"I have nothing against rich people... but what made America great is the middle class."
*sigh* She's partially right. The American worker has made this the greatest country in the world, but that's not the connotation of what she's saying. Her implication is that the rich haven't done anything for the country but get rich. Those that can handle the truth know that while the middle class made this country great, it was also the so-called "rich" that made it great as well. Men like Henry Ford, John D. Rockefeller, J.P. Morgan and Bill Gates not only amassed great wealth but created great wealth for millions of Americans. Think about how many people have been employed the past 25 years because college drop-out Gates invented something that everyone in America would eventually need...a simple (though crash-prone) computer operating system. What if he had made his first million and then retired, where would we be? Even a liberal like Thomas Friedman understands this.
Yes, the middle class built this country but so did entrepreneurs with big dreams. Thanks to capitalism and political freedom, they were able to make these dreams reality and enrich us all.
Hillary knows this, but she wants power and you can't have the degree of power she craves when the populous is 'on their own.'
But now I think Fred needs to get on with it. Certainly this non-candidate campaign of the past few months has been historic and wildly successful, but now he needs to strike while the iron is hot lest he come off as too much of a political cock-tease (please pardon the expression).
Anyway, these scumbags cornered Rudy today at an appearance asking a bunch of stupid questions and implying that he knew the buildings would collapse, etc. G-d I hate them. Rudy, being a presidential candidate, just smiled and answered as polite as he could, I'm sure fighting the urge to tell them to pound sand.
For those who need a primer in the physics of steel, go here.
"I've always been against the idea of rock stars lecturing people as if they know something the rest of us don't - it looks arrogant.
"It's not as if they have a private source of information. To state the obvious as if you are the only person that knows it is intellectually weak."
In terms of this Republican administration, some views about stem cell research, gay rights, separation of church and state, and on and on—I don’t agree with any of them. But you can worry about the trees and the environment and gas emissions later. Right now there’s a bigger problem, and it’s a guy who doesn't care if you’re a Republican or a Democrat; he wants to blow himself up and take you out. That’s the problem.
That's Popinjay Libertarianism right there!
Here's the part of the story that seems to be missing:
Dateline Montgomery, Al. - Holy sh*t! Giant pigs live among us!
Seems like the kind of thing that would give one pause, especially if they lived in Alabama.
In RCTV's case, the broadcaster failed to meet basic public-interest standards. The criterion for this assessment is similar to that used by the US Federal Communications Commission. RCTV will be free to broadcast via cable and satellite, which are available across the country.
In the UK, if Channel 4 aided an attempted coup against the government that resulted in civil unrest and even death, would anyone be supporting the renewal of its licence? RCTV has lost its licence because its wealthy owners slanted news coverage to provide support to the April 2002 coup against Chávez and the elected government. This will not be news to those who gathered in parliament last week to view John Pilger's excellent documentary The War on Democracy, which shows footage of RCTV involvement.
There's some interesting back and forth in the comments section including this from "hyvaslide":
The author of this "editorial" mischaracterizes Chavez's treatment of RCTV. Its "support" for the 2002 coup consisted of running editorial cartoons instead of displaying pictures of pro-Cavez crowds(see "Rising Censorship Among World's Oil Powers" http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0524/p01s04-woam.html). And even if this decision was interpreted as tacit support for the coup, such a stance does not merit the arbitrary withdrawal of the outlet's broadcasting license. Freedom of speech demands a hands-off aproach from regulatory bodies unless the news agency in question is inciting imminent violence.
Back and forth, to and fro.
Look, here's the thing with Hugo Chavez: his situation is very similar to Hitler's. Now I'm not saying Chavez is another Hitler. Hitler is responsible for the deaths of six-million Jews and a fair number of gentiles. Chavez is still in the minor leagues on that count. Like any good Marxist, he prefers the slow painful death of starvation to the tacky quick death of a gas chamber. Anyway, defenders of Chavez love to point out that he was democratically elected. That's true, by Latin American standards. He won the presidency twice, through lots of intimidation and rule-bending, but he won it. Hitler won power in Germany quite democratically as well. There was intimidation, there was rule-bending, but ultimately the Nazi party made the right power plays and won a majority of seats in the Reichstag. Once in power they made all the moves necessary to end democracy and keep their hold on power. Churchill knew this was coming...most learned men of the age knew this was coming, and while I'm not a history expert, I'm sure there were many Labour MP's in Britain at the time who were saying "Hey, he was democratically elected by the Germans. Leave him alone."
That's the point with Chavez. We can quibble over the legitimacy of his elections or his power to censor broadcasters, but ultimately all learned men know that his goal is a dictatorship, that's why defending his "democratic" actions is a fool's game. Chavez is a dangerous thug and an enemy of freedom and anyone who tries to paint the situation with a layer of anti-Americanism and Utopian dreams are just as dangerous.
"I didn't come here to be a congressman — I came here to do something," the Ohio Republican said as he choked up with tears in his eyes on the House floor. "And I think at the top of our list is providing for the safety and security of the American people. That’s at the top of our list. After 3,000 of our fellow citizens died at the hands of these terrorists, when are we going to stand up and take them on? When are we going to defeat them?"
"Ladies and gentlemen, if we don’t do it now, if we don’t have the courage to defeat the enemy, we will long, long regret it," he added.
Just awesome. He's a good man.
Just look at one of the emails on her blog:
Ro- my heart hurts for you right now. EH not much of a friend. Glad you have true friends & know the difference. Today she was mean spirited & that is saying something about her. Glad 4 U 2 B out
(Rosie's response) i am glad 2 b out 2
Yep, she's the victim. If only she could live in a world where there weren't these annoying contrary opinions and everyone lived together in peace with one mind, one thought.
Don't worry Ro...the Fairness Doctrine is on the way.
His basic theme seems to be: if the left isn't winning in the marketplace of ideas, there can't possibly be anything wrong with their ideas. It must be the marketplace itself that is "broken," and the left needs to use the power of government to fix it--in both senses of the word "fix."
This is the American left's version of what strongmen like Vladimir Putin and Pervez Musharraf call "managed democracy." The "marketplace of ideas" can be trusted to work--so long as everyone agrees with them. But if the public obstinately persists in disagreeing with the left, then the marketplace of ideas must have been "broken" by meddling troublemakers like Rush Limbaugh and Rupert Murdoch and Karl Rove--and we know how to "fix" those guys, don't we?
Scary stuff. I've said it before and I'll say it again. This is the battle of the 21st Century. Postmodernism v. Reason (the real kind).
Writes the Hitch:
I once had quite an argument with the late Sen. Eugene McCarthy, who maintained
adamantly that it had been right for him to vote for Ronald Reagan in 1980 for no other reason. "Mr. Carter," he said, "quite simply abdicated the whole responsibility of the presidency while in office. He left the nation at the mercy of its enemies at home and abroad. He was the worst president we ever had."
Hitchens, of course, has a soft spot Nixon as the worst president ever, but places Jimmy a close second, it seems. RTWT.
This is big folks, and despite what many will tell you, it's not about a fear of Hispanics moving into our neighborhoods. They're already here, which would be fine, but many came here illegally and they are being rewarded while those that came here legally are, in effect, being punished. It's being done to get votes for the the Democrat Party and their hopes of a permanent majority. It's being done so big business can get cheap labor. It's being done because so many people, politicians and many faceless corporations, don't care about anything that's bigger than themselves.
We're not just angry that they want to reward people for breaking the law, we're also worried about security. The point of this legislation that Lindsey Graham is so proud of is to reward illegal immigrants. It pays lip-service to border enforcement, but there is no intention whatsoever to deal with border enforcement and security. None of the power-brokers in Washington, D.C. seem concerned about border security, not even...I'm sorry to say, our President.
You know what the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have done for this country? It's terrible indeed that we've lost so many great men and women in these battles, but they've kept Americans safe from harm. Democrats love to point out that Osama bin Laden keeps saying how happy he is to fight America in the Middle East, on Islam's home-field. Of course he says that. You never hear a discouraging word from bin Laden...that's how propaganda works. If we weren't in Iraq and Afghanistan, we would be fighting terrorists on American streets.
Welcome to Israel.
Car bombs, suicide bombers in shopping malls...these would slowly become a way of life in the United States. As the situation deteriorates in Washington, D.C., one has to wonder how much longer until that day arrives in America.
What the hell is going on!!!!
I see a dozen protesters in at the most, and two of them seem to be from the press.Where are the "hundreds?"Somebody looks like a monkey today.I applaud your effort, but I can't abide your lack of reason.
Blue Patriot 05.17.07 - 4:44 pm #
I can only speak to the Las Vegas rally, which I said contained "a handful" of people. There were, however, two other protest in two other cities. You need to read more carefully.
Jim Rose Homepage 05.17.07 - 5:00 pm #
we up in Carson City reported for duty!Homepage 05.17.07 - 5:48 pm #
"making America work" eh?
bvac 05.17.07 - 9:27 pm #
Support the mission! I don't care how many troops come home in body bags, we're staying until America is victorious!
jr666r 05.18.07 - 2:08 am #
Hilarious! Really!Most healthy Americans realize that we can only genuinely support the troops by getting them out of a situation that they don't belong in.They did their jobs -- Hussein is gone, no wmds, an "elected" parliament. Granted our troops were deceived while Bush laughed at the idea of finding wmds during the White House press corp dinner a few years back, but what the heck, "bring 'em on!"The pathetic turnout says it all -- let's see, is that the 28% idiot base?It's hilarious -- you guys try to make up for the fact that a "handful" of folks showed up because Republicans work for a living. I guess that's why there are more vets in congress who are democrats than republicans --You screw ups care more for the money than what really matters -- like civic duty.Oh well, I'm sure that the few Republican soldiers who are as easily mislead as you will appreciate the "handful" who showed up who support the fact that their lives are in danger because of lies and incompetence.Truly hilarious if it wasn't so sad!
abdiel 05.18.07 - 4:32 am #
Ah!The Carson City Protest was "quite successful!"Not just a handful -- but two! And all the media -- some channel 4 cameraman!Oh! And they got a staff person to close the door because she didn't want a confrontation with a potentially overzealous ideologue!Way to show you're a man -- you sure intimidated that nice girl with the glasses!It's a good thing you weren't on the other side where Bush brownshirts would have very happily shoved you on your way!But hey! You gotta admit, closing a door in your face is really more profound -- it says, the door was open, you were invited in, you asked a stupid question, you got a stupid answer.Alls fair and even!"Quite" a "success!"
abdiel 05.18.07 - 5:06 am #
First of all, stop having the nerve to call yourself a libertarian. No libertarians are supporting this war. Libertarians do not take part in "wars of choice". We defend our country and leave alone those who leave us alone.Second, Melanie Morgan and MAF are just one Prozac short of Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist crazies. That's why there was no one there, not that they were all working. C'mon, lets cut the BS. Nobody is buying it.
Ed 05.18.07 - 9:59 am #
We defend our country and leave alone those who leave us alone.Exactly, but the terrorists didn't leave us alone, did they?(see 9/11) Isolationism is NOT libertarianism. You need to do your homework.
Jim Rose Homepage 05.18.07 - 11:10 am #
How did our website get populated with so many cheese eating defeatistist surrender monkeys Jim? Those guys suck. Iraq will pay for attacking us on 9/11 and if our troops have to massacre 100's of thousands more iraqi civilians to be victorious then so be it (there not even christians anyway).
jr666r 05.18.07 - 11:43 am #
Sorry Jim, I forgot the 9/11 attackers were Iraqi.Oh wait a second, according to EVERYONE, Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Afghanistan did. I could have been convinced on Saudi Arabia's involvement. Maybe even Pakistan. But not Iraq. It not only had nothing to do with 9/11 but was dominated by secular Sunni's, the enemies of Shiite Al Queda.So how does that fit into libertarianism again?
Ed 05.18.07 - 12:55 pm #
Can you feel the love?
It looks like I'm going to have to write a treatise on my philosophy before libertarianism is totally usurped by Noam Chomsky and his band of zealots.
Shouldn't the American people be able to expect a certain decorum and dignity from the man who occupies the White House? On this measure, as well, Giuliani fails miserably. Much has been written in the blogosphere about his three public appearances in drag. In each instance, he tried to be funny by dressing like a woman. Can you imagine Ronald Reagan, who loved a good joke, doing something so ignoble in pursuit of a cheap guffaw? Not on your life.
I'm also guessing that Mr. Dobson is not a fan of taking the Lord's name in vein or enjoying sexual innuendo either. With that in mind, here's a clip of Ronald Reagan courtesy our of friends at TVparty.com.
Nobody loves Ronald Reagan more than I, but I'm not so full of self-deception that I believe him to have been something he wasn't. Reagan was a real man, just like Rudy, and unlike James Dobson.
Here are some snapshots:
Debbie Lee is the mother of the late Marc Alan Lee, the first Navy Seal killed in Iraq. Despite what happened to her son, she still believes in America's mission.
MORE: Here's are two shots of about 7 pro-Harry Reid folks. They chanted to the passing traffic, "Support our troops! Support our Congress!"
UPDATE: The Raw Story is making hay of the fact that there weren't many people at the Las Vegas protest. It's not surprising. You don't get large numbers from Republicans at protests, they're almost always busy at their jobs making America work. Unlike ANSWER, we don't protest for a living.
MORE: The Carson City protest was quite successful.
Alternate Headline: "Democrats Plan To Institute Fairness Doctrine On House Floor"
UPDATE: Republicans fight back (go figure). Pelosi says 'nevermind.'
From the Las Vegas Review-Journal:
An Israeli-owned real estate investment group, in what is being called the most expensive large-site transaction on the Strip, has bought the New Frontier and its 36 Strip acres for more than $1.2 billion, the casino's current owner, Phil Ruffin, confirmed late Tuesday.
Ruffin said El Ad Properties, which controls several landmark New York City buildings, signed the purchase agreement last week for the hotel-casino site.
Ruffin, a Wichita, Kan., businessman who paid $167 million for the New Frontier in 1998, had been seeking an equity partner to help finance redevelopment of the New Frontier into a 2,750-room Swiss-themed resort.
He said a $100 million deposit on the deal arrived Monday.
"We're under contract, and that means we're doing the deal," Ruffin said. "We've been successful with the property, but it got to a point where it was better to let someone else come in and redevelop the site."
Ruffin had been in negotiations with El Ad since March. An Internet-based real estate Web site reported a deal had been struck to sell the New Frontier to El Ad for $1.5 billion on March 19, but Ruffin denied the reports.
Ruffin and gaming sources familiar with the deal said El Ad will close the aging Western-themed hotel-casino when the transaction is completed in 90 days. The 984-room New Frontier will be demolished, and El Ad will build a replica of New York's landmark Plaza Hotel on the site.
That's one hell of a return on his investment. Bought for $167 million, sold for $1.2 billion. I'm in the wrong business.
So anywho, Ron Paul basically said that the reason we were attacked on 9/11 is because we were bombing Iraq for 10 years. Amazing! The Left is always saying how George W. Bush used 9/11 as an excuse to go to war with Iraq and now, according to Paul, this very excuse was caused by bombing Iraq!
Not surprisingly, Rudy took umbrage. Hot Air has the video as well as his interview with Sean Hannity after the debate, which was even better (i.e. the stuff about facing reality). This is why Rudy is so popular with Conservatives despite his pro-choice stance on abortion.
Please, please, please let me see Rudy/Fred in '08!
UPDATE: Did Rudy "pay for this microphone"?
READ. THE. REST. I insist.
I think an old parable explains why the professional subcultures of articulate intellectuals, such as academics in the humanities, artists and journalists, all experience such enormous pressures to conform to the same viewpoint.
In the parable, a king wants to buy some clocks and travels to the Bavarian village were the ten best clockmakers in the world keep their shops all along one street.
As he enters the street all the clocks in all the shops strike 1 o’clock in one massive group chime. The king marvels at the great accuracy of the clockmakers of the village, but a few moments later he hears another group chime. After investigating he finds that all the clocks in 9 of the 10 shops show the same time but that all the clocks in the 10th shop show a different time by several minutes. Puzzled, the king
calls all the clockmakers together and ask why the clocks in the 10th shop do not chime at the same time as all the clocks in all the other shops.
The owner of the odd shop out immediately steps forward and says that due to his unusual skill and innovation his clocks keep more accurate time than the clocks of the other shops. The other shop owners protest loudly. The king is at a loss. The town lacks a master town clock or sundial, so he has no means of determining which clocks keep the best time. Confused, he decides not to buy any clocks and leaves town. Angered, the owners of the 9 agreeing shops burn down the shop of the odd man out to prevent such confusion from arising again. Now when someone comes to town, all the clocks will chime at the same instant. Customers will not become confused and everyone will sell more clocks.
The clockmakers destroy the nonconforming clockmaker among them because they know that as a practical matter we judge the accuracy of clocks by consensus. Absolute time does not exist. Essentially, a parliament of clocks votes on the correct time. (Even scientifically, this is true.) By fiat, we say that the clocks that deviate from the consensus time are inaccurate, but logically that need not be so. Different technologies or different levels of care in setting, winding or servicing the clocks could lead to the minority clocks being more accurate. However, if all the clocks agree, then no lay person will have grounds for suspecting that the majority clocks don’t keep accurate time.
What does this mean for our political culture? Barone touches on the question, noting that "The economic divide in New York and Los Angeles is starting to look like the economic divide in Mexico City and São Paulo", but doesn't go much further. But if the process continues, the implications will be profound.
If Barone is correct - and there's no reason to believe he isn't - then we're headed for an even more serious social schism between the heartland and the coastal metropolises. The heartland (along with smaller cities and towns on the coasts) will be comprised of melting-pot Americans, the coastal cities a bewildering melange of immigrants from all points of the compass, topped with an exceedingly thin layer of ultra-wealthy natives.
None of this is surprising if you paid attention to the 2000 election. The Bush/Gore county-by-county breakdown showed us how America was becoming two countries, and it's only getting worse. This is why there's a push to dump the Electoral College. Just as big business will try to push legislation to destroy small businesses, the coastal cities will do whatever they can to make "flyover country" irrelevant.
I've stated many times that I'm a Giuliani man and I remain so, but the things that Fred Thompson has been doing in his non-campaign for president is enough to make me squeal like a girl. I'm this close to defecting. I'd literally have an orgasm if those Giuliani and Thompson were on the same ticket.
O'Hurley is currently living in Vegas and headlining Spamalot at Wynn Las Vegas. He joined dozens of local Las Vegas entertainers and resort workers for a group photo in front of the "Welcome To Fabulous Las Vegas" sign in celebration of National Tourism Week. O'Hurley could not have been nicer or more accommodating. If you've ever wondered what he's like, rest assured, he's a great guy. He also graciously took the time to pose for a photo with the Popinjay.
I agree with Erick and now is the best time to clean house. With the party in the minority, we need to weed out the deadwood and get some people with guts in Washington. Many worry about 2008 and the presidential race, but I think the presidency and Congress are two separate issues. We need to work hard to get a Giuliani, Romney or Thompson elected, but in the Congress, if it takes a few terms to get it right, then so be it. No point having a majority if it's just a bunch of Chuck Hagel/Lindsay Graham types.
It's certainly plausible and so far Brownback is mum on the issue. Smart, loyal readers of Jim-Rose.com will remember that Quinn & Rose were the first to uncover a 1999 ABC report on a link between Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. Back in 1999, Bill Clinton was president and the media believed Saddam was dangerous...that ended in 2001.
However, they weren't exactly the A-Team. They made a very stupid, yet humorous, mistake:
The men - several of whom were in the same family - had videotaped their practice sessions in the Poconos, the source said. That videotape, in which they railed against America, led to their arrests.
The men made the mistake of bringing it to a retail store, seeking to get a copy burned to a DVD, according to one of the sources. A store employee who later watched the tape called the FBI who began immediately investigating.
"Um, hello? Is this the FBI? Yeah, this is Skeeter from the Video Hut. Dude, check it! You need to see this video tape!"
Not to make light of this store employee. He or she is a hero, but as someone that works in video and digital media, I just find the whole thing amusing. Good catch, dude!
Now, on to the serious stuff. THEY WERE IN THE COUNTRY ILLEGALLY! DO I NEED TO S-P-E-L-L IT OUT FOR YOU?
As far as this abortion thing goes, I've said many times that I understand where the pro-lifers are coming from and I don't expect them just to shove their beliefs to the side, but you've got to play the hand your dealt. Right now, we need a strong leader who will fight terrorism and socialism. Rudy may not score 100 on the Reagan checklist, but he's proven to everyone that he does have the will to fight for what he believes is right. McCain is a backstabber, Gingrich wants to be loved, Fred and Mitt, we just don't know for sure. With Rudy, we have plenty of empirical evidence.
''It was not Reaganesque.'' ''No red meat.'' ''Too low key.'' That was the preponderant reaction I heard to Thompson's half-hour presentation (leavened by a few favorable comments, mostly by women, that he was more ''statesmanlike'' and ''presidential'' than the announced candidates). Lincoln Club members, like many conservative Republicans, had been unimpressed by the existing field of Republican hopefuls and envisioned Thompson as the second coming of Ronald Reagan. They did not get it Friday night.
I shouldn't be surprised by this. Republicans are never satisfied with anything, but there are reasons for it. First off, I watched the speech online and it was a good speech. On substance, it was dead-on. Was it a fiery speech? No, but that's not Fred Thompson. He's a slow talkin' Tennessean, folksy and loaded with common sense. If you're looking for Al Pacino, then rent one of his movies.
This, as I said, is typical of conservative Republicans. They suffer from a condition which psychologists call "hyper-vigilance." They are always on guard for something to go wrong, for the proverbial other shoe to drop. If things aren't going gang-busters than we're screwed. It's all or nothing, and besides we're always going to get the shaft so best not get our hopes up and be disappointed.
To quote Barry Goldwater, let's grow up Conservatives!
UPDATE: Geesh! What did I tell you?
Yes, Sarkozy is a believer in man-made global warming (he says) and against the Iraq War, but this is a vast, vast improvement from Jacques Chirac and he has made it a point to say that America can count on France as a friend. The best thing he can do for us is to get things straightened out at home; get unemployment down, cut taxes, get immigration under control and fight terrorism. If it's not in Iraq, fine, but fight it in your own country. Make France great again.
MORE: Ken Timmerman has a nice perspective.
MORE: No revolution is complete without some hotties. I give you, Sarko's Babes!
Raise your glasses in a toast!
It may already be working, in fact. The Washington Post has a story today about the Congressional Democrats failure to pass any legislation of consequence. First David Broder strays off the reservation and now this article from WaPo? They'd better beef up security around the newsroom and get lawyered-up before another letter arrives.
Meanwhile, we have nonstop efforts to silence any and all speech from conservatives and libertarians. These same people on the Left trying to censor anyone who disagrees with them seek to confuse the issue by saying that they are the ones being censored. Here's how Roseanne Barr explains that she could never be a host on "The View":
In reality, I could never host that show, or any network show, because I have opinions that are not sanctioned by the powers that be who refuse to allow even one dissenting voice over the airwaves of television(in this a "free" country).
What in the name of all that is holy is she talking about? Is she having us on, or does she really believe this? I don't even know anymore.
I'm burning out.
He is good. Also, Rudy is kind of tripping over the abortion issue. Sorry, but I just can't get worked up about abortion. Call me a heathen if you wish, I just can't see how it can be more important than fighting terror.
Matthews to Romney: What do you say to Roman Catholic leaders who would deny communion to those who support abortion rights?
Romney: "I don't have anything to say to them. They can do whatever the heck they want!" [Applause/laughter.]