It’s Happening In Real Time. Pay Attention.

Posted February 18, 2014 by Car in
Categories: Uncategorized

It’s time to pay attention, liberals, because the downfall is happening in real time. No need to crack a book to learn history’s lessons of the end run of socialism. Just turn your eyes to Venezuela.

Think of not being able to buy soap, rice or toilet paper or order a cup of coffee, where even the rich are feeling poor. “In the serene private clubs of Caracas, there is no milk, and the hiss of the cappuccino machine has fallen silent. In the slums, the lights go out every few days, or the water stops running. In the grocery stores, both state-run shops and expensive delicatessens, customers barter information: I saw soap here, that store has rice today. The oil engineers have emigrated to Calgary, the soap opera stars fled to Mexico and Colombia. And in the beauty parlours of this nation obsessed with elaborate grooming, women both rich and poor have cut back to just one blow-dry or manicure each week.”

Toyota Motor Company shut down assembly. GM and Ford aren’t assembling cars either, because they can’t get parts. Inflation is at 50%. The TV stations are all now state controlled. Propaganda posters boast of socialist Venezuela, while there isn’t even toilet paper to wipe their asses. Twitter was shut down the other day when it was being used to coordinate student protests against the government. Yet, useful idiots like Sean Penn and Danny Glover supported Chavez and the social revolution which has lead to this ruin.

But the problem is, it is easier to wreck things, than to repair them.

The genius of the Left — Chavez’s for example — is that it destroys things from the inside out. They pervert religion, collapse the mores, abolish the family, shred the constitution and gradually expropriate the property. The differences from one day to the next are apparently imperceptible, but it is harder and harder to go back until finally there is no reversal of ‘progressive gains’ possible at all. The public is finally faced with the stark choice between chaos or authoritarianism. And most people will chose the Boss over the Mob.
The problem with Venezuela is that Chavismo has left people with nowhere else to go. It’s burned the bridges. There’s no reopening the car plants or restarting the factories, or even repairing the power plants. The engineers have all emigrated to Alberta, Canada. The same can be said of Syria. Who wants to open a store in Homs? In ten years nobody left in Homs will even remember how to do it. A whole generation of children is now growing up who know nothing other than war.

So, what do we learn from this? Well, Chavez had a cult of personality thing going, who touted equality, and raged against the income gap between the rich and poor. He poured government money into social programs which propped up his popularity. His government nationalized many industries, using that money to fund his programs.

High oil prices funded Mr. Chavez’s “Bolivarian revolution” over the past 14 years. He made massive investments in health and education; because the government releases almost no reliable data, it is debatable how much impact these had on human development, but they did inspire a belief in redistribution and justice, and ensured his huge popularity.

Which brings me to this

Even before President Obama was elected in 2008 I wrote that he was showing Chavez-like tendencies. I have never seen any reason to revise that notion; it has only strengthened. Reading the Globe and Mail article I quoted above, I am struck in particular by this seemingly unimportant quote, “the government releases almost no reliable data.” That’s been especially true of Obamacare and the present administration, as I pointed out last Thursday. Far more than ever before in my memory, domestic statistics released by the government have become almost pure propaganda, and few on right or left trust them.

Who believes anything Obama says anymore?

The problem in debating the problems (and end run of liberal goals) , is neatly summed up by David Horowitz in “The Black Book of The American Left”:

What makes an outlook “conservative” is that it is rooted in an attitude about the past rather than in expectations of the future. The first principles of conservatism are propositions about human nature and the way human beings behave in social context; about limits, and what limits make possible. This practicality,this attention to experience, to workable arrangements, explains why the conservative community can be liberal and tolerant toward its members in ways that the progressive left cannot.
In contrast to the conservative outlook, liberal and radical ideologies are about the future, about desired outcomes. The first priciples of the left are the priciples of politically constructing a “better world.” Throughout the modern era, the progressive future has been premised on a social contract that would make all of society’s members equal – or at least provide them with equal starting points.
Since ideologies of the left are commitments to an imagine future, to question them is to provoke a moral rather than an empirical response: Are you for or against the equality of human beings? To dissent from the progressive viewpoint is not a failure to assess relevant facts but an unwillingness to embraxe a liberated future. It is, therefore, to will the imperfections and injustices of the present order. In the current cant of the left, it is to be “racist, sexist, classist,” a defender of the status quo.
That is why not only radicals, but even thos who call themselves liberals, are instinctively intolerant toward the conservative position.

Their political views are a MORAL choice. Chavez’s goals were what counted, not what was produced. It doesn’t matter that there isn’t toilet paper to wipe their asses. The useful idiots sung his praises until the end.

“I join with millions… of freedom-loving people around the world, in hope for a rewarding future for the democratic and social development charter of the Bolivarian Revolution,” he said, referring to liberation icon Simon Bolivar.

“We all embraced Hugo Chavez as a social champion of democracy, material development, and spiritual well-being,” added Glover, star of the “Lethal Weapon” movies and a long-time supporter of Chavez and liberal causes.

On Tuesday, “JFK” and “Natural Born Killers” director Stone said: “I mourn a great hero to the majority of his people and those who struggle throughout the world for a place.”

Oliver Stone, Sean Penn, Danny Glover and every other useless fucking tool needs to watch this:

This is going to be fun

Posted January 30, 2014 by Car in
Categories: Uncategorized

Liberals out in Seattle are growing a “Food Forest.” What’s a “Food Forest’? Oh, I’ll let them tell you in all their unicorn-dreams optimism:

A food forest is a gardening technique or land management system, which mimics a woodland ecosystem by substituting edible trees, shrubs, perennials and annuals. Fruit and nut trees make up the upper level, while berry shrubs, edible perennials and annuals make up the lower levels. The Beacon Food Forest will combine aspects of native habitat rehabilitation with edible forest gardening.

The goal of the Beacon Food Forest is to bring the richly diverse community together by fostering a Permaculture Tree Guild approach to urban farming and land stewardship. By building a community around sharing food with the public we hope to be inclusive to all in need of food.

Who can go and and take whatever they want? ANYONE. Foragers of all stripes. NPR:

Of course, any “free” food source begs the question of what to do with overzealous pickers. No definitive answer on how to handle that predicament has been established yet, though. According to Herlihy, the only solutions right now are to produce an abundance of fruit so there’s enough for everyone and to embed “thieves’ gardens” with extra plants in the park for those people eager to take more than their share.

Oh, that’s going to work great! Because you can easily accommodate for those who take “more than their fair share.”

In 1974 the general public got a graphic illustration of the “tragedy of the commons” in satellite photos of the earth. Pictures of northern Africa showed an irregular dark patch 390 square miles in area. Ground-level investigation revealed a fenced area inside of which there was plenty of grass. Outside, the ground cover had been devastated.

The explanation was simple. The fenced area was private property, subdivided into five portions. Each year the owners moved their animals to a new section. Fallow periods of four years gave the pastures time to recover from the grazing. The owners did this because they had an incentive to take care of their land. But no one owned the land outside the ranch. It was open to nomads and their herds. Though knowing nothing of Karl Marx, the herdsmen followed his famous advice of 1875: “To each according to his needs.” Their needs were uncontrolled and grew with the increase in the number of animals. But supply was governed by nature and decreased drastically during the drought of the early 1970s. The herds exceeded the natural “carrying capacity” of their environment, soil was compacted and eroded, and “weedy” plants, unfit for cattle consumption, replaced good plants. Many cattle died, and so did humans.

This “Food Forest” is either going to fail, or they are going to curtail the “free foraging” idea, which is the basic premise of the park.

It won’t work. It never does.

It’s not that liberals don’t know anything. It’s just what they know isn’t so.

Thanks to my friend Roamy for this story.

Disgusting

Posted January 29, 2014 by Car in
Categories: Uncategorized

Obmama as Cory Remsburg by a member of the adoring press:

Last night’s speech also ended on an emotional — and upbeat — note when Obama recognized Army Ranger Cory Remsburg, who was almost killed in Afghanistan and continues to recuperate from a brain injury. “My fellow Americans, men and women like Cory remind us that America has never come easy,” the president said. “Our freedom, our democracy, has never been easy. Sometimes we stumble, we make mistakes; we get frustrated or discouraged. But for more than 200 years, we have put those things aside and placed our collective shoulder to the wheel of progress.” That story could also apply to Obama himself: Nothing in his seven years on the national political stage (2007-2014) has come easy. The 2008 race for the Democratic nomination. Even that general election. The health-care law. The re-election campaign. And now the president’s current situation in which he finds himself bloodied and bruised after the botched health-care rollout. Perseverance is an important quality for any president. Bill Clinton was usually able to talk his way out of sticky situations. But Obama’s M.O. is to grind it out. That, more than anything else, was the message he wanted to send last night — both he and the country are grinding it out.

NOTHING has come easy? Huh, that’s funny because it would appear to me that a rather inexperienced politician, who goes from “community organizer” to president in 11 short years wouldn’t appear to be the harshest row anyone’s hoed.

Oh, he’s “struggled” with low poll numbers. Poor baby. He hasn’t (up until now, perhaps) been able to dictate his will upon us. He’s won two elections with a press that would have fallen on their sword for him.

And while Remsburg has been undergoing surgeries, therapy, and relearning how to walk – Obama has been golfing, vacationing in Hawaii, and hob-nobbling with celebrities.

Soldier on, Obama.

Our Country Is In The Best Of Hands

Posted January 15, 2014 by Car in
Categories: Uncategorized

Tags: ,

In one of the most embarrassing moments of modern diplomacy, Obama uttered the sophomoric “give peace a chance” ideology in regards to Iran.

“My preference is for peace and diplomacy, and this is one of the reasons why I’ve sent the message to Congress that now is not the time for us to impose new sanctions, now is the time for us to allow the diplomats and technical experts to do their work.”

“What we want to do is give diplomacy a chance, and give peace a chance.”

*facepalm*

Meanwhile, Iran is doing a victory lap.

Iran’s “moderate” president, Hassan Rouhani, tweeted this morning that “world powers,” including the U.S., had “surrendered” to the “Iranian nation’s will” in confirming a six-month interim nuclear deal that will allow the Iranian regime to continue its advanced centrifuge program and develop a new nuclear facility at Arak.

Let’s remember who these people are – they sent CHILDREN to the front lines in their war with Iraq. Children as young as 12.

Obama’s foreign policy has been a disaster, starting with Iraq and Afghanistan, then devolving into Egypt, Syria, Russia and Iran.

Meanwhile, John Kerry continues his quest for that Nobel Peace prize but doesn’t appreciate being called on it.

“American Secretary of State John Kerry, who turned up here determined and acting out of misplaced obsession and messianic fervor, cannot teach me anything about the conflict with the Palestinians,” Yaalon said, according to the paper.

You’re supposed to pretend that he’s serious about brokering peace.

“If these comments are accurate, we find the remarks of the defense minister to be offensive and inappropriate, especially given all that the United States has done to support Israel’s security needs and will continue to do,” she said at a regular media briefing. “Secretary Kerry and his team, including Gen. (John) Allen, have been working day and night to try to promote a secure peace for Israel because of the secretary’s deep concern for Israel’s future.”

Palestine is really committed to peace with Israel, as you can see:

In a fiery speech broadcast live on Palestinian television Monday, the Palestinian minister for religious affairs called for Muslims to flock to Jerusalem to fight a holy war, or jihad. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas sat front and center in the audience and joined others in applauding his minister’s speech, according to video released by a watchdog organization.

But Kerry is super cereal about the negotiations. I don’t know how this is going to fit in:

In a speech over the weekend, Abbas voiced a hardline position on key negotiating issues, insisting that Palestinian refugees and their descendants have a “right” to move to the land on which the State of Israel sits and that he would not agree to any peace deal that does not include east Jerusalem as the Palestinian capital.

The NYT (no link, I hate them) points out the obvious:

Mr. Kerry is trying to persuade Mr. Abbas and Mr. Netanyahu to agree to a framework that would set out the core principles of a peace deal and provide guidelines for continuing to discuss the details. Senior Israeli and Palestinian officials have in recent days splashed cold water on the effort, suggesting that the two sides may have irreconcilable differences on borders, refugees, security, the status of Jerusalem and the recognition of Israel as a Jewish state.

Ba haaa haa haaa … you think? The Geeeniuuuses at the NYT needed senior officials to point this out?

The Palestinians are ridiculous, and one need only investigate ONE of the sticking points to realize this: the Jerusalem issue.

Abbas and hard liners demand that there is no peace agreement without a Palestinian capital in east Jerusalem. Daniel Pipes explains why this is an issue. Jerusalem is of significant religious importance to both Jews and Christians. Not so much to Muslims.

It is not the place to which they pray, is not once mentioned by name in prayers, and it is connected to no mundane events in Muhammad’s life. The city never served as capital of a sovereign Muslim state, and it never became a cultural or scholarly center. Little of political import by Muslims was initiated there.

But now it is a focal point.

The city being of such evidently minor religious importance, why does it now loom so large for Muslims, to the point that a Muslim Zionism seems to be in the making across the Muslim world? Why do Palestinian demonstrators take to the streets shouting “We will sacrifice our blood and souls for you, Jerusalem” and their brethren in Jordan yell “We sacrifice our blood and soul for Al-Aqsa”? Why does King Fahd of Saudi Arabia call on Muslim states to protect “the holy city [that] belongs to all Muslims across the world”? Why did two surveys of American Muslims find Jerusalem their most pressing foreign policy issue?

Yes, why? Politics. Of course. Muslims only care about Jerusalem when others seem to care about the city. Time and time again, they have neglected the town.

Politics, not religious sensibility, has fueled the Muslim attachment to Jerusalem for nearly fourteen centuries; what the historian Bernard Wasserstein has written about the growth of Muslim feeling in the course of the Countercrusade applies through the centuries: “often in the history of Jerusalem, heightened religious fervour may be explained in large part by political necessity.” This pattern has three main implications. First, Jerusalem will never be more than a secondary city for Muslims; “belief in the sanctity of Jerusalem,” Sivan rightly concludes, “cannot be said to have been widely diffused nor deeply rooted in Islam.” Second, the Muslim interest lies not so much in controlling Jerusalem as it does in denying control over the city to anyone else. Third, the Islamic connection to the city is weaker than the Jewish one because it arises as much from transitory and mundane considerations as from the immutable claims of faith.

MECCA is the central city of Islam; a city in which non-Muslims are not even ALLOWED to enter. Can you imagine if non-Muslims demanded entry into Mecca? let alone wanted it as a non-Muslim capital. Yet Palestinians have made Jerusalem a central point – perhaps THE central point – to their peace negotiations with Israel.

Exit question: When will Kerry get his Nobel?

What’s Not To Love?

Posted December 19, 2013 by Car in
Categories: Uncategorized

Not everyone has the same sucky view of Obamacare the Affordable Care Act. People who aren’t really paying for their health insurance, for example, LOVE it. People like Sue Spanke (SYWM).

Spanke, a self-employed artist in her 50s, is paying $350 a month for a Blue Cross policy with a $5,000 deductible. She got a letter from Blue Cross that said the policy was being canceled and a similar ACA-compliant policy would cost her $500 a month.

After she got mad, Spanke eventually called the state auditor’s office, which told her she qualified for a federal subsidy to help pay for a new policy, because her income is relatively low, and that she should talk to an insurance agent.

Spanke said she hadn’t tried the ACA’s new online marketplace, http://www.healthcare.gov, because she doesn’t like using the Internet and had read about the site’s ongoing problems. But her insurance agent did the work for her and determined she could get a policy, after subsides, for a mere $30 to $40 a month — and with a deductible of only $500.

“I went from a horrible policy that didn’t cover anything, that was breaking me, to the best policy at the best price I’ve had since I was in my 20s,” she said.

She was MAD, but then … health insurance for $30 or $40 dollars a month? So now she LOVES Obamacare. Shit for free, that’s what that is.

Now, if only we can get all those people who’s premiums and deductibles and doubled and tripled to love it as well …

So, if you are one of those racist h8ters who are still criticizing Obamacare … that’s simply because you’re a loser.

No doubt there will be some Obamacare losers—most of them healthy, wealthy people who will have to pay a bit more. And there will be plenty of libertarian critics who will denounce the perceived paternalism of the situation. But there is no shortage of winners.

There are winners. And there are losers.

Suck it up.

Don’t Forget To Talk About Health Care Over The Holiday!

Posted December 19, 2013 by Car in
Categories: Uncategorized

In a last bit of “work” before Obama flies off to Hawaii for two weeks, Obama and Michelle “met” with moms to … what?

The president, first lady Michelle Obama, and other top administration officials met with local mothers who have benefited from or promoted the law.

Oh, yes. Photo- op. Plus, Obama has GOT to be feeling a little blue about how horribly his “Signature Piece of Legislation” is turning out. SO ValJer sent her minions out to cherry pick the .001% who are benefiting from this steaming pile of crap to pluck him up and afford him a little bit of positive PR propaganda for the MSM.

The rare joint appearance by the president and first lady was billed as an opportunity to promote the insurance exchanges among a demographic the White House says is crucial to getting consumers to sign up for ObamaCare.

“I think this is a recognition of the role that moms play in their families,” White House press secretary Jay Carney said Wednesday. “And they, I think, bear truths to their children and one of the truths that we hope moms around the country will convey is that it is very important to get covered, to be insured, to protect themselves against the potential of falling ill with a debilitating disease.”

Oh yes. They’re panicking.

And a Kaiser poll released earlier this month found that four in 10 college-educated white women hold a “very unfavorable” view of the law, 10 points worse than a month ago. Another 10 percent of women say they have a “somewhat unfavorable” view of the law.

Just wait until they see how much $$ they’re going to be paying in Obamacare taxes (tied to their insurance premiums) starting in January. We got hit with another $40 per month in taxes alone. Yes, the moms are going to love that.

The first lady is expected to tout the moms’ meeting later Wednesday evening, in a trio of interviews with African American talk radio hosts. The Obamas and other female senior administration officials have also sat for interviews with prominent women’s magazines.

I bet the copy for those interviews was written even BEFORE the actual meeting with the moms.

Healthcare for the Holidays

Posted November 26, 2013 by Car in
Categories: Uncategorized

These people are mentally challenged. Seriously?

This holiday season, millions of Americans have a chance to get quality, affordable health insurance—many for the first time. If you have family members who are uninsured, you can play a big part in helping them find coverage that works for them. It might not always seem like it, but your family listens to you. So have the talk.

It gets worse.

Pick A Time

Start early: Don’t wait until the last minute—be sure to start the conversation early!

Integrate the talk into family time: Take advantage of downtime after meals or between holiday activities to start your talk.

The Organizing for Obama site offers plenty of “helpful” hints for idiots to propagandize to their loved ones, and each of these wonderful ideas can be printed out (or EMAILED) for convenience.

This doesn’t sound irritating at all; from the “conversation tips” section:

Start by asking: “Have you thought about signing up for health insurance on the new marketplace?”

Offer to walk them through it: “Would you like to take some time with me to sign up right now?”

Ask them to make a plan, and commit to it: “When do you plan on signing up?”

Don’t forget to follow up: “Have you signed up yet?”

Why can’t any of these Obama-loving asshats show up at my house to have such a talk? To be honest, I can’t find a single person who’s interested in discussing anything to do with Obama, outside of the occasional facebook loonie.

Where the entire argument is usually along the lines of “you’re racist.”


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.