Vote R in the Midterms – Don’t Stay Home, Don’t Vote Independent or Libertarian

Everyone who wants to see Harry Reid dethroned in two weeks, raise your hand.

Republicans are expected to take the Senate, but the elections are far from decided. Some of the races are too close for comfort, because Democrats know how to “find” votes when they need them. The truth is, the conservative base needs to come out in massive numbers – no staying home and sulking because the establishment this or the establishment that. No “protest” ( throwaway) vote for a third party. The only way to save the country – or at least slow down its demise is to crush the Democrats in numbers.

An animated Ann Coulter came out of her “bat cave” to appear on Hannity, Tuesday,  to talk about why it’s so important for Conservatives to vote  R in two weeks. And I’m posting the video because I agree with her message 100%.

I know the Republican establishment can be somewhat *disappointing* at times, but don’t even think about voting third party, people. As Coulter notes, we need to have 53-54 seats to provide some padding for 2016, when we’re expected to lose a few. If ObamaCare is ever to be overturned, the Senate has to be in Republican hands when Obama leaves office.

But first, Sean wanted to talk about the nothingburger “has-been intern” Monica Lewinsky story, which Coulter impatiently pushed aside. “At one point I felt sorry for her, but this is getting to be like some aging celebrity’s farewell tour,” she quipped.

Also important – a new Citizens United documentary featuring Michelle Malkin reveals how far left, big moneyed interests poured into Colorado and turned it from red to blue. The same tactics are being used in Texas, and several other states, Malkin says, visibly  disgusted by the rank hypocrisy displayed by  the left as it rails against right leaning donors like the Koch Brothers.

Malkin appeared on the Kelly File to talk about the film, Rocky Mountain Heist:

Here’s a report CNN did on Alison Lundergan Grimes’ embarrassing family business. It’s apropos because she’s staked out positions on the minimum wage and feminism which Hugh Jass – the family business she has worked for – has a mortifyingly bad record on.

Via Truth Revolt: CNN Reports On Alison Grimes’ Hugh Jass Hypocrisy Awkward Family Promos:

“I’m fighting for all Kentuckians, all working Americans across this nation. I don’t believe $7.25 an hour raises a family of four above the poverty level,” says Grimes. However,CNN reports that “her family’s burger joint pays some tipped staffers minimum wage.” It’s a point that Grimes was happy to dodge.

“My family is not in this race. I’m on the ballot. And as much as Mitch McConnell wants to attack my family, he has from the beginning, I’m going to stay focused on the issues. And for me, it’s about making sure that hard working Kentuckians have a bright future. And that future includes having not just a minimum wage, but a living wage.”

SEE ALSO:

Powerline: THE DEMOCRATS GO BACK TO THEIR RACIST ROOTS [UPDATED]

Faced with major electoral losses this year, the Democratic Party is pulling out all the stops. For them, that means descending, again, into racism. As Glenn Reynolds says:

Democrats used to use racial fearmongering to get white voters to turn out. Now they use racial fearmongering to get black voters to turn out. Not much else has changed….

The Democratic Party is trying to use the shooting of Michael Brown by police officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson, Missouri to stimulate black turnout. There is zero reason to believe that the Brown incident had anything to do with race. Is there any evidence that Wilson, if attacked by a 6′ 4″, 292 pound white man, would not have shot him? No. Wilson may or may not have overreacted; we may never know for sure. But connecting the incident to race is sheer political opportunism by the Democrats.

The Daily Caller: Does This Video Show A Hispanic Activist Openly Committing Vote Fraud?

YouTube-screenshots-American-DailyIndy

A Republican party official in the largest county in Arizona says surveillance tape shows a progressive Hispanic activist blatantly and openly engaging in vote fraud.

The surveillance video below was recorded on Aug. 25 during this year’s primary election cycle at a central Maricopa County elections processing facility on the edge of downtown Phoenix.

A. J. LaFaro, Chairman of the Maricopa County Republican Committee obtained the video. He was watching the polls that day during the early-voting period voting for the Aug. 26 primary.

“The team processing the early ballots through the optical scanning equipment had gotten way ahead of the ‘upstream’ citizen boards preparing the early ballot batches for processing,” the Republican party official said, according to the Arizona Daily Independent.

While the information systems coordinator was on a long lunch break, he explained, he was “seated at one of the cubicles looking toward the reception area that is now behind bullet proof glass because of the violence and protesting that occurred by militant groups during the November 2012 general election.”

If Democrats win any seats in two weeks, it will be through using tactics like these.

MORE:

Signs that Democrats are going to lose:

WaPo: Democrats have an early vote problem:

Compared to overall voter registration, Iowa and North Carolina Democrats are doing much worse than earlier in the month, and Republicans in those states much better.
 We’ve also added new states that recently began early voting: Nevada, California and Colorado. In each, Republicans are outperforming Democrats.

RCP: A Sign “Democrats Are Going To Lose” Is “There’s Already Finger Pointing”

RON FOURNIER, NATIONAL JOURNAL:
The clearest indication we have that Democrats are going to lose:
My phone was lighting up yesterday with White House officials blaming Senate candidates and the [Democratic] Senate Campaign Committee and Senate campaigns complaining about the White House.
 There’s already finger-pointing inside the Democratic Party
That’s 46 percent to 37 percent for the GOP.

Iowa

2010    DEM + 18,008

2012    DEM + 55,769

2014     DEM + 1,441

This What Educational Failure Looks Like

The expression is that “A picture is worth a thousand words”.

This one is the ultimate intellectual expression of the American Left. In it, one sees the contempt that they have for other people’s achievements, and those who help perpetuate society by safeguarding those achievements and keeping the peace. Any discussion of the inconvenient truth that no matter WHO leads it, Marx/Commu/Socialism will never work is wasted on people who can find eloquence in excrement.  They are blind to a political and economic system that allows the individual to “pursue happiness” by taking responsibility for their own destiny, rather than being yoked to a collective standard chosen by other people.

I have had exchanges with some of the #OWS (Occupy Wall Street) supporters this week on Twitter.  All condemn the “greed” of Wall Street, while being completely blind to their own envy and sense of entitlement to what these “evil” greedy people have. They rail against corporations for their lack of “accountability to the people”, and refuse to acknowledge that corporations answer to their shareholders and the government, and were designed that way, instead of focusing their attentions on the people who were always intended to be accountable to them: elected officials.

They tell their sob stories of hundreds of thousands of dollars in student loan debt for their MFA degrees and living in parents’ basements, unable to get food stamps for their cats, or jobs that allow them to pay back their student loans. Each adds their plaintive voices to a chorus of whiny stories that call themselves “We Are the 99%” as opposed to the evil, greedy 1% of rich people who they feel entitled to “take” from. I’d call them “We Are The Falsely Entitled”. They talk about “new” economic models where workers have a say in how businesses are run, and how they have to “collapse the system” in order to build a society that is “fair” and doesn’t pick winners and losers, which is utter nonsense.  If society didn’t pick winners and losers, then you should be able to go to the corner store and purchase an ice cold Chrystal Pepsi for yourself.  They are immune to the suggestion that it is reasonable and understandable to be angry about a government that picks winners and losers, when its role is to act as referree.

This insistence on “fairness” is the expression of the naive and those blinded by envy, both of whom are eminently willing to surrender a potential that they have been tricked into thinking that they do not have, or that they are too afraid to command for themselves, to people only too willing to harness for their own ends. In either event, their childish notion of “fairness” pervades their demands and beliefs. A fairness that betrays opportunity for a physical equality, doled out by beneficent “rulers” who decide what is best for all and make it the assigned task for society.

But what I find the most offensive is that this segment of society, clinging to their Noam Chomsky readers, talking about the need for greater Democracy everywhere, and approving of every new law made by activist federal courts over the last 40 years utterly rejects the Democratic apparatus we already have.  It is urgent to “collapse the system” because “The Corporations” make all the choices for them, leaving the voter with only Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee when the time comes to cast the ballots. When you point out the flaws in this thinking, such as the success that the Tea Party had in backing and electing candidates in 2010, they only offer the electronic equivalent of a blank stare, followed by “That can’t be right. I saw all about the Tea Party is bad on MSNBC.”

When you suggest that if they really are the 99%, then it should be any problem for them to field and elect their own candidates, the only response is mumbling about corruption. And when you suggest that they simply don’t have the right to “collapse” a system that everyone else in society relies on, and has built their lives around, then they don’t have much to say at all, other than to condemn you as one of the 1% or as someone being led by the nose by that 1%.

As ridiculous as they appear to be, their ignorance and their appetites are dangerous. This is a mob that largely has no understanding of civics, of their political history, both the one that is their birthright, and the one they stupidly embrace, and yet believe that society can and should provide them with a life free from want, difficulty, or hard labor. They demonstrate no understanding that the democracy they cry out for is, at its core, only what 50%+1 wants, or that without safeguards for the minorities that are part of the system they want to collapse, they will inevitably be part of the 49%. While I don’t want to spare them the impact of learning that lesson firsthand, I do not want to live in the environment that would teach them, because revolutions are messy, and the temptation for the rest of the world to interfere is too great.  That means that we HAVE to engage them, and let them know that they are nowhere near being 99%, and that the only reason this has gone on this long is because the rest of us had to get up and go to work in the morning.

Crossposted at Taxes, Stupidity, and Death.

#AttackWatch is a Hit on Twitter (With Updates)


-

TOO FUNNY.

President Thin Skin has revamped his old and patently dishonest “Fight the Smears” Website  under a new name, “Attack Watch”.  With a hip and slightly spooky black, white and red motif, it aims to correct the terrible, awful things people say about the Dear Leader. He doesn’t want to take away your guns,  he really *hearts* Israel, just listen to what world leaders say! He’s deported more Mexicans than anybody, ever! He’s created (or *ahem* saved) eleventy million jobs! etc! etc!

The Obama campaign is launching a new website to handle misinformation against President Obama.

In an email, Obama’s reelection campaign manager, Jim Messina, announced the formation of AttackWatch.com.

“Forming the first line of defense against a barrage of misinformation won’t be easy,” Messina wrote in a fundraising email to campaign supporters. “Our success will depend on a team of researchers and writers to stay on the lookout for false claims about the President and his record, bring you the facts, and hold our opposition accountable.”

As an example, Messina mentioned a claim by presidential candidate Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) that Obama was president when the Troubled Asset Relief Program was passed into law.

Messina said the site will be running from now through November 2012.

Jim f’n Messina!

Jim “Punch back twice as hard” Messina:

Messina’s name came up in this  Patterico report on  the Obama Administration’s responses to the  town halls and Tea Party protests of 2009:

Somewhere between August 2nd and August 6th a strategy was devised that put all tools at the [Obama] administration’s disposal in line and firing at the protesters. August 4th seems to be an important day in the roll out of this strategy. The White House famously posted a new aggressive offensive on their blog calling out what they described as “mis-information” about the proposed bill and directed true-believers to report any sources of these “lies” to a special e-mail address: flag@whitehouse.gov. Also on the 4th, an organization called Health Care for America Now (HCAN) released a document that became a blueprint for intimidation and, ultimately, violence under the guise of confronting the tea party protesters at these town hall meetings.

HCAN is an organization funded by various unions, most significantly SEIU, whose main purpose is to promote and push the effort for government-provided, universal health care. (To understand the SEIU’s reasons for pushing for this government health care, read this post.) The National Field Director for HCAN is Margarida Jorge. Margarida Jorge used to work for the SEIU as an organizing director.”

HCAN and Jorge issued detailed instructions (set forth at the BigGovernment link) on how to organize health care support and to limit protesters’ ability to gain media attention and ask questions at last summer’s Congressional health care events. The DNC, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and leftist blogs joined HCAN in criticizing the Tea Party protesters as “angry mobs” and calling for liberals to push back.

White House involvement became clear when, on August 6 as David Axelrod and Jim Messina talked to Senators about how to handle health care meetings with constituents, Messina promised: ”If you get hit, we will punch back twice as hard.” Thus:

“Two days after the instructions on how to manage and control protestors at town hall meetings were released by Margarida Jorge at HCAN, one day after the Speaker of the House likened protestors to Nazis and mere hours after President Obama’s top political advisors assured Congressional Democrats that “If you get hit, we will punch them back twice as hard”, Kenneth Gladney lay beaten and bloody on the ground outside Rep. Russ Carnahan’s Town Hall meeting.”

Now we have Messina in charge of “Attack Watch”, but who’s going to be doing the attacking?

Conservative Twitter users are having a blast tonight, as @AttackWatch debuts on Twitter:

DLoesch: So glad #attackwatch is here to dispel those unfounded attacks involving Solyndra, Gibson, Fast and Furious, Gulf moratorium, NBPP, etc.
Paceset9999RT @TimGamble: #Attackwatch The head of Obama’s Jobs council, Jeffrey Immelt, is sending lots of jobs to China.Please stop him. @attackwatch
blogho Dear #attackwatch There are several former Dems who are in my tea party group. Is there a reward for turning them in?
keder Hey @AttackWatch, I heard GE’s Jeff Immelt flies in a cororate jet. Get him! #attackwatch
ctsa How 1930’s Germany of you Barry. #AttackWatch
MrsD55 Dear #attackwatch, Somebody made a Barack Obama joke the other day.
MrsD55 Dear #attackwatch, I heard that Vann Jones said, “F*** it, I’m buying some gold.”
MikeShawTV #attackwatch – When you care to narc on the very best
thomasa56 Hey, #Attackwatch I saw someone making Obama look bad. His name was Barack Obama.
-
And so on. There are too many too keep up.
-
SEE ALSO:
-
-
You’ve got to give them credit for chutzpah. Most totalitarians pay you to report opposition to the state, these guys ask you for your money instead.
Mark Steyn at The Corner: Attack of the AttackWatch!

Jonah, re the President urging his supporters to report dissenters to ThinSkinWatch.com, I was flattered to discover via  a reader that I am the only sinister foreigner to be honored with my own page of Presidential smears at TouchyAndInsecure.com. You can find it here – http://www.attackwatch.com/tag/mark-steyn/ .

UPDATE:

The hashtag was already in heavy rotation by Twitter users by Wednesday morning, but many users are conservatives such as columnist Michelle Malkin, who offered upher own daily column as an example of an Obama “attack.”The website is meant to be “the first line of defense against a barrage of misinformation,” according to an email from Obama’s campaign manager announcing the launch on Tuesday.

UPDATE II:

LOL -

For more information, visit http://twitter.com/misfitpolitics.

UPDATE III:

More MSM coverage:

AoSHQ: Oh No: Washington Post Headline, “Attack Watch, new Obama campaign site to ‘fight smears,’ becomes laughing stock of the Internet”CBS News Political Hotsheet: Conservatives mock Obama’s “AttackWatch.com”

 

Linked by Ace of Spades HQ, and Cold Fury, thanks!

If any of you morons figured out what the lava joke was about, let me know. I didn’t get it, either.

Share

Obama: Not Honest, Not Smart

graphic via iknowjack.com

Yesterday, Charles Fried wrote a risible and scoff-worthy piece at The Daily Beast entitled:  Obama Is Too Good For Us. I excerpted this already, yesterday, but it bears repeating:

Barack Obama is not a skillful strategist like Bill Clinton. He is not a gifted rhetorician like Ronald Reagan. Nor is he a bold and inspiring leader like Abraham Lincoln. And he can’t seem to shake himself loose from the strings that attach him to the trial lawyers, to big labor, and, surprisingly, to the standard banker-economists who got us into the mess we are in now. But he is an honest man. He is intelligent, analytical, and knowledgeable. And he tries hard to think through the dilemmas which confront us and to tell us clearly and straightforwardly what he wants to do and why he wants to do it.

Now…I have no idea who this Charles Fried is…I can’t tell you if he’s just a fellow left-wing “intellectual” who assumes these things about Obama, because that’s how he sees himself, or if he was engaging in some kind of Alinsky Jedi-Mind trick where he writes flattering and soothing things about the master to keep the scales from falling from the drones’ eyes.   It’s always one of the two – they’re either mindless drones who believe what they want to believe – or they’re true believers in on the ruse. You never know with these people.

Fried’s absurd contention that Obama is “an honest man” disqualified the entire piece from taking up any more of our time. The man is many things, but “honest” is decidedly not one of them. In my post, yesterday, I  linked to my magnum opus from 2008 where I tabulated Obama’s lies, exaggerations, and flip-flops for several months. I also linked to a website that continues to tabulate the lies to this day. We are not talking about differences in opinion, here, but  provable lies. It should be beyond obvious by now to even the most casual observers that, as Jim Geraghty famously noted back in  2008,  all Obama statements come with expiration dates.

Anyone who doesn’t notice this, by now, obvious fact, has to be a mindless drone.  Those who notice, and look the other way, because they’re down with the program, is what we call “a fellow traveler”, and there are many in this category in the MSM. That’s why  so many damaging stories about Obama don’t get explored by said media. We saw this throughout the 2008 election season, and ever since. They won’t report on a damaging story until it’s reached critical mass in alternative media. See ACORN for just one example.

They have had Obama’s back on his stupid birth certificate, his fake Social Security number, all the scandals coming out of his various departments, particularly his thoroughly corrupt DOJ including but not limited to Operation Fast and Furious. They take Obama’s side on the economy, even though it’s he, and his fellow partners in crime in Congress who have brought us to the precarious place we are. Obama’s only half way done, he tells his minions at fundraisers. Half way done with what? Completely destroying the US economy?

The MSM has essentially become an American version of Pravda.

They ask us to believe, despite mounting evidence to the contrary, that Obama is “intelligent, analytical, and knowledgeable”.

Today in his excellent WSJ piece, Is Obama Smart?, Bret Stephens writes:

I don’t buy it. I just think the president isn’t very bright.

Socrates taught that wisdom begins in the recognition of how little we know. Mr. Obama is perpetually intent on telling us how much he knows. Aristotle wrote that the type of intelligence most needed in politics is prudence, which in turn requires experience. Mr. Obama came to office with no experience. Plutarch warned that flattery “makes itself an obstacle and pestilence to great houses and great affairs.” Today’s White House, more so than any in memory, is stuffed with flatterers.

Much is made of the president’s rhetorical gifts. This is the sort of thing that can be credited only by people who think that a command of English syntax is a mark of great intellectual distinction. Can anyone recall a memorable phrase from one of Mr. Obama’s big speeches that didn’t amount to cliché? As for the small speeches, such as the one we were kept waiting 50 minutes for yesterday, we get Triple-A bromides about America remaining a “Triple-A country.” Which, when it comes to long-term sovereign debt, is precisely what we no longer are under Mr. Obama.

Then there is Mr. Obama as political tactician. He makes predictions that prove false. He makes promises he cannot honor. He raises expectations he cannot meet. He reneges on commitments made in private. He surrenders positions staked in public. He is absent from issues in which he has a duty to be involved. He is overbearing when he ought to be absent.Then there’s his habit of never trimming his sails, much less tacking to the prevailing wind. When Bill Clinton got hammered on health care, he reverted to centrist course and passed welfare reform. When it looked like the Iraq war was going to be lost, George Bush fired Don Rumsfeld and ordered the surge.

Mr. Obama, by contrast, appears to consider himself immune from error. Perhaps this explains why he has now doubled down on Heckuva Job Geithner. It also explains his insulting and politically inept habit of suggesting—whether the issue is health care, or Arab-Israeli peace, or change we can believe in at some point in God’s good time—that the fault always lies in the failure of his audiences to listen attentively. It doesn’t. In politics, a failure of communication is always the fault of the communicator.

And so on. Be sure to read the whole thing. Thus far the piece has garnered 1,370 comments, been “liked” 6,708 times on FB. I daresay Mr.  Stephens has struck a chord.

One comment worth reprinting:

 I never got the case that he’s so smart–he never did anything to show it, certainly. Oh, he’s not stupid, but I read a few years ago that someone estimated (based on textual analyses of writings and speeches where we know the president was the primary author) that the average Presidential IQ has been in the 120 range–a bit more than one standard deviation above the mean, about the 70th percentile. That sounds about right for Obama.

But I think that beyond intelligence there is another matter–his appalling ignorance. This is a guy who doesn’t know the difference between liability and collision/comprehensive auto insurance, and no one on his staff does either, as proved during the ObamaCare discussions. He has not a clue about history, or any aspect of science and scientific method. His knowledge of business or economics is a trivialized Keynesianism that only knows how to spend govt money. He does not seem to be well-read, he certainly never tries to use allusion. His vocal style is a turgid imitation of the old Southern Baptist preacher style, but he uses pauses very woodenly and his demeanor, body language, intonations and content are incongruent with each other, projecting weakness, condescension and insincerity, as we saw (not for the first time) in yesterday’s speech. He is highly competitive and a dangerous enemy because he is almost totally amoral and without scruple. He has no problem lying, even to his friends and supporters, to advance his personal interests. He is massively insecure and thin-skinned, esp for a politician.

Thing is, this was all blatantly obvious in 2008, but he won rather decisively. THAT is worth trying to understand.

Massive funds+ in the tank media+complete absence of scruples = electoral success!

UPDATE:

I should have added “mass-amnesia” to that equation. How else can you explain how American  opinions can be so easily manipulated by the liberal narrative?

Thomas Sowell sounding downtrodden today, after initially supporting the debt ceiling deal:

Why was there a financial crisis in the first place? Because of runaway spending that sent the national debt up against the legal limit. But when all the big spending bills were being rushed through Congress, the Democrats had such an overwhelming majority in both houses of Congress that nothing the Republicans could do made the slightest difference.

Yet polls show that many people today are blaming the Republicans for the country’s financial problems. But, by the time Republicans gained control of the House of Representatives, and thus became involved in negotiations over raising the national debt ceiling, the spending which caused that crisis in the first place had already been done — and done by Democrats.

Had the Republicans gone along with President Obama’s original request for a “clean” bill — one simply raising the debt ceiling without any provisions about controlling federal spending — would that have spared the country the embarrassment of having its government bonds downgraded by Standard & Poor’s credit-rating agency?

To believe that would be to believe that it was the debt ceiling, rather than the runaway spending, that made Standard & Poor’s think that we were no longer as good a credit risk for buyers of U.S. government bonds. In other words, to believe that is to believe that a Congressional blank check for continued record spending would have made Standard & Poor’s think that we were a better credit risk.

How on earth do you forget the massive spending spree Dem Socialists have been on since Obama was elected, and the fact that the tea party spontaneously arose from nowhere to fight the insanity?

Rigid, Inflexible Ideologue Pushes Us Closer To Financialgeddon!

We been hearing a lot about inflexible ideologues holding us hostage over this debt ceiling “crisis”, and how childish they are, and how they are terrorists who are taking hostages as part of this process.

Yesterday, they struck again.

It really is amazing just how small of stature some people are.  It must be difficult in among the shadows who are leading from behind with a plan that they dare not clearly present for fear of rejection, and it must be even harder for poor little Harry.  Am I the only one who thinks that without the shoes he clearly has trouble filling, no one would give him another thought five minutes after he speaks?

Turning a Yawning Chasm into a Growing Gulf

“Ever get the feeling you’ve been cheated?”

-Johnny Rotten, at the close of the last Sex Pistols concert.

I’m starting to feel this way every single day.

 Each day, the cries that people who are rejecting or have rejected the status quo “Are stupid, insane, or my personal favorite, “handing the election to Obama” because they just don’t see the wisdom in any debt ceiling fix that gives more spenditol to the hopelessly addicted in D.C. without honest, true (not gimmicky) and most importantly immediate cuts to the Federal Government’s spending grow louder, and I find myself growing more annoyed with people I have more similarities than differences with, not because of the differences, but because their inability to convince me that the compromise they are rallying behind will prevent the calamity they fear has driven them to derision, name-calling, insults, and questioning our patriotism.  In other words, they are acting like the Democrats do when we tell them “No.” too.

Whether it’s the New York Times’ favorite “maverick” referring to the Tea Party as Hobbits, and claiming that “Others know better” than the Tea Party Freshmen in the Congress, or people I respect telling me in serial FB postings that anyone who isn’t for Boehner’s plan to raise the credit limit again in exchange for promises to make some piddling cuts at some time that history tells us will never be made anyway, and then bring us back to this point yet again during election season is the same as a Democrat such as the President, contempt is the tune played with the complete expectation that we will dance, and its put me into a position I never wanted to be in.  I’m being pushed into declaring for the Tea Party.

It isn’t that I had any particular beef with the Tea Party.  My objections have really been more dealing with the movement’s long-term prospects.  As I said to a Republican Tea Party basher on FB:

‎1. I am not a Tea Party member. I enjoyed the fact that it was grassroots and genuine. I never signed on, because I knew that it was destined to be co-opted or marginalized because it threatened the political establishment and their power base.
2. Your willingness to appoint them with a responsibility to “shut people up” chills me a bit. The appeal of the tea party was a central message, and the ability for people who had felt marginalized or removed from the mainstream political process to participate and bring some of their own ideas to the fore. A “leadership” would be counter to that idea.
3. Much of what I’ve feared has come to pass…a degree of co-opting, both actual, and presumed by those for whom it would be handy to do so, and marginalization…by a corrupt media that needed a group of “extremists”, and a political establishment that needed a boogeyman to save us from.
4. And even though I don’t agree with a lot of them, I’d rather have a political system that doesn’t “silence” the fringes, or anything outside the mainstream, largely because I firmly believe that we HAVE to trust the people, in the firm knowledge that they are going to make mistakes (Thanks, 52%ers!) or that none of this political system means anything and we can simply officially appoint those who presume to be our betters as such, and dispense with the charade.

And how did we arrive at this point, anyway?  Really, before we entrust these responsible stewards of the public purse with the ability to spend even more money, isn’t that a question we all should be asking?  If the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, while expecting a different result, then the “compromise” they are offering doesn’t make any damn sense.

The Tea Party owes its existence to government’s reckless and irresponsible spending, and the way that government demonstrated its feeling of entitlement to not only continue spending more money than it takes in, but to continually increase this spending in order to mitigate the consequences of really poor decisions. (Too Big To Fail, anyone?)

It was a terrific thing to behold as it gathered steam, because people who had never given politics a second thought, or only considered it when filling out a ballot were now looking at the ways their elected officials had squandered their trust, and enhanced their own power and finances at the expense of our own personal sovereignty and wallet.  They had realized that government by the professional and the expert first benefits the professional and the expert, and then trickles down only to the extent that doing so will also benefit the professional and the expert.  But this newfound clarity threatens not just the chattering class, whose false narratives and very selective reporting kept the majority of the nation slumbering and dreaming dreams in which every man woman and child was a lottery winner, and never had to be asked to pay for the welfare state that continued to grow in its quest to provide for them from cradle to grave, and so the new narrative began, about these “extremists” who opposed what government hath wrought not because it stifled freedom and opportunity, and confiscated wealth on an enormous scale to redistribute it to others who did nothing to earn it , but because they were “racists who didn’t want a black President to succeed.”  They were haters, who if given an opportunity to do so, would commit unspeakable acts of violence against those who disagreed with them, even kill them if they thought it necessary. 

It was certainly a surprise to the everyday mothers, fathers, grandpas, and grandmas who came to the rallies, and participated in the peaceful protests.  It was a surprise to those who came to townhalls to confront their elected officials about the trust that they so casually abused, only to find themselves shouted down, disrespected, and questioned by their public servants, and their supporters, many of whom freely feed at the public trough.  I know many people who consider themselves part of the Tea Party, one of who graciously lets me co-blog with her when I get the urge to speak up, and the media portrayals of them couldn’t be farther from the truth.  And as irritating as that is, its ok.  One of the things that came clear during the emergence of the Tea Party and the rush of the legacy media to portray them as unhinged extremists is the fact that the self-appointed cognoscenti were defending a power base, and the shriller the denunciations, the more obvious it became to observers that the media members, and their patrons in the Democratic Party were the ones standing naked while commenting to each other about their resplendent wardrobes.  The more they condescended, complained, and projected, the more hollow their lofty pronouncements rang.

And it had a result, as the elections of 2010 proved, and the consequence was a series of election gains in the House of Representatives that completely changed the make up of that body. 

Now we find ourselves facing yet another crisis.  Another in a string of crises that miraculously can only be solved by the federal government spending more money that it does not have, to pay for consequences that it bears the responsibility for.  The only truly good comparison that I can think of is the domestic violence victim who keeps going back to her abuser, because he promises that this time, things will be different…after he tells her that it is her fault that he beats her.  We keep going back, and if we hesitate, we’re told to “get our asses back in line.”  And for all the noise about the approaching deadline, “inflexible ideologues”, and swift and certain financialgeddon, and the absolute and positive need to address this RIGHT NOW, OR ELSE!  and the only option, no matter how it is dressed up, is to increase the credit limit now, and make cuts later, or whenever they can get around to it, if they feel like it, and the moon is in the right phase, with the only real distinctions being how much, and whether or not the timing is politically beneficial to one side or the other, several key facts and follow-up questions keep getting lost.

1.  We actually hit the debt ceiling in May of this year.  In all the hysteria, hyperventilation, finger-pointing, and name-calling, that fact seems to get lost.  One might ask how this got to be a “crisis”, considering the fact that it couldn’t have been a surprise.

2.  The US’s credit rating has already been downgraded.  While I don’t expect it to be a harmless event if the other rating agencies follow, I also noted that the sky didn’t fall, and I didn’t have to take a wheelbarrow full of $100,000.00 bills to the Safeway to buy a loaf of bread after it happened. 

4.  The Democrats have not passed a budget since 2009, despite the fact that it is one of Congress’ duties.  This works to their advantage.  No budget means no parameters on spending.  Anything goes until you hit the ceiling.  Besides, they were too busy with Spendulous, Cash for Clunkers, and Obamacare to actually attend to their duties.  And who do you think you are for asking pointed questions about it anyway, peasant?

5.  Do your creditors maintain your credit score when your debt to income ratio is already too high and you decide that you can and should borrow more?   So why should we believe that a government that is characterized by an abject avoidance of restraint when it comes to spending the public’s money will not suffer the same fate when if they pass a bill that bumps out that limit, and purports to address a portion of the spending problem, somehow, some way, some time?  It would be like believing that the chronic alcoholic will be ok if the bartender doesn’t serve him the last two shots he’s used to downing nightly; the real problem is in the 5 shots he was served before.  And yet the Tea Party is now the enemy of America, and actively working for the re-election of Barack Obama for recognizing that what is being offered and discussed is a “more of the same” of what we’ve had before, and declining to go along with it.

6.  Teh Fred! and others keep crowing about a victory in shifting the conversation away from tax increases, and demanding we take that, and ignore the fact that even with the “cuts” being proposed, the leviathan that is Fedzilla still grows.   More and more people are getting clued in to the magical growth formula in government accounting based on premise that Zero = Last Year’s Budget.  Taxes weren’t negotiable because despite what Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi believe, this was NEVER a revenue problem; it is a spending problem, and taking away what never should have been on the table to begin with, and then rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic will not prevent a really, really cold swim.

It comes down to this:  Government Spending first empowers the government.  Democrats have known this for years, and used it to their advantage to cultivate a block of constituents beholden to them for their sustenance due to the advent of multigenerational welfare, and they have carefully nurtured it until we have reached a point where nearly 50% of the citizens in this country don’t have any of the precious “skin in the game” that the Teleprompter President likes to babble on about, because they pay no taxes.   They have no intention of changing this state of affairs.  TPOTUS himself has all but admitted that his idea of “shared sacrifice” is that the people who are paying the check need to pay even more.   The real-life warnings that the failed welfare states of Europe pose do nothing to change any of this.  They will spend it, even when they don’t have it, and they will do anything for their fix.  If unchecked, this can only end one way.

Get used to scenes like these, because if we don’t address the festering sore that is Federal Spending now, we lose choices. There won’t be an option that helps Granny get the check that the Federal Government has no business paying her. The government will probably not have the ability to perform its enumerated duties, let alone pay for mohair subsidies, studies on the flow rate of catsup, or refurbishing mosques in foreign countries.   This nonsense cannot be sustained.  Enacting special welfare and calling it general welfare is a path to ruin.  Growing a federal bureaucracy that must continue to worm its tentacles further and further into all aspects life and business in order to justify itself is not conducive the maintenance of freedom and liberty.  This is what “go along to get along” has gotten us…legions of experts who prove day in and day out that there is no problem that government cannot create, and then make worse with its “solutions”.  Learned professionals without any practical experience who pass laws and regulations without a thought to the cost that it imposes on those who they would regulate, because they only choose to see what they have done as a goal that they have fulfilled.

We aren’t stupid for deciding that more of the same isn’t a serious answer.

We’re not unpatriotic for not trusting a professional political class peopled by Republicans as well as Democrats when they tell me that if we just do this for them this time, then they can get majorities in the next election and things will be different.  Tell it to Newt Gingrich.  We’ve swallowed that turd sandwich before.  Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice, shame on me.

And calling me a Hobbit because I see the snare and refuse to step into it doesn’t change my mind or my heart in the Reagan tradition.  It just tells me that you know you’re more concerned with your power than you are for the future of this country, and that lacking a convincing argument, you believe that I’m as willing to compromise as you are, in the pursuit of being loved, of course.  Just ask “the maverick”.

My friends…

No thanks. The madness can’t continue if enough people just opt out.

Unmitigated Arrogance And Gall On Display

The grumpy old guy has gone off the reservation again.

John McCain, is quoted in the New York Times berating the Tea Party Republicans for having the temerity to not play the Washington game of doing the same old thing, and declaring it something different.

Mr. McCain mocked Tea Party-allied Republicans in the House for believing — wrongly, he said — that President Obama and Democrats will get the blame for a default if Republicans refuse to increase the nation’s debt ceiling.

By that flawed logic, “Democrats would have no choice but to pass a balanced budget amendment and reform entitlements and the Tea Party Hobbits could return to Middle Earth,” he said, quoting a Wall Street Journal editorial.

“This is the kind of crack political thinking that turned Sharron Angle and Christine O’Donnell into G.O.P. nominees,” he jeered, referring to two losing Tea Party candidates for the Senate in 2010.

——-

Mr. McCain assailed the conservative Republicans in the House who are threatening passage of the debt cutting plan by the House speaker, John A. Boehner, calling their political logic “bizarro” and noting sarcastically that they have only been in office a short time.

“Maybe some people who have only been in this body for six or seven months or so really believe that,” he said. “Others know better. Others know better.”

Shame on you, Senator.  You are part of the greatest deliberative body in the world, and rather than making your case and persuading your colleagues (and the American Public), instead you belittle and insult your colleagues who stand firm on doing what they were sent there to do, which was stop the madness.

Instead you give us the same arrogant condescension that we despise from the Democrats.  “We know better than you.  Shut up and do what you’re told.”

I think someone’s been in D.C. long enough.

Linked in Michelle Malkin’s Buzzworthy! Thanks!

  • Blog Stats

    • 4,678,931 hits
  • free counters
  • Is your cat plotting to kill you?
  • Follow

    Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

    Join 545 other followers

    %d bloggers like this: