Roads & Bridges

Cluster18 Comments

Stop me if you have heard this before:

We still have too many ports that aren’t equipped for today’s world commerce.  We’ve still got too many rail lines that are too slow and clogged up.  We’ve still got too many roads that are in disrepair, too many bridges that aren’t safe,” – President Rinse and Repeat

That’s right folks, our roads and bridges are still in need of repair, despite the 2009, $800 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act! Don’t those words sound great together? Who could possibly be against Reinvesting in America’s Recovery? And putting Americans back to work at the same time?? It’s a win – win.  Why we were going to invest that $800 billion in rebuilding America’s infrastructure, improving deteriorating schools, and beginning the transition to green energy. What noble and heart warming causes, that only evil, backwater, troglodytes, (ie; conservatives) could possibly oppose. But alas, here we are again today, 4 years later almost to the day, and the cause continues. WE NEED TO SPEND MORE MONEY! We need to reinvest in America, don’t you know, and those obstructionist, heartless  Republicans are standing in the way.

Let’s call him President Rinse and Repeat. It seems to work pretty well, so why try and fix something that’s not broken? As long as we have roads and bridges that are in need of repair, the Democrats can get away with just about anything.

 

Regarding DOMA And Other “Assurances.”

Leo Pusateri100 Comments

OK– I’ll open the floodgates–time for a ramble….

Marriage is a word used to describe a societal institution, and it means something–or at least it has, that something being a relatively permanent, committed union between a man and a woman. Yes, I know that people have historically taken their own marriages too lightly and the Hollywood left and others have treated their marriages in much the same manner as middle-school kids treat crushes; but the essential accepted definition of the term, “MARRIAGE” has nonetheless remained intact for the better part of 2000 years.

Now, however, we are being told that we, in a new ‘enlightened’ era, must arbitrarily re-define the longstanding societal institution of marriage, for better or worse, to include same sex couples, and that it should be so under the 14th Amendment, and upheld between States under the “Full Faith and Credit” clause.

Fine and dandy, I guess…BUT–

We’re also told that that’s as far as it will go– and if we (those who are against gay marriage and/or those who are on the fence) think that it is the beginning of a slippery slope ‘anything goes’ redefinition of the institution of marriage, we’re just paranoid neanderthals.. 10 or 15 years ago, we were also told that there was no need to pass a defense of marriage amendment to the Constitution, because the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) protected that traditional definition.

Fine and dandy, as well, I guess;

However, up to this point, no one has been able to adequately explain how, if the SCOTUS decision tilts the “gay marriage” way, that polygamists, incestuous couples, etc., will not also want equal protection under the 14th Amendment, and sue for the right to marry, and that the term ‘marriage’ will have so many meanings so as to render what has been a veritable societal institution meaningless.

In other words, what is to prevent the slippery slope we’re being assured will not happen?

Personally, I’m of the mind that it’s a State issue, and that ALL unions should be civil unions. But should the term “Marriage” be so malleable so as to become meaningless?

Are people really thinking things through on this issue? Or are many merely living in the zeitgiest of the moment,  inconsiderate of and/or oblivious to the ramifications?

I’ve been thinking long and hard the past few days, and I can’t see any assurances that my worst nightmare regarding the institution of marriage, that it essentially becomes meaningless, will not come to fruition.

While many marriages have failed since time imemoriam, the institution of marriage on balance has unarguably been a net-positive as a building block for literally thousands of years into our civilization.

I guess all I’m saying is that we may be taking this issue a bit too cavalierly; jumping in the clouded pool without regard as to its depth and/or its potential consequences.

I await to be educated to the contrary.

UPDATE, by Mark Noonan – Mark Steyn nails it:

…It came up at dinner Down Under this time last year, and the prominent Aussie politician on my right said matter-of-factly, “It’s not about expanding marriage, it’s about destroying marriage.” That would be the most obvious explanation as to why the same societal groups who assured us in the Seventies that marriage was either (a) a “meaningless piece of paper” or (b) institutionalized rape are now insisting it’s a universal human right…

The thing about liberals is that, at bottom, they are just downright nasty – doesn’t matter what the issue is, they will always take the worst possible position and if it contradicts their previous position its no matter…as long as hatred the destruction of our civilization proceed, they’re just pleased as punch.

You Can’t Fix Stupid – Gay Marriage Cont.

Cluster114 Comments

And at this point, there is a whole lot of stupid walking around. I find it hard to believe that with gas prices nearing $4/gal., unemployment persistently high, GDP persistently sluggish, record debt, record deficits, higher taxes, increased food stamp dependency, and record number of people on disability, that gay marriage seems to be the most pressing issue. But according to liberals and the media, and again I apologize for the redundancy, gay marriage is paramount to all other concerns. And it isn’t even about equality, of course don’t tell your stupid liberal friend that, because they are bound to become unglued and call you an extremist, and when that happens you know darn well that racist word isn’t far behind. Every single human being in America has equal rights in terms of marriage – we are all free to marry a member of the opposite sex, whom is not closely related and of the age of consent. Love is not required, never has been. Therefore, every living being in this country is on equal terms. Expanding on that, none of us has the right to marry a member of the same sex, with the exception of nine states (can you see where I might be going with this?), nor do we have the right to marry a close relative, or a minor, so again equal terms. Expanding even further, legal rights really aren’t even in question here in that through wills and living wills (thank you Amazona), same sex couples can bequeath personal property to their partner, extend visiting rights and/or POA’s, so the only unsettled issue would then be the tax considerations extended to them on behalf of the IRS, which really would be a minor issue to resolve. What this issue really boils down to is the redefinition of a word and ultimate acceptance. Attitudes are certainly shifting on this issue as evidenced by recent elections at the various states, and this is of course where the issue belongs. If liberals were so confident in the shifting political winds on this issue, they wouldn’t be relying on nine robed justices to impose this mandate for them, but I believe that confidence is not as strong as they would have you believe. Equally wrong in my opinion, is their insistence to offend the hundreds of millions of people of Faith worldwide, who hold dear the timeless and rich tradition of the institution of marriage.

Enough of gay marriage – again hard to believe that this issue has risen to this level. In two other news items, which should be of much more import, unless you listen to the media of course, Kathleen Sebelius today has admitted that health care premiums will in fact rise. This announcement will only surprise the media and brain dead liberals, again sorry for the redundancy, as many conservatives have mentioned this since day one despite the persistent lies from the POTUS. And Janet Napolitano has stated that a pathway to legalizing illegal immigrants should come before securing the border, an effort of which has almost completely dropped off her radar. The cost of illegal immigration, the rising costs of entitlement dependency, the rising costs of SS and Medicare with no sensible reform in sight, and the legacy costs of public unions pensions, which is bankrupting our cities and states, is what our national dialogue should be centered around. Instead, we discuss ad nauseum, an issue of relatively minor concern that is quite frankly intellectually beneath us. Sadly though, you can’t fix stupid.

UPDATE, by Mark Noonan:  A libertarian in favor of gay marriage notes his problem…

…I have a feeling that if the push to end DOMA and Prop 8 were primarily the work of Reason or the Ayn Rand Institute, certain traditionalist conservatives would be at least slightly more amenable to it. This would be because the implicit threat of future civil-rights lawsuits against, say, churches that refuse to marry gays would be a moot point. No Cato Institute senior fellow wants to file suit against the Catholic Church for exercising its First Amendment rights. Social conservatives know this; they trust libertarians enough even if they don’t agree with them.

Continue reading →

Are We There Yet? – Open Thread

Cluster127 Comments

Another Sunday, another good day for an open thread. A few days back I posited a query to all liberals seeing if they are finally at a point where they might be growing disenchanted with The One They Have All been Waiting For. Evidently, we aren’t there yet, because not one of them is ready to criticize anything about their benevolent leader. Hard to believe though considering that there is so much material for which to do so. Starting with the sequester scare, followed by Obama’s recent pledge of hundreds of millions to Syrians and Palestinians. Now how can cutting a few hundred million dollars from some government agencies result in having to shut down White House tours, and vaccinations for children, yet somehow we found the money to help Syrian refugees. You would think liberals and the media would question that.

I am also always amazed at the false perceptions so many liberals have of conservatives. A notion implanted in their minds by the educational system and the media. My effort going forward will be to dispel those notions. I have begun a personal dialogue with Mitch who is a little older than I first believed and has a better sense of humor than I would have given him credit for. I don’t know how much political common ground we have but that will be discovered in the weeks ahead. I do hope that we can just have civil conversations, regardless of our disagreements, and I am happy that that has been the case thus far. I think Mitch is surprised to learn that I am just a normal human being rather than the false notion of conservatives he has construed in his mind. I think if conservatives can begin to reeducate the numerous misinformed liberals that have bought into the medias and democrats false ideals of who we are, we can begin to bring back some semblance of normalcy and civility. I have told Mitch that we here at the blog would welcome more liberal posters who could articulate their positions rationally and without lashing out at some false notion, but that far too often, all we get are hyper emotional rants.

This entire country needs to learn how to dial down the rhetoric. Do I think that we are in a really bad place in terms of debt, spending, restriction of liberties, and the soon to be calamity of Obama care? Yes to all the above. But it will require determined, measured, and well articulated positions on the conservative approach to convince those who are ingrained with false ideals, rather than just name calling.

Avoiding a “Morally Vacuous and Historically Ignorant” Foreign Policy

Mark Noonan45 Comments

Ran across a useful and interesting argument between the generally conservative and generally libertarian views of our foreign policy – especially as it relates to war and the use of force in general.  Here is Noah Rothman arguing against the essentially libertarian idea of non-intervention (using Syria as an example of why we should, at times, intervene), and here is the retort by Nick Gillespie forcefully arguing the libertarian viewpoint.  Both articles repay reading – but my view is that both of them got it wrong, to a certain extent.

Continue reading →

Can You Name The Party?

Cluster20 Comments

A case of corruption in Bell, California today reached is conclusion with the conviction of 5 ex city employees, including the mayor, who used the city treasury to enrich themselves beyond all reasonable measures. Funny thing though, in most if not all, main stream media reporting, their party affiliation is not identified:

(Reuters) – Five former elected officials from the scandal-plagued California city of Bell were convicted on Wednesday of misusing municipal funds by collecting exorbitant salaries in a case that drew national attention as a symbol of public corruption.

Now I can guarantee you that had these folks been Republicans, that fact would have led each story in the head line. Fact is though these ex officials are all Democrats, so it’s just another case of media malpractice which continues to misinform and mislead the low information voter. Because of this malpractice, we have so many liberal heads full of garbage as to what constitutes conservatism, that it may take decades to actually cut through and penetrate the bone deep ignorance of so many, but that will have to begin with a press that is willing to be objective rather than hyper partisan and emotionally charged. I am not holding out any hope. As it is, this story will just fade away, and little concern will be expressed by those liberals who profess to care so much for the middle class, who in this case were completely taken advantage of. Waiting for condemnation and outrage from our resident liberals.

 

Are We There Yet?

Cluster79 Comments

Well again there are quite a few issues to address and I have trouble landing on just one, so consider this an open thread on a few issues du jour that are on my radar.

1. Immigration Reform – The brilliant Harry Reid announced today that immigration reform would be landing on the Senate Floor in the next work session possibly in April, meaning once again that Democrats will attempt to rush something through, as they did with the stimulus and the health care bill, which as we all know hasn’t turned out real well. Aside from that, it seems to me that entitlement reform and tax reform should take a much higher precedence than immigration reform. The main reason we continue to operate from continuing resolution to continuing resolution is because of Harry Reid’s gross irresponsibility in not passing a budget. This allows the Democrats of course to move from crisis to crisis and blame republicans for obstructionism. It’s insanity. But so is this entire government at the present time. Tax reform and entitlement reform are desperately needed.

2. Eric Holder should resign. Period. – This is a direct quote from our illustrious Attorney General:

“I am concerned that the size of some of these institutions become so large that it does become difficult for us to prosecute them when we are hit with indications that if we do prosecute — if we do bring a criminal charge — it will have a negative impact on the national economy, perhaps even the world economy,”

So perceived economic concerns now take precedent over adjudicating corporate crime. The Attorney General is responsible to uphold the laws of the country, not to evaluate economic impact. I have said before that the only regulation our federal government needs to effectively regulate the free market, is a fair and responsible Justice Dept. We now know that we don’t have one.

3. If anyone had any questions about cronyism within the Obama regime, this should remove all doubt. Close friend, Chicago elite, and former 2008 campaign bundler, Penny Pritzker is reported to be on the verge of being appointed to head up the Commerce Dept. Her qualifications? Being well connected, and raking in millions after over seeing the failure of Superior Bank in Chicago of which she ran. This appointment would be unconscionable and should raise HUGE red flags with every one. Of all the disappointing appointments Obama has made, this one would certainly be the icing on the cake.

Just an aside – the title “Are We There Yet” is a question directed to many Obama supporters wondering if they have finally come to the realization that what Obama promised with his soaring rhetoric, is far removed the results he is producing.If not, I wonder when that time comes for them.

There are many other issues of extreme import, so feel free to discuss what’s on your mind as well.

The TMZ Approach To Politics

Cluster94 Comments

Well, I guess it had to come to this, much to my displeasure, but I can’t blame them:

One way to attract younger votes, the report states, is having Republican leaders spend more time going on “The Daily Show,” “The Colbert Report” and MTV, and giving interviews to publications like People and Us Weekly.

We as a society should be embarrassed at the level we have sunk to. Rather than strictly being a mechanism of government that follows the Constitution and perpetuates those doctrines of governance that have created the most economically successful country in the world and the most advanced in terms of human rights and cultural diversity, we have allowed our nature of politics to devolve into a swamp of  mindless celebrity idol worship and gossip. And because of that, we are rapidly spiraling downwards into a banana republic and destroying what was the most successful experiment in human government ever.

On the positive side, it looks as though the GOP is finally growing a pair and willing to campaign in traditionally blue areas and take the fight to the liberals. As Mark has repeatedly, and rightly advocated, we need to take the fight to them and expose them for the failures they are, for the petulant children they are, for the pandering fools they are, for the racists they are, and for the hypocrites they are. That being said, I hope we do that in an intelligent, articulate, self assured, and confident way, and that means that Sarah Palin may have to stay home. Sorry Conservatives, but in my opinion she is a walking cliche. While I do personally respect her for her courage to engage in the battle and for her few success’s in governance, she did resign for all the wrong reasons, and is incapable of elevating the debate above a bumper sticker approach and perpetuates the TMZ mentality. Her holding up a big gulp at CPAC is a good example.

We need more Ted Cruz, Scott Walker, and Rand Paul types to fight the battle for us, and deliver something as brilliant as Marco Rubio did at CPAC:

“The answer is simple. Because I am privileged. I am privileged to be a citizen of the single greatest society in all of human history. There’s never been a nation like the United States, ever. It begins with the principles of our founding documents, principles that recognize that our rights come from God, not from our government — principles that recognize that because all of us are equal in the eyes of our creator, all life is sacred at every stage of life. These principles embody the commitment to individual liberty which has made us the freest people in history. They also made possible our free-enterprise economy, which has made us the most prosperous people in history. The result is an America where — which is the only place in the world where it doesn’t matter who your parents were or where you came from. You can be anything you are willing to work hard to be. The result is the only economy in the world where poor people with a better idea and a strong work ethic can compete and succeed against rich people in the marketplace and competition. And the result is the most reliable defender of freedom in the history of the world.” Read the full transcript here.

I urge all conservatives to start to elevate the debate, but at the same time, get in the face of every petulant childish liberal you know and ridicule them if needed on the failed policies they support, the division they have created, and the mockery they have made of this country.

UPDATE, by Mark Noonan:  A new Hill poll shows that people solidly back the GOP budget proposals until they find out they are GOP proposals.  Which means the people simply don’t trust us – which is understandable, as we’ve been untrustworthy (so have the Democrats, but at least they talk a game about caring about the people – plus Obama remains personally popular).   Lesson:  we get a messenger that the people can trust, and we’ll beat the Democrats like a drum.

Campaigning Against the Consultants

Mark Noonan88 Comments

There is a strong and valid argument to be made against our political consulting class – and at CPAC, a lot was said against them.  From NRO’s The Corner:

Here at CPAC, it’s evident that in the aftermath of the devastating November election conservatives are turning not on the losing candidates — Mitt Romney, for one, was warmly received –  but on the people who ran their campaigns. With an eye to 2014 elections, some conservatives and tea partiers are pushing a new solution: Down with the consultants.

In an interview with NRO, Jenny Beth Martin, co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots, blasted the professional political class, decrying “any consultant who thinks that they can come into a state and say, ‘this is who you need to have as your representative and we’re going to make sure that person is elected.’”

“That is the antithesis of what we’ve been talking about in this whole entire movement,” she said. “We want limited government. That means we don’t want Washington, D.C., making laws that limit how we live our lives, and we sure don’t want people from Washington, D.C. — consultants — telling us who is going to represent us.”

The rage reached its height during a panel on Thursday entitled “Should We Shoot All the Consultants Now?” During the discussion, Democratic pollster Pat Caddell ranted against campaign consultants, saying, “they’re in the business in the lining of their pockets and preserving their power.”…

Which is very true, but not the whole story.  Professional campaign consultants can have a very important role to play – how to jump through the legal hoops; how to fund raise; how to get the message out through traditional and new media.  But the problem is that consultants have taken over what the campaigns say and where they say it.  They are telling the candidates to not spend time or money in some areas because they are strongly Democrat; they are telling the candidates to stay away from this or that issue because it will result in negative press.  What they don’t understand is that the reason some areas are strongly Democrat is partially because the GOP hasn’t done any campaigning in there.  What they don’t understand is that the sort of statements which might cause an MSM firestorm to erupt are precisely the sort of things which fire up the base and convince a doubting electorate that, just maybe, this candidate isn’t a tool of the Ruling Class.

My view is that last year Romney should have headed for Pennsylvania in the flush aftermath of the first debate – Obama and the Democrats were rocked on their heels and a sudden splurge in that State (as well as other blue States which elect GOP governors/senators) would have thrown them in to panic – and people in a panic make gigantic mistakes.  When gasoline prices in Los Angeles hit $5 a gallon, Romney should have done a campaign rally in front of a Los Angeles gas station.  These actions would not necessarily be with a mind towards winning California or Pennsylvania – but of firing up the base (including the base in States where we won’t win – because that generates donations and volunteers who can work in other States); of going in to their backyard and planting our flag; of showing the nation that we’re in it to win the whole ball of wax.  I ask:  if Romney had done such things, would he have gotten fewer votes?  I doubt it.  Still might have lost – but it would have been closer…and certainly a more fun, energizing and even if lost a successful campaign…because we would have sown seeds in areas where the GOP has been absent for decades.

As I said in the immediate aftermath of our loss, we have to start getting in to the blue areas – and professional campaign consultants simply will not allow that.  And so the consultants have to be shoved aside and kept to what they are good at:  fund raising, hoop jumping, etc.  The campaign, itself, has to be the product of the candidate and his more ardent supporters.  Let’s face some facts here, boys and girls:  as long as we resign California and New York to the Democrats, we’re always going to have a hard time winning the White House.  And do pay attention – Democrats have started to work on turning Texas blue.  Say it can’t be done?  Just watch them – and even if it doesn’t work, its going to force us to spend time and effort locking down part of our electoral base.  We simply must do it to them, as well.
As we head towards 2014 and 2016, all rule books must be thrown out.  Everything must be on the table – no corner of the Great Republic must be signed off to the Democrats.  Don’t play it safe – in fact, play it as dangerous as possible.  Tens of millions of people didn’t vote in 2012…lets go get them, and bury liberalism forever.

Only From the Minds of the Imbecilic Left!

tiredoflibbs41 Comments

Hagel Announces Steps To Improve Missile Defense Against North Korea

3/15/2013 3:20 PM ET

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel announced Friday that the U.S. is taking additional steps to defend itself from a nuclear attack by North Korea.

Hagel said that the U.S. would deploy fourteen additional ground-based missile interceptors, providing a 50 percent increase in the nation’s missile defense capability.

The Defense Secretary said that the U.S. would also deploy additional radar in Japan to provide improved early warning and tracking.

Additionally, Hagel said that the Defense Department is conducting an environmental impact study of a new ground-based interceptor site in the U.S.

The moves come on the heels of a recent nuclear test by North Korea, which has also threatened a pre-emptive attack on South Korea and the U.S.

http://www.rttnews.com/story.aspx?Id=2078047

——–

Let’s see, which is more harmful to the environment?

1) an Anti-Ballistic Missile System or,

2) a nuclear explosion

Sorry Seattle, but we cannot protect your city from a nuclear ballistic missile attack since the protective missile system will harm the environment.

What was the Senate thinking when they confirmed this clown.