And speaking of Vegas: can Republicans run the table in the Senate elections of 2010?
I wouldn’t bet on it.
But it’s theoretically possible that Republicans could win back the Senate in 2010 if they play their cards right.
There are ten Senate seats in play that are currently held by Democrats but are considered “competitive” for Republicans, and Republicans would have to win every single one—as well as keeping all of its own currently held seats. These ten “competitive” races include states that are so traditionally Democratic that just a short while ago it seemed literally impossible that Republicans could win there. But post-Brown, anything seems possible, and strong Republican candidates have been coming forward to run in the presently encouraging environment.
Let’s remember that things could change dramatically in the nine long months that remain till the next election. Just consider the last nine months if you doubt this fact. But looking back, the reports of the death of the Republican Party seem to have been a tad premature.
The problem as I see it, is that if Obama & Co back off of their agenda then the business community may display renewed interest in business activities.
Small business is the primary job creator in this country, and as they become confident enough to restart hiring then that confidence can seep out into the larger economy, boosting consumer confidence.
Renewed consumer confidence would have a positive impact on the economy, possibly finally shaking off the recession and improving employment rates.
If the recession ends, Obama & Co. will immediately claim credit for ending the recession, and Bubba will think *golly gee, they were right after all* and go to the voting booths this November in the off-year election and re-elect a sizable number of democrats.
Republicans and the business community are left dumbfounded….
Boxer vulnerable? Be still my savage heart…
The problem is, Obama & Co aren’t backing off their agenda. Have you seen their budget? They aren’t going to back off their agenda. I don’t know what they’re counting on, but I don’t think it’s a 2010 economic recovery.
But they’re starting to arm the IRS. Now that’s good hearing: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-irs-arms-60-of-its-investigators-with-12-gauge-pump-actions-guns-2010-2 WTF??? What’s up with that?
These are the days of miracle and wonder
— Paul Simon
Well, as the linked article says, it was a long shot that Democrats would acquire a supermajority in 2008, yet they did.
It was even more of a long shot that Scott Brown could come from 30 points behind to take Ted Kennedy’s seat in Mass.
No one can responsibly predict that the Democrats could lose the Senate, but I’d say just about anything is possible this year.
But even to decrease the Democratic majority down to, say, 52 is a big deal, because unless Obama hits a real run of luck on the economy or turns to the center, I will predict that next year Democrats are going to have a much harder time with party discipline and their majority may not mean much.
can Republicans run the table in the Senate elections of 2010?
No. It actually looks like we may have reason to not hold such elections. Normally, no one would be even able to contemplate such things! but Normally, such wouldnt even be possible, but now are. And the possible has a way of happening.
we are not linking together events and things and considering if they are a result of the learning people have gotten. like the fact that oppressed people have a RIGHT (and duty to attack their oppressors).
had a huge list of examples here. then said…. why bother.. the attacks are usually from the same ‘class’ of people… the report is asymetric, and the pressure cooker is at top pressure.
if 40 kids can attack a man because they threw stones at him…and tons of other similar cases go misreported and misrepresented…and that there is now a wave of illegal immigrant crime (and i mean serious stuff with torture, decapitations, and more). …and its not really reported….we have a tinder box going to go up. one ONLY has to see how they report it, and to haev known how it was done elsewhere, to recognize the same tactic.
Home invasion caught on camera
Thursday, September 04, 2008
abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=news/local&id=6369950
read this and see wahts missing..
A massive manhunt has been sparked by the robbery of an elderly couple by a group of assailants who followed them from their Bronx business to their home in suburban New York. Police in Harrison say the assailants stole jewelry from the couple and swiped the family’s car, which they crashed on northbound Hutchinson River Parkway as they fled. It was not immediately clear if the two victims suffered injuries. They are in their 70s. Harrison Police Chief David Hall says they have video footage of the attack from a camera on the family’s property in the town, which is about 31 miles northeast of New York City.
Hall says the couple were attacked about 7:30 p.m. Wednesday. The same house was invaded in December 2006. He says that crime remains unsolved.
a massive manhunt.. and whats missing? a description of the criminals. how massive can that be if you cant tell any one what they look like (same problem in malmo sweden). the same thing can be said for a whole lot of these. and as such, this creates a tinderbox situation. it does NOT result in the progressives bringing peace. its not intended to.
the difference between a capitalis and a socialist who sells you somethign is easy. the capitalist is honest, he wants a relationshiop, and he wants to keep it, and so he wants you to be happy. the socilaist hates capitlism, he doesnt want a customer, jsut the money, and wants the customer to make him happy, not the other way around, and so a socialist is a con man in a capitalsts suit. and so they are so society goes.
go ahead watch the tape. unless you SEE the tape you wont know how bad it was, who did it, etc…its a white jewish couple, followed and preyed upon by a black gang who traveled from the city to upstate to get them. they beat the couple (see the vid) and its never considered a race incident.
this is akin to shaking up a bottle and letting the cork blow off when some point is reached. and we know that point. as soon as the potential punishment is not easy… a certain group will go wild… as they do all over thw world..
Maybe when a shapiro says it…
President Obama’s State of the Union address was the greatest American rhetorical embrace of fascist trope since the days of Woodrow Wilson. I am not suggesting Obama is a Nazi; he isn’t. I am not suggesting that he is a jackbooted thug; he isn’t (even if we could be forgiven for mistaking Rahm Emanuel for one).
President Obama is, however, a man who embodies all the personal characteristics of a fascist leader, right down to the arrogant chin-up head tilt he utilizes when waiting for applause. He sees democracy as a filthy process that can be cured only by the centralized power of bureaucrats. He sees his presidency as a Hegelian synthesis marking the end of political conflict. He sees himself as embodiment of the collective will.
No president should speak in these terms — not in a representative republic. Obama does it habitually.
so much for the idea that a fascist has to be of only one kind. and so much for the idea that america never had such (its always had such, the rogressives want communism with a fascist streak and always have. when communism became a dirty word, they renamed to progressive. when that became a dirty word, they renamed to liberal. now that that is dirty word, they are… they moved into feminism, now thats a dirty word of sorts depending on where you circle, and so on it goes).
It would be pointless to discuss at length the dictatorial, demagogic nature of much of Obama’s address —
the attacks on the banking system;
the unprecedented personal assault on the Supreme Court justices;
the dictatorial demands (“I want a jobs bill on my desk without delay”);
the scornful looks and high-handed put-downs directed at his political opponents.
It would be even more pointless to discuss the incomprehensible stupidity of Obama’s policy proposals. (Export more of our goods? Why didn’t anyone else think of that?)
I agree… beacuse until they taste the whip, they dont believe its plaited and not ready whip.
It is worth examining, however, the deeper philosophy evident from Obama’s address. From the outset, his speech was an ode to himself. He opened, bizarrely, by comparing this moment in history to past American crises: “when the Union was turned back at Bull Run …” He suggested that “America prevailed because we chose to move forward as one nation, as one people.” This, of course, is unmitigated, self-serving rubbish — 620,000 Americans died in the Civil War because we didn’t move forward as one nation. But that is irrelevant to Obama — in his mind, today’s crisis is just like the Civil War. He is a modern-day Lincoln, and those who oppose him are benighted rebels. What’s more, only his powerful leadership can lead us through.
and we have a fantasy of what living in germany is like. its abotu as real as the villian in the rain slicker with the boots. that villian was only one man, and the army did not copy him. we have a completely unrealistic vewi of the world, and we admit it, and then go on blithly using it to jduge things and deny easy facts.
if we didnt, we would all know that progressive are the communists of america, always were. and we didnt lose how many million preventing communism and fascism, only to create it ourselves.
listen to this next paragraph and maybe some will get it. some will get that you dont want collusoin across the isle. it only results in a benfiit for them against us. we have an adversarial system, abhoring that, means we will change to a system where youc ant fight and win. duh.
Then it was on to his critique of American politics. It should be noted at the outset that American politics is designed to produce gridlock. The governmental structure was carefully calibrated to thwart grand, ambitious programs like Obama’s socialist remolding of America; the founders deliberately shackled government by pitting interest against interest. Obama does not accept that, and so he despises the American system of republicanism. He acknowledged that political debate is deeply entrenched: “These disagreements, about the role of government in our lives, about our national priorities and our national security, they’ve been taking place for over 200 years. They’re the very essence of democracy.” Then he dismissed the very essence of democracy in a single stroke: “But we still need to govern.”
[edited for length by neo-neocon]
The problem is, Obama & Co aren’t backing off their agenda. Have you seen their budget?
In a perverse way I view this as a plus. I encourage Barry and Co. try to shoot the moon politically. They’ll almost certainly fail, and irreparably damage the liberal/ leftist/ progressive/ socialist/ communist brand in the process.
Now if they were soft-pedaling socialism until after the mid-term election, then I’d be worried.
I think Scottie has the right of it. “It’s the economy, Stupid”
I hate to see the economy continue to falter, but that will be of benefit for the Republicans. If things pick up by late summer, then the Dems will hold on, and may even gain.
Iran nukes, or a terrorist attack and all bets are off. I can see anything from a Rep sweep to a declaration of martial law and no elections being held.
The current meme about getting small businesses to hire people misses the point. The reason they are not hiring is because they do not have enough job orders to keep the employees they have retained working full time.
The problem as I see it, is that if Obama & Co back off of their agenda then the business community may display renewed interest in business activities.
That’s not going to happen, for two reasons:
1. Obama isn’t going to back off.
2. If he did back off, businesses are still spooked, and won’t do anything major until they have some confidence that they’re not going to get stuck with a mandate or three.
businesses are still spooked
Exactly. If Barry can hammer secured lenders – people with lots of money and clout – he can hammer small businesses – who lack either.
Small businessmen have to live by their wits much more than guys running large outfits, because they’re always teetering on the edge of disaster. Bankrupting GM took generations; bankrupting a small business can be done easily in a quarter.
So are small businessmen going to stick their necks out? Are they hell.
The Bamma’s egomaniacal-hubristic-self obsessed-narcissism is heading(FULL Freaking Speed Ahead!) for a Shipwreck. C’Mon, November! Hang the malignant ponzi scheming-child whore running ACORN Grifters around his scrawny deserving neck, along with all the Reaping of his Sowing.
NeoConScum, quit vacillating and pick a side, will ya?
I agree that Obama is not going to back off but it’s irrelevant to the economy’s recovery in 2010 whether he does so or not.
The Democrats blew their opportunity to move the economy toward recovery in 2009. It’s too late for anything they might now do, to take effect in time for the mid-term elections.
In addition, the ‘stimulus’ bill and higher deficits have made economic recovery much more problematic. There’s a reason why 77% of investors now perceive the Democrats to be hostile toward investors.
The Democrats are much more vulnerable than they can admit or what Republicans dare hope for but a good indication of just how bad things are is that in Wisconsin, the home of progressivism, Russ Feingold is already in trouble. Like Massachusetts, if Feingold’s Wisconsin seat is in trouble, no Democrat is safe.
Things are not going to get better before they get even worse. And that shall be fatal for the Democrats because it will just further convince independents of the Democrat’s economic incompetence.
Obama is gambling on everything in 2010 and he’s going to lose, simply because he’s been betting ‘against the house’ since he decided to gamble in Jan of 09 that the US economy would get better on its own and, while getting better, could withstand the ‘porkulus’ bill and a tripling of Bush’s deficits.
He, his closest advisers, Pelosi and Reid fundamentally misjudged what the 2008 election was really all about and it was their hubris that led to that misjudgment.
Never giving credence to the obvious; that, after winning the Democrat primary, the electoral necessity for Obama to have to run as a centrist, confirmed that the great center in the American polity did not support the leftist view of socialism’s desirability.
So they focused upon health care and their leftist agenda and, were it the late 90’s boom times, they might have pulled it off but in an economic recession patience is thin, in such times, necessities count not wish lists.
Neither Wall street nor Main street have any confidence in the economic prescriptions of the Democrats and without investor and consumer confidence, the business sector isn’t going to see the conditions necessary for them to even consider expanding.
The Democrats are going to lose BOTH the House and Senate and Obama will instantly become a lame duck President, as it will be the greatest mid-term reversal in history. Obama will get all the blame and have, after almost two years have only accomplished getting the country buried under debt.
And that’s without any kind of nasty shock, like another terrorist attack, which given Al Qaeda’s announced threats may well happen in 2010.
If that happens, the resultant pressure upon Obama will become unbelievable, as he’ll be seen by many as completely incompetent, someone who talks a good game but can’t deliver when the chips are down. It will have happened well into his watch and, the American people will judge him to have failed in his primary responsibility.
Nor will blaming it on Bush be an option. If he tries that, it will convince Americans in even larger numbers that they’ve backed an incompetent poseur and they’ll correct that in 2012, just as they did with Carter.
And if after that, there’s another successful attack before 2012 there will be serious calls for impeachment. And the Democrat party will be banished into the wilderness of political exile for decades.
Who would have thought that Democrats could be facing all this within 12 months of gaining total political power?
Reality, as they say, can be a bitch, can’t it?
I am not sure that GOP understands what Scott Brown accomplished in Massachusetts. The party insiders are still talking about litmus tests for its candidates in 2010.
They also want money. Their problem in 2008 and 2010 isn’t money, it is the message.
Scott Brown has shown that you can have a big enough tent and still stick to your core principles.
They can not count merely on Obama and Dem’s screw-ups to get Republicans elected. They have to show the voters – Republican or Independent as to why.
Media never questions some obvious things of Dems, especially the President. When he is claiming jobs to be his #1 priority in 2010, no one questioned him why that was not the case in 2009. Isn’t that a reasonable question to ask?
It certainly is a reasonable question. And Obama still has residual good will, along with the natural reluctance of people to look at their own judgment in electing him.
That’s why, right after the SOTU address, Obama’s ratings by viewers, rose to 83% positive. Those very same people however will withdraw that positive assessment if by August the economy hasn’t clearly turned the corner or if something nasty happens.
I too suspect that some Republicans don’t get the Massachusetts message a whole lot better than the Democrats. Many do though because the Republicans were thrown out in 2006. I also expect that the ‘Scott Brown’ model is going to be the ‘template’ for Republican contenders in blue states.
I subscribe 100% to Geoffrey’s analysis. Bottom line: the Dems are best (only?) suited as an opposition party. Getting simultaneous control of the WH, the Senate, and the House was the worst thing that could have happened to them. They had the chance to implement their ideas, such as they were, but without any bipartisan cover whatever, so the results were hung unequivocally around their necks.
No carping about the wonderful things they would have done but for those despicable Republicans (although they’re nevertheless pathetically trying that tactic), no weasel room to blame anyone else for the results of their policies. They had a free hand, implemented their policies, and screwed the pooch. A pretty clean experimental result, IMO.
I keep trying to tell youse guys that normal analysis does not apply to the Baraq/Dem situation. They play dirty and ’twill get dirtier. We are in the fight of our lives. Betsybounds and Artfldgr, inter alia, get this, but many do not.
I suspect Baraq will welcome an al Qaeda attack, allowing him a declaration of martial law. At that point, we are done, finished, fini. Because it will never be lifted.
I’m not sure I agree that Obama has any residual good will. And I’m not sure about any natural reluctance of people to look at (question?) their own judgment in electing him. New Jersey, Virginia, and above all Massachusetts just about rule that out–if the fall of Bush (before he actually fell) hadn’t already done so. And I don’t for a minute think that he’s got until August to turn this thing around for himself and his party. My guess is that he might–might–have a month. The remaining puzzlement is, as always, that he doesn’t seem to care. Why might that be?
They can not count merely on Obama and Dem’s screw-ups to get Republicans elected. They have to show the voters – Republican or Independent as to why. I’ve read numerous pundits and bloggers’ similar statements that the Republicans cannot prevail unless they advance a positive program of their own. I disagree to an extent, perhaps to a great extent. That may have been true a year ago, or even a few months ago, but it’s less so now, and soon it will be totally untrue. First of all, the Republicans have been advancing a program of their own for some time–health care is a major case in point. Insurance sales across state lines, tort reform, other measures–these are not new, they are just under-covered by the MSM. But we are quickly approaching a point (if we haven’t already reached it) where simply opposing Obama is positive enough of a program. Increasing numbers of Americans actively oppose what Obama and the Dems are doing; they see that it’s bad, and they want it stopped. That will be good enough for now: A case where the greatest positive is a determined negative.
I don’t think Obama’s ever gambled anything on the economy’s getting better; in fact, I think all his gambling is tied up in bets that it’s going to get worse. I don’t think he wants it to get better. I think his whole program is consciously designed to wreck it. That accounts for the legislative hurry: Ram it all through before people see how bad it’s going to make things, before everyone completely loses faith it all of it. Paul Ryan is one Republican who is on to the game: http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YWU5ZmEzNGI0OTNhYTQ3NDE3ZDE5YjAyMzEwZjdiMGI=
I’m hoping he persuades others–especially others in a position to make a difference–before it’s too late. It’s an extraordinary statement he’s made, but extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures.
I suspect Baraq will welcome an al Qaeda attack, allowing him a declaration of martial law. At that point, we are done, finished, fini.
Tom, I agree a declaration of martial law would certainly finish someone, permanently. Where we disagree is that it would be America.
It would be awfully difficult for a martial law declaration to succeed in this country. For one thing, we have an armed, albeit disorganized, citizenry. For another–well, as I’ve mentioned before, my Marine husband has been wondering for some time now whether the American military would obey orders to fire upon citizens.
I do not think it’s an idle question, even though one hopes it is.
Ditto Occam, a crisis would allow O to make a speech. It would sound great, but a closer reading would reveal that it would only offer excuses for not taking action.
We all know what the outcome of 9/11 would have been if Obama had been in office then (we would be waiting for the Taliban to extradite bin Laden, all nice and legal, with optimistic progress reports every three months). Remember the Italian proverb, he is so good he is good for nothing. That would be Obama in a crisis. The Iranian bomb is a slow moving crisis and I am alarmed that the public is not screaming about it.
Don’t the voters realize he is going to get a lot of them killed? Any of the above should be able to finish the dems, but he seems to the teflon president.
I think O’s budget might be what allows the Dems to keep the Senate. They can sqeeze that through on 51 Senate votes and allow the Bayh’s and Lincoln’s to cut hard right (up to and including threatening to leave the party). If health care goes no further by November it will be long forgotten by the public – if unemployment is still 10%, and it will be, next November there’s only one thing that’s driving the election: the economy. So the Dems are pretty much screwed, but there might be a way for certain Dems to position themselves as being better positioned to impact Obama. In this scenario, the economy ‘double dips’, the Dems get routed in the House, but narrowly keep the Senate.
This would set up for O to tack to The Big He but if there’s anything we’ve learned over the last year it’s this: O is no Bill. Not even close.
O.B., I’m not willing to bet that a declaration of martial law would be the finish of America. I’m not prepared to rule out that such a declaration might come, but I’m also not prepared to lay any money on the opposition’s victory. Shoot, I’ve already made it pretty clear that I think there would be a helluva fight, and I have a lot of faith in the American people–especially when they are pushed far enough.
But this is all speculation, of course. And I’m pretty paranoid.
SAB’s comment upstream nails the economy. It’s all about the demand, stupid. The MSM and the late night comedians, i.e. Olberman, mocked W when he told Americans to go to the malls and spend after 9/11 – but he was right. If everybody is hunkering down – which probably makes quite a bit of sense for the individual in times of turmoil – where is the demand going to come from that will drive employers to hire (who are already scared about new government mandates)? O submits these ridiculous budgets (last year’s submission was, in my view, the single worse act any President has done in the last 15 years – who lends to somebody that PLANS on rolling over debt for the ENTIRE plannable future!) that can only make sense if you assume massive tax hikes (demand, what demand?). We’d be better off with a junior corporate financial analyst in charge.
I agree with much of Geoffrey Britain’s analysis. Good job, GB!
However, I’m not so sure that the money saved up from the stimulus, which coincidentally doesn’t start to flow until this summer, won’t make some short-term bump in the economy in time for the election.
Of course, the Obami aren’t the most competent when it comes to economics. They are cutting it close and they may well have misjudged how much they have spooked the sordid, sweaty people who actually make the economy work.
I believe the Obami have also underestimated the intelligence and commonsense of American voters who might not have the time to decode all the details of the budget and programs, but know deep down that the government can’t create a healthy economy by spending trillions and trillions of dollars.
Even if there is some good economic news come autumn, it may not convince voters that this Obama fellow knows what he’s doing.
There is also the question of the bond market that I have found worrying for some time. From NRO:
We going to get called on our bonds. Maybe not this year, but soon.
“I suspect Baraq will welcome an al Qaeda attack, allowing him a declaration of martial law. At that point, we are done, finished, fini. Because it will never be lifted. Tom
Only a nuclear terrorist attack upon a major US city would allow an American President to declare near-permanent martial law. Nothing less would suffice.
“I’m not sure I agree that Obama has any residual good will. And I’m not sure about any natural reluctance of people to look at (question?) their own judgment in electing him. New Jersey, Virginia, and above all Massachusetts just about rule that out—if the fall of Bush (before he actually fell) hadn’t already done so. And I don’t for a minute think that he’s got until August to turn this thing around for himself and his party. My guess is that he might—might—have a month. The remaining puzzlement is, as always, that he doesn’t seem to care. Why might that be?” betsybounds
That 83% positive rating (of viewers) after the SOTU is what I base my presumption of Obama’s residual good will upon. What other explanation is there?
Some can easily admit to a mistake but everyone is reluctant to admit to bad judgment, it’s human nature.
The Mass. election, et al was the first opportunity for independents to send a message to the Democrats, it was only tangentially a message about Obama. Most who voted for him still support hoping he does well.
Most economists and politico’s consider August as the deadline for any economic improvement to affect the mid-term elections. That makes sense to me.
He doesn’t seem to care. Why? Simply because he’s an ideologue, a true believer, ironically, he has faith that if he stays the course, the cavalry has to ride over the hill in time and deliver his happy ending. He’s also a narcissist or possibly a sociopath. They don’t think quite like you or I.
BTW, thanks for the link to Ryan, one of the Republican’s brightest young stars. And economically, he’s right, we are going to pay a heavy price for allowing the democrats their ‘little socio/economic experiment’. The mid-term elections are going to determine just how big a price we shall pay.
I keep coming back to the Richard Epstein interview about Obama before the election:
Deep down Obama believes that the economy just keeps grinding out profits and his responsibility is to redirect those profits more equitably as he sees it.
I also take GB’s point (and have made the same in the past) that Obama sees himself as a major historical figure in a narrative where things will work out if only he stays the course.
The Tea Party is about to take a fatal step with this upcoming convention. With it, and with any formal group declaration of policy, they lose the independents who have been their strength.
I am sad to see this happen.
Hopefully there will be enough of a lower case tea party sentiment to see enough incumbents booted… but I’m no longer optimistic.
“”With it, and with any formal group declaration of policy, they lose the independents who have been their strength.””
We need a working definition of what an Independant is. How about…” Someone who doesn’t mind the wool pulled over his eyes but reflexively revolts when its pulled over his nose and mouth too”?
Pundits make lousy actuaries. I remember absolute assurances of impending party-demise following the elections of 1964, 1972, 1974, 1976, 1980, 1982, 1992, 1994, 1996, 2006, and 2008.
SAB made the point earlier:
“The current meme about getting small businesses to hire people misses the point. The reason they are not hiring is because they do not have enough job orders to keep the employees they have retained working full time.”
True enough, and more than grounds to disagree with my initial assertion regarding small businesses hiring and thereby boosting consumer confidence.
However, I think that assertion is more accurate of large businesses than small businesses.
Businesses in general won’t hire at all until they feel they can support that employee, and people won’t spend until they have a job to support their spending.
The thing that is being overlooked in the equation, however, is that many small businesses are started precisely because individuals have found they need to either replace a job they lost or have to add another revenue stream to support their own household budgets.
So, you have people starting small businesses out of their homes and such as a necessity, and eventually a small percentage of those businesses grow larger.
As those businesses grow larger, they have to add employees.
The martial law discussion is overwrought. I don’t read artfl’s long posts, but I assume it is he who brought it in to the discussion.
A significant percentage of people who supported Obama still do not get how much money we are talking about here. They are innumerate – yes, even the one’s with graduate degrees – and still perceive all totals as Big Number. They believe that the Bush spending and Obama spending are similar, so that’s a wash, except that Obama is spending it on good stuff while Bush spent it on bad stuff. I do not exaggerate when I tell you that most liberals I speak with – educated, well-read people – systematically exclude information that conflicts with their view. (Intelligence is not a factor in self-delusion, as they are playing chess against themselves and can choose which side wins). There is a core group who will not be moved by any data.
Fortunately, there are enough people who at least mostly want to know the right answer who have picked up that we are spending enormous amounts of money and don’t seem to be getting much back. They may hold little love for Republicans, but are determined to beat back this spending assault.
As to the GOP getting it – no, they don’t. Politicians are natural tinkerers with Plans, and always have mission creep. The Tea Partiers have a clear triple message: 1. stop spending so much money, 2. stop the corruption and 3. defend us from foreign enemies. Everyone has numbers 4-10 as well, but we agree less about those. The first three should be enough to win most elections in 2010 and maybe on into 2012.
Here’s my worry. Social conservatives will take a back seat if they decide they must – they’ve done it repeatedly – but they will not stand for being actively repudiated by the rest of the party. They will stay home. All those who calculate how many votes can be picked up if we would just drop this abortion/gay marriage rhetoric seem to discount that each step away from that loses some voters as well as gains them. Attend to both sides of that balance scale. I can’t tell you what the numbers are (I’ll bet Karl Rove could do it state-by-state), only that both sides of that Republican divide tend to focus on only one side of the equation.
Remember Ross Perot’s wild cards in 92 and 96.
I’d be satisfied in 2010 and 2012 to hear republican candidates claiming they don’t have all the answers to our woes but at least get that the liberal agenda must be stopped if we are to have any chance at saving ourselves.
I see no better way to unite people of all stripes on the right than by driving home the urgency to halt the left.
Well, let me make this perfectly clear (heh heh): I’m not saying I think we’re headed for martial law, and such discussions may indeed be “over-wrought” (although that being said, I don’t see any reason to rule it out totally). However, we continue to see that Obama and the Democrats in Congress are determined upon something that the clear majority of Americans–their constituents–actively, and in many cases passionately, oppose (Fox is reporting this morning that health care bill “compromise” discussions among the Democrats are in full swing, with a vote in both houses being unapologetically contemplated). With that, and with Obama’s abomination of a budget introduced this week, in mind, I would like someone who thinks artfldgr, I, and some others are just looney to please address my question. The puzzlement is, as always, that these guys don’t seem to care how unpopular their agenda is. Why might that be? I have a hard time thinking it’s because they’re just stupid.
“We need a working definition of what an Independant is. How about…” Someone who doesn’t mind the wool pulled over his eyes but reflexively revolts when its pulled over his nose and mouth too”?”
That’s one working definition but it’s incomplete. That’s because there are two kinds of independents; you address the first, the kind that stand for nothing and so, will fall for anything. It’s the second kind of independent where your definition fails; those who know exactly what they believe and recognize that both sides of the argument have at least some validity.
I’ve been an independent my entire adult life (I’m 61) and have never registered with any party. I know what I believe but don’t think that essentially half the public is completely wrong on everything, which is your premise, if you think, that the Democrats are completely wrong…
Betsyhounds, I posted this earlier but maybe it is an answer to the Obama indifference to the public will;
he assumes his natural superiority and treats with condescension us mere mortals. As Thomas Sowell wrote, he is self-anointed, Plato’s man of gold, the shepherd guiding the flock for its own good; lying is Ok because our weak reptilian minds can’t handle he truth. A truth that is bestowed upon him but not upon us.
I wonder why he puts up with us.
But as you noted, he/they do not put up with us.
The remaining puzzlement is, as always, that he doesn’t seem to care. Why might that be?
its funny that people who would not die to save family and friends and way of life, do not comprehend the mentality of people who WOULD die or sacrifice to acheive an end. the symptom of this is easy to spot…they cant assess any situatino where the other is going to do something and not end up on top. ie… they have no concept of sacrifice, and so they have no idea of what sacrifice can acheive for them.
i mean really… in a country where the poor get free little carts to drive around in and cell phones, and think they are oppressed, do you really think that they have any idea of the value of real self sacrafice to a cause bigger than them? so people like hux and others are completely blindsided and lose to any set of people will to fight so hard that they are beyond winning and losing in the traditional sense of acconting outcomes.
it mean for a man to gain everything but lose his soul? the secular version is what does it mean for a man to gain everything but lose a figment of imagination as a price? everyone here is so used to capitalisms freedom to choose only benififical outcomes or not deal, cripples them to seeing the way a game is played when there is no benificial outcome!!!!
got that? they are not selling a benificial outcome for us… so waht does that tell you? it tells you that they cant rely on being right at the end of the day and having people come around. to go into such a think to make such a horrible end for most, is not to go in thinking that the slaves will love you for it. so using the idea of a successful outcome for obama as a politician among free people is ABSURD. but absurdity is what rules when being reasonable in unreasonable situations. it gets you to thinkt hat the right thing to do, is an absurd thing to do in reality.
so where does reasonable assesments go when they are all based on the premise that the person executing a plan wants to come out of it like roses with the victims? i mean, do you think bernie madoff cared what his victims thought and that they wont like him after he succeeds? do you think that a suicide bomber who gives his life for the cause, the way OTHER REVOLUTIONARIES are prepared to do, cares that the victims are not going to think well of them after?
her is how it really plays out. if he doesnt succeed, peopel will hate him about as much as carter when the progressives get through with them. he gets to write books, and his family is set for afew generations. if he does succeed, then he is in a position like stalin, and how much we love him doesnt matter. does it? the ONLY bad outcome is the one they never believe in. which is to succeed, become a despot, AND THEN FALL. so from HIS place, he cant lose. you only think he can lose cause you think like a collectivist bottom thinker, and do not want to be alone from your group. he is a collectivist leader, he is the only one allowed to be an individual, and despots dont stand as a group of friends, they stand alone anyway.
so again… he has nothing to lose.
what did lenin lose? what did stalin lose? what did mao lose? waht did castro lose? waht did pol pot lose? waht did kim jong lose? the respect of people they would rather exterminate, but dont as expendible peopl;e in outher states can be used to take over them and take what they have if they do.
what do they lose? and now you know why they are trying. and why we wont add up the outcomes right. what we think is important isnt to them…and so what keeps us from acting…does not keep them from acting. its not any more complicated than that. which is why it works.
It would be awfully difficult for a martial law declaration to succeed in this country. For one thing, we have an armed, albeit disorganized, citizenry.
again… you and hux have not analysed this in light of who you are assessing. if i was assessing jeffry dahmer, i would use jeffry dahmer in my model, not me as jeffry dahmer. the difference is critical.
for instance. you all envision that the people with guns will fight and there will be all kinds of skirmishes and things and so we will prevail. do you really think the guys in mexico who were willing to mow down children at a birth day party are going to sit there and watch the show? or do you think they are going to call up the 100k members they have and tll them. go at it? those are not the state…and those are not the people your refering to. but where are they in your analysis? [with the pixies and faeires whom are also not believed in]
but you guys refuse to learn from history. you guys dont believe in marx own words. “the revolutionary holocaust”…i have quoted the whole paragraph, i ahve tried to lay out whats different. i keep saying that your playing whist, and they are playing chess, and your losing.
here is where your analysis is faulty. you assume that they want to win by subjugation. right? that they want the people on the other side of their usurption of power to be part of the future. but you forget what i said. about 30% of the population has to go to make their power place permanent! if your willing to remove and kill 100 million. do your tactics change? sure…
you just block off the bridges to ny.. and the few roads out. you dont even have to work it out…just look up where they put the tolls. NY has 4 days of food. what happens in 10 months in winter? the SAME way stalin won against armed hungarians. they didnt fight them. they blocked them in and starved them to death. let me know how well bullets do when they can cut the power, and water too…
the people inside the area will kill each other off to each each other. how do i know? ‘
its the history that my family lived through.
even the civil war was partially won by the north blockading the south. duh. if one is to discuss and make assesments as to outcomes of military moves, one should not do so from a place of ignorance. but remember. the god of the gaps in ignorance is now equivalent to experience, know how, merit, and that.
otherwise, you all wouldnt sit around and believe our future is parallel to the movie red dawn.
[which is in remake now]
Sorry, Betsy, I wasn’t clear above. I agree with you completely. A politically-motivated declaration of martial law by Obama would finish him, and the leftists, not America. He’d almost certainly break his teeth on such a declaration, for several reasons. Besides an armed citizenry, the military, as you point out, would at best be a questionable quantity in implementing that declaration.
Btw, sometime ago I reversed my position on the Second Amendment for just this reason. I read somewhere that there had been only a few thousand members of the Gestapo. If everyone they’d tried to arrest had been met them with a pistol and taken out one Gestapo agent with him, so that eventually every arrest was a SWAT-like affair, they wouldn’t have gotten very far. With an unarmed populace, not a problem.
We are in a position that the people who were right obama from day one, are once again marginlized in favor of the people who were wrong. why? because the people who are wrong want their chance to be right, and if they dont have the right answer, do the coll;ectiv thing and push out the ones who so far HAVE BEEN RIGHT!!!
i would suggest going back and looking at your comments all back before obama was elected. your singing the exact same tune against reality. take a step back and look.back then we were wrong for saying he is going to lie, run things up. that he was going to act like the communists and radical progressives that he surroudned himself with. and hux, occam, and others gave all the same BS kind of answers that they are giving now. they just didnt tally that they were ever wrong. so far… they have been almost 100% wrong.
AT EVERY turn you guys have been wrong!
lets give a quick accounting here. i said that his friend meant that he was serious bad news. and that you know a man by his friends, and this is a man intimate with stalinists. then i was called a cold war throwback. a xenophobe. paranoid.
come today.. those who were against that position act like they were always on it. that it was obvious. or now they concede that that did indicate somethign. but did they conclude they were wrong? no… thye were all over the map that they cant even tell what wrong is. fine
when i said and others said he is not stupid that he is malicious. what did we get? you are racists. you dotn understand socialism. he woudl never do that. he woudlnt ruin it for future people of color. the cold war is dead, communism and dictatorship of the proletariat is not there. now we are STARTING to accept that he might be malicous. that his friends are rinning things into the ground.
want to know where we are right now? we are sitting in a coffee klatsch and thinking amoung ourselves… Maybe herr hitler DOES mean what he says in mein kampf? i mean.. MAYBE the progressives really do mean what they wrote about..
[we didnt take 100 million tortured to death as serious enough!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!] i can list out more things
but then i am too long to be listened to
of course… because its EASY to assert the impossiblitly of something in a sentence…moon travel is not possible…and refutation takes waht? so the morons who think that that game is the same as honest debate dont get it, and the morons who watch dont get it also. right now iran can strike the US. in fact without a missle it can!!!!!!!!!!
metal storm can shoot 100,000 rounds a minute…and you think a man with a browning high power and a scope will win against, drones, metal storm, mortars that can fire at them within 3 feet of target from 20 miles away. meanwhile, we forget that THEY are the side that accepts REAL scorched earth as a ACCEPTABLE Tactic. i mean really… china can refil every person in the US with SPARE people from their country. so how valuable are you as an asset when your not even a cooperative one?
study history.. .it tells you what people are willing to do.
just talk to Rabbi abraham cooper of the simon wiesenthal center about korean defectors.
Kwon Hyuk (new name):
“The glass chamber is sealed airtight. It is 3.5 meters wide, 3 meters long and 2.2 meters high. [There] is the injection tube going through the unit. Normally, a family sticks together and individual prisoners stand separately around the corners. Scientists observe the entire process from above, through the glass.”
Dr Kim
“We wanted to determine how much gas was necessary to annihilate the whole city of Seoul,”
when assesing tactics, strategy and outcome…failure to assess what the other side thinks is ok…is a failure to understand what can happen to YOU
[edited for length by neo-neocon]
I read somewhere that there had been only a few thousand members of the Gestapo. If everyone they’d tried to arrest had been met them with a pistol and taken out one Gestapo agent with him, so that eventually every arrest was a SWAT-like affair, they wouldn’t have gotten very far. With an unarmed populace, not a problem.
time to go back and read. the people at that time DID have guns…but they didnt stop the gestapo. i know why, but you barely know about the conditions your talking about. that paragraph above shows you dont.
“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty. So let’s not have any native militia or native police. German troops alone will bear the sole responsibility for the maintenance of law and order throughout the occupied Russian territories, and a system of military strong-points must be evolved to cover the entire occupied country.” –Adolf Hitler, dinner talk on April 11, 1942, quoted in Hitler’s Table Talk 1941-44: His Private Conversations, Second Edition (1973), Pg. 425-426. Translated by Norman Cameron and R. H. Stevens. Introduced and with a new preface by H. R. Trevor-Roper. The original German papers were known as Bormann-Vermerke.
now why would you have that conversation if one had already removed guns and had complete control?….
Nazi Weapons Act of 1938 (Translated to English)
Classified guns for “sporting purposes”. All citizens who wished to purchase firearms had to register with the Nazi officials and have a background check. Presumed German citizens were hostile and thereby exempted Nazis from the gun control law. Gave Nazis unrestricted power to decide what kinds of firearms could, or could not be owned by private persons. The types of ammunition that were legal were subject to control by bureaucrats.
Juveniles under 18 years could not buy firearms and ammunition.
any of that sound familiar? so brilliant one.. how did they do it?
they sent troops to the homes of the registered guns at night, a few at a time. when something happened in an area, they used military force and a list of names to grab people. if they found a gun that wasnt turned in, they murdered the whole family, the neighbors and a few others for good measuire. by the next day, they had their guns.
this law was passed the day AFTER kristallnacht…you know, the night when the people were so pissed off at jews being only 3% of the population but owning a disproportionate amount of stores, banks, businesses and wealth. isnt that the SAME argument we use here? of course it is! but you argue that we are different.
they even made laws in which the favored could have guns, and the disfavored (jews, gypsies, etc.. though you now only read jews), were not allowed.
[kind of like allowing the oppressed to have guns and removing the guns from their oppressors, and then let class hatred, hegel, and the people do your work for you] heck.. if you read congressional records and things, you can read about the requests by senators and such to have laws from nazi germany translated, and copied some into our books
but we are different…you should read how we reported that here.
Searches of Jewish homes were calculated to seize firearms and assets and to arrest adult males. The American Consulate in Stuttgart was flooded with Jews begging for visas: “Men in whose homes old, rusty revolvers had been found during the last few days cried aloud that they did not dare ever again return to their places of residence or business. In fact, it was a mass of seething, panic-stricken humanity.”4
and the german army didnt have drones, robots, computer controlled 50 caliber sniper rifles, infra red scopes, starlight scopes, daisy cutters, and on and on…
Finding out which Jews had firearms was not too difficult. The liberal Weimar Republic passed a Firearm Law in 1928 requiring extensive police records on gun owners. Hitler signed a further gun control law in early 1938.
of course YEARS ago when we tried to tell people that the reason for gun registry was not criminals, but was how despots disarm people. but that was done so long ago, its now normal…THATS chess..
the ONLY way to do this, is to put peices in place way before they are needed.
that way, its easy to deflect their implication.
[edited for length by neo-neocon]
“”I know what I believe but don’t think that essentially half the public is completely wrong on everything, which is your premise, if you think, that the Democrats are completely wrong…””
Geoffrey Britain
Yes. Pretty much exactly 180 degrees wrong on almost every issue. Which makes perfect sense if you consider their political ideas are formed out of a nearly 180 degree inverted sense of morality. Just ponder the whole planet over people issue to get my drift.
BetsyBounds –
I think it is highly unlikely that martial law ever be declared in something other than a true full-blown emergency. I have to think that O and his ilk look over fly-over country and think ‘all of those bitter clingers are armed, and hate us’. And I think they would fear the military, if they ever started thinking that way.
I’ve always been glad to be on the right side.
Artfldgr: the thing is—
If you’re correct and we are no different in this country, and this is the level of ruthlessness involved with the left here—then the die was cast long ago and there is no way out and never has been, unless people had seen the end result back in the 50s or 60s, and nipped it in the bud. That sort of foresight is not ordinarily human nature, and in any case it did not occur.
If you’re not correct, however, and if we are different in this country, and that what you describe is not the level of ruthlessness involved with the left here, then the next set of elections can begin overturning what we see is an attempt to move this country hard left.
That’s basically it. That most of us prefer to believe the latter scenario is not stupid. I happen to still think that, although you may be correct historically, that sort of hardness and ruthlessness is not present in the left in this country.
I could be wrong. But if I am wrong, there would be nothing to do about it at this point anyway. It would be too late, and it would have already been too late decades ago, because there is no way to get enough people to see into the future and nip things in the bud.
The puzzlement is, as always, that these guys don’t seem to care how unpopular their agenda is. Why might that be? I have a hard time thinking it’s because they’re just stupid.
betsybounds: Why can’t the Obami be stupid or, more accurately IMO, blinded by ideology, personality cultishness and greed?
We’ve seen plenty of examples. Obama’s visit to Copenhagen to get the Olympics. Obama’s media overexposure. Obama’s roaming the halls of the Copenhagen Climate Summit begging the Chinese premier to talk to him. The failure to close Guantanamo. The failure of Cash-for-Clunkers. The failure of engagement with Iran. The failure of Israel-Palestine negotiations. The failure to enforce the Obami’s choice of president in Honduras. The walkback of the KSM trial in NYC. The failures to pass health care and cap and trade bills. The inability to stop an unknown from winning Ted Kennedy’s seat. I could go on.
If Team Obama has secret powers that could protect them from huge losses in 2010 — much less instituting an Obama Reich in the US — why haven’t they unleashed those powers yet?
Is this all some cunning plan and in early November we will wake up to martial law?
Or is this what it looks like — a cumulative string of abject failures by a team of delusionally confident Ivy Leaguers with little or no executive, business, or military experience?
the reason we won in wwii was that we were too afraid of losing.
the reason we lost in vietnam, and will lose in the near future, is that we are sure we will win.
only those afraid of losing will defend what they will lose, those who are sure of victory, or the impossibility of loss, like the japanese, do not prevent it.
That most of us prefer to believe the latter scenario is not stupid.
I’d say it’s not just a matter of preferring to believe, but that one can mount strong arguments that our country and our people are in fact different from those that have gone fascist.
Furthermore I’d say that the successful resistance to Obama’s big bills, his plummeting polls, the growth of the Tea Parties, the Republican gubernatorial victories in NJ and VA, the astonishing victory of Scott Brown in Mass, the ongoing retirements of Democratic candidates, and the possiblity that Republicans could take the House and the Senate, glowingly support the argument that America cannot be easily rolled into fascism.
Obama called on Congress to deliver a “forceful response” to Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, and Kerry now says he favors the repeal of the First Amendment
The Hill reports that Kerry and Sen. Arlen Specter (R2D2, Pa.) are the only two senators so far to back the idea of repeal.
[as the author points out We laugh at the Kerry-Specter initiative to repeal the First Amendment, because it has zero chance of winning the support of 67 senators and 290 representatives, the threshold for even proposing a constitutional amendment. We are, however, even more appalled with Kerry and Specter than we were before, if you can believe it. ]
Russia returning to its old form?
JTA responds…
jta.org/news/article/2010/02/03/1010463/jewish-agency-drops-plans-for-st-petersburg-meeting-blames-russian
[it was always planned that they would REVERT as they never removed those who ran the place. just cahnged the labels. checka, vchecka, smersh, kgb, now fsb… it would be like germany being allowed to keep the SS and we all believe that they are not nazi]
“Two weeks ago we were advised for the first time about some outstanding issues regarding the legal status for the Jewish Agency in Russia,” the letter said. “We immediately submitted all the required documentation and have since been waiting for an official response. In the interim we have received numerous unofficial messages but no clear answer. Today we heard via the office of the Israeli Ambassador in Moscow that the Russian Foreign Ministry still maintains that our legal status in Russia is not adequate for convening a meeting of the Board of Governors.”
if you know whats been going on there on the ground.. this would tno be a surprise.
marx was antisemetic. so his followers are and were. (is obama isreal freindly?)
its funny that we can make jokes about the usefulness of rearanging the deck chairs on the titanic and then believing everything was then ok..
but when the communist state who murdered millions does the same thing… we think it represented meaningful and fundemental changes.
they are now realizing that they can never catch up with communism, and they cant deal hacving capitalism… (a recent article).. and so, russian imperialism is back..
dont think so?
then ask them to give back parts of georgia they took..
imperialists dont give back the land after they liberate… a nuanced point that we miss. which is why we think the US is imperialist (which is why we kept japan, germany, france, north africa, belgium, spain, and such… ) and russia is not (which is why they gave back latvia, estonia, lituania, poland, slovakia, czech republic, hungary, ukraine, islands off japan after wwii, and many other places)
inversions..
we are the enemy so the enemy is our friend.
duh
If you’re correct and we are no different in this country, and this is the level of ruthlessness involved with the left here–then the die was cast long ago and there is no way out and never has been, unless people had seen the end result back in the 50s or 60s, and nipped it in the bud. That sort of foresight is not ordinarily human nature, and in any case it did not occur.
actually it DID occur..
we just dont know our history..
i remember about a year ago watching film of testimoney, and one of the testimony was a man who was describing how small publishers were selling to americans communist propaganda. and he in turn showed that within that was the comiterm order to take over race groups, feminist groups, and such. about a decade later was the pizzy stuff in england and other stuff here.
what do you think HUAC was about?
the laws (some still on the books) that forbid communism (another reason to change the name).
what happened was that the propaganda worked. lattimore who was a spy wrote a book declaring mccarthy as having his own political system, mccarthyism…
how did that attempt go? mccarthy turned out to be right, and lattimore turned out to be a spy. but our culture thinks what?
and over the years… when someone said a registry system was how the nazi’s, disarmed the people…did we believe those people, or call them names, racists, and gun lovers of murder? well, that was the prevention happening that you didnt see.
you didnt see it because the level of knowlege you had was from the side calling the names. the level of history you had couldnt call out who was busted for not knowing, or injecting fantasy and such in the conversation.
kennedy was an anticommunist… but when good old uncle spoke with the kgb for political advice… what did we do? left him in office until he died, and then thought that the office should go to a copy of him (which it didnt). when it became known that harry dexter white was a communist and that the federal reserve was compromised in form and idea… what did we do? i will tell you what we did.
we all made sure to take the reasonable position and give them benefit of the doubt over and over.
we wanted nice nice in the senate and house beacuse they taught us that the adversarial system was wrong… yeah, wrong cause you cant get big sweeping power grabs with it.
now they are pushing new history curriculum which erases american history before communist/progressivism in the US and starts history in the 1870s. (thats in north carolina) again… tons of people have been fighting it. not all of them are crackpots and loones.
lots of them know the same history i know. the VALID history (or do you think there is a conspiracy in that i gave out the history and glenn beck copied what i said weeks later?)
but reasonable people blamed the cassandras for predictng where we are. they didnt want to blame the people actually doing the acts that made the others sound crazy when they told you!!!!!!!!
transferrence of blame went to the person acting, to the person reporting… the crazier obama, or someone else behaves.
the more funny names they call me here. the more they want less information, the more they want the reality to go away.
and like in companies. there are two ways to do this. you can actually work hard and clean up… (but thats not reasonable).. or you can pretend that its not there, and go after the people who are trying to wake you up early.
guess which one people take.
anyway.. i am at the point that if they call me one more name, push one more bad thing about the truth i am telling, which they can verify
(ever notice no one ever tries to show my facts wrong?), and i will accept an offer from the progressives.
i mean after all, what do you think they are going to do to me once this comes to a head? i would have been better to shut up and never say anything.
If you’re not correct, however, and if we are different in this country, and that what you describe is not the level of ruthlessness involved with the left here, then the next set of elections can begin overturning what we see is an attempt to move this country hard left.
ONLY if we forget the concept of two steps forward one step back. the founding fathers said CONSTANT VIGILANCE . the problem i have is that we have little experience as a people in these things. they ARE more ruthless than i can express. history does a better job, if you know it.
my position is from preponderance of evidence.
HOW TO FIGHT?
easy… our founding fathers said how. not with guns, until guns are needed. not with violence until nothing but violence. remember, if king george conceeded what would have happened? there is a reason they take over information… because when the people know, they can resist by ignoring them. real power does not come from the end of a gun. you only need a gun to take power away from someone else that has it when you dont have the gun. so the way you combat this is to know history!!!!
i was NEVER taken in by any of this…i never let the unreasonable be reasonable.
they know it too…which is why they start with children
and like euthanasia
because they found that once you found ouyt the truth, like the red and blue pills, you cant go back!
neo… can you go back to how you used to be when you didnt know them better? of course not. there are no literature categories for people who found the truth of capitalism, and warned others.. there are a huge number of literature for those who found out the truth about socialism and communusm, and tried to warn everyone.
the number is large and it spans those outside, inside, part of it that left, and more.
That’s basically it. That most of us prefer to believe the latter scenario is not stupid. I happen to still think that, although you may be correct historically, that sort of hardness and ruthlessness is not present in the left in this country.
so you think that after meeting an aborted baby who made it, such people would not throw live babies to die? thats not ruthless enough?
how about having to dismember a live baby as a means of doing the abortion?
“The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.” — Margaret Sanger, letter to Clarence Gamble, Dec. 10,1939
planning to commit genocide and then renaming and relabling the same organization, and placing 4 times the number of them in race neighborhoods isnt ruthless and devious?
is this ruthless?
“The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race.” — Sally Miller Gearhart, The Future – If There Is One – Is Female
“If anyone is prosecuted for filing a false report, then victims of real attacks will be less likely to report them.” — David Angier (Massachusetts District Attorney
(so convicting men on false allegations is ideologically ok.. hows that for ruthless?) and i broiught the feminsts as examples beacuse women are supposed to be the NICER ones.
“If the power of persuasion doesn’t work, we will use the persuasion of power if that’s what is necessary.”
who said that? well the current seiu guy has been saying it… but it was originally Owen F. Bieber in 1984!!! he was with the UAW.
[edited for length by neo-neocon]
“The leaders in the German sterilization movement state repeatedly that their legislation was formulated after careful study of the California experiment as reported by Mr. Gosney and Dr. [Paul] Popenoe. It would have been impossible, they say, to understake such a venture involving some 1 million people without drawing heavily upon previous experience elsewhere.” (2) Who is Dr. Paul Popenoe? He was a leader in the U.S. eugenics movement and wrote (1933) the article ‘Eugenic Sterilization’ in the journal (BCR) that Margaret Sanger started. How many Americans did Dr. Popenoe estimate should be subjected to sterilization? Between five million and ten million Americans. “The situation [in the U.S.A] will grow worse instead of better if steps are not taken to control the reproduction of mentally handicapped. Eugenic sterilization represents one such step that is practicable, humanitarian, and certain in its results.”
but we deny the negro project is a eugenics program despite the founders starting the american eugenics movement
AND supplying the necessary inspiration from american progressives.
so in reality, they were copying us…
then we realized what it was, and sanger had to rename her program… progressivism, like bolshivism becamea bad word, and we completely oppposed the ideology.
then over time, with a new name, they then went about the same ruthless plans.
the difference was that the americans were more subtle… they would do with conniving, scheming, plotting and collusion, what others did openly.
that is, in a bizarre way, the other despots thought that such skulduggery was beneath them and they did their things in the open.
after wwii… this changed… and they changed.
The Germans final solution started twenty-seven years later than the U.S. programs did.
we continued to sterilize people up till the 1980s.
and now obamas czars and others are saying we need a program like chinas forced sterilization.
so have they changed, or have they become more ruthless by loving the fun of tricking people over fighting with them?
Margaret Sanger corresponded with Ernst Rudin
who is he?
Ernst Rudin was director of the foremost German eugenics research institute (Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Genealogy, in Munich, Germany).
dont you think that this history would change the idea of abortion in america?
and how did they sell eugenics?
oh yes… as a womans liberation new right..
and that all that women now have would be lost if they stopped killing their babies, and stopped sexing with strangers without regard.
sure… of course.
but hey, who am i to argue?
[i mean we have been doctoring popiulatino figures byu having an open border!!! our people have exterminated 50 million… we are self removing ourselves, and others who are more easy for progressives to control are being let in]
In an address to the German Society for Rassenhygiene [Race-hygiene] Ernst Rudin, a professor of psychiatry who was one of the organization’s original members and now its head, recalled the early, fruitless days when the racial hygienists had labored in vain to alert the public to special value of the Nordic race as “culture creators” and the danger of “unnatural” attempts to preserve the health of heredity defectives. Now Rassenhygiene [Race-hygiene] was finally receiving the attention it deserved, and Rudin virtually slavered over the man whose efforts produced this change: “The significance of Rassenhygiene did not become evident to all aware Germans until the political activity of Adolf Hitler and only through his work has our 30 year long dream of translating Rassen- hygiene into action finally become a reality.” Terming it a “duty of honor” (Ehrenpflicht) for the society to aid in implementing Hitler’s program, Rudin proclaimed, “We can hardly express our efforts more plainly or appropriately than in the words of the Fuhrer: ‘Whoever is not physically or mentally fit must not pass on his defects to his children. The state must take care that only the fit produce children. Conversely, it must be regarded as reprehensible to withhold healthy children from the state.’ (E. Rudin, “Aufgaben and Ziele der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Rassenhygiene,” Archiv Fur Rassen- und Gesellschafts- biologie 28 (1934): 228-29)
Three months before the German ‘sterilization law’ was passed, Rudin’s “Eugenic Sterilization: An Urgent Need” article was published in the journal (BCR) Margaret Sanger started and continued to influence until its demise in 1940.
it only died because normal people where aborhed by it.
just as in the south, they abhored racism!!!
so the dems threw picnics in white areas and invited blacks and all had a nice time
and in the black areas, where whites couldnt see or know what was happening, they hunted black republicans down.
[edited for length by neo-neocon]
I’d say it’s not just a matter of preferring to believe, but that one can mount strong arguments that our country and our people are in fact different from those that have gone fascist.
given that a large majority can claim genetic heritage back to the same people.
how so?
given that our progressives gave them the ideas
how so?
The first step would thus be to control the intake and output of morons, mental defectives, epileptics.
The second step would be to take an inventory of the secondary group such as illiterates, paupers, unemployables, criminals, prostitutes, dope-fiends; classify them in special departments under government medical protection, and segregate them on farms and open spaces as long as necessary for the strengthening and development of moral conduct.
Having corralled this enormous part of our population and placed it on a basis of health instead of punishment, it is safe to say that fifteen or twenty millions of our population would then be organized into soldiers of defense—defending the unborn against their own disabilities.
The third step would be to give special attention to the mothers’ health, to see that women who are suffering from tuberculosis, heart or kidney disease, toxic goitre, gonorrhea, or any disease where the condition of pregnancy disturbs their health are placed under public health nurses to instruct them in practical, scientific methods of contraception in order to safeguard their lives—thus reducing maternal mortality.
The above steps may seem to place emphasis on a health program instead of on tariffs, moratoriums and debts, but I believe that national health is the first essential factor in any program for universal peace.
With the future citizen safeguarded from hereditary taints, with five million mental and moral degenerates segregated, with ten million women and ten million children receiving adequate care, we could then turn our attention to the basic needs for international peace.
There would then be a definite effort to make population increase slowly and at a specified rate, in order to accommodate and adjust increasing numbers to the best social and economic system.
In the meantime we should organize and join an International League of Low Birth Rate Nations to secure and maintain World Peace.
Summary of address before the New History Society, January 17th, New York City
Plus, here’s a note: I certainly did not mean to imply that there were not people who saw what was going on. My point is that they were unable to effectively nip it in the bud despite seeing and warning. There are always Cassandras, but they tend not to be believed because what they are warning about is only proven to be the case ex-post facto. At the time, those people seem mad, and are mixed in with others who actually are mad and who are warning about things such as aliens from outer space.
So we are not in any disagreement on the fact that there were many people who understood and who warned. My point is that they were not heeded, and the long Gramscian march went on. As for the rest, I agree that knowledge—especially of history—is good. That’s one of the reasons I write this blog. I just am not at all sure knowledge of history is enough to combat that Gramscian march that’s already occurred. But it is important to try.
As for ruthlessness—the examples you use are from the past. I was referring to the people in charge right now, including Obama.
If Team Obama has secret powers that could protect them from huge losses in 2010 – much less instituting an Obama Reich in the US – why haven’t they unleashed those powers yet?
Is this all some cunning plan and in early November we will wake up to martial law?
Or is this what it looks like – a cumulative string of abject failures by a team of delusionally confident Ivy Leaguers with little or no executive, business, or military experience?
because as i said, they unmask themselves a bit early every time. (which is why they dont win 100%)…i said that long ago. but rather than ask me rational questions like your doing fecetiously to sound smart, you did an end around.
they think they have power, and some end up taking their masks off early, or in company they are relaxed in. this is the time when things can be disrupted for a while, becuase this is the time when people recoil. since they coordinate on a time table, they have to hit their marks as they go. miss too many and they then have to take a while to maneuver into place. ergo the harder they push when everyone thinks they should stop. its a keystone point if they refuse to drop it, and if the keystone dont make it in, or the parts of the stone needed dont, then the arch cant stand. if they had control.. they would not have to play games they play… but if you listen carefully they give their tells.
what then happens is we then convince ourselves that a tell is not a tell. after all, its reasonable to give others the benifit of the doubt, right? (and i keep bringing that up as thats the thing con men use, and sociopaths, and other maladaptive strategies against the good in heart). you see this as a battle between two parties. you dont realize that, its people in both parties that are of the same idea? i explained it, but you were too busy trying to slam me than get it. like a parent who says you can have peas or carrots, you dont realize you still get a vegetable no matter what choice.
of course they are going to lose to republicans.remember my example of feminists for porn, and feminists against porn, all united under one umbrella above the two issues? you think its a dem rep thing, when its a progressive democrat/progressive republican vs democrat/republican thing. you cant get it unless you understand your opponent, and i said, failure to do that, and you wouldnt even know the “wolf in sheeps clothing” next to you… (fabians)
control both side of an issue and you control the whole issue. for a person who belittles me a lot you sure dont get when a person has been dropping hints as to things the size of cinder blocks. the people blocking them in their majority are not republicans… are they? no… its the progressive caucus and progressives (socialists, communists, menshiviks, liberals, call them whatever you want this decade after this attempt they will have a new name anyway), against those who are not.
what is the magic they will pull next election? we will vote to get rid of the DEMS..,and we will vote in a new set of progressives who are under the republican ticket. not only that, but since the reps are the party to hate, guess which side is going to seem to do things? oh… and if it fails, which do you think will walk away with the blame, republicans or progressives?
Is this all some cunning plan and in early November we will wake up to martial law?
no… martial law will become apparant when we realize we have been played and we cant do anything about it. that is, when all these laws COME INTO EFFECT at the same time, with china or others sayin screw it and pulling the debt to ZERO in one month. how many symbols and signs does one need to know that they are yelling we meet at 2012.. that wont be till after chavez has his factories up and they are sure that they can send the problem army people to another country. how do you think they solve the army problem in other countries?
that is, a conflict allows you to separate your forces in any way you want. and so those soldiers your saying wont let it happen, wont be here.
they will be in columbia, afghanistan, maybe iran now that they can launch a emp attack. kind of hard to fight your way from south america, up through the canal, and then counter others in the US when you get here. even harder from afghanistan.
in case you havent noticed, obama broke his promise to stop the war..
Or is this what it looks like – a cumulative string of abject failures by a team of delusionally confident Ivy Leaguers with little or no executive, business, or military experience?
oh yes they are incompetent.. but i never said this was their plan…did i? the only way such incompetents with skeletons can get anywhere is if others are feeding them. i said this long ago when i talked of post turtle.
“You know…. he didn’t get there by himself, he doesn’t belong there, he doesn’t know what to do while he’s up there, and you just want to help the dumb shit get down”
funny… but it has a bigger implication when applied to people not turtles in the back hills.
but dont worry.. you have the technique of debate judo, where you grab their examples and draw them into wild assumptions… and yet refuse to learn history to give a common ground so that they dont use those examples. in this way, ignorance becomes a weapon in social situations. i try to explain what happened in germany, you dont dance, you dont push, you pull it back and go to the extreme of it cant happen here, where are the goosesteppers.
and you seem to win
not only that, you marginalized all the people, not just me, who know history and which history could help you understand how things work.
the nazi ordeal was not being used as a negative to project whats happening here… its being used as a common ground to understand principals of action.
i mean really, dont you think it took great skill to foment in the time of two presidential terms a whole new culture out of a comic book and have everyone dance as the devil played the tune?
to say no, is to know it can happen by accident…to say yes, is to imply there was mechanics behind all the distracting ruffles, flourishes, and distractions… no way out, unless you deny humans are kind of the same all over. not equal, not exactly akin, but generally. which is what this argument does get to. humans somehow become different when they sail across the ocean and immigrate to the US from germany, russia, hungary, ukraine, and all those socialist states. thats why we are socialist, they are so different.
anyway… i tire of this…
Artfl: “anyway… i tire of this…”
Not tired enough.
I have read almost nothing of artfl’s posts, but I did catch some of the answers to him and scanned back into his work for his responses.
Artfl, you have no idea what the American people are like. You have been told this but refuse to accept it because of your limited perspective. You see it as genes + ideas = character.
People who were brought up differently act differently. They have a different culture, different responses, different interpretations. The Anglosphere in general, and America in specific, is different than the rest of the world. You would prefer to think otherwise, and reason that people here must be just like the people you grew up with, and that we are foolish for not seeing that. Somewhere above you have said many of us were wrong at every turn, but the evidence you provide for that is only your interpretation of selected events. A better argument could be made that you have been wrong at every turn, connecting dots according to your own imagination and calling those connections the only possible picture that can be drawn. You are a bright but paranoid person, straight out of the 2nd chapter of Chesterton’s Orthodoxy http://www.ccel.org/ccel/chesterton/orthodoxy.v.html. The evidence for this is that you have displayed no ability to reframe, nor ability to admit 1% error. When challenged, you run in a tighter circle, admitting even less contrary information, acknowledging ever less of the validity of other’s perspective. You grew up in a paranoid place. That world is applicable to many places in space and time, but not this place.
I say this for visitors more than for Artfl, who I know from long professional experience will be incapable of taking this in. I didn’t want folks dropping by to think that we let paranoia go unchallenged. Most of us just don’t read him and have no interest in his CFR Trilateralist fantasies.
I wonder if we need pre-election ads to warm-up a region to Republican-libertarian ideas.
hello there and thank you for your information — I have definitely picked up anything new
from right here. I did however expertise some technical issues
using this website, as I experienced to reload the web site many times previous to
I could get it to load properly. I had been wondering if your web hosting is OK?
Not that I’m complaining, but slow loading instances times will often affect your placement in google and can damage your high quality score if ads and marketing with Adwords. Anyway I am adding this RSS to my email and can look out for a lot more of your respective interesting content. Make sure you update this again soon.