Obama The Racist And Government (In)Ability

Heather MacDonald in the Wall Street Journal:

Some in Mr. Wright’s crew of charlatans have already had their moments in the spotlight; others are less well known. They form part of the tragic academic project of justifying self-defeating underclass behavior as “authentically black.”

Obama is coming out hard against the man he previously dismissed with “Oh, him? He’s just crazy sometimes. But he doesn’t mean any harm…”

The wise saying that one’s walk talks louder than their talk talks is bringing all Obama’s chickens home to roost.

He spent 20 years listening to this vitriol and hatred spewing against the very nation which has blessed him, his ungrateful and narcissistic wife, and his children. He chose to allow this man to be a confidant and counselor. He exposed his children to a hate-monger.

And we trust him to make good and sound judgments for our entire nation?

Moving on to other news:

I’ve never much cared for Newt since his affair. A man who cannot love his wife is a man I cannot trust.

But this is against his philosophy and all the good things he has stood for:

This is mostly right:

“If enough of us demand action from our leaders…”

After all, it is our leaders who have not allowed us to harness the natural resources so plentiful in our land.

This is all wrong:

“…we can spark the innovation we need.”

Thomas Edison did not ask government to invent a light bulb. He did it himself.

Many liberals are claiming now that the “deregulated” energy companies need government oversight to ensure they are innovating enough and not gouging their customers.

If they were indeed deregulated there would not be an issue. It is the fact that the energy industry has to ask permission of the government before their allowed to breathe, let alone innovate. A deregulated energy industry would be drilling in ANWR right now, without harming animal populations (because who wants the backlash from that). We would have been building Nuclear power plants by the dozens and they’d be efficient and reliable and safe, the way they have been.

Instead we’re stuck with too little growth and subsequently higher and higher costs for energy.

Scoop your brains back into your skull Newt. Government is never the answer.

More Important Things

There are methods of changing our worlds so much more effective and therefore more important than government.

In America we have the ability to guide our government in ways still unequaled around even the free world. So our involvement in government is a good thing.

But it is our involvement in government, and not it’s inverse, and more natural state, government’s involvement in our lives, that is the correct, proper and more important of the two choices.

Further, beyond government is the heart of man.

Government has not the ability to lift the heart of man the way that forgiveness, salvation, and redemption do.

The more important thing is our work in individual lives and in groups, drawing them to Christ and His salvation.

Only as individual lives and communities are changed from the inside out will effective and true change come about in the rest of world.

Government Is Not The Solution

Watching this news report regarding a real problem, the issue of blind people not being able to hear the quiet hybrid and electric cars to know to avoid them, I was both dismayed and heartened.

Near the end of the report the reported says with apparent relief “the government is going to study this, we have nothing to fear” (quoted loosely), and the automakers response: don’t bother, we already know it’s an issue and we’ll fix it ourselves.

Lawmakers are not engineers or usability experts or researchers or anything even remotely related to that.

They are usually those too stupid to actually succeed at life by their own merit and yet unusually skilled at convincing other dupes of their innate superiority and a seriously inaccurate view of their own self-worth and self-ability. A terrible combination.

So as the lawmakers are spending time, lots of time, subpoenaing testimony by experts and every snake-oil salesman who catches their eyes, those with something to actually do (say, fix the problem by putting proximity sensors and and AI which senses intersections and pedestrians and putting an automatic, low-volume, low-frequency horn which will not disturb other drivers but merely warn pedestrians) will be unable to do so as their hands will be tied and their time sucked away by the zombies we keep electing to office.

Anybody catch my drift here? Or the *slight* bit of vitriol coursing through my veins?

Government is not the solution, and it should keeps its mangling and sticky claws out of most everything.

McCain: “Why I Run For President”

The second half is mostly fluff, meant to tickle ears.

But the first half is a major difference between him and his current rivals, Clinton and Obama.

McCain on foreign policy:

Obama On Wright

From LGF, view it and pass it on:

Says So

On MSNBC, billionaire investor Sam Zell says so:

Speaking on “Squawk Box” this morning, Zell attributed much of the current economic troubles to fear-mongering and politicking by Democratic presidential contenders Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack [Hussein] Obama.

“Obviously what we have going on is an attempt to create a self-fulfilling prophecy,” said Zell, chairman of Equity Investments Group and owner of the Chicago Cubs, Chicago Tribune, Los Angeles Times and other companies. “We have two Democratic candidates who are vying with each other to describe the economic situation worse.”

10,000 Lies

Does the truth we find in this humor scare anyone else?

I’ve had the following images floating around on my computer for a while, waiting for me to actually post them. It seems to me, in their attempt to paint the liberal and Democrat as the loving, caring, truly human leadership, anybody with a mind will recognize the fallacies and dangers of the blanket statements made in this children’s book.

Children reading this book will be cursed with the feeling there is actual truth to be found in the ideas. They will accept without thinking the lies of socialism and liberal socio-political theory and practice.

Read and weep for America.

What parent wants their children to hurt?

What parent tries to protect the children from the pains of life?

What parent can?

Laudable.

But given the current state of Political-Business relations, wouldn’t it be more accurate to say: “Democrats give the Police Officers’ and Firefighters’ Unions the tools they need to keep dead weight and stupid policies in place hampering the heroes efforts, abilities, skills, and desires to serve as they are called”?

And I would want my children to go to those war-zones, indoctrination facilities, stupid-makers, great-levellers of the people they call schools?

I know what they mean is that we can all go to college. But 1) where is that a constitutional right or a universal requirement, and 2) aren’t there plenty of great colleges for cheap?

There are plenty of jobs in which one can work their way up to a comfortable level of pay which require no college. And the government has neither interest nor right to take money from those who aren’t going to college to give to those who are.

Maybe if there were less “free” money floating around from the government, the cost of education would come down, and only those dedicated and intelligent people would stay in teaching as it became less of a lucrative career option.

Democrats are government, not Mommy. This is a legitimate role for Mommy, not government.

To the extent that Democrats seek to usurp this role, they confuse the nature of society and culture. This is immoral.

Pompous, self-aggrandizing, megalomaniacal do-gooders!

Show me someone who believes this and I’ll show you someone certifiably insane.

First, there is no proof the Earth is “sick” with Global warming. There is proof there are regular and natural cycles of warming and cooling, and there is not proof we are even in a warming cycle.

Second, the temerity of the writer and those who agree with him in assuming a political party which has existed a mere 200 years has the might to enact significant change in an entire planet which they believe has existed 4.5 Billion years.

Someone call the nice men in white coats.

False.

The truth is, Democrats make sure schools cannot fire bad teachers. Democrats make sure children know all about condoms and how to have sex with each other, leaving it to the parents to teach reading and writing and true morals.

Individually, Democrats are generally caring people. But are they busy loving people to hell?

UPDATE:

These are not parodies, these are selections from one of two books for children:

Why Mommy Is A Democrat & Why Daddy Is A Democrat

Mea Culpa: Conservative Pragmatism & Idealism

I’ve not given up on Romney and still consider his vastly superior to McCain, but in light of the results of Super Tuesday and some thought I’ve given to other articles I’ve written recently, here’s my Mea Culpa:

In the article on winning the culture war I wrote:

A key fact in any war is that those fighting FOR something have a distinct advantage over those fighting AGAINST something. A positive goal inspires confidence and wins allies, while a negative goal works against the human spirit bringing discouragement and desperation.

This principle is equally applicable on a battlefield, in the ‘culture war’, and in elections.

There is something wrong with how I’ve presented my arguments for Mitt. In fact, there’s something wrong with how much of the conservative blogosphere and talk radio and the new media have argued for Mitt.

While I do believe, in a positive sense, that Mitt is a better candidate, and not just for pragmatic reasons. Issue for issue, he is more in line with true conservatism and my ideals of what America needs than any other candidate, Red or Blue.

I have framed my argument as a negative, and that is wrong and counter-productive.

Michael Medved, even though he supports McCain, has maintained decorum throughout this debate by maintaining that each of the Republicans are superior in many ways to the Democrat alternatives.

I do not agree with him completely in this, but I do agree that a better and stronger argument is made from a positive position, and his position has been unflinchingly positive.

Will I support the Republican nominee at all costs? I don’t know yet.

Is there a point at which conservatives need to take a serious look at where the party is headed and maybe allow a fall to occur in the hopes we’ll regain the moral high-ground and wrest control of the party? Maybe.

Would it be better to stick with the party and work in individual lives and hearts to bring about the sea change necessary to reclaim the party and then the entire culture? Yes.

That is why I blog.

Mea Culpa.

Who Would You Choose

I work in the field of public policy and keep abreast of current events. But despite being in the midst of the primary season, I remain undecided regarding my choice for the nomination. So what better way to make my choice than fill out a questionnaire remotely resembling a personality profile on a matchmaker website.
A friend told me about this web site, so I’ll pass it along: http://www.votechooser.com/

End Of January Election Links

Obama and Clinton being children:
There’s a bold line between idealism and fantasy,
neither of them have grown enough to know the difference.

With big thanks to Sweetness & Light.

McCain is the front runner, but he’s not won yet. America’s Mayor has endorsed him after ending his own bid to become America’s President. The Governator is expected to endorse him as early as today. (Politico)

McCain will be a “hold-your-nose-and-vote” nominee because even he will be preferable to any alternative.

It is telling that, following exit polls, we know that liberals and moderates voted for McCain in Florida, while conservatives voted for Romney.

Speaking of Romney, he has some tough choices to make: Will he write the big check?

Huckabee needs to get his personal vendetta against Romney out of his eyes, drop out of the race, and endorse the one man who will support a real conservative agenda who still has a chance of winning.

Liberals Anonymous is looking for new members:

Liberals Anonymous (LibAnon) is a nationwide organization of current, former, and recovering American liberals and Democrats. Its sole mission is to establish and maintain recovery programs designed to help similar individuals overcome the plethora of congenital illnesses inherent in postmodern American liberalism with which they are embittered. Liberals Anonymous accomplishes this worthy goal by making the idiosyncratic elemental disease nature of liberalism self-evident to the afflicted individual.

(From the American Thinker)

Back to Romney, and Hugh Hewitt. Ace of Spades apologizes for not getting it right…

I can’t keep knocking Hewitt for being a bit overly enthusiastic about being, ultimately, right. If some of us had seen the lay of the land as well as Hewitt and supported Romney as the best realistic consensus conservative candidate, we might not be in the position we’re in now.

…and endorses Romney.

Jay, do you truly think the media darling candidate is your candidate? Come on, you’re better than that. I know it.

And Orson Scott Card thinks religion may play a bigger part of this than we realize:

After the Iowa caucuses, an African-American friend of mine from Los Angeles wrote to me, scoffing at the idea that Obama’s victory there meant that a black man could now be elected president.

I thought he was too pessimistic. But then came Hillary’s “comeback” in New Hampshire.

I keep hearing about how the pollsters “got it so wrong” and how Hillary’s victory came from the Democratic regulars getting out the vote for her.

And Mitt Romney’s defeat was also laid at the feet of many causes, none of which sounded particularly solid to me. Yes, McCain is something of a “favorite son” in New Hampshire now. But he also has another “virtue” that Romney and Huckabee both lacked: He’s not openly religious.

I suspect that racial and religious prejudice are both playing more of a role than anyone is willing to admit.

Read Card’s latest WorldWatch.

Riehl ponders:

Has anyone stopped to think that if McCain gets the GOP nod, there will come a time when the party has to draft a platform with an obstinate, if not defiant, McCain - an often angry man with a history of holding conservatives in disdain?

We need speeches like this more often. Bob Corker, Senator from Tennessee, in debate on the tax rebate checks said:

“What I see in this package is nothing but a political stimulus,” said Corker. “It’s a stimulus to make the American people think that we, as a body, are doing something to actually cause the economy to be stronger.”

(From Copious Dissent)

My chief argument against this package is that it is not tied to taxation. Those who pay no taxes will get as much as those who pay taxes. That is wrong.

This will tie economic stimulus and government largess together irrevocably. Government is a burden. A necessary burden, but a burden nonetheless. The way the government to affect the economy meaningfully is to lighten itself, not to quixotically throw money back to us who were compelled to surrender it to them in the first place. That is adding insult to injury.

Back to Romney. American Thinker asks why the other candidates hate Governor Romney. Some of the answers:

• He can win
• He isn’t beholden to special interest groups
• He believes America’s best days are ahead of it

And once more, from the American Thinker: What does that ACU score really mean for McCain?

So where did McCain differ from the ACU?  The big areas were taxes, campaign finance reform, the environment and, most recently, immigration.  There was also a smattering of support for trial lawyers; federal intervention in health, education, safety or voting issues; internationalism; and some social issues.