This guy's anger was based in psychosis and brain chemical imbalances and was percolating long before anyone outside of Alask knew who Sarah Palin was and even longer before the Tea Party existed. This is yet another "let no crisis go to waste" moment for liberals. It seemed so easy to make their point until those pesky facts started getting in the way - again. If Palin is guilty of anything it is plagiarism for stealing the targeted map idea from the DLC and DCCC, both of which had maps "targeting" republicans. In fact, the DCCC map included photos of the "game", I guess so any crazy people won't make any mistakes and shoot the "wrong" person.
To be sure, it is a terrible tragedy that has been visited upon the victims, their families, and our nation. I have been praying for those people since it happened. Also, I have been praying for the victims and families of the Fort Hood shooting since it happened. It just amazes me how quickly the media pounced on Palin for this yet have still not condemned Islamic extremism for Fort Hood. Which do you think was more influential?
Even so, it WOULD be nice to rid our political discourse of such potentially violence-inducing pronouncements as:
"We have our boot on their throat" - Bobby Gibbs
"We have the opponent in the crosshairs" - Sarah Palin, thousands of upper-management employees of American companies, and countless coaches at all levels of athletic competition
"[big]Government isn't the solution to our problems. Government IS our problem" - Ronald Reagan (for some reason this seems to be considered by many an inflammatory comment so it is included here)
"If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun" - Barack Obama, and some guy in a Chicago gangster movie
We need to open our eyes and realize the daily propaganda war being waged against the conservative, freedom-loving, God-fearing people of our society. The left are constantly reporting with a "holier-than-thou" twinkle in their eye distorted and abridged stories while conveniently "forgetting" the rest of the story that makes them look as bad or worse. I really don't begrudge them their right to do it, freedom of speech and all, but when it is ABC, CBS, sometimes CNN, and always NBC and MSNBC doing it, I'm sick of their whining about FOX. It just reeks of hypocrisy.
You can add Rupert Murdock to this list as well as Nixon and the FCC. FCC needs to let communication be free and not controlled. We have problems consistently because of this. People don't know what the real war is about even after millenniums. It's simply Control. I don't know why people think Obama is different than any recent presidents. He has the same agenda.
ReplyDeleteThe worst of all was Dick Cheney and Bush. They took the Constitution and burnt it with the patriot acts. It is against the law to create such laws, but the American people don't care.
Patriot Act was totally unconstitutional, as was the crap Bush pulled with bailouts and such. But whereas Bush overstepped the Constitution a handful of times, Obama does it as a matter of policy. That is not to excuse Bush as his discretions disturbed me immensely, but Obama is Bush on steroids.
ReplyDeleteTo be sure, Lincoln did many unconstitutional things as well, but his were temporary and expired with the end of the Civil War. That is until early 20th century progressives decided that many of his worst ideas, most notably the income tax which valiantly served the temporary purpose of funding the War, should be made permanent in order to promote class warfare - an idea ripped directly from the pages of the Communist Manifesto.
And here we stand today. The "working class" pitted against the "rich" with the "lower class" getting screwed totally and constantly. Pre-income tax, the USA was a society of no economic classes. Those who were smartest or most ambitious or had the best work ethic made it and necessarily made many many more better off by providing employment and easements for millions willing to work for them. Everyone who was able was more than willing to work because that's how it was. Those who were unable were provided for by their families, churches, and communities.
I say "necessarily" because, although those who made it big may not have been altruistic give-everyone-else-all-I've-worked-for types, they realized that they needed all those other people to continue their successes. And as a result their good fortune flowed down through the rest of society as those other people were being paid by the successful to help them be successful. Everyone was free to invent things and ideas and make themselves successful as well if their creation was good enough and filled a need for others - that is to say if their creation efficiently met a demand.
So Henry Ford and Bill Gates were able to move up through society riding on their intelligence, ambition, and ability to see a need and fill it more efficiently than anyone else. Much wealth was created in this country due to them and countless others who followed similar templates to success. This all happened because of a system called "capitalism", featuring a "free market" - a system which for a century now has been under attack by the aforementioned progressives. (DISCLAIMER: sorry if "under attack" is too inflammatory. It is in no way meant to persuade any nut job to pop off any legislator of any party.) In fact, Gates did it IN SPITE of the progressive movement. Furthermore, Microsoft would never have existed if it was required to be born under current conditions what with all the regulations and carbon taxes and increasingly suffocating corporate taxes, etc.
So there is why people think Obama is different than other recent presidents: it's because he IS different, and I'm not talking about his skin color. His agenda is NOT the same. While I'll concede they all strive for power (that is probably true of EVERY SINGLE PRESIDENT with the possible exception of George Washington - for that is an inherent trait of anyone ambitious enough to run for the office), no president, not even FDR or Wilson (well, maybe FDR and Wilson, but certainly not even Carter or Clinton), has ever had anywhere near the same agenda Obama has. By his own statements he wants to take progressivism to its logical conclusion: the destruction of America as we have known it for 2 and a half centuries and replacing it with any run-of-the-mill socialistic society that has risen and fallen continuously over the past 100 years. He has never defined with words what "fundamentally changing America" means, but his actions, attitudes, policies, and surrounding cast (Cass Sunstein, Andy Stern, Van Jones, Bill Ayers, George Soros, et al) have all defined it as turning us into the Soviet Union, Cuba, Venezuela, or at best the European Union. And we all know how great things go in those societies.
ReplyDeleteAnd as for the Tea Party's resistance to these events, they say "Use the power of persuasion. If that doesn't work, use the ballot box."
Obama's crony Stern says, "Use the power of persuasion. If that doesn't work, use the persuasion of power." Who is using the threatening rhetoric?