I must say that I do agree with this.
Deep concern about the government’s healthcare activity is nothing new, and politicians who believe that the opposition to the Democrats’ plan is a put-up job are deceiving themselves and imperiling their own careers.
Stephen Hunter writes this concerning depression era bandits Bonnie and Clyde; both the historic and film versions.
That point is that the legendary Penn movie that invented the New Bonnie and Clyde was such a ideological crock that it deserves placement in that list of other leftist crocks mistaken by gullible critics and film lovers as somehow great: Beatty’s own Reds, the appalling JFK, and the toxic oeuvre of Michael Moore and his tribe of screwball clones in the documentary field, as well as the recent spate of angry, misguided Iraq war films.
This really is not news; when Bonnie and Clyde was released and soared, following an initial few weeks of failure, the Chicago Daily News columnist Mike Royko launched a mini-crusade to restore Clyde and Bonnie to their actual dimensions, as vicious murderers, no matter that (as the ad copy said) they were young, they were in love, and they robbed banks. The only thing that mattered about them, Royko said, was that they killed, and killed a lot of people. The critic of the New York Times, Bosley Crowther, then the oldest, whitest guy in New York, also dared to denounce the film; he not only felt the lash of social ostracism and contempt, he may have even lost his job as a consequence.
I thought they were both idiots. I know better now.
Heh.
Christina Hoff Sommers and Nancy K.D. Lemon step in to the ring and battle facts in feminist scholarship.
Lemon:
In regard to the rule of thumb, for example, she asserted that Romulus of Rome, who is credited in my book with being involved with the first antidomestic-violence legislation, could not have done this as he was merely a legendary, fictional character, who along with his brother Remus was suckled by a wolf.
In fact, Plutarch and Livy each state that Romulus was the first king of Rome. He reigned from 753-717 BC, and created both the Roman Legions and the Roman Senate. He is also credited with adding large amounts of territory and people to the dominion of Rome, including the Sabine women. The modern scholar Andrea Carandini has written about the historic reign of Romulus, based in part on the 1988 discovery of the Murus Romuli on the north slope of the Palatine Hill in Rome.
Hoff Sommers:
She (Lemon) confidently informs us that Romulus actually existed and ruled Rome from 753-717 BC. That is preposterous. She cites Livy and Plutarch as sources. These first-century writers did not claim to be offering historically accurate accounts of events that took place some 700 years before their time, but openly professed to be summarizing beliefs, myths, and legends that had come down through the ages. She also cites the contemporary Roman archaeologist Andrea Carandini—a maverick figure who discovered what he claims might have been a wall of a palace that could have belonged to Romulus. As the July/August 2007 issue of Archaeology politely notes, his suggestion “represents a sharp break with two millennia of scholarship.”
Ouch.
Hypocrisy is one of those things that grate on my nerves more than just about anything. Lately, from the left concerning health care reform, lying seems to be so common that it’s almost expected every time President Obama opens his mouth.
“If you want to keep your current plan, you can …”
Lie.
“There will be no rationing…”
Lie.
“These protests are not representative of how people feel…”
Again, lie.
You get the point.
Also, the absolutely amazing drivel that comes from Nancy Pelosi about swastikas and Harry Reid’s claim that those who protest the current debacle called health care reform are evil mongers. The left is trying it’s best to stifle dissent and debate. All of this is to be expected.
Yes, hypocrisy is to be expected as well in almost any political argument, I understand that. But to display it in such an open, idiotic way as this is beyond even the stupidity that is currently the Obama administration. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard some idiot like Pelosi or Reid, or some other dolt pushing for this atrocious version of health care reform, claim that the protest are nothing more than “AstroTurf” sponsored by evil insurance companies or militia types, or the--GASP!!--Republican Party. However, now hypocrisy raises its ugly head:
Work to Pass Obama’s Healthcare Plan and Get Paid to Do it!$10-15 hr!
Just saying.
Yes, Obama’s bait and switch.
There is a growing sense of a “we’ve been had”, bait-and-switch. Millions of moderate Republicans, independents, and conservative Democrats—apparently angry at Bush for Iraq and big deficits, unimpressed by the McCain campaign, intrigued by the revolutionary idea of electing an African-American president—voted for Obama on the assumption that he was sincere about ending red state/blue state animosity. They took him at his word that he was going to end out of control federal spending. They trusted that he had real plans to get us out of the economic doldrums, and that he was not a radical tax-and-spend liberal of the old sort.
Instead, within days Obama set out plans that would triple the annual deficit, and intends to borrow at a record pace that will double the aggregate debt in just eight years.
He not only took over much of the auto- and financial industries, but also did so in a way that privileged unions, politically-correct creditors, and those insider cronies who favor administration initiatives. On matters racial, his administration is shrill and retrograde, not forward-looking. It insists on emphasizing the tired old identify politics that favor a particular sort of racial elite that claims advantage by citing past collective victimization or piggy-backs for advantage on the plight of the minority underclass.
In other words, the Obama swing voter thought he was getting a 21st-century version of pragmatic, triangulating Bill Clinton—and instead got something to the left of 1970s Jimmy Carter.
As ObamaCare goes down in flames, Nancy Pelosi stoops to a new low by claiming that protesters against President Obama’s proposed government take over of health care are carrying swastikas.
The whole narrative from the left that the protests against ObamaCare springing up at townhall meetings across the country are being funded and orchestrated by evil insurance and pharmaceutical companies is bizarre in that the left seems to disregard what polling clearly shows; that the majority of Americans are not down with this debacle.
Is it me, or does this look like it's right out of a Gay Pride Parade?
At the outpost, named Oz Yehonatan, the settlers built a wooden structure they mockingly called the “Obama Hut,” saying it was a sign of appreciation for the US president for his actions that had led to a dramatic rise in the number of outposts.
This most certainly seems the reasonable thing to do:
Senator Lamar Alexander introduced the “Auto Stock for Every Taxpayer Act” today, which would “require the Treasury to distribute to individual taxpayers all its stock in General Motors (GM) and Chrysler within one year following the emergence of the companies from bankruptcy proceedings.”
But I suspect that the goal of President Obama and the other Neo-Coms in power is to control Chrysler and General Motors. Therefor the above mentioned bill will never see the light of day. Perhaps I’m wrong. I hope so.
The problem is that Al Gore is a liar.
He must have had lunch with Nancy Pelosi.
Are simply crimes. But, unfortunately, some defendants are less equal than others.
“Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.” This quote, from the Englishman William Blackstone, aptly describes the aims and priorities of our own American system of justice . . . Unless, that is, you are a liberal crusader who is out to get someone because he was accused of a “hate crime.” In that case, Blackstone’s formulation is turned on its head: better to convict ten innocents than to give people a symbolic impression that “hate crimes” aren’t more serious and worse than all other crimes.
To give people special consideration based on gender, sexuality, race ... anything is simply wrong. Think about it; two people are murdered under similar circumstances. The only real difference is that one victim is, say, homosexual, and the other is straight. Why should the severity of the punishment be more with regards to one victim over another?
Can someone please answer that?
No, waterboarding is not torture, no matter what some people say. But even the most pacifistic among us would agree that some people should be waterboarded just because.
Ever wonder how tabloids get such juicy stories?
A reporter with the National Enquirer allegedly checked Brooke Shields’ mother out of her nursing room on Thursday by posing as a friend, according to People. Teri Shields, 75, suffers from dementia.
Damn.
Let’s see, who am I going to trust, Nancy Pelosi or the CIA?
I don’t know about you, but I’m going with the CIA on this. At the very least, this is probably a battle that Pelosi can’t win. Think about it; an organization that has spent years specializing in CYA vs an imbecilic politician of the worst stripe ...
It makes me wonder if we are witnessing the beginning of the end of Nancy Pelosi’s career.
By now I’m suspecting that many Obama supporters (those with intellectual honesty) are suffering a severe case of voters remorse. Aside from the several examples of bungling of foreign diplomacy to “tax cheats may apply”, the true scope of President Obama’s reign is beginning to become apparent. George F. Will sums it up particularly well with this.
In February, California’s Democratic-controlled Legislature, faced with a $42 billion budget deficit, trimmed $74 million (1.4 percent) from one of the state’s fastest-growing programs, which provides care for low-income and incapacitated elderly people and which cost the state $5.42 billion last year. The Los Angeles Times reports that “loose oversight and bureaucratic inertia have allowed fraud to fester.”
But the Service Employees International Union collects nearly $5 million a month from 223,000 caregivers who are members. And the Obama administration has told California that unless the $74 million in cuts are rescinded, it will deny the state $6.8 billion in stimulus money ...
Anyway, the Obama administration, judging by its cavalier disregard of contracts between Chrysler and some of the lenders it sought money from, thinks contracts are written on water. The administration proposes that Chrysler’s secured creditors get 28 cents per dollar on the $7 billion owed to them but that the United Auto Workers union get 43 cents per dollar on its $11 billion in claims—and 55 percent of the company ...
And most chilling of all:
The Obama administration’s agenda of maximizing dependency involves political favoritism cloaked in the raiment of “economic planning” and “social justice” that somehow produce results superior to what markets produce when freedom allows merit to manifest itself, and incompetence to fail. The administration’s central activity—the political allocation of wealth and opportunity—is not merely susceptible to corruption, it is corruption.
Oy, what have we wrought?
Daniel Medley was born and raised in the mountains of Central Idaho and now lives in Utah with his wife and son.
| September 2010 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||
| 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
| 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
| 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 |
| 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | ||
