My only real concern is that he not be elected and that his candidacy is detrimental to the Dems, be he nominated or no. But I do like one thing he appears to be doing.
His attitude toward the accusations, ranging from that of oppression even in the worst degree, deserving of immolation, to just plain dimbulbedness, over his tendency to get a little too close sometimes, is, as I see it, this: "ok, I'm listening. I stand corrected in that I am now better apprised of the changing standards for casual public physical contact , especially between men and women and I stand informed that at times my practices in that regard have been unpleasant for some. I will act on this by being more restrained because I like people in general and I really like being liked by them and I don't want to trouble them in this regard. But I do not recognize a necessity on my part for contrition, for penance, for auto da fe; if you think I do, I say to you frankly, I disagree. I have, in my public life, displayed a sensitivity adequate to prove to any person of common sense my fundamental regard for all except conservatives. If you are one who maintains that my recently noted behavior is characteristic of the expected and consummate malice of my sex ,then you disregard my freely chosen behavior to the contrary".
If that is his attitude I congratulate him for a signal service he is doing. Why, the poor dear, he's accident prone just like me and he doesn't refrain from parodying the sight of himself in his awkward moments. And he displays a refreshing lack of tolerance for presumptuous politically correct aggression which is largely eschewed, in cowardly fashion, by his Dem colleagues.
I had a friend who got too close sometimes; he meant nothing untoward about it and I knew it. BFD, if you know what I mean.
Those who , having become convinced of purposeful and forceful degradation of their sex or race by members or the whole of , other sexes or races and who rage that their perception is irrefutable and moreover, was obvious and completely acceptable to those who "willingly" did them this offense, have intimidated significant official portions and social factions of our polity and our society. They very often assume that their accusation satisfies all standards for conviction and punishment. Despite his devoted membership in a party enslaved by that principle, Joe Biden appears unable to abide it and I respect him for that.
We conservatives are assumed by those who condemn Biden to be far beyond the pale. Of course, the pale was that borderland of the Russian empire, which was murderously hateful of "Christ killers" but equally so of those whose society also exemplified exceedingly positive values and the determination to preserve them, in which a kind of tolerance was grudgingly extended. Beyond it? - Complete outlaw and subhuman status, attended by "appropriate" and unrestrained sanctions.
I think (and I think he would squirm at this) that Biden senses the outrage we have felt for decades by the attacks directed toward us by "politically correct" converts and the newly enlightened by leftist doctrine. Nothing like a convert for fanaticism, right?
Nah, you'll never be one of us Joe, but I do laud what I see to be your assertion of your self respect in the face of the mindless totalitarian crowd. Jack
Wednesday, April 10, 2019
Tuesday, April 2, 2019
Incivility? Oh my!
I have seen many columns, comments and signs lamenting what is described as an all encompassing ambience of " icky" profane "hatred", distrust, reflexive opposition and unwillingness to compromise in the current American polity. I think that analogous to saying in 1942 " the present state of war between the U.S. and the Axis is to be condemned and terminated because of the certainty of misbehavior on the part of all parties involved". Some who preach overall "tolerance" are of good will but they ignore the origins of this, our second Civil War. Some are disingenuous and know full well why such decisive struggle obtains in our land today; they were its progenitors.
In the early '60's, expression of naked disdain and wishes for complete destruction of our democracy were uttered and published only in marginal settings by people wholly without credibility. Yet, by 1968 their Marxist message had captured a very influential faction of the tragically naive boomer generation and they proceeded to enact their ethereal dreams and by 1972, to preempt the Dem party, which shared our two party system. Their advent was a profound shock to the majority of Americans from which it took decades before we fully realized the existential danger in their onslaught on all we value: on religious faith, on the rule of law, on the sanctity of the womb and its immediate aftermath, on the worth of our military and our police, on the condemnation, incarceration and execution of sociopathic criminals, on our time honored right to bear arms, on our love for the proven 5000 year old institution of marriage between only those of opposite sexes, on the predominant right of parents to instruct their children in the realities, as they see them, of conjugal relations, of firm support for equality of legal standing and of unfettered opportunity for those willing to live positive lives in a society and economy which rewards merit and effort, of gratitude for the indescribably good fortune of being born American and of their country's, on balance , essential worth and benefit to humanity.
To decry the present existential conflict without acknowledging those who brought it on is ,at best, ignorant and is probably disingenuous. Those Dems truly appalled by it must bid those who consciously engendered it to refrain. But this will not happen, either from the plaintive or the responsible side.
This can only be resolved one way. Consider the ferocity and consummate dedication to victory and complete totalitarian domination of those who champion the increasingly manifest antisemitic cause of the Dem party.Judge you also of the unrelenting malice of its onslaught on our duly elected President over the last three years and of the contempt for our real America embodied thereby. There can be only one way to meet this: unstinting opposition leading to the permanent and richly deserved marginalization of the Dem party. Its present motivation is unmistakeable; I know ,its appalling but its real. Those who most energize them now are dedicated to a "completely transformed" America on the historically condemned Marxist model . We must meet them and defeat them! Jack
In the early '60's, expression of naked disdain and wishes for complete destruction of our democracy were uttered and published only in marginal settings by people wholly without credibility. Yet, by 1968 their Marxist message had captured a very influential faction of the tragically naive boomer generation and they proceeded to enact their ethereal dreams and by 1972, to preempt the Dem party, which shared our two party system. Their advent was a profound shock to the majority of Americans from which it took decades before we fully realized the existential danger in their onslaught on all we value: on religious faith, on the rule of law, on the sanctity of the womb and its immediate aftermath, on the worth of our military and our police, on the condemnation, incarceration and execution of sociopathic criminals, on our time honored right to bear arms, on our love for the proven 5000 year old institution of marriage between only those of opposite sexes, on the predominant right of parents to instruct their children in the realities, as they see them, of conjugal relations, of firm support for equality of legal standing and of unfettered opportunity for those willing to live positive lives in a society and economy which rewards merit and effort, of gratitude for the indescribably good fortune of being born American and of their country's, on balance , essential worth and benefit to humanity.
To decry the present existential conflict without acknowledging those who brought it on is ,at best, ignorant and is probably disingenuous. Those Dems truly appalled by it must bid those who consciously engendered it to refrain. But this will not happen, either from the plaintive or the responsible side.
This can only be resolved one way. Consider the ferocity and consummate dedication to victory and complete totalitarian domination of those who champion the increasingly manifest antisemitic cause of the Dem party.Judge you also of the unrelenting malice of its onslaught on our duly elected President over the last three years and of the contempt for our real America embodied thereby. There can be only one way to meet this: unstinting opposition leading to the permanent and richly deserved marginalization of the Dem party. Its present motivation is unmistakeable; I know ,its appalling but its real. Those who most energize them now are dedicated to a "completely transformed" America on the historically condemned Marxist model . We must meet them and defeat them! Jack
Sunday, March 24, 2019
Rep. Omar and the Dems' Contract with America.
Rep. Omar: she's at it again and its becoming harder, ya know, to afford her the benefit of the doubt. Her criticism of Israel, done of her own volition, puts one in mind of the old saw - "if it quacks like a duck. . . ." Ok but she's approaching incredibility in her smirking, Brer Rabbity disclaimers of antisemitism. Within the last couple of days she has sneered at the notion that her criticism of the Jewish State stems from anything other than that "entity's" proven and incomparable perfidy . She pleads her innocence of personal prejudice in her choice of public opposition to Israel, arguing that it is Israel's actions which make her snide references inevitable.
Antisemitism: simply one of the oldest and historically condemned - monstrous and subhuman in its enactment - of injustices.
We have within living memory compelling evidence of the consequences of failure to oppose "persons" who expressed concerns analogous to Rep. Omar's obvious, ehhh, fixation on Jewish Israel.
Her family are refugees from Somalia, yes? When people endure the indescribable hardships of flight from their homes because of unendurable oppression and travel in anguish, uncertainty, discomfort and poverty to strange cold places, there must be something very compelling motivating them to do so. But this motivation appears to have had little effect on Rep. Omar. Rather it is Israel which excites her. Has she been there? If so, was she wronged? Has she fought against Israeli forces? If so, why? Has she considered how one as assertive as she would be treated in Somalia? Somehow, I think not.
What drives her? Why, could it be just plain, visceral , yes, antisemitism?
Perish the thought, says Nancy Pelosi ; rather, consider all forms of destructive disdain save those approved by our unassailable righteousness to be, by definition, justified. Oh, maybe Rep. Omar erred but LOOK at all the other forms of "hate", why just look at them!
I comment on Rep. Omar in this way because she is integral to my consequent comments:
In 1994 Newt Gingrich hamstrung the Clintons' administration with his Contract with America. The Dems clearly now offer an analogous though not as honest implied contract in their undeniable radical swing to the unabashed left. Here is what they promise therein:
"That AOC and Rep. Omar and their devotees will be afforded limitless deference and leeway for their impetuous declarations of condemnation for virtually all that everyday Americans value, we affirm and as our power grows to be total, that they will guide us. No, we will not presently surrender to them actual authority over our party but be patient , be patient, they are close at hand. The years will not be much and will pass quickly and then the "fundamental transformation" will be realized. We are the means by which you may bring this to reality simply by voting for us. After that, we will trouble you no more and you may retire into listless subjectivity - after all, that's all you want isn't it? Oh, leave it all to us!"
That the Dems offer us this contractual arrangement becomes more obvious every day. Jack
Antisemitism: simply one of the oldest and historically condemned - monstrous and subhuman in its enactment - of injustices.
We have within living memory compelling evidence of the consequences of failure to oppose "persons" who expressed concerns analogous to Rep. Omar's obvious, ehhh, fixation on Jewish Israel.
Her family are refugees from Somalia, yes? When people endure the indescribable hardships of flight from their homes because of unendurable oppression and travel in anguish, uncertainty, discomfort and poverty to strange cold places, there must be something very compelling motivating them to do so. But this motivation appears to have had little effect on Rep. Omar. Rather it is Israel which excites her. Has she been there? If so, was she wronged? Has she fought against Israeli forces? If so, why? Has she considered how one as assertive as she would be treated in Somalia? Somehow, I think not.
What drives her? Why, could it be just plain, visceral , yes, antisemitism?
Perish the thought, says Nancy Pelosi ; rather, consider all forms of destructive disdain save those approved by our unassailable righteousness to be, by definition, justified. Oh, maybe Rep. Omar erred but LOOK at all the other forms of "hate", why just look at them!
I comment on Rep. Omar in this way because she is integral to my consequent comments:
In 1994 Newt Gingrich hamstrung the Clintons' administration with his Contract with America. The Dems clearly now offer an analogous though not as honest implied contract in their undeniable radical swing to the unabashed left. Here is what they promise therein:
"That AOC and Rep. Omar and their devotees will be afforded limitless deference and leeway for their impetuous declarations of condemnation for virtually all that everyday Americans value, we affirm and as our power grows to be total, that they will guide us. No, we will not presently surrender to them actual authority over our party but be patient , be patient, they are close at hand. The years will not be much and will pass quickly and then the "fundamental transformation" will be realized. We are the means by which you may bring this to reality simply by voting for us. After that, we will trouble you no more and you may retire into listless subjectivity - after all, that's all you want isn't it? Oh, leave it all to us!"
That the Dems offer us this contractual arrangement becomes more obvious every day. Jack
Sunday, March 10, 2019
They don't call 'em "progressives" for nuthin'.
No, they surely don't. It would have been a simple and consistent thing to take affirmative action, such as that they supported for Rep. Steve King, against Rep. Omar for her very apparent and casually expressed antisemitism. But leave it to them to rewrite one of the millenia old verities of criminal law (criminal law now being, for the left, an organic element of adversarial politics). "No longer will we punish the perpetrator; rather we will task the crime itself and minister correction to it alone! Excepted from this amendment is the present President; he must answer in ongoing proceedings and indeed his close confinement is to expected".
I can just picture it. "You have been found guilty of the crime of . . . . You are sentenced to . . . immediate personal exoneration and relief from all legal disabilities. The crime for which you were convicted will be publicly chastised at and by. . . ."
How very artificial it was of Nancy Pelosi to word the resolution opposite to concepts like "hate" and "bigotry" instead of citing an apparently hateful and bigoted person sitting in her own caucus. Since she and her party consider the definition of hate to be that of insolent opposition to their irrefutable wisdom, this was slick indeed (shades of slick willie). In doing so they fancied themselves freed of the responsibility for specificly taking to task their antisemitic colleague publicly (privately they excuse her). And they arrogated to themselves the focus of the condemnation on those they know to be their fundamental enemy, the real America.
As for "bigotry", its definition is that of unreasoning and intolerant support for a specific creed . Why, this defines the American left! Their reflexive excoriation of all who question them is legend.
I spent twenty years working with state prison inmates and they were very clever in composing, ehhh, disingenuous language. One said to me "maybe there should be a riot and some people should get their throats cut" after I enforced on him a common prison rule. He expected he would not be held responsible for the obvious threat he had uttered because his wording did not express an intention.He should have been indicted. I'm not surprised that leftists seek to enfranchise cons. They think just like them. They think any amoral or senseless device of theirs excused by their consummate and self evident righteousness.
Its time to revisit the brilliant and courageous David Horowitz's 2004 book Unholy Alliance: Radical Islam and the American Left. In it he soundly documents the sympathy and empathy expressed and enacted by America hating leftist Americans for kindred radical Islam. Too, the journal Commentary has held forth at length over the increasingly open and obvious antisemitism of a significant faction of the left worldwide.
Gads! I am sick to death of antisemitism, that ancient and deathless scourge! I've never understood its ferociousness and its persistence. It must be visceral, no more, no less and it must be met with equally essential intolerance. Though opposition to Israel is not by definition antisemitism, its inordinate extent and intensity world wide is plainly indicative of motivation by unmitigated, essential Jew hatred.
In the '60's it was hard to imagine scruffy America hating whelps someday exercising decisive institutional power just as it may now seem a reach to picture such as Reps. Omar and AOC someday exercising totalitarian rule. But we know better now don't we?
How many countries have or would now admit to their law making institutions members determined to destroy their nations and to replace them with their very antitheses ? That we do bespeaks a laudably principled political culture but we must not exalt these wrongheaded dreamers; we must disempower them and their apologists. Luckily the democracy they would extinguish affords us still the means to do so, if we remain true to our precious heritage and fully appreciate the continuing threat to it. Jack
I can just picture it. "You have been found guilty of the crime of . . . . You are sentenced to . . . immediate personal exoneration and relief from all legal disabilities. The crime for which you were convicted will be publicly chastised at and by. . . ."
How very artificial it was of Nancy Pelosi to word the resolution opposite to concepts like "hate" and "bigotry" instead of citing an apparently hateful and bigoted person sitting in her own caucus. Since she and her party consider the definition of hate to be that of insolent opposition to their irrefutable wisdom, this was slick indeed (shades of slick willie). In doing so they fancied themselves freed of the responsibility for specificly taking to task their antisemitic colleague publicly (privately they excuse her). And they arrogated to themselves the focus of the condemnation on those they know to be their fundamental enemy, the real America.
As for "bigotry", its definition is that of unreasoning and intolerant support for a specific creed . Why, this defines the American left! Their reflexive excoriation of all who question them is legend.
I spent twenty years working with state prison inmates and they were very clever in composing, ehhh, disingenuous language. One said to me "maybe there should be a riot and some people should get their throats cut" after I enforced on him a common prison rule. He expected he would not be held responsible for the obvious threat he had uttered because his wording did not express an intention.He should have been indicted. I'm not surprised that leftists seek to enfranchise cons. They think just like them. They think any amoral or senseless device of theirs excused by their consummate and self evident righteousness.
Its time to revisit the brilliant and courageous David Horowitz's 2004 book Unholy Alliance: Radical Islam and the American Left. In it he soundly documents the sympathy and empathy expressed and enacted by America hating leftist Americans for kindred radical Islam. Too, the journal Commentary has held forth at length over the increasingly open and obvious antisemitism of a significant faction of the left worldwide.
Gads! I am sick to death of antisemitism, that ancient and deathless scourge! I've never understood its ferociousness and its persistence. It must be visceral, no more, no less and it must be met with equally essential intolerance. Though opposition to Israel is not by definition antisemitism, its inordinate extent and intensity world wide is plainly indicative of motivation by unmitigated, essential Jew hatred.
In the '60's it was hard to imagine scruffy America hating whelps someday exercising decisive institutional power just as it may now seem a reach to picture such as Reps. Omar and AOC someday exercising totalitarian rule. But we know better now don't we?
How many countries have or would now admit to their law making institutions members determined to destroy their nations and to replace them with their very antitheses ? That we do bespeaks a laudably principled political culture but we must not exalt these wrongheaded dreamers; we must disempower them and their apologists. Luckily the democracy they would extinguish affords us still the means to do so, if we remain true to our precious heritage and fully appreciate the continuing threat to it. Jack
Monday, March 4, 2019
If everything is a crime then everybody . . . right gunowners?
I heard on the radio a commentary which really caught my attention with its clarity, plausibility and applicability to New York State and the burgeoning national assault on gunowners' yet Constitutionally affirmed rights.
The speaker said he had seen in Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged the following prediction, which I can only paraphrase: a prime means in the establishment by tyrants of unassailable rule will be the incipient enactment of myriad laws establishing theretofore lawful acts as crimes. This, done thoroughly, will eventually render every citizen an outlaw and subject to the sanctions society directs to those so judged. These laws may not be extensively enforced, perhaps they will be only to make fearful examples. Their chief purpose will be to intimidate and to motivate compliance with the measures totalitarians must disingenuously seek in an essentially free America, such as the willingness to give up natural and Constitutional rights. The process would be twofold: first create a perception of guilt among the law abiding majority leading to cooperation by most in measures they perceive to be not quite as bad as they feared, at least at their inception. Secondly, for the recalcitrant, the means for official repression of any insolent enough to assert their wrong headed "freedoms" in the face of the unchallengeable wisdom of the leftist elect, is closely at hand,since all citizens would by then be criminals, yes?
The speaker saw in this a plausible perception of Andrew Cuomo's crusade to disarm the lawful, not for protection from the amoral monsters (truck mass murderers, killers of police) blithely excused by such as he but to disarm the institutions (such as NRA) which he knows stand firm against his left's determination to take full control of our lives.
He made a very good point. Cuomo's latest chapter in what he glories in being "just a step in a continuing crusade" did not contain some of the outrages which were predicted (at his behest perhaps? Oh I think so) . Unobtainable insurance policies, constant surveillance of gun owners, byzantine regulations, the proscription of hundreds of thousands of firearms presently owned by his subjects (we are no longer citizens, but then, that's what he's always thought) were not in this latest pronunciamento . But stand by!
Andrew is running for President, I am told by one who knows and even he, through the haze of his aristocratic contempt for fly over country, knows he must hold his nose and patronize it until January of 2021. He must be seen as arguably motivated by just good ol' common sense in Chariton, Iowa or McCook ,Nebraska after all. Too, those federal lawsuits do pile up and that unforgiveably lawful new Supreme Court could be trouble. "Ahh, though, sue me, just sue me, ahh, win some ,lose some", says Andrew, " as we say in our New Yawk which is an oasis of civilization and culture in an American wilderness I am destined to tame. Yessiree!"
Recently there was a terrible accident in New York State involving a stretch limousine. Andrew's proposed solution, which has met a temporary setback - "just ban all stretch limousines, yeah. I know some people have their life savings and 18 hour days invested in such businesses but what do I care? I've got a state job!" That's vintage Cuomo.
Andrew is a frantic child and he is recklessly demonstrating in N.Y. what any Dem elected President now will do if empowered. The threat to freedom and our entire proven way of life in the real America is manifest. Jack
The speaker said he had seen in Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged the following prediction, which I can only paraphrase: a prime means in the establishment by tyrants of unassailable rule will be the incipient enactment of myriad laws establishing theretofore lawful acts as crimes. This, done thoroughly, will eventually render every citizen an outlaw and subject to the sanctions society directs to those so judged. These laws may not be extensively enforced, perhaps they will be only to make fearful examples. Their chief purpose will be to intimidate and to motivate compliance with the measures totalitarians must disingenuously seek in an essentially free America, such as the willingness to give up natural and Constitutional rights. The process would be twofold: first create a perception of guilt among the law abiding majority leading to cooperation by most in measures they perceive to be not quite as bad as they feared, at least at their inception. Secondly, for the recalcitrant, the means for official repression of any insolent enough to assert their wrong headed "freedoms" in the face of the unchallengeable wisdom of the leftist elect, is closely at hand,since all citizens would by then be criminals, yes?
The speaker saw in this a plausible perception of Andrew Cuomo's crusade to disarm the lawful, not for protection from the amoral monsters (truck mass murderers, killers of police) blithely excused by such as he but to disarm the institutions (such as NRA) which he knows stand firm against his left's determination to take full control of our lives.
He made a very good point. Cuomo's latest chapter in what he glories in being "just a step in a continuing crusade" did not contain some of the outrages which were predicted (at his behest perhaps? Oh I think so) . Unobtainable insurance policies, constant surveillance of gun owners, byzantine regulations, the proscription of hundreds of thousands of firearms presently owned by his subjects (we are no longer citizens, but then, that's what he's always thought) were not in this latest pronunciamento . But stand by!
Andrew is running for President, I am told by one who knows and even he, through the haze of his aristocratic contempt for fly over country, knows he must hold his nose and patronize it until January of 2021. He must be seen as arguably motivated by just good ol' common sense in Chariton, Iowa or McCook ,Nebraska after all. Too, those federal lawsuits do pile up and that unforgiveably lawful new Supreme Court could be trouble. "Ahh, though, sue me, just sue me, ahh, win some ,lose some", says Andrew, " as we say in our New Yawk which is an oasis of civilization and culture in an American wilderness I am destined to tame. Yessiree!"
Recently there was a terrible accident in New York State involving a stretch limousine. Andrew's proposed solution, which has met a temporary setback - "just ban all stretch limousines, yeah. I know some people have their life savings and 18 hour days invested in such businesses but what do I care? I've got a state job!" That's vintage Cuomo.
Andrew is a frantic child and he is recklessly demonstrating in N.Y. what any Dem elected President now will do if empowered. The threat to freedom and our entire proven way of life in the real America is manifest. Jack
Thursday, February 7, 2019
Mr. President!
I was thrilled by President Trump's State of the Union Address and I didn't even watch it live. I could not abide having to suffer Nancy Pelosi's haughty visage for that long. I read the text, viewed excerpts and enjoyed commentary on Fox; no sense bothering with thoroughly predictable MSM screed . Americans, we've got a President, we surely do and he did himself and we who believe in him mighty proud that night. His detractors, true to form, have been shown to be as so many petulant microbes.
I rejoiced at his ringing denunciation of socialism and at his declaration that we will never be cursed by its dictatorial sway. How the Infanta Alexandra's eyes burned with vindictive intent at that; how very much she has to learn in this hard world outside of her dreamy leftist haven.
His mere mention alone of the N.Y. Legislature majority's disgraceful self congratulatory ovation (they cheered, mind you!) after its hideous sanctioning of extended baby killing measures speaks for itself and reflects humiliation beyond description on those New Yorkers who empowered these terribly wrong headed people. It puts the President squarely on the right side of an issue which could be decisive in 2020 and is sure to provoke a veritable avalanche of hyperbolic Cuomoblovo from our preposterous Governor.
President Trump's condemnation of antiSemitism, with its implied support for the heroic Israelis, was magnificently complemented by his account ,dramatically endorsed by Holocaust survivors in the audience, of the advent of American troops assuring them, after their unspeakable travails at the hands of totalitarian savages, of reunion with civilized humans and of their deliverance.
I'm reminded of the outrage I felt for the nonetheless courteous WWII vets who had had to countenance the tawdry and presumptuous presence of Slick Willy at their 50th anniversary commemorations when I read of our President's moving expression of genuine love and gratitude for such immortals in the very audience that night. It was a surpassingly redeeming assertion of how the real America cherishes them.
His rejoinder to the doubtful on "our triumph over Communism, our giant leaps of science and discovery and our unrivaled progress toward equality and justice . . . " was a happy warrior's confirmation of faith in his, yes flawed but still eminently worthy country in a chamber hosting also his sour minded opposition, which shamed itself beyond measure with its characteristically childish bad will and bad humor.
His conclusion approached a standard set by our most exalted orators: ". . . rekindle the bonds of love and loyalty and memory that link us . . . keep America first in our souls . . . ."
Well done Mr. President, well done sir! What a signal service you have done in this telling assurance of your belief, for which you have energetically and courageously demonstrated such determined devotion, in our country's worth. Let the real America redouble its resolve to support you without stint. Jack
I rejoiced at his ringing denunciation of socialism and at his declaration that we will never be cursed by its dictatorial sway. How the Infanta Alexandra's eyes burned with vindictive intent at that; how very much she has to learn in this hard world outside of her dreamy leftist haven.
His mere mention alone of the N.Y. Legislature majority's disgraceful self congratulatory ovation (they cheered, mind you!) after its hideous sanctioning of extended baby killing measures speaks for itself and reflects humiliation beyond description on those New Yorkers who empowered these terribly wrong headed people. It puts the President squarely on the right side of an issue which could be decisive in 2020 and is sure to provoke a veritable avalanche of hyperbolic Cuomoblovo from our preposterous Governor.
President Trump's condemnation of antiSemitism, with its implied support for the heroic Israelis, was magnificently complemented by his account ,dramatically endorsed by Holocaust survivors in the audience, of the advent of American troops assuring them, after their unspeakable travails at the hands of totalitarian savages, of reunion with civilized humans and of their deliverance.
I'm reminded of the outrage I felt for the nonetheless courteous WWII vets who had had to countenance the tawdry and presumptuous presence of Slick Willy at their 50th anniversary commemorations when I read of our President's moving expression of genuine love and gratitude for such immortals in the very audience that night. It was a surpassingly redeeming assertion of how the real America cherishes them.
His rejoinder to the doubtful on "our triumph over Communism, our giant leaps of science and discovery and our unrivaled progress toward equality and justice . . . " was a happy warrior's confirmation of faith in his, yes flawed but still eminently worthy country in a chamber hosting also his sour minded opposition, which shamed itself beyond measure with its characteristically childish bad will and bad humor.
His conclusion approached a standard set by our most exalted orators: ". . . rekindle the bonds of love and loyalty and memory that link us . . . keep America first in our souls . . . ."
Well done Mr. President, well done sir! What a signal service you have done in this telling assurance of your belief, for which you have energetically and courageously demonstrated such determined devotion, in our country's worth. Let the real America redouble its resolve to support you without stint. Jack
Sunday, February 3, 2019
The left: it has hit the slippery slope
Dr. Nick Waddy, (who posts prolifically and convincingly at Waddyisright.com) made a very good point in response to my Cuomo the Calculating post on this site and I'd like to presume to develop on it. He said the Dems appear to be so confidently contemptuous of President Trump that they are newly emboldened to be frank about their real intentions. I think it is happening, at least in an ascendent and perhaps potentially dominant faction of the Dems and that it may be a decisive development., which could contribute mightily to the reelection and prospering of our good President.
Saul Alinsky, the sage of the New Left, bade radicals conceal their extremism until they had achieved final and irrefutable power and Marxists like Hillary and Barack Obama and even reflexive do gooders like Mario Cuomo paid that perceptive advice good heed.
Bernie Sanders has always been completely honest about his consummate hostility to American free enterprise, economic justice, health well being and our law making process. His considerable success in 2016 appears to have inspired others on the left to abandon Alinskyite restraint and to hold forth with abandon on their frankly radical views and intentions and to give ever more dependable notice of how it will be for all who doubt them, should they take full power.
A telling present example is frantic N.Y. Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who lacks his father Mario's tact, his at least vestigial respect for traditional American values and his wise recognition that his "New Yawk know it all" image denied him national office. Now that Andrew wields dictatorial power within N.Y. the insufferable self righteousness and disdain for opposing views he shares with his Dad has found enthusiastic and histrionic affirmation in his joyous imposition of his bigoted views on his subjects. His public ecstatic celebration (Celebration!) of his massive augmentation of the ability to kill unborn babies at will was ghoulish in the extreme; he actually had State office buildings (including one named after Al Smith, a Catholic ) lit to commemorate a development profoundly disturbing to a multitudinous segment of the population of his principality of humbled N.Y . He has presented his new command extending the rights of youthful victims of sexual abuse to bring their victimizers to justice as mainly a necessary curb on a Catholic Church which is a yet cherished institution in N.Y. and which now stands fully alarmed by his obvious disdain for it. He has reaffirmed his commitment to the energetic harassment of lawful gunowners as they exercise a Constitutionally confirmed right which he regards as discredited. Many of us have long been aware of such convictions in him but he appears to be blithe to wear them on his sleeve now and apparently to believe they enhance his Presidential ambitions.
Fortunate for the right to life is the Virginia Governor's recent admission of support for abortion laws which may cause the live birth of babies for whom "decision" would then be made as to their continued sojourn among the living. Tell me Governor, your being knowledgeable on this procedure, in case of termination, what method of execution would be employed? This casual matter of fact statement by this feckless and soon to be banished man may have been a faux pas on his part but never doubt its veracity and embrace by the abortionists. Its good, though yet appalling, to have such a window into their profoundly wrongheaded and, in this, inhuman, minds.
Here's the real kicker though: a national news service reports, just by the way dontcha know, a proposal by the precocious Infanta, yet new born Rep. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez of again, N.Y.(AOC as she is already fashioned by those who expect her swift rise to the very top ), of a "Green New Deal", God help us all. Now this plan is not lacking in breathtaking presumption mind you. It would "eliminate U.S. greenhouse emissions and REMAKE THE ECONOMY (oh that's all?) by phasing out all use of fossil fuels within a decade". Wellll! The report does opine (naturally) that this plan stands little chance of immediate implementation; my, that is a consolation to my troubled mind.
Picture a young JFK championing, in the midst of the economic boom of the mid '50s, a measure "to completely transform this neodepression economy we suffer from now". Richard Nixon would have become President in 1961 and the Cuban Missile Crisis would never have happened. Perhaps then we ought to embrace AOC's seminal outlook, yes! Maybe not.
Our current economic fortune notwithstanding: completely rejected by her airy dorm room style conjecture is the fact that the U.S. already leads the world's major economic engines in reducing carbon emissions, due to the resolutely opposed by "environmental" fanatics ,yet decisive, exploitation of the U.S. one thousand year reserve of clean natural gas. There is not, despite the haughty disdain of the myopic and arrogant U.S. "green" crowd , any conclusive scientific evidence that recent possible climatological change is attributable to the maliciousness of profligate mankind and its certain that the elitist views of affluent Western liberals have little purchase with nations such as China and India emerging from unimaginable poverty (and, yes, liking it even) . But still we have made a creditable effort to address the possibility. That is of no moment to AOC and her acolytes because it denies to such as her an issue she and her ilk hope to ride to totalitarian triumph.
Dr. Waddy is right. A very significant America hating segment of the Dem ( I can't stand to call them Democrats - they are fundamentally anti democracy) party now thinks it a winning position to openly advocate the radical transformation of our country on terms murderously and historically disproven by the thoroughly tried Marxist experiment of the 20th century. They actually think our President as impotent as to have opened a once in a lifetime door for their intrusion into our national health and life. It sets up yet another existential decision (perhaps comparable to that of the 1864 Presidential election which was the last hope of the Confederacy) for our country. Let's face this head on and take full advantage of the ill inspired turn of the Dems to reckless leftist adventurism. Don't be deceived by their possible embrace of Biden. Poor dear, he would open the gate to their most savage and totalitarian cadre and dictators. Jack
Saul Alinsky, the sage of the New Left, bade radicals conceal their extremism until they had achieved final and irrefutable power and Marxists like Hillary and Barack Obama and even reflexive do gooders like Mario Cuomo paid that perceptive advice good heed.
Bernie Sanders has always been completely honest about his consummate hostility to American free enterprise, economic justice, health well being and our law making process. His considerable success in 2016 appears to have inspired others on the left to abandon Alinskyite restraint and to hold forth with abandon on their frankly radical views and intentions and to give ever more dependable notice of how it will be for all who doubt them, should they take full power.
A telling present example is frantic N.Y. Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who lacks his father Mario's tact, his at least vestigial respect for traditional American values and his wise recognition that his "New Yawk know it all" image denied him national office. Now that Andrew wields dictatorial power within N.Y. the insufferable self righteousness and disdain for opposing views he shares with his Dad has found enthusiastic and histrionic affirmation in his joyous imposition of his bigoted views on his subjects. His public ecstatic celebration (Celebration!) of his massive augmentation of the ability to kill unborn babies at will was ghoulish in the extreme; he actually had State office buildings (including one named after Al Smith, a Catholic ) lit to commemorate a development profoundly disturbing to a multitudinous segment of the population of his principality of humbled N.Y . He has presented his new command extending the rights of youthful victims of sexual abuse to bring their victimizers to justice as mainly a necessary curb on a Catholic Church which is a yet cherished institution in N.Y. and which now stands fully alarmed by his obvious disdain for it. He has reaffirmed his commitment to the energetic harassment of lawful gunowners as they exercise a Constitutionally confirmed right which he regards as discredited. Many of us have long been aware of such convictions in him but he appears to be blithe to wear them on his sleeve now and apparently to believe they enhance his Presidential ambitions.
Fortunate for the right to life is the Virginia Governor's recent admission of support for abortion laws which may cause the live birth of babies for whom "decision" would then be made as to their continued sojourn among the living. Tell me Governor, your being knowledgeable on this procedure, in case of termination, what method of execution would be employed? This casual matter of fact statement by this feckless and soon to be banished man may have been a faux pas on his part but never doubt its veracity and embrace by the abortionists. Its good, though yet appalling, to have such a window into their profoundly wrongheaded and, in this, inhuman, minds.
Here's the real kicker though: a national news service reports, just by the way dontcha know, a proposal by the precocious Infanta, yet new born Rep. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez of again, N.Y.(AOC as she is already fashioned by those who expect her swift rise to the very top ), of a "Green New Deal", God help us all. Now this plan is not lacking in breathtaking presumption mind you. It would "eliminate U.S. greenhouse emissions and REMAKE THE ECONOMY (oh that's all?) by phasing out all use of fossil fuels within a decade". Wellll! The report does opine (naturally) that this plan stands little chance of immediate implementation; my, that is a consolation to my troubled mind.
Picture a young JFK championing, in the midst of the economic boom of the mid '50s, a measure "to completely transform this neodepression economy we suffer from now". Richard Nixon would have become President in 1961 and the Cuban Missile Crisis would never have happened. Perhaps then we ought to embrace AOC's seminal outlook, yes! Maybe not.
Our current economic fortune notwithstanding: completely rejected by her airy dorm room style conjecture is the fact that the U.S. already leads the world's major economic engines in reducing carbon emissions, due to the resolutely opposed by "environmental" fanatics ,yet decisive, exploitation of the U.S. one thousand year reserve of clean natural gas. There is not, despite the haughty disdain of the myopic and arrogant U.S. "green" crowd , any conclusive scientific evidence that recent possible climatological change is attributable to the maliciousness of profligate mankind and its certain that the elitist views of affluent Western liberals have little purchase with nations such as China and India emerging from unimaginable poverty (and, yes, liking it even) . But still we have made a creditable effort to address the possibility. That is of no moment to AOC and her acolytes because it denies to such as her an issue she and her ilk hope to ride to totalitarian triumph.
Dr. Waddy is right. A very significant America hating segment of the Dem ( I can't stand to call them Democrats - they are fundamentally anti democracy) party now thinks it a winning position to openly advocate the radical transformation of our country on terms murderously and historically disproven by the thoroughly tried Marxist experiment of the 20th century. They actually think our President as impotent as to have opened a once in a lifetime door for their intrusion into our national health and life. It sets up yet another existential decision (perhaps comparable to that of the 1864 Presidential election which was the last hope of the Confederacy) for our country. Let's face this head on and take full advantage of the ill inspired turn of the Dems to reckless leftist adventurism. Don't be deceived by their possible embrace of Biden. Poor dear, he would open the gate to their most savage and totalitarian cadre and dictators. Jack
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)