Thursday, April 08, 2010
If Obama didn't exist we'd have to invent him
He has certainly re-energized our politics, no doubt about that and we probably wouldn't have heard of a Tea Party Movement without him. My friend and I were talking about Alex Jones and Glenn Beck yesterday and he seems to feel that while the bulk of what they're saying is right on they're also riding ($$$$$$) the wave of The Crisis and while we don't know the exact nature of Alex Jones' financial status he has probably made more money off the New World Order than anyone. Now we hear that Alex Jones has distanced himself from that Michigan Hutaree militia group which I guess the finer point here is that by your wayward actions you distract from the real threat the NWO poses or maybe Alex Jones is kinda like the Hef of politics objecting that one offshoot of his thinking may be too hardcore and gynecological for his tastes. There's gonna be a Tea Party in my area at the Westchester County Center on April the 15th, glad to see we still have some spunk left as a country but to the average person who merely scans the headlines in between his two jobs this might all get glumped together, certain key words and phrases from the endless political gabfests on cable, the Internet, the more traditional papers and any other media you care to throw in (a sampling of key words & phrases: Alex Jones, Tea Party, Hutaree, John Birch Society, protestors at funerals of dead soldiers). It's all a part of this vast Right-Wing Universe out there so maybe we need something other than the Nolan Chart to find out where we stand and oh yes, there's no polar Left-Wing Cosmos out there, no yin and yang to balance it all out, no Leftist Fringe at the other end of our political solar system according to the leading lights of the msm. It's simply THEM vs. US (the Moderates).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"...we probably wouldn't have heard of a Tea Party Movement without him."
ReplyDeleteThe history of the modern day Tea Party movement has a foothold prior to Obama's election with a Ron Paul money bomb event.
But to your point Z that is the problem. What we have largley going on right now is party cheerleading; demonizing the opposition for the sole sake of trying to score points for your favorite party.
Let's inquire:
What administration added the largest entitlement since Social Security?
What administration doubled the size of the Department of Education?
What administration increased the Federal Budget to the largest degree since LBJ?
Surely you know the answer to these questions but a great many people don't want to think about it. They're much more comfortable chalking all of this country's ills to one man or a trio of two men and a woman.
1.Socialists believe in the use of force to gain their personal ends. Whether it's light bulbs or alternative energy or public schools or national health care, in the end there's always a gun at your head to get you to conform. If a man holds you up in the street, does it matter if he wants the money for drugs or to bail out someone's mortgage? It's still a gun, and it's still armed robbery.
ReplyDelete2.Socialists believe in slavery. Their concept is not the slavery of an individual owning another individual, but of a state owning the output of the individual. We are now forced to work four months out of the year for the federal government before we see a dime of our own income, and it's getting worse. Our new administrtion has just indebted every family an additional $11,000 without our permission or approval. This is economic slavery. (If you don't believe me, watch what happens if you don't pay your taxes. See No. 1 above.)
3.Socialists are racists. The content of the character doesn't matter; it's all about the color of the skin. Read the e-mail I received in response to last week's column, in which the writer somehow made the extraordinary leap in logic from my premise of government fiscal irresponsibility to William Byrd whipping slaves three centuries ago. Yes, Byrd was a nasty man. But what on earth did that have to do with the topic of my column? This illustrates that socialists will always bring up the subject of race, regardless of the prevailing drift of the conversation.
Most people tend to look at the content of peoples' character rather than the color of their skin. If someone is honest, hardworking and decent, then who cares what he looks like? But if they're angry, abusive and violent … then sorry, the content of their character is demonstrating that they're not people to associate with, regardless of skin color. Conservatives – true conservatives – really don't give a diddly darn about someone's melanin content. As columnist Burt Prelutsky put it, "… most white Americans don't spend a lot of time dwelling on anyone's race. They're much too busy trying to make a living and raise their kids."
4.Socialists believe the worst in everyone. They believe that we are all racists, therefore racism must be shoved in our faces constantly. They believe we are stingy, so we must have our money forcibly removed and redistributed to others. They believe we are heartless and that the only source of compassion is the government, so compassion becomes government-mandated.
ReplyDelete5.Socialists think religion, especially Christianity, is stupid and nothing but a prop for the unwashed masses. Why else would they forbid expressions of faith anywhere except (grudgingly) within the walls of a church? Religious people are seen as uneducated, primitive, bitterly-clinging troglodytes.
6.Socialists believe in an ignorant society. How else can we explain their slavish devotion to a public school system that is so dumbed down that students can't read their own diplomas? Socialists know an ignorant society is good. Useful idiots are more amenable to dominance than citizens who have read and understood the documents of the Founding Fathers.
7.Socialists believe you have no right of self-defense. They don't even want you to talk about it in a school assignment. They pretend to have utter faith that government agents can protect you from any and all harm. In reality, it's the government agents that are among our biggest threats. What socialists are really concerned about is your ability to defend yourself against them.
8.Socialists are intolerant. If you have a dissenting opinion, you are mocked and ridiculed for having the temerity to disagree. Socialists do not believe in freedom of speech or they wouldn't be concerned about Rush Limbaugh or what ministers say from the pulpit.
9.Socialists are hypocrites. They expect the unwashed masses to conform to their ideals while they, the lofty and elite, are exempt. How else can you explain Al Gore's energy-sucking mansion? How else can they claim conservative talk radio or Internet news is too powerful when socialists dominate the newspaper and television media?
10.Above all, socialists are in denial. No matter how much you point out the obvious – that the government is fulfilling the dictionary definition of socialism – they flat deny it. If you point out the horrors of socialized medicine, for example, a socialist will say "But this time it will be different." Socialists are unconcerned that the government holds 40 percent of Citibank and over 80 percent of AIG. Nancy Pelosi assures us that government takeovers of banks should be "transitional" but not permanent, and Steny Hoyer hesitates "to use the word nationalization." You'll notice they don't deny it's a government takeover. They merely refuse to call a duck a duck. Quack quack.
I dunno Z-man, are you trying to find a silver lining in all the crap going on in Washington?
ReplyDeleteObama is again showing his absolute ignorance and astounding stupidity in the field of foreign affairs and national security by indicating we would not use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states that attack us with chemical or biological weapons. He seems to be giving our enemies a green light to attack and expect little but conventional response for such an attack, for we long ago destroyed our chemical and biological weapons. Eventually, this guy will have us shooting spitballs at those who may kill tens of thousands in the name of Allah. Its becoming quite obvious to this observer that we cannot afford to wait until 2012 to reign in this nut job. Some way must be found to stop this "son-of-a-Kenyan" before our nation is destroyed. He seems to be set on a course of deliberate destruction of the United States in one way or another. Many thought before his election that he and Michelle hated this nation and now those fears are being proven correct with each move this Marxist takes. Those in the Kremlin need to set back and watch this fool, they could learn a lot about how to destroy America. Their dream of a defeated America is coming true and they need not lift a finger.
ReplyDelete"I believe we’ve come to the point that we must go at the matter of realistically reducing… if not totally eliminating, nuclear weapons—the threat to the world.”
ReplyDelete-Ronald Reagan, March 28, 1982
Well you have to admit Beth it has clarified issues, shown them in stark relief whereas maybe if we had another Republican as president we'd turn apathetic. Sometimes things have to get worse before they get better and I echo soapie's comment above. All the bad stuff didn't start with Obama, some even started with Republicans and the basic problem as I see it is we don't know when to stop legislating. Send Congress home, tell them we don't need them anymore, that we have enough laws thank you and let's enjoy our civilization already what's left of it.
ReplyDeleteI had to read Anon's comments again, they're flatout superb!
ReplyDeleteAnon doesn't know a flying fuck about Socialists.
ReplyDeleteThank you.
Ahh Satyavati now there is your big "fuckin" mistake.
ReplyDeleteTalk about Socialists and you notice how quickly the usual suspects on the Left rush to defend the home team. They crawl out from under the rocks when the world is even mentioned..
Even Marx said morality was irrelevant!
Marx had no ethics, he rejected morality, and envisioned a communism beyond both. [1] Marx is supposed to have founded a science which sought in an objective, morally neutral manner to understand the origin, growth, and collapse of capitalism as well as the ultimate succession of communism. One only has to read in the history of Marxism to appreciate how generally this view has been defended.
So thanks, but your cursing and silly talking points are worthless as is your communist philosophy. You socialist libturd.
I'm not a Marxist and neither is Obama.
ReplyDeleteGet your ideologies straight.
He's a Centrist.
I'm a Socialist.
I'm not defending anyone or anything. I'm saying you don't know WTF you're talking about.
The problem with people lately is that they use words they make up definitions for.. if it doesn't agree with your preconceptions and personal ideological stance, it's socio/commu/Marxist.
Move back into reality.
Satyavati devi dasi said...
ReplyDeleteI'm not a Marxist and neither is Obama.
I'm not defending anyone or anything. I'm saying you don't know WTF you're talking about.
Oh the language!!!!! So this is your response!!
It sounds like you got your panties on to tight.. MY GAWD, you sound like an IDIOT or You’re either retarded, or a bit drunk.
But Thank you for clearly and concisely showing us how nuts socialists really are...
Oh the language!!!!! So this is your response!!
ReplyDeleteIt sounds like you got your panties on to tight.. MY GAWD, you sound like an IDIOT or You’re either retarded, or a bit drunk.
Is this the reasoned, rational, intelligent response I get to saying that you don't know the difference in these ideologies?
And no, I'm not an idiot, nor am I retarded, and drinking is prohibited by my religious beliefs.
I'm hoping perhaps you can come up with something with a little more substance than this.
Z-man: Where to begin, so much for the mind to munch. But to the cogent point I go.
ReplyDeleteThis country occasionally needs a leader to jerk us toward the collectivist oblivion. It's the only thing that gets through the haze of pseudoreality (cheaper and less intelligent than soap operas) and 24/7 ESPN and tweets about small dogs and sandwich fillings. Of course, as the Soapster points out, it usually leads to the picking of the low-hanging fruit of the right because you have to cater to the suckling class who need that government tit to survive.
Anony/Zard: Socialism is a political philosophy and utopian dream, usually with a dystopic, big-brother orgy of enslavement as a result by leaders who use the idealists as their pawns.
What you were describing in your tome of a comment was the leadership Democrats.
Saty: Obama is many things (many of which resemble the aforementioned Zardoz Manifesto), but centrist is one word that doesn't describe him (unless you define "centrist" as voting present).
He did spend his formative years in the company of socialists, and Marxist professors, and people who wanted to radically transform this country into something it is not (but accelerating toward), and something the Constitution was designed to stop.
And to get back to the Soapster's comment about how it is more than Obama and Co that is responsible for the march to collective dystopia, Obama is certainly accelerating in in a violently leftward arc. But he's also a politician, and not going to sacrifice himself and his power for any ideals he may have.
If you want the definition of a Centrist, try the RINOs. And the Blue Dog Democrats. And the people who are watching The Biggest Loser. Ironically, we all are.
Patrick, I hate to burst your self inflated bubble but, I found this diatribe to be very amusing. By the way, who designated you to evaluate and pass judgement everyone else’s comments?
ReplyDeleteSaty and her misguided values are more than enough to swallow , add you to the mix and we have a cocktail of more bullshit then we could find in a pasture.
I hope that you got the point, if not, I guess I'll just have to try harder.
Bottom line, like Beth said... “SOCIALISM SUCKS” unless of course you are a loser/drug addict/poor/homeless/or a douchebag that lives of the entitlements of the government.
“SOCIALISM SUCKS” unless of course you are a loser/drug addict/poor/homeless/or a douchebag that lives of the entitlements of the government.
ReplyDeleteWhich part of I am a college educated, full time working, top 2% credit score, bigass house on six acres professional have you never really understood?
Very few people in America right now understand socialism, Mal.. and you're one of them.
Mal.. and you're one of them.
ReplyDeleteInteresting, but Useless
But I will give it some Consideration.
Thanx to Pat for pointing out Obama is not a centrist as Saty contends so he saved me some work. I do believe Obama is a socialist in his heart but whether he will follow through or not is an open question and folks like Saty seem to be saying no way is he a socialist because he's not gonna do these things. To me it's somewhat off the point but not totally, just because he may have made the practical political calculation to not go full socialist doesn't mean he's not one in his heart. Now if on the other hand if he nationalizes and federalizes everything within the next year or so at what point in time can we stop with saying he's not a socialist? Sounds like a fair deal to me.
ReplyDeleteI guess I am getting tired of labeling the president and prefer to just point out that I don't like the direction he is pointing our country towards and why.
ReplyDeleteI can't help thinking from time to time what Daniel would say about all of this after all he was one of the very few conservative bloggers who maintained that Obama is not a socialist. I wonder if he's changed his mind.
ReplyDeleteWho's Daniel?
ReplyDeleteGo to Beth's bloglinks there and you'll see Right Minds, "Obama and Race" at the very bottom and he hasn't blogged getting close to a year now. Neither has Average American, two bloggers I really really miss.
ReplyDeleteI've decided to join in and put my 2 cents into this blog. I'll start by say that Socialism Sucks!
ReplyDeleteWhy, in the name of the almighty Spam, do people get tax breaks for breeding? This seems to be the inverse of logic. We plop our little miracles onto the planet and they put a burden on the system. More miracles=more burden=more cost.
They want education, libraries, police protection, food, clothing, shelter and medical care. Basically these little miracles are demanding socialism and I for one will not stand for it!
Shouldn't the breeders pay their fair share? Should they shoulder burden they've created? This is just tripendicular logic-defying socialism dude, and dudett's! I don't want to subsidize your children. You plopped, you pay for'em. Socialism is about holding someones hand for life and telling them how to live. It does not promote the idea of independence. It's basically like living under your parents roof until they die - when they die, who will take care of you? You never learned and were always comforted.
I despise the American Left; and their Big Brother, the European Left. Their leaders are Marxists - their leaders are Communists - and they now control much of our mass media and academia. We have several Marxists on our Supreme Court, and in the leadership of the Democrat Party. The Marxist Left is very powerful - they are our enemy.
Millions of people died in the struggle to fight against communist regimes. But the Marxists have made a comeback and are infiltrating both the politics of the U.S and Europe.It's time that Americans stand up and say that we have had the best and want to continue to have the best
Actually, America is moving more into economic fascism camp -- which is a combination of market mechanisms and socialism. To get to total socialism, we have to first go through a form of National Socialism/Fascism, and we are well on our way there now.
ReplyDeleteOn a side note: What ever Sati is for, I'm against.
Well we're headed somewhere and it ain't good call it what you want. If Obama is a socialist in his heart that's what really matters to me, the only question is how far he'll go.
ReplyDeleteOn a side note: What ever Sati is for, I'm against.
ReplyDeleteI shall for the moment refrain from utterly humiliating you for making this statement.
Rest assured that I can if necessary.
Right now, though, we'll assume you're making another ill-advised joke.
Mal: By the way, who designated you to evaluate and pass judgement everyone else’s comments?
ReplyDeleteI did. Because I try to see things from the eyes of all people, even when they are so clueless or obtuse that it hurts all the way down near my left nut. In that way, I can win arguments rather than sounding like I masturbated my way into mental retardation.
Z-man: I do my best. Or my worst, when I don't walk the line....