Republicans: “Men Are Weak. Leaderless. Divided.” Wait, That’s Democrats
Monday, November 30th, 2009If you listen to Democrats, Elrond’s assessment of mankind as given to Gandalf the Grey in Tolkien’s classic Lord of the Rings describes Republicans:
“Men are weak. There’s no strength left in the world of Men. They’re scattered, divided, leaderless.”
Liberals look at Republicans and see hopelessness on the other side. They rejoice. These are the same people who control every branch of government and the press and are failing miserably to fulfill any hope of real change.
Still, the Left worries over Republican rifts. From the Washington Post’s Jon Cohen and Dan Balz:
The Republican rank and file is largely in sync with GOP lawmakers in their staunch opposition to efforts by President Obama and Democrats to enact major health-care legislation, but a new Washington Post poll also reveals deep dissatisfaction among GOP voters with the party’s leadership as well as ideological and generational differences that may prove big obstacles to the party’s plans for reclaiming power.
Republicans and GOP-leaning independents are overwhelmingly negative about Obama and the Democratic Party more broadly, with nearly all dissatisfied with the administration’s policies and almost half saying they are “angry” about them. About three-quarters have a more basic complaint, saying Obama does not stand for “traditional American values.” More than eight in 10 say there is no chance they would support his reelection.
But for all the talk among Republican elected officials about a nascent comeback after gubernatorial victories in Virginia and New Jersey this month, there is also broad frustration among Republican voters about the party’s direction, detachment from its congressional representatives and a schism over its priorities.
As weak, divided and leaderless as the Republican party seems right now, they still beat the Democrats.
If the Democrats are so concerned, perhaps they ought to fix their own house. Right now, the troops, even the sycophantic ones, are restless. Today, Michael Moore wrote a Dear Obama letter:
Do you really want to be the new “war president”? If you go to West Point tomorrow night (Tuesday, 8pm) and announce that you are increasing, rather than withdrawing, the troops in Afghanistan, you are the new war president. Pure and simple. And with that you will do the worst possible thing you could do — destroy the hopes and dreams so many millions have placed in you. With just one speech tomorrow night you will turn a multitude of young people who were the backbone of your campaign into disillusioned cynics. You will teach them what they’ve always heard is true — that all politicians are alike. I simply can’t believe you’re about to do what they say you are going to do. Please say it isn’t so.
It is not your job to do what the generals tell you to do. We are a civilian-run government. WE tell the Joint Chiefs what to do, not the other way around. That’s the way General Washington insisted it must be. That’s what President Truman told General MacArthur when MacArthur wanted to invade China. “You’re fired!,” said Truman, and that was that. And you should have fired Gen. McChrystal when he went to the press to preempt you, telling the press what YOU had to do. Let me be blunt: We love our kids in the armed services, but we f*#&in’ hate these generals, from Westmoreland in Vietnam to, yes, even Colin Powell for lying to the UN with his made-up drawings of WMD (he has since sought redemption).
From Big Hollywood a response:
Below are the first few paragraphs, but Moore’s closing plea — a purely symbolic hand-wringing of concern for the Afghan people — is odd considering he wants President Obama to withdraw from Afghanistan, which can only mean turning 25 million innocent people over to brutal Islamics. Oh, well, being a Leftist means never having to make sense…
And that’s the problem with the Left these days [A nice take down by Jules Crittendon here]. They lack intellectual coherence and yes, leadership.
If the Left is looking for leadership, they better look beyond President Barack Obama, or Harry Reid. Now, Nancy Pelosi? She’ll lead, alright. She’ll lead the party right off the radical cliff into oblivion. President Obama and Harry Reid will wander the wilderness seeking the politically expedient solution.
There are no politically expedient solutions that work, though–well none that involve liberal ideas. America is not a liberal country. She’s a center-right, God-loving, work-desiring country. The middle class, common-sense aesthetic , as long as it’s not plunged into poverty, still reigns. Give the Democrats another couple years of disastrous policies both foreign and domestic and the country will be enslaved by liberal policies. The country will be destroyed from within. They will rule precisely nothing. The Golden Goose will be killed.
Leaderless. Divided. Democrats. Really, it’s the best way. Heaven forbid they unite. May they fumble along until the Republicans retake the government helm.
Obama Knew The Crashers? He Met Them Before–UPDATED
Monday, November 30th, 2009In case you missed it this weekend…
Is there more to this story? The Anchoress thinks so. Gateway Pundit has more details about how the Crashers are buddies with Obama’s buddy terrorist-loving Rashid Khalidi.
Anyway, American Power has more. I just wanted you guys to know that there might be more story behind the fame-grabbing meme–which is for sure true.
At the very least, this is more evidence of an amateurish administration.
UPDATE:
Amateur hour, indeed. From the Washington Post:
E-mails turned over to the Secret Service show that Tareq and Michaele Salahi had sought a top Defense Department official’s help to gain access to last week’s White House state dinner.
People familiar with the inquiry into how the Salahis were able to attend Tuesday’s gala, even though they weren’t on the official guest list, said the Salahis exchanged e-mails with Michele S. Jones, special assistant to the secretary of defense and the Pentagon-based liaison to the White House. It was unclear how well the Salahis know Jones, but Jones includes the Salahis’ lawyer, Paul W. Gardner, as one of her 50 friends on Facebook.
These people surprised no one. Via The Anchoress
Election: Democrats Should Be Nervous, Republicans Should Wake Up
Wednesday, November 4th, 2009Quick takes:
Hoffman loss: What She said. Michelle Malkin nails it:
Conservatives owe NY-23 candidate Doug Hoffman immeasurable gratitude. He overcame impossible odds (single digits just a month ago) to come within two points of defeating Democrat Bill Owens. Hoffman had zero name recognition. National Republican Party officials dumped nearly $1 million into the race on behalf of radical leftist GOP candidate Dede Scozzafava, who then turned around, endorsed Owens and siphoned off 5 percent of the vote with her name still on the ballot after she dropped out.
More here.
New Jersey: This election could have gone any way. New Jersey, Chicago, Philadelphia, New Orleans are cess-pits of electoral despair. Corrupt. So a Christie win is a surprise. Will NJ reduce taxes and turn from their evil ways? Somehow, I doubt it. Still, President Obama put his pride on the line and campaigned there. And the Democrats were not buoyed by his transfixing personality… So, I’m guessing that everyone is back to politics as usual.
Virginia: Now this election will cause some Democrats heartburn. Barack Obama won handily here and guess what? The Virginians ain’t buyin’ what he’s currently sellin’.
Finally, there’s the little talked about California 10 election. This is a solidly liberal district and it very nearly fell to a Republican who got no big money help. Republicans need to stop giving ground and writing off the coasts. There are many conservative spots that would turn Republican. American citizens are sick of the inside-the-beltway types dictating from on high. Everything is up for change. In that environment, everything needs to be fought.
Today 80th Anniversary Of Black Tuesday: Nancy Pelosi Celebrates With Health Care Bill
Thursday, October 29th, 2009Here is some of the disaster she’s wrought:
Government will Regulate… Everything
Obviously, this is just scraping the surface and there will be more to come.
Health Care Big Lies & More Big Lies & For A Refresher, Reagan
Tuesday, October 27th, 2009What they said would happen:
What actually happened:
Why we love Reagan:
Ronald Reagan speech on role of government and citizens:
I think we’re for an international organization, where the nations of the world can seek peace. But I think we’re against subordinating American interests to an organization that has become so structurally unsound that today you can muster a two-thirds vote on the floor of the General Assembly among nations that represent less than 10 percent of the world’s population. I think we’re against the hypocrisy of assailing our allies because here and there they cling to a colony, while we engage in a conspiracy of silence and never open our mouths about the millions of people enslaved in the Soviet colonies in the satellite nations.
I think we’re for aiding our allies by sharing of our material blessings with those nations which share in our fundamental beliefs, but we’re against doling out money government to government, creating bureaucracy, if not socialism, all over the world. We set out to help 19 countries. We’re helping 107. We’ve spent 146 billion dollars. With that money, we bought a 2 million dollar yacht for Haile Selassie. We bought dress suits for Greek undertakers, extra wives for Kenya[n] government officials. We bought a thousand TV sets for a place where they have no electricity. In the last six years, 52 nations have bought 7 billion dollars worth of our gold, and all 52 are receiving foreign aid from this country.
No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. So governments’ programs, once launched, never disappear.
Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth.
There is more at the link.
AIP Column: Democrat Decay
Tuesday, October 27th, 2009What happens when Democrats run things unchecked? Detroit, Michigan:
Urban decay might as well be called Democrat decay. Democrats rule every major city in America and the more power the Democrats have in the city, the more likely the city will be a complete mess.
Enter Detroit, Michigan.
Detroit might be the second worst example of unchecked Democrat policies in the United States today and that’s saying something. The first would be New Orleans. Close behind would be Philadelphia and Chicago. Remember New York City before Rudy Giuliani? No? That’s because the city was too dangerous to visit before the Republican mayor cleaned house.
Economic chaos precedes sociological anarchy and that’s where Detroit finds itself. For years, Michigan rolled along fat on car manufacturers tax gouging. Communities sprung up like neat little lines of boxes all around the cities. There were indulgent public school programs (my own high school had a beautiful, full-service planetarium thanks to the local Oldsmobile plant).
Taxes continued to increase as more public services were offered. Then, a confluence of events turned Michigan on its head and the state has yet to find its footing. Union demands outstripped the companies’ ability to increase production adequately to continue increased profits. The car companies grew top-heavy with layers of innovation-killing management. Good ideas would get stifled in layers of play-it-safe-bean-counting management. The states and cities weren’t and continue to be undiversified economically. The equivalent of a seaside fishing town, Michigan got swept along whatever the economic weather. And when sales dropped, tax revenue dropped. And when income fell far enough, jobs were lost but not until after years on furloughs (being paid to do nothing) and lay-offs which drained profits from struggling companies.
And what did Detroit and the state of Michigan do? Raise taxes, of course! Loathe to cut companies or their employees slack, the government continued to hike taxes on those working to help those without a job. In Detroit these days, that’s nearly 25% of the working population. Can you fathom that number? One in four people languishing while Democrats fiddle.
Please read the whole thing.
New AD: Transparency Hypocrisy By Democrats
Tuesday, October 20th, 2009Transparency is just a word to them:
Will The Debt Hamstring Democrat Hopes? Doubtful.
Saturday, October 17th, 2009This dropped yesterday:
The Obama administration has released new deficit numbers, and they are not pretty.
The deficit for Fiscal Year 2009, which ended Sept. 30, came in at a record $1.42 trillion, more than triple the record set just last year.
In addition, future deficits are currently projected to total $9.1 trillion in the coming decade.
Will the reality of massive debt stop Democrats? No. Their answer to debt is to push reality down the road. They have too many big plans they want to pass right now. They know they’ll lose the coming elections, but they hope to get the big programs passed while they can. Let the grown-ups deal with deficit details.
Shocker: Conservatives Not Racist
Friday, October 16th, 2009Gather a bunch of white good-old Georgia boys in a room and ask them questions. Wait how long it takes til they bring up race and blame black people.
It won’t happen. Even if James Carville really, really, really hopes it would happen:
Instead of focusing on these intense ideological divisions, the press and elites continue to look for a racial element that drives these voters’ beliefs – but they need to get over it. Conducted on the heels of Joe Wilson’s incendiary comments at the president’s joint session address, we gave these groups of older, white Republican base voters in Georgia full opportunity to bring race into their discussion – but it did not ever become a central element, and indeed, was almost beside the point.
So, will the media let it go? Doubtful.
Breitbart: NEA Conference Call, Your Tax Dollars, And Artistic Coercion–UPDATED
Monday, September 21st, 2009Here is the explosive tape from the NEA at Brietbart as well as a transcript in full. I’m listening now.
Nick Gillespie, also of Breitbart’s Big Hollywood says:
As Patrick Courrelieche, an L.A.-based arts organizer who participated in the call, reported at Big Hollywood, the people running the call, including the NEA’s director of communications Yosi Sergant and members of the White House Office of Public Engagement and United We Serve, told the assembled crew of “thought leaders” that “we’re going to come at you with some specific asks here” (that’s a direct quote from Buffy Wicks of the Office of Public Engagement).
Chief among the requests from Sergant (who was either “reassigned” from the agency or “reportedly resigned” after denying the full extent of his role in organizing the call) was “to pick something whether it’s health care, education, the environment, you know… [and] apply artistic, you know, your artistic creative communities’ utilities and bring them to the table.” Beyond the specific policy issues above, the call organizers stressed the ideologically loaded concept of “service” as the animating principle of the Obama administration and wanted the artists to do whatever they could to promote that. As Wicks put it, “We really view [our efforts] as an onramp to a lifetime of service. We really want service to be incorporated into people’s daily lives.”
Given that the NEA prides itself on being the single largest funding source for the arts in the country, such arm-twisting by agency officials, however masked in fulsome compliments to creators’ genius, is disturbing on its face. It clearly sets a political agenda for the very people who are likely to be applying for, well, NEA and other government grants. Does anyone think that the organizers were fishing around for projects that might complicate the public option for health care?
The National Endowment for the Arts has always been looked upon with skepticism by many a taxpayer. Taxpayer money has been used to fund such notable pieces of artwork such as the cross in urine jar, etc.
But this affront goes one further. Artists are asked directly to create to support the Obama administration’s agenda ends. By definition, artists should be “independent”, right? But the government is asking artists to play along with a certain perspective.
There are problems for both the taxpayer and the artist. What would happen, for example, if an artist didn’t support the president? What if an artist created art that harmed the President’s objectives? Would funding be pulled? Consider some of the things said in the preamble to the call:
“the role that we played in the campaign”
“the president has a clear ‘arts agenda’”
“all on this phone call were selected for a reason”
So artists might feel honored because they like this president, but when or if their opinion changed, this call could be construed as coercion. It IS coercion.
Now, the American taxpayer has an entirely different concern: The Obama administration is using an arm of the government to pay artists with taxpayer money to create, essentially propaganda. Art will be used to promote the taxpayer’s dime to promote a specific Obama policy.
“Valerie Jarrett is one of our fantastic leaders”
“Bolster civic engagement with this effort”
“We want to connect with labor unions, womens groups”
“It’s going to take all of us working together–progressive groups”–this is the United We Serve, a government program director talking–the Corporation for National Service.
This, obviously, is a problem all the way around.
The government is asking artists to focus on these policies: health care, energy and environment (parks), education (Department of Education), and community renewal.
Listen to the whole thing. It’s an abomination. And listen with this thought in mind: Imagine if President Bush’s surrogates engineered a similar phone call. Yeah. There’d be outrage.
Perhaps Andrew Breitbart and friends shouldn’t be surprised when they find the White House staffers making “specific asks” of allegedly independent artists on a conference call organized by the allegedly nonpartisan National Endowment of the Arts. Obama’s appointee to head the endowment, Rocco Landesman, said about 20 days after that conference call, “If the president had wanted a timid NEA, he would have made a different choice.”
No timid NEA. Oh no. The NEA is the new Obama propaganda funder. Thank you, American taxpayer.
UPDATED:
Dan Riehl and the connection between ACORN, NEA, faith based initiatives and Obama.
