Previous 21 - 30 Next
In response to:

Who Wants War?

Kenneth L. Wrote: Sep 23, 2014 12:45 PM
Corbett, I still insist that you are a black/white thinker, and guilty of platitudinous thinking as well. As Joan Rivers said "They started it! THEY STARTED IT! You're insane!" Just because we are in Saudi Arabia drilling for oil, with the permission of the Saudi government/royal family, there is no justification for the 9/11 attack. And the 9/11 attack, just to remind you, is the worst ever in our history, worse than Pearl Harbor in terms of the number killed, and the fact that they were all innocent civilians. We need to eradicate this threat from the world, and the fact that we are ambivalent about it, and get so little support from other governments, is a travesty.
In response to:

Who Wants War?

Kenneth L. Wrote: Sep 23, 2014 12:37 PM
"Economist Donald Boudreaux writing in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, Aug. 12: A good way to test if someone is speaking in platitudes is to ask yourself if you can imagine a normal human adult believing the opposite." Who Wants War? Some have commented here that Republicans want war. This is nonsense, of course, and cynical paranoia to boot. No sane person wants war, as WJF says a few minutes ago. But those advocating for "World Peace," on bumper stickers and in popular song, do so with an insufferable tone of proprietary wisdom and virtue. Is it any wonder that those of normal intelligence are disgusted by these sophomoric platitudes? We are in wars because the enemy has a vote, period. And the unintelligent pursuit of this grave responsibility by politicians brings tears to my eyes. I'm so relieved that I am too old to fight, and my heart breaks every time I see the injuries sustained by our brave warriors while these same politicians sit on their very large backsides debating whether to properly fund the war effort they voted to authorize.
Dozens of books could be written on this subject. This is a great collection of illustrative examples of the inconsistency (muddle-headedness) and hypocrisy of the left.
In response to:

What Drives Anti-Fracking Zealots?

Kenneth L. Wrote: Sep 22, 2014 10:53 AM
What drives the ani-fracking zealots? The usual: ignorance.
In response to:

What Drives Anti-Fracking Zealots?

Kenneth L. Wrote: Sep 22, 2014 10:52 AM
"The all-inclusive title would have us believe that all environmentalists are dishonest, flawed persons." Chip, you miss the point. No, they are not all dishonest. And their flaw is one of a well-meaning useful idiot. It's not evil, just pathetic. Consider an analogous issue. Transporting oil by train is far more dangerous than transporting it by pipeline, but there is hysterical opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline by well-meaning environmentalists. By the way, Chip. Where do you stand on the Keystone pipeline?
Many of these comments make a lot of sense, but there are a couple of misconceptions that explain the seeming contradictions: 1) When conservatives support immigration reform, it's for high-tech, engineering, science and math, etc., not for "landscaping and gardening help for the rich." It has been shown that each immigrant in these jobs creates an additional 3 or more jobs needed in support roles, to maximize their productivity. John McCain, Marco Rubio, and their ilk are no conservatives. Politicians in general are ill-equipped to deal with this issue. 2) Milton Friedman was right. We can't have open borders and a welfare state that competes against entry-level jobs. 3) Black and "Native" Americans do indeed have a unique history. It's a history of oppression by an incompetent government employing mainly liberal/progressive/socialist Democrat policies.
In response to:

Why Do Liberals Love Obama Anyway?

Kenneth L. Wrote: Sep 22, 2014 10:24 AM
Duh! Lib/Prog/Socialist Democrats have painted themselves into a corner. If you oppose the anointed one on anything you're a racist.
In response to:

Your 'To Do' List to Save America

Kenneth L. Wrote: Sep 19, 2014 8:44 AM
You have reasoned your way to defeat. What you miss is that politics is a perverse process, and being right doesn't carry the day. You should listen to Ann and Thomas Sowell when they write on this subject. If we lose the Supreme Court we've lost the USA.
In response to:

Your 'To Do' List to Save America

Kenneth L. Wrote: Sep 19, 2014 8:33 AM
johnm h Wrote: "Of course we should challenge in primaries and of course we must vote against all Democrats in the general election." john, this is the right answer, of course. But Ann (and Thomas Sowell, if you're questioning her gravitas) is writing about political realities. We know these are realities because we read on this very site people who promise to simply stay home if their libertarian or TEA Party candidate loses the primary. They refuse to vote for RINOs. Another "right" answer is that everyone has to vote in these primaries. 12%, 20%... These turnouts aren't going to cut it. And wishful thinking isn't going to get Christine O'Donnell or Sharon Angle elected. Finally, Harry Reid is an almost perfectly evil, self-interested politician. We're not going to prevail against him unless we get him out. And Ann is absolutely right about the courts. Harry Reid is a temporary evil. A liberal Supreme Court could transform this country in a permanent way. Like it or not, it is imperative that we acknowledge the political reality and get the Senate majority to stop judicial activists from taking away our constitutional rights and imposing their politically correct orthodoxy (free speech, guns, etc.). It's life or death, john.
Heretic, I agree that Townhall readers a generally well-informed conservatives and thus do not suffer from ignorance or racist beliefs to the degree that liberal progressive socialist Democrats do. But there is a great deal of ignorance in the country. I think Kerwick's point is much like Thomas Sowell's point when he writes about unemployment rates and illegitimate birth rates prior to the 1960s. It's to surprise those ignorant of history to help them overcome the tendency to make racist assumptions based on what they observe in the present. The change in violent propensities can be emphatically shown to be related to perverse public policies pursued by government at all levels since the late 1960s. Recognition of this (and, in fact, ownership of this reality by Democrats) could go a long way toward helping us begin the long process of recovery from our worst social pathologies.
In response to:

When Corporations Flee

Kenneth L. Wrote: Sep 16, 2014 8:13 AM
"The sheer size of government is the major factor in all this corruption." Not only corruption, but reduced GDP. Imagine we're a small group on a desert island. If 10% of us are employed by government we make less food, housing, means of transportation, technology, etc. Our standard of living suffers. Imagine that we put 20% or 30% to work for government. Even disregarding the gross inefficiency of and harassment by government, it's obvious that we need fewer unproductive people and more productive people to improve our standard of living. Who furthers that goal? Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and their ilk, or Governor Moonbeam?
Previous 21 - 30 Next