“Every time I let the government make a choice for me, I give up a little more of my freedom. I become more dependent and reliant on government to manage my life. I am right where the Socialists want me to be – perpetually dependent on them.” -J.D. Pendry
This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material available in my efforts to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research, educational, or satirical purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
…is quite pertinant to today’s issues, but comes to us from last century.
This is from William F. Buckley:
Conservatives in this country — at least those who have not made their peace with the New Deal, and there is serious question whether there are others — are non-licensed nonconformists; and this is dangerous business in a Liberal world, as every editor of this magazine can readily show by pointing to his scars. Radical conservatives in this country have an interesting time of it, for when they are not being suppressed or mutilated by the Liberals, they are being ignored or humiliated by a great many of those of the well-fed Right, whose ignorance and amorality have never been exaggerated for the same reason that one cannot exaggerate infinity.
During his sabbatical, a university professor wishes to come to Florida to interview me for a study he is doing on black Tea Partiers. He said he wants to find out why “you think the way you think.” Why do I get the feeling this guy believes that black conservatives are a strange phenomenon, almost unique as discovering a Bigfoot? This professor is flying all the way to Florida to actually meet me, an extremely rare species — a Blackus Conservativus.
As believers in traditional values such as faith in God, family, and country, conservatives are viciously attacked by the mainstream media, which function as enforcers, punishing all who dare challenge the left’s socialist/progressive agenda. The MSM portrays conservatives as nutcase extremists; take Col. Allen West, Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, and Ted Cruz to name a few.
Liberals decry as “kooky” those of us who believe that the institution of marriage should continue to remain the union of one man and one woman. Expecting the president to obey the Constitution is also declared by Obama media sycophants and the mainstream media a bit nutty, mean-spirited, racist, and extreme.
The left, assisted by their buddies in the MSM, use a very effective tactic to render conservatives politically impotent. They accuse us of being haters and aggressors, all the while forcing every item on their socialist/progressive list down America’s throats. Conservatives who were simply minding their own business are branded the bad guys.
Conservatives are swiftly becoming an ever-increasingly “silenced majority” — persecuted, intimidated, and bullied into shutting up. Rush Limbaugh says our country is in the midst of a peaceful takeover. America as founded is slipping away daily.
Since 9-11-01 we have been subjected to more and more loss of freedom through the government’s intrusion into our lives.
These intrusions are done in the name of security. There be terrorists here and there and everywhere.
How many terrorist attacks have occurred in the USA since 9-11?
The number is pretty low. And it has nothing to do with the NSA, or the FBI’s surveillance of Americans.
The scandals that keep coming out of Washington are proof that their agenda is to kill liberty in this country.
Didn’t Obama say that the “war on terrorism is over” in one of his hundreds of speeches? If the war on terrorism is over, then there is absolutely no reason for the government’s overreach into our lives.
Remember candidate Obama in 2007? The then candidate gave a foreign policy speech denouncing exactly what this Administration has done. In fact, they’ve expanded the liberty crushing agenda that Bush pulled with the Patriot Act. Here’s what he said then:
I guess the joke’s on us.
Power corrupts absolutely.
Under the guise of fighting terrorism, the government has expanded its powers immensely. The TSA is the most overbearing and useless organization ever created in this country. They violate our Fourth Amendment rights every time we get into an airport to board a plane. They search 90 year old ladies in wheelchairs under the guise of not profiling Muslims. Guess what morons? Muslim men and women in the age group of 20-40 are the threat. Not some old lady in a wheelchair.
Now we find the IRS targeting certain groups that call themselves the Tea Party, along with other conservative groups against big government, or just wanting to teach the Constitution. Why is that? What end does this government seek?
Control.
This Administration has gone after the First Amendment by targeting the Tea Party and other Conservative groups through the IRS. They have tapped the phones of Americans violating the Fourth Amendment, and they have been going after guns in a vain attempt at taking away our divine right to life, and liberty, by attacking the Second Amendment.
It’s about controlling the masses so that they can enrich themselves and screw the rest of us.
All under the guise of security, or to “protect the children” from harm. If they really wanted to protect the children, then there would be no more gun free zones, and every school in America would have armed staff to stop any idiot that tried to harm them.
Fighting terrorism in America, what a false flag that is.
They keep the stupid people scared in order to run roughshod over the rest of us that know better.
Here’s an interesting article from the NY Times, the fish wrap of record, but they changed it so it wouldn’t be so damning to their messiah.
The editorial originally declared that the Obama “administration has lost all credibility” as a result of the recently revealed news that the National Security Agency and the Federal Bureau of Investigation have been secretly collecting call data from American users of Verizon under the authority of the Patriot Act.
The media has been complicit in this whole charade with their idolizing of Obama and their complete lack of integrity. If they had been doing their job from the start, then Obama probably wouldn’t have been elected in the first place, never mind a second time.
I apologize for being all over the map on this, but it really pisses me off.
At any rate, it’s still a decent article for this rag.
Within hours of the disclosure that federal authorities routinely collect data on phone calls Americans make, regardless of whether they have any bearing on a counterterrorism investigation, the Obama administration issued the same platitude it has offered every time President Obama has been caught overreaching in the use of his powers: Terrorists are a real menace and you should just trust us to deal with them because we have internal mechanisms (that we are not going to tell you about) to make sure we do not violate your rights.
Those reassurances have never been persuasive — whether on secret warrants to scoop up a news agency’s phone records or secret orders to kill an American suspected of terrorism — especially coming from a president who once promised transparency and accountability.
The administration has now lost all credibility on this issue. Mr. Obama is proving the truism that the executive branch will use any power it is given and very likely abuse it. That is one reason we have long argued that the Patriot Act, enacted in the heat of fear after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks by members of Congress who mostly had not even read it, was reckless in its assignment of unnecessary and overbroad surveillance powers.
The Obama campaign played a big role in a liberal onslaught that far pre-dated Citizens United.
The White House insists President Obama is “outraged” by the “inappropriate” targeting and harassment of conservative groups. If true, it’s a remarkable turnaround for a man who helped pioneer those tactics.
On Aug. 21, 2008, the conservative American Issues Project ran an ad highlighting ties between candidate Obama and Bill Ayers, formerly of the Weather Underground. The Obama campaign and supporters were furious, and they pressured TV stations to pull the ad—a common-enough tactic in such ad spats.
What came next was not common. Bob Bauer, general counsel for the campaign (and later general counsel for the White House), on the same day wrote to the criminal division of the Justice Department, demanding an investigation into AIP, “its officers and directors,” and its “anonymous donors.” Mr. Bauer claimed that the nonprofit, as a 501(c)(4), was committing a “knowing and willful violation” of election law, and wanted “action to enforce against criminal violations.”
AIP gave Justice a full explanation as to why it was not in violation. It said that it operated exactly as liberal groups like Naral Pro-Choice did. It noted that it had disclosed its donor, Texas businessman Harold Simmons. Mr. Bauer’s response was a second letter to Justice calling for the prosecution of Mr. Simmons. He sent a third letter on Sept. 8, again smearing the “sham” AIP’s “illegal electoral purpose.”
Also on Sept. 8, Mr. Bauer complained to the Federal Election Commission about AIP and Mr. Simmons. He demanded that AIP turn over certain tax documents to his campaign (his right under IRS law), then sent a letter to AIP further hounding it for confidential information (to which he had no legal right).
…and anyone with a brain can figure this out. I guess that leaves out liberal idiots. Here’s a report that comes from the Congressional Research Service basically stating the obvious. At least to those of us who can use our brain housing group for something other than a hat rack.
There’s no guarantee new regulations will prevent another tragedy.
That’s the logical, if grim, conclusion to be drawn from a new Congressional Research Service Report on “Public Mass Shootings in the United States.” CRS strives to be studiously neutral, so they’re not going to put it quite like that.
Instead, the report’s authors say things like “the utility of widely employed preventive measures in these areas [law enforcement and public health] to fight public mass shootings is far from clear.”
As the Daily Beast’s Megan McCardle observed in December, “it is beyond horrible to suggest that even a small number of attacks are largely unavoidable. I don’t like saying it. Unfortunately, I think it’s true.” The tragic fact is, there’s not a great deal that public policy can do to avert spree shootings.
Still, it’s worth asking, as CRS does, “what are the parameters of this threat?” The report defines “public mass shootings” as incidents involving four or more deaths and “gunmen who select victims somewhat indiscriminately,” excluding drug trafficking, gang activity and terrorism.
This crisis to crisis management that Obama and his minions are doing is really getting old. The propaganda machine of this Administration has been something to behold. Joseph Goebbels would be proud and envious.
Let the sequester happen. It’s the only way these idiots can cut any spending whatsoever, except by coercion. What an absolute failure in government.
Prepare for the end of food safety as we have known it. For a breakdown in public order. For little children languishing in ignorance. If only Edward Gibbon were here to chronicle the devastation. On March 1, the fabric of our civilization begins to unwind.
That’s when the economy begins to stall and we turn our back on our values, all because the federal government will have to begin to cut a few tens of billions of dollars from the largest budget the world has ever known.
This is the lurid fairy tale spun by President Obama. In the fight over the sequester, he is resorting to the tried-and-true (and tiresome) strategy of every official confronted with unwelcome budget cuts, from the commander in chief to a lowly bureaucrat toiling at some school district: maximize the scaremongering and pain.
In fairty-tale terms, Obama is the princess and the sequester is the pea.
In fairty-tale terms, Obama is the princess and the sequester is the pea.
In Hans Christian Andersen terms, Obama is the princess and the sequester is the pea. Over the next 10 years, the sequester amounts to a $1.16 trillion cut, or roughly 3 cents on every federal dollar. If we can’t squeeze a couple of pennies out of every dollar, we might as well begin our great national bankruptcy proceedings right now.
Sometimes societies just plod along, oblivious that the world is being reinvented right under their noses. In 2000, one never saw pedestrians bumping into themselves as they glued their noses to iPhones. Thirteen years later, it is almost rare to see anyone on the street who is not stumbling about, networking or texting. Yet most of us are scarcely aware of the collective effect of that odd habit repeating itself millions of times over each day, of millions of books not read, of “hellos” not offered, of brains wired to screens rather than the physical world about them. When cars once drifted into your lane, you assumed a DUI; now their drivers are most likely texting.
Cars, of course, look about the same as they did thirty years ago. But we just assume now that they almost never break down. Up until 1980 I used to see them with hoods up by the side of the road almost every five miles or so. Today, entire notions such as points, plugs, tune-ups, and carburetors have simply quietly passed away for most motorists. The old jalopy with 100,000 miles on it was junk; the new Accord with 150,000 miles has another easy 250,000 to go. The world changes while we snore.
…are rampant in the House and Senate. Nancy Pelosi being the biggest moron to ever hold a seat in the House, let alone to have been Speaker, is one of the worst. The liberal media isn’t helping because they let these idiots say whatever the hell they want without question.
The Republicans are just as culpable, if not more so.
Several weeks before the slow-motion “fiscal cliff” negotiation ended in a giveaway-rich, tax-hiking, 154-page spending bill that senators had all of six minutes to glance at before approving by an 89-8 vote in the wee hours of January 1, President Barack Obama reportedly told House Speaker John Boehner flat out: “We don’t have a spending problem.”
Boehner, in relaying the quote to The Wall Street Journal three days after the House of Representatives grudgingly ratified the Senate plan, expressed astonishment at the president’s words. But he shouldn’t have. Spending denialism—of the literal sort—has become a core progressive value in the age of Obama.
“Spending isn’t the problem,” Steve Benen wrote at Rachel Maddow’s blog in December. “We don’t have a spending problem. We have an aging problem,” seconded Mother Jones’s Kevin Drum in January. “We don’t have a spending problem, we have a military spending problem,” chimed in The Washington Post’s Ezra Klein.
Such confident consensus would be more convincing if not for the fact that federal spending rose from $1.77 trillion in fiscal year 2000 to $3.72 trillion in 2010. If spending growth had been pegged to the rates of inflation and population, Washington would still be doling out less than $3 trillion a year, and the fiscal conversation would be about surpluses, not debt ceilings.
Truth, Lies and In Between 