I never got tired of bashing the late Fred Phelps, of the Westboro Baptist Church. Now I get to bash Madeleine Albright for all the same reasons, to wit religious bigotry, from Washington Examiner:
CONCORD, N.H. — Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright on Saturday said there was a “special place in hell” for women who backed Sen. Bernie Sanders over Hillary Clinton in Tuesday’s primary.
During her remarks, Albright made it clear to women in attendance in the Granite State’s capital city — especially those backing Bernie Sanders — that they need to help out Clinton because they have a duty to do so. The former secretary repeated her often-used line that there is “a special place in hell” for women who don’t help out other women.
So according to Gospel according to Albright:
- There is some new heretofore unknown Biblical prophesy to, applicable apparently only to women, to elect Mrs. Clinton President
- When Christ died on the cross it only absolved male believers from their sins, but not women. So who knew God was such a sexist.
- Apparently the Christian belief that mortal acts and not acceptance of Christ as your savior is the key to eternal salvation, at least if you are a chick is false.
Did the Westboro Baptist Church keep the last Reverend Phelps’ pulpit open? If so Maddy should apply for the late Reverend Fred’s post.
By the way, if Mrs. Clinton has any understanding of professed Methodist belief, she should repudiate Albright.
Hat tip: Ed Driscoll, Instapundit.
Mrs. Clinton, a/k/a Miss Piggy, used to be called smart, but the only thing she has been consistently called is a liar. If you believe Miss Piggy Wall Street political donations to say Karl Rove are the epitome of evil, and the Constitution must be amended to ban them. Then on the other hoof, a Wall Street donation to herself is not per say evil. That is to say Wall Street money is inherently evil, unless Miss Piggy is the recipient of said money, from Politico:
“But she did acknowledge that she may not have done a great job at explaining her record on Wall Street. She explained that she went on the speaking circuit after leaving government, one that included stops before heart doctors and auto dealers and camping associations, and Wall Street, too.
She also said it’s important to note when she received the speaking fees. “I went to Wall Street before the crash,” she said, adding that she was trying to tell them to clean up their act, knock off the dangerous mortgage practices, and stop paying their CEOs so much.
I think the best evidence that the Wall Street people at least know where I stand and where I have always stood is because they are trying to beat me in this primary,” she said. “I have a pretty good understanding of how to stop them.”
Not to quibble with Politico, but Mrs. Clinton did not suddenly turn ugly. Like her emails, she was born ugly.
Hat tip video and reax, American Power:
Hmm, is she trying to accuse Sanders of something nefarious, like she’s in bed with a Jewish cabal, or something?
I’ve never heard of anything like that, especially since I think Sanders’ attack on her Wall Street ties is completely legitimate. Let’s see how this plays out today in all the talking-head commentary.
Note, Mrs. Clinton did not deny any Wall Street quid pro quo. She denied that she changed her votes based on Wall Street donations. What she failed to mention is how much she will charge for another Mark Rich preemptive pardon.
I’m outside Columbia New Jersey as this is written. Truck is running fine, all is well. Some heavy rains down here last night and some flooding down in the city made things a little problematic for me this morning. But nothing I haven’t seen before.
I have to pick up some cams in Edison New Jersey and run them up to Geneva New York, and then home.
If you’re driving at nine tenths the speed of light, and you turn your headlights on, isn’t the light coming from those headlights traveling at 1.9 times the speed of light? I swear I saw some people attempting that experiment on the New Jersey Turnpike today.
Bernie Sanders, like most hardcore leftists, likes to quote the Bible to make his political points. He has done so on several occasions when he felt, apparently, that it was to his advantage to invoke the word of God.
(Aside…I hasten to add the distortion of Christianity that is liberation theology to this list.)
The problem is, that there are still, despite the best efforts of the left, a large number of people who understand very well the Bible, its teachings and implications.
It strikes me though, that in the case of both of these, what their stated policies do, is attempt to answer the need for moral power which the Bible is about, with brute power, specifically the power of governments.
Now, anyone who has read this site for any length of time, knows that we here at this blog have written repeatedly and at length about the subject of charity.
Just because a government performs an action that on the surface happens to conform to a stated morality, doesn’t make the people subjected to that government, moral. After all, since when is man made law the final arbiter of morality? And in the case of what the left likes to call wealth redistribution, which is in fact, theft, there seems a moral lack that they routinely gloss over.
At the risk of being overly obvious, government is not charity. Government is force. Charity comes from the heart, not from a man-made book of rules enforced by governments, with guns, and jail cells.
Is there a difference between fancy ketchup and regular Ketchup? If so, what? And, what about catsup? Is it made with real cats?
It’s amusing to watch the left screaming about the Fed, and its influence on our economy. Calls for the elimination of the Fed by liberals strikes me as humorous because they clearly have no clearer idea of how the thing came about in the first place. For all their screaming about how bankers have too much influence on our economy, what they fail to understand is that the Fed was created by our government in direct response to the stock market run and bank runs of 1907, wherein JP Morgan rounded up a number of bankers to save the day. Without his efforts, we probably would have ceased to be a country at that point. The Fed was put into place because there was a unfounded mistrust as regard the banks. But of course none of them seem to know that, or even when told the truth of the matter, absorb that information. I guess some people don’t like their illusions being attacked.
I see where Donald Trump is doing his best to imitate Al Gore…claiming the election was stolen from him. Oddly enough I see Carson doing the same thing, along with Bernie Sanders. I hope I’m wrong, but it’s beginning to look like this kind of thing is the new normal.
To the Carson team, I say this. Ben Carson is an honorable man, but let’s be honest about this thing. You guys sent out an ambiguous message, CNN picked up on it, and everybody else ran with it. Your bad. And stole the election? Does anybody would anything over half a brain really believe that Ben Carson would have gotten tge additional 25000 votes that were needed to put your guy on top, absent that whole screw up? Sorry, I’m not buying it.
Have you wondered at all how many miles you scrolled with your thumb?
Lena Dunham tells us that she won’t return to Twitter until such time as they write some code of conduct protecting women. (What, not Wymyn, anymore?) And there was much rejoicing. I haven’t been on Twitter in sometime, but I must say that anything that keeps her in the corner with the dunce cap on served my purposes very well indeed thank you.
Remember, I’m off Friday night, so I will see you Monday. And down the road I go.
B. Hussein Obama is rarely seen in a Christian church but he did make political stop a Muslim mosque, Kevin Liptak, CNN Politics does a Monica for the Obama regime:
But for Obama, who continues to be dogged by conspiracy theories that suggest he himself is a Muslim (Obama is a Christian), a stop at an Islamic center proved far more complicated the first seven years of his term. A CNN/ORC poll in September found that 29% of Americans said they believed Obama was a Muslim, including 43% of Republicans.
There are but two entities, and onlyl one person on Earth who knows if one Barrack Hussein Obama is in fact a Christian, and that one person is not named Kevin Liptak. If Obama is a Christian is known only to him and God. Has Liptak managed to tap into Obama’s prayers? Somehow I doubt it. What Liptak is offering is what comes out the south end of a north facing hog.
Hat tip, and reaction to way twenty-nine percent of Americans who believe Obama is a Muslim, Robert Spencer, Jihad Watch:
This suspicion persists after seven years of his presidency not because of bigotry, but because he so consistently and repeatedly advances the Muslim Brotherhood agenda, to the rage and chagrin of Egyptian protesters against the Morsi regime in 2013, has made a series of disastrous concessions to Iran, has bullied Israel, and has spoken positively about Islam on numerous occasions while criticizing Christianity.
I, like Liptak, do not believe Obama is a Muslim. Then neither to I believe Obama a Christian. An honest theist must stand before and submit to his god. I believe, the only god to whom Obama worships is himself.
Suddenly it may be Two Thousand all over again. When, Algore won the popular vote but lost the electoral vote. A tidbit from American Power:
Remember, Pat Caddell warned that the Democrats will never release the raw vote totals, because they’d show the Bernie won the popular voted. The system is rigged!
Ask yourself, why would Iowa Democratic Party officials be sitting on results showing Mrs. Clinton winning Iowa?
Tonight I’m just outside Syracuse New York. I have the load of potato chip dip of all things, and I’ll be dropping it off in Queens at about 8 o’clock in the morning. Truck continues to run well, I’m in good health and good spirits.
The reports are that the groundhog has predicted an early spring. While there are those that will laugh at the reliability of the groundhogs prognostications, I should point out that they have been far more accurate than those predicting global warming.
Looking forward to spending some quality time with Donna. This weekend is her birthday and that’s always a special time for us.
By now, you all know that Ted Cruz won in Iowa last night. This despite the many predictions of his demise. All of which were wishful thinking.
All of the polls showed Ted Cruz losing Iowa… mostly on the strength of Cruz being strongly against the ethanol mandate. In cornfed Iowa, this is big stuff. No politician in history has ever challenged this nonsense… not in corn country… and survived to go on to the next round, before. He had Iowa Governor Branstad actively campaigning against him on the matter, and he still won. And yes, he won the race rather handily. Which raises the question about the political sacredness of the ethanol mandate. it also addresses the issue of a genuine conservative can win despite the misgivings of the establishment GOP.
The poll takers were also suggesting that Rubio was within striking distance of actually winning this thing. Put together and at the very least, these would seem to call into serious question, polling data and its accuracy, or at the least, those of the establishment GOP pundits observing at all.
As for Trump, it would appear as I suggested last night that the inevitability factor has disappeared. So has the constant output of tweets on Twitter. As of this writing the new services are now making mention but he hasn’t done anything on that service in 12 hours. There’s a number of possible reasons why, of course. I’ll leave them to your imagination.
And as if to show himself as completely disconnected from reality, Marco Rubio told his adoring audience that the pollsters said he had no chance…. and claimed victory. Hmmmm Marco? Third place isn’t exactly a win.
I have to say I overheard Limbaugh today talking about Rubio and how Rubio is a principled conservative. No, Rush, he is not. And yes, he is the last hope for the GOP establishment at this point. They’ve got to latch on to somebody after all, I love ya, man, but you’re dead wrong about this. We’re going to come back to this one I’m sure. Repeatedly.
Something on the order of 60% of Iowa Republicans voted for either a black or one of two Hispanic men. And quite literally none of the Democrat voters in Iowa did that. Ponder the importance of that.
Add to that, with O’Malley removing himself from the race,….( mostly because the only people that were noticing he was in the race, were laughing…) the average age of the Democratic candidates is now 71. I guess all we really need to do is run those DNC spots over again about fresh ideas, and young faces. Maybe they’ll go for it without noticing.
If there’s anything that surprises me it’s that Jeb Bush didn’t remove himself from the race. Yes, as Brit Hume points out, he’s got several million dollars to keep him going, but going in one direction? He’s already spent 54 million dollars and only managed 2%. At this point he’s acting like he has no clue as to why he’s even in the race. And frankly, I don’t either.
I’m going to add something here in an effort to reemphasize something I suggested last evening. There’s been an awful lot of late, talking about how this election and these candidates are going to be the end of the Republican Party. Interestingly enough, that kind of talk has been coming from liberals… both Democrat and Republican.
But I have to say that my read is a little different. We’re going to see the end of the Democrat Party in this.
Ponder the completely untenable choices of the soon to be indicted criminal and the socialist / communist. It doesn’t seem unreasonable to me to ask the question about how many of the Democrat party faithful are going to be rushing headlong for the exits. In fact, I’m going to suggest that is one major reason why Donald Trump is doing as well as he is. Seeing the lack of intelligence on the Democrat tickets these days, there’s a lot of people jumping ship for something more tolerable.
If you don’t trust I’m saying on this, consider this little mentioned fact… The fourth place Republican candidate got more votes then Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton combined.
While I’ve been writing this a lady driver pulled up next to me in her truck and went inside to grab something to eat or use the restroom or something. And somebody was waiting for her to return. I couldn’t resist this.
Off to bed, and then down the road I go. I’ll see you tomorrow.
Miss Chrissy Mathews on Iowa, 27 January, from Politico:
With the news that Donald Trump would be bowing out of Thursday night’s Fox News debate, MSNBC’s Chris Matthews seemed dubious at best over the network’s ratings without Trump.
“Who’s going to watch a debate between the two Cuban guys?” he asked during Tuesday night’s episode of “Hardball.” “Who’s gonna watch a debate between Rubio, Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz? Who cares?”
It looks like Chrissy had best get used to a Cuban-American candidate. The odds are pretty good that there will be at least one Cuban-American on the republican ticket.
I’m outside of Scranton Pennsylvania tonight is this is written. I’ve been watching the results from Iowa, and listening to a few of the local stations out that way. It’s been a fascinating evening.
Im headed for Syracuse early in the morning and then probably back to Rochester to pick up another southbound load. The truck is running fine, and I am well pleased with it.
By the way, Donna birthday is on Saturday, so I’ll be taking Friday afternoon off and may or may not actually have a nightly ramble up for Friday night. We’ll see how that goes.
I’ve not had a chance to look at the raw numbers but on the surface it comes out Cruz, Trump, Rubio. To make matters even more interesting, Rubio very nearly took second.
I believe it was Ben Hogan, now many years ago, who said nobody remembers who came in second. More recently, June I believe… Donald Trump said those words on his Twitter account. I wonder if he’ll remember those words now that he’s come second in the Iowa caucuses.
In one of the Rocky movies, there is a moment where Rocky lands a glove on his Russian counterpart, cutting him in the process. His trainer says words to the effect of…. “You see? He’s not a machine. He’s just a man. Now go get him.”
What we have going on here is on that level. The idea that Donald Trump is the inevitable GOP nominee has been shown for the falsehood it is. Up until this moment, he’s been taking everything in sight on sheer momentum. That momentum is now broken. Not only did Ted Cruz hand Trump his hat, but Marco Rubio as unlikely as it sounds, came close to doing the same thing.
The upshot of these results is that Trump has far less in the way of Support then we were supposed to believe. And we now have a three man race on our hands for the GOP nomination.
That’s aura of inevitability has been benefiting the Donald for months now, in that the press has been salivating over every syllable uttered by The Donald. Going forward, that’s no longer true I think.
As for the Democrat side of things, what we have is essentially a dead heat between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. Here again, the inevitability factor please large. Clinton, was considered the presumptive nominee until Benghazi, classified emails, and so on.
I see a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth that an open-faced communist like Bernie Sanders is coming so close to a presidential nomination. But I would ask IF Bernie Sanders and his outright socialism is such a step down for the party of FDR. As for his success as a measure of the deterioration of the culture as a whole, I don’t think I’d go quite so far. Ask yourself, would Sanders be doing nearly as well if it wasn’t so apparent that Hillary Rodham Clinton was melting down before our eyes? I don’t think so. Will Sanders do nearly as well in the general? I don’t think so.
It is quite true and will not be discounted by me that there has always been a certain level of support for socialism in these United States. But Sanders and his success is more about circumstances that have nothing to do with him than it does with political idealism.
The all too popular refrain of ” this election will be the end of the Republican Party” has it backwards. I’m starting to see the end of the Democrat Party.
And down the road I go. I’ll see you tomorrow. When given the intolerable choices of Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton does anybody really suppose that most people aren’t going to be rushing headlong to the exits?
Brian Sack has written a tongue in cheek guide to assimilation into western society for Muslim immigrants. This author takes the liberty of using Sack’s humor to make some serious points.
First why social justice warriors favor unchecked immigration. Muslims like SJW’s are intolerant bigots, from Federalist:
How Can I Silence These Opinions that Offend Me?
Dislike or offend—it doesn’t matter. As famously well-assimilated immigrant Salman Rushdie once said: “Nobody has the right to not be offended.” We understand that certain cultures have a terrible time handling criticism or dissent, but it was you who came here—without a gun to your head. If there was a gun to your head, it was being held by someone who couldn’t handle criticism or dissent.
For the SJW view of tolerance of dissenting opinion see, Click, Melissa.
Second, why women who value their western freedom and safety, should oppose uncontrolled immigration:
Why Isn’t that Woman All Covered Up?
As you have noticed, Western women are not covered from head to toe in an unsettling black bedsheet. This is mainly because it’s the twenty-first century. We have Oculus Rift, the Apple Watch, autonomous Teslas, and women are allowed to choose whether they ghost about town under a bedsheet. Unsurprisingly, most choose not to. This was the very same choice women in Iran made until the Angry Bearded Yelling Men took over in 1979!
Does an Uncovered Woman Desire My Hand on Her Crotch?
You should always assume the answer is no. Creepily traipsing about the mall in a disconcerting black bedsheet does not make a woman more pious, pure, or moral than an un-sheeted one. It makes her subservient to a misogynistic, patriarchal system derived from a Bronze Age origin story that was copped together from other Bronze Age origin stories./blockquote>
Hat tip: Maetenloch. Ace of Spades
Women, Muslims immigrants are not your friends. Neither are these SJW types who favor unchecked Muslim immigration.
File under: Western culture, war on.
Got the truck back from the shop last night and the thing is raring to go. I haven’t seen this kind of performance out of it for months. I have a huge smile on my face as this is written.
Investor’s Business Daily has a wonderful piece yesterday on Bernie Sanders, which fills in a lot of the blanks.
It wasn’t as bad as he says. His family managed to send him to the University of Chicago. Despite a prestigious degree, however, Sanders failed to earn a living, even as an adult. It took him 40 years to collect his first steady paycheck — and it was a government check.
“I never had any money my entire life,” Sanders told Vermont public TV in 1985, after settling into his first real job as mayor of Burlington. . . .
Sanders took his first bride to live in a maple sugar shack with a dirt floor, and she soon left him. Penniless, he went on unemployment. Then he had a child out of wedlock. Desperate, he tried carpentry but could barely sink a nail. “He was a shi**y carpenter,” a friend told Politico Magazine. “His carpentry was not going to support him, and didn’t.”
Then he tried his hand freelancing for leftist rags, writing about “masturbation and rape” and other crudities for $50 a story. He drove around in a rusted-out, Bondo-covered VW bug with no working windshield wipers. Friends said he was “always poor” and his “electricity was turned off a lot.” They described him as a slob who kept a messy apartment — and this is what his friends had to say about him.
The only thing he was good at was talking … non-stop … about socialism and how the rich were ripping everybody off. “The whole quality of life in America is based on greed,” the bitter layabout said. “I believe in the redistribution of wealth in this nation.”
Ok, having gone through all of that, let’s compare.
Let’s see here.
No ambition, check.
Very little measurable talent, check. Been living off the efforts of others all his life, check.
Same input, same output. If you have limited talent and absolutely no ambition, you generally want somebody else’s money.
Yeah, this guy needs to be in the White House…not.
Oh, and as for my comments of yesterday as regards Donald Trump deciding he doesn’t want to go through the process of debating the other candidates, I think the best critic of the Donald on the matter is himself. Observe, if you will, The Donald calling others cowards for not debating.
That said, there’s one other idea that seems to be coming up that I am investigating. It appears that at least some of the objection from the Trump camp is because the RNC has approved illegal aliens, a radical Muslim activist, a Bernie Sanders supporter, a Black Lives Matter supporter and a Mexican illegal immigrant to the debate to confront Donald Trump. And, one presumes, Ted Cruz.
I guess an ISIS member wan’t available.huh?
First of all, why would we care what anti-american types think? That said, obviously, this is to skew things towards Rubio, the establishment’s last great hope.
And you know, under those conditions it’s my view that Ted Cruz should probably walk as well.
But of course the question arises, if that was the biggest issue, why in the hell didn’t Donald Trump say so in the first place as opposed to pointing the finger at Meg Kelly? There’s a number of things about this don’t add up and I’m looking into it.
And down the road I go. I’ll see you tomorrow.
Ok, scratch the children. However I only only savor the Washington Post headline, had the Bush administration ever issued such a tone deaf proclamation, from Hill:
The Obama administration is looking to ease public fears over the Zika virus as it becomes increasingly likely that the mosquito-borne disease will spread to the U.S.
White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Wednesday that federal officials are planning a “conspicuous, concerted effort” to communicate the risks of the disease, making clear that it poses a far different — and less severe — threat than the recent Ebola epidemic.
While both viruses had a rapid spread, the Ebola virus can be fatal for anyone who becomes infected, while the Zika virus is most dangerous to women who are pregnant. Healthy, non-pregnant adults who contract the Zika virus will encounter symptoms like a “mild form of dengue fever,” Earnest said.
As the Zike virus is most dangerous to women, maybe the regime can fund development of non-gender biased version of the virus.
Then we have a proven method to combat mosquito-borne disease. Bring back the DDT.
I’m in Batavia New York tonight. Roughly 30 miles from the house. There is a load of drinks going down to Carlisle Pennsylvania in the morning and I should be there around 10 o’clock or so.
My truck continues to improve as we get little bugs here and there sorted out. I am well pleased. Maybe tomorrow I’ll get some of the salt off the outside.
The idea that Donald Trump is going to bypass the debate Thursday night is not going to harm him among his more ardent supporters any more than the idea that Hillary Clinton is a half step away from being indicted for her crime, felonies, will hurt her among her more ardent supporters. The old adage about when your argument isn’t based in fact, it’s impossible to defeat by way of fact, would seem to apply here.
I think I should also point out that the people who are praising Trump for this move, other of course then the Rabid Weasel Brigade supporting him, are liberals who don’t like Fox News. CNN for example was basically wetting their pants for the better part of last night over it. The Washington Post, similarly this morning.
In the end, then, it seems to me less than clear exactly what effect this is going to have in the race outcome. Until that is, you get into people who are on the fence and haven’t really made up their minds yet about how this race should proceed. There are a number of voices that haven’t been heard from yet.
As I said last night, I really can’t remember when we’ve seen anybody winning at Iowa actually attaining the nomination, other than W. The law of averages really doesn’t support it happening again.
And, again, there is the specter of Ronald Reagan having skipped the last debate before Iowa, at having lost that state, going on to win that I’m a nation. I’ve seen from supporters going on at length about that aspect, but there’s two points that Trump supporters seem to be missing. First, Ronald Reagan did not have the support of the GOP establishment. George Bush did, and Bush won that particular state that year..
The other point that the Trump supporters seem to miss, and I think intentionally so, is that Trump has been turning in increasingly poor performances at each debate. With Ted Cruz by some polls only being 2 points behind him, and I’m quite sure is own polling data is showing him this as well, one can easily understand why he’s not interested in playing that particular game.
As I say, the Trump robots aren’t going to care about any of that, but the average voter in Iowa will, and it’s starting to look like Cruz will end up picking up Iowa, and even if it doesn’t, he’s going to come away looking like a winner for actually showing up to the debate. Trump, meantime, ends up looking like a petulant child. That’s not going to do him any good at all amongst independence in the remaining states as we go forward, particularly when we’ve just come off a seven year run with such a personality.
And down the road I go. I’ll see you tomorrow
Addendum: (DavidL) Every candidate loves to compare him/herself to the Gipper, even the Donald. However, in one very important aspect, Donald Trump is not, and can ever be, a Ronald Reagan. The Gipper had no visible ego. Reagan never claimed to more than a B grade movie actor, back when had B grade movies. Reagan never pretended to an intellect. Whereas, Donald is all ego, He tells you can work with Speaker Tablecloth, b/k/a Nancy Pelosi, but walks out of a debate because he can not handle Megan Kelly. Reagan went face to face with the Hollywood moguls and Mikhail Gorbachev. Reagan did not need a fawning media tell him how great he was. Alas the Donald is not the Gipper.
As this is written I’m at the Flying J in Carlisle Pennsylvania.
That’s a bit of a rare event for me actually. Mostly because this place is usually so crowded by 3 o’clock in the afternoon you can pretty much forget about getting a parking spot anytime past about 5. As it happens though, I’m here without a trailer because my trailer is being loaded. I’ll pick it up about 8 o’clock in the morning and head back north.
Seems they caught rather more snow down here then we did further north.
This stuff is everywhere and is giving Logistics businesses fits.
Oh well. Part of the game, I suppose. On to other matters….
After watching Bernie Sanders for several weeks, now, I have come to the conclusion that his transition to senility will be an extremely smooth one. In fact, I doubt anyone will notice at all.
That said, the only two honest people in this race, are Ted Cruz and Bernie Sanders. It’s my view that the presidential race should come down to those two people. It is the race, I think, that liberals are in abject fear of, because it will give the American people and clear choice. The socialism that is every American leftists wet dream, or constitutional conservatism writ large. There’s only one way that contest is going to go, and the left knows it.
No, don’t misunderstand. I think Sanders is downright CRAZY. There is no logic to any of his political beliefs. None. And yet, at least he has the advantage of being honest about his political beliefs, which is something that Hillary Clinton and what’s his name Milloy don’t have in their resume. Even the left doesn’t trust Milloy… he’s pulling, what, about 5% among Democrats?… and Hillary Clinton is melting down before our eyes, and will likely be indicted before the convention.
I see that amost predictably, Noam Chomsky has endorsed Hillary Clinton as of yesterday. I find it fascinating, personally. You see, I can’t help but wonder which that endorsement is going to hurt more. The communist and criminal who is trying to pass herself off as a centrist or the whack job communist trying to pass himself off as the smartest guy in the room.
Seems about as close to an even money bet as you’re going to find in the world of politics.
Then too, no matter who wins, it’s more than a little bit difficult to run against the current status quo, given that they’re running at that point against their own, Barack Hussein Obama. They can’t call for real change because supposedly that’s already occurred. The cognitive dissonance is going to be amusing to see.
As for Ted Cruz, he’s the only one on the Republican side who is actually a conservative despite the whole of the rest of the field trying to pass themselves off as such. Also, he’s the only one of the field not actively trying to snatch the mantle of Reagan.
Regarding that, it’s always been fascinating to me how many people claiming to be conservative and claiming to revere Ronald Reagan, didn’t support him back in the day.
It’s my feeling that at this point the Democrat race is wide open. That said, the Republican race is going to end up In Ted Cruz’ hands.
Yes I know, Donald Trump and all that. But the implosion of Donald Trump has already begun before they even vote in Iowa, & I will remind you that do the candidates who win in Iowa very seldom win the nomination. Indeed I can’t remember the last time that happened.
I note with mild amusement, Donald Trump supposedly pulling himself out of the debate just before Iowa. It should be noted in fairness that this is a move that Ronald Reagan made, years ago, and he won the nomination. Still, Trump is no Reagan, and the outcome of this is likely to be different. After all, when Reagan decided not to do the last debate, he had a far more substantial lead on his opponents. It’s my view that this move is going to hurt him, and the damage has already been done… even assuming that he decides to go to the debate after all. This will be the break point for the Trump campaign. It’s all downhill from here.
So when Donald Trump self destructs, as I’ve been saying all along he would, Cruz is in the best position to pick up the pieces. He’s got the best list of qualifications, he’s an actual conservative, and the fact that the press doesn’t like him, along with the GOP establishment, is doing his position nothing but good. And from what I see here, Ted Cruz has the best organization on the ground for get out the vote.
And, down the road I go. I’ll see you tomorrow.
Tonight, I’m outside Allentown, PA.
The truck is running fine, but I wonder about getting any runs in NYC.
The snow down there is still a problem. According to everything I’m hearing, and seeing, the socialist paradise that is New York City has apparently not managed to plow itself out. All the reports would suggest that the first serious test of city services being run by the avowed communist Bill de Blasio has been dramatically failed.
I can’t say I’m surprised.
The central subject is gun control today.
The very notion that somehow the people themselves were never intended to keep and bear their own weaponry is ludicrous and utter liberal stupidity at it’s finest. If weapons are to be held by “well regulated” (which the anti-gun types invariably take to mean governmentally controlled…) militia, then how are the people supposed to maintain their ability to perform one of their primary mandates…which is to overthrow an over-reaching, unconstitutional or tyrannical government ?
It’s nonsensical to believe that the founders would not have the foresight to enable the citizenry to defend themselves against a tyrannical government considering that this nation was born out of just such a conflict, but by those self same founders.
Founders, by the way, who made their wishes on the point clear…
“A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
? James Madison, The Constitution of the United States of America
“The constitution shall never be construed…to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.”
? Alexander Hamilton
“A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies.”
? George Washington
“[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation (where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.”
? James Madison
“A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves… and include all men capable of bearing arms.”
? Richard Henry Lee, The Letters of Richard Henry Lee 1762-1778 V1
“The Right is General – It might be supposed from the phraseology of this provision that the right to keep and bear arms was only guaranteed to the militia but this would be an interpretation not warranted by the intent. The militia as has been elsewhere explained consists of those persons who under the law are liable to the performance of military duty and are officered and enrolled for service when called upon. But the law may make provision for the enrollment of all who are fit to perform military duty or of a small number only or it may wholly omit to make any provision at all and if the right were limited to those enrolled the purpose of this guaranty might be defeated altogether by the action or neglect to act of the government it was meant to hold in check. The meaning of the provision undoubtedly is that the people from whom the militia must be taken shall have the right to keep and bear arms and they need no permission or regulation of law for the purpose.”
? Thomas McIntyre Cooley, General Principles of Constitutional Law in the United States of America;
Furthermore, this liberal notion that somehow the perceived safety of the individual ( and not all individuals, but only those that liberals have deemed worthy of such protection…which is apparent from the calls for violence from the left towards those they disagree with on the right. ) is more compelling and paramount than the rights of all citizens , as a whole, is ridiculous liberal babble. The idea that one individual or a group’s perception overrides the expressed rights of any individual or group is not a concept that can even exist in a nation where liberty and freedom of the individual is the primary concern.
The right to keep and bear arms belongs to every citizen, whether they choose to exercise that right or not. If an individual decides to forego that right, they choose not to exercise that right..that is their decision. They do not have the power or authority to deny others the freedom to choose whether or not they exercise their rights. The Bill of Rights is a limitation on governmental power not the power of citizens. It was the people’s way of stating that they agreed to be governed by this new system, but only if they had these specific and undeniable rights. The Constitution of the United States is a contract between the government and the citizenry and that contract cannot be changed except by the methods contained within it. So liberals, if you want to end the right of the people to keep and bear arms do it the way the constitution intended. Sure, it will be one Hell of a fight, but not any worse than simply attempting to infringe upon them one regulation and one EO at a time, or trying to confiscate them in one fell swoop. Do it according to the law and principles laid out and then at least, when the battle does come, you can say you followed the Constitution
….even though we all know you don’t give a damn about it.
As for the leftist assertion that it’s all about the children, I noticed that at least one person agrees with you on this point.
“ The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation.”
? Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf
Down the road I go. I’ll see you tomorrow.
As this is written I am headed for the Albany New York area to eventually run to the house for the weekend. I’m showing 6 degrees on my information center here in the truck. Personally I’m ready to fast forward to complaining about how hot it is outside.
It’s been a pretty good week, and my truck has been behaving itself.
I think it was Andrew Fletcher who famously said,…
“Let me make the songs of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws.”
I have often said that no law can encapsulate or if you will capture in amber, a culture. The thinking …the philosophy …the motivations of a people. What informs their daily lives.
What does a better job of reflecting those things is the music attached to people, a culture, a nation. Clearly, the Fletcher quote that I have provided affirms this. The music, thought Fletcher, was more important, closer to the heart of a people.
Now, couple that with the idea that for the first time in recorded history (and you should pardon the pun..) older music is outselling what’s being produced today.
Part of the answer in that happening of course, is sheer numbers. There is by far more music recorded now than there ever has been, and certainly when stacked up against the volume of what’s coming out today it overwhelms the more recent product.
Now, we can have discussions, and I’ve gotten involved in several, suggesting that the quality of music has gone downhill. The musicianship. The sheer artistry angle. And that’s certainly true…. What is produced today really stinks by comparison for the most part.
But I suspect that there is a deeper meaning here, a deeper implication. The contents of each, the newer music versus the older conveys a different attitude. A different way of thinking. A different philosophy. As the Fletcher quote suggests, when you listen to a song, there is a cultural philosophy being transmitted. Subtly of course, and less than direct.
Which leads us to this… is part of the reason that older music is outselling the more recently produced product, because of a rejection of the philosophy being transmitted by the newer material?
If so, what are the implications for us as a people?