Some Thoughts on Human History and Progressives

Many of you might have noticed that I often put quotations around the word, “progressive.”  Over the last couple of years, I’ve probably wasted a thousand keystrokes doing that, so I might as well explain why.

For the vast majority of human history, mankind has lived in a state of tyranny.  This probably started not long after cave man Ugh realized that his neighbor, Argh was weaker than him, and carried a smaller club.  After Argh’s untimely demise (with the exception of some tribal societies), the course of mankind was set.

As mankind developed from hunter gatherers to simple agrarian societies, to city states, and then empires, a variety of chieftains, kings, dictators, warlords, priests, priestesses, and self declared “gods,” have ruled mankind.  During those  countless ages, the average person lived, or died, at the whim of his or her self-appointed leader.  Economies were controlled, taxes were high, incomes were close to nil, and the average person often died as penniless as they were at birth.  Economies centered on the wealth of the leaders, not on the people, so  pestilence and starvation killed many when it did not need to happen.  There was little to no income distribution.  There was the top class; the leaders and their enforcers, and there were the peasants.  There was not even a hint of equality or justice, just oppressive rule.  (I know that Rome was, for a time, a republic, and some Greeks practiced democracy, but even then, they were a drop in the bucket when compared to the total history of man)

These tyrannical leaders did not tolerate dissent, or even the chance of dissent.  people were tortured, maimed, and executed to insure the power of the ruler(s).  People were killed for treason, heresy, or for simply knowing someone who might have done something.  There was no, “taking to the streets.”  Such events would have been met with lethal force.  Not only that, the entire town in which such a thing occurred might be razed in retaliation.

The leaders during those dark times were said to be wiser, stronger, more suited to rule, and it had been ordained by God that they should have power.  And all the while, excesses and corruption were the order of the day.

However, as the centuries passed, progress-REAL progress, was made.  The Magna Carta established that people have some rights, though it is not as codified as are the rights in our Constitution.   Also, John Locke, among others, formulated the ideas of natural rights and the social contract.

Our Founding Fathers were the next in line for real progress.  They created, in the Unites States Constitution, the greatest charter for human freedom ever devised. They embraced the idea of Natural Rights, in the human freedoms are from God, and that government exists to protect those rights-and cannot take them away.  Humans were protected in their right to free speech, their freedom of religion, their right to defend themselves, their right to property and all the others that we tend to take for granted today.  In our Republic, man rules himself, and government exists only to do those functions that man cannot do for himself, such as national defense, enforcing contracts, establishing courts, coining money, and so forth.  Or at least, that’s is how it’s supposed to be.

However, the forces of tyranny did not rest or concede when true human freedom started to emerge.  The next stages of tyranny were  Communism, followed by the original “progressive movement,” and then Fascism.  All of these are related in terms of the fact that they center power in an elite, that then control all aspects of human behavior.  Their only differences are in process and scope.

The results were horrific.  Over a hundred million people were killed in the name of Communism.  Fascism might have  equaled  that, had they not been stopped by WW II.  The “progressives,” operating in Western Democracies, had to move slowly.  Incrementalism has been their primary operating procedure.  However, they inspired the Nazi’s with their love for eugenics, and were “fellow travelers” with the other two movements.

Over the decades, “progressives,” operating under a variety of labels , have moved through our institutions.  They have used a variety of justifications to give the Federal government more power.  They have taken control of education.  They are in control of the MSM.  They have crafted  regulations  that destroy business and industry.  They created social programs that have encouraged dependency, and then have created economic crisis to fill those programs to unprecedented levels.  They have legalized sexual assault in the name of “security.”  They have also used the created and false crisis of global cooling, global warming, climate change in order to justify the reduction of our lifestyles.  All of this, of course, will be monitored and controlled by the authorities.

Their desire for control extends to all aspects of human life.  Government wants to tell us what kind of food can we eat- even if we can grow our own.  We are told how much water our toilets can use.  The kinds of car we can own-and eventually, even if we can own one is to be determined by unelected  bureaucrats.    What kind of house we can build, the healthcare we can recieve, and a host of others, are all in the crosshairs of the “progressives.”  They even seek to control mass media and the internet to control the free flow of information.  In the end, are we free if the government dictates so many of our basic human functions?

We also see how the “progressives” treat those that disagree with them. Conservative and Libertarian students are threatened and punished on   campuses, where free speech is curtailed, and labeled as “hate.”  Union members and other “progressives” engage in violence and intimidation to silence those that dissent.  The Consitution itself has been declared “outdated,” or “irrelevant.”  The Founders themselves are attacked and discounted.  After all, if we are to be controlled by an all powerful government, the very ideas of freedom have to be attacked, silenced and discredited.

As you can see, “progressives” are not progressive. They are REgressive.  They seek to return us to a state in which we are controlled and dominated by a small elite.  And just as the monarchs of old, they seek the “divine right of kings,” in order to gain and maintain control over us.  Of course, they tell us that it’s for our own good, but they proceed from the faulty premise that they know better than us, and that we cannot self govern.

We were born into a state of freedom.  In terms of human history, this is a rare and precious gift.  Only the tiniest fraction of all humans that have ever lived have enjoyed these freedoms.  If we allow the Regressives to take them away, it might be centuries before they re-emerge, and hundreds of millions will die in the process.

Are we going those freedoms, and the future of mankind, over to a small elite that “knows what’s best?”

NOTE: This is yet another post that could be turned into a small book.  Obviously there are things I could not touch on without making it my first book. Feel free to let me know what I missed in the comment section.

The Black Holocaust: Part Five

Planned Parenthood Here is part five in the Series, The Black Holocaust.

With friends like the progressives, who needs enemies?

Please share these videos with concerned Americans.

Another Liberal Comment Dissected

It seems that Deborah Kitchell came back for more.  I know, it’s useless to argue with them, as facts mean nothing to them, but it’s sometimes good to keep ones skills sharp, and watching them spin reality is kinda fun, so here we go with Deborah’s response to my post…

I never said that the Tea Party were terrorists or extremists on par with the EXTREME far right groups like the American Nazi Party, KKK, et al. You are absolutely correct that totalitarian movements whether left (communist) and right (fascist) have been responsible for more than 200 million deaths world wide, but I was referring to right and left movements HERE in the U.S. and KKK lynchings, union worker deaths, random murders of government workers (McVie example) are more numerous. In terms of facts, I am not sure a right-wing blogs entitled The Jawa Report, Pundit Press, and OWS Exposed are the most reliable source for statistics on the antics of Occupiers, but given that it is/was predominately a youth movement compared to Tea Partiers which tend to be a middle-aged to senior movement, I don’t doubt that when young males get excited, they do stupid things that get exaggerated by the right. However, the Occupy protests I attended in my small city (as were most nation-wide) were peaceful, VERY respectful to police and non-theatrical. I do recall viewing actual scenes of Tea Partiers hurling racial epithets at Congressmen/women, carrying guns to protests, and stupidly, but proudly displaying posters of your president awash in swatikas and Hitleresque mustaches. Again, given the typical age of Tea Party types, I have no doubt that their large protests were more subdued compared to the large protests of the youthful Occupiers.

Ok then. Let’s take a look at the first paragraph.

1.  The American Nazi Part is extreme right wing, is it?  Here is something right from their own platform…

We demand the creation of an honest, self-sufficient, debt-free economy based solely on the productive capacity of the Aryan worker, which will guarantee conditions of full employment and price stability. We also demand public control of all banking and credit institutions as well as all utilities and all monopolies, confiscation of all conglomerate holdings, cancellation of all usurious debt, comprehensive profit sharing in all basic industries, and the institution of a national program of interest-free loans for families, farmers, and small businessmen.

We believe that the proper function of an economy is to serve the economic needs of the people, not to make profits for big bankers and huge multinational corporations. We must put an end to both economic freeloading and economic exploitation in America. There must be no place for parasites who draw their sustenance from society without giving anything in return. We also believe that HONEST WORK is the only legitimate basis for wealth - not speculation, usury, or money-manipulation - and that a sound economic system must rest, not on debt or some extraneous metal, but on the productivity of the Aryan worker alone. We believe further, that money is properly a medium of exchange and store of value, not a commodity like bread or steel, and that therefore money and credit should not be issued for profit, but to serve the legitimate needs of the people without interest. Finally, we believe that it is unnecessary for any rational society to suffer unemployment when there is work to be done and people who want jobs. We must have an economy based on the long-term interests of the man who works for a living, not the chronic loafer or the man who lives by renting out his capital.

Yes folks, this is a so called right wing movement.  This could come right from an occupod!

2.  And of the KKK, it seems that David Duke, their former leader, came out in support of the occupy movement!

3.  As for the reliability of the reports on occupy violence, this blog was one of many that covered the deaths, the rapes, the illegal activities, and the like.  We took the information from local media reports.  It is reliable, unless the deaths did not occur, and the local media, coroners, police, EMT’s, and everyone else lied about it. But, since we are exaggerating it, I guess all the videos, posts, local media reports, are all bunk.  After all, Deborah said so.

4.  According to Mussolini, fascism is “socialism for one state.”  I guess socialism is right wing?

5.   I do recall viewing actual scenes of Tea Partiers hurling racial epithets at Congressmen/women, carrying guns to protests, and stupidly, but proudly displaying posters of your president awash in swatikas and Hitleresque mustaches.

Might you share the links to that?  I mean video of racial slurs towards congressmen.  As the saying goes, a picture is worth a thousand words.  And, in the case of video, footage is worth a million words.

Why is it wrong to open carry where it is legal?  And, with all of those “bitter clingers,” was one single person shot?  With us being terriblly violent and dangerous, surely at least a dozen people were shot, right?

And for the Hitler signs, Was it eqaully wrong when leftist protesters did the same to Bush…

Frankly, it’s free speech.

Now, for the next.

In terms of your comments about thugs, I will also have you know that I have relatives that were coal miners in WV during the strikes in the 1930s and 40s and they were not thugs beating people up–they were hard working but grossly exploited working people fighting coal company thugs, goons (Pinkerton men included) for THEIR RIGHTS as workers. Now, with coal companies writing legislation regulating the enforcement of worker violations, we are now seeing black lung AGAIN and horrible mining accidents with death tolls not seen in 30 years. Do you really trust the ultimate goals of private corporations (making money) over the government (providing for the common good)? Adam Smith said that unbridled capitalism only works with ethical business practitioners–that has never been the case and certainly isn’t today. Government does not regulate in a vacuum–it regulates when abuses in the private sector takes place and is needed to protect the public. But, I digress…

I had family member that were union members as well.  I was told stories about elections, and how the union enforcers were at the site.  Anyone that showed any indication of disobeying the union bosses were instantly taken out and beaten.  And as for now, unions aren’t thugs, are they?

Yes, there are more videos-dozens more.  Union violence is nothing new, and thanks to the alternative media, more and more people are finding out about it.  And we’ll continue to show the evidence.

Oh, and by the way, the companies that my grandparents worked for no longer exist.  It seems that the unions made it impossible to operate.

You know what bothers me, these arguments between those who more closely identify with the Occupy or the Tea Party Movement is exactly what those with the power want. You guys do seem to “get” crony capitalism at work in this country and it is exactly that kind of corporate ownership of this country that those of the left ALSO despise. As long Americans fail to reasonably look for common ground on both side of an issue and infect the public discourse with venom–the plutocracy which is taking in this great country of ours (if it already hasn’t occurred!) will win. Its an old story going back hundreds of years (thousands if looked at somewhat differently): divide and conquer–pit the middle class against the poor.

You are correct that crony capitalism exists, and the more power that government gives itself to regulate it, the worse it becomes.  Large corporations become larger and more powerful in a high regulatory environment.  The cause is simple; the large and highly capitalized corporation can afford to absorb the increased costs of taxes, labor, and regulations because they sell more stuff, and can spread the increased costs out more effectively per unit.  The small company cannot afford to do so very easily, so they are eventually crushed under the pressure, leaving the big guys in control.  It’s because of the regulations and influence that the market has become so distorted.  Crony capitalism exists because government gave itself the power to regulate and pick the winners and losers.  So, the corporations come with their money and influence to channel that regulatory power to their own favor.

It isn’t about the middle vs the poor.  It’s about the state, and it’s cronies, against all of us.  The state’s main mission the the accumulation and preservation of power.  In fact, the pressure against the middle class comes from government, in the form of taxes, regulations, and attacks on self sufficiency.  Taxes take money out of the pockets of those that produce, and wastes most of it before it ever get’s spent on anything meaningful.  Regulations kill jobs, lowering the standards of living for those that have lost jobs, and causes far fewer jobs to be created, decreasing the chances of people to even get to the middle class.  Then, people end up being trapped in government programs that punish success and reward failure.

The poor serve as an important power bloc for the left.  Regulations and taxes kill jobs, trapping people in poverty.  Government programs penalize people who try and work, so they discourage people from trying.  After spending billions on education, their programs chronically under-educate the poor, and a steady stream of leftist propaganda convinces millions that they cannot survive off the government plantation.  Then, they are convinced that successful people are the cause of their misery-that the evil rich  have somehow stolen their wealth, and seek to deprive them of even more.  The state uses the poor to advance the class warfare narrative, and keep them in poverty to help maintain their own power.

And now for the next paragraph…

It is not Marxism or any other political theory of the left you have to be afraid of. It is the effects of an economic theory being touted as political theory: unbridled capitalism. Remember, we had until the 80s struck a solid balace between capitalism and socialism giving us the rise of the most affluent middle class in history (1947-1979) and it was done with tax rates on the wealthy that exceeded 80%! (and fewer tax loopholes!) But, whatever. I suspect you are likely an ideologue not interested in what is really ruining this country. It was the greed of selfish bankers and Wall Street corporate moguls that sank us in 2008 and be assured, will do it again! But, if you tout the typical Tea Party line, just believe it is those wine sipping. latte drooling socialistic bleeding heart liberals (by the way, I’m from a family that lived the most socialistic life ever: the US Military!) and lazy poor people that catapulted this country and the world into financial oblivion. That’s EXACTLY WHAT WALL STREET and their tools at CSNBC, Fox News, the Wall Street Journal, et al WANTS YOU TO THINK! For me, given the feckless Democrats and downright mean Republicans, this country is in real trouble. We need a strong leader like the Roosevelts to stand up to Wall Street and break up the big banks and devise new programs to help average Americans, an Eisenhower to stand up to the military industrial security complex, and the OLD John McCain to foster REAL campaign finance reform. I will hold my nose like I do every election year I can remember and vote for Obama, but I do not see ANY leader on either side of the political spectrum, save possibly Elizabeth Warren who has the guts to stand up for the middle class in this country. Rant over…

Wow, there is a lot in this one.  First, we haven’t had unbridled capitalism since probably the 19th century.  Even since, government has interfered with it more and more, and increasing the problems incrementally.

Prior to the election of Reagan, we had…

1.  Double digit inflation.

2.  Double digit unemployment.

3.  Double digit interest rates.

That’s quite a balance Deborah.

Oh, and by the way, remember how the economy did after Kennedy cut taxes?

But, whatever. I suspect you are likely an ideologue not interested in what is really ruining this country. 

Projecting much?  I’ve read history, and I know what is ruining this country-the government.  You seem to want to throw gasoline on that fire.  You can’t change reality-no matter how hard you try.

Roosevelt made the Great Depression worse, not better.  Remember that if Obama passed the Porkulus, that unemployment wouldn’t go over 7%?  We all know how that worked out.

And then, she goes of on a series of talking points, followed up by support for a woman who keeps lying about her ethnicity.  That, of course, has offended the Cherokees, but what they heck, she preaches the class warfare line better than most.

Here are some quick observations on the rest:

1.  ”military industrial security complex”  If she is referring to the police state, I agree.  The Patriot act has to go.  No government should be given that much power.

2.  ”REAL Campaign finance reform,” which will ensure that the unions continue to dominate the campaigns, as they will be exempted.  Let’s take a look at where those evil Koch Brothers stack up…

And hey, let’s just look at the rest, just to be sure…

3.  Elizabeth Warren is as great an enemy to the middle class as any closet Marxist.  There won’t be a middle class with people like her, and Obama, in power.

Sorry Deborah, there can be no middle ground.  We will either be free, or be slaves, and I’m not quite ready to live on the government plantation.

And finally, I will end this post as I do with so many dissections.  For Deborah’s sake, here is a video from Yuri Bezmenov, the highest ranking KGB officer to defect to the West.  He predicted Deborah’s reactions and talking points approximately 30 years ago.

And no, she won’t get it because she isn’t supposed to.

A Tale of Two Stories: Islamists Call for the Death of Gays, but let’s Stop Chik-Fil-A from Opening New Restaurants!

As is commonly known, homosexuality is a death sentence under Shariah law, but it seems that, at least according to the MSM and American liberals, that Chik-fil-a is a far greater threat.  So, let’s take a look at this, and see where the facts take us.

First up, The Progressive Puppy takes a look at how homosexuals are treated in Islamic countries…

These days, gays and lesbians live in terror under Islam.   Spiegel International: In most Islamic countries, gay men and women are ostracized, persecuted and in some cases even murdered. Repressive regimes are often fanning the flames of hatred in a bid to outdo Islamists when it comes to spreading “moral panic.” …More than 30 Islamic countries have laws on the books that prohibit homosexuality and make it a criminal offense.  In most cases punishment ranges from floggings to life imprisonment.  In Mauritania, Bangladesh, Yemen, parts of Nigeria and Sudan, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and Iran convicted homosexuals can also be sentenced to death.  In those Muslim countries where homosexuality is not against the law gay men and women are nonetheless persecuted, arrested, and in some cases murdered.  Although long known for its open gay scene, Egypt has recently started to clamp down hard.  The lives of homosexuals are monitored by a kind of vice squad who tap telephones and recruit informants.  As soon as the police have accumulated the kind of evidence they need they charge their victims with “debauchery.”

Then, there is more, people are devoted to tracking down, and then killing homosexuals in these countries…

One of the worst offenders is Iraq, where over 4,000 U.S. troops sacrificed their lives bringing “freedom” to the Iraqi people and where the murder of gays by roaming Sharia death squads is standard procedure.  From Guardian UK:  Sitting on the floor, wearing traditional Islamic clothes and holding an old notebook, Abu Hamizi, 22, spends at least six hours a day searching internet chatrooms linked to gay websites. He is not looking for new friends, but for victims.  “It is the easiest way to find those people who are destroying Islam and who want to dirty the reputation we took centuries to build up,” he said.  When he finds them, Hamizi arranges for them to be attacked and sometimes killed.  Hamizi, a computer science graduate, is at the cutting edge of a new wave of violence against gay men in Iraq.  Made up of hardline extremists, Hamizi’s group and others like it are believed to be responsible for the deaths of more than 130 gay Iraqi men since the beginning of the year alone.  (Many of them were tortured.)

The author goes on to point out that even though many lives were sacrificed to bring about “democracy” in  Iraq, we saw through that war, as well as the “Arab Spring” Tyrant Exchange Program, that extermists now rule-literally, if not formally.  Frankly, The Progressive Puppy makes a good point.  Then again, that is what democracy does-it’s the 51% abusing the living (you know what) out of  other 49.

Alright then, we see that even the progressives are noting that homosexuals are being KILLED in these countries, yet there isn’t much of an outcry.  Then, what of Chik-fil-a, whose CEO happens to espouse Christian beliefs?

The other day, we covered that several cities, including Boston, are telling Chik-fil-a, “nyet comrade,” when it comes to opening restaurants in their cities.  However, Boston’s Mayor, Tom Menino seems to go out of his way to help some Muslims, who just so happen to advocate the DEATH OF HOMOSEXUALS!  The Boston Globe has more…

Given his stance on Chick-fil-A, would Mayor Tom Menino grant permits to a group that has counted among its leaders a man who has repeatedly called homosexuality a “crime that must be punished” by death?

Actually, he has done that??.?.?.?and more! Menino effectively gave away city land valued at $1.8 million to the organization, and he gave a speech at its ribbon-cutting ceremony.

It’s the Islamic Society of Boston’s mosque, and when it comes to anti-gay sentiment, one of its early supporters makes Chick-fil-A look like the Provincetown Men’s Chorus

 …reporters discovered that the Islamic Society of Boston counted imam Yusef al-Qaradawi as one of its spiritual guides. As the Weekly Standard reported at the time:

“The ISB does not dispute the fact that they have repeatedly used al-Qaradawi as a tool to raise funds for the Boston mosque, printing a brochure that highlighted al-Qaradawi’s enthusiastic support of the mosque and playing a videotaped message of support from him at a 2002 gathering.”

Also in attendance at the gathering, listening to al-Qaradawi’s message: Mayor Tom Menino.

Outside Boston, al-Qaradawi is better known as a vocal supporter of terrorism who teaches a hard-core version of Islam. His claim to fame as a “progressive” is that he was the first prominent imam to urge women to become suicide bombers, too.

Well, at least they’re not Christians, or anything truly dangerous like that, right?

And what does this al-Qaradawi say about homosexuality?

“[A homosexual should be given] the same punishment as any sexual pervert??.?.?. Some say we should throw them from a high place, like God did with the people of Sodom. Some say we should burn them.”

According to the Anti-Defamation League, “In 2003 Qaradawi stated on IslamOnline that the punishment of homosexuality is the death penalty.”

OK then, Christians are bad, very, very bad; but a radical Imam that calls for the death of homosexuals is just fine?

Of course, Chicago is another city that has told Chik-fil-a to take a hike, but once again, Islamic groups seem to be perfectly welcome, like the Nation of Islam.  Here is what their Leader says…

In Its Own Words
"[T]he Jews don’t like Farrakhan, so they call me Hitler. Well, that’s a good name. Hitler was a very great man. He wasn’t a great man for me as a black person, but he was a great German. Now, I’m not proud of Hitler’s evils against Jewish people, but that’s a matter of record. He raised Germany up from nothing. Well, in a sense you could say there’s a similarity in that we are raising our people up from nothing."
— Louis Farrakhan, radio interview, March 11, 1984

"Jews have been conclusively linked to the greatest criminal endeavor ever undertaken against an entire race of people … the black African Holocaust. … The effects of this unspeakable tragedy are still being felt among the peoples of the world at this very hour."
— The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews (NOI book), 1991

"Who are the slumlords in the Black community? The so-called Jews. … Who is it sucking our blood in the Black community? A white imposter Arab and a white imposter Jew."
— Speech by NOI national official Khalid Muhammad, Nov. 29, 1993

"These false Jews promote the filth of Hollywood that is seeding the American people and the people of the world and bringing you down in moral strength. … It’s the wicked Jews, the false Jews, that are promoting lesbianism, homosexuality. It’s the wicked Jews, false Jews, that make it a crime for you to preach the word of God, then they call you homophobic!"
— Louis Farrakhan, Saviours’ Day speech, Feb. 26, 2006

So, you would think that Chicago would be rather dim on that organization?  Not so, as a restaurant owned by that organization was welcomed with open arms.  

OK, what are we to take from this?  Here are some thoughts…

1.  Organizations that espouse Christian beliefs are bad, and should be banned, because they don’t support gay marriage.

2.  Organizations that openly espouse Muslim beliefs, like KILLING homosexuals, are OK, and entitled to public support.

3.  Jews are evil, and should be killed off.

4.  Picking on Christians is easy, because the vast majority of them are non-violent, and pose no real threat.  Muslims, on the other hands, have centuries of violence and oppression, including to the present time, and would kill people and blow things up if they don’t get their own way.

Or, these are just typical hypocritical regressives?

Or (and my personal opinion) is this…

Matthew 10:22-23  And ye shall be hated of all men for my name‘s sake

Sometimes, it’s that simple.

The Black Holocaust Part Four

Planned Parenthood

Here is the next segment of the Black Holocaust.  As the video clearly shows, the “progressives” have been busy-for decades.  They have busied themselves will trying to exterminate our fellow citizens.   While the methods and terminologies have changed, the purpose and intent have not changed one bit.

Please share this with concerned Americans.

The Constitution: It’s Around Here Somewhere

“Barack Obama, a man long intent on breaking free from the Constitution’s essential constraints, has succeeded in doing so.”Phil Kerpen

Despite the best efforts of Barack Obama and the Federal Government, our Constitution is not dead yet, but it soon will be unless we can force the bushwhackers in the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches to cease using it for target practice.

Our friend Curtice Mang, a contributor at What Would The Founders Think, has ruminated upon the assault on our founding document by the socialistic control freaks presenting themselves as ‘progressives’ and ‘Democrats’, and he offers his conclusions in a tome titled The Constitution: I’m Not Kidding! And Other Tales of Liberal Folly.  A sampling:

  • To suggest, for example, that Article 1 of the Constitution (which created the legislative branches and specifies their powers and duties) is not relevant because James Madison didn’t have an iPod is akin to belittling Mozart’s music for its lack of electric guitars.
  • The political left has a fundamental belief that all money is theirs to spend. There are, however, two exceptions: they won’t spend it on defense and they won’t spend their own.
  • For a brief look at the effect of higher taxes we must turn our attention to that esteemed economist, businessman and preeminent rock guitarist, Keith Richards of the Rolling Stones. In his autobiography, Richards wrote that in the early 1970s the tax rate in Britain for high-income earners was 83 percent and it went up to 98 percent for investments and “unearned” income. The Stones then made a rational business decision: they moved to France.
  • The role of government is to protect all its citizens from everything—except government.
  • During the 2008 presidential campaign, Barack Obama said, “We are the people we have been waiting for.” Although I’m sure it was unintended, it sounds quite similar to Jimmy Buffett’s “We Are the People Our Parents Warned Us About.” Keep that in mind the next time a liberal politician says that the government needs to increase your taxes or you drive past the Robert C. Byrd Memorial Lint Factory.
  • Over the past couple of decades, the government—from George H. W. Bush to Bill Clinton to George W. Bush to both parties in Congress—encouraged home ownership. But, really, they did much more than encourage. They made laws and regulations, like the Community Reinvestment Act (1977), that made it easier than ever to own a home. The CRA was used to help fuel the housing bubble in the first decade of the new century by providing justification for lowing lending standards. No credit, no problem. No job, no problem. No income, no problem. Any convenience store clerk with an associate degree in women’s studies could qualify for a half-million–dollar mortgage. If the two-year degree was in minority studies and you worked part-time in fast food, you could get a $700,000 loan. And, if you never went to college, lived in your parents’ basement, and spoke highly of the 1960s, that got you a million-dollar house, plus your loan officer would meet you for drinks—and he paid the tab!
  • If one were to listen to the political left (not a practice I would recommend on an empty stomach—or even a full stomach, for that matter) the mortgage meltdown was the result of: a) Wall Street greed or b) Greedy Wall Street. That the government encouraged, cajoled, coerced, or even demanded that lenders make bad loans played no role. And Fannie Mae got a free pass. Not to worry, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd (D–Clueless) came to the rescue with the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (2009). (Ugh! I just swallowed a Life Saver.) Only in Congress could an individual who had a large role in creating the housing crisis get to “reform” the financial sector. When eight members of the Chicago White Sox took bribes from gamblers to throw the 1919 World Series (and became known as the Black Sox), even the baseball owners (not the brightest lot) had the good sense not to put them in charge of “reforming” the integrity of the game.
  • Judging by their performance, the likes of Frank, Dodd, Pelosi, and Obama, et al., have much to be modest about. Yet modesty and humility are not in their DNA. If they had any modesty or humility, they would not tell the banks who to lend to, what interest rates to charge, what socks to wear, where to eat, what to eat, and where to be merry. They have all the answers—just ask them. The problem is they don’t have the correct answers.
  • The environmental left would have preferred that the internal combustion engine never have been invented. They look back fondly on the horse and buggy days when horse dung was piled neck deep along the side of the road and flies were so plentiful they had their own union. Ah, yes, those were the days.
  • Given what the American taxpayer has doled out to GM, I think each American of legal driving age ought to get a free car. Really, we’ve already paid for it.

The Constitution: I’m Not Kidding! And Other Tales of Liberal Folly by Curtice Mang is available through Amazon or Bob Mack’s humble Book Emporium.

Original Post: Be Sure You’re Right, Then Go Ahead

Newt Gingrich a Fan of Theodore Roosevelt, FDR, and Woodrow Wilson?

When we are looking for a Conservative to nominate in order to defeat Barak Obama in November.  I know that some of my fellow bloggers are leaning towards Newt Gingrich for that task.  However, I strongly disagree, and for additional evidence, offer the following video…

After that, can we doubt that Gingrich  is a progressive?  And, what might a Republican progressive President do with the power of the executive branch.  Being a regressive, that POTUS wouldn’t reduce the power of the government-they would increase it.  Regressivism requires power to meet it’s “lofty” goals, and with that power comes control.  Human nature, as well as history,  teaches us that such power is not relinquished easily.

Professor Epstein: Obama is Incoherent and Frightening

Here is what Richard A. Epstein, Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Professor of Law at New York University Law School, and senior lecturer at the University of Chicago, had to say regarding the major speech that President Barack Obama (one-term Democrat) gave at Osawatomie, Kansas:

The painful ignorance that is revealed in these remarks augurs ill for the long-term recovery of America. With the president firmly determined to set himself against the tides of progress, innovation will be harder to come by. The levels of unemployment will continue to be high as the president works overtime to impose additional restrictions on the labor markets and more taxes at the top of the income distribution—both backhanded ways to reward innovation and growth.

The problem, therefore, with the president’s speech is not that it is demagogic in tone. The problem is that it is intellectually incoherent. As a matter of high principle, the president announces his fealty to markets. As a matter of practical politics, he denigrates and undermines them at every step. It is a frightening prospect to have a president who lives in a time warp that lets him believe that the failed policies of 1935 can lead this nation back from the brink. His chosen constituency, the middle class, should tremble at the prospect that his agenda might well set the course for the United States for the next four years.

In Professor Epstein’s analysis of President Obama’s speech, he echo’s some of the comments that I have been making on liberal blogs like Balloon Juice and others- that in spite of his rhetoric and because of his economic incoherence and illiteracy, workers, school teachers, union employees, blue collar employees, the middle class, supporters of Occupy Wall Street, and related groups are going to suffer the most from President Obama’s policies.

As Epstein wrote in his article Populist-in-Chief:

It is a good thing when plants can achieve the same output with less labor. Do we really want an America in which thousands of people work in dangerous occupations to turn molten lava into steel bars? Far better it is that fewer workers are doing those jobs. The jobs lost in that industry will be in part replaced by newer jobs created in the firms that build the equipment that make it possible to run steel mills at a lower cost and far lower risk of personal injury. The former workers can seek jobs in newer industries that will only expand by competing for labor.

And what about those ATM machines? Does the president really want people to have to queue up in banks to make deposits or withdraw cash in order to make a boom market for human tellers? Perhaps we should return to the days before automation, when phone calls were all connected by human operators. And why blast the Internet, which has created far more useful jobs than it has ever destroyed?

You see, if President Obama had his way, we would return to the Great Depression, when people were dependent on government for goods and services because government was in the business of destroying productive business around the world. If President Obama had his way, he would increase taxes and regulations on businesses while giving out subsidies and tax breaks to favored businesses, favoring those who hire lobbyists and special interest groups who redirect wealth over those who create wealth and make products or sell goods and services. If President Barack Obama had his way- a Congress of Democrats that went along with his ideas and ideals- America would be dragged back to the early 1900’s, when we had a low standards of living and shorter life spans, and Obama would happily fill up dangerous and inefficient steal mills with ‘workers’, he would sign praises to the joy of labor while factory workers worked for low wages (compared to today) in dangerous industries, and the working class would have few goods (like cheap cars coming in from the Far East, cheap electronics built in backward nations around the world, and labor-saving devices everywhere built everywhere) just so that he could burnish his protectionist credentials.

When government gets in the business of redirecting wealth and picking and choosing the winners and losers in society, the only people who win and get wealthy are government officials- this lesson has been demonstrated over and over around the world many times over. And yet, that is exactly what Barack Obama and his Democratic Party are proposing to do- increase the power of the government to control wealth, liberty, and property in our society, and that somehow through this ‘workers’ and the ‘99%’ will get more wealthy and happier. The logic is not explained, the mechanisms by which wealth is created are not explained- rather, the logic is the same logic that is found in every despotic tyranny throughout history- people have earned things that others want, and the government will get those things by playing one side off the other. Obama’s magic act of wealth creation is the same sort of tyranny that the world has seen many times over- and has fallen for many times over as well.

Our nation has not only learned nothing from the Great Depression, we have learned the wrong lessons as well (see my post Lessons from Economic Recessions- Introduction and Great Depression), and are going about repeating the same mistakes that turned a recession in 1930 into a Great Depression that lasted to the 1950’s (and included in it the collapse of the world into a deadly World War!). We must not allow this guy to enact those same policies- I don’t care who does what with the GOP, and it doesn’t matter who they are, anyone is an upgrade over this incoherent ideologue whose mind is so filled with mush and mindless platitudes and liberal bumper slogans that he is now unable to effectively design any policies that have a slightly positive effect on anyone.

President Obama, any Democrat who supports him, and any Republican who agrees with his policies needs to join Herbert Hoover on the unemployment line (or better yet, get a job somewhere in the private economy building or making or doing something useful!).

Original Post:  A Conservative Teacher

Classic Snarky: I’m a Democrat-You Owe Me

Note:  Here is a classic CH 2.0 post from the one and only Snarky Basterd.

I’m a democrat. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I have my own pile of money, but I want yours, too, including the four pennies you have rattling around in the bottom of that peanut butter jar you frugal idiots like to use as a change holder. Give it up! You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I just say I like the public school system. My kids go to private schools so that your kids can go to public schools and learn how to be good little democrats like me. When my kids grow up and become better members of a collectivist society, and your kids grow up confused, my kids will get government jobs and take more money and freedom from your kids. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I have a job with health insurance, but I think it’s everyone else’s fault when I get sick and have to cut back on my lifestyle so I can pay for health care that should be free, along with cars and houses and big screen TVs. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. There is no god. You can go ahead and get down on your knees and pray to the ceiling for forgiveness and strength and peace, but I’ll be standing right behind you with a tire iron, bashing your skull and stealing your wallet. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I hate people. I would rather sleep with my dog or a cucumber or a tree than with another person…unless I can just dump them on the curb after we’re through. You just have sex to make more people so you can continue to earn more money while you rape the planet. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I love taxes. It’s patriotic…for you…to pay them. I don’t pay any, anyway. And if I have to, I’ve figured out loop holes or have offshore accounts to shelter my money, so the government never really gets too much from me anyway. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. It’s not only my right but also my duty to take freedom and representative republicanism from you, little by little, and replace it with government bureaucracy. From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. I’m needy. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I have a $20 million vacation playground on Martha’s Vineyard and a guarded compound in South Chicago and belong to the richest majority in Washington’s history. But I hate rich people who aren’t democrats and want your property too so I can save endangered swamp rats and build turtle tunnels and fix toilets. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. There are more of you than there are of me. You breathe too much. I’ve told the world outlandish lies that you’re causing global warming, using faulty correlations to get everyone so worried they’re about to let me tax thin air. And you’ll breathe a lot less. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I’m an elitist. I’m perfect. I’m not like all of you stupid wingnuts out there working your greedy little fingers to the bone trying to make a little money and feed your family and have something to call successful when you retire. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I live in the city so I can get stupid drunk and piss on the streets when I want and kick your parked car when it gets in my way. It’s too bad that you have all those guns in your humble suburban and country homes. If you didn’t, I’d come and toss you out on your naked ass and make you live in the fetid cities that my government policies screwed up. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I think you hate homosexuals. I have no idea that you just want to be left alone and live your life the way you see fit and not have your children taught with government money that they should seek alternative lifestyles for the fun of it. I just want you to do what I think you should do with your life. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I’m so tolerant I can’t tolerate anyone who doesn’t think the way I do. In fact, I hate white people. I hate all people. I hate myself. I hate myself so much that I hate you even more when you are happy. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I don’t know how to do anything for myself. I need to be told what to do. I don’t think human beings are capable of taking care of themselves. That’s what government is for. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I don’t think any people should have rights. I think fish and frogs and grass should, however, and I want to represent them in court…and you to pay for it. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I’m a child. I act like a child and I think like a child and I live like a child and I throw up my hands and have little fits when I don’t get my way. There should be no consequences for anything I do. But there should be consequences for you, even if you’re blameless in what I accuse you of. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I’m racist but I get others to think that you are racist just because I call you one. It’s a riot to watch you squirm because I know you have a conscience. I do not. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I was born poor or middle class or rich, but it doesn’t matter. I was born black or white or Asian or Latina, but it still doesn’t matter. In fact, it’s Bush’s fault that I was even allowed to be born at all. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I want health care at your expense, while I’m young and virulent and child-like. But then I want you to kill me when I start to get old and weak and feeble, so that all of my young and virulent and child-like democrat friends can have health care at your expense.

Then I want to come back to life as a rock, so lots of birds can shit on me. They owe me, too, for being a loony moonbat.

Previously posted at Feed Your ADHD.

Moderate Democrats Almost Extinct?

Note:  This is a post from A Conservative Teacher.  The original post link is at the bottom of the content.

Conservatives and liberals, libertarians and progressives, I have bad news for you- most of the American people are moderates and independent voters and want a candidate who is moderate and independent. Oh, I know you guys all want a purist, someone who is ideologically consistent and always agrees with your every viewpoint- but the truth of the matter is that the American people elect the party that they feel is the most moderate. Of course, this is all subjective, as the American people might view a party as ‘moderate’ when in reality it is very extreme, but at a certain point in politics perception becomes reality, and so it is important to be perceived as voters as being a moderate and independent party.

And the Democrats of today are not moderates or independent. Via RealClearPoliticscomes this article called Moderate House Dems a Vanishing Breed:

Two issues plague Democrats when it comes to congressmen representing swing districts: The moderates don’t get heard in Washington, and centrist districts are rapidly becoming extinct because of the way congressional lines are being drawn….

….Not all of Main Street is on one side or the other, said former congresswoman Kathy Dalhkemper, a Democrat who represented northwestern Pennsylvania until being defeated last year in the wave of moderate-Democrat losses to Republicans. “The Democratic Party is not really the ‘big tent’ it claims to be,” she said of the small space available to represent centrist districts.

Dalhkemper thinks most Americans are pretty centrist: “More people are swing voters than we realize. Take myself, for example. I don’t believe in everything that every Democrat stands for, and I am proud to say that I have voted for Republicans in the past.”…

…More than 50 moderate Democrats were in Congress before the 2010 midterm elections. That number is circling the drain at 22, with more disappearing each day.

Rep. Dennis Cardoza of California, one of the fiscally conservative “blue dog” Democrats, announced his intention to retire last week, citing a lack of politicians in the middle as one of his reasons. He joins 12 other centrists who have said they would retire or seek another office. Fellow blue dogs Mike Ross of Arkansas and Dan Boren of Oklahoma have said they won’t be coming back when their terms expire in January 2013.

A moderate Democrat such as Boren represents a district with a large number of white working-class, often Catholic traditional Democrats who outnumber registered Republicans by a wide margin, explained Eldon Eisenach, a Tulsa University political theorist.

…A moderate Democrat is almost always against stringent gun control, is personally against abortion, is skeptical about extending affirmative action beyond anti-discrimination, supports a fairly aggressive foreign policy, wears patriotism on their sleeves, and actually sees periodic conflicts between regulation and job-creation….

….David Wasserman, House analyst for the Cook Political Report, points to this statistic: “There are six conservative Southern Democratic Housemembers remaining. After 2012, it’s possible none of them, who are threatened by redistricting, will be in office.”

And the 19 Democrats who voted against Nancy Pelosi for the House Minority Leader position have very little incentive to stay; they’re a minority within a minority in the House, not to mention members of a minority party in their districts. “So they’re triply marginalized,” said Wasserman.

The moderate Democrat is a disappearing breed, which is a problem for Democrats overall – because, in any given election year, those moderates could be the difference between being in the majority or the minority party.

The Republicans might have have a lot of pressure from the tea party and the media might accuse them of being extreme right-wingers- but their Presidential nominee is likely going to be a moderate like Mitt Romney, their previous Presidential nominee was a liberal John McCain, many Senators and Congressman are pretty moderate, and here in Michigan our Governor is a moderate GOP. That might make many of the Tea Party crowd unhappy and drive conservatives to anger, but by being perceived as less extreme has led the GOP to winning large amounts of political power in our nation, where the Tea Party and conservatives in the party can then push their agenda from a position of strength rather than a position of weakness.

If Democrats had nominated Hillary Clinton in 2008 or the so-called ‘Blue Dog’Democrats had had influence or not been wiped out in 2010, then maybe they could have claimed to be the party of moderation and independence- sadly, none of that is true, demonstrating that the Democratic Party of today is a party of extreme left-wing views that has been hijacked by progressives and liberals, and should only represent the citizens of our nation in a few random districts in Congress.

Original Post:  A Conservative Teacher

I think that the “progressives” are under the assumption that if they say it enough, it’ll become the “truth.” The “it,” in this instance, is the charge that the Tea Parties are racist. FOX News has the story that the NAACP is about to chime in as well.

The NAACP reportedly is about to take up a resolution to condemn the Tea Party movement for “explicitly racist behavior.”

The Kansas City Star reported that the organization plans to vote as early as Tuesday on the language at its annual convention in Kansas City. The resolution reportedly will call on “all people of good will to repudiate the racism of the Tea Parties” and stand against the movement’s attempt to “push our country back to the pre-civil rights era.”

Tea Party groups have repeatedly denied allegations of racism. Gina Loudon, one of the founders of the St. Louis Tea Party, called the NAACP’s charges untrue and said it was a “shame” the NAACP was going down that road.

“I can’t believe that the Tea Party is even going to be put in a position of dignifying something like that,” she said. “This is sad because this established organization is being used by the left.”