How about this for a tactic—nominate your oppositions’ candidate who is despised by the core of his own party, thereby eliminating any viable competition, then cut him off at the knees in the general election.
Ha!
On second thought, I can’t see how something like this could be done by direction from above, but then end result is the same.
Unless we can start controlling who votes in primaries, we will never be able to select good candidates.
Just conjecture. I’m not sure what the election rules are with respect to delegates or even being allowed to remain on the ballot.
I suddenly find that Ron Paul is a HELL of a lot better than the remaining choices.
In the greatest hoax of modern history, Russia’s ruling ‘socialist workers party,’ the Communists, established themselves as the polar opposites of their two socialist clones, the National Socialist German Workers Party (quicknamed ‘the Nazis’ ) and Italy’s Marxist-inspired Fascisti, by branding both as ‘the fascists.’ Jonah Goldberg is the first historian to detail the havoc this spin of all spins has played upon Western thought for the past seventy-five years, very much including the present moment.
-- Tom Wolfe, author of Bonfire of the Vanities
I agree.
Being a student of history, as I am sure many of you are, I see marked parallels in the thought processes and actions of the totalitarians that plagued Earth in the 1930’s and 1940’s and those so-called Liberals that run almost every American college campus, newsroom and film studio, as well as half or more of the American government.
Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left from Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning, by Jonah Goldberg spells out those parallels:
- How, before World War II and the Holocaust, fascism was considered a progressive social movement both in the U.S. and Europe—but was redefined afterwards as “right wing”
- How the Nazis were ardent socialists (hence the term “National Socialism") who loathed the free market, believed in free health care, opposed inherited wealth, spent vast sums on public education, purged Christianity from public policy, and inserted the authority of the state into every nook and cranny of daily life
- How the Nazis declared war on smoking; supported abortion, euthanasia, and gun control; and maintained a strict racial quota system in their universities—where campus speech codes were all the rage
- Adolph Hitler, Man of the Left: how his views and policies regarding capitalism, class warfare, environmentalism, gun control, euthanasia and even smoking are remarkably close to those of modern liberals
- How Woodrow Wilson and the other founding fathers of American liberalism were far crueler jingoists and warmongers than modern conservatives have ever been
- How Wilson’s crackdown on civil liberties in the name of national security far exceeds anything even attempted by Joe McCarthy, much less George W. Bush
- How Mussolini and Hitler both thought—quite rightly—that they were doing things along the same lines as FDR
- How, in the 1930s, FDR’s New Deal was praised for its similarity to Italian Fascism—“the cleanest, neatest, most efficiently operating piece of social machinery,” said an influential member of FDR’s team
- How, just like modern liberals, Mussolini promised a “Third Way” that “went beyond tired categories of left and right” in order to “get things done”
- Mussolini’s and Hitler’s not-so-secret admirers: how many prominent progressives—from W.E.B. Dubois in the U.S. to George Bernard Shaw England—publicly praised German Nazism and Italian Fascism
- Liberal fascism and the cult of the state: how progressivism shared with fascism a conviction that, in a truly modern society, the state must take the place of religion
Another author, James Gregor, in his book, The Faces of Janus, noticed the same common roots:
The great taboo
To argue that Soviet communism, Italian fascism, and German Nazism were all branches from a common source in collectivism and socialism has been one of the great taboos of the 20th century. Among many intellectuals, and not only among those on the political left, the consensus has been that Soviet communism, no matter how disappointing in practice, was an amoral, idealistic, and “progressive” attempt to bring political harmony, social justice, and economic equality to all mankind. Fascism and Nazism, on the other hand, were manifestations of reactionary, capitalist forces attempting to maintain their system of social injustice and economic exploitation through dictatorship, violence, and war.
Goldberg and Gregor are not alone in this opinion.
Imagine living in a country that is invaded and turned into a police state by two successive conquerors and then escaping to a free country, only to find the same kind of tyranny slowly taking hold there. Balint Vazsonyi does not have to imagine it because he lived it. In Hungary, Vazsonyi lived under two kinds of socialist dictatorships, first the Nazis and then the Soviets, until escaping to America in 1956. He was shocked to see emerging in mid-1960s America the very things he fled. Vazsonyi writes that the present situation ”must count among the most amazing spectacles of history to be inundated with the rhetoric, theory, and practice of communism, and see not one communist around. We read and hear daily about class warfare, universal health care, speech codes, sensitivity training...the list goes on and on. The agenda is with us, the Party is not.”
-- Thomas Stelene, Neo-Communism’s War on Liberty
Having read many Soviet and Red Chinese Communist publications in translation, as well as having studied the rise to power of the likes of Hitler and Stalin, I am alarmed to hear the same arguments, the same methods and sometimes using even the same words, coming out the mouths of opinion leaders like Schumer, Feinstein, Reid and Pelosi.
With the presidential primaries upon us, the prospects do not look heartening. Those candidates who have actually had a track record for standing up for the American way (Tancredo, Hunter, Thompson and Paul) were largely suffocated by media inattention, while the Leftists and stealth-Leftists are showered with adoration in turns.
To copy the words of Lenin, but for the cause of freedom, I ask, ”what is to be done? “
I can’t help but believe that when Right-thinking folks pull the lever for McCain, they are thinking his is something which time has proven he is not—a Conservative.
Why he calls himself a Republican can only be reconciled with the possibility that his job is to infiltrate and ruin the GOP from within.
He is far from America’s Great White Hope vis-a-vis Hitlery Clinton. His is a lot closer, in fact, to a Manchurian Candidate.
He has proven to be an attack dog against the families of POW’s and MIA’s in Vietnam.
He has campaigned hard to reopen trade relations and grant recognition for Vietnam, despite the fact they had done nothing to deserve it.
He was involved with the Keating Scandal.
He is dead-set against the Second Amendment.
We all know what he thinks about free political speech after McCain-Feingold.
He was instrumental in defeating the Republicans in getting our judicial nominees through a Demoncratic roadblock.
And he is all for granting illegal immigrants amnesty.
Tell me then, what is Conservative about John McCain?
I would wager most of the folks on this push don’t cruise for ‘love’ in bath houses or public men’s rooms stalls, yet over the past 20 years our concept of dating has been impacted by the ever-present invisible threat of contracting the deadly and incurable AIDs virus.
Statistically, if you are straight, and even more so if monogamous and not one to share needles or risk blood transfusions, your actual chances of coming down with AIDs/HIV are pretty slim.
But those loveable scamps like Elton John and his fellow Brown Dirt Cowboys, have through their anal antics, spawned another and far more dangerous (catchable) plague for the general population to contend with: Methicillin-resistant staphylococcus (MRSA).
(more...)Of course Conservatives know we have a clearer world vision than do Leftists… that’s why we are “Right” (in more ways than one).
Even if you are not a climatologist, if you have followed the Left’s Method of Operation for any length of time, you have learned to be suspicious of the truth and motivations behind their Crisis of the Day, whichever it may be.
In character with this MO is the great Hue and Cry —the shrieking alarum, meant to short-circuit reasoned thought and careful deliberation—the suppression of dissent, even the denial that any exists, and the character assassination of those with the temerity to speak out. Like clockwork, so it has been in spades with the trumped-up Algoreian Crisis of Global Warming.
Scare schoolchildren with the prospects of drowning polar bears, panic coastal cities and island nations with dread thoughts of rapid inundation, and by dint of this hyped-up fear, demand sweeping powers and of course, lots of money to combat the Global Warming Bogeyman.
Not so fast Hippy.
Today, Marc Moreno posted on the Inhofe EPW Press Blog that:
(more...)Leftists, regardless of how many times they have been caught in a lie, will blissfully sail on repeating that same lie. They will even attack those who expose them, calling them liars.
In the past Leftists have lied about Domestic Violence statistics, Gun Violence statistics, and Endangered Species. My guess is that they will lie about anything to spread alarm and ram their laws through Congress.
In the end, they will have secured for themselves a source of taxpayer-funded income, a raft of legislation that they can wield against their targets and a splinter group of an adoring victim class.
From nothing to power, the currency is the Big Lie.
Global Warming is just the latest emergency that they plan to stampede the herd with. Look through the speeches and writings of many of the leading Leftists and count how many times the word epidemic is used.
Once again, the facts underlying the hysteria show that they are lying.
Mr. Patterson, a professor of geology at Carleton University, has spent several years studying 5,000 years’ worth of sedimentary fossil evidence in deep Canadian fjords, which he analyzed in light of solar patterns. He found that changes in the fossil record correlate highly with changes in climate which in turn correlate with solar change. Over thousands of years, one finds dark layers of dirt which accumulate during cold periods, interspersed with fossilized fish scales and phytoplankton which build up during nutrient- and life-rich warm periods.
The record “correlates closely to the well-known 11-year ‘Schwabe’ sunspot cycle, during which the output of the sun varies by about 0.1 percent. “
He also found that longer-term solar variations also correlate with changes in the fossil record, some of which are more dramatic than the 11-year cycle and have a correspondingly greater impact on the climate and the fossil record.
In one case, Mr. Patterson and colleagues found a drastic shift from warm, sunny and dry conditions to several decades of cold and rain over a mere 62 years. Some of the solar-driven changes are much more dramatic than the present modest change.
His conclusion: ”It is global cooling, not warming, that is the major climate threat to the world, especially Canada.”
That is because the Earth is entering its weakest Schwabe cycle in two centuries beginning around 2020. Also of note: “CO2 variations show little correlation with our planet’s climate on long, medium and even short time scales,” he contends.
All of this is consistent with a 2003 poll by German researchers Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch in which two-thirds of poll respondents among more than 530 climate scientists from 27 countries did not believe that “a reasonable assessment of the effects of greenhouse gases” could be reached because the science is still in its infancy.
The article continues…
For a more philosophical take, read contrarian number two, Vaclav Klaus, who penned an op-ed for the Financial Times followed by a smartly arranged question-and-answer session with readers.
The issue today is “more about social than natural sciences and more about man and his freedom than tenths of a degree Celsius changes in average global temperature.”
Asked whether ignoring the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is a sound risk-management strategy, Mr. Klaus responds: “I think it is a very bad risk management strategy to follow the summary report on climate change of the IPCC. To do it would be a giving up of risk management rules and of standard cost-benefit analysis techniques in favour of environmentalist ‘precautionary principle’ which totally discredits risk management and comparison of costs and benefits.”
In the course of Googling what is going on now with the immigration debate, I came across this article in the American Thinker. It has nothing to do with immigration, but deals with something that the Gray Lady and the rest of our MSM and entertainment media seem to be fairly silent on.
James M. Arlandson, however, did write about, [t]he truth about Muslim-Christian marriages: Some Friendly Advice to Christians.
Having witnessed a trend among European women to gravitate towards Arab men, and American Blacks to gravitate to Islam, I had often wondered what the draw was.
Evidently, this self-proclaimed Religion of Peace has in its provisions a total abrogation of any concept of Women’s Lib and many advantages for menfolk:
Men can marry up to four women (and additional slave girls don’t count) ; divorce is as easy as pointing at your recalcitrant female, (or just overweight and lesser-attractive) and saying I divorce you three times. There is no Western-style messy child support, child custody or alimony concern, as the woman is simply out in the cold. I guess this has been the rule from the time Mohammed walked the Earth, right up to the present.
It gets even better, beatings by husbands are freely allowed, but there is no provision for a woman’s use of force in self-defense. Her testimony is worth only half that of a man, due to the Islamic belief that women suffer from a mental incapacity, and she is only entitled to half the inheritance of her similarly-situated male counterparts.
Rape victims are often stoned to death for their troubles, a strung-out affair, lasting sometimes half an hour.
Even those women who have not run afoul of Islamic law, particularly in Islamic Africa, must undergo infibulation in order to be considered marriageable.
Have I been missing something? Or has Hollywood not lectured us lately, through the medium of hit movie films, of what life for women is like under Islam?
Have I missed the extensive news reporting about this, or have I just been distracted by the endless reporting of the still-dead Anna Nicole Smith, the missing Natalie Holoway, the tearful incarcerated Paris Hilton and the crotch-flashing party girls Lindsey and Britney?
(more...)A gay gang that allegedly raped victims lured on the Internet, drugged them and infected them with the AIDS virus has shocked the Netherlands and raised questions over its liberal sex culture.
Health Minister Ab Klink on Thursday called the case “horrible”, as the press splashed the news across its front pages.
The matter came to light Wednesday, when police said they had arrested three seropositive homosexual men two weeks ago after four victims, men aged 25 to 50, accused them of rape and premeditated bodily harm.
Ronald Zwarter, the police chief in the northern town of Groningen, where the alleged crimes took place, said two of those arrested, a couple aged 48 and 33, had confessed.
“Their stated motive was that it excited them—and also that, the more HIV-infected people there were, the better their chances of unprotected sex,” he said.
“They considered unprotected relations to be ‘pure’.”
A fourth man who allegedly supplied the three suspects with several litres of the date-rape drug GHB and ecstasy tablets was also arrested.
The gang risks up to 16 years in prison.
According to police and prosecutors, eight more victims have come forward since the case was publicised.
Officials said the three seropositive men invited gays contacted on the Internet to private homosexual orgies.
When the victims turned up, they were allegedly given ecstasy and GBH (which is undetectable when mixed in drinks), leaving them helpless and, in some cases, with no memory of what happened.
The three suspects—one of whom is a male nurse—were said to have raped the men, and even injected some of them with a mix of their contaminated blood.
The case has deeply unsettled the Netherlands, and caused it to cast a hard look at its easygoing views on sex, with some figures suggesting that frequent homosexual orgies posed a public health risk.
“That homos organise orgies is nothing new, but this is something else. This is unimaginable,” said Frank van Dalen, the president of a gay rights group called COC.
He stressed that the illegal use of GHB (gamma-Hydroxybutyric acid)—known on the street by such nicknames as “Easy Lay, “Gay Home Boy” and “Liquid Ecstasy”—also posed a danger in heterosexual circles.
Said Henk Krol, the editor of a homosexual magazine titled Gaykrant: “These people were drugged, it’s therefore rape, pure and simple. It’s shameful, disgusting and terrifying. Those who did this are crazy.”
Health officials pointed to a recent rise in the number of HIV infections in Groningen—from 14 in 2005 to 25 last year, out of the town’s total population of 185,000—as significant.
“This doesn’t mean that the rise is entirely explained by the orgies… but it’s probable that part of the rise has been caused by them,” Marco Ter Harmsel, of Grongingen’s municipal health service, told the Dutch newspaper DRC.
(more...)It’s not enough to be tolerant. You must fully endorse what to many is a major religious sin and a moral perversion. Schools—from elementary on up—actively promote the homosexual agenda. They harshly punish any disagreement.
Cases in point:
(more...)Emily Brooker was a student at Missouri State University (MSU) working to win her Bachelor of Social Work when MSU stifled and silenced her speech because it fell outside the liberal orthodoxy of the MSU School of Social Work. She found that the college engaged in indoctrination, not education. When Emily took a brave stance in defending her views on particular issues, MSU retaliated against her by trumping up grievance charges and forcing her to advocate positions contrary to her religious beliefs. In legal jargon, she was deprived of due process and equal protection.
Emily had to conform to MSU’s orthodoxy in order to get her degree, which she received on May 19, 2006. However, that wasn’t the end of it. Emily sued MSU officials: the university president, the directors of the School of Social Work, and the professors — and she won a smashing victory.
Emily enrolled in MSU in September 2002 to obtain a Bachelor of Social Work degree. In the spring of 2005, she registered for SWK 209 on Social Welfare Policy taught by Professor Frank G. Kauffman, a course that is required in order to graduate with a Bachelor of Social Work. Professor Kauffman identified himself in class as a liberal and social work as a liberal profession, and he used the class to routinely engage in leftist diatribes against President Bush and the Federal Government. Emily and other students vocally questioned his statements.
As a result, Emily received a C grade in this course. When she approached Kauffman about her grade, he claimed it was because she was tardy and had exhibited unprofessional behavior in class. Emily appealed her C grade based on her superb academic performance. Kauffman replied with a harsh email denying her appeal. Emily then appealed to the Social Work Department chairperson, who granted her appeal and raised her grade to a B.
In the fall of 2005, Emily enrolled in SWK 409 on Social Welfare Policy, another course required for graduation, also taught by Kauffman. In this course, students were supposed to work in small groups on an advocacy project of their own choosing. Emily joined a group to do a project on homelessness.
A few weeks into the course, Kauffman brought to class a guest from PROMO, an organization of advocates of homosexual behavior, and Kauffman suggested that the groups change their focus and work on advocating homosexual foster homes and adoptions. In the next class, Kauffman stated that the class had to attend a town hall meeting on homosexual adoption, and then write a letter to Missouri legislators advocating homosexual adoption, and that the letter must be on MSU letterhead and signed by each student. Emily participated in everything else he requested, but did not want to sign a letter promoting homosexual foster homes and adoption.
Emily was notified by phone that she had violated the School of Social Work’s Standards of Essential Functioning. She was accused of a Level 3 Grievance. The Grievance hearing, which lasted two and a half hours, violated a dozen elements of due process as well as subjecting her to personally invasive questions criticizing her Christian beliefs. The faculty demanded that Emily write a paper declaring that she would lessen the gap between her personal beliefs and professional obligations as to the ethics code.
BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation today said a new report by criminologists Prof. Don Kates of the United States and Prof. Gary Mauser of Canada that shows the rate of firearms ownership is irrelevant to the homicide and violent crime rate should be required reading, especially for reporters, editorial writers and elected representatives.
Appearing in the current issue of the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy (pages 649-694), the Kates/Mauser report entitled “Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide? A Review of International Evidence” is a detailed look at gun ownership and how it does not relate to the incidence of murder and violence. They conclude that “nations with very stringent anti-gun laws generally have substantially higher murder rates than those which allow guns.”
“The Kates/Mauser research strips bare the claims by gun control proponents that America is more dangerous than other countries because of our right to keep and bear arms,” said SAF founder Alan M. Gottlieb. “What these two seasoned researchers have revealed is that some of the most violent countries in Europe are those with the most stringent gun laws. It seems hardly a coincidence that here in America, the highest crime rates are in places with strict gun control policies, such as Chicago and Washington, D.C. However, in areas here and abroad with high rates of gun ownership violent crime rates are lower.
“The authors note an earlier study by Kates that showed a declining murder rate over the 25-year period from 1973 to 1997, while overall gun ownership increased 103 percent and handgun ownership went up 163 percent,” he continued. “Yet during that period, the murder rate dropped 27.7 percent.”
Gottlieb said the timing of this report’s release in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy is significant due to the renewal of the gun control debate following the recent events at Virginia Tech.
“Kates and Mauser make a solid factual case against all the emotion-laden rhetoric from the gun control crowd,” Gottlieb stated. “While their research will obviously not close the debate, they’ve made a strong case against the traditional anti-gun mantra. Gun ownership is not the problem, and this new report proves it.”
Normally an enumerated Constitutional right, in legal parlance (the terms of art being bolded) is deemed fundamental and any governmental infringement thereupon given strict scrutiny review, and only a compelling governmental interest will justify that infringement. Even so, any governmental infringement upon that right must be narrowly tailored to address the specific evil while leaving the vast bulk of that fundamental right alone.
The Second Amendment is one such Right enumerated as one of the initial ten Amendments, collectively known as the Bill of Rights. These enumerated rights are part of a super law—Constitutional law—designated under Article 6, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, also known as the Supremacy Clause, as trumping anything in the State laws, Constitutions of courts to the contrary.
In a perfect world, where the Constitution is followed the way to alter a Constitutional provision is to Amend it—using a supermajority vote of Congress and the Amendment being ratified by a supermajority of the States—no easy task.
It is NOT, however, to be altered by the mere solemn pronouncements of those sitting on a Federal Court of Appeals or even the U.S. Supreme Court. Their tasks are to clear up ambiguities, not to re-write the Constitution—otherwise the Amendment process is a complete lie.
Well, we are currently living under a Complete Lie. That Lie is Gun Control—which goes kind of like this: by disarming people (without having to go through that pesking Amendment thingy) we make them safer.
But only the most braindead or deluded among us will have failed to notice that massacres take place where Gun Control rules have been applied and almost never where citizens are free to exercise their fundamental right of Self Defense (e.g. the Second Amendment Right to Keep and Bear Arms --- RKBA for short)
Janet Ellen Levy, in her American Thinker entry:
The Fight To Bar Arms covers this slow-motion coup against the Constitution:
By Bob Unruh © 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
Cho Seung-Hui’s murderous rampage – during which he killed 32 students and faculty members at Virginia Tech – is prompting research into gun laws, resident aliens and graphically violent writings. Investigators also may want to check his medicine cabinet, because psychiatric drugs have been linked to hundreds of violent episodes, including most of the school shootings in the last two decades.
The New York Times has reported the killer was on a prescription medication, and authorities have said he was confined briefly several years ago for a mental episode. They also have confirmed that the “prescription drugs” found among his effects related to the treatment of psychological problems.
Dr. Peter Breggin, a prominent critic of psychiatric drugs and founder of the International Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology, said even if Cho wasn’t taking psychiatric drugs the day of the shooting, he might have been tipped over into violent madness weeks or months earlier by a drug like Prozac, Paxil, or Zoloft.
Left speechless by this latest outrage?
No.
Actually kinda getting numb with the non-stop incredibly evil stupidity of those calling themselves Democrats.
1) Cause the problem
2) Blame the other guys.
Beneath contempt?
You decide.
(more...)Page 5 of 7 pages
robert108:
[quote]SO if I’m reading you correctly, we are to believe that, in fact, Obama is...
robert108:
Sparkie: If you want to filter out the bullshit on this blog, stop posting your...
robert108:
[quote]How do you filter out all the bullshit rumors posted as cynical mockery of the...
Sparkie Arbuckle:
Eagle & R108 SO if I'm reading you correctly, we are to believe that, in...
Sparkie Arbuckle:
r108 How do you filter out all the bullshit rumors posted as cynical mockery of...
robert108:
[quote]...SAB will return to a full time Obama smear site. [/quote] Another lie; while the...
robert108:
[quote]Who would post so many rumors about Palin? And all in one place? r108! You...
Sparkie Arbuckle:
Eagle That poem is about my home state....
Lestat:
I don't think Obama has championed the end of earmarks as Palin recently has. Obama...
Blue Eagle Six:
Yea Sparkie I am, That poem, especially the last stanza, seemed somehow germane yet apropos...
FlyOnTheWall:
Nice list....
Blue Eagle Six:
Actually it's: Hillary, Obama, Saul Alinsky - And Satan [url=http://sweetness-light.com/archive/hillary-clintons-idol-saul-alinsky-and-satan][Lucifer][/url] Obama & Hillary are both...
Sparkie Arbuckle:
Who would post so many rumors about Palin? And all in one place? r108! You...
Sparkie Arbuckle:
Lestat [quote]SAB will return to a full time Obama smear site[/quote]What? SAB? No? No smears....
Sparkie Arbuckle:
Eagle You a Frost fan or something?...
Design by Mark Jaquith | Maintenence & Hosting by Blogrescue.com |
Powered by ExpressionEngine 1.5.2 |
Creative Commons licensed