"Liberalism is totalitarianism with a human face." - Thomas Sowell
Freedom and liberty are the foundation of America. This love of freedom requires that freedom for others be just as important as freedom for you. Today this commitment to freedom is being superceded by a constant government expansion that will leave all of us subservient to the power of bureaucrats.
China’s One-Child policy is an epic disaster. Why does it have so many cheerleaders?
by Jonathan Last - September 26th, 2011 (Publication Date) - The Weekly Standard
A few weeks ago Vice President Joe Biden made, by his standards, a minor squall when he visited China and held forth on the country’s One-Child policy. Biden didn’t endorse One-Child, exactly, but said that he would not “second guess” it. He wasn’t the first Westerner to look favorably upon the regime. Tom Friedman once mused that One-Child “probably saved China from a population calamity.” The Associated Press lauded it recently as a “boon” to Chinese girls. Others believe One-Child to be so admirable that it ought to be replicated on a global scale. Financial Post columnist Diane Francis, former Planned Parenthood director Norman Fleishman, and Ted Turner—among others—have all said that the entire world ought to adopt China’s One-Child policy.
It’s hard to know what’s at the root of all this admiration. Part of it may be a reaction to the gauche American habit of having children. Push environmentalists hard enough and eventually they devolve into overpopulation hysterics. Or perhaps appreciating One-Child is, like following professional soccer, just a way of peacocking moral superiority.
But the more charitable (and likely) explanation is that people who claim to admire China’s One-Child policy simply don’t know very much about it. Like where it came from. Or how it actually works. Or what it has really done to China’s demographics.
Like almost everything that progressives admire or invent, the one-child policy has created some horrible unintended consequences. China will never recover from this experiment without serious action. One possible action, growing more likely every day, is war.
Without a war to provide wives for the huge population of men for whom marriage is not possible, the nation is likely to see massive civil unrest and social instability.
Those on the outside who dismiss these pressures are simply deluding themselves. Of course our own progressive elite politicians are so busy admiring the one-child policy that they have not begun to deal with its real world unintended consequences, for either China, or the rest of the world.
With active encouragement from the Government, whole generations of school-children have now had the apocalyptic threat of climate change pushed down their throats — not just in science classes, but in almost any subject you can think of (questions on the need to fight global warming have even cropped up in English GCSE papers).
In geography, the present curriculum no longer concentrates on countries, continents, rivers, mountains or cities. Instead, it insists that pupils should learn about global warming and climate change and the likely effects of rising sea levels.
The propaganda is all-encompassing.
[Snip]
When David Miliband was Labour’s education minister, he ordered that copies of Al Gore’s propaganda film An Inconvenient Truth should be sent to every school in the country. A High Court judge decided that the ‘apocalyptic vision’ of global warming presented in the film was politically partisan and not an impartial analysis of the science of climate change.
Mr Justice Barton ruled that the film contained nine errors so serious that the schools must be issued with corrections.
This is what passes for science in the minds of the ideological extremists who dominate our governments. Lying to children is easier than actually proving their case. When someone insists that "the science is proven and therefore I don't have to defend my position, just make my opponent shut up", you have to wonder why they are so defensive about their inability to provide a credible rebuttal.
This article is another in a long line of articles and reports that proves the anthropogenic global warming claim is lies, not science.
by Jim Treacher - September 19th, 2011 - The DC Caller
Republican Mark Amodei’s runaway 22-point victory over Democrat Kate Marshall in last Tuesday’s special U.S. House election rattled the advisers of Democratic contenders, who worry about persistent economic doldrums and a potential Obama drag at the ballot box.
The most effective TV ad Amodei used against Marshall was called “echo.”
Here is a video of the ad from the article and it is the best thing you can watch to give you encouragement for 2012. It does not attack Marshall or Obama. It attacks their policies very effectively. That is what has gotten the left wing political advisers so spooked.
For the first time in years people are not being distracted by the left wing Alinsky smears. They are focusing on the important issue. Progressive policies do not work!
by Jeffrey Folks - September 19th, 2011 - American Thinker
One thing about the Obama White House: you can't fault them for a lack of optimism. Obama has been operating on little more than "hope" for three years now, with rosy predictions of economic improvement just around the corner. Back in June 2010, the president kicked off "recovery summer" with "groundbreakings and events across the country." When that recovery failed to materialize, he insisted that we were just going through a "soft patch." We're still in that soft patch, which is starting seem more like an endless swamp.
No problem. When rosy predictions fail, one can always resort to lies.
The Obama Administration is an excellent example of how government confuses the American people with lies and distortions. Statistics are created that are known to be lies and brashly publicized. Then quietly revised later with no publicity. That way they can insist the statistics are accurate even when what they said does not resemble the truth at all.
Another important point in this article that Democrats NEVER understand; whether you take a dollar out of the private sector by taxing it or borrowing it, either will harm business growth as that dollar is no longer available for investments that create jobs.
The final point I find critical is pointing out how the lust for control by government bureaucrats results in egregious regulations which provide so much damage to freedom that any spurious claims to benefits are simply ridiculous. This burden discourages investors by strangling any thought that government is not their enemy. We have reached that point today. Government is our enemy. Freedom is an illusion. If you doubt it go watch the populace line up for their ritual groping at airports when there has never been a single attempt to harm citizens that has been prevented by this insanity.
Media’s war president depiction obscures reality of security leadership failures
by Frank Gaffney - September 12th, 2011 - Washington Times
... the lack of a robust GOP response to the president's national security stewardship to date, would be laughable were the implications not so serious. While the take-down of bin Laden and other al Qaeda operatives is certainly welcome, they do not begin to offset Mr. Obama's serial failings as commander in chief. Such failings have had a far worse effect than making him "irrelevant." They have helped to make the world a vastly more dangerous place for America, its people and others who love freedom.
A necessarily illustrative list of ways in which such dangers are arising would include the following examples:
Israel soon is likely to be engulfed in yet another war for its very survival. Straws in the wind are: the sacking of its embassy in Cairo over the weekend and intensifying attacks on its territory and natural gas pipelines from territory at least nominally controlled by Egypt; the portentous approval next week by the U.N. General Assembly of the Palestinians' demand for recognition of their unilaterally declared state; the increasingly overtly-hostile posture toward Israel being taken by Turkey under its Islamist prime minister, Recep Erdogan; the arming to the teeth of jihadists in Libya; Lebanon under the control of Iranian proxy, Hezbollah; the prospect that the Muslim Brotherhood will emerge ascendant as Egypt unravels; and Iran's incipient nuclear weapons capability.
China is becoming increasingly assertive in the South China Sea and elsewhere as its military build-up progresses, its economic power becomes more dominant and its colonial expansionism spans the globe. Last week, The Washington Times' Bill Gertz reported that in 2008, Chinese naval vessels and bombers temporarily blinded and repeatedly buzzed the crew of a U.S. Navy survey ship. Unfortunately, prospects exist for far worse.
The evisceration of our military and its supporting industrial base - a likely hallmark of the Obama policy legacy - will be a far more important determinant of our future security and that of the free world more generally than all of Mr. Obama's putative decisiveness in the fight against al Qaeda. Today's spin will be the subject of tomorrow's ridicule as we inevitably reap the whirlwind of wars that could have been prevented.
The number of people who will die as a direct result of the geopolitical ignorance shown by President Barack Obama will vastly exceed the number who died due to the naive ignorance of Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain. Obama and Chamberlain are two of a kind. Arrogant and sure of their mastery of every situation. Neither was humble enough to understand how little control they had over events and both were more impressed with foreigners than with the strengths of their own countries.
Obama despises America. He has an excuse. He was not raised here and truly is ignorant of what America stands for. He has only been told what leftist extremists who hate us believe about our nation. Though Chamberlain had less reason to despise his nation, he was a gutless appeaser and did only what was popular during his entire life. It is no surprise he presided over the demise of Britain as a world power. It is no surprise Obama is presiding over the destruction of America as a world power. Such men have no true perspective of the world. Their arrogance makes them incapable of seeing the world as it is.
Great nations are led by great men. Obama is not a great man and is incapable of leading America towards anything but a socialist tyranny.
by Clarice Feldman - September 11th, 2011 - American Thinker
It's the tenth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks and an appropriate time for people to recall where they were on that day and how they reacted. I don't really need an annual reminder though... Like so much of that tragedy, the really important things -- the doomed WTC jumpers, the dancing in the Arab streets -- was underplayed or censored by the media.
Living in the District of Columbia, I remember the outrage, confusion and horror of that day and many days that followed... And on quiet nights I often imagine still hearing the tramping of thousands of commuters walking miles home from the center of the city when all other forms of transport were unavailable. They are so much a part of me, anniversary reminders are unnecessary.
Quickly the fear and outrage we felt was considered by the elite to be too dangerous to acknowledge or validate. They consider the rest of us moronic murderers it would seem. Instead of reminding us of the truth of that day, they fed us a steady stream of gelding, feminizing pap about religion of peace, multiculturalism, overwrought (never realized) fears and claims of anti-Moslem discrimination and harassment, and blame shifting to us the acts of genuinely murderous thugs.
Though this article notes the specific actions and words of Barack Obama in blaming our nation for the deeds of our enemies, Clarice is right to note that it was a large contingent of 'beltway elites' who have embraced this blame game. Though it is no longer of great value to mention it since he is gone from the public scene, I blame President George W. Bush and his evasive 'war on terror' as the beginning of this cover-up.
The linkage of this blame the victim game in Barack Obama's speech before congress on the economy with his words on 9/11 is typical Clarice brilliance. I share her fervent hope that we can rid ourselves of this America hating racist bigot. Only when we purge his Marxist ideas can we "restore... the prosperity we once enjoyed."
by Steven Greenhouse - September 4th, 2011 - New York Times
The United States Postal Service has long lived on the financial edge, but it has never been as close to the precipice as it is today: the agency is so low on cash that it will not be able to make a $5.5 billion payment due this month and may have to shut down entirely this winter unless Congress takes emergency action to stabilize its finances. “Our situation is extremely serious,” the postmaster general, Patrick R. Donahoe, said in an interview. “If Congress doesn’t act, we will default.”
The solution is easy, but will not be tolerated politically. The following is all that is needed:
-Stop giving free mail to incumbent legislators (called franking privilege). -Stop giving deep discounts to advertisers and bulk mail scams. -Stop delivering flyers with no address on them. -Increase automation and technology. -Ban unions and feather bedding work rules that leave customers lined up in cues waiting for lazy employees who do not care. -Cut salaries and benefits to reasonable limits commensurate with private employers. -Stop hiring twice as many blacks and other minorities as the percent of their population would justify while rejecting more qualified whites. -Fire some of the incompetents.
The postal service is mismanaged because it is a political patronage farce.
However that is exactly why it will never be fixed by any of these rational solutions. What will actually be done is to tax the people to cover up the corruption and bailout the unions, just as they did with Fannie Mae,Freddie Mac, General Motors and Chrysler. They will also tax email to cover up their losses. No way will they ever stop wasting billions on fat salaries, excessive management waste or arrogant lazy workers.
What is sad is that there are many good dedicated Post Office workers, even though only a small percentage of the work force. They get maligned because the system in which they work is such a joke and their co-workers are so bad.
by Ann Coulter - August 31st, 2011 - AnnCoulter.com
Amid the hoots at Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry for saying there were "gaps" in the theory of evolution, the strongest evidence for Darwinism presented by these soi-disant rationalists was a 9-year-old boy quoted in The New York Times.
After his mother had pushed him in front of Perry on the campaign trail and made him ask if Perry believed in evolution, the trained seal beamed at his Wicked Witch of the West mother, saying, "Evolution, I think, is correct!"
That's the most extended discussion of Darwin's theory to appear in the mainstream media in a quarter-century. More people know the precepts of kabala than know the basic elements of Darwinism.
There should be a thank you to Ann for this concise and clear explanation of the limits of evolution and the inaccuracies of Darwinism. Unfortunately, like the 9 year old in the article most people think the two mean the same thing. Actually, evolution is provable. Look at a Chiwawa and a Great Dane. Recognize they are both descended from wolves and it becomes clear. Evolution can make significant changes in an animal.
What there is no evidence of, as Ann points out, is one species becoming another species. Evolution has limits. Those limits have been proven. Darwinists will not accept that. As such, Darwinism has become a religion that takes on faith the hypothesis that evolution can explain the creation of a completely new species. Such transition has never been found. Yet the record is so overwhelming that if such evidence existed it should have been discovered by now.
Like the refusal to accept any evidence which proves global warming is not caused by man, the left wing chicken little extremists reject any evidence that refutes their desired hypothesis on evolution.
