rightwingsocialist: The Socialists at the gate.

rightwingsocialist: The Socialists at the gate.: It is clear that class warfare is upon us. The Radical Socialist(is that redundant?) are beating on the gate of our Republic. The Occupy m...

The Socialists at the gate.

It is clear that class warfare is upon us.  The Radical Socialist(is that redundant?) are beating on the gate of our Republic.  The Occupy movement wants redistribution of wealth, debt forgiveness, more public sector jobs. Our President, he of community organizer experience and devotee of the Alinsky model of change, and several Democrats in Congress support this.  Make no mistake, our "progressives" are socialists and they will do anything to bring their view of the world or heaven on earth to fruition.  They are now pitting the Haves against the Have Nots.  Our instruments of civil order are afraid to arrest those who occupy public places and who trample on the rights of others.  Unless those of us who believe in the values of our country, in the structures that made us great, in the value of work and individual effort take a stand now and act, the socialists will no longer just be at the gate but will totally occupy our country.

Your Republic is going away

In case you have not noticed, we are given up our Constitutional Republic on agency and board at a time.  The EPA can go around congress and thwart the will of the people so expressed by implementing rules that get the country far down the road to cap and trade. They stopped oil exploration in Alaska because Shell did not account for the impact of air quality by the ships (a minor amount as it turns out)  The National Labor Relations Board is trying to tell Boeing it cannot open a new plant in South Carolina. And a little know and as yet board created in the health reform legislation, the Independent Payment Advisory Board, will have the power to reduce payment for Medicare without being subject to administrative or judicial review.  Further its decision can only be overturned by a three fifths vote of Congress.  Obama wishes to give this board even more power.  The Constitution is being subverted.  More and more legislative power is flowing to the Administration under various boards and agencies.  These agencies issue rules to implement law, but these rules often go beyond congressional intent.  Agencies are making law and our Constitution and Republic are  being destroyed.

Obama and Petards

As a preface, I totally support Obama's decision regarding Bin Laden.  Obama is learning however that words have meaning.  If you recall Obama and his administration eliminated the words "War on Terror".  If there is no War, how do you justify killing Bin Laden as a combatant commander in the field?.  If the enhanced interrogation techniques were illegal as Holder claims, and since the intel that led to Bin Laden started with these interrogations, was not the action that derived from that information therefore also illegal (fruit from a poisoned tree).  Obama said that the days of the US acting unilaterally were over that we in essence would stop being a rogue (my words) nation.  Yet we acted unilaterally.  Europe is full voice decrying what we have done.  The words of candidate and President Obama have come back on him.  Hoist with his own petard.

President Obama's Decision

The President Obama made a tough decision to have the SEALS go in and and kill Bin Laden.  Some of his advisers were against it.  The easy call was to try missiles.  Obama made the tougher but leave no doubt call. The President has now had to face the realities of we are up against.  It is a war.  There is evil.  Some people really do want to kill us.  He also has to face the reality that without the interrogations used by the Bush administration and the rebuilding of our intelligence network he would not have had a decision to make.  For all the criticism Obama has dished out to Bush, I hope he has come to realize that as Commander in Chief you have to make hard decisions, take actions that others may condemn and deal with our enemies in less than nice ways if you are going to protect and defend our country.

President Utopia

It seems that Mr. Obama is running as the head of the Utopian party.  Despite the harsh reality of all that is going on around him:  $14 trillion in deficits; Medicare that cannot fulfill its obligations over the long run; states on the verge of bankruptcy; millions of jobs gone; the Mexican drug cartels taking over national parks and operating in 200+ of our cities; chaos in the middle east;  he continues to preach a mantra of never seeing another homeless person, everyone can have their health care paid for, the world will love us is we admit we are not special, nothing really needs to be serious done to entitlements and on and on. We have serious issues facing us and hard realities and choices to be made.   I think his campaign song needs to be Lennon's Imagine. 

Livinging in Denial

The discussions of the last few months over last year's budget have convinced my that far too many Democrats and not an insignificant number of Republicans are living in denial.  America stands on the brink of becoming Europe.  Our debt is out of control. Our obligations for entitlement programs mount with each passing day. The pension and health care obligations for municipal workers threaten bankruptcy to our states.  Business over committed to retiree benefits at the cost of their competitiveness.  And yet the cry of "Spend on. Spend on"  and "Give me mine, give me mine" .  It is time to face reality.  We must demand change, not that be can believe in, but change that will get us back to fiscal stability and health.  If we do not directly and forceful confront the reality of our collective irresponsibility and selfishness, and the irresponsibility of those we elect then we will fall off the cliff and wreck this great country of ours.

rightwingsocialist: Big Bed Buddies

rightwingsocialist: Big Bed Buddies: "I am always surprised at how big business is so willing to get in bed with big government. For people who are supposedly all about fre..."

rightwingsocialist: Of vacuums and regime changes

rightwingsocialist: Of vacuums and regime changes: "Regime change is a many sided thing. The biggest problem with it is what happens when you take the existing leader out. In Egypt..."

Of vacuums and regime changes

Regime change is a many sided thing.  The biggest problem with it is what happens when you take the existing leader out.  In Egypt, there was the structure of government, assured by the military, that allows for some sense of transition including elections, we hope free.  In countries like England and Australia a government may fall, but the opposition operates a shadow government that is ready to step in.  When the Shah fell in Iran there was a government, however repressive that was ready to go.  In the first Gulf War one of the reasons we did not take Hussein out was there was not one to replace him.  We did not heed that in the second Gulf War.  In Libya, who will take the place of the current dictator?  There is no government in exile ready step in.  We do not even now who to talk to among the rebel forces.  A vacuum created like this is most apt to be filled with someone more repressive or just with ongoing civil war

Big Bed Buddies

I am always surprised at how big business is so willing to get in bed with big government.  For people who are supposedly all about free market competition, too many CEO's are very willing to have major government regulation of their industry.  The real purpose is to stifle competition, especially from smaller more nimble companies.  One need only go back at look at the behavior of companies during the Roosevelt era. The big boys supported the NRA (not the national rifle association but the national recovery act)  Big business could afford the price of regulation, the small companies could not.  Regulation became a competitive advantage is a perverse way.  We see the same thing today with the support of the over reach of the government if regulating farms.  Agribusiness can afford it.  The independents cannot.  The small organic farmers will be forced to sell at much higher prices because they cannot spread the cost of regulation the way Agribusiness can.  This jumping into the government bed by business is a form of Fascism that we do not like to admit.

How Pure?

Several of my conservative friends, especially those who say they are of the tea party bent, seem to be insisting on ideological purity before they will call a potential candidate a conservative.  Beyond general platitudes about balanced budgets, I cannot seem to get anyone to say how pure is pure enough.  Such a stance could be costly to conservatives.  A little history is in order.  James Buchanan was elected president because some Whigs could not support their candidate who owned slaves but who was opposed to the extension of slavery.  Buchanan sided with the South, supported the Dred Scott decision, did not act when the South took over Federal forts.  He helped bring on the Civil War.  :Purity got in the way of good judgment.
If a conservative, but not conservative enough candidate is nominated for President in 2012, will the "pure" conservative stay away?  Will they run their own candidate and thus assure a Democratic victory.  Are they willing to pay that kind of price for the sake of ideological holiness?