Views on the News
November 12, 2011
Views on the News*
Liberals are not that hard to understand and there is no mystery as to what they will do only in what order they do things. Liberals, as I already said, are essentially the same; predictable enough to measure by what is called the Liberal Predictability Index. With the “Occupy Whatever” mob on Wall Street and elsewhere around the nation, the typical, predictably liberal, behaviors are in the news every day. They have:
· Taken over public property for their own private use.
· Interfered with productive citizens trying to earn a living.
· Bussed in and paid protesters to make their “Astroturf” movement appear “grass roots.”
· Had many Democratic Party politicians offer up support including Nancy Pelosi and the current President of the United States, Barack Obama.
· Garnered support from the Communist Party USA and the American NAZI Party.
· Spouted their racist, anti-Jew, anti-Capitalist rhetoric on camera.
· Burned a few American flags.
· Begun raping and pillaging their own for their own perverse gratification.
· Begun whining when others whom they do not officially approve of (i.e. the homeless) start to show up and want the occupier’s stuff which they hypocritically decide is theirs while at the same time the protesters claim that others are not entitled to their own stuff.
· Begun infighting over how money they have “earned” for the cause should be spent and holding a tight fist on said cash while at the same time demanding the taxpayers freely give and give and give some more unto them.
· Initiated riots.
· Pelted police with rocks and bottles, trying oh so hard to get themselves arrested so that they can then run to the media and claim that they did nothing wrong and are innocent victims of a police state.
The Liberal Predictability Index is indeed on the rise, because this is who liberals are! While they have been content for many years to play their true beliefs close to the vest and then act oh so indignantly when their ideology was correctly labeled as socialist, communist, fascist, and even hypocritical, they have abandoned all pretense of illusion now. Americans can see clearly who liberals are and what the left believes in since people tend to believe what they see with their own eyes, and they are seeing liberals at their finest right now.
(“Liberal Predictability Index Up in Recent Months” by J.J. Jackson dated November 5, 2011 published by Canada Free Press at http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/42064 )
Something strange happened along the road to Utopia: we ditched the supremacy of individual rights in favor of "the greatest good for the greatest number." One manifestation of this was affirmative action in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978), “There is a measure of inequity in forcing innocent persons to bear the burdens of redressing grievances not of their making.” A sly concept was tucked into the opinion: an individual's rights might still be curtailed if this were done to serve a compelling government interest. In Grutter v. Bollinger (2003), Justice Sandra Day O'Connor declared that "diversity" was such a compelling interest, and therefore race could indeed be considered one factor (among many) in determining school admissions. It was expected that it would take 25 years before the use of racial preferences would no longer be necessary to further this principle. Apparently now affirmative action and diversity have morphed into a perpetual right. The Fourteenth Amendment has now been stretched from guaranteeing non-discrimination into precisely the reverse, institutionalizing discrimination. The greater good has come to replace immutable legal principles and even truth as the goal of our judicial processes.
(“Noble Injustice” by R.B. Parrish dated November 6, 2011 published by American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/11/noble_injustice.html )
President Obama is a socialist and a vapid demagogue who has been educated beyond the level of his intelligence, and he is the choice of a puerile and spoiled electorate who want to be taken care of and obtain handouts from a parental figurehead. The Cold War was a competition of economic ideologies. In the 1960s, we used to have sincere debates about which economic system was better - a socialist, centrally-planned economy, or a capitalist, free-market economy. The debate is over and by 1990, even the Russians and Chinese were forced to implicitly admit the superiority of market economies. While our former enemies were busy converting their socialist systems to market economies, we were happily rushing headlong into socialism. We have been aware of the superiority of market economies since Adam Smith published The Wealth of Nations in 1776. In Principles of Political Economy (1848), John Stuart Mill gave three reasons to severely limit government interference in a nation's economy and markets.
· First, any increase in government power is a threat to human individuality, freedom, and originality, qualities necessary for the progress of the human race.
· Second, market economies function more efficiently and produce more prosperity.
· Third, laissez-faire economies inculcate moral virtues in citizens by making them more self-reliant, virtuous and intelligent.
At the close of World War II, Germany and Korea were divided into socialist and market economies. Socialism failed dramatically: East Germany had to build the Berlin Wall just to keep people from fleeing; and North Korea is still in the stone age. A satellite photo taken at night shows South Korea ablaze with the light of civilization, but North Korea is dark, both literally and metaphorically. In the U.S., we exist in a curious state of denial where we acknowledge the inferiority of socialism but continue to become more and more socialistic. We know what the best system is, but we lack the discipline to return to it. Ronald Reagan used to say that liberals know only how to tax and spend. If there was ever a man who embodies that aphorism, it is Barack Obama, who has no clue how a free-market economy works or why it produces economic prosperity. If a centrally planned socialist system worked, it would have produced prosperity in China, the Soviet Union, and North Korea, but it didn't. Only a free-market system knows how to efficiently distribute resources. Since the inception of Lyndon Johnson's "Great Society," we have had at least forty years of welfare programs designed to reduce poverty, and these programs have not worked and our current U.S. poverty rate is the same as it was in the late 1960s. Apparently we are incapable of learning from past mistakes because instead of reversing course, we continue on the same path. Socialism has killed the prosperity produced by our formerly great system. The U.S. is now ninth on the index of economic freedom and heading downward and lead by a clueless poseur for President. We have no one but ourselves to blame because Obama was chosen by the people of the U.S. since he was elected democratically, and Obama is nothing more than an iconic representation of our own ignorance, greed, and infantile sense of entitlement.
(“Does America Deserve Obama?” by David Deming dated November 4, 2011 published by American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/11/does_america_deserve_obama.html )
Conservatives are fired up and thanks to the Tea Party and Obama’s general left-wing bungling, we’re mad and ready to go for the throat on government spending. There is some sort of disconnect between what the conservative base of the Republican party wants and who the party ends up nominating for President. The states that go first in the primary and thus hold the most influence, New Hampshire, Iowa, South Carolina, Florida, seem random, but from the results in past elections one has to conclude they were chosen by some sort of RINO genius to ensure that only a milquetoast right-of-center candidate will win the nomination. Right now the country is a car speeding towards a cliff due to out-of- control spending, and conservatives want a president who will seize the wheel of that car and turn it around. The Republican we nominate is always someone who only promises to ease up on the gas a little. The left don’t have this problem. They nominate impractical left-wing nuts for President all the time. In fact, their more centrist candidates like Bill Clinton are the exceptions, not the rule. The problem is that at the end of the day, conservatives are just practical people. Maybe it’s best that there is some loathing between conservatives and our Presidential nominee. The last thing we want to do is fall in love with a politician. What type of people become skilled politicians? People who hate government? No, those people never learn to work in the system. The people who succeed in politics are those who kind of like government and see it as a great tool for change, i.e., they’re the enemy. We have this fantasy that the move to reduce government will one day be led from the top, but it’s just not going to happen. The true conservatives are always going to be those of us who never have the taint of politics on us, and if we want real change that reduces the size of government in this country, that means we’ll have to put even more pressure on a Republican President than we do on a Democrat.
(“Why Can’t the Republicans Nominate a Genuine Right Wing Nut?” by Frank J. Fleming dated November 10, 2011 published by PJ Media at http://pjmedia.com/blog/why-cant-the-republicans-nominate-a-genuine-right-wing-nut/ )
The successor to Barack Obama has a daunting task ahead of them to have any hope of properly changing the nation’s disastrous present course, but ideas and solutions are available, if only our politicians would listen. If the current regime is merely supplanted by an insipid or unremarkable Republican, America will simply languish for a while amid the horrendous damage that has been perpetrated over the past few years, awaiting the eventuality of the future Democrat who will simply continue the process. America urgently needs a leader who can rally it from the despondency and bleakness of its current state, and the lackluster future awaiting it if it remains mired in Washington “business as usual.” Having been degraded and humiliated both financially and spiritually on the world stage by a leader who clearly disparages everything worthy in its foundations and heritage, America must once again enjoy the inspiration of a leader who, instead of focusing endlessly on its imperfections, loudly and unabashedly trumpets its strengths and promises. What is being lost in the Republican primaries is the creation of winning ideas to turn this country around and restore it to its previous global leadership. Creating a best of breed Republican platform would look like this:
· Nominate constitutional expert, thought leader: President – Newt Gingrich.
· Nominate private sector, TEA Party conservative: Vice President – Herman Cain.
· Implementation plan: Contract With America (Newt Gingrich).
· Limit (downsize) government: Decommission cabinet departments (Ron Paul).
· Balance budget: Pass Balanced Budget Amendment (Newt Gingrich).
· Restore strong dollar: Audit and reform Federal Reserve (Ron Paul).
· Reform judicial branch: Correct, limit, or replace judges (Newt Gingrich)
· Reform (save) Medical Care: Repeal/replace ObamaCare (Newt Gingrich).
· Reform (save) Social Security: Privatize retirement like Chile (Herman Cain).
· Reform (replace) taxes: Transition to a Fair Tax (Herman Cain).
· Achieve energy independence: Unleash energy industry (Rick Perry).
· Revitalize national security: Fund at 4%, security is not discretionary (Newt Gingrich).
The beginning stage of a big change was instituted last November, and if the country is to be restored, the movement must continue. No longer should the people on Main Street accept any version of the Washington status quo and its sad adoption of the notion that the nation’s downward spiral is inevitable. If “We the People” are going to get the nation back, it will require the election of a principled leader who understands the enormity of the task, and is willing to judiciously and fearlessly tackle it, and when assessed in this manner, the field of worthy Republican candidates narrows significantly.
(“What America Needs from the 2012 Elections” by Christopher Adamo dated October 21, 2011 published by Intellectual Conservative at http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2011/10/21/what-america-needs-from-the-2012-elections/ )
The words of Martin Luther King still ring true: "The Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity," but many black Americans still find themselves spiritually and economically enslaved on the figurative 21st-century plantation. For the last 47 years, our leaders have passed bill after bill ostensibly to free black Americans from the manacles of poverty and provide ever-stronger safety nets for those disadvantaged. Two very formidable forces have conspired over these last 47 years to shackle the economic freedoms and aspirations of the black community: liberal progressive policies, generally supported by Democrats, and the socialist ideology espoused by prominent blacks such as Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. While the Civil Rights Act passed in 1964, finally ending the reprehensible practices of segregation, the liberal progressive policies passed during these last nearly five decades have perhaps done more damage to black Americans' prospects than the racial policies of the past. Unemployment in the black community stands at 16.7%, food stamp enrollment is up, and nearly three-quarters of all black children do not live with their biological fathers. Welfare policies devised by the left to aid single mothers have instead worked perversely to incentivize more young women to have children out of wedlock. High minimum wages advocated by labor unions mean employers are less apt to hire unskilled black youths, or any youths for that matter. For the left, "spending on education" generally means job protection and preserving benefits for teachers, rather than actually improving education for students in public schools, where black students can build a foundation for economic advancement. The effects of these so-called well-intentioned policies, while damaging, are certainly not as toxic as the socialist orientation and noxious rhetoric of "leaders" such as Al Sharpton and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Words do indeed have meaning, and the defeatist and demoralizing screeds of these prominent speakers do not inspire, but instead reinforce the victim mentality, and generate class hatred and jealousy, further cultivated by our own President Barack Obama. Since the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People's founding in 1909, socialism has been, unfortunately, deeply ingrained in the black community. In fact, NAACP founder W. E. B. DuBois received the 1959 "Lenin Peace Prize" and formally joined the Communist Party USA two years later. One of the primary tenets of socialist ideology is the creation of a welfare state, which is precisely what has happened in the black community. It is, in effect, a virtual plantation, where black Americans remain enslaved to damaging economic policies and poisonous attitudes of the rhetorical "overseers" who continue to reinforce exploitive, negative mindsets. The only way for black Americans to enjoy the full fruits of economic freedom is by once again embracing the spirit of individualism and self-determination laid out in our Constitution and exemplified by true black leaders such as Frederick Douglass and Booker T. Washington. It is only by abandoning the damaging liberal progressive policies and throwing off the shackles of the victim mentality can black Americans finally be "free at last."
(“Economic Freedom for Black Americans” by Allen B. West dated November 2011 published by The American Spectator at http://spectator.org/archives/2011/11/08/economic-freedom-for-black-ame )
Obama’s economic performance has set new records for all future Presidents to avoid. Right now we’re nowhere near where we need to be in order to make a significant dent in the unemployment rate. Unemployment has been at or above 9% for 28 out of the last 30 months, with no relief in sight. The Obama administration not only promised the unemployment wouldn’t exceed 8% if its stimulus package passed; based on their projections, the unemployment rate today should be right around 6.5%. Obama will have shattered all the records when it comes to the deficit and the debt. Under Obama the budget deficit and federal debt have reached their highest percentage since World War II. The same is true when it comes to federal spending as a percentage of GDP. During the post-recession period from June 2009 to June 2011, the median annual household income fell by 6.7%, a more substantial decline than occurred during the Great Recession. The degree of responsibility Obama has for all of this varies. There’s no question he took office facing difficult circumstances. It’s not possible to blame Obama enough for the poor state of the United States and the lack of leadership and confidence the United States engenders around the world today. The President himself promised us that virtually every indicator listed above would be better, much better, if only we followed his counsel and implemented his policies. He cannot escape either his words or his record. In our economy, our relations with other powers, our reputation around the globe, we’ve become a laughingstock under Obama. “Hope and Change” has become a hackneyed punch line of lost chances, hopes destroyed and dreams knowingly betrayed by golf vacations. During the 2008 campaign Obama showed no charity when it came to blaming Republicans for every bad thing that happened on their watch. We’ve gone from a post-partisan, post-racial America, to all partisan, all the time. President Obama’s economic record is the worst of any President since Herbert Hoover and his sheer ineptitude may even exceed that of Jimmy Carter, since he has failed on front after front, year after year, yet he tries to convince the American voting public that he deserves a second term.
(“Obama’s Economic Record: The Worst Since Hoover” by Peter Wehner dated November 4, 2011 published by Commentary Magazine at http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/11/04/obama-economic-record-hoover/
“The Worst of All Possible Presidents” by John Ransom dated November 5, 2011 published by Town Hall at http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/johnransom/2011/11/05/the_worst_of_all_possible_presidents )
The great strategic narrative of our time is about American decline, but although we are facing some brisk economic headwinds that our political leaders seem clueless in dealing with, I remain unconvinced that we have entered a period of terminal decline. At some point Americans, in their infinite wisdom, will elect officials committed to setting the ship of state on a sustainable fiscal course. One only hopes they will get around to it before financial collapse is staring the country squarely in the face. In any case, our current $15 trillion economy means we are still, by a wide margin, the biggest kid on the block, a condition that is likely to continue for some time. Even if China maintains its remarkable growth for another couple of decades it will only surpass us in the overall size of its economy. The United States will remain well ahead when economic power is measured on the basis of GDP per capita. In strategic terms, such poverty will limit China’s ability to mobilize enough of its economic power to build the type of military force required to challenge the United States on a global scale. Although China remains decades away from becoming a true global power and peer competitor to the United States, its growing wealth ensures two things: China already is and will remain a regional superpower, capable of contesting U.S. power in regions we consider crucial to our future security, and China is not alone. The “rise of the rest” will, over the next couple of decades, present the United States with a radically changed strategic environment, one in which America remains the world’s dominant power, but in which over a dozen nations can make life difficult for us militarily. Of course, through the adroit use of diplomacy and the smart use of our economic and military power, we might well be able to persuade these nations to join us instead of challenging us, and help ease our strategic burdens. Nothing about this new multi-polar world is truly new. This is the world as it has always been. As America enters a new era of multi-polarity, several things stand out from the British experience. First among these is that it behooves the current big kid on the block to adapt itself to the rise of other powers, rather than try to find ways to challenge or contest their growth. Such challenges typically fail, and they engender a huge amount of resentment and ill will. Furthermore, while a powerful fleet assures a large degree of global influence, as crises develop, the ability to place a credible force on the ground provides the best guarantee of either a peaceful settlement or a rapid victorious conclusion to any possible conflict. Finally, without a strong economy to underpin all of our geopolitical actions, whether diplomatic or military, we run a great risk of becoming the “weary titan” of the 21st century.
(“Back to the Future” by Jim Lacey dated November 9, 2011 published by National Review Online at http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/282624/back-future-jim-lacey )
* 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:
· Education at http://www.returntocommonsensesite.com/culture/education.php
· Employment at http://www.returntocommonsensesite.com/dp/employment.php
· Environment at http://www.returntocommonsensesite.com/dp/environment.php
· Foreign Policy at http://www.returntocommonsensesite.com/fp/philosophy.php
· Latin America at http://www.returntocommonsensesite.com/fp/latinamerica.php
· Terrorism at http://www.returntocommonsensesite.com/fp/terrorism.php