July 02, 2009
None Dare Call It Marxism
By: David Limbaugh
All right already. I won't call Obama a Marxist in this column. Instead, I'll point to some signs that indicate that Barack and Karl might well be soul mates. At least, they have similar attitudes about capital, labor and profits, er, surplus value.
Liberals, even those of the Marxist variety, take umbrage when you point out their ideological kinship with Marxism.
I suppose this dates back to the days when being a communist was tantamount to being an enemy of the United States, in that there was a global communist movement intent on -- and coming darn close to -- world domination. Though global communism has been defeated, there remains a strong contingent among us, whose nerve center is the Democratic Party leadership under President Obama, committed to obliterating America's free market.
Without getting into the intricacies of Marxist theory, suffice it to say that at the core of this political and economic philosophy is a belief in the historical class struggle. The capitalist (bourgeois) exploits the industrial worker (proletarian) by underpaying him and adding on unnecessary charges to the prices of goods and services, driving up costs to the consumer, and pocketing the profits.
In "Basic Economics," Thomas Sowell puts it this way: "Profits may be the most misconceived subject in economics. Socialists have long regarded profits as simply 'overcharge,' as Fabian socialist George Bernard Shaw called it, or a 'surplus value' as Karl Marx called it." The theory is that under socialism or Marxism, these surplus charges would be eliminated and goods and services would become more affordable.
Continue reading "None Dare Call It Marxism"
Posted by redguy at 10:15 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Printer Friendly
So Much For Wise Latinas
By: Ann Coulter
With the Supreme Court's decision in Ricci v. DeStefano this week, we can now report that Sonia Sotomayor is even crazier than Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
To recap the famous Ricci case, in 2003, the city of New Haven threw out the results of a firefighters' test -- which had been expressly designed to be race-neutral -- because only whites and Hispanics scored high enough to receive immediate promotions, whereas blacks who took the test did well enough only to be eligible for promotions down the line.
Inasmuch as the high-scoring white and Hispanic firemen were denied promotions solely because of their race, they sued the city for race discrimination.
Obama's Justice-designate Sotomayor threw out their lawsuit in a sneaky, unsigned opinion -- the judicial equivalent of "talk to the hand." She upheld the city's race discrimination against white and Hispanic firemen on the grounds that the test had a "disparate impact" on blacks, meaning that it failed to promote some magical percentage of blacks.
This strict quota regime was dressed up by the city -- and by Sotomayor's opinion -- as a reasonable reaction to the threat of lawsuits by blacks who were not promoted.
That's a complicated way of saying: Racial quotas are peachy.
According to Sotomayor, any test that gets the numbers wrong -- whatever "wrong" means in any given context of professions, populations, applicants, workers, etc. -- is grounds for a lawsuit, which in turn, is grounds for an employer to engage in race discrimination against disfavored racial groups, such as white men.
Consequently, the only legal avenue available to employers under Sotomayor's ruling is always to impose strict racial quotas in making hiring and promotion decisions.
Continue reading "So Much For Wise Latinas"
Posted by redguy at 05:42 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Printer Friendly
June 29, 2009
The Censorious Left's Global Warming Denier Deniers
By: David Limbaugh
There is so much misinformation on the subject of global warming and so little consensus -- as to what environmental changes are occurring, whether human behavior is contributing to them, whether they are causing significant environmental damage, and whether the proposed cap and trade legislation would do anything to alleviate any of this -- it is no wonder our freedom-hating majority in the House insisted on cramming it through before they could even read, much less digest, what it contained.
It would be bad enough if they passed innocuous legislation to address an alleged problem (man-caused global warming) without first verifying there is a problem and then analyzing and assessing the extent of it, but it's outrageous that they would pass a measure that could have crippling effects on our economy and American taxpayers.
Who do these people think they are -- that they can claim a mandate to do anything they want to, that they can grab as much power as they want, that they can transform our government overnight into an enemy of the people, with no fear of accountability? Oh, I know; the government has already behaved like the people's enemy all too often, but never on the scale we're witnessing today -- from a party that had the audacity to accuse President George W. Bush of abusing his authority.
Just where is the journalistic skepticism in today's dominant media culture or the professed open-mindedness of Democrats?
What is their response when people have the temerity to challenge their assertions on catastrophic global warming? It is ridicule and abuse. Not only are the doubters flat-earth Neanderthals; they are darn near treasonous, according to the dogmatic left.
Continue reading "The Censorious Left's Global Warming Denier Deniers"
Posted by redguy at 08:06 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Printer Friendly
June 26, 2009
Obamacare: Do Or Die For America
By: Christopher G. Adamo
With so much coverage of the current debate on Barack Obama’s attempt to impose nationalized healthcare on America, it may seem that little else can be said on the subject. Yet it needs to be discussed, and its manifold dangers explained to the American people. It is impossible to overstate the significance of this battle. If successful in establishing this pinnacle of his socialist agenda, Obama will unleash a “change” on the country from which it may never recover.
Clearly, he is aware of the governmental power he has the potential to accrue with the passage of this single atrocious new entitlement. His lust for that power is evident in the ferocity with which he is striving to ramrod his plan through the congress and onto America. The stakes are far too great for him to do any less. Ultimately, the zeal with which he is pressing forward should be the greatest indication to Americans of the long-term perils that await them if he succeeds.
While it may seem odd to draw comparisons between the healthcare “debate” and the recent uprisings in Iran, certain disturbing parallels indeed exist. America and the world witness the tragedy of an oppressed people yearning to be free, and the manner in which the Iranian government is scrambling to regain its iron-fisted control of the situation. Central to this effort is their disinformation campaign. And while nobody in our country is being slaughtered over health care controversies, the situation is rife with ominous signs of a government/media propaganda blitz that rivals anything ever concocted by Tass or Pravda.
Furthermore, though the violence in Iran is not likely to be recounted in our communities, particularly with respect to medical care, ominous patterns of governmental coercion, and suppression of all opposition are already beginning to unfold here. And if the poisoned seeds of impending tyranny are any indication, it is chilling to ponder the bitter fruit that they may bear if not immediately checked.
Continue reading "Obamacare: Do Or Die For America"
Posted by redguy at 05:34 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Printer Friendly
June 25, 2009
Throw the Bums Out
By: David Limbaugh
Here they go again -- our faithful representatives in Washington, that is. They're about to pass, without reading its 1,200-plus pages, an incredibly expensive and destructive cap and trade bill, which has little prayer of accomplishing what it sets out to accomplish but satisfies their urgent need to pay homage to their liberal ideology and secular humanist worldview.
Do you remember when Barack Obama was forced to give an answer to justify his advocacy of a capital gains tax increase in view of such taxes' history of actually decreasing revenues? The revenue reductions are worth it because it's a matter of "fairness," he said. Spread the misery. Likewise, with cap and trade, Obama and his congressional cohorts will wreak untold destruction on the economy and get little benefit in return.
I'm not exaggerating here. Doesn't it make sense that before enacting legislation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions for the purpose of reducing man-made global warming, Congress would investigate whether significant man-made global warming is occurring (as opposed to watching Al Gore's propaganda film and simply declaring, by fiat, that scientists have reached a consensus on the issue when they clearly have not)?
And if, after a thorough and balanced inquiry, they determine that it is occurring, shouldn't they next examine whether their proposed legislative remedy is likely to significantly ameliorate the problem?
But they not only have not conducted a bona fide examination of the man-made warming issue but also have not attempted to examine, in any remotely scientific way, how much their proposed bill would reduce global warming (assuming it exists to the extent they contend) or whether any such reductions would make any difference at all to humanity's short- or long-term health or happiness or anything else.
Continue reading "Throw the Bums Out"
Posted by redguy at 09:48 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Printer Friendly
June 24, 2009
Obama To Iran: Let Them Eat Ice Cream
By: Ann Coulter
On Iran, President Obama is worse than Hamlet. He's Colin Powell, waiting to see who wins before picking a side.
Last week, massive protests roiled Iran in response to an apparently fraudulent presidential election, in which nutcase Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was declared the winner within two hours of the polls closing. (ACORN must be involved.)
Obama responded by boldly declaring that the difference between the loon Ahmadinejad and his reformist challenger, Mir Hossein Mousavi, "may not be as great as advertised."
Maybe the thousands of dissenters risking their lives protesting on the streets of Tehran are doing so because they liked Mousavi's answer to the "boxers or briefs" question better than Ahmadinejad's.
Then, in a manly rebuke to the cheating mullahs, Obama said: "You've seen in Iran some initial reaction from the supreme leader" -- peace be upon him -- "that indicates he understands the Iranian people have deep concerns about the election."
Did FDR give speeches referring to Adolf Hilter as "Herr Fuhrer"? What's with Obama?
Even the French condemned the Iranian government's "brutal" reaction to the protesters -- and the French have tanks with one speed in forward and five speeds in reverse.
You might be a scaredy-cat if ... the president of France is talking tougher than you are.
More than a week ago, French president Nicolas Sarkozy said: "The ruling power claims to have won the elections ... if that were true, we must ask why they find it necessary to imprison their opponents and repress them with such violence."
Continue reading "Obama To Iran: Let Them Eat Ice Cream"
Posted by redguy at 08:59 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Printer Friendly
June 22, 2009
Reasons for Cautious Optimism
By: David Limbaugh
American freedom lovers studying the reign of Obama have been in a constant state of anxiety over the administration's assault on capitalism and America's very solvency, its thuggish political style, its PR war against America's history, its radical social policies and its Carteresque foreign policy. But for the first time, there are signs that America is starting to wake up.
The latest daily Rasmussen Reports Presidential Tracking Poll has Obama slipping into negative net approval territory, with more Americans strongly disapproving of his performance (34 percent) than strongly approving (33 percent). Just 54 percent of voters say they at least somewhat approve. Even the Gallup Poll reports a decline in his approval rating to a new low, albeit still at 58 percent. The decline results from a drop in support among independents, as well as Republicans -- but not Democrats.
Can you imagine what these numbers would be if the mainstream media weren't invested in Obama's success or, better yet, if moderate Democrats weren't still blinded by their lingering excitement over regaining the presidency and their vulnerability to Obama's cultish aura?
But it's not just the polling data that are encouraging. Obama's blame-it-on-Bush mantra is starting to wear thin. Another Rasmussen survey found that 39 percent of voters now think our economic problems are caused more by Obama's policies -- a 12-point jump from just a month ago.
Also, support for Obama's most dangerous agenda item, nationalized health care, is waning. A recent ABC News//Kaiser Family Foundation/USA Today survey indicates that 89 percent of Americans are satisfied with their health care. Worse (for Obama), congressional Democrats have warned that his plan is in jeopardy because its projected costs range between $1 trillion and $1.6 trillion, according to Congressional Budget Office scoring, and it would not even reduce by half the number of uninsured (the fraudulent impetus behind the administration's manufactured crisis). Just wait until further damaging truths come to light about the horrors awaiting America's health care system if it is nationalized, including government rationing and dramatically lower-quality care.
Continue reading "Reasons for Cautious Optimism"
Posted by redguy at 07:07 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Printer Friendly
