Previous 31 - 40 Next
Yesterday Fox News ran a piece on the Keystone XL vote with the subtitle "Fail Mary." Wish I'd thought of that.
In response to:

Gruber Was Right

Matt in N.C. Wrote: Nov 20, 2014 5:51 AM
Yes and no. American voters are generally uninformed and apathetic, and roughly half of them are either stupid or foolish. A sleazy nobody with a top-secret paper trail couldn't have won the presidency twice in other circumstances. But they've also been systematically lied to and kept in the dark by oily politicians, vile technocrats, and the press. Gruber proved himself partly wrong each time he correctly asserted the importance of dishonesty. Millions of intelligent Americans knew that Obamacare was disastrous, and millions more would've agreed if they'd been told convincingly. Lying to prevent large-scale rebellion is a plain admission that the public can grasp the truth and use it. Further, Gruber's disparagement of American voters was beside his point. They weren't voting on Obamacare. Congress was. Some of our lavishly paid representatives opposed Obamacare as needless and ruinous, but the Democrats running both houses squelched them. Some thought Obamacare was probably a bad idea, but supported it anyway. The rest either believed the regime's lies or helped create and propagate them. But not even the most ardent supporters of the bill knew what it said before they passed it, and they're still wrangling over the import of what staffers and lobbyists sneaked in. Now THERE are your stupid voters.
In response to:

Gruber Was Right

Matt in N.C. Wrote: Nov 20, 2014 5:14 AM
That's the most concise and accurate post I've read in a long time. My compliments.
Jon Stewart, a bitter, strident, but occasionally funny leftist scumbag, has called out Nancy Pelosi, a bitter, strident, but never intentionally funny leftist scumbag, for unpardonable behavior that would instantly destroy a Republican of her status. Stranger things have happened. They're both still scumbags.
The bad news is that if one side plays by the rules and the other doesn't, the other will win in the end. The good news is that people who set fires to contain conflagrations are not arsonists and aren't the moral equivalent of arsonists.
I hate to say it, but the Washington Compost has the rough beginnings of a point. The Republican Party, flawed as it is, is the party of principle, adult behavior, and lip-service, at least, to the Constitution. The Democrat Party is the party of division, license, childishness, cynicism, arrogance, usurpation, and abuse of power. Ruling by decree is in character for Democrats, but not for Republicans. If Republicans copied the Democrat methods that they've condemned, they wouldn't be irrational, but they would be hypocritical. The trouble is, such considerations are no longer important. When Democrats take power, they go crazy and quickly screw things up however they can, trampling Constitution, law, precedent, tradition, and simple decency along the way. When Republicans regain control, they try to clean up the mess in a deliberate, conciliatory, procedurally correct manner and usually fail to finish the job before voters get bored and start the cycle again. Democrats endure defeat after defeat knowing that when they return to power again, most of their legacy will be intact. Thus the state of the Union ratchets down. Of what use is standing on principle while the country falls? The next Republican administration should undo every bit of Obama-era foolishness as soon as possible by every means available. Further, it should repair as much pre-Obama damage as it can. Canceling Kennedy's EO allowing federal employees to bargain collectively would be an excellent place to start.
Exactly. Make the fools filibuster until they're too tired and hoarse to proposition interns. Wear out the fool-in-chief with veto after veto after veto. They wanted this fight. Force them to stand up and take their punishment for the full 15 rounds. Eventually people will get the message despite an embargo by the kept media.
It's not even as if the Democrat holdouts put ideology above mere political expediency. They know that the Republican majority in the next session will approve KX. They're just playing to their loony-left base.
You took the words out of my keyboard. Americans elected Obama twice, so it's hard to mount a convincing argument that they're brilliant. We may not have to wait for the forces of nature to thin the population. The forces of government are eager to step in, as usual. Recall, if you will, China, North Korea, the Soviet Union, and Cambodia. Bureaucrats and death panels won't always distinguish dissenters and the traditional Democrat base. Indeed, the party is apparently trying to build a new base. Ethnic cleansing has given most major cities to blacks, and they've become the preeminent minority for now; but their prospects aren't rosy. While they limit their own numbers, with official help, through crime and abortion, the government is frantically promoting Hispanics to the top spot. The elderly are in no better shape. The short-term plan is to tax the young and healthy to keep them alive and voting for politicians who promise that their checks are in the mail. (This requires striking an unstable balance between workers, needed to maintain the system, and government dependents, needed to maintain Democrat power.) The long-term plan is to ration the elderly—or at least aging Boomers—out of existence before their healthcare costs and Social Security payouts bankrupt the government and produce total collapse. Although it's highly unlikely that any administration has ever formally adopted or even considered these strategies, events suggest that parts of the federal government are following them unwittingly. And you can bet that technocrats within and without government have thought about demographic reconstruction, discussed it, and made policy recommendations conducive to it. It wouldn't be astonishing if Prof. Gruber were among them. Maybe the fool has obligingly blabbered about it on video.
You could've shortened your title to the first three words. It's hard to imagine that any president would be foolish enough to overstay the end of his final term, but Obama's erratic and domineering behavior leave room for uncertainty.
Perhaps 20 million illegal immigrants are in this country. Letting them stay will encourage more illegal immigration and eventually destroy the country. Democrats are counting on the former outcome—the federal government is soliciting bids to print 34 million new green cards—and they obviously don't give a damn about the latter provided that they remain in power over the wreckage. But we're too fastidious to drive illegals out by force; and if we did, we'd create a huge, expensive refugee crisis that we, the world's leading humanitarians, would eventually pay to clean up with money borrowed from China. So illegal immigrants and their descendants are going to be with us awhile, vacuuming up entry-level jobs, bankrupting hospitals, and casting illegitimate ballots. There is a long, steep path out of this insanity, however. It begins with not inviting more illegal immigrants. Every amnesty, waiver, taxpayer-funded benefit, and official refusal to enforce what laws we have sends a message around the world that more illegals are welcome. The second step is preventing further uninvited illegal immigration. Fortify the borders, plural, and put well-armed, well-equipped, attentive, serious-minded personnel there and at other points of entry. If these two timid measures had been in place in 2008, the recession alone would've reduced the illegal-immigrant burden substantially. Illegals were actually leaving until the economy perked up and the Obama regime intensified its efforts to keep them here. The next step is to use the power of examples. Round up a few prominent illegals, e.g., Jose Antonio Vargas, and deport them. Shut down businesses that hire illegals. Prosecute bureaucrats who wink at electoral and welfare fraud. When a city declares itself a sanctuary, declare that city in rebellion and suspend its government. These simple, prudent acts will require only that we replace the president, most of Congress, nearly all the federal judiciary, and a great many state and local officials. In other words, we're screwed.
Previous 31 - 40 Next