The recent groundswell of dissatisfaction with the intrusive airport security measures visited upon ordinary Americans bade me to wonder what the late William F. Buckley, Jr. would have thought of it all. Many years ago Buckley wrote an essay entitled "Why Don't We Complain?" in which he lamented the apathy with which most Americans supinely accept the ever-increasing incursions upon their freedom and autonomy by the government.
It would, of course, have been seen as quite impolitic had Buckley publicly expressed his chagrin at any of the enhanced security measures which were hastily enacted in the wake of the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001. But with the benefit of nine years experience and hindsight it is readily apparent that the basic approach to airport security, in which everyone is treates as equally suspicious, is simply the gesture of a bloated government which lacks the will to put your safety ahead of the totem of political correctness.
Any measure of security requires us to relinquish some of our personal liberty. In many cases that's a fully acceptable trade-off; I am quite content to be disallowed to stroll blithely into the Pentagon carrying a concealed weapon because the odds are quite overwhelming that someone less trustworthy than little ol' me could try the same thing with malicious intent and purpose. But the requirement that each and every passenger - even a nun in her habit, an infant, a grandmother in a wheelchair - all must submit to a full body scan or an invasive patdown - either of which is a gross affront to modesty - is sheer politically correct cowardice, required because the government is afraid to admit the truth.
We need only look at the practices which Israeil uses to see that these invasive measures need not be applied to every man, woman, and child that attempts to board an airplane. The elephant in the room is "profiling", which we durst not even consider. But every single attempted act of terrorism using airplanes against the United States has been perpetrated by indivduals who fit a certain "profile" - and I'm not speaking only of appearance or national origin. Israel has lived under a constant threat from the same enemies who have now begun to target America and it has successfully protected it's air travelers through the use of intelligent screening and... "profiling"!
Perhaps enough finally is enough. The Tea Party movement, which is a true grassroots American phenomenon, grew out of Americans' frustration at the erosion of their liberties at the hands of an ever-more intrusive and overreaching government. I think the recent spate of airport security incidents is a manifestation of the same sort, representing a further awakening by Americans to the dangers posed by our government's aproach to governing. William F. Buckley would no doubt be pleased by this turn of events and might note that we've finally started to complain!
Ironically, even after the results of the recent election and the MSM's coverage of the airport security controversy, the Obama administration still doesn't seem to get it. We heard this week that Secretary of "Homeland Security" Janet Napolitano is considering a waiver of the intrusive screening requirements for... whom? Nuns? Infants? Grandmothers in wheelchairs? Nope, Muslim women! You can't make this stuff up, as another Buckley - WFB's son Christopher, a novelist - has said: we're living in the post-satirical age!
But don't get me wrong, I'm fine with excluding Muslim women - and Catholic women, and Jewish women, and protestant women, and Mormon women, and Buddhist women, and lots of other women - and men - too. 99% of the traveling public ought to be able to answer a few questions from a screener, keep our shoes on, pass our carry-on baggage through an x-ray machine, and walk through a metal detector. But we ought to adopt some common-sense "profiling" of passengers which would reserve these extraordinary screening methods for those indivuduals whose circumstances raise reasonable suspicions about their trustworthiness. Even The Boston Daily Worker (a.k.a. The Globe) permitted publication of an op-ed piece recognizing this as long ago as 2006, but of course this isn't really the paper's editorial stance. And the majority of the left, in particular the A.C.L.U., vehemently opposes any such practices.
So - keep complaining, America; but in the meantime prepare to be exposed, humiliated, and groped. Unless you're wearing a hijab and burkha, in which case you will probably sail through airport security with nary a touch...
UPDATE: lest anyone think I plagiarized George Will's column in Sunday's Washington Post, be assured that I didn't read it until several hours after posting the above. But do read it yourselves, he has some good things to say - including the pithy description of the airport screening charade as "security theater"! Pitch perfect!
20 November 2010
18 November 2010
This is what you get...
...when you vote for radical leftists.
Two news stories this week reminded me of this fact. Here in the People's Republic, a mere 48% of the electorate voted for our benighted governor Deval Patrick. Unfortunately, there were four candidates, and the second-place finisher got 42%. This, to our fearless leader, apparently constitutes a mandate so overwhelming that he can blithely resume his long-held quest to enact a "right" for illegal aliens to pay the in-state tuition rate at state colleges and universities!
Mind you, the children of a member of our armed services living in Massachusetts on active duty does not quality as a "resident" able to receive such a benefit. Nor does someone who lives in a bordering state but who is employed in Massachusetts and pays taxes here. Soldiers and the gainfully-employed are not big priorities for the likes of Deval Patrick.
As for his messianic doppelganger, we got a painful reminder about him this week as well when the civilian trial of an Islamic terrorist almost resulted in his - the terrorist's - aquittal. B.H. Obama had insisted that the best way to try captured terrorists was in civilian courts - as opposed to military tribunals - and the the trial of Ahmen Ghailani was intended to be a rehearsal for the BIG ONE, the trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammad.
Well, as you're probably aware the rules of evidence are a *little* bit different in our criminal courts than they are in a wartime military tribunal. Nothing wrong with that. But the result in this case was the indubitably guilty Ghailani being acquitted of 284 of 285 charges.
Of course there are none so blind as those who will not see. We elected an inexperienced, radical young leftist as president of the most powerful nation on earth, thus we ought not be surprised that he has surrounded himself with the likes of Eric Holder and Janet Napolitano, who are (not surprisingly) in full agreement with him that trying war criminals in the civilan court system is a good idea.
If this is what Massachusetts - and America - want, so be it. But count me out. Barely six years ago a few leftist celebrities were vowing to leave America if G. W. Bush was re-elected. To my knowledge none did. But right about now Canada is looking better and better to me...
Two news stories this week reminded me of this fact. Here in the People's Republic, a mere 48% of the electorate voted for our benighted governor Deval Patrick. Unfortunately, there were four candidates, and the second-place finisher got 42%. This, to our fearless leader, apparently constitutes a mandate so overwhelming that he can blithely resume his long-held quest to enact a "right" for illegal aliens to pay the in-state tuition rate at state colleges and universities!
Mind you, the children of a member of our armed services living in Massachusetts on active duty does not quality as a "resident" able to receive such a benefit. Nor does someone who lives in a bordering state but who is employed in Massachusetts and pays taxes here. Soldiers and the gainfully-employed are not big priorities for the likes of Deval Patrick.
As for his messianic doppelganger, we got a painful reminder about him this week as well when the civilian trial of an Islamic terrorist almost resulted in his - the terrorist's - aquittal. B.H. Obama had insisted that the best way to try captured terrorists was in civilian courts - as opposed to military tribunals - and the the trial of Ahmen Ghailani was intended to be a rehearsal for the BIG ONE, the trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammad.
Well, as you're probably aware the rules of evidence are a *little* bit different in our criminal courts than they are in a wartime military tribunal. Nothing wrong with that. But the result in this case was the indubitably guilty Ghailani being acquitted of 284 of 285 charges.
Of course there are none so blind as those who will not see. We elected an inexperienced, radical young leftist as president of the most powerful nation on earth, thus we ought not be surprised that he has surrounded himself with the likes of Eric Holder and Janet Napolitano, who are (not surprisingly) in full agreement with him that trying war criminals in the civilan court system is a good idea.
If this is what Massachusetts - and America - want, so be it. But count me out. Barely six years ago a few leftist celebrities were vowing to leave America if G. W. Bush was re-elected. To my knowledge none did. But right about now Canada is looking better and better to me...
12 November 2010
More Incense, Less Nonsense!
One of the better Botafumeiro videos out there. The Pope. The Botafumeiro. Filmed with a real camera, not someone's phone. Alas it lacks the dramatic nature of the one - somewhere on youtube.com - in which the combination of an overmatched camera, some fortuitous glare, and a full load of incense make the thing look like a glowing meteor streaking across the transepts with a full tail of smoke. (Indeed, watching Benedict's stinginess with the incense I wondered if Spain had their own version of OSHA, but of course OSHA wouldn't allow any such thing unless everyone in the workplace, er, cathedral had hardhats... at least) But this one is much clearer and there are some unique perspectives, also the sound is decent; you can actually hear the words of the Himno al Apostol Santiago...
Don't misunderstand me - I *know* stuff like this is pretty much inessential to eternal salvation. But Catholic worship has always been distinctively sensuous and there's nothing wrong with doing things on an outsized scale in church - we're there to worship the God if infinite power and majesty after all. And for the past 45 years the liturgical "experts" have been introducing an endless stream of novelties in an effort to make the liturgy more "relevant" and "interesting" while eliminating the notions of power and majesty.
Bah! This is no novelty, no meaningless liturgical entertainment. They've been doing it for at least ten centuries. They had to, to relieve the interesting odors presented by hundreds of pilgrims camping inside the Cathedral! And for goodness sake, the thing had already been in use for a few hundred years when Catherine of Aragon - you may remember her - stopped by in 1499 on the way to England to marry the heir to the British throne. During her visit, the Botafumeiro parted company with its rope and crashed through a window in one of the transepts. Maybe she should have taken it as an omen and gone back home...
But anyway, this is an ancient tradition, beloved of Compostelians and pilgrims alike, and so what if it happens to be a little bit over-the-top? When in doubt as to the suitability of a particular liturgical element you can almost always make a proper judgment by asking three questions:
1.) Was it introduced for an actual reason, or as an experiment/novelty for the sake of "change"?
2.) Did it precede the Council (of Trent!)?
3.) What would Bugnini have thought of it?
I rest my case.
(n.b. get your minds out of the gutter, I said "sensuous", not "sensual"!)
Don't misunderstand me - I *know* stuff like this is pretty much inessential to eternal salvation. But Catholic worship has always been distinctively sensuous and there's nothing wrong with doing things on an outsized scale in church - we're there to worship the God if infinite power and majesty after all. And for the past 45 years the liturgical "experts" have been introducing an endless stream of novelties in an effort to make the liturgy more "relevant" and "interesting" while eliminating the notions of power and majesty.
Bah! This is no novelty, no meaningless liturgical entertainment. They've been doing it for at least ten centuries. They had to, to relieve the interesting odors presented by hundreds of pilgrims camping inside the Cathedral! And for goodness sake, the thing had already been in use for a few hundred years when Catherine of Aragon - you may remember her - stopped by in 1499 on the way to England to marry the heir to the British throne. During her visit, the Botafumeiro parted company with its rope and crashed through a window in one of the transepts. Maybe she should have taken it as an omen and gone back home...
But anyway, this is an ancient tradition, beloved of Compostelians and pilgrims alike, and so what if it happens to be a little bit over-the-top? When in doubt as to the suitability of a particular liturgical element you can almost always make a proper judgment by asking three questions:
1.) Was it introduced for an actual reason, or as an experiment/novelty for the sake of "change"?
2.) Did it precede the Council (of Trent!)?
3.) What would Bugnini have thought of it?
I rest my case.
(n.b. get your minds out of the gutter, I said "sensuous", not "sensual"!)
11 November 2010
Thanks!
On Veterans' Day I'd like to thank all whose selfless service has helped to preserve our freedoms and way of life in the greatest nation ever.
I'd like to personally thank +Uncle Don (WW2 + Korea), +Uncle Bill (WW2), Uncle Bob, Uncle Paul, George, Frankie, Joe, Eddie, Tom, Nathan, Dave, Ulysses, Mariel, and Jesse among others.
God bless you, and God bless America.
I'd like to personally thank +Uncle Don (WW2 + Korea), +Uncle Bill (WW2), Uncle Bob, Uncle Paul, George, Frankie, Joe, Eddie, Tom, Nathan, Dave, Ulysses, Mariel, and Jesse among others.
God bless you, and God bless America.
08 November 2010
Teddy got them into this mess...
...and they sure miss him now.
The late Ted Kennedy was pretty good at getting into scrapes during his lifetime, but he was even better at getting out of them. The Dems, and particularly our floundering president, could sure use him now.
Were it not for the late Ted Kennedy's endorsement, the callow B. H. Obama might never have become president. Early in the 2008 campaign Senator Hillary Clinton and Obama had each won a couple of primaries but Hillary was considered the frontrunner. Teddy's endorsement of Obama changed all that and launched the candidate on a path to nomination and election as president.
During the first year of the Obama regime a dying Kennedy made a couple of dramatic appearances in the Senate to cast the 60th vote to break G.O.P. filibusters. Then, and after his death, he was constantly invoked by the Democrats at they attempted to pass their wildly unpopular "comprehensive health care" bill. His shade loomed large over the political manoeuvering which broght the bill to the threshold of passage, but the unlikely election of Republican Scott Brown to fill the Senate seat Kennedy had occupied for 47 years seemed to toll the death knell for the legislation.
Alas, Teddy's spirit hadn't yet given up the ghost. Even as the Democrats engaged in some extreme logrolling and extra-parliamentary finagling to pass the bill at all cost and by any means, "We did it for Ted" became their all-purpose apologia.
In due course the midterm elections rolled around. You know the results. Voters were generally dissatisfied with the economy, but they were specifically opposed to the president and his eponymous healthcare plan. Perhaps they should have called it "Teddycare"?
Teddy's political legacy is clear. He bequeathed to America an inexperienced and incompetent chief executive, a political extremist who is the most polarizing president since Nixon. And as a bonus we got an ill-considered, intrusive, and economy-wrecking "comprehensive health care" plan whose repeal is the G.O.P.'s #1 campaign promise.
He got them - and us - into this mess. I, for one, am relieved that he has passed from the political scene, but the Democrats could sure use him now. Say what you want about ol' Ted - I sure have - but he was a veteran political operator and knew how to cut his losses. At least he'd have been able to mentor the feckless Obama, who now seems intent on doubling-down on the disastrous policies that have left the recovery to stagnate while irritating a majority of the country and leading his party to the most stinging midterm rebuke since - when? 1946? 1938? - at least fifty years hence.
The late Ted Kennedy was pretty good at getting into scrapes during his lifetime, but he was even better at getting out of them. The Dems, and particularly our floundering president, could sure use him now.
Were it not for the late Ted Kennedy's endorsement, the callow B. H. Obama might never have become president. Early in the 2008 campaign Senator Hillary Clinton and Obama had each won a couple of primaries but Hillary was considered the frontrunner. Teddy's endorsement of Obama changed all that and launched the candidate on a path to nomination and election as president.
During the first year of the Obama regime a dying Kennedy made a couple of dramatic appearances in the Senate to cast the 60th vote to break G.O.P. filibusters. Then, and after his death, he was constantly invoked by the Democrats at they attempted to pass their wildly unpopular "comprehensive health care" bill. His shade loomed large over the political manoeuvering which broght the bill to the threshold of passage, but the unlikely election of Republican Scott Brown to fill the Senate seat Kennedy had occupied for 47 years seemed to toll the death knell for the legislation.
Alas, Teddy's spirit hadn't yet given up the ghost. Even as the Democrats engaged in some extreme logrolling and extra-parliamentary finagling to pass the bill at all cost and by any means, "We did it for Ted" became their all-purpose apologia.
In due course the midterm elections rolled around. You know the results. Voters were generally dissatisfied with the economy, but they were specifically opposed to the president and his eponymous healthcare plan. Perhaps they should have called it "Teddycare"?
Teddy's political legacy is clear. He bequeathed to America an inexperienced and incompetent chief executive, a political extremist who is the most polarizing president since Nixon. And as a bonus we got an ill-considered, intrusive, and economy-wrecking "comprehensive health care" plan whose repeal is the G.O.P.'s #1 campaign promise.
He got them - and us - into this mess. I, for one, am relieved that he has passed from the political scene, but the Democrats could sure use him now. Say what you want about ol' Ted - I sure have - but he was a veteran political operator and knew how to cut his losses. At least he'd have been able to mentor the feckless Obama, who now seems intent on doubling-down on the disastrous policies that have left the recovery to stagnate while irritating a majority of the country and leading his party to the most stinging midterm rebuke since - when? 1946? 1938? - at least fifty years hence.
06 November 2010
This is just too cool...
The Pope... AND The Botafumiero!
"Look, Your Holiness, up in the sky... not a bird... not a plane... Holy Smoke, it's THE BOTAFUMIERO!"
"Guido, Georg, we must have one of these for St. Peter's! And another for the outdoor Masses! Will it fit in the Popemobile?"
"You thought the Bugninists were ticked when I put the candles back on the altar, wait until they see this thing in action!. And the tree-huggers won't like it either!"
"Hmm - this thing would cut quite a swath... properly aimed it could take out a half-dozen bad bishops in one shot..."
"Look, Your Holiness, up in the sky... not a bird... not a plane... Holy Smoke, it's THE BOTAFUMIERO!"
"Guido, Georg, we must have one of these for St. Peter's! And another for the outdoor Masses! Will it fit in the Popemobile?"
"Hmm - this thing would cut quite a swath... properly aimed it could take out a half-dozen bad bishops in one shot..."
For you Botafumiero afficionados who'd like to practice in case there are any openings for tiraboleiros any time soon, there's actually an online simulator! (Leo - you CAN get it to do 360's, even though that would be physically impossible inside the Cathedral...)
03 November 2010
Humbled? Chastened?
In case you haven't noticed the increased volume of traffic on this blog. I have returned from the "secure undisclosed location" and I am once again ensconced in the Archlaical Compound in North Carver.
I've been hankerin' for a good old-fashioned solemn high fisking and when I heard some bits of The Messiah'a presser yesterday I thought I had a winner; alas, after reviewing the fulll text of his remarks I realized that they were far too lengthy for a less-than-book-length fisking.
But - since this is politics - perhaps I can take some items out-of-context and coment on them rather than the whole megillah. So without further ado:
THE PRESIDENT: Good afternoon, everybody. Last night I had a chance to speak to the leaders of the House and the Senate and reached out to those who had both won and lost in both parties. I told John Boehner and Mitch McConnell that I look forward to working with them. [Like I look forward to a root canal] And I thanked Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid for their extraordinary leadership over the last two years. ["Extraordinary" indeed. Just as the decisions made by the captain of the Titanic were "extraordinary"]
Over the last few months I've had the opportunity to travel around the country and meet people where they live and where they work, from backyards to factory floors. I did some talking, [and wasn't I brilliant? And eloquent?] but mostly I did a lot of listening. [to myself. Nobody else knows what it's like to be me!] And yesterday’s vote confirmed what I've heard from folks all across America: People are frustrated -- they’re deeply frustrated -- with the pace of our economic recovery and the opportunities that they hope for their children and their grandchildren. [Bush had eight years to screw things up, how do they expect me to fix it all in just two years?] They want jobs to come back faster, they want paychecks to go further, and they want the ability to give their children the same chances and opportunities as they’ve had in life. [They're bitter clingers, obsessed with their guns and their religion and their enemies and their petty hatreds.]
The men and women who sent us here don't expect Washington to solve all their problems. [Well, actually the ones who sent me here DO expect that, but I can't say it publicly.] But they do expect Washington to work for them, not against them. [Their hands are out - palms up!] They want to know that their tax dollars are being spent wisely, not wasted, and that we're not going to leave our children a legacy of debt. [Of course it's a little too late for that, they should have thought of that in 2008.} They want to know that their voices aren’t being drowned out by a sea of lobbyists and special interests and partisan bickering. They want business to be done here openly and honestly. [Again, they should have thought about that in 2008!]
Now, I ran for this office to tackle these challenges and give voice to the concerns of everyday people. [because I'm smarter than everyone else. Figured I'd sweep into town and solve these problems and win re-election by acclamation.] Over the last two years, we’ve made progress. But, clearly, too many Americans haven’t felt that progress yet, [it's their fault, WE have made the progress but THEY haven't felt it! Don't you understand?] and they told us that yesterday. [It was a temper tantrum.] And as President, I take responsibility for that. [I'm only saying that because I have to sound contrite.]
What yesterday also told us is that no one party will be able to dictate where we go from here, [even though we just spent the last two years shoving unpopular legislation down the nation's throat without any Republican votes.] that we must find common ground in order to set -- in order to make progress on some uncommonly difficult challenges. And I told John Boehner and Mitch McConnell last night I am very eager to sit down with members of both parties and figure out how we can move forward together. [Now that partisan is out, I want to be bipartisan, or at least give the MSM a chance to claim I am...]
I’m not suggesting this will be easy. I won’t pretend that we will be able to bridge every difference or solve every disagreement. [But now that I can't have it ALL my way I'll settle for half - what's unfair about that?]
...
And with so much at stake, what the American people don’t want from us, especially here in Washington, is to spend the next two years refighting the political battles of the last two. [In other words, hands-off Obamacare! We can let the Bush tax cuts expire, and repeal anything else we dodn't like, but don't you dare touch anything WE'VE done!] We just had a tough election. We will have another in 2012. [Unless you ignorate proles figure it out by then.] I’m not so naïve as to think that everybody will put politics aside until then, but I do hope to make progress on the very serious problems facing us right now. And that’s going to require all of us, including me, to work harder at building consensus. {the 2012 Campaign starts tomorrow, I'm gonna have to criss-cross the whole country and spoon-feed it to to you thick-headed provincial noodniks so you understand how much you need all this stuff we're doing for you!]
...
You know, a little over a month ago, we held a town hall meeting in Richmond, Virginia. And one of the most telling questions came from a small business owner who runs a tree care firm. [Let's not talk about the woman who was tired of defending me.] He told me how hard he works and how busy he was; [and I told him how hard *I* worked and how busy *I* was,] how he doesn’t have time to pay attention to all the back-and-forth in Washington. And he asked, is there hope for us returning to civility in our discourse, to a healthy legislative process, so as I strap on the boots again tomorrow, I know that you guys got it under control? It’s hard to have a faith in that right now, he said. [So you see, the problem is that the Republicans aren't civil enough. This is beautiful - I'm half-way to turning America into a supersized Sweden and these people are still stupid enough to worry about "civility".GodAlinsksy bless their little souls. We're enacting a revolution but a few words about how those damn Republicans won't play ball are enough to set their tongues a-clackin' about "civility"!]
I do believe there is hope for civility. [I love this talk about "civility", keep it up!] I do believe there’s hope for progress. And that’s because I believe in the resiliency of a nation that’s bounced back from much worse than what we’re going through right now -- a nation that's overcome war and depression, that has been made more perfect in our struggle for individual rights and individual freedoms. [We survived Carter and two years of me, now that's resiliency!]
Each time progress has come slowly and even painfully, but progress has always come -- because we’ve worked at it and because we’ve believed in it, [and used parliamentary tricks, and traded pork for votes, and gotten the activist courts to decree what we never could have enacted legislatively,] and most of all, because we remembered that our first allegiance as citizens is not to party or region or faction, but to country -- because while we may be proud Democrats or proud Republicans, we are prouder to be Americans. [as long as we're Democrats]
And that's something that we all need to remember right now and in the coming months. [Listen to me, you unwashed cretins!] And if we do, I have no doubt that we will continue this nation’s long journey towards a better future. [Led on the shining path to a glorious workers' paradise by Barack the Benevolent. Someday you will all appreciate me!]
There's plenty more fodder in The Messiah's answers to the questions, maybe I can get to those tomorrow......
I've been hankerin' for a good old-fashioned solemn high fisking and when I heard some bits of The Messiah'a presser yesterday I thought I had a winner; alas, after reviewing the fulll text of his remarks I realized that they were far too lengthy for a less-than-book-length fisking.
But - since this is politics - perhaps I can take some items out-of-context and coment on them rather than the whole megillah. So without further ado:
THE PRESIDENT: Good afternoon, everybody. Last night I had a chance to speak to the leaders of the House and the Senate and reached out to those who had both won and lost in both parties. I told John Boehner and Mitch McConnell that I look forward to working with them. [Like I look forward to a root canal] And I thanked Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid for their extraordinary leadership over the last two years. ["Extraordinary" indeed. Just as the decisions made by the captain of the Titanic were "extraordinary"]
Over the last few months I've had the opportunity to travel around the country and meet people where they live and where they work, from backyards to factory floors. I did some talking, [and wasn't I brilliant? And eloquent?] but mostly I did a lot of listening. [to myself. Nobody else knows what it's like to be me!] And yesterday’s vote confirmed what I've heard from folks all across America: People are frustrated -- they’re deeply frustrated -- with the pace of our economic recovery and the opportunities that they hope for their children and their grandchildren. [Bush had eight years to screw things up, how do they expect me to fix it all in just two years?] They want jobs to come back faster, they want paychecks to go further, and they want the ability to give their children the same chances and opportunities as they’ve had in life. [They're bitter clingers, obsessed with their guns and their religion and their enemies and their petty hatreds.]
The men and women who sent us here don't expect Washington to solve all their problems. [Well, actually the ones who sent me here DO expect that, but I can't say it publicly.] But they do expect Washington to work for them, not against them. [Their hands are out - palms up!] They want to know that their tax dollars are being spent wisely, not wasted, and that we're not going to leave our children a legacy of debt. [Of course it's a little too late for that, they should have thought of that in 2008.} They want to know that their voices aren’t being drowned out by a sea of lobbyists and special interests and partisan bickering. They want business to be done here openly and honestly. [Again, they should have thought about that in 2008!]
Now, I ran for this office to tackle these challenges and give voice to the concerns of everyday people. [because I'm smarter than everyone else. Figured I'd sweep into town and solve these problems and win re-election by acclamation.] Over the last two years, we’ve made progress. But, clearly, too many Americans haven’t felt that progress yet, [it's their fault, WE have made the progress but THEY haven't felt it! Don't you understand?] and they told us that yesterday. [It was a temper tantrum.] And as President, I take responsibility for that. [I'm only saying that because I have to sound contrite.]
What yesterday also told us is that no one party will be able to dictate where we go from here, [even though we just spent the last two years shoving unpopular legislation down the nation's throat without any Republican votes.] that we must find common ground in order to set -- in order to make progress on some uncommonly difficult challenges. And I told John Boehner and Mitch McConnell last night I am very eager to sit down with members of both parties and figure out how we can move forward together. [Now that partisan is out, I want to be bipartisan, or at least give the MSM a chance to claim I am...]
I’m not suggesting this will be easy. I won’t pretend that we will be able to bridge every difference or solve every disagreement. [But now that I can't have it ALL my way I'll settle for half - what's unfair about that?]
...
And with so much at stake, what the American people don’t want from us, especially here in Washington, is to spend the next two years refighting the political battles of the last two. [In other words, hands-off Obamacare! We can let the Bush tax cuts expire, and repeal anything else we dodn't like, but don't you dare touch anything WE'VE done!] We just had a tough election. We will have another in 2012. [Unless you ignorate proles figure it out by then.] I’m not so naïve as to think that everybody will put politics aside until then, but I do hope to make progress on the very serious problems facing us right now. And that’s going to require all of us, including me, to work harder at building consensus. {the 2012 Campaign starts tomorrow, I'm gonna have to criss-cross the whole country and spoon-feed it to to you thick-headed provincial noodniks so you understand how much you need all this stuff we're doing for you!]
...
You know, a little over a month ago, we held a town hall meeting in Richmond, Virginia. And one of the most telling questions came from a small business owner who runs a tree care firm. [Let's not talk about the woman who was tired of defending me.] He told me how hard he works and how busy he was; [and I told him how hard *I* worked and how busy *I* was,] how he doesn’t have time to pay attention to all the back-and-forth in Washington. And he asked, is there hope for us returning to civility in our discourse, to a healthy legislative process, so as I strap on the boots again tomorrow, I know that you guys got it under control? It’s hard to have a faith in that right now, he said. [So you see, the problem is that the Republicans aren't civil enough. This is beautiful - I'm half-way to turning America into a supersized Sweden and these people are still stupid enough to worry about "civility".
I do believe there is hope for civility. [I love this talk about "civility", keep it up!] I do believe there’s hope for progress. And that’s because I believe in the resiliency of a nation that’s bounced back from much worse than what we’re going through right now -- a nation that's overcome war and depression, that has been made more perfect in our struggle for individual rights and individual freedoms. [We survived Carter and two years of me, now that's resiliency!]
Each time progress has come slowly and even painfully, but progress has always come -- because we’ve worked at it and because we’ve believed in it, [and used parliamentary tricks, and traded pork for votes, and gotten the activist courts to decree what we never could have enacted legislatively,] and most of all, because we remembered that our first allegiance as citizens is not to party or region or faction, but to country -- because while we may be proud Democrats or proud Republicans, we are prouder to be Americans. [as long as we're Democrats]
And that's something that we all need to remember right now and in the coming months. [Listen to me, you unwashed cretins!] And if we do, I have no doubt that we will continue this nation’s long journey towards a better future. [Led on the shining path to a glorious workers' paradise by Barack the Benevolent. Someday you will all appreciate me!]
There's plenty more fodder in The Messiah's answers to the questions, maybe I can get to those tomorrow......
Is there any hope for Massachusetts? Or Rhode Island?
Or California, for that matter?
As a tide of red swept the electoral map on Tuesday night, a few enclaves of moonbattery reasserted their approval of business-as-usual. Even in the midst of the largest G.O.P. victory in decades - an election which deposed Madam Speaker, decisively repudiated B. H. Obama's agenda, and left Harry Reid quivering in his boots - the voters of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and California stuck their fingers in their ears: "la, laa, laaa, I can't heeeeeaaaaar yooooooou"
Or perhaps a better image would be them thumbing their noses at the rest of us.
California and Rhode Island have been hit hard by the recession. The unemployment rate in R.I. is almost 12%, and it's higher in Calif. Masachusetts is facing a huge unfunded public pension liability, with their pension obligations only 63% funded (5th lowest in in the nation!)
What kind of people vote for Governor Moonbeam over Meg Whitman, or Barbara Boxer over Carly Fiorina, or David Cicillini over John Loughlin, or Deval Patrick over... anyone?
And I didn't even mention Barney, who remains in my prayers (really) although I wouldn't vote for him for dogcatcher.
Meanwhile the rest of the country, or most of it, has woken up to the dangers we're facing. I wonder what things will look like in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and California a few years hence, in 2012?
As a tide of red swept the electoral map on Tuesday night, a few enclaves of moonbattery reasserted their approval of business-as-usual. Even in the midst of the largest G.O.P. victory in decades - an election which deposed Madam Speaker, decisively repudiated B. H. Obama's agenda, and left Harry Reid quivering in his boots - the voters of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and California stuck their fingers in their ears: "la, laa, laaa, I can't heeeeeaaaaar yooooooou"
Or perhaps a better image would be them thumbing their noses at the rest of us.
California and Rhode Island have been hit hard by the recession. The unemployment rate in R.I. is almost 12%, and it's higher in Calif. Masachusetts is facing a huge unfunded public pension liability, with their pension obligations only 63% funded (5th lowest in in the nation!)
What kind of people vote for Governor Moonbeam over Meg Whitman, or Barbara Boxer over Carly Fiorina, or David Cicillini over John Loughlin, or Deval Patrick over... anyone?
And I didn't even mention Barney, who remains in my prayers (really) although I wouldn't vote for him for dogcatcher.
Meanwhile the rest of the country, or most of it, has woken up to the dangers we're facing. I wonder what things will look like in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and California a few years hence, in 2012?
How'd those predictions go?
I believe in accountability, and judging things by their results...
Even with regard to my predictions!
First the easy ones:
World Series:
Even with regard to my predictions!
First the easy ones:
World Series:
- Whomever wins Game 1 will win the series in seven. - Well, I got the "Game 1" part right"
- If I *had* to bet one way or the other I’d say the Giants in seven. - I did have the Giants...
- The G.O.P.gains 55+ seats - I was too conservative, it looks like the final tally will be 60-65
- Nancy Pelosi will resign her seat in the House to “spend more time with the grandchildren” - Pending
- ...and then demand use of a government jet to ship her goods back home. - Pending
- The G.O.P. gains 9 seats - Missed on that one, it's currently 5. AK, CO, and WA aren't yet decided...
- Governor’s race will require a recount - blew that one! Maybe Obama's visit put him over the top...
- Perry will beat Keating by 5 points - and that one too. Perry just had too much baggage.
- Barney will eke out a win over Sean Bielat... - not quite "eke"...
- ...and be typically ingracious in victory. - well, THAT didn't exactly take a crystal ball to predict!
- The surprise of the night will come in the 6th District… - maybe someday, not this year! Blew that one.
- John Loughlin will defeat David Cicilline by a very narrow margin. - Nope. And a real shame, too.
- the Dow will go up by at least 350 points - HA! Nailed that one cold, as I write this the Dow is up EXACTLY 350... oops, the Archlady just pointed out that it's up 3.50, not 350... never mind.
- Nevada - Got that one completely wrong.
- Delaware - The MSM is indeed touting O'Donnell's loss as a defeat for conservatism and the "Tea Party".
- Florida - The MSM hasn't completely ignored Rubio but they've downplayed him. And they do not seem to have any comprehension of what he's all about, they're calling him the "Obama of 2010"!
02 November 2010
Who's the navigator?
After I voted this morning I found myself behind a car with an unusual bumper sticker:
"God is my pilot, Katharine Jefferts Schori is my co-pilot"
Wow. Just wow. Who the heck puts a sticker like that on their car?
Would it be insenstive of me to note that a house divided against itself cannot stand?
I shall refrain from further speculation.
"God is my pilot, Katharine Jefferts Schori is my co-pilot"
Wow. Just wow. Who the heck puts a sticker like that on their car?
Would it be insenstive of me to note that a house divided against itself cannot stand?
I shall refrain from further speculation.
01 November 2010
Who, me?
Clinton - Bill, that is - has nothing on this guy.
“Now the Republicans are saying that I'm calling them enemies” quoth The Immaculate One.
Ummmm.... yah, the Republicans ARE saying that. Because it's... true!
But don't worry, we just misunderstood him:
“And I said, well, you can't punish your friends when — the folks who’ve been supporting it. Now, I did also say if you're going to punish somebody, punish your enemies, and I probably should have used the word ‘opponents’ instead of ‘enemies.’ Now the Republicans are saying that I'm calling them enemies. What I'm saying is you’re an opponent of this particular provision, comprehensive immigration reform, which is something very different." (Full story: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/44508.html)
Oh, excuse us. How dare we think that you consider us to be "enemies", nothing else you've said or done has given that impression. Ler us slink back to our guns and religion - and cling to them bitterly!
Tomorrow we begin to take back America. 2012 cannot come soon enough. Let's hope America has learned her lesson in time. Another four years of an inexperienced out-of-touch elitist might be too much for us to overcome. (Did I mention he's a socialist?)
“Now the Republicans are saying that I'm calling them enemies” quoth The Immaculate One.
Ummmm.... yah, the Republicans ARE saying that. Because it's... true!
But don't worry, we just misunderstood him:
“And I said, well, you can't punish your friends when — the folks who’ve been supporting it. Now, I did also say if you're going to punish somebody, punish your enemies, and I probably should have used the word ‘opponents’ instead of ‘enemies.’ Now the Republicans are saying that I'm calling them enemies. What I'm saying is you’re an opponent of this particular provision, comprehensive immigration reform, which is something very different." (Full story: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/44508.html)
Oh, excuse us. How dare we think that you consider us to be "enemies", nothing else you've said or done has given that impression. Ler us slink back to our guns and religion - and cling to them bitterly!
Tomorrow we begin to take back America. 2012 cannot come soon enough. Let's hope America has learned her lesson in time. Another four years of an inexperienced out-of-touch elitist might be too much for us to overcome. (Did I mention he's a socialist?)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)