Is it just me, or is Patrick Fitzgerald starting to look and sound like Captain Ahab?
Michelle Obama took a modest little vacation to Spain this month, but what I'm wondering is this: has the First Lady ever taken a vacation to Washington D.C.? Perhaps she would profit from a guided tour of the historic places that give so many reasons to be proud of The United States.
If D.C. is too pedestrian for Michelle's refined tastes, maybe a vacation to Boston, New Jersey and Pennsylvania, to visit places like Bunker Hill, Dorchester Heights, Trenton, Princeton, Valley Forge, and Independence Hall.
While in the hood, Mrs. Obama might take in the military cemetary near Gettysburg, where President Lincoln memorialized the brave Americans who gave the last full measure of devotion so that government of the people, by the people and for the people should not perish from the earth.
These vacation spots might inspire the First Lady with some pride in her Country, beyond that derived from the Presidential candidacy of her husband; but if vacationing stateside suits her not, how about something more cosmopolitan? What about a trip to Normandy, to see Omaha Beach and Point de hoc? How about Italy to visit Anzio? Remembering how America saved the World from Hitler might stir even a Harvard Law grad to a touch of appreciation for The United States of America.
One of the selling points for the Democrats' Financial "Reform" law was that it will protect consumers from the fine print in credit card contracts that consumers don't read. But, at 2,000+ pages, the Dodd-Frank bill is nothing but fine print, which no member of Congress read before voting for it.
Why is that procedure hazardous for opening a Visa card account, but safe for passing laws that affect our lives, liberty and property?
The Chicago Sun-Times reports: < Chicagoans should be limited to one handgun for every eligible person living in a home — and gun dealers should be banned within the city limits — in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to shoot down the city’s handgun ban, the city’s top lawyer said on Tuesday. One day after Chicago’s strictest-in-the-nation handgun ban was rendered unenforceable, Corporation Counsel Mara Georges argued that it’s “critical to public safety” to at least draw the line on the number of handguns in Chicago.>
When you read something like this you may be tempted to ask, “which part of ‘shall not be infringed’ don’t these people understand?” But, that would be a mistake. It’s not that these gun-grabbing big-government Liberals don’t understand the U.S. Constitution, it’s that they don’t like it. After all, that’s the whole point of the “Living Constitution” bit.
Our betters don’t like being bound by constraints on government power, they like constraining us -- or as the City's lawyer puts it, “draw[ing] the line.” Our Founding Fathers had a term for this type of activity: “Tyranny.” They pledged their lives, fortunes and sacred honor to overthrow it and secure liberty to their generation and ours, and the least that our generation of fathers can do is teach the facts of liberty and tyranny to our children around the dinner table, so that they don’t grow up to be either the clueless victims of tyranny, or the perpetrators of it.
The Supreme's got it right by striking down Chicago's handgun ban, but Richard M. Daley is beside himself (even more than usual) over the decision.
Why? Because Mayor Daley can't see why any law-abiding Chicagoan would object to being disarmed by the City, when the Chicago Police Department has a flawless record of arriving at the scene of the crime in plenty of time to identify the victim's body.
The smack-down of Texas Rep. Joe Barton by his fellow Republican Congressmen, and the mock outrage of Democrats should provide, as they say, "a teachable moment."
Our Founding Fathers in crafting a government to fulfill its proper role of securing Americans' God-given natural rights, while deriving it's legitimate authority from the consent of the governed, were careful not to create a democracy, where a simple majority could do whatever they pleased. Instead, the wise men who formed the greatest experiment ever in self-rule by free men, designed a Republic, in which the consent of the governed is expressed through elected representatives, and based upon the Rule of Law, not the mere whims of 50-percent+1.
So, President Obama summons the CEO of BP to the White House and makes him an offer he can't refuse. Under ordinary circumstances, this transaction would be recognized as a SHAKEDOWN. In this case, however, it so happens that 80% of the American People are in favor of the shakedown. Does that make the shakedown not a shakedown? Does that make the shakedown legal? We now know that it makes the shakedown unmentionable.
The Obama shakedown of BP is tyranny. It just happens to be popular tyranny, and perhaps BP had it coming. But what about the next time this usurped power is used by the government? A society governed by the rule of law has considered the question, "what about next time?" A society governed by the rule of man (whether an individual despot, a majority, or as in this case, a combination of the two) looks only at the moment, without regard for the consequences to liberty in the future. Our U.S. Constitution, with its hedges against both despotism and mob-rule, was instituted in order to secure the blessings of liberty not only to ourselves, but also to our posterity.
When I heard Rep. Barton's remarks the first time, I didn't know (and I still don't) that he was directing his apology to BP. I assumed he was apologizing to the American People, or his constituents, for the actions of the Federal Government (Eureka! we found an apology that Barack Obama doesn't like) in violation of the rule of law. Whoever the object of Barton's apology was, the fact remains that his characterization of the shakedown as a shakedown was true, but truth isn't always popular, and that's a good reason to protect and defend our rule of law Republic from inroads by tyrants as well as incidental majorities.
1) Obama on the BP Oil Leak: “the one approach I will not accept is inaction.”
Whoa, that must have been a devastating blow to the inaction lobby.
Obama's characteristic straw manning is exactly the type of bovine scatology with which college professors bemuse 18-year olds in the lecture hall; but can it really work long-term on the adult populace? I think not.
Why does someone employ a straw man argument? I’d say there are two possible reasons, and in Obama’s case both probably apply. A) straw man is used because you can’t answer the real arguments of the other side, and/or B) straw man is used because you don’t know the arguments of the other side.
We hear a lot about how intelligent Obama is, and that may be true, but his intelligence has been applied to mastering a breathtakingly narrow-minded set of ideas, not to critical thinking. And having lived a life essentially devoid of intellectual diversity, Obama is unacquainted with the ideas of his ideological and political opponents. Arrogantly secure in the knowledge that everyone he knows knows everything he believes to be true, Obama is able to dismiss his opponents’ ideas out of hand, without the bother of thinking about them. After all, why waste time thinking about ideas that are not only wrong, but evil? Imagine the hyperventilating there would be at NPR or the NY Times Editorial Board over the proposition that Barrack Obama is the most narrow-minded President in the history of the Republic. “Obama narrow minded? Why, how could that be? He believes everything we believe!” Hmmm, thou sayest.
2) Have you ever seen the Sean Connery, Michael Cain movie based on Kipling’s short story, “The Man Who Would Be King”? It’s the old ignorant-aborigonies-mistake-a-stranger-for-a-god-and-he-milks-it-for-all-it-is-worth-until-a-wound-exposes-his-mortality-and-the-natives-rise-up-and-murder-him story.
Well, I think that’s a good picture of Obama at this juncture. Some very ignorant Americans, armed with voter registration cards (in most cases), mistook this neophyte, Lefty college lecturer for an actual leader -- in some cases they actually mistook him for Jesus (who they also mistook for a Community Organizer) – so Obama’s incompetence and CYA lack of leadership in dealing with the oil leak has exposed not only his mortality, but the sad fact that he isn’t even a particularly exceptional mortal; and now many of the people who were fooled during the campaign have realized their mistake, and nothing Obama can say or do can make them love and worship him again. In fact, the more he tries the more it reminds them how gullible they were to believe in this phony, and being so reminded, the more irritated they become at the image of his face and the sound of his voice.
There's another old Lon Chaney silent movie in the genre, "West of Zanzibar," in which the final subtitiled line could serve as the epitaph on the headstone of the Obama Presidency: “No believe.”
The other day, President Obama, in stage-managed exasperation about the Deep Horizon oil leak, demanded that BP "plug the damn hole."
Welcome to our World, Mr. President.
Obama and the Democrats pass an eight-hundred billion dollar "stimulus" package, that stimulates nothing, but explodes the federal budget deficit. Americans at Town Hall Meetings and Tea Parties demand, "plug the damn hole," but Obama impassively lectures us on how his "stimulus" has brought America's economy back from the brink.
The U.S. economy is hemorraging jobs, with 10% of the workforce unemployed, and Public Opinion Polls scream, "plug the damn hole," but Obama instead devotes his attention and political capital to a government take-over of our healthcare system.
The Southwest border states are overrun with illegal immigrants crossing the Mexican border, so the People of Arizona pass a law to "plug the damn hole," and Obama's response is to slander Arizonans as racists, and nod in agreement as the President of Mexico insults American Patriots, all the while continuing his refusal to enforce our national border.
So, after a mere seven weeks of oil spouting into the Gulf of Mexico, Obama thinks he's frustrated. For 16 months Americans have been demanding that Obama "plug the damn holes" but he just keeps making them bigger.
A year ago Professor Obama lectured Americans on the impropriety of “meddling” with the internal affairs of a sovereign nation, Iran, then engaged in cracking the skulls of pro-democracy demonstrators. This week Mexico’s President, stands before the U.S. Congress and castigates America for Arizona’s immigration enforcement law, and Obama says, “Amen, amigo, meddle away.”
What is the dividing line between Conservatives and everyone else in America today? Limited –vs- Unlimited Government.
In a society where government is the first resort for every problem and psuedo-problem, what role does a Constitution play? Usually, in the hands of judicial activists, it becomes a cordon to prevent popular and representative majorities from executing guardianship of the foundations and traditions of the social and political fabric. Example: Californians pass a Proposition defining marriage as it has traditionally been defined for millennia, and the Courts say, “you can’t do that, it violates the Constitution.”
We have the Constitution limiting the consent of the governed, rather than the Constitution limiting the scope of the government. This turns the framers’ intent on its head.
Protests in Arizona, by advocates of illegal immigration.
Would these represent the kind of seditious, anti-government sentiment that Liberals were warning of earlier this month, when the Tea Party protests were happening, or should we, in this case, try to "understand their rage"?
<Crying "Raise our taxes!" and "Show some guts!", thousands of people rallied at the Illinois state Capitol on Wednesday to protest lawmakers' inaction on a tax hike.>
This must have been a grassroots collection of ordinary citizens from all walks of life, because news consumers were not treated to weeks of reporting and analysis of the participants' racial composition, income-level, education or political party affiliation. We were not introduced to any slang terms for perverted sexual acts, applied to the protestors by network news broadcasters, nor were we regaled with ominous hints about the propensity of such dissenters to commit acts of anti-government violence, accompanied by stock footage of carnage from The Unabomber's handiwork.
News reports of the rally did give passing mention to the presumably innocuous fact that the crowd included "public employees, labor union members and school teachers," so permit me to translate: this astroturf rent-a-mob consisted of a bunch of parasites, angered that the Democrats in Springfield have thus far failed to hike the rate at which they rob the productive private sector through taxation, in order to adequately suckle the unproductive sector, as represented by public employees, labor unions and school teachers.
Now, not being a Stalinist thug myself, and therefore unqualified for employment in the "mainstream" media or the Obama administration, I am perfectly content for this brood of blood-sucking parasites to skip work in order to clamour outside the State Capitol for policies that they support. I merely note, for the record, the double-standard of media scrutiny compared with the Tea Parties.
My niece recently asked me what books she should read to become a well-read person. Here's the list I gave her, off the top of my head.
Rob Roy – Sir Walter Scott
A Tale of Two Cities – Charles Dickens
Wuthering Heights – Emily Bronte
King Solomon’s Mines – H. Rider Haggard
Beau Geste – P.C. Wren
Beau Sabreur – P.C. Wren
The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings – J.R.R. Tolkein
The Brothers Karamazov – Fyodor Dostoevsky
A Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich – Alexander Solzenheitzen
Little House on the Prarie – Laura Ingalls Wilder
The Scottish Chiefs – Jane Porter
Harry of Monmouth – A.M. Maugham
The Last of the Mohicans – James Fennimore Cooper
Animal Farm – George Orwell
Lord of the Flies – William Golding
Ivanhoe – Sir Walter Scott
A Tale of the Western Plaines – G.A. Henty
Adam Bede – George Eliot
Tom Sawyer – Mark Twain
Madeleine Takes Command – Ethel C. Brill
The Aubrey-Matarin Novels – Patrick O’Brien
The Blackford Oakes Novels – William F. Buckley Jr.
Longitude – Dava Sobel
A History of the English Speaking Peoples – Winston Churchill
After the Flood – Bill Cooper
Heroes – Paul Johnson
Ronald Reagan, How an ordinary man became an extraordinary leader – Dinesh D’Souza
Manhunt: the 12-day chase for Lincoln’s killer – James L. Swanson
A History of the American People – Paul Johnson
The Fall of the Berlin Wall – William F. Buckley Jr.
The Secret Kingdom – Pat Robertson
Dictatorships and Double Standards – Jeanne Kirkpatrick
The Forgotten Man – Amity Shlaes
The Long Walk – Slavomir Rawicz
My Early Years – Winston Churchill
Men and Marriage – George Gilder
Up From Liberalism – William F. Buckley Jr.
Free to Choose – Milton Freedman
America the Last Best Hope – William J. Bennett
Architects of Victory: 6 Heroes of the Cold War – Joseph Shattan
The Genesis Flood – Harold Morris
Don’t Tread On Me – H.W. Crocker
Trafalgar: an Eyewitness History – Tom Pocock
America Alone – Mark Steyn
Liberty & Tyranny – Mark Levin
Coolidge – Robert Sobel
Economics in One Lesson – Henry Hazlitt
Endurance: Shackleton’s Incredible Voyage – Tyndale House
The Daily Herald ran a priceless headline, "FBI Arrests Christian Militia," over its copy & paste of the Associated Press story identifying arrested militia members as "Christian" and "Right-Wing."
I'm not quite sure what makes these particular militia-ists "Right-Wing" -- perhaps they favor cutting the federal budget, reducing marginal income-tax rates, or drilling in ANWR -- but the willingness of AP and The Daily Herald to label them as "Christian" reveals a transparent double standard that says more about the weasels in the news media, than it does about militiamen, Christian or otherwise.
When Muslim terrorists, open fire, torch cars, or blow up innocent civilians, while shouting "Allahu Akbar" AP routinely treats us to tortured euphemisms like "alleged gunmen," or "extremists," even though the perpetrators self-identify as adherents of Islam, quote from Islam's holy book, and are acknowledged as legitimate by vast numbers of Muslim leaders and followers. For some reason, AP, Rueters, and the news reports that parrot them, can't bring themselves to use the "M" Word.
But, AP has no such compunction when it comes to labeling militia wackos as "Christian." Certainly, these militia self-identify as Christians and quote from Christianity's holy book, but can any investigative reporter locate any significant support from Christian leaders and followers? Any prominent Christian to give credit to this militia's doctrines? To ask those questions is to answer them.
I heard a man on the news, who compared the passage of the Democrats' healthcare takeover to "Christmas Morning."
That's really not too far from the truth. What do so many people do between Thanksgiving and Christmas? They run up massive credit card charges so that Christmas Morning has a heap of goodies under the tree. Then Christmas is over. Then comes January, and the bills arrive. Then comes the sick feeling in the pit of your stomach, and the remorseful questions, "what have I done?" "why did I do it?"
Well, that's what Obamacare will be like for that man on the news report, but to most Americans it will be slightly different. We didn't run up our own credit cards. Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and your Democrat U.S. Senator and Representative ran them up for us. Christmas will be over soon. The bills are in the mail. Merry Christmas...or not.
Democrats have rammed through a government takeover of American health care. What now? National Review Online's editorial aptly begins with the words, "Nil Desperandum," and that is the right attitude for Americans distressed by this unprecedented inroad on the private sector.
David Horowitz likes to say that "in politics, there are no lost causes, because there are no won causes." But, much will depend on the intrepidity of Republican legislators and candidates -- isn't that a scary thought? -- who are America's last best hope to repeal Obamacare. Is there a Republican leader out there who can lead this fight? Paul Ryan, perhaps?
Ultimately, however, the American People will decide at the ballot box whether to restore Constitutionally limited government, or accept the new order. Will our future be free markets and individual choice, or will it be, "Comrade, it has been noticed by the Ministry of Healthcare Cost Control that you frequently eat ice cream after 9pm. Surely you know, Comrade, that this kind of reckless behavior costs the taxpayers millions of dollars a year in medical expenses, that could be used to feed a hungry child, or pay the college tuition of a disadvantaged youth..." We'll have a pretty good idea on November 3rd.
NAIROBI, Kenya (AP) — Swarms of Somali pirates are moving into the waters off East Africa, triggering four shootouts Friday...
The end of the monsoon season and the resulting calmer waters signal the beginning of the most dangerous period for ships traveling the Gulf of Aden and Indian Ocean. Nearly half the 47 ships hijacked off Somalia last year were taken in March and April.
Cmdr. John Harbour of the European Union Naval Force said a spike in attacks was very likely in coming weeks. But this season, ship owners and sailors are more prepared to try to evade pirates, fight back, or have armed security onboard, raising the likelihood of violence.
"We know the monsoon is over. We know they're coming," Harbour said. "We're taking the fight to the pirates.">
Ships arming to fight pirates? What does this accomplish, other than to perpetuate the cycle of violence?
Instead of imitating the American Cowboy types, like those Navy Seal snipers, Europeans should take a lesson from American Universities and declare their ships as GUN-FREE ZONES. Problem solved.