Views on the News

Views on the News*

October 25, 2014


Liberalism is steeped in feelings and emotion, guided by what others think and feel at the expense of dealing with reality, and perception reigns supreme.  Liberalism thrives in times in which there are no crises, when liberalism raises lightweight issues and gives them gravitas.  School lunch programs, child obesity, the size of soda drinks, gay rights, free contraception, are their rallying “causes celeb.”  However, when crisis presents itself, we reap the bad consequences of liberalism in governmental leadership.  More frequent now are the vapid responses to crisis led by the conveniently appointed, those “politically correctly” installed into position of power.   The responses tend to be inept and politically expedient.  Imagery, polls and elections are the focus rather than the required action and solution.  Is seems to be contrary to their DNA to depart from the warm and fuzzy to the tactful, strategic and necessary.  Keynesian economics is owned by the liberals partly because the solution to economic woes is easy, print money.  No budgetary trimming or tough decisions here.  The Centers for Disease Control, when confronted with the need for actual disease control isn’t quite up to the challenge.  We get blank stares and far away eyes delivering talking points shrouded in illogical conclusions.  Vacant stares from over appointed bureaucrats complete with Stepford wife type news conference deliveries of talking points is what we get.  Voltaire said we live beneath “the government we deserve.”  Unfortunately, it takes a crisis to point out the frailties of liberalism.  When confronted with tough decisions and necessary action, there is no room for consideration of political correctness and imagery.  Crystallization of the problem and focus on the solutions, as distasteful or agenda-contrary they may be, must be implemented.  Good judgment, logical decision-making, and intelligence must eventually supplant the emotionally guided and politically correct machinations of liberalism

(“Liberalism just not up to the task anymore” by James Longstreet dated October 17, 2014 published by American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/10/liberalism_just_not_up_to_the_task_anymore.html )

Much has been written about the right-ward shift of the Republican Party, but far less about a mounting left-wing movement among Democrats.  President Barack Obama has accelerated this leftward trend in two ways.  First, his administration, particularly in contrast to that of former President Bill Clinton, has laid the rhetorical basis for a move to the left by shifting the party agenda on social, environmental and economic policies.  Clinton may have declared that “the era of big government is over,” but under Obama an ever-expanding federal government has become the essential raison d’être for the party.  Obama’s success has hinged in part on the far-left portions of the party controlling their more-fevered passions, particularly about ever-increasing income inequality and bans on fossil fuel use.  This leftward shift has been intensified by the growing geographic bifurcation of our political culture.  Just as the Republican’s rightward shift reflected the domination of the traditionalist South and, to some extent, the socially conservative Great Plains, the Democratic march to the left similarly mirrors the party’s growing reliance on its urban Northeast and West Coast base.  Up until the early 2000s the Democrats were highly competitive, at least in local elections, in the Great Plains, Appalachia, the Intermountain West and even parts of the Southeast.  The overall Obamaism has redefined the Democrats from a broad national party to one that is essentially bicoastal, and urban.  Nowhere is this shift more evident than in energy policy. Tough controls on carbon emissions appeal to the well-educated urban liberals, mainstream media, entertainment and downtown real estate developers who are their primary funding sources.  In the new Democrat calculus, greens, wealthy venture capitalists, Hollywood producers, feminists and ethnic warlords matter much more than coal miners, factory or construction workers.  In the past, Democrats needed to address the sensitivities of religious Catholics, Evangelicals and others.  This is not the case in places where nature-worshipping Druidism is more important than traditional religion.  But you have to give the new Left Democrats credit for not playing the double game of faux class warfare, like the Obama administration, which has played the populist card while, in reality, serving as patsies for crony capitalists. In the place of Obama’s empty rhetoric, they are building a new openly redistributionist agenda that does not seek to pay off one group of capitalists for the benefit of another.  This new, more ideologically rigid, Democrat Party is already a reality in places like New York City, where Mayor Bill de Blasio has worked to force market-rate developers to provide more subsidized apartments to lower-income residents even in luxury buildings, increased taxes on the affluent, and proposed ever more Draconian environmental policies.  The most politically effective theme of the new left Democrats has been the push for higher minimum wages.  Although like a populist move, many analysts see this rapid escalation at the lowest end of the employment sector, covering a majority of private sector workers, could reduce entry level employment and accelerate the already rapid decline in the full time workforce.  To some new left Democrats, mandating higher wages for the poor helps expand a permanent base of voters dependent on government to set their wages, as well as cover their health care and housing expenses.  The new left Democrats may also find that their embrace of Draconian environmental laws, including forced use of high-priced, subsidized “green” energy, could hurt manufacturers, homebuilders, and logistics firms which often employ many usually reliably Democratic voters, notably Hispanics.  Ultimately, like the Republicans after 2008, the Democrats could end up boxed into an ideological corner, forcing their presidential candidates, including Hillary Clinton, to adopt positions further left than they themselves might prefer.  Having convinced themselves that they will be bailed out by lunatic “wingnuts” on the Republican right, the Democrats may find that themselves dealing with their own group of zealots, who could similarly marginalize their party in the post-Obama political world.

(“Thunder on the Left” by Joel Kotkin dated October 17, 2014 published by Orange County Register at http://www.ocregister.com/articles/party-638889-left-democrats.html )


The over-riding theme of life in America since Barack Obama became President has been the continued loss of confidence Americans have regarding the federal government.  From the Centers for Disease Control, the Veterans Administration, the Secret Service, to the Department of Justice and the Internal Revenue Service, these and other agencies have been tainted in ways that have turned his two terms into a litany of scandals and failures.  Obama is a President for whom politics is the sole reason against which every decision is made.  Most Americans, not the “low information” ignorant ones, are experiencing a generalized depression about the nation these days.  It’s a sense of weariness because our paychecks don’t stretch enough in the supermarket where the cost of food is soaring.  We wonder about the quality of education our children or grandchildren are receiving.  It’s poor when compared to other nations and it undermines a belief in America’s exceptionalism.  Six years into the Great Recession the White House thought that, if the government spent $834 billion on top of the national debt, it would “stimulate” the economy but government spending did not relieve Americans during the Great Depression, generate new jobs or achieve anything else that this tried-and-failed liberal theory was said to do.  Only the naïve or ignorant believe that the government knows how to spend our money better than we do, but liberals, Democrats, do.  Their answer to every problem government encounters is more money, but not to repair and expand the infrastructure, roads and bridges, on which the nation depends and not for a military that is currently at low pre-World War Two levels of personnel and old equipment of every description.  Our Secretary of State, John Kerry, is echoing the President, telling people that mankind is doomed because “climate change” is coming unless billions or trillions are spent in ways that will avoid it.  No one can avoid climate change because that’s what climate does; it changes with well-known and predictable cycles tied to the Sun’s cycles.  Our military’s mission is now being redirected to addressing “climate change” at a time when, having been withdrawn from Iraq, a new, larger and far more dangerous entity, the Islamic State, has emerged, stretching into Syria as well.  The President has sent more than 4,000 of our military to Africa’s Ebola hot zone as a humanitarian gesture, but he has never seen any necessity to dispatch our military to our southern border to stem illegal entry.  Indeed, his administration has taken Arizona to court when it passed legislation to address the problem.  Indeed, his signature legislation, ObamaCare, is destroying our healthcare system and is a testament to the lies he repeatedly told before the Democrats in Congress passed it in 2009.  No Republican voted for it. After the midterm elections, hundreds of thousands will learn that their employers will no longer provide them with healthcare insurance.  Americans are left to wonder how the nation can survive a President who has steadily engaged in programs that have harmed America’s economy.  He is the first to have had our national credit rating reduced.  In the process he has ignored the limits imposed on his office by the Constitution. The courts have repeatedly rebuked this.  On November 4th voters will have an opportunity to go to the polls and vote out as many of his supporters, incumbent Democrats and candidates for Congress, as possible to restore our confidence in our government with new leadership.

(“Killing Confidence in Our Government” by Alan Caruba dated October 19, 2014 published by Canada Free Press at http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/66860 )

Obama still maintains over 80% approval in the black community.  I cannot give black folks a pass who are willing to follow Obama to hell because of racial loyalty and America's past sins, because it is just plain wrong.  The image that comes to mind is Obama dressed as a pied piper playing a seductive tune, leading black Americans to their deaths.  There comes a time when the America-did-us-wrong excuse simply is not good enough.  We are all Americans.  It is morally right and our patriotic duty to lay aside resentments and racial, sexual, and gender loyalties and do whatever is best for our country.  C'mon, black America, we are better than that.  I keep coming back to white America's pattern of expecting less of black Americans because of slavery.  There are many rock-solid right-thinking, responsible blacks out there fully capable, willing, and able to stand on their own two feet without government handouts or special concessions due to their race.  Such blacks are purposely kept in the shadows by Democrats and the mainstream media.  There are those who believe that America's debt for slavery will never be paid, because it's the gift that keeps on giving to liberals and race exploiters.  The Democrat Party and the mainstream media are notorious for masterfully encouraging Americans to segregate themselves into victimized voting blocs: blacks, Hispanics, women, the class-envious, homosexuals, and so on.  This enables them to deceive each group to use their votes for Democrats as currency.  It's protection money against their supposed Republican, rich, white, racist, sexist, and homophobic oppressors.  Ronald Reagan said that the Soviet Union would eventually implode because of the weight of its own immorality.  We are witnessing the implosion of the Obama presidency for the very same reason: his immorality.  This man uses every governmental agency to bully Americans into submission  and punish his opposition.  His immorality includes being an award-winning serial liar.  The stakes are far too high to give black Americans a pat on the back for circling the wagons around a failed Presidency.  Fellow Americans, regardless of race, creed, or color, we must come together as one nation under God, united and unhyphenated to do whatever is necessary to heal our land, because first and foremost, we are Americans.

(“Sorry, Blacks, You Can’t Sit This Out” by Lloyd Marcus dated October 18, 2014 published by American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/10/america_in_crisis_sorry_blacks_you_cant_sit_this_out.html )


It is always a delicious moment when progressives (the current politically correct name for left-wingers, socialists, and Marxists) have to admit their falsehoods.  Such is the case with the same progressives who relentlessly repeated the lie during the administration of President George W. Bush that no WMDs were found in Iraq and that, therefore, the reason for the U.S. going to war against Saddam Hussein was a lie. Remember the left-wing slogan: "Bush lied: People died."  Republican consultants and presidential advisers decided NOT to provide the evidence that there were indeed WMDs, which allowed the Left to falsely demonize the Bush administration and deeply harm the Republican Party.  Hussein's stockpiled weapons of mass destruction were found during the Iraq War and that buried under the desert sands may well be yet more undiscovered WMDs.  Much of those sands now lie within the territory occupied by the Islamo-Nazi head choppers of ISIS.  In fact, thousands of shells and bombs containing chemical and nerve agent weapons were found, along with some 500 metric tons of yellow cake uranium, which was subsequently shipped out by U.S. forces to Canada for disposal.  President Bush claimed that we went to war to discover Hussein's "old" WMDs and to prevent him from restarting his perilous weapons program.  Remember that Saddam Hussein was near to producing nuclear weapons but it was left to Israel to destroy that threat by bombing Iraq's Osirak nuclear facility, thus saving the world and U.S. troops from catastrophe.  In his September 12, 2002, speech, Bush had pleaded with the ever morally compromised UN to enforce sanctions and weapons inspections. In that speech, the President did NOT claim that an Iraqi "active weapons program" existed as now the New York Times is falsely alleging.  The cassus belli for the Iraq war was Hussein's refusal to disarm; his desire to restart the Iraqi aggressive weapons program; and the threat of arming, aiding, and abetting terrorists who posed a clear and present danger to the West and the Free World.  The New York Times on the other hand tried to spin the reason for going to war was based upon the presence of "active" WMDs.  We now come to what may be a monumental mistake by Team Bush, who chose to remain silent for years and refrain from telling the world and the American public that President Bush did not lie about WMDs.  The weapons really existed and in enormous amounts.  How could Bush's political advisers not see the importance of presenting this information amid deafening shouts that the President and those of us who supported Operation Iraqi Freedom were a pack of filthy liars?  This act of stupidity in part led to the electoral defeats of 2008 and 2012, with the baleful result of America enduring the last six years of the Barack Hussein Obama regime along with the support of its mainstream media "amen corner" and the increasingly far left Democrat Party.

(“The howling hyenas of the Left, and the silent lambs of the Right by Victor Sharpe dated October 20, 2014 published by Renew America at http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/sharpe/141020 )

The Global War on Terror, including the ISIS campaign, is a thirty, if not a hundred, years’ war, whether we like it or not!  Barack Obama, the President with the least understanding of military affairs of any on record, is fighting this as a limited war, a war of “containment” with no overall strategy of the moment, much less any kind of grand strategy for the long run.  Obama, along with his various Middle East “experts” of the Susan Rice and Samantha Power variety, persists in stumbling from crisis to crisis, never accomplishing much, never looking forward to the next move, forever playing catch-up ball.  The end result has been political chaos, humanitarian disaster, and a revival of Jihadi fortunes throughout the Islamic crescent.  The Bush administration was unwilling to lay out the facts of this conflict in the manner of John F. Kennedy’s description of the Cold War as the “long twilight struggle.”  Bush had a strategy, and a very profound one: crush the Taliban, harry Al Qaeda, destroy Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, which would inevitably try to set itself up as Terrorism Central, and terrify the rest of the Arab world, whether allies or enemies, into behaving themselves.  Much of this worked, but at the same time, Bush and his people were unwilling to define the conflict, to clarify that the post-9/11 campaigns were simply the first phase of a long war that would last for decades at best.  An ignorant and easily-led public expecting instant results was not adequately prepared for a lengthy, grueling struggle against a canny and fanatical enemy, and soon lost patience.  The Democrats, always ready to take advantage of anything at all, no matter what the risk or cost to national security or the actual interests of the people, proved more than willing to exploit this in 2008.  Obama promised that the U.S., under his guidance, would return to a 90s status quo, the status quo that had vanished on September 11, 2001 and is doomed never to be revived.  He was unable to keep that promise, any more than he kept any of his others.  The war effort was geared down to the lowest possible level, with pullouts from Iraq and Afghanistan scheduled in defiance of any and all developments and with action left to drone strikes.  So the first phase of the war, under Bush, was a success on its own terms.  The second, under Obama, is a disaster of near-apocalyptic proportions.  Tens of thousands have already died, millions will join them, possibly no small number of them on the streets of American cities.  Despite this, ISIS will eventually be defeated, as much by its own internal contradictions, sectarian conflict, assassinations, and friction with other Jihadi outfits and nations, as anything else.  There are a lot of people who want to be caliph, and Arab history gives a good idea as to how this will all shake out.  There will be a third phase: Another such organization will arise and require further action. This is due to the nature of the distributed network on which Islamism is based and the fact that the Jihad is a product of a mass religious movement.  There is a strategic solution (there is always a strategic solution).  One that is not easy to face, particularly for Americans, who like things done quickly, simply, and humanely, with as little fuss and expense as possible.  It was not a conflict that could be settled in a few quick campaigns, but only through lengthy, grueling efforts, many of them invisible to the citizenry and difficult to explain at best.  The long-term strategy will be different from that of the Cold War: Rather than simple containment until the Soviet empire collapsed of its rotten weight, it will be a war of attrition.  There are a billion-plus Muslims currently active.  If 1% are convinced fanatic Jihadis, that translates into about ten to twelve million, which means that we need to kill a large portion of that ten to twelve million.  We need a grand vision for the United States, not only as the world’s leading economy and pioneer in participatory democracy, but as something more: a nation with a great destiny as defender of the West and protector of the civilized virtues against a savage and implacable enemy.

(“Our Hundred Years’ War” by J.R. Dunn dated October 21, 2014 published by American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/10/our_hundred_years_war.html )


* There is so much published each week that unless you search for it, you will miss important breaking news.  I try to package the best of this information into my “Views on the News” each Saturday morning.  Updates have been made this week to the following issue sections:

·  National Service at http://www.returntocommonsensesite.com/intro/service.php


David Coughlin

Hawthorne, NY