Mr. Huntsman is in a mad scramble to make himself distinguishable, nay, relevant, in a Republican field which is intensifying its stiffening adherence to core conservative principles.
Using the same tired rhetoric as left-wing pols and Tea-Party carpers, he smears the front-runners as "extremist." Compared to his watered-down moderation, every Republican candidate is blazing conservative radicalism, with fire in the heart to take on the statist assault decimating this nation's economic recovery.
Contrary to his attempt to shape the Republican narrative, the electorate is steadily clamoring for the take-charge spirit to take on the tax-and-spend status quo and take off where Obama has merely stumbled and pouted. Big Government is a big failure, and President Obama, the knee-jerk Progressive who believes only in the Almighty sway of Gargantuan Government, has no other tools at his disposal. Every trick he has trickled out has failed, one after the other. Any harder tack the right is well-placed and welcome, despite any strident rhetoric of current contenders.
Besides, Mr. Huntsman should not be chiding anyone on extremism. No candidate but he must justify the near-extreme decision to take a diplomatic post fron one of the most liberal, and loathed, Presidents in modern history, only to run on the opposing ticket as a moderate in a similar cast.
Granted, his straight-forward rebuttal to Michelle Bachmann's pledge to bring gas back down to $2 a gallon is justifiable. Yet Bachmann' outspoken slovenliness with the facts needs no commentary nor addendum.
However, Huntsman unjustifiably slams Texas Governor Rick Perry as "unelectable". Perry can boast of leading a Republican bastion of electoral votes with a sound state economy, a state which has created jobs in the wake of the Great Recession. Perry balances religious and social conservatism with a healthy dose of down-home limited-government sense and sensibility. A late-comer who did not officially throw his hat into the ring until after the Iowa straw poll, he still garnered 750 votes and zoomed into front-runner status. Huntsman's denunciations are mere desperation in light of a race heating up, and burning away moderate chaff like the formed governor of Utah.
Huntsman also fleetingly castigates Governor Romney: "You know, if we were to talk about his inconsistencies and the changes on various issues, we’d be here all afternoon." Yet the glaring shortcoming of Huntsman's taking orders, then challenging, the incumbent Democratic President is the gravest inconsistency of all. How would he fare squaring off against hist former boss in general-election debates, where even Obama's kind words would box Huntsman to fight against his own record.
Mr. Huntsman may not have the questionable personal peccadilloes of Newt Gingrich, or the libertarian idiosyncrasies of Ron Paul, yet his empty swipes at well-positioned and well-financed front-runners merely underscore his dwindling relevance in a national contest looking for outstanding, outspoken, and yes--outrageous--candidates who are unafraid to talk truth to the progressive powers that be, and hopefully will not be for long.
Monday, August 22, 2011
Ryan Won't Run
Congressman Paul Ryan has refuted once again any notion of his running for President for 2012.
He is doing the right thing.
His Medicare plan, although necessary and principled, is currently the objection of facile criticism from the left and jittery Republicans who still sting from the Democratic upset in Upstate New York.
Mr. Ryan's passion for fiscal solvency serves this nation better within the halls of Congress, not in the Executive Branch.
With Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann taking on a more prominent leadership role in the House of Representatives, Ryan would have more opportunity to pursue his agenda with a larger and more energized Republican majorities in Congress and another consensus Conservative in the White House.
Thank you again for your direct candor, Congressman Ryan!
He is doing the right thing.
His Medicare plan, although necessary and principled, is currently the objection of facile criticism from the left and jittery Republicans who still sting from the Democratic upset in Upstate New York.
Mr. Ryan's passion for fiscal solvency serves this nation better within the halls of Congress, not in the Executive Branch.
With Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann taking on a more prominent leadership role in the House of Representatives, Ryan would have more opportunity to pursue his agenda with a larger and more energized Republican majorities in Congress and another consensus Conservative in the White House.
Thank you again for your direct candor, Congressman Ryan!
Saturday, August 20, 2011
Mike Castle: Run in 2012
Dear Mr. Castle:
My name is Arthur Christophher Schaper, a committed fiscal conservative currently living in Southern California.
Your untimely loss to Tea Party firebrand Christine O'Donnell in September 2010 was a great disappoint to me. Although I do not share all of your views, I believed that your dedication to low regulation and fiscal restraint are just what Washington D.C. needs in its legislators. I also believe that your extensive commitment to the health, wealth, and welfare of Delaware more than justified you as a fitting replacement for the liberal incumbents marching in lock-step with the Obama social-democratic political machinery.
I am writing this open appeal to you so that you would consider challenging incumbent Tom Carper for the other U.S. Senate seat up for reelection in 2012.
We who are dedicated to the long-term success of this nation must stop the Obama juggernaut at all costs, and that includes supporting conservative candidates who are the most electable in all fifty states, including the First. I believe, sir, that you are a more fitting alternative to any Democratic candidate, no matter how long his or her term of service.
Once again, please consider a run for U.S. Senate in 2012. This country needs every voice for fiscal conservativism that can be rallied to the cause.
Sincerely,
Arthur Christopher Schaper
My name is Arthur Christophher Schaper, a committed fiscal conservative currently living in Southern California.
Your untimely loss to Tea Party firebrand Christine O'Donnell in September 2010 was a great disappoint to me. Although I do not share all of your views, I believed that your dedication to low regulation and fiscal restraint are just what Washington D.C. needs in its legislators. I also believe that your extensive commitment to the health, wealth, and welfare of Delaware more than justified you as a fitting replacement for the liberal incumbents marching in lock-step with the Obama social-democratic political machinery.
I am writing this open appeal to you so that you would consider challenging incumbent Tom Carper for the other U.S. Senate seat up for reelection in 2012.
We who are dedicated to the long-term success of this nation must stop the Obama juggernaut at all costs, and that includes supporting conservative candidates who are the most electable in all fifty states, including the First. I believe, sir, that you are a more fitting alternative to any Democratic candidate, no matter how long his or her term of service.
Once again, please consider a run for U.S. Senate in 2012. This country needs every voice for fiscal conservativism that can be rallied to the cause.
Sincerely,
Arthur Christopher Schaper
Reponse to "Pro-Beck Anti-Beck" Debate
We need new commentators like Glenn Beck who love and cherish the Jewish State, no matter what their religious, or political motivations. Although I do not share all of Beck's religious convictions, I do share his heart-warming support for Israel.
In the Jewish Journal's "Pro-Beck Anti-Beck" debate, Mr. Levine's defense of Beck's "Restoring Courage" Rally in Jerusalem is both timely and necessary. I heartily concur with Mr. Levine's contention that "for so many Jews, hatred of the right overwhelms their love of Israel."
Rabbi Grater's grating criticism is clearly motivated by political acrimony, which sadly overemphasizes Beck's infrequent mischaracterizations of certain Jews and religious sects. These faux-pas are ultimately irrelevant respecting his well-intentioned and worthwhile support of the Jewish State.
I hope that the state of Israel will deem Glenn Beck one of the Righteous Among the Nations. Though he may not have saved Jews from the Nazi Holocaust, his fervent advocacy for the Jews and for Israel may rally the world to defend the Chosen People from the galvanizing threats of Iranian President and radical Islamist Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to "wipe Israel from the face of the Earth."
If only left-leaning Levites like Rabbi Grater would appreciate those who advocate for Israel as a nation and people, respecting her culture, values, and religious legacies, they would find much less to carp at and more to celebrate in Mr. Beck.
G-d bless you, Glenn Beck!
Speak up for the Jewish State, no matter how hard the Mainstream Media may backlash!
In the Jewish Journal's "Pro-Beck Anti-Beck" debate, Mr. Levine's defense of Beck's "Restoring Courage" Rally in Jerusalem is both timely and necessary. I heartily concur with Mr. Levine's contention that "for so many Jews, hatred of the right overwhelms their love of Israel."
Rabbi Grater's grating criticism is clearly motivated by political acrimony, which sadly overemphasizes Beck's infrequent mischaracterizations of certain Jews and religious sects. These faux-pas are ultimately irrelevant respecting his well-intentioned and worthwhile support of the Jewish State.
I hope that the state of Israel will deem Glenn Beck one of the Righteous Among the Nations. Though he may not have saved Jews from the Nazi Holocaust, his fervent advocacy for the Jews and for Israel may rally the world to defend the Chosen People from the galvanizing threats of Iranian President and radical Islamist Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to "wipe Israel from the face of the Earth."
If only left-leaning Levites like Rabbi Grater would appreciate those who advocate for Israel as a nation and people, respecting her culture, values, and religious legacies, they would find much less to carp at and more to celebrate in Mr. Beck.
G-d bless you, Glenn Beck!
Speak up for the Jewish State, no matter how hard the Mainstream Media may backlash!
Response to "Still the Only Solution to the World's Problems"
Mr. Prager's analysis of the Ten Commandments was a stellar interpolation of current events, eternal values, and pressing import.
Excellent throughout!
Indeed, no one is godless, the greatest folly of atheism. We all answer to someone. The question is, to what, or to whom. The insipidness of modern life has foolishly assumed that "It's my life, I can do what I want." Yet nothing could be further from the truth.
I also enjoyed Mr. Prager's connection with covetousness and class warfare. The haves and have-nots is a false dichotomy created by the political class to incite envy among those who have not because they work not, or ask amiss, that they may spend what is not theirs on their divers lusts.
My only concern is that, for all the holiness and goodness inherent in God's Law, or rather, Instruction-Direction (the literal meaning of Torah), Mr. Prager does not explain how mankind can live up to the standard in the law. For Rabbi Yochanan writes: "But if a man do the whole, with the omission of one, he is guilty of the whole, and of every one".
Knowledge of the Law certainly has not made the race any better, let alone a near-heaven on earth. Our first parents, Adam and Eve, sinned because they wanted the knowledge of Good and Evil, which only instilled in them yetster hara, which undermines any fantastic notion of yetser hatov in humanity today (consider mass murder at the hands of the State, Nazi, Communist, etc.)
The Law is good, Mr. Prager. But it does not make me good. I think we would do well to search for the One who can make us good, true, and holy. The Law is certainly a diligent schoolmaster, but what is the one needful lesson?
Excellent throughout!
Indeed, no one is godless, the greatest folly of atheism. We all answer to someone. The question is, to what, or to whom. The insipidness of modern life has foolishly assumed that "It's my life, I can do what I want." Yet nothing could be further from the truth.
I also enjoyed Mr. Prager's connection with covetousness and class warfare. The haves and have-nots is a false dichotomy created by the political class to incite envy among those who have not because they work not, or ask amiss, that they may spend what is not theirs on their divers lusts.
My only concern is that, for all the holiness and goodness inherent in God's Law, or rather, Instruction-Direction (the literal meaning of Torah), Mr. Prager does not explain how mankind can live up to the standard in the law. For Rabbi Yochanan writes: "But if a man do the whole, with the omission of one, he is guilty of the whole, and of every one".
Knowledge of the Law certainly has not made the race any better, let alone a near-heaven on earth. Our first parents, Adam and Eve, sinned because they wanted the knowledge of Good and Evil, which only instilled in them yetster hara, which undermines any fantastic notion of yetser hatov in humanity today (consider mass murder at the hands of the State, Nazi, Communist, etc.)
The Law is good, Mr. Prager. But it does not make me good. I think we would do well to search for the One who can make us good, true, and holy. The Law is certainly a diligent schoolmaster, but what is the one needful lesson?
Response Poem to "Homeland Bound"
First of all, I like that Mr. Suissa's poem include an outline of the Jewish State, including the West Bank, Gaza, and the Golan Heights. I believe that Israel has every right to exist right where it is now, with its current borders intact, post-1967. Take back the West Bank, take back Gaza, and do not cede the Golan Heights!
Here is a poem I was moved to write in response to Mr. Suissa "Homeward Bound."
Take Back the Holy Land
Promised by YHWH to Abram, who became Abraham, Father-of-Many
Abraham had many sons,
Of whom I am one
Remember the Promise
The Promised Land
Given by God to Abraham
Cottage or cottage cheese
West Bank or Bank of the West
Israel belongs to the Jews
A Blessing to the Gentiles
A nation through whom
All the nations will be blessed
Blessed be Abraham
Said Melchizedek, King of Righteousness
And Blessed be God-Most-High
Abraham had many sons,
Of whom I am one
Israel, the Prince with God
Wrestled with the Heavenly Messenger
He lost his strength to walk
Yet he gained the Promise
Israel, the Cup of Trembling
The Apple of God's Eye
Forbidden Fruit to the Forces of Evil
The Promised Land for Everyone
Abraham had many sons,
Of whom I am one
Jews may dream
Yet YHWH proclaimed
A Father of many nations I have made you
As weeping prophets of old foretold
Weeping for joy or sorrow or both
I will make a new covenant
A brit shalom shalom
A name never to be cut off
If heaven and earth can be cut to length
I will cast off the seed of Israel
Like the stars in heaven
Like the sands on the shore of the sea
Thy seed shall inherit the Gentiles
Abraham had many sons,
Of whom I am one
Captives no more
They shall all return
From their tents, from their troubles
They will laugh again, like Isaac
Jerusalem, the Cup of Trembling
All will be cut who try to cut you
YHWH will destroy all nations
Who seek your destruction
YHWH who gave Israel manna from heaven
Will give wealth to you and to the world
Many sons had Abraham
And I am one of them
Here is a poem I was moved to write in response to Mr. Suissa "Homeward Bound."
Take Back the Holy Land
Promised by YHWH to Abram, who became Abraham, Father-of-Many
Abraham had many sons,
Of whom I am one
Remember the Promise
The Promised Land
Given by God to Abraham
Cottage or cottage cheese
West Bank or Bank of the West
Israel belongs to the Jews
A Blessing to the Gentiles
A nation through whom
All the nations will be blessed
Blessed be Abraham
Said Melchizedek, King of Righteousness
And Blessed be God-Most-High
Abraham had many sons,
Of whom I am one
Israel, the Prince with God
Wrestled with the Heavenly Messenger
He lost his strength to walk
Yet he gained the Promise
Israel, the Cup of Trembling
The Apple of God's Eye
Forbidden Fruit to the Forces of Evil
The Promised Land for Everyone
Abraham had many sons,
Of whom I am one
Jews may dream
Yet YHWH proclaimed
A Father of many nations I have made you
As weeping prophets of old foretold
Weeping for joy or sorrow or both
I will make a new covenant
A brit shalom shalom
A name never to be cut off
If heaven and earth can be cut to length
I will cast off the seed of Israel
Like the stars in heaven
Like the sands on the shore of the sea
Thy seed shall inherit the Gentiles
Abraham had many sons,
Of whom I am one
Captives no more
They shall all return
From their tents, from their troubles
They will laugh again, like Isaac
Jerusalem, the Cup of Trembling
All will be cut who try to cut you
YHWH will destroy all nations
Who seek your destruction
YHWH who gave Israel manna from heaven
Will give wealth to you and to the world
Many sons had Abraham
And I am one of them
"Don't be a Lieu-ser! Ban Shark Fins!"
The Easy Reader reported on a recent demonstration against State Senator Ted Lieu's hesitance to support a ban on harvesting shark fins. "Don't be a Lieu-ser! Ban Shark Fins!" One poster punningly opined.
State Senator Ted Lieu's (D-Torrance) vapid defense for voting against a shark-fin ban is that it would discriminate against Chinese-Americans, who eat shark-fin soup as a delicacy. Yet there is no discussion about the tax-and-spend deficit-run California Government which is discriminating against the citizens of the Golden State and our posterity.
One demonstrator said, "Sharks scare me, but I still think they have a right to live." Since when do animals have a right to anything? What about the right of Americans to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, all of which are diminished by Leviathan Government that wants to regulate another trade, creating another set of black market blackguards!
State Senator Ted Lieu's (D-Torrance) vapid defense for voting against a shark-fin ban is that it would discriminate against Chinese-Americans, who eat shark-fin soup as a delicacy. Yet there is no discussion about the tax-and-spend deficit-run California Government which is discriminating against the citizens of the Golden State and our posterity.
One demonstrator said, "Sharks scare me, but I still think they have a right to live." Since when do animals have a right to anything? What about the right of Americans to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, all of which are diminished by Leviathan Government that wants to regulate another trade, creating another set of black market blackguards!
Janice Hahn: Eternal Office Seeker
Janice Hahn, recently elected Congresswoman for the CA-36th, has declared that she will run will for the seat in the newly created 44th Congressional district, which overlaps the current district represented by Laura Richardson, another irresponsible pol who could not handle state stipends or pay her mortgage on time.
So much for diligently advocating for the needs of her South Bay constituents. Even her carefully crafted words of comfort, stressing that she will seek to meet "the needs of all Californians," as if that vague wave of good-will really will induce us to believe that she will fight for the interests of anyone besides herself?
The troubled communities of Watts, Wilmington, and wharf-town San Pedro (all part of the newly-carved 44th Congressional district) elected this woman three times to be their Councilmember on the Los Angeles City Council. Since they were so minimally impressed with her lackluster presence there, they should be more than happy to foist her into another term of self-congratulation at the federal level.
Still, it is unfortunate that, once again, the Beach Cities of the South Bay got sandbagged with a state-and-self-centered politician who is ever climbing to higher heights to highlight her resume at running for public office.
So much for diligently advocating for the needs of her South Bay constituents. Even her carefully crafted words of comfort, stressing that she will seek to meet "the needs of all Californians," as if that vague wave of good-will really will induce us to believe that she will fight for the interests of anyone besides herself?
The troubled communities of Watts, Wilmington, and wharf-town San Pedro (all part of the newly-carved 44th Congressional district) elected this woman three times to be their Councilmember on the Los Angeles City Council. Since they were so minimally impressed with her lackluster presence there, they should be more than happy to foist her into another term of self-congratulation at the federal level.
Still, it is unfortunate that, once again, the Beach Cities of the South Bay got sandbagged with a state-and-self-centered politician who is ever climbing to higher heights to highlight her resume at running for public office.
Response to Easy Reader News: "Crackdown"
Mr. Repohl's "Crackdown" is a crack-up on account of its crack pot notions about the cause and continuation of crime and social control in London, and the near fanatic adherence to the good will of the Welfare State, which is the root causes of the riots and disregard for human rights across the Western World.
The riots in London are a call for Moral Clarity. First of all, the moral equivalence of comparing Great Britain with the dictatorships of Burma and Bahrain is offensive and petulant. While those regimes in Asia and the Middle East have it made it their place to suppress not just political dissent, but any demontration of human rights among their peoples, Prime Minister Cameron is protecting the rights of all Britons to enjoy their life, liberty, and property free form the maurauding hatred of headstrong hoodlums for too long nursed to bite the government that has fed them again and again, to no avail.
This clarion call must declared loudly and clearly throughout the world: the social-democratic experiment of transferring wealth from the rich to the poor has exacerbated inequality, with bureaucracts enabling welfare dependents, who drop babies into the world without caring for them or rearing them to respect themselves, each other, or society as a whole. From the riots in over-pensioned underemployed Greece to the moral decadence of London slums, the era of Big Government as Big Brother and Nanny State is coming to a nasty, bitter end.
To call British Prime Minister's measures to stop the riots sweeping London streets a "repressive regime" in action is like calling the 2009 Obama stimulus "job creating", or our uncalled for actions in Libya coordinated, or the European social-democratic agenda of transfer-wealth-to-assist-all "successful."
Besides, If repressive, Cameron's coalition government is repressing "criminality, pure and simple." That is the proper role of government, a role which the United Kingdom has seemingly neglected for quite some time.
When a city is in a state of chaos, a stte of siege is appropriate. Rapid trials and immediate consequences for "petty offenses" prevent them from becoming a "grand wickedness" en masse of the miscreants who prevent law abiding citizens from walking the streets safely and freely. Cameron's London 2011 is facing drastic times, which call for drastic measures. If only the United States had seen that kind of anti-riot mobilization in New Orleans 2005 or Los Angeles 1992. Many innocent lives would have been spared, more property would have beem secured, and order more quickly restored in those large municipalities.
Repohl chides Cameron for being an absentee leader because he was spending an "idyllic vacation" in Tuscany. Yet unlike the chief executive of the United States, Mr. Cameron returned to his country's aid straightaway to, while our President takes in the sun against the backdrop of our markets, economy, and morale taking a dive.
Mr. Repohl insists that the rioters are fighting back against a government which has marginalized them, impoverished them, and has provided them no way out of their predicament. On the contrary, public housing, public assistance, and state mandated handouts of the Britishh Welfare State have propagated the near-permanent entitlement-mentality underclass which is sweeping the streets of London with rampant devastation.
In the United States, we faced a similar backlash in light of another progressive President who insisted that government intervention at all levels of society would end Povery and usher in a Great Society. The result: race riots, political upheaval, decay of law and order, and finally a Silent Majority who threw out politicians obsessed with the basic goodness of humanity, that merely needed a whole lotta peace, love, and taxpayer dollars.
Indeed, a "moral collapse" has been imminent in Great Britain because of the Welfare State, which has allowed Britons to get money and demand more of it without working. When members of a society feel no compunction to participate in their own lives or the well-being of their communities, they become rabid dependents who will fiercely defend to their death (and the deaths of their countrymen) the "right" to live off of them. Now that the bankrupted British Government has to cut back on the immoral entitlement culture whic it can no longer afford, angry welfare queens, deadbeats, and hotheads are taking to the streets, galvanized by an unjustified rage against the powers that be.
"The me-first-take-what-you-can culture" denounced by the Labour is a result of the welfare state, not corporate greed. The social programs which were meant to aid the downtrodden in society have merely given those same recipients permissen to trod down the public square with anti-social violence.
In short, the riots in London and throughout the United Kingdom are not a result of state repression of the poor, marginalized, and unemployed, but a consistent outcome from statist polices which create a poverty-entitlement mentality. The expectation of Big Government to pay the way of its citizens from the womb to the tomb has bred an outright contempt for authority and order--a dangerous build-up which must be dealt with right now. First, dismantle the welfare state which encourages shiftless dependence and deviance, then demand the restoration and reinvigoration
The British Government, and the world, must acknowledge once and for all that the Oliver Twists of Charles Dicken's day who would beg "Please sir, may I have some more?" have become the barbaric hordes of William Golding's "Lord of the Flies," who, having been reared to in the affinities of Western respectability, wreaking havoc, crying out: "'Kill the beast! Cut his throat! Kill the beast! Bash him in!"
The riots in London are a call for Moral Clarity. First of all, the moral equivalence of comparing Great Britain with the dictatorships of Burma and Bahrain is offensive and petulant. While those regimes in Asia and the Middle East have it made it their place to suppress not just political dissent, but any demontration of human rights among their peoples, Prime Minister Cameron is protecting the rights of all Britons to enjoy their life, liberty, and property free form the maurauding hatred of headstrong hoodlums for too long nursed to bite the government that has fed them again and again, to no avail.
This clarion call must declared loudly and clearly throughout the world: the social-democratic experiment of transferring wealth from the rich to the poor has exacerbated inequality, with bureaucracts enabling welfare dependents, who drop babies into the world without caring for them or rearing them to respect themselves, each other, or society as a whole. From the riots in over-pensioned underemployed Greece to the moral decadence of London slums, the era of Big Government as Big Brother and Nanny State is coming to a nasty, bitter end.
To call British Prime Minister's measures to stop the riots sweeping London streets a "repressive regime" in action is like calling the 2009 Obama stimulus "job creating", or our uncalled for actions in Libya coordinated, or the European social-democratic agenda of transfer-wealth-to-assist-all "successful."
Besides, If repressive, Cameron's coalition government is repressing "criminality, pure and simple." That is the proper role of government, a role which the United Kingdom has seemingly neglected for quite some time.
When a city is in a state of chaos, a stte of siege is appropriate. Rapid trials and immediate consequences for "petty offenses" prevent them from becoming a "grand wickedness" en masse of the miscreants who prevent law abiding citizens from walking the streets safely and freely. Cameron's London 2011 is facing drastic times, which call for drastic measures. If only the United States had seen that kind of anti-riot mobilization in New Orleans 2005 or Los Angeles 1992. Many innocent lives would have been spared, more property would have beem secured, and order more quickly restored in those large municipalities.
Repohl chides Cameron for being an absentee leader because he was spending an "idyllic vacation" in Tuscany. Yet unlike the chief executive of the United States, Mr. Cameron returned to his country's aid straightaway to, while our President takes in the sun against the backdrop of our markets, economy, and morale taking a dive.
Mr. Repohl insists that the rioters are fighting back against a government which has marginalized them, impoverished them, and has provided them no way out of their predicament. On the contrary, public housing, public assistance, and state mandated handouts of the Britishh Welfare State have propagated the near-permanent entitlement-mentality underclass which is sweeping the streets of London with rampant devastation.
In the United States, we faced a similar backlash in light of another progressive President who insisted that government intervention at all levels of society would end Povery and usher in a Great Society. The result: race riots, political upheaval, decay of law and order, and finally a Silent Majority who threw out politicians obsessed with the basic goodness of humanity, that merely needed a whole lotta peace, love, and taxpayer dollars.
Indeed, a "moral collapse" has been imminent in Great Britain because of the Welfare State, which has allowed Britons to get money and demand more of it without working. When members of a society feel no compunction to participate in their own lives or the well-being of their communities, they become rabid dependents who will fiercely defend to their death (and the deaths of their countrymen) the "right" to live off of them. Now that the bankrupted British Government has to cut back on the immoral entitlement culture whic it can no longer afford, angry welfare queens, deadbeats, and hotheads are taking to the streets, galvanized by an unjustified rage against the powers that be.
"The me-first-take-what-you-can culture" denounced by the Labour is a result of the welfare state, not corporate greed. The social programs which were meant to aid the downtrodden in society have merely given those same recipients permissen to trod down the public square with anti-social violence.
In short, the riots in London and throughout the United Kingdom are not a result of state repression of the poor, marginalized, and unemployed, but a consistent outcome from statist polices which create a poverty-entitlement mentality. The expectation of Big Government to pay the way of its citizens from the womb to the tomb has bred an outright contempt for authority and order--a dangerous build-up which must be dealt with right now. First, dismantle the welfare state which encourages shiftless dependence and deviance, then demand the restoration and reinvigoration
The British Government, and the world, must acknowledge once and for all that the Oliver Twists of Charles Dicken's day who would beg "Please sir, may I have some more?" have become the barbaric hordes of William Golding's "Lord of the Flies," who, having been reared to in the affinities of Western respectability, wreaking havoc, crying out: "'Kill the beast! Cut his throat! Kill the beast! Bash him in!"
Michelle Bachmann: Christine O'Donnell Redux
Michelle Bachmann, the outspoken chairman of the House Tea Party Caucus, is running for President on strict demands for fiscal restraint.
Her outspoken dedication to fiscal restraint is commendable. Her stance against raising the debt ceiling, no matter how much was cut, was a principled stance. There is no need for the United States Government to borrow more money. It is time to cut, cut, cut the spending.
Yet the questions on most reporters' minds are about her social views. Her heated rhetoric on these issues may cost her the nomination. If she does win the Republican nomination, it will be a dream come true for Obama, who can simply paint her as a Tea Party Extremist so outside of the mainstream, that Obama will look like a stable centrist.
To put it bluntly, Michelle Bachmann would be to the 2012 Presidential Election what Christine O'Donnell was for the 2010 U.S. Senate Race in Delaware.
She has demonstrated a number of times her opposition to gay marriage, and she has characterized homosexuality as aberrant and sinful. She even set up a clinic to counsel individuals into leaving the homosexual lifestyle. Like Christine O'Donnell in her interview with Piers Morgan, candidate Bachmann has repeatedly ducked questions about her opinion of gays, their proper status in society, and to what extent she respects their rights as American citizens. Despite her calm demeanor in the face of these divisive questions, Ms. Bachmann simply has left no room for herself to wiggle out of her strong views on this matter.
A reliable Tea Party favorite, her outstanding views outdistance the mainstream and distract the core debate from fiscal issues, the one cause which will bring down the Democrats across the board in 2012. Ms. Bachmann would better serve this country if she stood her ground but gave up the Presidency.
As Speaker of the House Henry Clay once quipped, "I would rather be right than be President." If Bachmann wants to stay right with the right wing of her party, let her stay in the House and be the necessary check on the establishment. The last thing the Republican Party needs is Christine O'Donnell redux, but this time at the national level frustrating this nation's attempt to stop the liberal assault our institutions and values.
Her outspoken dedication to fiscal restraint is commendable. Her stance against raising the debt ceiling, no matter how much was cut, was a principled stance. There is no need for the United States Government to borrow more money. It is time to cut, cut, cut the spending.
Yet the questions on most reporters' minds are about her social views. Her heated rhetoric on these issues may cost her the nomination. If she does win the Republican nomination, it will be a dream come true for Obama, who can simply paint her as a Tea Party Extremist so outside of the mainstream, that Obama will look like a stable centrist.
To put it bluntly, Michelle Bachmann would be to the 2012 Presidential Election what Christine O'Donnell was for the 2010 U.S. Senate Race in Delaware.
She has demonstrated a number of times her opposition to gay marriage, and she has characterized homosexuality as aberrant and sinful. She even set up a clinic to counsel individuals into leaving the homosexual lifestyle. Like Christine O'Donnell in her interview with Piers Morgan, candidate Bachmann has repeatedly ducked questions about her opinion of gays, their proper status in society, and to what extent she respects their rights as American citizens. Despite her calm demeanor in the face of these divisive questions, Ms. Bachmann simply has left no room for herself to wiggle out of her strong views on this matter.
A reliable Tea Party favorite, her outstanding views outdistance the mainstream and distract the core debate from fiscal issues, the one cause which will bring down the Democrats across the board in 2012. Ms. Bachmann would better serve this country if she stood her ground but gave up the Presidency.
As Speaker of the House Henry Clay once quipped, "I would rather be right than be President." If Bachmann wants to stay right with the right wing of her party, let her stay in the House and be the necessary check on the establishment. The last thing the Republican Party needs is Christine O'Donnell redux, but this time at the national level frustrating this nation's attempt to stop the liberal assault our institutions and values.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)