The highly anticipated Obama announcement concerning Afghanistan should becoming this week, maybe even today and I must admit I feel a bit underwhelmed by the whole thing.
In the months leading up top this monumental decision (more so recently) we've been hearing through leaks that Obama will authorize somewhere in the range of 30,000 troops with the focus being turned to ending the war.
How inspiring.
This decision is classic Obama. It's weak, it tries to play both sides, it assumes the American people are morons and it will ultimately fail.
First of all, we should all now know that Obama was just lying during the campaign about this being a just war. As far as he is concerned, the only just war their is is one America will lose badly in.
How do we know he's lying? Because, as always, his policy doesn't match the stated goal. If the real goal is to end the war, then there is no need to send 30,000 more troops. The number of troops you need to not fight a war is zero. Everybody knows this and for Obama to make this move that is clearly designed to do nothing but endanger soldiers lives shows how little respect he has for the American public. He seems to think if he keeps repeating it enough than we must believe it because of the power of his persona. I guess he really doesn't check the polls.
So what does he think it'll do? He thinks by sending 30,000 more troops it will prevent pro-war conservatives from labeling him weak in a fight and therefore not tough enough to lead. He also assumes that by ordering 30,000 more troops into a battle so they can surrender, he will placate the Mike Moore/Dennis Kucinich wing of his own party. Both these propositions are of course absurd and will achieve the opposite result. I always thought Bill Clinton was a man of far less than average intelligence (I still do, actually) but he was able to triangulate issues in a masterful way that confounded Republicans for eight solid years. Watching Obama try and take all sides of an issue is an exercise in the painfully absurd. It's like listening to British people speak Spanish, it has all the fundamental elements required but is still horribly wrong.
I'm sure Obama will stride up to the podium in West Point (guess he needs some cover) like Patton addressing his troops and then give a speech that makes him look like Alan Alda in M*A*S*H* (not a compliment lefties). It should be high theater of a mind completely gripped in an egotistical delusion of its own making. Hopefully no soldiers get killed while this idiocy hashes itself out.
Monday, November 30, 2009
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
NFL Week 12 Predictions
Sometimes it helps to actually hit publish on these things:
Packers -10.5 over LIONS (W)
Raiders +13.5 over COWBOYS (L)
BRONCOS +6.5 over Giants (W)
Bucs +11.5 over FALCONS (W)
Dolphins -3.5 over BILLS (L)
BENGALS -13.5 over Browns (L)
RAMS +2.5 over Seahawks (L)
Panthers +3.5 over JETS (L)
EAGLES -9.5 over Redskins (L)
Colts -3.5 over TEXANS (W)
CHARGERS -13.5 over Chiefs (W)
Jaguars +3.5 over 49ERS (L)
Cardinals +.5 over TITANS (L)
Bears +10.5 over VIKINGS (L)
Steelers +2.5 over RAVENS (L)
SAINTS -3.5 over Patriots (W)
This Week 6-10
Overall 91-81
Packers -10.5 over LIONS (W)
Raiders +13.5 over COWBOYS (L)
BRONCOS +6.5 over Giants (W)
Bucs +11.5 over FALCONS (W)
Dolphins -3.5 over BILLS (L)
BENGALS -13.5 over Browns (L)
RAMS +2.5 over Seahawks (L)
Panthers +3.5 over JETS (L)
EAGLES -9.5 over Redskins (L)
Colts -3.5 over TEXANS (W)
CHARGERS -13.5 over Chiefs (W)
Jaguars +3.5 over 49ERS (L)
Cardinals +.5 over TITANS (L)
Bears +10.5 over VIKINGS (L)
Steelers +2.5 over RAVENS (L)
SAINTS -3.5 over Patriots (W)
This Week 6-10
Overall 91-81
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Two for Tuesday
I must admit to feeling vindicated by the response to the publication of email conforming that global warming data has long been manipulated and is fraudulent.
The response from the mainstream media has been virtually nonexistent which makes me happy. Don't get me wrong, it's frustrating that they won't report this story to all audiences but we should know better than that at this point. The silence is telling though. Usually when some data comes out to debunk global warming the media spin machine goes on full attack to slander whatever group or person found the contrarian data, calling them deniers and comparing them to Holocaust deniers.
This time? Silence. That's because even the MSM knows that they've been had this time. The emails from one of the worlds, supposed, premier global warming data centers debunk the entire theory that the Global Warming Hoax has been built on. There is no defending it so the media isn't even going to try. They hope that by ignoring it, it will simply pass on by where they can resume their agenda at some later date. They plan Copenhagen as if it is still a legitimate endeavor.
I suspect they won't be so lucky this time. Cap and Tax legislation is coming up in the Senate and there is an election year coming up. Suppose this will play a role in the debate?
-----------------------
Now that the health care bill is open for debate, we get to see just who has the stones in Democrat caucus. There seems to be two differing camps of thought with no middle ground.
You've got the Lieberman camp which is adamantly against a government plan. Supposedly Ben Nelson is in this camp as well but he's a flake so who knows. Lieberman is even against the trigger option that might at one time have gotten Olympia Snow on board although she seems against even that now (must have seen some polling). Mark Prior, Blanche Lincoln, Evan Bayh might also be in this camp but they are weak and can be bought off (see Landrieu Mary). Lieberman is the leader, if he holds some of others might follow.
The other camp is the very leftist pro-government plan and has just about every other Senator in it. We'll call it the Franken camp. The only question is how committed are they? If they mean it when they say government plan or nothing, does that mean they will let this thing die, wait for 2010 elections hoping that some of the Liebermans and Lincolns of the world get voted out? Seems like a risky proposition.
All of this ignores the House and Nancy Pelosi. She isn't going to approve a bill that isn't pro-abortion or has a government run health plan. If the senate liberals crumble to Lieberman, you can bet Nancy won't. If the Senate liberals win and the final bill is a government run health care plan without the Stupak amendment, it might lose the support it needs in the House.
All of the competing interest seem to opposed to ever really hash this thing out. I never put it past liberals to bribe each other off but this would take Louisiana Purchase, 300 mil+ buyoffs all over the Congress. Not impossible but you would think that there are enough people who are depending on economic issues to get reelected that would have to squash all those bribes just to survive.
I hope they fight like caged Wolverines over this. I've said it before but lb on lib crime is one of life's most hysterical displays. Add that to it being an election years and political infighting in the Dem party is only good for the GOP and it should be quite the show.
The response from the mainstream media has been virtually nonexistent which makes me happy. Don't get me wrong, it's frustrating that they won't report this story to all audiences but we should know better than that at this point. The silence is telling though. Usually when some data comes out to debunk global warming the media spin machine goes on full attack to slander whatever group or person found the contrarian data, calling them deniers and comparing them to Holocaust deniers.
This time? Silence. That's because even the MSM knows that they've been had this time. The emails from one of the worlds, supposed, premier global warming data centers debunk the entire theory that the Global Warming Hoax has been built on. There is no defending it so the media isn't even going to try. They hope that by ignoring it, it will simply pass on by where they can resume their agenda at some later date. They plan Copenhagen as if it is still a legitimate endeavor.
I suspect they won't be so lucky this time. Cap and Tax legislation is coming up in the Senate and there is an election year coming up. Suppose this will play a role in the debate?
-----------------------
Now that the health care bill is open for debate, we get to see just who has the stones in Democrat caucus. There seems to be two differing camps of thought with no middle ground.
You've got the Lieberman camp which is adamantly against a government plan. Supposedly Ben Nelson is in this camp as well but he's a flake so who knows. Lieberman is even against the trigger option that might at one time have gotten Olympia Snow on board although she seems against even that now (must have seen some polling). Mark Prior, Blanche Lincoln, Evan Bayh might also be in this camp but they are weak and can be bought off (see Landrieu Mary). Lieberman is the leader, if he holds some of others might follow.
The other camp is the very leftist pro-government plan and has just about every other Senator in it. We'll call it the Franken camp. The only question is how committed are they? If they mean it when they say government plan or nothing, does that mean they will let this thing die, wait for 2010 elections hoping that some of the Liebermans and Lincolns of the world get voted out? Seems like a risky proposition.
All of this ignores the House and Nancy Pelosi. She isn't going to approve a bill that isn't pro-abortion or has a government run health plan. If the senate liberals crumble to Lieberman, you can bet Nancy won't. If the Senate liberals win and the final bill is a government run health care plan without the Stupak amendment, it might lose the support it needs in the House.
All of the competing interest seem to opposed to ever really hash this thing out. I never put it past liberals to bribe each other off but this would take Louisiana Purchase, 300 mil+ buyoffs all over the Congress. Not impossible but you would think that there are enough people who are depending on economic issues to get reelected that would have to squash all those bribes just to survive.
I hope they fight like caged Wolverines over this. I've said it before but lb on lib crime is one of life's most hysterical displays. Add that to it being an election years and political infighting in the Dem party is only good for the GOP and it should be quite the show.
Friday, November 20, 2009
Friday Night Beatdown
Boy, the Syracuse Orangemen sure do know how to play with the affections of their fans.
There was guarded optimism before the season started mostly hinging on the abilities of newcomers Brandon Triche, Wesley Johnson and the return of Scoop Jardine from injury.
All of that was pretty much dashed in a season opening lose to LeMoyne. Even for Boeheim's notoriously inconsistent teams, losing to LeMoyne was more embarrassing then other losses to lesser teams (Colgate).
Integrity was then restored by soundly beating a top 20 California team. This win put the team back to respectability but not necessarily prominence. After all the Cal basketball team, much like the football, can be wildly inconsistent in their own right. Still, a trip to the finals of a preseason tournament is respectable, so the Cuse had come back from the low of the early season loss.
Then on Friday they moved the needle way, way the other way by soundly trouncing the hell out of No. 4 North Carolina. I don't recall the last time SU beat a top four team at all let alone badly unless it was against UConn. How a team can lose to LeMoyne and then beat UNC is beyond me.
Does this tournament tell us anything? Sure. Mostly that the Cuse will probably be all over the board this year, beating the UConn, Nova and ND's of the world mixed in with the occasional loss to DePaul or the Johnnies. Business as usual otherwise.
One thing is for certain though. Come tourney time, the Cuse won't have to worry about quality wins out of conference.
There was guarded optimism before the season started mostly hinging on the abilities of newcomers Brandon Triche, Wesley Johnson and the return of Scoop Jardine from injury.
All of that was pretty much dashed in a season opening lose to LeMoyne. Even for Boeheim's notoriously inconsistent teams, losing to LeMoyne was more embarrassing then other losses to lesser teams (Colgate).
Integrity was then restored by soundly beating a top 20 California team. This win put the team back to respectability but not necessarily prominence. After all the Cal basketball team, much like the football, can be wildly inconsistent in their own right. Still, a trip to the finals of a preseason tournament is respectable, so the Cuse had come back from the low of the early season loss.
Then on Friday they moved the needle way, way the other way by soundly trouncing the hell out of No. 4 North Carolina. I don't recall the last time SU beat a top four team at all let alone badly unless it was against UConn. How a team can lose to LeMoyne and then beat UNC is beyond me.
Does this tournament tell us anything? Sure. Mostly that the Cuse will probably be all over the board this year, beating the UConn, Nova and ND's of the world mixed in with the occasional loss to DePaul or the Johnnies. Business as usual otherwise.
One thing is for certain though. Come tourney time, the Cuse won't have to worry about quality wins out of conference.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
BullSh*t Radar
Being the naturally curious human being that I am (hence the name of this blog) I try my best to absorb all kinds of media and opinions. The best source for an all in one pu pu platter of opinion is on radio and I listen to as many hours as I can fit in a day.
A recent schedule change shifted my drive time to later in the day, which opened up a whole new slew of entertainment. I've been at this for about four months now and I think some opinions can be made about my new drive time listening.
First, the Mark Levin Show is just excellent, no complaints at all.
The other new show I get to hear is the Glenn Beck program (taped delayed to evening drive).
And I can't decided if he's the most emotional, passionate voice on the radio or just completely full of it and laying it on extra thick for dramatic effect.
It's not the content of the show that sets off my BS alarm. I generally agree with the points Beck makes about the corruption in government, failure of both parties and the need for drastic change. I just wonder if I believe it more than he does.
My suspicion lies in the delivery. Every time I hear the voice tremble, the tears flow, the overly dramatic (and lengthy) pauses and the deepening of tone I can't help but immediately think that it is the most contrived, calculated delivery on radio and that I'm being played by this guy.
These nuances/production qualities have recently become even more apparent as Beck has delved into lengthy discussions about saving THE REPUBLIC (always in all caps), about "The Plan" he is developing to save THE REPUBLIC and the various modifications to his timetable for deployment of said "Plan" due to changes occurring in THE REPUBLIC. These things all strike me in two ways, the first being that grassroots alterations to the way governments are elected and run are absolutely needed in this country but it also strikes me that Beck is either a) faking it for ratings b) emotionally unstable/paranoid or c) a raging narcissist who has way overvalued the import of his ideas and influence.
I readily admit that my initial problem is that I have a knee jerk suspicion of men who become emotional to the point of tears so quickly. You could convince me that Dick Vermeil was in the Taliban based on this fact alone. It strikes me that it is a smoke screen to conceal the individuals true motives or indicative of a mental weakness, either of which make the message being conveyed moot. Crying is right up there with doing things "for the children" on the list of tools for political contrivance.
I suspect that my suspicions will be resolved one way or the other in the coming year. Beck himself has built up his ideas on how to instigate resistance to the Statist assault on the Constitution that is currently taking place. If whatever Beck has been building up to turns out to be something truly substantial (able to effect the outcome of things) then I will happily eat my words, chalk up my spidey sense going off to simple stylistic issues and not say a word about it again. If in a year though Beck is still stuck in the vagaries of his new direction and dedication, purely speculative and secretive in nature and the 2010 elections come and go with nothing to show, then I will be content that my fears were right and the Beck is simply selling "Glen's Revitalizing Tonic" to the masses of people looking for a way to counteract the red wave coming from Washington.
Personally, I hope Beck proves me quite wrong. The things that are going on in our government these days is such an atrocity that the daily barrage of news assaults simply overwhelms the mind and crushes the spirit. I hope Beck delivers something tangible to his dedicated fans that gives the conservatives of the nation an outlet for constructive and effective opposition. You can never have to much help in a dogfight and I hope Beck is able to rise to the level of the truly genuine that his radio colleagues Rush, Levin and Hannity have. Otherwise he may further depress and disenfranchise the very group of people he hopes to inspire.
A recent schedule change shifted my drive time to later in the day, which opened up a whole new slew of entertainment. I've been at this for about four months now and I think some opinions can be made about my new drive time listening.
First, the Mark Levin Show is just excellent, no complaints at all.
The other new show I get to hear is the Glenn Beck program (taped delayed to evening drive).
And I can't decided if he's the most emotional, passionate voice on the radio or just completely full of it and laying it on extra thick for dramatic effect.
It's not the content of the show that sets off my BS alarm. I generally agree with the points Beck makes about the corruption in government, failure of both parties and the need for drastic change. I just wonder if I believe it more than he does.
My suspicion lies in the delivery. Every time I hear the voice tremble, the tears flow, the overly dramatic (and lengthy) pauses and the deepening of tone I can't help but immediately think that it is the most contrived, calculated delivery on radio and that I'm being played by this guy.
These nuances/production qualities have recently become even more apparent as Beck has delved into lengthy discussions about saving THE REPUBLIC (always in all caps), about "The Plan" he is developing to save THE REPUBLIC and the various modifications to his timetable for deployment of said "Plan" due to changes occurring in THE REPUBLIC. These things all strike me in two ways, the first being that grassroots alterations to the way governments are elected and run are absolutely needed in this country but it also strikes me that Beck is either a) faking it for ratings b) emotionally unstable/paranoid or c) a raging narcissist who has way overvalued the import of his ideas and influence.
I readily admit that my initial problem is that I have a knee jerk suspicion of men who become emotional to the point of tears so quickly. You could convince me that Dick Vermeil was in the Taliban based on this fact alone. It strikes me that it is a smoke screen to conceal the individuals true motives or indicative of a mental weakness, either of which make the message being conveyed moot. Crying is right up there with doing things "for the children" on the list of tools for political contrivance.
I suspect that my suspicions will be resolved one way or the other in the coming year. Beck himself has built up his ideas on how to instigate resistance to the Statist assault on the Constitution that is currently taking place. If whatever Beck has been building up to turns out to be something truly substantial (able to effect the outcome of things) then I will happily eat my words, chalk up my spidey sense going off to simple stylistic issues and not say a word about it again. If in a year though Beck is still stuck in the vagaries of his new direction and dedication, purely speculative and secretive in nature and the 2010 elections come and go with nothing to show, then I will be content that my fears were right and the Beck is simply selling "Glen's Revitalizing Tonic" to the masses of people looking for a way to counteract the red wave coming from Washington.
Personally, I hope Beck proves me quite wrong. The things that are going on in our government these days is such an atrocity that the daily barrage of news assaults simply overwhelms the mind and crushes the spirit. I hope Beck delivers something tangible to his dedicated fans that gives the conservatives of the nation an outlet for constructive and effective opposition. You can never have to much help in a dogfight and I hope Beck is able to rise to the level of the truly genuine that his radio colleagues Rush, Levin and Hannity have. Otherwise he may further depress and disenfranchise the very group of people he hopes to inspire.
NFL Week 11 Predictions
I'm really getting hammered now, my once sizable positive is now crashing back toward .500 and beyond. As always, home team in CAPS
Dolphins +3.5 over PANTHERS(W)
LIONS -3.5 over Browns (W)
PACKERS -6.5 over 49 ers (L)
Steelers -9.5 over CHIEFS (L)
Redskins +11.5 over COWBOYS (W)
GIANTS -6.5 over Falcons (L)
BUCCANEERS +11.5 over Saints (L)
JAGUARS -8.5 over Bills (L)
Colts +0.5 over RAVENS (W)
VIKINGS -11.5 over Seahawks (W)
Cardinals -8.5 over RAMS (L)
BRONCOS +2.5 over Chargers (L)
Bengals -9.5 over RAIDERS (L)
PATRIOTS -10.5 over Jets (W)
Eagles -3.5 over BEARS (W)
TEXANS -4.5 over Titans (L)
This Week 7-9-0
Overall 86-71
Dolphins +3.5 over PANTHERS(W)
LIONS -3.5 over Browns (W)
PACKERS -6.5 over 49 ers (L)
Steelers -9.5 over CHIEFS (L)
Redskins +11.5 over COWBOYS (W)
GIANTS -6.5 over Falcons (L)
BUCCANEERS +11.5 over Saints (L)
JAGUARS -8.5 over Bills (L)
Colts +0.5 over RAVENS (W)
VIKINGS -11.5 over Seahawks (W)
Cardinals -8.5 over RAMS (L)
BRONCOS +2.5 over Chargers (L)
Bengals -9.5 over RAIDERS (L)
PATRIOTS -10.5 over Jets (W)
Eagles -3.5 over BEARS (W)
TEXANS -4.5 over Titans (L)
This Week 7-9-0
Overall 86-71
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Empire State Miracle
For those of you who were wondering why it rained frogs from an angry red sky this morning, we now have the answer. New York Governor David Patterson actually managed to say something intelligent and insightful during one of his smoke breaks from his usual inanity.
The good Governor was in the middle of a semi-rant against President Obama and Stooge General Holder's decision to try POW's in a civilian court when he actually made two points of interest.
The first was that he was told six months ago that this was going to happen, which pretty much means Eric Holder is a liar since he claimed to only discuss a matter of critical national security, constitutionalism and basic legal common sense with his wife and brother. Unless he's brothers with Clarence Thomas or married to Condoleezza Rice, then I can assume this advice was essentially worthless and we can now assume that Obama was the main influence, he certainly has pushed Patterson around before. But this only outs Holder as a little weasel, something we already knew.
The real gem was how Patterson noted that it was not a good idea to bring the terrorists to New York when they "still have been unable to rebuild that site." Referring to Ground Zero of course.
Patterson happens to by 100% correct on this matter. Eight years after the attacks, the site of the Twin Towers looks about like it did once they put the fires out just minus a bit of rubble. Maybe they've put in some skeleton infrastructure for a subway line but at the end of the day, what was once a monument to freedom and capitalism is now, still, just a hole in the ground cause by terrorists we now want to treat as citizens.
I'll ignore for the moment the fact that these terrorists should be decorating the inside of a hole in the ground by now as well as the fact that these scumbags are being treated just as well and I suspect better, than any of you or I would be in his shoes. If you think I'm exaggerating just remember how quick we killed off Tim McVeigh. No political correctness issues when you execute white christian men I guess. No problem calling them terrorists either.
But I digress.
How is it possible that in this technologically advanced age, with the federal government and the State of New York throwing money behind it, that there isn't a shiny new tower at least halfway done by now? We have destroyed, rebuilt and secured two entire nations in the middle east yet we can't build a monument of any kind in the spot where this monumental world shift was instigated? Absolutely disgraceful. Every day we allow that site to remain a scar on the land we show ourselves to be weaker and weaker across the globe. Don't doubt for a second that they don't keep track of these things in Afghanistan, Pakistan, China, Russia, North Korea, etc.
So who is to blame for this atrocity? Certainly after September 11th the entire country would have applauded and donated to rebuilding efforts. It would have been a political trophy for any New York politician who could claim credit for its construction, so what is the problem?
It's really no shock when you see who runs that city and state. Governor = leftist, Mayor = leftist. Unions = leftists, civilian lobbyists who want to influence what is constructed and how = leftists, state legislature = leftists, Senators = leftists, Representatives = mostly leftists or moderates (I do like Pete King though).
Do we see a pattern? Yes we do. An entire state that has been run by liberals for years. What do we know about such states? Mostly that they only do two things really well; talk and raise taxes. This is exactly what is happening in New York. All of these various groups are trying to assert influence over the rebuilding plans so they can get whatever piece of the pie they want. As such, nothing ever gets done except for a constant redrawing of plans to be reviewed by various committees. That's another thing liberals excel at, forming committees. Even if all these special interests groups could agree on some kind of plan that would satisfy all the fringe groups wants as well as union demands, the politicians have created an economic environment where there will never be anybody to occupy or pay for the buildings. The State is so bankrupt that they might not make it until Christmas let alone subsidize tower construction. The taxes are currently so high that the the State can't get any more money from the people to try and close the gap. The high taxes are also causing businesses and people with potential investment money to flee the state. I bet Gov. Patterson wishes Rush Limbaugh was still working in Manhattan paying his millions of taxes to the State.
This kind of display is available for all to see in California, Michigan, Illinois, Mass., etc. States with dominant liberal control simply rot from the inside out. No creativity, no growth, just a massive explosion of debt and inspiration crippling stagnation. The opposite is also on display. While the entire nation is slowing somewhat, the states with conservative economic policies, like Texas, Colorado, New Hampshire, etc., seems to be humming along pretty well along. Certainly not drowning like the blue states.
Given the totality of data at hand, it should come as no shock to anybody what is taking place in New York, a once great state. What should truly be appalling is the irony that the home of Wall Street, the home of commerce, the home of the Twin Towers, the home of so many American dreams, the home of capitalism itself is being choked out of existence by a socialism that was created from within. Until the "leaders" of New York get this shame rectified and fill that hole with a building or monument fitting of the history of New York, we can't claim any kind of victory in this ideological struggle. Traditions, symbols and history matter to a cohesive nation state and our enemies know this, certainly better than we do and we need to get this solved ASAP before sheer embarrassment turns to apathy.
read the Patterson story here.
The good Governor was in the middle of a semi-rant against President Obama and Stooge General Holder's decision to try POW's in a civilian court when he actually made two points of interest.
The first was that he was told six months ago that this was going to happen, which pretty much means Eric Holder is a liar since he claimed to only discuss a matter of critical national security, constitutionalism and basic legal common sense with his wife and brother. Unless he's brothers with Clarence Thomas or married to Condoleezza Rice, then I can assume this advice was essentially worthless and we can now assume that Obama was the main influence, he certainly has pushed Patterson around before. But this only outs Holder as a little weasel, something we already knew.
The real gem was how Patterson noted that it was not a good idea to bring the terrorists to New York when they "still have been unable to rebuild that site." Referring to Ground Zero of course.
Patterson happens to by 100% correct on this matter. Eight years after the attacks, the site of the Twin Towers looks about like it did once they put the fires out just minus a bit of rubble. Maybe they've put in some skeleton infrastructure for a subway line but at the end of the day, what was once a monument to freedom and capitalism is now, still, just a hole in the ground cause by terrorists we now want to treat as citizens.
I'll ignore for the moment the fact that these terrorists should be decorating the inside of a hole in the ground by now as well as the fact that these scumbags are being treated just as well and I suspect better, than any of you or I would be in his shoes. If you think I'm exaggerating just remember how quick we killed off Tim McVeigh. No political correctness issues when you execute white christian men I guess. No problem calling them terrorists either.
But I digress.
How is it possible that in this technologically advanced age, with the federal government and the State of New York throwing money behind it, that there isn't a shiny new tower at least halfway done by now? We have destroyed, rebuilt and secured two entire nations in the middle east yet we can't build a monument of any kind in the spot where this monumental world shift was instigated? Absolutely disgraceful. Every day we allow that site to remain a scar on the land we show ourselves to be weaker and weaker across the globe. Don't doubt for a second that they don't keep track of these things in Afghanistan, Pakistan, China, Russia, North Korea, etc.
So who is to blame for this atrocity? Certainly after September 11th the entire country would have applauded and donated to rebuilding efforts. It would have been a political trophy for any New York politician who could claim credit for its construction, so what is the problem?
It's really no shock when you see who runs that city and state. Governor = leftist, Mayor = leftist. Unions = leftists, civilian lobbyists who want to influence what is constructed and how = leftists, state legislature = leftists, Senators = leftists, Representatives = mostly leftists or moderates (I do like Pete King though).
Do we see a pattern? Yes we do. An entire state that has been run by liberals for years. What do we know about such states? Mostly that they only do two things really well; talk and raise taxes. This is exactly what is happening in New York. All of these various groups are trying to assert influence over the rebuilding plans so they can get whatever piece of the pie they want. As such, nothing ever gets done except for a constant redrawing of plans to be reviewed by various committees. That's another thing liberals excel at, forming committees. Even if all these special interests groups could agree on some kind of plan that would satisfy all the fringe groups wants as well as union demands, the politicians have created an economic environment where there will never be anybody to occupy or pay for the buildings. The State is so bankrupt that they might not make it until Christmas let alone subsidize tower construction. The taxes are currently so high that the the State can't get any more money from the people to try and close the gap. The high taxes are also causing businesses and people with potential investment money to flee the state. I bet Gov. Patterson wishes Rush Limbaugh was still working in Manhattan paying his millions of taxes to the State.
This kind of display is available for all to see in California, Michigan, Illinois, Mass., etc. States with dominant liberal control simply rot from the inside out. No creativity, no growth, just a massive explosion of debt and inspiration crippling stagnation. The opposite is also on display. While the entire nation is slowing somewhat, the states with conservative economic policies, like Texas, Colorado, New Hampshire, etc., seems to be humming along pretty well along. Certainly not drowning like the blue states.
Given the totality of data at hand, it should come as no shock to anybody what is taking place in New York, a once great state. What should truly be appalling is the irony that the home of Wall Street, the home of commerce, the home of the Twin Towers, the home of so many American dreams, the home of capitalism itself is being choked out of existence by a socialism that was created from within. Until the "leaders" of New York get this shame rectified and fill that hole with a building or monument fitting of the history of New York, we can't claim any kind of victory in this ideological struggle. Traditions, symbols and history matter to a cohesive nation state and our enemies know this, certainly better than we do and we need to get this solved ASAP before sheer embarrassment turns to apathy.
read the Patterson story here.
Monday, November 16, 2009
Deconstructing Bill
Last nights Pats-Colts game could not have gone much better. Bellicheat blows and easy one, Tom Brady takes the loss and if you took the Pats plus the points, you still won. If there was a way to remove a Manning win from the equation, everything would have been perfect. Either way, it was good times all around.
I must say though, the post game analysis leaves something to be desired. Everybody seems to be a hammering Bill on going for it, arguing the spot or beating a dead horse about blown timeouts.
The spot and the decision to go for it were both fine. The timeouts were indefensible but it shouldn't have mattered.
The only problem was the play called.
If you have a chance to put away the Colts by gaining two yards, you have to take it. No way Manning wasn't going to score after the punt. If you're going to man up and go for the win though, how about you call a play that is designed to get you, oh I don't know, three, four yards instead of 2 yards two inches? Seriously, the best you can come up with is a 2 yard out to Kevin Faulk? Does Wes Welker not no how to run a quick out? Maybe a play action pass to Moss?
If you're going to stake a game on one play you simply cannot cut it that close and count on a octogenarian running back to make the play, especially when Indianapolis was crowding the line looking for the quick snap and toss. That's just a little too cute Bellichek, lets hope nobody was stealing tape on that call.
I must say though, the post game analysis leaves something to be desired. Everybody seems to be a hammering Bill on going for it, arguing the spot or beating a dead horse about blown timeouts.
The spot and the decision to go for it were both fine. The timeouts were indefensible but it shouldn't have mattered.
The only problem was the play called.
If you have a chance to put away the Colts by gaining two yards, you have to take it. No way Manning wasn't going to score after the punt. If you're going to man up and go for the win though, how about you call a play that is designed to get you, oh I don't know, three, four yards instead of 2 yards two inches? Seriously, the best you can come up with is a 2 yard out to Kevin Faulk? Does Wes Welker not no how to run a quick out? Maybe a play action pass to Moss?
If you're going to stake a game on one play you simply cannot cut it that close and count on a octogenarian running back to make the play, especially when Indianapolis was crowding the line looking for the quick snap and toss. That's just a little too cute Bellichek, lets hope nobody was stealing tape on that call.
Labels:
Indianapolis Colts,
New England Patriots,
NFL,
Sports
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Tragedy By The Bay
There was a unspeakable tragedy Thursday night in the Bay area and for once, it had nothing to do with Oakland.
As fans of San Fransisco's beloved 49ers flocked to the stadium to catch the game, all seemed well on this picturesque night.
Until the kickoff that is.
As soon as kicker Joe Nedney put foot to ball to start the contest, the entire playing field suddenly turned into a vast ocean of pure excrement, swallowing all aspects of humanity and, for tonight anyway, competitive sport.
The fans in attendance were shocked, stunned, appalled and driven to fits of physical violence and illness by the unholy display on what used to be hallowed gridiron.
San Fransisco PETA Chief and GLAAD enthusiast Maurice DeFranschitti, in attendance to protest the use of leather footballs on the field and blame George Bush for the increase in the price of water soluble lubricant, struggled to right his world. "These things NEVER happen in the animal kingdom. Only man can create a mountain of shit this big!" In an unfortunate twist of irony, DeFranschitti was then bitten by the rare Yellow-bellied marmot, driven insane by the intense methane fumes.
Many other fans simply had questions.
"Do you suppose they trucked in all this from Chicago or did they just borrow some of the excess in Sacramento?" one concerned conspiracy theorist asked, to nobody in particular.
The saddest event from a frightful night was the tale of an overweight, shit covered man wearing a tattered "6" Bears jersey. Early reports seem to indicate that the man is suffering from sever Downs Syndrome and his barely coherent rants seem to confirm that theory.
"HOW CAN YOU THROW 5 PICKS WHEN YOU ONLY ATTEMPT 4 PASSES?! IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE! IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE! I LOVE SHEEP AND OYSTERS! TAKE ME BACK! TAKE ME BACK! I CAN GROW A BEARD!!!!!!"
A sad end to a miserable day. May God Almighty spare that man from the nightmare of his own existence.
Patrick T. McGarry, reporting.
As fans of San Fransisco's beloved 49ers flocked to the stadium to catch the game, all seemed well on this picturesque night.
Until the kickoff that is.
As soon as kicker Joe Nedney put foot to ball to start the contest, the entire playing field suddenly turned into a vast ocean of pure excrement, swallowing all aspects of humanity and, for tonight anyway, competitive sport.
The fans in attendance were shocked, stunned, appalled and driven to fits of physical violence and illness by the unholy display on what used to be hallowed gridiron.
San Fransisco PETA Chief and GLAAD enthusiast Maurice DeFranschitti, in attendance to protest the use of leather footballs on the field and blame George Bush for the increase in the price of water soluble lubricant, struggled to right his world. "These things NEVER happen in the animal kingdom. Only man can create a mountain of shit this big!" In an unfortunate twist of irony, DeFranschitti was then bitten by the rare Yellow-bellied marmot, driven insane by the intense methane fumes.
Many other fans simply had questions.
"Do you suppose they trucked in all this from Chicago or did they just borrow some of the excess in Sacramento?" one concerned conspiracy theorist asked, to nobody in particular.
The saddest event from a frightful night was the tale of an overweight, shit covered man wearing a tattered "6" Bears jersey. Early reports seem to indicate that the man is suffering from sever Downs Syndrome and his barely coherent rants seem to confirm that theory.
"HOW CAN YOU THROW 5 PICKS WHEN YOU ONLY ATTEMPT 4 PASSES?! IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE! IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE! I LOVE SHEEP AND OYSTERS! TAKE ME BACK! TAKE ME BACK! I CAN GROW A BEARD!!!!!!"
A sad end to a miserable day. May God Almighty spare that man from the nightmare of his own existence.
Patrick T. McGarry, reporting.
Labels:
Chicago Bears,
Humor,
Jay Cutler,
NFL,
San Francisco 49ers,
Sports
NFL Week 10 Predictions
Home team in CAPS
49ERS -3.5 over Bears (W)
Saints -13.5 over RAMS (L)
Buccaneers +9.5 over DOLPHINS (W)
Lions +16.5 over VIKINGS (L)
Jaguars +6.5 over JETS (W)
TITANS -6.5 over Bills (W)
Bengals +6.5 over STEELERS(W)
Broncos -4.5 over REDSKINS (L)
Falcons -1.5 over PANTHERS (L)
RAIDERS -1.5 over Chiefs (L)
Eagles +2.5 over CHARGERS(L)
CARDINALS -8.5 over Seahawks (W)
Cowboys -2.5 over PACKERS (L)
Patriots +2.5 over COLTS (W)
Ravens -10.5 over BROWNS (W)
This Week 8-7-0
Overall 79-64
49ERS -3.5 over Bears (W)
Saints -13.5 over RAMS (L)
Buccaneers +9.5 over DOLPHINS (W)
Lions +16.5 over VIKINGS (L)
Jaguars +6.5 over JETS (W)
TITANS -6.5 over Bills (W)
Bengals +6.5 over STEELERS(W)
Broncos -4.5 over REDSKINS (L)
Falcons -1.5 over PANTHERS (L)
RAIDERS -1.5 over Chiefs (L)
Eagles +2.5 over CHARGERS(L)
CARDINALS -8.5 over Seahawks (W)
Cowboys -2.5 over PACKERS (L)
Patriots +2.5 over COLTS (W)
Ravens -10.5 over BROWNS (W)
This Week 8-7-0
Overall 79-64
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
What, No Gays in the Steel City?
****UPDATE 11/12**** It appears the city of Pittsburg has decided to do the right thing and let LJ sit on his ass for a while. Cudos. ptm
Larry Johnson is quickly becoming the Hepatitis C of my sporting life.
As a long time Raiders fan I was introduced to LJ years ago when he came into the league as a Chief. Like many of the people who know LJ, I quickly came to regret it as he demolished my beloved Silver and Black, accelerating our descent into the gloom. I was as abused, battered and beleaguered.
The last few years have provided some relief from the onslaught. After LJ's momentous 400 carry season he aged faster than Goldie Hawn sans Botox. As got he got suckier and suckier, I became happier, culminating with his recent booting by the Chiefs in a homophobic, anti-social, coach killing, rampage. I, along with all the gay men and nightclub going women, rejoiced. No longer would I have to worry about the scourge of LJ and the Raiders now seem secure in their position as the third place team in the AFC West. Crappy to be sure but always better than those suckers in KC.
But the Hepatitis is not so easy to shake.
ESPN is reporting a rumour that LJ might in fact be in the plans for the Pittsburgh Steelers to get some of those "tough yards" and to replace the chalk outline that used to be Fast Willie Parker.
Tough yards means short yardage.
Short yardage means goaline.
Goaline means TD vulture for the love of god!
I JUST TRADED FOR RASHARD MENDENHALL, NOT THREE WEEKS AGO!!!!
There appears to be no way to shake this insidious condition known as LJ. How fitting is it that the Steelers would one again return to harass me. I remember the Immaculate Reception. We all remember that sham that cost Al his fourth ring and here you you are again, conspiring against me.
Only one conclusion can be drawn from this; if Virginia is for lovers, Pittsburgh is for bigots. That's right I said it! Why else would you so cavalierly ponder taking in such a worthless human being. I've defended Pitt and it's crumbling society, bad economy, weather and inability to count rivers (there isn't three rivers, there are two rivers that become one other river. they are subtractive in nature!) for far too long. You're no better than Detroit unless you're comparing QB's with outstanding rape cases and neckbeards. Adding LJ is just the final chain link in your anchor of mediocrity.
This fantasy league I'm in actually plays for some decent money and I'm currently in first due to the Mendenhall ascension/Parker convalescence. The choice is yours Pitt, do you want to be the capitol city of hate crimes, bigots and homophobia or do you want to let me win a few hundred bucks?
As ALCOA would say, "You Make The Call!"
Larry Johnson is quickly becoming the Hepatitis C of my sporting life.
As a long time Raiders fan I was introduced to LJ years ago when he came into the league as a Chief. Like many of the people who know LJ, I quickly came to regret it as he demolished my beloved Silver and Black, accelerating our descent into the gloom. I was as abused, battered and beleaguered.
The last few years have provided some relief from the onslaught. After LJ's momentous 400 carry season he aged faster than Goldie Hawn sans Botox. As got he got suckier and suckier, I became happier, culminating with his recent booting by the Chiefs in a homophobic, anti-social, coach killing, rampage. I, along with all the gay men and nightclub going women, rejoiced. No longer would I have to worry about the scourge of LJ and the Raiders now seem secure in their position as the third place team in the AFC West. Crappy to be sure but always better than those suckers in KC.
But the Hepatitis is not so easy to shake.
ESPN is reporting a rumour that LJ might in fact be in the plans for the Pittsburgh Steelers to get some of those "tough yards" and to replace the chalk outline that used to be Fast Willie Parker.
Tough yards means short yardage.
Short yardage means goaline.
Goaline means TD vulture for the love of god!
I JUST TRADED FOR RASHARD MENDENHALL, NOT THREE WEEKS AGO!!!!
There appears to be no way to shake this insidious condition known as LJ. How fitting is it that the Steelers would one again return to harass me. I remember the Immaculate Reception. We all remember that sham that cost Al his fourth ring and here you you are again, conspiring against me.
Only one conclusion can be drawn from this; if Virginia is for lovers, Pittsburgh is for bigots. That's right I said it! Why else would you so cavalierly ponder taking in such a worthless human being. I've defended Pitt and it's crumbling society, bad economy, weather and inability to count rivers (there isn't three rivers, there are two rivers that become one other river. they are subtractive in nature!) for far too long. You're no better than Detroit unless you're comparing QB's with outstanding rape cases and neckbeards. Adding LJ is just the final chain link in your anchor of mediocrity.
This fantasy league I'm in actually plays for some decent money and I'm currently in first due to the Mendenhall ascension/Parker convalescence. The choice is yours Pitt, do you want to be the capitol city of hate crimes, bigots and homophobia or do you want to let me win a few hundred bucks?
As ALCOA would say, "You Make The Call!"
Labels:
Chiefs,
Larry Johnson,
Pittsburg Steelers,
Sports
Political Catfight
I must admit I've actually had a change of heart on the infamous Stupak amendment. Don't get me wrong, it's still a shortsighted political blunder by pro-lifers who should really know better than to believe that this amendments will mean anything in the end.
But oh man, how sweet is it to see lib on lib crime?
People with any common sense have always known that the Democratic Party is the Party of Tolerance in about the same way Islam is a Religion of Peace and that's through rumor only. Like radical Islamists, liberals are really only tolerant of people who are exactly like them. This hypocrisy is usually exposed when they turn on conservatives who no longer cross the aisle or the rouge free thinking Democrat. Think of poor Joe Liebermann who was drummed out of the party for daring to be pro war, Olympia Snowe who was cast aside because she favored a socialist trigger instead of direct socialism. No tolerance for them. The saddest example is John McCain who loved nothing more than leftist adoration and thought he could ride it all the way to the White House. Shocked he must have been to be attacked as a Bush-esque candidate.
This time it's different though. The radical leftist, pro-deathers have got their sights set solely on the merely liberal in their party. 41 Democrats, led by Colorado's own Diana DeGette, have written a letter flatly refusing to give the final ok to a bill that restricts abortions in any way. Read the letter here. They sound pretty serious to me. Now we know from Saturday's vote that there are enough Reps on the other side who will not vote for the healthcare package without the Stupak language. It wouldn't have been there in the first place if that wasn't true, so how does this play out?
Depends on how serious everybody is. Liberals by and large have no spine or principals on anything but this might be the one topic liberals are ready to go to the mattresses for. Consider; Speaker Pelosi has essentially ran the House with an iron hand. She managed to get the Cap and Trade bill passed which is amazing considering that it is an economy destroyer and we happen to be in the middle of a recession. Nobody in the Dem caucus outside of Jane Harmon has ever so much as publicly defied Speaker Pelosi and now we have to groups (Blue Dogs and Feminists) openly defying her to the point of issuing mandates.
The big trick though is that no matter who wins in the Dem party, Conservatives win overall. If both sides are serious, then it results in a stalemate killing any kind of reform that liberals want. This would infuriate the left wing base, they would attack their own and the blue wave of 2006 and 2008 would reverse itself. If the Blue Dogs win, feminists will go ballistic. They will also attack moderates in their own party, raise funds against them, etc. all to the benefit of the GOP. If pro-choicers win, it will cement the party as being solely the domain of the ideological far left. This won't make much difference in New England or the Pacific coast but moderate Democrats in the South and Sun Belt, who have more in common with conservatives already, will have to consider jumping ship or at least disengaging themselves from the Dems. Either way the GOP wins, one less Dem vote is the same as one more GOP vote.
The only way the libs can save this is if they hammer out some kind of bribe behind closed doors and have some kind of burying the hatchet, "we are family" type of mass press conference prior to passing legislation.
However, it seems neither side is interested in burying the hatchet unless it's to take out the other side completely, politically speaking of course.
Stupak may just turn out to be a great thing after all.
But oh man, how sweet is it to see lib on lib crime?
People with any common sense have always known that the Democratic Party is the Party of Tolerance in about the same way Islam is a Religion of Peace and that's through rumor only. Like radical Islamists, liberals are really only tolerant of people who are exactly like them. This hypocrisy is usually exposed when they turn on conservatives who no longer cross the aisle or the rouge free thinking Democrat. Think of poor Joe Liebermann who was drummed out of the party for daring to be pro war, Olympia Snowe who was cast aside because she favored a socialist trigger instead of direct socialism. No tolerance for them. The saddest example is John McCain who loved nothing more than leftist adoration and thought he could ride it all the way to the White House. Shocked he must have been to be attacked as a Bush-esque candidate.
This time it's different though. The radical leftist, pro-deathers have got their sights set solely on the merely liberal in their party. 41 Democrats, led by Colorado's own Diana DeGette, have written a letter flatly refusing to give the final ok to a bill that restricts abortions in any way. Read the letter here. They sound pretty serious to me. Now we know from Saturday's vote that there are enough Reps on the other side who will not vote for the healthcare package without the Stupak language. It wouldn't have been there in the first place if that wasn't true, so how does this play out?
Depends on how serious everybody is. Liberals by and large have no spine or principals on anything but this might be the one topic liberals are ready to go to the mattresses for. Consider; Speaker Pelosi has essentially ran the House with an iron hand. She managed to get the Cap and Trade bill passed which is amazing considering that it is an economy destroyer and we happen to be in the middle of a recession. Nobody in the Dem caucus outside of Jane Harmon has ever so much as publicly defied Speaker Pelosi and now we have to groups (Blue Dogs and Feminists) openly defying her to the point of issuing mandates.
The big trick though is that no matter who wins in the Dem party, Conservatives win overall. If both sides are serious, then it results in a stalemate killing any kind of reform that liberals want. This would infuriate the left wing base, they would attack their own and the blue wave of 2006 and 2008 would reverse itself. If the Blue Dogs win, feminists will go ballistic. They will also attack moderates in their own party, raise funds against them, etc. all to the benefit of the GOP. If pro-choicers win, it will cement the party as being solely the domain of the ideological far left. This won't make much difference in New England or the Pacific coast but moderate Democrats in the South and Sun Belt, who have more in common with conservatives already, will have to consider jumping ship or at least disengaging themselves from the Dems. Either way the GOP wins, one less Dem vote is the same as one more GOP vote.
The only way the libs can save this is if they hammer out some kind of bribe behind closed doors and have some kind of burying the hatchet, "we are family" type of mass press conference prior to passing legislation.
However, it seems neither side is interested in burying the hatchet unless it's to take out the other side completely, politically speaking of course.
Stupak may just turn out to be a great thing after all.
Monday, November 9, 2009
No I In Homo, Just One In DipSh*t
Well Larry Johnson finally got cut from the Kansas City Chiefs today after serving his two week suspension for tweeting gay slurs about his coach.
What's amazing about this story, aside from the Chiefs suspending somebody just to cut them, is that it finally solidifies Johnson's status in the pantheon of really stupid, really bad guys.
This guy has been a serious trainwreck his entire career. First he gets drafted and pouts about sitting behind 2000 yard season Priest Holmes. Then he gets in the doghouse of the world's most estrogen soaked head coach in Dick Vermeil. Finally given a chance to shine, Johnson puts up two great years, then starts demanding more money. That's just the on the field stuff. This colossal waste of oxygen has had numerous incidents involving abusing women, one where he spit a drink all over one for some perceived infraction. For the cherry on top, MENSA laureate Johnson decided to tweet is dislike of his coach all over the cyberspace, sprinkled liberally with gay slurs. How exactly does a person go do this and expect nobody to notice? Is he not aware of what Twitter is?
Either way, being cut couldn't happen to a more deserving guy. Most people would be done with for just one of Johnson's strikes but he went for the hat trick; abuse women, abuse coaches, selfish. It's good to know whatever unfortunate things happen to Larry in the future, and with a guy like Johnson you know they're coming, they will be well deserved.
What's amazing about this story, aside from the Chiefs suspending somebody just to cut them, is that it finally solidifies Johnson's status in the pantheon of really stupid, really bad guys.
This guy has been a serious trainwreck his entire career. First he gets drafted and pouts about sitting behind 2000 yard season Priest Holmes. Then he gets in the doghouse of the world's most estrogen soaked head coach in Dick Vermeil. Finally given a chance to shine, Johnson puts up two great years, then starts demanding more money. That's just the on the field stuff. This colossal waste of oxygen has had numerous incidents involving abusing women, one where he spit a drink all over one for some perceived infraction. For the cherry on top, MENSA laureate Johnson decided to tweet is dislike of his coach all over the cyberspace, sprinkled liberally with gay slurs. How exactly does a person go do this and expect nobody to notice? Is he not aware of what Twitter is?
Either way, being cut couldn't happen to a more deserving guy. Most people would be done with for just one of Johnson's strikes but he went for the hat trick; abuse women, abuse coaches, selfish. It's good to know whatever unfortunate things happen to Larry in the future, and with a guy like Johnson you know they're coming, they will be well deserved.
Yeah, Lets Let These Guys Run Healthcare
Well, a completely depressing yet wholly predictable announcement came today in Connecticut.
It turns out that Pfizer is closing down a research facility in the New London area.
Aside from being another sign that businesses in liberal states are shutting down at an alarming rate, it's also a sign at the abject stupidity of government in general.
The Pfizer facility in question was the main attraction in the much hyped Kelo v. City of New London case where the United States Supreme Court decided that private property could be taken from an individual citizen and given over to another private citizen so long as the property is a "blight" (as defined by the government who wants to take the land) and that the new private citizen can generate more tax revenue for the city. Apparently that constitutes the common good of eminent domain.
What of that area now? After years of heartbreak and fighting that left many people displaced from their homes and bitter at being forced to leave a neighborhood their families had lived for years, that entire section seized by the City of New London is in ruins. The homes have all been bulldozed in anticipation of a massive new commercial complex, highlighted by the existing Pfizer plant. Now it is truly blighted, overgrown with weeds and with the departure of Pfizer, completely abandoned.
All of us who see the folly in the government taking private property can now shout from the rooftops about how right we are but what good does that do the people of the community who were forced from their homes? Nothing. Their lives were still uprooted and their communal history destroyed by the cold, clumsy hand of government. The same kind of leftist government that we now have nationally spouting its inane belief in community organizing, group think. It takes a village indeed. It seem as if the people of New London had a managing community long before the government decided to make a dandelion farm out of their property.
This is especially pertinent after the House's ill-conceived, ill-intentioned stab at Nationalized Healthcare Saturday night. What should be obvious is that the government does far worse than over hype and under deliver. Government is a degenerative force by nature. Even with the best intentions the government can only do a good deed for somebody or group by doing ill to somebody else. Big government activists sleep well at night by justifying taking the fruits of ones labor (and by extension their freedom) by employing the Robin Hood justification model, robbing the rich to give to the poor. Ignoring how this very practice robs people on both ends of their human ambition and dignity, the entire claim is a complete lie. The area in question, while not blighted by any means, was filled with lower income families. They were the victims, they had their property taken in an effort to give a gift to a big business pharmaceutical company. How very nice of the party of the liberal guy, the Democrats, to rob the poor to prop up the rich. All in the name of the liberals true goal in all things, taxes and control. I suspect Pfizer will be fine after this affair becomes nothing more than a curious historical footnote, the fate of the residents of New London is unknown and as far as I can tell, uncared about.
I suspect hoping any of the people involved in this atrocity to feel any sense of shame is far out of the realm of possibility, they've no doubt moved on to their next public fleecing scheme. At the very least can we not use this as a teachable example of government incompetence? Given the current plans dancing in the heads of ideological radicals in power currently, it seems more important than ever.
read the fully story here from the DC Examiner
It turns out that Pfizer is closing down a research facility in the New London area.
Aside from being another sign that businesses in liberal states are shutting down at an alarming rate, it's also a sign at the abject stupidity of government in general.
The Pfizer facility in question was the main attraction in the much hyped Kelo v. City of New London case where the United States Supreme Court decided that private property could be taken from an individual citizen and given over to another private citizen so long as the property is a "blight" (as defined by the government who wants to take the land) and that the new private citizen can generate more tax revenue for the city. Apparently that constitutes the common good of eminent domain.
What of that area now? After years of heartbreak and fighting that left many people displaced from their homes and bitter at being forced to leave a neighborhood their families had lived for years, that entire section seized by the City of New London is in ruins. The homes have all been bulldozed in anticipation of a massive new commercial complex, highlighted by the existing Pfizer plant. Now it is truly blighted, overgrown with weeds and with the departure of Pfizer, completely abandoned.
All of us who see the folly in the government taking private property can now shout from the rooftops about how right we are but what good does that do the people of the community who were forced from their homes? Nothing. Their lives were still uprooted and their communal history destroyed by the cold, clumsy hand of government. The same kind of leftist government that we now have nationally spouting its inane belief in community organizing, group think. It takes a village indeed. It seem as if the people of New London had a managing community long before the government decided to make a dandelion farm out of their property.
This is especially pertinent after the House's ill-conceived, ill-intentioned stab at Nationalized Healthcare Saturday night. What should be obvious is that the government does far worse than over hype and under deliver. Government is a degenerative force by nature. Even with the best intentions the government can only do a good deed for somebody or group by doing ill to somebody else. Big government activists sleep well at night by justifying taking the fruits of ones labor (and by extension their freedom) by employing the Robin Hood justification model, robbing the rich to give to the poor. Ignoring how this very practice robs people on both ends of their human ambition and dignity, the entire claim is a complete lie. The area in question, while not blighted by any means, was filled with lower income families. They were the victims, they had their property taken in an effort to give a gift to a big business pharmaceutical company. How very nice of the party of the liberal guy, the Democrats, to rob the poor to prop up the rich. All in the name of the liberals true goal in all things, taxes and control. I suspect Pfizer will be fine after this affair becomes nothing more than a curious historical footnote, the fate of the residents of New London is unknown and as far as I can tell, uncared about.
I suspect hoping any of the people involved in this atrocity to feel any sense of shame is far out of the realm of possibility, they've no doubt moved on to their next public fleecing scheme. At the very least can we not use this as a teachable example of government incompetence? Given the current plans dancing in the heads of ideological radicals in power currently, it seems more important than ever.
read the fully story here from the DC Examiner
Sunday, November 8, 2009
They Do It For A Reason
I'm not sure what the most sickening aspect of Saturday nights vote in the House on the healthcare bill was.
Was it the fact that an American elected body voted to destroy a vast part of the economy, destroy jobs and nationalize an industry unconstitutionally, the standing ovation it got or the fact that a group of leftist women representatives got into a tearful screaming match when it became apparent that abortion would have to be cut from the bill to get it passed?
As appalling as the thought is of federal representatives being brought to tears because they won't get to pay to kill babies (for now) that isn't the right answer. There is no right answer, it's all a disgrace and reminds us why the framers decided to have House elections every two years.
Because the House if prone to do all kinds of nutjob things.
The very composition of the body ensures it. House Representatives only have to win the backing of a small number of people from a limited geographical area. Naturally this allows fringe candidates with radical ideas to get elected.
This is why Saturdays vote should be disappointing but not surprising to anybody. If anything was surprising about the vote, it's that it took so long and was so close given the extreme leftist composition of the House and its leader.
Sadly for some Dems, this vote may destroy them and be all for naught. The Stupak amendment was a sham and will provide no cover for moderate Dems in red districts. The amendment can very easily be removed when (if) the bill ever makes it to the reconciliation process and don't think Pelosi won't try to do it. Harry Reid is a jellyfish and Pelosi will bulldoze him if a bill ever makes it out of the Senate into reconciliation. Voters know this and the moderates won't be able to justify their votes based on the success of the Stupak amendment. Besides, many moderate Dems have always claimed they were moderate because of fiscal issues and this bill is still a trillion dollar plus atrocity.
I suspect these Dems who sided with Pelosi will greatly regret it as they end up being voted out of office and the bill they sacrificed their job for winds up dead in the Senate along with Cap and Tax.
Thankfully, the House is the one area where retribution by the people can occur swiftly and decisively. If the Senate were a collection of radicals (more than it is anyway) then the people could only institute change every six years, staggered. With the House, the people get the whole enchilada every two years, plenty close enough where Saturday won't be forgotten. To the ultimate demise of many.
Was it the fact that an American elected body voted to destroy a vast part of the economy, destroy jobs and nationalize an industry unconstitutionally, the standing ovation it got or the fact that a group of leftist women representatives got into a tearful screaming match when it became apparent that abortion would have to be cut from the bill to get it passed?
As appalling as the thought is of federal representatives being brought to tears because they won't get to pay to kill babies (for now) that isn't the right answer. There is no right answer, it's all a disgrace and reminds us why the framers decided to have House elections every two years.
Because the House if prone to do all kinds of nutjob things.
The very composition of the body ensures it. House Representatives only have to win the backing of a small number of people from a limited geographical area. Naturally this allows fringe candidates with radical ideas to get elected.
This is why Saturdays vote should be disappointing but not surprising to anybody. If anything was surprising about the vote, it's that it took so long and was so close given the extreme leftist composition of the House and its leader.
Sadly for some Dems, this vote may destroy them and be all for naught. The Stupak amendment was a sham and will provide no cover for moderate Dems in red districts. The amendment can very easily be removed when (if) the bill ever makes it to the reconciliation process and don't think Pelosi won't try to do it. Harry Reid is a jellyfish and Pelosi will bulldoze him if a bill ever makes it out of the Senate into reconciliation. Voters know this and the moderates won't be able to justify their votes based on the success of the Stupak amendment. Besides, many moderate Dems have always claimed they were moderate because of fiscal issues and this bill is still a trillion dollar plus atrocity.
I suspect these Dems who sided with Pelosi will greatly regret it as they end up being voted out of office and the bill they sacrificed their job for winds up dead in the Senate along with Cap and Tax.
Thankfully, the House is the one area where retribution by the people can occur swiftly and decisively. If the Senate were a collection of radicals (more than it is anyway) then the people could only institute change every six years, staggered. With the House, the people get the whole enchilada every two years, plenty close enough where Saturday won't be forgotten. To the ultimate demise of many.
Labels:
Healthcare,
House of Representatives,
Politics
Friday, November 6, 2009
2010 Elections - CO
Now that we've passed the off year governors races, lets take a quick peek at Colorado and what elections are in store.
Governor: Bill Ritter has horrible polling numbers and is going to be facing a tough primary opponent. If he surives that he will have an uphill fight to retain office, probably against Scott McInnis. Cook Political Rating-Toss Up.
Senate: The unpopular Ritter appointed an unknown who became unpopular in Michael Bennett. The last polling numbers I saw have him barely hanging on to 50% job approval. Jane Norton obviously saw blood as she entered the race late and has been a fundraising machine ever since. Her name recognition and Ritters downward trend could cause a party switch. Cook Political Rating-Toss Up.
Senate: Mark Udall (D) isn't up for reelection until 2014.
CO-1: Denver. Diana DeGette holds easily. No chance for a Republican takeover. Probably ever.
CO-2: Boulder. Jared Polis holds easy. If he gets booted it will be by another liberal in a primary.
CO-3: Pueblo/Western Slope. This Republican district (Cook rates R+5) seems to like John Salazar even though he is far more liberal than the population he represents. He is a classic vote holder, waiting until liberals have a clear lead in the House votes, then Pelosi clears him to vote conservative. When push comes to shove though, he sides with the Pelosi gang. If Republicans can find a good oppenent,the district could be had. Not this time though.
CO-4: Fort Collins, Greely, Eastern Plain. Betsy Markey is in big trouble. She only won this Republican district because Marilyn Musgrave is fairly detestable. If the GOP doesn't get this one back in the current climate, it would be a major disappointment.
CO-5: Colorado Springs. Heavy Republican. Doug Lamborn won't be sweating much.
CO-6: South Denver, Aurora. Republican district and Mike Coffman is popular. No sweat for the GOP.
Co-7: North Denver, Arvada. This could be the most interesting race. This young district (created after 2000 census) has been very competitive for years. Republican Bob Beauprez held the seat for a few terms but Democrat Ed Perlmutter took over when Beauprez ran for governor and has been cruising ever since. However, Perlmutter hasn't really been challenged by a viable GOP candidate. This cycle could be different as former Senate candidate and Aurora city councilman Ryan Frazier is ready to challenge him. Frazier has name recognition in the area and more importnantly has the backing of many pro-businness groups across the state. If the economy stays bad, his fiscal conservatism might get him into office. Also helping frazier is that he is a bit of a libertarian socially which fits in the Denver better than it would in southern or western Colorado. If Perlmutter wins by any sizeable margin though, look for this district to go dark blue for some time.
Outlook: In the House, the GOP should be able to take back the fourth district. The third and seventh are certainly possibilities but not a sure thing by any stretch. The seventh is more realistic than the third due to the presence of viable candidates. If Michael Bennett doesn't step up his effort soon, he's going to find himself on the outside looking in. Jane Norton is well known in the state, has held office before and can raise tons of cash. Bennett was appointed to his position and never generated much excitment.
Governor: Bill Ritter has horrible polling numbers and is going to be facing a tough primary opponent. If he surives that he will have an uphill fight to retain office, probably against Scott McInnis. Cook Political Rating-Toss Up.
Senate: The unpopular Ritter appointed an unknown who became unpopular in Michael Bennett. The last polling numbers I saw have him barely hanging on to 50% job approval. Jane Norton obviously saw blood as she entered the race late and has been a fundraising machine ever since. Her name recognition and Ritters downward trend could cause a party switch. Cook Political Rating-Toss Up.
Senate: Mark Udall (D) isn't up for reelection until 2014.
CO-1: Denver. Diana DeGette holds easily. No chance for a Republican takeover. Probably ever.
CO-2: Boulder. Jared Polis holds easy. If he gets booted it will be by another liberal in a primary.
CO-3: Pueblo/Western Slope. This Republican district (Cook rates R+5) seems to like John Salazar even though he is far more liberal than the population he represents. He is a classic vote holder, waiting until liberals have a clear lead in the House votes, then Pelosi clears him to vote conservative. When push comes to shove though, he sides with the Pelosi gang. If Republicans can find a good oppenent,the district could be had. Not this time though.
CO-4: Fort Collins, Greely, Eastern Plain. Betsy Markey is in big trouble. She only won this Republican district because Marilyn Musgrave is fairly detestable. If the GOP doesn't get this one back in the current climate, it would be a major disappointment.
CO-5: Colorado Springs. Heavy Republican. Doug Lamborn won't be sweating much.
CO-6: South Denver, Aurora. Republican district and Mike Coffman is popular. No sweat for the GOP.
Co-7: North Denver, Arvada. This could be the most interesting race. This young district (created after 2000 census) has been very competitive for years. Republican Bob Beauprez held the seat for a few terms but Democrat Ed Perlmutter took over when Beauprez ran for governor and has been cruising ever since. However, Perlmutter hasn't really been challenged by a viable GOP candidate. This cycle could be different as former Senate candidate and Aurora city councilman Ryan Frazier is ready to challenge him. Frazier has name recognition in the area and more importnantly has the backing of many pro-businness groups across the state. If the economy stays bad, his fiscal conservatism might get him into office. Also helping frazier is that he is a bit of a libertarian socially which fits in the Denver better than it would in southern or western Colorado. If Perlmutter wins by any sizeable margin though, look for this district to go dark blue for some time.
Outlook: In the House, the GOP should be able to take back the fourth district. The third and seventh are certainly possibilities but not a sure thing by any stretch. The seventh is more realistic than the third due to the presence of viable candidates. If Michael Bennett doesn't step up his effort soon, he's going to find himself on the outside looking in. Jane Norton is well known in the state, has held office before and can raise tons of cash. Bennett was appointed to his position and never generated much excitment.
NFL Week 9 Predictions
Home team in CAPS
FALCONS -10.5 over Redskins (W)
Cardinals +3.5 over BEARS (W)
BENGALS +2.5 over Ravens (W)
Texans +9.5 over COLTS (W)
PATRIOTS -10.5 over Dolphins (L)
Packers -10.5 over BUCCANEERS (L)
JAGUARS -6.5 over Chiefs (L)
SEAHAWKS -10.5 over Lions (W)
Panthers +14.5 over SAINTS (W)
Chargers +4.5 over GIANTS (W)
49ERS -4.5 over Titans (L)
EAGLES -3.5 over Cowboys (L)
Steelers -3.5 over BRONCOS (W)
This Week 8-5-0
Overall 71-57-0
FALCONS -10.5 over Redskins (W)
Cardinals +3.5 over BEARS (W)
BENGALS +2.5 over Ravens (W)
Texans +9.5 over COLTS (W)
PATRIOTS -10.5 over Dolphins (L)
Packers -10.5 over BUCCANEERS (L)
JAGUARS -6.5 over Chiefs (L)
SEAHAWKS -10.5 over Lions (W)
Panthers +14.5 over SAINTS (W)
Chargers +4.5 over GIANTS (W)
49ERS -4.5 over Titans (L)
EAGLES -3.5 over Cowboys (L)
Steelers -3.5 over BRONCOS (W)
This Week 8-5-0
Overall 71-57-0
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Quick Hits: 11/5/2009
NJ GOV: Libs can try and spin this all they want but Corzine was an Obamanite and he got rolled by five percent by a real Republican in Chris Christie. This State is still deep blue so nobody should start expecting conservative senators or representatives but losing this governorship after millions spent and numerous Obama appeals should be very alarming and if the various democratic reelection groups have to spend any time or money defending the Garden State in 2010 you know the Dems are going to get whitewashed across the country.
VA GOV: Well, that blue surge lasted about three election cycles. Conservatives didn't just win the gov. they swept all statewide ballot positions. It appears the 2008 elections were the anomaly, not a voter shift in Virginia. The surge in Dem voter turnout appears to be solely related to Obama charisma. If that goes, what else is left?
NY 23: It would have been nice if Hoffman had won but lets be honest, he had both the GOP and DNC running ads against him. Besides, the second most conservative candidate won. Owens is way more conservative than Scozzafava could ever dream to be. The makeup of the House didn't really change either as the former Republican representative was a liberal anyway. Next year conservatives get another chance at this seat and a real primary should eliminate all the cross party fighting that occurred this year. The real lesson for party leaders is that the people do not like the party heads picking candidates in smoke filled rooms.
DONALD STERLING: Clippers owner Donald Sterling settled for almost three million dollars to end a lawsuit against him accusing him of deliberately excluding blacks and Hispanics from his rental properties in Koreatown, LA in violation of the Fair Housing Acts. Many people wonder why the NBA owners haven't condemned him for it. Are they delusional? Donald Sterling has figured out a way to lose every year, intentionally antagonize his limited fan base, spend all his time with call girls and still make millions and millions of dollars a year. Owners in every sport admire him and are trying to figure out how he does it.
THE RALLY: Michelle Bachmann's rally on the capitol steps against government run healthcare, planned in only four days or so, was a smashing success. I've heard estimates putting the crowd at 20,000+ and from the reports, quite a few of them wanted to talk to their reps about the upcoming vote. What I wouldn't give to see the faces of these reps having to face constituents in their own offices. The best part? The biggest disruption of the day was when some Code Pink activists were arrested for causing a scene in Sen. Lieberman's office. Liberals just can't quite master the art of peaceful demonstrations.
FORT HOOD, TEXAS: If a military psychiatrist who is Muslim, goes on verbal rampages against the United States, ponders whether we should have a Muslim uprising here, then gets his gun and starts randomly shooting innocent people at an Army base, it is only one of two things; a hate crime or a terrorist act. I don't care which but either way, so long as this guy isn't clinically insane or mentally ill in some way, if he is found guilty he should be lined up against a wall and shot as a traitor for turning on his fellow soldiers like a devious coward.
VA GOV: Well, that blue surge lasted about three election cycles. Conservatives didn't just win the gov. they swept all statewide ballot positions. It appears the 2008 elections were the anomaly, not a voter shift in Virginia. The surge in Dem voter turnout appears to be solely related to Obama charisma. If that goes, what else is left?
NY 23: It would have been nice if Hoffman had won but lets be honest, he had both the GOP and DNC running ads against him. Besides, the second most conservative candidate won. Owens is way more conservative than Scozzafava could ever dream to be. The makeup of the House didn't really change either as the former Republican representative was a liberal anyway. Next year conservatives get another chance at this seat and a real primary should eliminate all the cross party fighting that occurred this year. The real lesson for party leaders is that the people do not like the party heads picking candidates in smoke filled rooms.
DONALD STERLING: Clippers owner Donald Sterling settled for almost three million dollars to end a lawsuit against him accusing him of deliberately excluding blacks and Hispanics from his rental properties in Koreatown, LA in violation of the Fair Housing Acts. Many people wonder why the NBA owners haven't condemned him for it. Are they delusional? Donald Sterling has figured out a way to lose every year, intentionally antagonize his limited fan base, spend all his time with call girls and still make millions and millions of dollars a year. Owners in every sport admire him and are trying to figure out how he does it.
THE RALLY: Michelle Bachmann's rally on the capitol steps against government run healthcare, planned in only four days or so, was a smashing success. I've heard estimates putting the crowd at 20,000+ and from the reports, quite a few of them wanted to talk to their reps about the upcoming vote. What I wouldn't give to see the faces of these reps having to face constituents in their own offices. The best part? The biggest disruption of the day was when some Code Pink activists were arrested for causing a scene in Sen. Lieberman's office. Liberals just can't quite master the art of peaceful demonstrations.
FORT HOOD, TEXAS: If a military psychiatrist who is Muslim, goes on verbal rampages against the United States, ponders whether we should have a Muslim uprising here, then gets his gun and starts randomly shooting innocent people at an Army base, it is only one of two things; a hate crime or a terrorist act. I don't care which but either way, so long as this guy isn't clinically insane or mentally ill in some way, if he is found guilty he should be lined up against a wall and shot as a traitor for turning on his fellow soldiers like a devious coward.
Timely. Poignant? Not So Much.
Quick, who said today that the possibility of failure in Afghanistan was a distinct possibility?
No, it wasn't my three year old daughter, it was razor sharp British Prime Minister Gordon Brown.
Now I know this is shocking. Not that he would say something so plainly obvious and ignorant but that he is still the PM. It seems like he has been running that country into the ground for damn near a generation. I guess bad times just move slower.
Clearly Mr. Brown is trying to drum up support for his Labour Party by beating the drums of war and trying to incite a little nationalistic excitement and pride but what exactly does he expect to achieve? The Conservatives are in a prime spot to make sure Brown and his Labour comrades never see the end of the Afghanistan conflict.
Even if they were still around how exactly will victory be achieved? The United States has completely back-burnered this issue. President Obama's handpicked NATO commander has set forth a plan of action which has been promptly ignored so that the administration can dive headfirst into the financial and social nightmare that Europe is currently trying to escape from. The United Kingdom is even broker than we are, public support is nil and apparently, their military isn't exactly a dynamic entity right now (another casualty of liberal policy). Germany isn't going to send more troops and possibly can't depending on how you interpret the Grundgesetz. France has no military capability to help even if they wanted to (they don't) unless NATO decides to drop a nuke on Kandahar. Italy is busy trying to convict its prime Minister of election crimes and Spain is still trying to hash out if they want to be full socialists or just partial.
Which brings us to the big problems for Afghanistan and by extension Mr. Brown.
NATO is a complete sham.
Any treaty organization whose members can enter or leave any conflict they want without reprisal from the other members is no organization at all. Many of its member nations cannot wage war. Many of the ones that can have absolutely no desire to do so for a variety of economic and political issues both foreign and domestic.
Why is this so bad for Gordon Brown and all the rest of his socialist democrat contemporaries around the globe, including here in the US? Because it shows the inherent weakness of the liberal international world view. Liberals like Brown and Obama constantly blame world conflict on the lack of global cooperation and understanding. They argue that peace can only be achieved through the greater globalization of all people around the world into one true global community through various multinational institutions such as NATO or the United Nations. This is pure theoretical folly. It makes the same mistake communism makes about the individual in believing that people are naturally cooperative and that a state of mutual respect and opportunity will eliminate all the worlds problems. It isn't so for people and it isn't so for nations states. At the end of the day, international law or treatises are only followed so long as they are beneficial to the individual nation state. When they cease to be beneficial, they are ignored and the nation, like the individual, takes whichever path leads to the most prosperity and security for them, the rest of the nations be damned. The competitive nature of man and the nations they create will always rule the day.
This is of course, the proper way it should be. After all, the French people elect leaders to protect their interests, not the entire worlds. If all the worlds leaders believed that then everything would be fine as all people would be represented on the world stage by their elected leaders and an honest competition could follow that would reward nations that excel while encouraging others that do not. Leaders like Brown and Obama are simply not content to mind the affairs of their own nation. They see an irresistible need to meddle in the affairs of other nations as well. They create massive, ineffective institutions to try and wedge all the worlds nations into one massive bureaucracy for the purpose of forced egalitarian equality, as defined by them of course. Unfortunately, the only place where this intended equality can exist is in the realm of mediocrity, which sounds about right for where Brown finds himself.
For the time being at least.
No, it wasn't my three year old daughter, it was razor sharp British Prime Minister Gordon Brown.
Now I know this is shocking. Not that he would say something so plainly obvious and ignorant but that he is still the PM. It seems like he has been running that country into the ground for damn near a generation. I guess bad times just move slower.
Clearly Mr. Brown is trying to drum up support for his Labour Party by beating the drums of war and trying to incite a little nationalistic excitement and pride but what exactly does he expect to achieve? The Conservatives are in a prime spot to make sure Brown and his Labour comrades never see the end of the Afghanistan conflict.
Even if they were still around how exactly will victory be achieved? The United States has completely back-burnered this issue. President Obama's handpicked NATO commander has set forth a plan of action which has been promptly ignored so that the administration can dive headfirst into the financial and social nightmare that Europe is currently trying to escape from. The United Kingdom is even broker than we are, public support is nil and apparently, their military isn't exactly a dynamic entity right now (another casualty of liberal policy). Germany isn't going to send more troops and possibly can't depending on how you interpret the Grundgesetz. France has no military capability to help even if they wanted to (they don't) unless NATO decides to drop a nuke on Kandahar. Italy is busy trying to convict its prime Minister of election crimes and Spain is still trying to hash out if they want to be full socialists or just partial.
Which brings us to the big problems for Afghanistan and by extension Mr. Brown.
NATO is a complete sham.
Any treaty organization whose members can enter or leave any conflict they want without reprisal from the other members is no organization at all. Many of its member nations cannot wage war. Many of the ones that can have absolutely no desire to do so for a variety of economic and political issues both foreign and domestic.
Why is this so bad for Gordon Brown and all the rest of his socialist democrat contemporaries around the globe, including here in the US? Because it shows the inherent weakness of the liberal international world view. Liberals like Brown and Obama constantly blame world conflict on the lack of global cooperation and understanding. They argue that peace can only be achieved through the greater globalization of all people around the world into one true global community through various multinational institutions such as NATO or the United Nations. This is pure theoretical folly. It makes the same mistake communism makes about the individual in believing that people are naturally cooperative and that a state of mutual respect and opportunity will eliminate all the worlds problems. It isn't so for people and it isn't so for nations states. At the end of the day, international law or treatises are only followed so long as they are beneficial to the individual nation state. When they cease to be beneficial, they are ignored and the nation, like the individual, takes whichever path leads to the most prosperity and security for them, the rest of the nations be damned. The competitive nature of man and the nations they create will always rule the day.
This is of course, the proper way it should be. After all, the French people elect leaders to protect their interests, not the entire worlds. If all the worlds leaders believed that then everything would be fine as all people would be represented on the world stage by their elected leaders and an honest competition could follow that would reward nations that excel while encouraging others that do not. Leaders like Brown and Obama are simply not content to mind the affairs of their own nation. They see an irresistible need to meddle in the affairs of other nations as well. They create massive, ineffective institutions to try and wedge all the worlds nations into one massive bureaucracy for the purpose of forced egalitarian equality, as defined by them of course. Unfortunately, the only place where this intended equality can exist is in the realm of mediocrity, which sounds about right for where Brown finds himself.
For the time being at least.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)