that’s life in the Internet Age.)
Really, these guys are almost making me pull for O’Donnell to win just because it would piss them off so much.
Update: Actually, you know what the Gawker piece reminds me of? Some drunken frat boy saying, “Oh, yeah, Christine O’Donnell? I totally could have nailed that chick. She was all over me, man.” I didn’t buy that shit in college and I’m certainly not buying it now.
Update: Sullivan comes through:
Sully points out that Gawker paid low four figures for the story and pics. Considering the traffic they’re getting, they probably think it’s worth it.
And so this, from Weigel.
Amen. I think these guys expected everyone to start crowing that O’Donnell was a hypocritical slut. But, in the end, this will end up making her look better.
Posted by Hal_10000 on 10/29/10 at 06:29 AM in Elections Election 2010 • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink •
Thursday, October 28, 2010
This is the exact opposite of true. Cato takes apart the specific example:
Read the whole thing, which cites numerous Cato scholars on the subject of railroads. The subsidies and incentives Lincoln put in place spawned decades of corruption and bankruptcy.
But we don’t need to go that far back. The communications explosion of the last couple of decades was created by deregulation of the telecom industry. Yes, the government created ARPANET. But almost everything that has come since has been from private industry. What government flunky though of the iphone? What political hack forced industry to developed hard drives that fit into the palm of your hand? (Just this moment, my wife is ransacking the house looking for a data card that is small enough to get lost and spacious enough to contain thousands of digital pictures).
What about HDTV? During the Bush I years, industry demanded subsidies to develop HDTV. Bush refused. I don’t know if you’ve been to a Best Buy lately, but HDTV seems to be doing just fine.
And don’t even get me started on energy policy. This administration is an avid and vocal supporter of energy-consuming, sky-polluting, planet-warming, poor-people-starving ethanol fuel—the Mother of All Boondoggles that would simply not exist without government subsidies and mandates. Our economy and the planet would be better off if we simply burned money in our fuel tanks instead of corn ethanol. Then there is the long ugly history of the Synthetic Fuels Corporation.
Now all lies contain some truth in them and there is something to what Biden is trying, in his ham-fisted, mealy-mouthed way, to say (funny how much less articulate he gets when he can’t plagiarize). As Adam Smith noted, there is a role for government in funding things that benefit the public generally but are not narrow enough to benefit an interest specifically. Roads and railroads, for example (to some extent). General science funding—controlled by peer-review and not by Congress—has helped make this country the world leader in science (necessary disclosure: I am paid out of federal science grants). NASA spending has stimulated enormous technological breakthroughs. NIH funding has helped uncovered genetic markers of disease and lay down the basics of the discoveries the pharmaceutical industry then turns into practical treatment. And, as I noted, ARPANET was what the internet was built on. But all of the big breakthroughs—except NASA—came when government simply put up the money and let scientists and engineers figure out what to do. Very very little has ever come from politicians issuing edicts and trying to rewrite the laws of physics.
So there is a role for government. But that role is limited and consists mainly of the economy of scale—of being able to bring large sums of money to bear on specific limited problems or providing apolitical funding to science and technology. But the idea that “every single great idea” has come from government is sheer poppycock. Government creates the conditions necessary for success; it does not create success.
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
If a republican did this…
If we had a republican controlled White House asking the Pentagon for information on the likely opponents for the next election cycle, like the Obama WH has just done, the left would be screaming “WATERGATE” and demanding impeachment proceedings.
The only reason ABC is now reporting this, and as if nothing is bad and the whole thing is legal, which while it is still, doesn’t remove the fact that this is a scummy big brother-like move that we should point out repeatedly, is because they want to put a positive spin on it. Can you imagine how it would be reported if a republican candidate asked the Pentagon for the same about demcorats? And do you understand how early this request has been made and what the likely reason is? These scumbag demcorats play scorched earth politics, and we better get them exposed or beat them at this game, or we will lose. Of course, every leftist moron will tell you the dirty tactics are all and only from republicans and their machine!
Posted by AlexinCT on 10/27/10 at 02:12 PM in Elections Election 2010 Left Wing Idiocy • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink •
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Guys, You’re Not Helping
Last week, we had Joe Miller’s bodyguards—active duty military personnel actually—illegally arrested and handcuffed and aggressive reporter. Last night, we had this:
The backstory is that this woman is Moveon member who tried to present Rand Paul with some kind of bogus award for being the most valuable Republican in merging our government with corporate interests. She’s a moron, but there’s no excuse for this kind of violence, even if the recipient is a moron. This is shameful.
Of course, you just know the media is going to run full tilt with this. The comparisons to 1933 Germany have already begun (with, of course, the ignoring of similar union-related violence).
The thing is that we don’t have the margin for error that the liberals do. We have to be on our best behavior at all times. This shouldn’t really need saying. It’s 2010. Everyone has a smart phone except me and my cat (and she’s been pricing iphones lately). The minute anyone does something stupid, it’s going to be YouTube. And if it’s done by a conservative, Chris Matthews will be comparing it to the Beer Hall Putsch three second later.
Every little incident, especially for the next week, is going to be taken as a sign of the coming Tea Party Police State. Just look at the sign business. Even a study of the Tea Parties found very few racist signs. And yet the Democrats are still running around claiming that Tea Party protests feature swastikas, black-face and burning effigies.
Brace yourself. We’re going to get more of this. Not because of a surge of Right Wing violence but because of a surge of Left Wing desperation. The best we can hope for is that people don’t act as stupidly as the guys in this video did.
Posted by Hal_10000 on 10/26/10 at 07:57 PM in Elections Election 2010 • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink •
That’s a great start..
This, looks like a classy and very smart move by the GOP. Beats that Greek temple cermony of 2008. Hope they also don’t lose track of the msesage the public is sending, and let’s hope it is just the start of all the changes to put big government on the diet it needs by the GOP. Boehner and the republicans better do more than stuff for show though, or they will be feeling the pain in 2012 too and be banished to go join the demcorats.
Posted by AlexinCT on 10/26/10 at 10:34 AM in Deep Thoughts Elections Election 2010 • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink •
Things that make you go hmmmmm?
One of Wall Streets corporate giants, you know, one of those evil company our resident class warfare spouting communist pretending to be something else accuses of running America with help from the evil republicans, just endorsed Obama and demcorats.
If you go by campaign contributions, Vanguard isn’t alone in backing demcorats either. Despite the massive propaganda, republicans can’t come close to offering the return on investment demcorats do for these companies. And even though donations to demcorats are down, you are still getting this sort of tacit recommendation from those that scored big because of demcorat’s largesse with tax payer money. Remember that the next time muirgeo1 spouts how evil republicans and corporations rule the world and make it an unjust place for the middle class.
Posted by AlexinCT on 10/26/10 at 08:00 AM in Elections Election 2010 Politics Law, & Economics • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink •
Want to bet this would be all over the news if a republicans were in charge of things?
Last week I pointed out to my wife that the price of gas had gone up almost 20 cents in just 3 short weeks here in Connecticut, with no real reason for this hike to happen that I could tell of. The US economy is still in a slump, people are cutting back on discretionary stuff, and trips definitely fall in that category, I don’t know of any new state or federal taxes or mandates imposing new gas regulations that might impact price, and while the energy industry is likely switching over to production of heating oil in preparation for winter - one I have a feeling is going to be a doozie up here in the North East – and this might impact available gasoline supply and thus price, nothing else came to mind that could drive such a drastic price jump. Even more interesting was the fact that nobody was talking about this news.
A quick look at the details for the year yielded this graph confirming the hike.
So I did some more digging and found out that this isn’t normal at all.
So we have an event that defies historical trends before an election, and then in a negative way for consumers during bad economic times, right before and election, and the MSM doesn’t seem to think it is a big deal? Three guesses why this is the case and the first 2 don’t even count. The Washington Times article blames crude prices for the hike:
There’s a graph for that too, and while that one concurs on the price, I am not seeing that big of a reason for that jump in gas prices we have as the ppb hasn’t gone up by that much.
So why the price hikes at this time? We know that Obama and the left have always wanted to control consumption of energy and that they have often said they would like gas priced at ridiculous ranges, anywhere from $4.50 all the way up to $12 a gallon, so people would drive less and depend more on public transportation, but to do anything to push this agenda right before an election you are looking at being murdered in already, seriously seems implausible to me even for the stupid democarats. It’s beyond suicidal. So what’s going on then that’s jacking up prices? At this point your guess is as good as mine. The news to me however is that the MSM isn’t reporting it, and obviously why they are not is, that it is damaging to already embattled demcorats. Note that I am not blaming demcorats for this hike because there is no proof they are or the likely idiotic anti-oil parts of their agenda are behind the hike. Certainly we all can agree however, that if republicans were in charge, the MSM would be blaming them for this in order to help demcorat’s election prospects.Close this post...
Posted by AlexinCT on 10/26/10 at 06:28 AM in Elections Election 2010 Politics Law, & Economics The Press Machine • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink •
Monday, October 25, 2010
Some “encouraging” news…
Here’s some information about our debt spending everyone should keep in mind.
Thank you, Nancy! Then again, if you listen to the economic geniuses on the left, the problem faced by our economy and the anemic growth is because Nancy and her buddies didn’t spend enough! If we were 10 trillion in debt the economy would be growing at 5%. Shit, lets go 30 trillion in debt and make that baby really fly. Let me pre-empt muirgeo1 and say “Evil corporations did it!” so he can spare us that crap. More of the same, or some change? Let’s “Hope” we get that “Change”!
Update: When asked for commentary Nancy said: Our media shills have not been effective at selling the shit sandwich we have given America as gourmet food!
Posted by AlexinCT on 10/25/10 at 10:01 AM in Deep Thoughts Elections Election 2010 Left Wing Idiocy Politics Law, & Economics • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink •
Pelosi Update, Part 692
Nancy Pelosi did say we had to pass healthcare to find out what was in it. And, oh ye gods, are we finding out:
Oh, but I’m sure these guys are some Right Wing flunky group.
In other words, this is a feature, not a bug. Note also, later in the article, that Families USA is talking out of both sides of their mouth. They later turn around and say the bill will cut the deficit. That is, they use one estimate to tell use how many federal goodies we get and another to tell us how much is going to cost. That, my friends, is the definition of mathematical practice.
About damned time..
It looks like the people at the DoD and/or State have finally wizened up and are now telling the Pakistanis that those billions in military aid come with strings attached. And for once it isn’t useless “feel good” nonsense demands by the left, for things they turn a blind eye too as long as it is their buddies doing it in the name of the left’s collectivist revolution, but actually something that will help the US and our foreign policy out.
The Pakistanis have of course reacted to this as I expected they would:
Basically, we hate your guts, want your money, and you better not expect us not to use it in a way that ends up hurting you if we want that, because we are ingrates. They can kiss my arse. With friends like this we really don’t need enemies. Let the Chinese pay the Pakistanis if the intent is to check India in the region. That’s their goal. We should be doing everything possible to get India on our side and to make Pakistan less likely to support any kind of terrorism.
Update: Changed the language that some have construed as offensive. That was not the intent I had at all, but in the world we live today were the PC police is ready to accuse everyone of being evil, I guess it is better to be safe than sorry. Although these bastards that want our tax dollars, with no strings attached, while they then help the very scumbags we are fighting and that are killing our service members or help kill them, sure as hell deserve to be insulted at a minimum.
Posted by AlexinCT on 10/25/10 at 08:55 AM in Politics Law, & Economics War on Terror/Axis of Evil • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink •
Some politicians are getting it.
Pawlenty gets it. In this PJTV interview with Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit, he said the one thing I was hoping to hear from republicans about this coming election: If the GOP fooks it up again, Americans should vote for a 3rd party in 2012.
At least Pawlenty gets it. If it is more of the same, back to the same old crap where they grow government at 10% of the pace the demcorats are doing it, then Americans are going to boot them too in 2012. We have had enough of this collectivist shit. It is a recipe for mediocrity at best, and a dastardly disaster in the making any other time. This is precisely why the demcorats, the angry left, have been so terrorized by the Tea Parties, and out to destroy the movement before it gets too much traction. As a political movement they stand to lose the most if Americans steer away from the crappy & drastically over priced government we have now. The GOP however shouldn’t delude itself into thinking that they can pick up where they left, unless they want to share the fate of the demcoratic party.
Posted by AlexinCT on 10/25/10 at 08:02 AM in Elections Election 2010 Left Wing Idiocy Politics • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink •
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Hating the Player Instead of the Game
PJ O’Rourke appears to have come to the same conclusion that Hal outlined in his previous post:
I want to highlight something that Hal wrote that dovetails nicely with this:
Hal’s not throwing around hyperbole with that statement. A brief run through the archives brings up these statements from muirgeo:
And let’s not forget this famous quote, which pretty much confirms what Hal and PJ are saying:
That’s just from our little corner of the Internet; it’s not hard to find similar sentiments expressed all across the Team Blue-oriented blogs.
The focus on the O’Donnell/Coons race in Delaware is instructive. O’Donnell, to be quite blunt, has been getting creamed in the polls ever since the primary ended. She doesn’t have a hope in hell of winning, and never did even before her past and personal philosophies were splashed all over the media. Normally, no one would really be paying attention to a Senate race that had such a foregone conclusion as this one. But like Sarah Palin, O’Donnell has served a purpose for the Left as a convenient boogeyman/scapegoat/nexus of hatred that has allowed Democrats and progressives to avoid actually practicing any sort of self-introspection as to why they are about to get crushed on a nationwide scale.
I suspect a great deal of this anger is rooted in the frustration by the Left that the populist wave that they normally exploit to the utmost is running completely against them right now, and the feeling that an opportunity to consolidate permanent power in the regime is slipping away from them (a sentiment that is ludicrous, really, seeing as how the bureaucratic apparatus that nurtures their social engineering fetishes remains ever-permanently ensconced.) They were predicting another 40-year run of dominance, but completely misread as to exactly why they were put into office. It’s gotten to the point that even James Carville has to admit that Bush-bashing is counterproductive, and will not help the Democrats. The Left has been scrambling trying to find an effective “boogeyman” for their base to focus that populist anger on, and have failed miserably. Blaming Fox News hasn’t worked. Blaming John Boehner hasn’t worked. Blaming Bush no longer works. Blaming Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh hasn’t worked. Blaming Christine O’Donnell hasn’t worked. And so they’ve directed that anger onto the voters themselves and people who are questioning their policies, calling them racists, rubes, and battered spouses. PJ, though, has an idea of who the batterer actually is:
Posted by on 10/24/10 at 10:42 AM in Elections Election 2010 Politics • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink •
Who's Logged In
Total Members: 27587
Links and Info
The ACLU and Terry Jones
Most recent entries
This page has been viewed 43781863 times