The Maliki Withdrawal Demands

Maliki's Demands

Commentary has this great little coverage of the obvious on the Maliki demands. The summary that would be no surprise to the rational, but probably "shocking" to your average lefty:

1). Democracy breeds "politicians", and now Iraq has them as well. The lefts favorite kind of government, Dictatorship, has a few of them too (one guy can't really do EVERYTHING, and he may even realize he is mortal and will have a successor someday). News for the leftys-politicians say things to get votes! (shocking revelation though that may be)

2). Since Iraq now has politicians and elections, they say things that have to be taken politically. Bill Clinton; "The age of big government is over", Billy C again; "We need to have regime change in Iraq". MOST times the politician doesn't really mean what he says, he just wants votes! Politicians sometimes like results too, but only when those results can be translated into votes!

3). Our media these days isn't interested in much beyond making Bush look bad and getting BO elected, so they take statements that DIDN'T include a "timetable" in any sense other than the US would be "out at some point in the future" and translate them very disingenuously into "Maliki Calls For Timetable'. That would be the equivalent of getting married with the "Until death do us part" in the ceremony and the headline reads "Groom Calls for Marriage Timetable". There is misleading and downright lying-I'd put this one in the lie category, but I'm sure the MSM would make the claim it is just a good head fake for the good of the sheep. (gotta defeat that horrible Bush!!)

Naturally, this works really well with the MSMs bleating lefty sheep ... Bush "isn't hearing the calls"!! One of the other clues that can help when evaluating our MSM is this. When they state something like this that "seems so obvious", then it only lasts for a short time and the Democrats never pick it up, that probably means something. They don't WANT it dug into, because then the stupidity of their headlines would be obvious and they would eventually be exposed as biased quacks. Whereas by doing it the way they do, even some reasonable people are caused to "wonder". "Gee, I saw a headline that said that the Maliki government wants US troops out on a timetable, and then I didn't hear anymore-I wonder what is up with that? Maybe there IS something to that Bush incompetence!" Of course for the lefties it is; "Biased right wing media, won't even hammer away on the obvious story that the Maliki government is working their tails off trying to get the US troops out just as fast as they can and stupid Bush is dragging his feet ... shucky darn, guess I'll go read the Daily Kos".

The nice thing about the MSM is that if one is too exposed to them, they manage to make EVERYONE stupider ... and waste a ton of time just getting to the bottom of their head fakes!

Who Pays the Taxes?

Political Diary - WSJ.com

So the top 50% of earners pay 97% of the taxes, and the bottom 50% pay just 3%. BUT, according to BO and the Democrats, it STILL "isn't fair". By god, that goose had better give us more golden eggs RIGHT NOW!!

New data from the IRS will be out in a few weeks on who pays how much in taxes. My contacts at the Treasury Department tell me that for the first time in decades, and perhaps ever, the richest 1% of tax filers will have paid more than 40% of the income tax burden. The top 50% will account for 97% of all federal income taxes, while the bottom 50% will have paid just 3%.

But hey, maybe it will work! Maybe we CAN get those golden eggs faster and that lower 50% can get even MORE benefits ... after all, we know it is ONLY those higher income earners that are "greedy". But wait, didn't we do high taxes before? How did that work?

Economist Glenn Hubbard of Columbia University has shown that in 1970, when the highest tax rate was 70%, the top 1% shouldered 16.7% of the income tax burden. Today the top tax rate is 35% and the same class of taxpayers pays a whopping 39% of the burden. The worst way to "soak the rich," Mr. Hubbard finds, is to raise tax rates.

News at 11, people that only get .30 cents out of every $ they make will find a way to "not make that $" ... they may defer it, they may plow it back into their business, or they may just go fishing, but they aren't going to take it as income. They didn't GET to be high income by being stupid!!!

So current tax policies are "soaking the rich" for over DOUBLE what they were in '70, PLUS, the economy is MUCH larger and those "rich" are making far more money, so the overall revenue is MUCH higher! One would think it couldn't get much better than that, but of course that would assume that taxation was actually about "funding the government".

Much like rape not being about sex, taxation has never been about funds. Both are about the same thing-POWER! BO and the Democrats don't like to see people be motivated and carry through on moving to higher income brackets by earning saving and investment. Those activities tend to breed INDEPENDENCE, and it is DEPENDENCE that BO and company want!! Now it is true that killing that off is likely to make EVERYONE worse off, but that is not their concern. They have NEVER actually cared about the people that they claim to care about, and could care less if they all die of starvation, national health care or AIDs.

Their purpose is to use their power to destroy independence in any form they can. High taxes and inflation are two very good levers to help them meet their goals.

Bad Day for the Captain

He Truly Is About CHANGE!

When BO says CHANGE, he really means it! He is about as shifty as a drunken cat on a beach ball! Pretty well done Ad. Now if BO was a Republican the MSM would have put all this together and run it as often as "Bring Em On" and "Mission Accomplished"!

Conservatives for BO?

RealClearPolitics - Articles - Conservatives for Obama?

Thomas Sowell is always brilliant, and maybe even more important in this age of BO, BLACK! One would hope that he can speak the truth without being called a racist.

The whole article is important, but particularly the following:

If all that was involved was Democrats versus Republicans, the
Republicans would deserve the condemnation they are getting, after
their years of wild spending and their multiple betrayals of the
principles and the people who got them elected. Amnesty for illegal
aliens was perhaps the worst betrayal.

But, while the media may treat the elections as being about
Democrats and Republicans-- the "horse race" approach-- elections were
not set up by the Constitution of the United States in order to enable
party politicians to get jobs.

Nor were elections set up in order to enable voters to vent their emotions or indulge their fantasies.

Voting is a right but it is also a duty-- a duty not just to show
up on election day, but a duty to give serious thought to the
alternatives on the table and what those alternatives mean for the
future of the nation.

No matter what anyone thinks of BO, the fact is that there is no way this guy has DEMONSTRATED any qualifications to be President. One would NEVER hire anyone for a leadership job in a business, or even in your personal life without having DEMONSTRATED ***WAY*** more than this guy!!!

I suspect that the nation has NEVER come even close to this level of frivolity in the election of a President.

Just in more or less my lifetime:

Eisenhower - Supreme Comander Eurpope WWII
Kennedy - 2 terms US House, in 2nd term Senate, War Experience WWII
Johnson - House of Rep and Senator forever
Nixon - House, VP
Ford - Speaker of House (+)
Carter - Gov State of Georgia
Reagan - Gov State of California
Bush - Head of CIA, VP
Clinton - Gov Arkansas
Bush - Gov of Texas

Obama? -- less than a SINGLE term in the Senate, and Illinois House????

If this wasn't for real it would be beyond imaginable. This is a roll of the dice on long odds beyond anything ever seen in the US. WHY????

My Theories:
1). The MSM successfully convinced the populace that W is the greated idiot in the history of the world -- and we are still here. The message is "if Bush can be President, than ANYONE can be President, it is EASY" ... yes, they claim that he has done a "horrible job" (wink, wink, nod, nod) ... but everyone actually knows that things are "pretty good". We put the village idiot in the job and he didn't REALLY (wink, wink) do THAT bad, ANYONE will CERTAINLY do better!!!

2). Sowell points this one out kind of ... it is time to "teach the Republicans a lesson". I'm a bit reminded of Clevon Little in Blazing Saddles holding the pistol to his own neck and saying "nobody move or the Ni***r gets it!! It would be nice if all the worlds dangers were the humorous foils of a Mel Brooks script, but I'm afraid such is not the case.

3). Thanks in part to the media and thanks to the times being as good as they are, we completely miss our peril. We have lived with strongly divided government for so long ... the whole Reagan administration, all but the first two years of the Clinton admin, and all but the middle 4 years of the Bush admin that we are complacent. Even during the brief periods of undivided government, the Senate margins were razor thin so a fillibuster threat was always exteremely real, the minority party could stop whatever they really wanted to. Even if the Democrats don't completely get a filibuster proof senate, it is almost certain that their margins are going to be close to that. I completely agree with Sowel that the Republicans did a lot of stupid things relative to spending and immagration while they had control. BUT, this is giving the Lamborghini, the liquor and the firearms to the teens ... and going off to Europe for a year!!!

Any "conservative" that falls prey to BO ISN'T!!!

Big Re-Up Nothing to Report

Power Line: The big re-up

1200 troops re-up in Iraq, no news from the MSM at all. Why would they do it? I thought all the troops that are on the ground every day would HAVE to know even more about the "Iraq Fiasco", "lost cause", "civil war", "no progress or hope of progress", etc. Why in the world would 1200 of them re-enlist in a volunteer force when it is obvious that they are risking their lives for something that has no hope of any kind of success at all? They must be insane? Seems like that would be a HUGE news story.

I KNOW that our MSM has no bias and is always trying to give us the straight information, so why would this not be reported. This is like a 10% at one time re-enlist. That would seem to be completely impossible if the view that the MSM and Democrats present to us every day is true, wouldn't it?

I'm SURE that the MSM and the Democrats are going to give us some clear explanation for this "sometime soon".

Kerry Forgot VP Discussion of 2004?

The Associated Press: Kerry says McCain lacks judgment to be president

I've always thought that one of the things that allows lefties to be lefties is very short and selective memories. As the VP search was going on, I recalled the interval when the Kerry camp and the MSM was in a tizzy over the delightful prospects of the then "maverick" John McCain running with Kerry in a cross-party ticket.

Four years later, Kerry thinks that McCain doesn't have the judgment to be president! Wow, so that must mean that Kerry isn't much of a judge of character. Also shows the kind of trust one can put in your typical liberal. McCain crossed party lines to defend Kerry, one can see the sort of result that bi-partisanship earns from those bastions of "even handedness", the lefties. The following from the AP article.

McCain came to Kerry's aid in March 2004 after Bush and his campaign tried to paint the Democrat as weak on defense. He rejected the suggestion in broadcast interviews and chided both parties for waging such a "bitter and partisan" campaign.

Your typical liberal just figures it is "fun to watch" when they throw some foolish person that actually practices that "bi-partisanship" from the right under the bus. It is the classic "mistake" that conservatives are prone to. Since we hold many things more important than politics, when a liberal does something we agree with, we tend to support them. We are also much more likely to just "put politics behind us and do the right thing", since we see so very many things as FAR more important than politics (God, country, family, friends, career, sports, fireworks, firearms ....).

Not so the left-politics and political power are all there is. If they can make use of a conservative, they will, but it is pure "use" they have no loyalty to anything beyond raw political power and control. They were all for having a few Republicans around as long as they were "Democrat lite" and held no real power of any sort. Ah yes, the days of "civil politics". The left is perfectly willing to be "civil" as long as you operate the way they dictate. Difference of opinion? You are suddenly "evil, racist, extremist, radical, uncivil, a hater, a liar ..." etc. Not agreeing with a lefty is the only real definition of "uncivil".

Towing the Sheriff Boat

Managed to get down to the Mississippi last Tuesday for a PERFECT night out. We drove down to the Alma lock and dam, then started towing tubes north of the Wabasha bridge. As we were retrieving a tuber, we were motioned over by a boat that turned out to be the Sheriff boat ... disabled engine. I suspect the two deputies figured that the least embarrassing potential was the ugly bald fat guy with the family in the boat. It was an obvious embarrassing situation. It was clear that getting it over was high on thier priority list-one of their first comments was "tow as fast as you feel comfortable, don't pay any attention to the no wake zone!" We ran about 10MPH and threw up plenty of wake and got them to the lower harbor in Wabasha.

They offered to pay for gas, but we enjoyed doing our good deed for the day and were on our way. More tubing and a nice meal at the Pickle Factory in Pepin. Kind of night one wished that they could bottle for re-use as desired!

Fireworks 2008

Last night we had our best home fireworks show ever. The weather was perfect, and progress is being made on the methodology front. The KEY innovation this year was the addition of 40 HDPE tube launchers from Pyro Mortars. I'm a little taken back by the name, as a person with an average interest in firing off something like $700 worth of fireworks (shared 3x) in 15 min or so, the term "pyro" seems extremely misplaced!

After years of fireworks, I continue to come to the conclusion that fireworks are not "sippin entertainment". There is some "optimum show", but it is not a long drawn out shoot one, reload, shoot another, repeat. It needs a kickoff with some draw, a middle with solid interest and reasonable pace, and then a finale that is something to remember.

We got there. Fireworks were purchased from Island Fireworks, but I'll link to some websites to show examples and to try to remember what to purchase for next year.

• For $29, we picked up 6 small 200 gram repeaters in a grab bag and fused them together (maybe just a bit too slowly). Very nice kickoff I thought, could have been improved by a short volley of mortars.
  
• For value, it is very hard to beat Rambo Kid and Double Impact as mortar shells. They can be had for around $1 a mortar, and with taking the time to fuse them in a nice mortar setup with HDPE tubes, these are the bread and butter of the display. For a decent amount more size, Excalibur is a nice touch, but at $75 for 24 shells, more spendy.
• It was the first year for a "wave repeater" Peacock is an example on the web and one we had, but "Pyro Swords" stole the show in the category.
• We ended the show with a 3" 9 shot finale with assorted other items to fill in (mortars and a nice triangle 500 gram cake, but I think for next year we will skip the 3".
  

Live and learn, everything appeared to be shut down, we even had a slow beer around the fire before heading off to bed, but in the AM it was discovered that a couple of spent cakes next to one of my 20 tube mortar sets had caught fire and had COMPLETE melted to a puddle with the cakes being nothing but ash. Sitting in the middle of our 2x football field sized lower lawn of grass with nothing but green for 100+ yards in any direction, the danger approximated zero, but it was a reminder to do some soaking at the end of the show, especially if conditions are getting dry. At $50 or so, a VERY inexpensive fireworks lesson!


The initial model for next year:

1. Some small "early test firings" to maintain crowd interest.
   
2. more mortars, mixed multiple fires ... except for kick-off an finale, 2-4 in a group is likely all that is needed.
   
3. A couple of roman candle packs in a milk crate that are fused can give a good relatively long shoot, inexpensive "filler".
   
4. The 500 gram cakes can hold their own ... no need to mass mortars around them.
   
5. Some 200 gram cake/mortar combos are great for the intermediate.
   
6. While we did a "No firecrackers" version this year, the addition of a few strings of fused firecrackers is a nice inexpensive way to add some sound interest.
   
7. Getting to the right combo of some 200 gram cakes and potentially a fountain or two could be a great way to go. The big shows are generally limited as to what they can do on the ground due to lack of visibility ... good spot to capitalize in a private show.
   

Another high for the home show, onward and upard for next year!

Good Reading on Limbaugh

Rush Limbaugh is Just Getting Warmed Up - NYTimes.com

I rarely get to listen to Limbaugh unless I'm driving somewhere. From my POV, the amount of time taken for the amount of content is not worth my time unless I can easily "double up" and listen while doing something else. I find him far more of an entertainer than a political personage, but I think that in itself is interesting. "Conservative entertainment" is what he does and it can be just as "fun" as the usual liberal forms, I'd argue that society would be improved if that was understood and something over 50% of entertainment was in fact conservative.

What would that mean? True "conservative" entertainment covers at LEAST "both" sides of topics (left/right) and often many more angles. It assumes that the audience is mature and open minded enough to WANT to hear what the entertainer finds to be the most important/interesting/funny/etc information on the topic from as many sides as the entertainer finds to to be important to the topic. Appropriate emotion is certainly important, but conservative entertainment sees the human as BOTH an emotional and rational being, with a balance where reason is primary being sought if not always achieved. The core of maturity (and true intelligence) is to be able to hold multiple ideas in one's attention and realize that in the human state, our task is to discern the "best currently possible". CERTAINLY realizing that part of that "best" is determined by our emotion, but also always aware that it is important that our emotion serves our reason and intellect.

Liberal entertainment is something we are well familiar with. Sadly it is mistakenly often called "mature entertainment", when in fact it should often be called "juvenile entertainment". The term "pornography" is horribly misused in our society to be generally limited to sexual pornography, when the word is MUCH more important than that. It might better be described as "looking at only a single or very limited aspect of something in order to achieve some sort of physical or emotional arousal/impact". The overt appeal is to the simplistic physical or emotional aspects of thetopic. Much of liberal entertainment, and even "news" is simply that; pornography. A specific response is the objective of the pornography purveyor, and that objective is very clear and accessible to even those with little or no maturity or knowledge of a subject. Liberal entertainment removes many dimensions of the world and leaves it seemingly simple, accessible, obvious, limited, predictable and "all about me and my easy satisfaction/titilation/emotional wallowing/feeling superior/feeling correct etc"

Liberal entertainment and reporting is extremely easy to find in our society today. In general it is all that is easily accessible to most people. Here is a great example from today's CNN headlines. A woman died in a hospital. We know very little about much of anything relative to it happening, BUT, it is clearly "an indictment of the health care system". It is a single emotionally charged incident, the MSM tells you how you ought think about it--in the unbeleiveable case that all aspects of the presentation of the information didn't already tell you how to "think" about it as easily as a provocatively dressed woman or nicely prepared meal tells you how to "think".

I believe that Chafets and the NYT did a good job here, not a hatchet job at all. No doubt that Limbaugh is a "personality" with a large ego that like all large egos sometimes gets in his own way. One doesn't become a lot of things--surgeons, fighter pilots, entertainers, CEOs and politicians come to mind as easy examples; without a large ego, it simply goes with the territory and is both a help and a hindrance in the same way as everything else that humans bring to the table is.

This quote states the obvious proof that Limbaugh is conservative entertainment pretty well I think:

Limbaugh’s audience is often underestimated by critics who don’t listen to the show (only 3 percent of his audience identify themselves as “liberal,” according to the nonpartisan Pew Research Center for the People and the Press). Recently, Pew reported that, on a series of “news knowledge questions,” Limbaugh’s “Dittoheads” — the defiantly self-mocking term for his faithful, supposedly brainwashed, audience —
scored higher than NPR listeners.

In general, most Limbaugh listeners (and Limbaugh himself) ENJOY discussion of key issues or the day, since they understand that there are many sides and viewpoints and the task at hand is ALWAYS selecting from conflicting alternatives the best available answers. In contrast, most liberals would like to chant "Bush lied people died" or scream "The Planet is being Raped" and walk away to talk with others that agree with what they have been manipulated to feel and think on a given topic today. If feels much better to them to see themselves as superior, they know that the mainstream culture will support them in that view, so that is the course they choose to take.

I found this discussion on Reagan to be important. I believe that many in the conservative movement today have again lost their faith in America:

Limbaugh admires many aspects of Reaganism, but he is especially animated by his belief in American exceptionalism. “Reagan rejected the notion among liberals and conservatives alike who, for different reasons, believed America was in a permanent state of decline,” he wrote to me in an e-mail message. “He had faith in the wisdom of the American people. . . . He knew America wasn’t perfect, but he also knew it was the most perfect of nations. Reagan was an advocate of Americanism.” In response to a separate question, he wrote: “America is the solution to the world’s problems. We are not the problem.”

Hat's off to the NYT, they don't ALWAYS get it wrong!

If He was an R, He Could Be Censured

Power Line: Enjoying the Good Life in a Mean Country

While it is news to most of the MSM sheep, the only thing "new" about BO as a politician is that his graft is bigger and his cronies are more shady than the average Democrat pickpocket. This post covers a few more of the sordid details ... ho hum, BO gets sweetheart deals on a subprime loan and a giant book deal. Why not? He is GOOD! for goodness sake! It isn't like he is some evil Republican that has like grubbed for money WORKING or (perish the thought) tried to get (horror) profits! Can't have those profits! A little graft from convicted felon buddy Uncle Tony? Hey, NO PROBLEM, see that "D" next to his name? Talk about your free pass. You can be the Pope of Hope AND live in a 2 million home you paid 1.6 for because your felon buddy helped you, AND you got a sweetheart loan, AND a book company gave you a deal they would give to nobody else! Talk about your "new kind of politician"!

Now THIS is Newsworthy!

CNN Political Ticker: All politics, all the time - Blogs from CNN.com

So I wonder if BO had any "incidents" with anyone in '87? Maybe he is a "hot head" too? Who knows, all it takes is somebody to "make the claim", and I KNOW that the MSM will have it listed as a headline, right? Heck, that is only 21 years ago. I wonder what the statute of limitations is on roughing up a Sandinista?; assuming it happened of course. I love the special deal that since McCain is a "renegade", so he has crossed swords with many Republicans, it makes it "especially believable" that one could just report an out of hand statement from someone with an axe to grind from an incident that allegedly happened in '87. I wonder what else it is that the MSM is going to suddenly find Republicans so believable on? I thought Republicans were greedy, ignorant, evil liars? Maybe at least some of them have suddenly reformed?

See, it is is ONLY Republicans that engage in the "politics of personal destruction", no way the MSM or Democrats would EVER be guilty of such a thing! They just NEVER report on "rumor and innuendo", that is one of the ways that we can tell that the MSM and the Democrats are good and Republicans are evil!

A Nation of Cowards

A Nation of Cowards

This is a nicely written laymen oriented philosophical treatise on the relationship between gun rights and freedom. The bottom line is pretty easy to understand--the only enforcement of the idea that government exists at the consent of a the governed is an armed populace. If the governed have no actual power to revoke that consent, then it is only a matter of time that the government will rule as it pleases, consent be damned. After 9-11, many liberals seemed to want to compare the 3K deaths to "car accidents", and yet "one shooting is too many, guns need to be banned".

There seems to be a significant dichotomy there, but I think it actually turns out consistent. On one hand a nation ought to "learn to live with" mass murder by terrorists, and at the same time the general public ought to simply hope that some form of public protection or "social justice" can save them from the depredations of criminals. Control of the masses in a Fascist state demands a certain level of docility in order to be effective. Both the arms and maybe more importantly, the basic idea of individual responsibility for protecting ones own life, family and home is critical to the breaking of the spirit, and the populace accepting their position as wards of the state.

While Nazi Fascism was active and promotional of German exceptionalism as a collective, there is no reason that Fascism must always take that approach, and it appears that the current US virus is taking the opposite track since the historical American spirit is far more individual than collective. There seems to be a move to actually destroy any aspects of American exceptionalism along with the move to Fascism and in it's place to make former "Americans" into "citizens of the world", "part of the world community" where any of the "specialness" of America is removed and we stumble along as a "former world power" -- more than mildly ashamed of our history, but ever seeking approval from our European, UN, or Third World "betters".

Majority Against Freedom?

Poll: Majority against free trade - CNN.com

The MSM seems to think that a majority of American's being against free trade is a problem for "McCain". I'd say it will turn out to be just a bit bigger problem than that. Global Warming may or may not be a problem, and it may or may not be due to human efforts, but I'll let you in a big secret; Trade **IS** Human Caused! What people think and do DOES make a difference in trade!

So what does it mean to be "against free trade"? To the extent that we know anything at all about economics (and if we know anything about anything, it would be hard to imagine that we don't know anything about a 100% human initiated area like economics), then FREE TRADE IS GOOD! Nothing in economics is much more certain than that. Saying 51% of Americans are against something that basic relative to economics is worse than 51% of Americans thinking that babies are delivered by storks! Human beings created economics, they invented neither sex or babies, and sex and babies will continue to happen no matter what people believe. Not so with economics!

How many times as the press lamented belief in creationism? A lot, but science knows WAY less about the physical universe than we do about Economics, no scientist yet has indicated that the universe is 100% created by and for humans and exists only because of human interaction like the economy. Again, the universe will continue operation no matter what we think about it, but it has been shown again and again that when groups of people get stupid ideas about economics, it is is WAY easy to destroy the economy. In fact, it is MUCH easier than having a good one!

How many times have they lamented that some % of Americans see a connection between Iraq and Al Quaeda? A bunch, yet "proving a negative" is pretty much impossible, and proving a negative when there are some "inconvenient facts" like connections of Iraq to the first WTC bombing and some of the key folks that fled Afghanistan fleeing to Iraq. The MSM may well be right, there may be "no connection", but their idea that it is somehow "impossible for a rational person to believe" it is "out there" and VERY selective on what is rational / believable at best. It takes only ONE black swan to disprove the theorem "all swans are white".

But what about this? 100% of economists will tell you that free trade is good, it is in fact the cornerstone of economic success, without which we would be back somewhere between medieval serfs and Soviet Gulag slaves. What is more, since economics is all human created, if we CAN'T understand something that 100% of economists agree on, then is there ANYTHING that is "knowable"?

The answer is no, there is not. To the accuracy of this poll, 51% of Americans have left rationality behind and are blindly following the manipulations of the MSM or some emotion, whim or error of their own. Most likely when the peril that we are in becomes clear, people will wring their hands and say "how could this happen here"? There were PLENTY of signs--the manipulation of Katrina into some supposed "FEDERAL government failure", the whole Global Warming gambit, the current "recession", Valerie Plame, the manipulation of the public to fail to see progress in Iraq and on and on. At every step, statements have been made about "Karl Rove and the manipulation of America by the Bush administration", while the true mass manipulators have picked most of the masses up with both the left and the right hands. (many on the RIGHT are ALSO now convinced that "free trade is bad" and "there is no progress in Iraq").

Unlike the shadowy figures of the supposed "vast right wing conspiracy" the Richard Scaife's, Olin foundation, etc, the left is a bit more clear, and it really isn't a "conspiracy". ABC, NBC, CBS, NYT, MoveOn.org, Harvard, Yale, etc, Hollywood, George Soros, etc. are pretty clear about a number of their goals, they just don't STATE them directly--so I'll help:

1. The destruction of religious faith and transcendent morality -- the abolition or reversal of right/wrong, just/unjust. They see the goal of human existence as "maximization of pleasure" via any means possible with no moral component.
2. The advancement of "practicality/pragmatism" as law--"the most good for the most people" as decided by a small elite that makes those decisions and uses the mass media and or police forces to convince/coerce the rest. Environmentalism, gay rights, abortion on demand, euthanasia, gun control, control of trade, government owned business. "Liberal Fascism"
3. The destruction of "upward" mobility. The idea that children can "advance" economically beyond their parents is dangerous to the the amoral society. It allows a belief in individual potential, responsibility, merit, valuation of some choices beyond others, and a whole host of other issues of "meritocracy" that the left abhors. At the core, "merit" and "individual achievement" exposes the fact that the elite of the left DO NOT hold the sum total of human knowledge in their heads, and even if they did, that quantity of knowledge (however far we may expand it) will ALWAYS be insignificant next to transcendent knowledge (God). Their most core belief is that man is infinitely perfectible on his OWN power and merit. God is not desired and does not and can not exist!
4. All "advancement" must be controlled and dictated by the elite. The university and the government being the only significant components of this, but some wealth is allowed as long as it is controlled by or in direct service of the elite. "Advancement" is by following the dictates of the elite in education / government and "performing" as what THEY define as "performance" (some forms of education, seniority in right contexts, entertainment or sports success). The destruction of upward mobility can also be called "destruction of the middle class" (or bourgeois in more traditional terms). ALL must be dependent on the elite and the dictates of the elite. To stray from the elite in thought or action is either actual or symbolic death. When thus is achieved, liberal fascism is acheived -- the goal of all left movements.

We are seeing the destruction of knowlege in the populace at a frightening level and the movement to BO promises to increase the level of peril immeasureably.

Naive Limosine Liberals?

Op-Ed Columnist - Obama’s Money Class - Op-Ed - NYTimes.com

The MSM is always hugely interested in where any money the Republicans get comes from. Brooks is the NYTs "token conservative" (and the "conservative" REALLY needs quotes in Brooks case!). They seem to believe that Republicans are swayed by money, but strangely, Democrats aren't. Surprise, surprise, lawyers have given a lot of money to BO, as have teachers, professors and investment folks. No doubt they have zero expectation he will be swayed by that!

Will BO have second thoughts on big capital gains increases? I certainly hope so, but I don't really think he is going to need those limousine liberal dollars after he gets the reins of power, so I would expect that he is actually quite likely bit the hand that is feeding him. Many of the very class now contributing to BO would not have the money to contribute if it were not for Reagan and a generally conservative basic economic approach the last quarter century. Sadly, most of them are too manipulated to realize that, and therin lies a large part of our peril.