Name Calling: Liberal Forte

Yes race baiting is getting old. So is calling conservatives stupid or mentally ill. If the liberals have any logical arguments, they should make them. Instead they continue to call names. Someone on NBC just called the Republicans bastards. He said that Republicans want to control minorities. President Obama told Latin American supporters that Republicans were their enemy. Ed Schults, Howard Dean, Reverend Al, and even Barack Obama seem to always fall back on the race card and other forms of name calling.

This blog was started to give scientific arguments refuting the arguments of the Man-made Global Warming proponents. Unfortunately, it is hard to find their scientific arguments. They have explained how the greenhouse effect works. However that theory was originally advanced to explain the warming of the early earth, hundreds of millions of years ago when the atmosphere was chiefly CO2. Now the atmosphere is far less that 1% composed of CO2. They do not give their figures and their assumptions to prove their theory that minuscule amounts of extra CO2 will have drastic affects. They have not attempted to advance any explanations because they cannot do it. Instead they call anyone who doubts them idiots, fools, or crooks.

The tea party and other conservatives give economic arguments to advance the proposition that a free market, without government involvement, is the only economic systems that improves the human condition and allows everyone to improve their lot. Instead of answering with arguments in favor of government control, socialism, or other economic system, they call the tea party racist.

The same thing happens with anyone who expresses opposition to governmentalized healthcare. Supposedly intelligent, educated people in the news media are the worse. Insults and verbal abuse of conservatives is considered to be a fine and appropriate response. After the last election, 'stupid' was the most common term in the liberal editorial pages describing the voters who put the Republicans in office. It goes on and on.

Some years ago, many newspapers ran headlines stating that polls show that most Americans support the war in Iraq. The journalists who wrote the stories found it hard to believe that people could be so dumb. After all, the journalists had been writing against the war steadily for a year or so. Why wasn't the public falling for their propaganda? So the journalists turned up the volume. A lot of their new propaganda centered around overblown accusations of corruption and atrocities. They never grew tired of calling George Bush and his supporters liars. They eventually got their own way and the country turned 180 degrees against George Bush and 'his' war. Since then the liberals, the left, and the progressives have focused on ungrounded accusations and name calling because it seems to work. The biggest name caller of all, Al Franken, was elected as their Senator by Minnesotans.

To liberals, the conservative view does not qualify as an 'alternative opinion" worthy of debate. And the Tea Party, they talk about silly, irrelevant things like founding fathers and the constitution. They are really stupid. Google "conservatives are stupid," "conservatives are Nazis," or "Tea Party shit." There will be plenty to read but little or nothing offered in the way of discussion of issues. Try it.

Republican Minds Held Hostage: Copenhagen Syndrome?

Too many Republicans are becoming appeasers because they fear the mainstream press, which calls the Tea Partiers domestic extremists.

The main stream media (aka: The Drive-bys, the Government Controlled Press [GCP], the Lame-Stream Press) are domestic extremist groups in their attacks on freedom. We should not be intimidated by their propaganda. Propaganda takes many forms but it always has at least an element of untruth. Some of their statements and claims of dubious truth are as follows:

Doubtable declarations of the GCP, a sampling of items: unproven, highly doubtable Man-made Global Warming [mmgw] proclamations of long standing, now newly repeated. Greed of Bankers caused the meltdown (as if bankers now are any less greedy that ever). "We just want to help you" (Twilight Zone stuff, not to mention 1984 Big Brotherism)

More recently: Conservatives are accused of being "domestic extremists" (letters to the governors demanding resignation, group arrested in WI after FBI agent provocateur op with implied connections to tea parties); another attack on Catholic Church and the Pope; another attack on GOP and chairman Steele (many GOP’s suffering from Copenhagen syndrome go along with this one especially: their minds are held hostage by the GCP), the economy is improving; government health care will save money; Obama now will allow drilling for oil (that’s a good one); and for that matter – Obama is a moderate (everyone should have seen through that one by now); Obama is so smart (right), man-made global warming (we’ve stopped messing around, its time that You Will Believe, or else); Government takeover of student loans will save money by eliminating the "middleman" (the progressives will always eliminate the middleman, that is private enterprise, and the little man, by appropriating more and more power for government.)

Oh, I almost forgot, the Tea Party isn't racist either. Progressive schemes are what the Tea Party doesn't want. All races are welcome and encouraged to join the fight for freedom. As we know the progressive ideology is bankrupt. The Progressive deck has only a few cards: racism is the card that has worked best for them in the past. Common sense conservatives have no reason to fear it or them.

One more: Toyota cars are no good, according to the GCP. I used to prefer GM and was leaning toward the Chrysler Charger. No more; until they are again free, I will go with Ford, Toyota, and KIA. Also, Chinese products are probably being unfairly attacked. This is a scheme to enact tariffs by the back door.

The Left Not Playing with a Full Deck

The Democrats, the radical left, and the press are always playing the race card, however ineptly. The truth is they do not have many cards to play. Journalist Chris Mathew's comment that during the Sate of the Union Address, he forgot for an hour that Barak Obama was black is a case in point. Since the campaign began, race has been the most important issue for Chris Mathews. Contrary to what he and Democrat politicians are always telling us, based upon the history of the last two centuries and on a lot of recent comments from Democrats, it is obvious that racial prejudice is a significant characteristic mostly of the left. Biden said candidate Obama was "clean." Democrat Senator Ried said he had light skin and no negro dialect. The liberal apologists in the press, i.e., most of the press, explain these remarks as clumsy compliments. On the other hand they never tire of stating that America is still a racist country. I would submit that comments like 'light skin' were calculated messages to racist Democrats that this black boy is OK. They knew he could usher in the most radical measures that this nation has ever seen. With him they had the black vote and the far left vote, they just need the old boy vote. They wanted to let their own party members know that it was OK to vote for this black. The only person I know who did not vote for him on account of race was one of my uncles who had never voted for a Republican in his life. I guess he had to skip the last election.

Race is no issue at all for conservatives and Republicans. At least, they never reach the issue of race in their deliberations. The choices are so stark already, why worry about race when there is so much wrong with just being a modern Democrat? I forgot that BHO was part black a long time ago. During the speech, I could not forget for five minutes that he is a communist. He spoke about one aspect of society after another which he wanted government to take a leading role in. A leading role, as we have seen, can quickly transform into near total control if not outright ownership. He wants to go from the current government assistance for student loans to government takeover, and give a repayment break for 'government service' while he's at it. Are ACORN members 'government service' workers? Probably are, according to BHO. He has already taken over General Motors and Chrysler. He has taken over AIG, the largest US insurance company. He has, for most purposes, taken over control of energy and he wants complete control via cap-and-trade. He wants virtual control, through regulation, over the financial industry and healthcare. The unions, especially government unions, and the press are already at his beck and call. Unfortunately, we can only imagine the extent of infiltration of radical socialists into all levels of government agencies. The Republicans are not racists but they are intimidated by the race card. They need to trump it with the truth.

Judge Sotamyer Love Fest in Senate

I had hoped that the confirmation hearing of Judge Sotamyer for the United States Supreme Court would address some interesting and important constitutional issues. Unfortunately, if radio talk show host Bill Cunningham is correct, the senate confirmation of Judge Sotamyer is fairly certain to go through smoothly. He says that this is because she is Hispanic, a woman, and a liberal. Her questioning, especially by the Democrats, will be more of a love fest and her confirmation is virtually a fait accompli.
Apparently, he believes that the intimidation campaign by the press and the Democrats will effectively silence the Republicans. The theory, according to some Democrats who offer helpful advice to the Senate Judicial Committee Republicans, is that by opposing the confirmation of a Porto Rican, they will incur the wrath of voters of Spanish descent. In my opinion, the only way that national origin should enter into the debate is via the issue raised by the recently reversed "Fireman's case" ruling of Judge Sotamyer. In her decision she ignored the claims of unlawful discrimination in promoting firemen due to favoritism of African Americans over those of non-African descent.
Actually, the racial thing is all a smoke screen anyway to get an extremely liberal appointment. A radicalized Supreme Court could help with the socialization of the United States in areas that are too extreme for even congressional Democrats. Since the Democrat majority in the Senate could get whomever they want anyway at this point, I conclude it is their own electoral chances they are concerned about. Some Democrats know that their constituency is not as radical as this nominee. They want as little as possible about what she believes and her past writings and associations to see the light of day.
The talking point of the liberals will be: she is a liberal who will replace a liberal so there will be no change in the balance. Of course that is not the way to look at a life-time appointment. Eventually we will need a court that can help can bring government back to sanity.

I would like her views to see the light of day. Especially, I would like to know about her views of the Commerce Clause and what she feels is the legitimate role of government in economic matters. I would question her as to her response to those who believe that the New Deal Legislation overreached the federal authority. She could be questioned about several specific laws that are still in force, Bacon Davis for example. I would also ask her views regarding constitutional challenges to specific recent economic proposals and executive orders, Cap-and-Trade for example.
I would vote against her because of her socialist leanings. Why not? The Democrats raked Alito and Roberts over the coals because of their conservative leanings. Furthermore, under President Bush, conservative nominees to the Federal Courts of Appeals were not acceptable to the Democrats in the senate. They were able to block by Senate filibuster rules attempts to appoint conservatives. [I am a little unclear of the history of this or how it was done. For example, when the Democrats in the Senate blocked the nomination of Judge Michael Estrada, the Republicans wanted to change the filibuster rule. Democratic leader Tom Daschle, noting that the Senate had approved 124 of Bush's 126 judicial nominations that have reached the Senate floor, said, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." www.committeeforjustice.org/innews/articles/old/news050903_ap.aspx
I think, because of 70 vacancies in the circuit court at the time, Republicans could not find any conservatives to nominate who would be acceptable to the Democrats; or maybe they were not turned down by the full senate because they could not get them out of committee.]
Incidentally, Mark Levin says that what was really happening with Judge Michael Estrada is that the Democrats were afraid that, because of his qualifications, he would eventually be nominated to the Supreme Court. They did not want the first Hispanic justice to be conservative.
My view is that there is no reason why Judge Sotamyer should not be borked. (Robert Bork was conservative and favored constitutional originalism and economic laissez faire. Therefore, he didn’t stand a chance when he was nominated by Reagan. He was attacked unfairly and dishonestly, especially by then Senator Biden.) “(Perhaps the best known use of the verb to bork occurred in July 1991 at a conference of the National Organization for Women in New York City. Feminist Florynce Kennedy addressed the conference on the importance of defeating the nomination of Clarence Thomas to the U.S. Supreme Court. She said, "We're going to bork him. We're going to kill him politically. . . . This little creep, where did he come from?" Thomas was subsequently confirmed after one of the most divisive confirmation fights in Supreme Court history.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Bork Of course, opposition to Judge Sotamayor should not sink to the level of Joe Biden. The plain facts about her should be fully and transparently exposed before she is granted a life-time appointment. That would also mean not rushing this through.
In any case, the Democrat racial intimidation is the same chicken shit they used to prevent regulation of Fannie May and Freddie Mac when President Bush and Senator McCain called for it to avoid the mortgage problems that we all know about. If Republicans fall for it again, that’s even more chicken shit .