Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Thursday, September 24, 2009
In its actions toward Honduras, the Obama administration is demonstrating contempt for the fundamentals of democracy.
Strong arm tactics. That is what is discussed in Tuesday's WSJ Opinion page, Baucus Bludgeons Humana. Apparently, Humana sent a one-page letter to their customers informing them of proposed changes to Medicare in the health reform legislation:
A new study from America's Health Insurance Plans, the industry trade group, finds that seniors on Advantage in California spent 30% fewer days in hospitals over fee-for-service patients, based on federal data. Democrats say that insurers are "overpaid," but the cuts—as Humana correctly noted—mean that seniors may lose this coverage.
Mr. Baucus doesn't want seniors to be educated about these facts, and obviously he's willing to use his enormous power to punish any private company that doesn't affirm his, well, creative version of reality. Nearly half of Humana's yearly revenue comes from Medicare Advantage, and the insurer says that it is complying in full with the CMS investigation. Yesterday, the agency also barred all Advantage insurers from providing similar information to their beneficiaries.
This episode neatly shows how all U.S. health care will operate if Mr. Baucus's bill becomes law.
Humana merely made the mistake of trying to tell seniors the truth about what will happen to their coverage, and now CEO Michael McCallister had better hire a good team of lawyers. Mr. Baucus and the Obama Administration are out to make him an object lesson to the rest of the business class, and that means they won't stop until Humana cries uncle or is ruined.
Author Mark Helprin reports that Obama blinked twice while the world watched. In his WSJ article, Obama and the Politics of Concession, he discusses the blinks: to Russia over missile defense, and to Iran over their nuclear program.
Not OK. When Neville Chamberlain returned from Munich at least he thought he had obtained something in return for his appeasement.
Stalin tested Truman with the Berlin Blockade, and Truman held fast. Khrushchev tested Kennedy, and in the Cuban Missile Crisis Kennedy refused to blink. In 1983, Andropov took the measure of Reagan, and, defying millions in the street (who are now the Obama base), Reagan did not blink. Last week, the Iranian president and the Russian prime minister put Mr. Obama to the test, and he blinked not once but twice. The price of such infirmity has always proven immensely high, even if, as is the custom these days, the bill has yet to come.
Baltimore's ACORN office finally stepped up and filed a law suit against those meddlesome kids. $2 million, which is a paltry sum compared to the massive (proposed) cuts in government grants to the criminal organization. These comments from James Taranto caught our eye, and suggest ACORN is saving money by going to the low-cost attorneys.
Here's another oddity: Acorn's co-plaintiffs are the employees it recently fired precisely because of the misconduct the defendants exposed. Doesn't this create a big fat conflict of interest for the plaintiffs' lawyers? Maybe Thompson and Williams can sue Acorn for rightful termination.
1) Clinton meeting with his cabinet members during the Lewinsky rumors to lie to them as he did the American people. Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, the cabinet members stood by Clinton. Not one resignation. Not an honorable one among them.
2) During the same time, August 1998, when Clinton fired on Sudan and Afghanistan in retaliation for the embassy bombings - three weeks prior. A liberal using deadly force in foreign affairs rather than domestic affairs is a red flag, and most believed this pathetic show of force was to distract from Lewinsky, his most recent scandal. Not one member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff or any other senior military official resigned in protest.
There are policy decisions one can support, one can disagree with, and one that requires a resignation. The resignation sends a very clear statement of protest while giving the resigning official the space necessary between his honor and the offending politician.
According to a McLatchy story last Friday, those who know General McChrystal well suggest he will resign if not given the necessary support in Afghanistan. Just guessing at this point, but it appears Obama replaced the commander just a few months ago with a principled general, someone he is now pulling the rug out from underneath. For foreign, and war, policy, this is called voting "Present".
Remember, the generals on the ground asked for 35,000 more troops for the original Afghanistan surge. Obama sent 17,000. And guess what? The surge did not achieve the intended results. Hmmm...
Obama is in a pinch here. The seasoned leaders in uniform all joined the military during the Cold War. They prepared for the worst for most of their careers, served with the best, and will be having some reservations with a national policy of apology, quagmire and defeat.
No resignations during Clinton. Let's not make that mistake again.
U/T: Threat Matrix
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Mark Steyn writes at NRO, The Long Retreat: Our security will now depend on the kindness of strangers. This paragraph on missile defense was our favorite:
Charles Krauthammer analyzes Obama's communication skills in his Townhall article, Does He Lie? It appears Charles has figured him out. Obama's changing arguments for healthcare reform:
So on to the next gambit: selling health care reform as a cure for the deficit. When that was exploded by the Congressional Budget Office's demonstration of staggering Obamacare deficits, Obama tried a new tack: selling his plan as revenue-neutral insurance reform -- until the revenue neutrality is exposed as phony future cuts and chimerical waste and fraud.
Obama doesn't lie. He implies, he misdirects, he misleads -- so fluidly and incessantly that he risks transmuting eloquence into mere slickness.
James Taranto does some analysis on the recent ACORN defunding vote in congress, specifically the votes from the Black Caucus members. In his Best of the Web series, Shrieker of the House:
The employee, Juan Carlos Vera, was eventually fired. But there was some hesitation among the ACORN management. From the Union-Tribune:
In an afternoon press conference, David Lagstein said he believed his employee, Juan Carlos Vera, did his best to deal with a challenging situation, and would not be disciplined.
But two hours later, Lagstein stated he had reevaluated the videos posted online in which Vera was secretly filmed answering questions about smuggling people across the Tijuana border. Lagstein said in his earlier evaluation, he had only found a short, 52-second video, and not a longer seven-minute video. After consulting with supervisors and state ACORN officials, he decided Vera had contradicted his earlier statements and his conduct was "unacceptable."
As for the punchline that ACORN has become:
Doug Ross has an ACORN employment application - here.
Jay Leno comments - here.
Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal ordered all state funding to ACORN stopped - here.
And The Jawa Report suspects shenanigans with a recently uncovered ACORN police report - here.
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Coke's CEO Muhtar Kent comments on the soda tax idea floating around DC:
If it worked, the Soviet Union would still be around.
A CEO who knows his history? Did he just call President Obama a commie??
Our advice: order your Leninade now, while it is still tax-free!
U/T: Reason.com - who used a picture of our hat in their post!
We asked the RealSoda CEO, Ushanka.us friend, Commie Obama Rally Cap owner, the idea man behind Leninade, and the Willy Wonka of the soda world to offer his $0.02 on this matter. His reply:
Well, actually this is another example of how the politicians who have no real scientific knowledge find another way to collect money from the general public under the supposed guise of protecting people from overconsumption of something. Now, again... if you don't have nationalized medicine then you should not be so worried about paying the costs of overconsumption. So the argument that makes most sense is to let people eat and drink what they want and pay their own medical bills and/or insurance.
Just as is the case with the schools, they banned sodas including stuff like Diet Coke and Diet Pepsi and then they introduced fruit juices which have the same sugar per ounce (albeit "natural", whatever that means) as what's in sodas. That is to say, the caloric content is essentially the same but one is banned and the other is forced down peoples' throats. Of course the liquor stores in the perimeter of the schools are selling sodas like there's no tomorrow...
Should the tax on sodas be limited to those with HFCS? Or cane sugar? How about evaporated cane juice? How about honey (more fattening than sugar)? How about concentrated fruit juice additives which are like simple syrup when added? The government doesn't care if you get fat or not; they just want your money. Their death panels will take care of anyone who overindulges once their health scare plan takes effect :(
Link to RealSoda. Link to our Leninade commercial.
Jon Stewart scoops CNN, MSNBC and NYT with... The Audacity of Hos
|The Daily Show With Jon Stewart||Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c|
|The Audacity of Hos|
Monday, September 14, 2009
It is to his credit that we can get the same advice regardless of which ACORN office we walk into.
As Mikhail says, "Obama is ACORN".
Today, a third video emerges. This time, an ACORN office in New York City:
Link to FoxNews Story. No stories at CNN or MSNBC, again. Why are some news outlets ignoring a criminal organization that will soon get over $4 billion in taxpayer money? Didn't the media used to do stings like this?
A big Ushanka Tip to James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles.
UPDATE - 10 minutes later...
We continued searching for more MSM outlets that are covering this story. A Google News search shows that FoxNews is the primary for the top three ACORN-related news stories.
We did notice the San Francisco Chronicle link in the top news story. Here is a link to their article, and an excerpt from the objective news organization:
The link that SD Chronicle offers to the CNN article does not mention any case where the police were called.
Well. Now the major paper in San Francisco (offering online only now) can say they covered the story.
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Saturday, September 12, 2009
Our favorite signs:
"Joe Wilson for Truth Czar"
"Stalin Called. He Wants His Policies Back."
Ushanka.us' Dmitry is there and will be sending video into the Ushanka.us bunker for editing and distribution. Be sure to check back later....
U/T: Drudge, Breitbart
UPDATE - 10 minutes later...
Another early video - nice editing!
We're only half way through Robert Conquest's The Great Terror, a book about Stalin's purges.
Stalin's purges led to about a million killed, and many more suffering in work and re-education camps. But like all
One example is the analysis of others that Conquest discusses. Most work camps, while 'free' in concept to Stalin, actually cost more than they produced when one considers the capture and transportation of the prisoners, housing, supples, etc. And, at a loss to Stalin's (and every commie's) most prized asset, the army. It is estimated that 250,000 soldiers were pulled from outward-facing duties to support the transportation, prison and execution operations.
Here's another example of how these people can't be trusted to bring a project in on time, or under budget. From pate 287:
That is a 68.3% cost over-run.
We expect similar overages with Obama's heath care 'reform'. We further expect a book to report the results of his 'reform', in the same vein as Conquest's, in some future date.
Friday, September 11, 2009
Step 1: Go viral.
Step 2: Go on Glenn Beck's show.
Step 3: Release another whopper the next day.
Here is the same couple in the Washington DC office. Same scam with the same results.
We decided to go to ACORN's website to see exactly what they had to offer. Here is a screenshot:
BALTIMORE – The group ACORN has fired two employees who were seen on hidden-camera video giving tax advice to a man posing as a pimp and a woman who pretended to be a prostitute.
Fox News Channel broadcast excerpts from the video Thursday. On the video, a man and woman visiting ACORN's Baltimore office asked about buying a house and how to account on tax forms for the woman's income. An ACORN employee advised the woman to list her occupation as "performance artist."
The pair also claimed they planned to employ teenage girls from central America as prostitutes, and an ACORN employee suggested that up to three of the girls could be claimed as dependents, according to transcripts of the video posted online by conservative activist James O'Keefe.
O'Keefe told Fox he posed as the pimp and that he was shocked by the ACORN employees' helpfulness.
In a statement, ACORN Maryland board member Margaret Williams said the video was an attempt to smear ACORN.
ACORN — which stands for the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now — advocates for poor people. It conducted a massive voter registration effort last year and became a target of investigations when some employees were caught submitting false registration forms with names such as "Mickey Mouse."
Put simply, it was the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan that laid much of the imaginative groundwork for 9/11. So imagine the sorts of notions that would take root in the minds of jihadists—and the possibilities that would open up to them—if the U.S. was to withdraw from Afghanistan in its own turn.
Withdrawal from Afghanistan, and a Taliban takeover in Kandahar and perhaps Kabul, would plunge Afghanistan into another civil war infinitely bloodier than what we have now. Withdrawal would force Islamabad to abandon its war on terror and again come to terms with its own militants, as it did in the 1990s. Only this time, it wouldn't be clear who is patron and who is client. Withdrawal would give Pakistan's jihadists the freedom to shift fronts to India, with all the nightmare scenarios that entails. Withdrawal would invite the al Qaeda remnant in Iraq—already on an upswing—to redouble its efforts, and do so with the confidence that the U.S. has permanently soured on Middle Eastern interventions.
This is not the noblest fight, and no sane nation would wage it by choice. But we did not choose it and, if we keep our nerve, we can win it. Otherwise, the consequence will be ashes flying again in our own streets, something to remember on the eve of another 9/11 anniversary.
Forced unionization for all health care workers? That is what Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Committee warns in his WSJ article, Read the Union Health-Care Label.
Following this playbook, the Senate bill creates a "personal care attendants workforce advisory panel" that will likely impose union affiliation to qualify for a newly created "community living assistance services and support (class)" reimbursement plan.
The House bill has a $10 billion provision to bail out insolvent union health-care plans. It also creates a lucrative professional-development grant program for health-care workers that effectively blackballs nonunion medical facilities from participation.
There's more. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus has suggested that the federal government could pay for health-care reform by taxing American workers' existing health-care benefits—but he would exempt union-negotiated health-care plans.
Americans are unlikely to support granting unions more power than they already have in the health-care field. History shows union bosses could abuse their power to shut down medical facilities with sick-outs and strikes; force doctors, nurses and in-home care providers to abandon their patients; dictate terms and conditions of employment; and impose a failed, Detroit-style management model on the entire health-care field.
In his Wednesday Best of the Web post, James Taranto offers some British health-care stories from the Daily Mail and Sunday Times. Just 'scare tactics' by right-wingers?
Parents are being threatened with having their children taken into care [state custody] after questioning doctors' diagnoses or objecting to their medical care.
The mother of a 13-year-old girl who became partly paralysed after being given a cervical cancer vaccination says social workers have told her the child may be removed if she (the mother) continues to link her condition with the vaccination.
A couple had all six of their children removed from their care after they disputed the necessity of an invasive medical test on their eldest daughter. Doctors, who suspected she might have had a blood disease, called for social services to obtain an emergency protection order, although it was subsequently confirmed that she was not suffering from the condition. The parents were still considered unstable, and all their children were taken from them.
A single mother whose teenage son is terminally ill and confined to a wheelchair has been told he is to become the subject of a care order after she complained that her local authority's failure to provide bathroom facilities for him has left her struggling to maintain sanitary standards.
Not fair. The Brits got their Hope and Change before us.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Frank Thomas, at the WSJ no less, is the latest to fail in his effort to paint Obama as the anti-socialist. His article: The Red Scare Returns.
He follows the same tired old script (yawn):
1) Do not acknowledge recent socialist actions by our Dear Leader,
2) Offer something as a definition of socialism, ie. a line that has not been crossed so therefore he's not a socialist, and
3) Mock and mis-represent those of us - and our numbers are growing - that label our Dear Leader a socialist with the intent to silence our voices or distract from our compelling arguments.
We'll use the three items above as the outline of our retort:
1) Ignoring Recent Events:
There is no mention of GM, Chrysler, forced TARP money to banks, or any other recent event in his article. What journalism school teaches its students to make a case against something by ignoring the thing you're making a case against? (rhetorical)
We'll quote from the far more moderate analyst, Rush Limbaugh, on these events - his Morning Update for tomorrow:
Let the record show, we were calling Obama, and the Dems, socialists when it wasn't popular. We also use the words Marxist, Statist, and Communist. These labels may lower the political discourse, but it is becoming apparent that the days are numbered for our right to do so if Obama's agenda is not stopped.
2) Socialism Il-Defined
Thomas Franks says the Red Scare is only legitimate if the following occurs:
Nope. It isn't Huey Long that is doing the haunting. Many of those wealthy, and not so wealthy, have lost 40-50% of their wealth in the past year. Some of them lost it when the government told them to take 10 cents on the dollar as Chrysler bond holders.
It appears Franks has caught that nasty swine envy bug going around - in comments about Atlas Shrugged (in our library at the left):
Shall we assume Thomas trusts his money with someone other than a banker?
3) Demonize Us
So it doesn't really matter that there isn't much of a proper, visible, '30s-style left in America. One Van Jones is all it takes to negate the Obama administration's cautious centrism. The radicalism is just under the surface, if you're willing to believe.
And it's this willingness to believe, with its escalating cries of "socialism" and "indoctrination" that intrigues me most. Can people really be moved to worry about communism with the Soviet Union gone? Can you really hope to gin up a red scare without almost no reds?
...where else is a suspicious mind to go when there are no other explanations being offered?
And so we all dare to call it treason. Calling it treason is a movie in which we can all have a role.
So we're all 'birthers'. And traitors. (yawn)
As for his comment: "Obama administration's cautious centrism", we blame the public schools.
Our suggestions for Mr. Frank:
1) Get ten minutes with colleague Bret Stephens and discuss that thought that communism isn't a threat because there isn't a Soviet Union,
2) Assuming you are in the NY office, look out the window tomorrow at that pit across the street and ask yourself if anyone discounted the radical muslim threat before 9/11 in the same manner you discounted the socialism threat with your intellectually lazy Huey Long line,
3) Consider a different old-media outlet that is more in tune with your enlightened ways of thinking. The New York Times will be the same commute, and
4) Buy one of our Commie Obama Rally Caps. Winter is coming!
Our reason to celebrate? The double-post today (below) from both Karl and our new Guest Blogger, Mikhail. Two bourgeois capitalists with keen eyes for newsworthy events tirelessly working together to mock and defeat
ACORN will receive $4 billion from the Stimulus package.
When we think of Obama, we think of ACORN.
From this point forward, when we think of ACORN, we'll think of this 18-minute, 2-part video:
Pimps, whores, tax cheats, hypocrites, criminals,
YouTube might be the end of mainstream liberalism. Hidden cameras, YouTube, and some imagination is all that is needed to put an end to this pseudo communist movement. For those who have to lie and deceive to keep their movement alive, it is just a matter of time.
U/T: YouTube's veritasvisuals
2:20PM: WHOOPS!!Mikhail beat us to this post! (See below) We'll leave both posts, as the commentary is complementary. I like the way you think, Mikhail!
SC Congressman Joe Wilson stands up and yells "You Lie" to our Dear Leader during his Healthcare grovel to congress last night.
Sweetness & Light calls it "The Shout Heard Around the World".
We recognize this face. It is the face of every tea-partier and townhall'r that we've encountered in the past 6 months.
Apparently, one member of congress still represents his constituents.
From the blog, Truth and Common Sense:
The 1:24 minute video ("You Lie" is at 1:18):
More from Truth and Common Sense:
That my friends is brilliant and nothing to be sorry for.
Watch for a cigar post later today. This is too good to not celebrate.
U/T: Truth and Common Sense, SondraK, Sweetness & Light
Tuesday, September 08, 2009
(BTW - for those under 18, avert your eyes at 2:28 when the gun shows up...)
News from Friday:
So far that is roughly 9,076,205 gun bought this year!
Conservative estimates of legally owned guns in the USA put the number at 355,029,250 guns in the USA. That is 1.17 guns for everyone in the USA...
That's not counting the one in the video above. And why do we need a Civilian National Defense Force again?
So why all the gun buying?
Sunday, September 06, 2009
Saturday, September 05, 2009
In contrast, persons who are realistic about the human nature and concentrated power will understand what a serious indictment this video presents.
The Communists running the show today make the Liberal Democrat party of the past seem like Conservative Republicans. This is a shocking video. If it were not for their arrogance they would be ashamed of themselves.
John Cavanagh, clearly desperate for more funds for his non-profit Institute for Policy Studies, has decided to take one for the team. In a web interview with state-run Yahoo! TechTicker he offers the following:
Carbon credits are kinda like stocks. They can be traded. And the White House will be the Washington DC Carbon Exchange, or WDCCE. Ignore the whole GM, Chrysler, Bank TARP, etc. Until our Dear Leader puts a cap on emissions, he's not a socialist.
Marx said "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." That doesn't mean he's a communist!
Obama has a dilemma here, and we blame the public schools and their failure to three generations of Americans.
On one hand, he is forced to send shills of John Cavanagh's miniscule caliber out there to stand in rising waters and stick his finger in the 'He's not a Socialist' dike.
On the other hand, it is people like John Cavanagh that are the product of the public school systems and are energized to vote by 1-2 syllable words like "hope", "change" and "free stuff".
Will Cavanagh's loyalty be rewarded with a stimulus grant for the Institute for Policy Studies, or a Czar post?
Link to interview, with video.
Friday, September 04, 2009
It is easy to see what Communists want.
But an ideology that puts 100 million into early graves and causes the suffering of many more, in such a short span of time, deserves a closer look. And the timing is relevant. Americans are facing the same ideology in a new form: same suffering, less killing.
Readers of Ushanka.us know we are studying the history of Communism and sharing what we learn here in our blog and our videos. We list some of the books and movies that we've read/seen on the subject to the left to help others with their search for an explanation of why this particular history seems to repeat itself.
So when something comes along that provides a clear review of the history, the ideology, the tactics and the relevance for today, we clear the desk and give it our undivided attention.
Such a piece was published this week by our fellow blogger, Oleg Atbashian. Oleg blogs at the graphically-rich The People's Cube, and sometimes writes at Pajama's Media. His article, Obama Regresses to Cold War Methodology - and Switches Sides. Links to the article: PJM, and People's Cube) (We copied the article to a word processing program from the People's Cube site, then formatted into 22 pages of double-spaced reading.)
Oleg's article gives us the rare exposure to the two main study areas of Communism: the history, and the mindset that allows it to fester. We normally see one or the other in our other resources.
The 'Lens' through which Oleg offers his analysis:
The problem with that is, the ideas of Cold War-related injustice and guilt are the products of false conscience planted by elaborate propaganda. The picture that Obama is trying to reverse is an airbrushed, made-in-the-USSR fabrication. Flipping the wrong picture upside down doesn't make it right - it still is the wrong picture, only upside down.
Generated in the depths of KGB think tanks, the Cold War-era propaganda template is comprised of the following linked axioms:
1. Socialism is "progress."
2. Aversion to "progress" is a sign of outmoded backward thinking.
3. All forward-thinking people are leftists.
4. Leftists always speak for all people.
5. People always unanimously support leftist leaders.
6. Leftists are always under assault from the well-organized capitalist enemy.
7. All workers and peasants hate capitalist exploiters.
8. Armed resistance to a leftist government can only conceivably be staged by CIA agents in the service of American imperialism.
9. Capitalists engage in relentless anti-socialist propaganda, subversion, and sabotage; they will commit any crime in order to kill hope and prevent the masses from liberation.
10. The dying non-socialist sector of the world is run by a criminal conspiracy of capitalist oligarchs operating from the United States (and sometimes from Israel when appropriate).
The unsustainable generosity in sponsoring global anti-Americanism was one of the Soviet regime's many obsessive behaviors that hastened its own demise. If anti-American lies were anthrax, one might say the USSR had left behind enough stockpiles to exterminate all life on earth many times over.
And since such views are part of the ideological template that vilifies America and lionizes its enemies, Obama's instinctive reaction was to back Zelaya and throw a lifeline to Ahmadinejad.
Like John Kerry at the Senate hearings, President Obama may be acting in good faith, but his processing of reality is just as impaired by the same "metaphorical deformation." As a result, the leader of the free world strays across the frontlines and joins the Marxist leaders Hugo Chavez, Raul Castro, Evo Morales, and Daniel Ortega, at least two of whom - Castro and Ortega - were committed Soviet clients.
The Soviet Union may have self-destructed in 1991, but the seeds of intellectual deception it had planted gave such a bountiful crop that seventeen years later America has elected a leader who is guided by received notions designed to subdue and destroy this country. Apparently, the rumors about America's victory in the Cold War appear to have been greatly exaggerated.
While free democracies invest mostly in the creation of goods and services, tyrants invest their nation's capital in the creation and dissemination of propaganda. It pays off handsomely in the form of moral support from the brainwashed "global community" when a tyrannical regime takes over another country allegedly "to advance progress in the interests of all people."
...it's impossible to disprove the leftist "history of American imperialism" without knowing that just about every Cold War conflict began as a premeditated KGB operation.
The important fact about modern-day anti-Americanism is that it spreads almost exclusively among impressionable cultural elites who are most exposed to ideological clichés delivered through media and educational channels.
...since anti-Americanism is incompatible with common sense that guides our daily lives, people must be reminded of it every day to keep it alive. That is the burden that radical intellectuals have taken upon themselves, dispensing daily quotas of leftist clichés to the "unwashed masses" down below.
One can only imagine the cognitive dissonance in the heads of believers in leftist myths who have campaigned their way into the U.S. government and are now discovering the real world at CIA briefings.
Links to the article: PJM, and People's Cube
Unable to identify who or what has put them in hock to the horizon, national electorates are attempting accountability by voting whole parties out of power. Rasmussen recently found that 57% of voters would throw out Congress en masse if they could. Gerrymandered districts ensure that they can't.
Ya, but.... Remember the PUMA (Party Unity My A**) movement in last year's campaign where the Hillary supporters vowed to revolt? While we're on board with Dan's point, we know we'll vote for the candidates that 'suck less' next year. That means our disgust with the Republican party will not translate into votes against their candidates. You?
Mary Anastasia O'Grady reports there are behind-the-scenes attempts by the State Department to strong-arm Hondurans to restore Zelaya to power. Combined with what we already know - Visa and Aid restrictions - we're just shy of calling Obama a full fledged commie.
By insisting that Mr. Zelaya be returned to power, the U.S. is trying to force Honduras to violate its own constitution.
When I asked the State Department whether it was employing such dirty tricks a spokeswoman would only say the U.S. has been "encouraging all members of civil society to support the San Jose 'accord'"—which calls for Mr. Zelaya to be restored to power. Perhaps something was lost in the translation but threats to use U.S. power against a small, poor nation hardly qualify as encouragement.
Your government at work.
Keeping with tradition, we're posting Laura Hollis' latest Townhall article, Don't Call Them Progressives. We won't be so presumptuous to say she 'speaks truth to power', but with all of her articles we've linked to we can say with all confidence that Laura Hollis speaks to us!
[Regarding using Sen. Kennedy's death to achieve socialist health care] ...given the 100 million other people who died in the fruitless pursuit of contemporary collectivist dystopias, what’s one more? I’d call this Stalinesque, but even Stalin was more tempered. He reportedly said, “One death is a tragedy; a million deaths is a statistic.” Apparently, today’s regressive does not even view the single death as a tragedy, at least if it is a stepping stone to the greater good.
What is “progressive” about America is its grounding in individual liberty and human freedom.
So let’s recap: incensed mobs demanding collective adherence to failed ideologies; the abolition of personal freedom; millions of impoverished individuals dependent upon a handful of self-appointed elites; the confiscation of more and more individual wealth to satisfy the appetite of an insatiable and bankrupt government; the elevation of deeply flawed human leaders to the status of gods, and the willingness to sacrifice other human beings to appease them. You can call these behaviors many things, but “progressive” they are not; one need know only a little history to see the frequency with which they occur.
Tuesday, September 01, 2009
One of our signs:
This was a weak showing from both sides - at least for those who chose to stand outside.
We watched 6 union guys (from Dayton) hand out professionally-printed signs and offer to let people use their cell phones to call their representatives in congress. We watched 11 pink-shirted protesters try to put on a good show - bless their hearts. And, we watched one lone lady with a "No New Taxes" sign and a Cincinnati Tea Party shirt walk amongst the crowd. Her name is Terry, and she deserves all the credit for being in the middle of it all.
Our camera work leaves much to be desired, hence the few clips. We hope you get an idea of what is going on, and we encourage others to attend future meetings.
Thanks for watching.
Here are the signs we took: