My observations on last night’s debate: Romney knew his supporters will remain in his camp and there is very little he can do to loose them. I have my reservations like many here on RedState but I have mustered as much enthusiasm I can in order to support the R&R Ticket. While we all enjoy some Rest and Relaxation, I want our national economy and population to get back to Work. I am campaigning, calling and donating. Because we can’t afford, I can’t afford, 4 more of Obama’s Lost Years. And Romney knows, assumes (rightly I think) that most of the like-minded individuals will be on board. We are less than 2-weeks out from the election and there are few votes to be had. But Romney made a play for them.

His repeated use of the word “peace” and related phrases, his standing above the fray as Obama attempted to drag him into the muck, mud and mire of antagonism and conflict, his chuckle at Obama’s closing remarks, his broad sweeping vision for US foreign policy based on principle and strength, and his direct connection and attacks on economic and domestic problems inherent in Obama’s administration played to his sweet spot.

Romney was calm when Obama ranted about horses and bayonets and insulted his intelligence when describing the Navy fleet consisting of ships, boats, submarines and carriers. Romney didn’t defend himself like I would have liked, but I will vote for him anyway. Instead he sought to lay out a vision of world peace that in some bizarre way may appeal to women and confused young men who do not understand that the world is dominated by the aggressive use of force. Technically, in terms of market share and acquisition costs for new votes relative to broadcast audience (60M) and commercial spending, this was hands down the right move. Romney is, if nothing else, a smooth operator.

Romney gave them what they wanted to hear: “I am not pro-war.” But know this, Romney also laid down a clear line between himself and Obama – he will not dismantle the military. So that it will be there when he needs it or future generations need it. I have no doubt that Romney is not the ignorant buffoon that Obama is when it comes to the use of our military.

When Obama started talking about guns falling into the wrong hands I almost fell out of my seat. I desperately wanted Romney to shout “what the hell happened in Libya and Egypt? Do you think those arms that terrorist have been using did not come from the US?” But this may have opened a can of worms in terms of intelligence briefings that Romney has become aware of as his campaign has been brought into the fold of intel communications. Instead he chose the higher road, implied Obama’s incompetence and left it at that. Again deflecting, dodging and parrying rather than going for the jugular. That set Obama on edge, and it made Mitt look Presidential.

On a side note, does it strike anyone else as ironic that our greatest adversary in the last decade shares 4 of 5 letters with our president’s name. Teddy Kennedy and others have fumbled Obama/Osama – but we keep coming back to it. That’s like Hitler vs. Titler (instead of Truman) or Gorbachev up against Rorbachev (instead of Reagan). Apparently Bob Schieffer does… “Obama bin Laden.”

http://youtu.be/bfr9zyKqvhw

I feel the vice as it tightens on my head and the noose is tighter on my neck.  Your relationship with your government has been fundamentally changed by one man, Chief Justice John Roberts.  The Obamacare mandate construed as a tax is a new boot on the neck of Americans.  We’ve lost our freedom and I feel the pressure of government impinging on my ability to work and live let alone process this ruling by the Supreme Court.  I’d like to think that bureaucrats in Washington do not have the power to effect my daily life.  I’d like to think that my government is at least one step removed from my family.  But this ruling puts them at our doorstep, in our bank accounts… the enemy within has let in the enemy without, they have passed through our gates.

The power to tax is the power to destroy.   

Corporations and the Police Power.–And of course the same principle is equally applicable to the exercise by the State of its police powers. Thus, in what was perhaps the leading case before the Civil War, the Supreme Court of Vermont held that the legislature of that State had the right, in furtherance of the public safety, to require chartered companies operating railways to fence in their tracks and provide cattle yards.  Marshall, John

Source: This quotation comes from the words of DANIEL WEBSTER and those of JOHN MARSHALL in the Supreme Court case, McCulloch v. Maryland.Webster, in arguing the case, said: An unlimited power to tax involves, necessarily, a power to destroy, 17 U.S. 327.  In his decision, Chief Justice Marshall said: That the power of taxing it [the bank] by the States may be exercised so as to destroy it, is too obvious to be denied, and that the power to tax involves the power to destroy [is] not to be denied.  http://quotationsbook.com/quote/38275/

Roberts disagreed with Obama that was a tax:

And Roberts disagreed with Pelosi that it was based on the commerce clause:

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/flashback-when-asked-where-constitution-authorizes-congress-order-americans-buy-health

Roberts found that Patient Affordable Care Act, Obamacare, was actually a tax disagreeing with Obama and that it was not based on the commerce clause but instead based on Article 1 Section 8 and Congress as a taxing authority is able to levy any tax for any reason.  So Roberts made the most compassionate and kind argument in favor of the defense.

Never has a Supreme Court Justice or even a lower court or municipal judge in America decided a case based on a fictitious, imagining, manufactured and artificial arguments that the defense didn’t even make.  It is insane for the court to adjudicate so favorable a one sided claim.  Instead of rising above the fray politics, Roberts invites politics as he created a legal precedent by affirming Obama and the Democrats.  Instead of avoiding attacks on the court he invited them and gave cover political cover to the enemies of the constitution.

In its less than illustrious existence this decision goes beyond anything that the Supreme Court has ever done to expand the scope and roll of Congress and the Federal Government as a taxing authority.  Roberts, by joining the liberal justices and deciding against Kennedy Scalia, Thomas and Alito proves that there are only very few limits on what a supposedly conservative Republican nominee to the court will not do.  In his weak kneed, lack of support for constitutional principles Roberts proves that there is no protection for original intent in our courts and legal system.

There’s no chance Stevens, Keagan, Sortamayor, or Ginsberg would ever rule in favor of conservative positions.  Their ideology is so complete and hardwired, their hearts so entrenched in Marxism, their fingers are so dirty, their minds are so distorted that they would never rule in favor of the Constitution.

The most gracious treatment of Roberts would say he kicks this decision back to the American people.  As if to say “I’m not going to do your dirty work for you, if you want your stupid state-run systems to usurp individual liberty so be it.  If you want to transform America into a socialist European country that is your prerogative.”  Now is it up to the people to take action and elect representatives who won’t violate the constitution.  Even presenting Roberts in this light makes him into a sell-out.  Giving into the State-first Washington establishment means even he no longer upholds his commitment and duty to uphold the constitution.

Obama ripped up the Constitution and Roberts wiped his nose with it.

Obama lit the fire and Roberts pored fuel on it and tossed the Constitution to the flames.

I hate to admit it but Newt is right.  We must limit the powers of the courts.  This is just the latest example of a court, in this case the highest court, running amuck.  The firewall has broken down between the constitution and self-government for individual freedom.  Who can we seek to redress this injustice and restrain these courts.  The Congress has to curtail courts across the states to limit the damage from these types of rulings.

The power to tax is the power to kill, and Obama has no compunction about politically knocking off his enemies.  Roberts has turned a blind eye.  We must be prepared come November.

The events of the last 24-hours were brought to you by the efforts over the last 6 years.  In the Politico:

In the biggest break in a global pursuit of bin Laden that stretched back to the Clinton administration, the U.S. discovered the compound by following one of the terrorist’s personal couriers, identified by terrorist detainees as one of the few al Qaeda couriers who bin Laden trusted.

This is the key piece of what I call Court Jester journalism from the Politico.  Since the pursuit of bin Laden stretches back to Clinton, when Clinton dodged capturing bin Laden in Sudan, we can wonder where the intelligence to track this courier came from?  Let me suggest we gained this information divulged from terrorists captured and interrogated under the Bush administration.

Waterboarding wins.  Will the media give Bush and others the credit they deserve?  Of course not!

Obama can take credit for the work of the Bush policies and people all he wants.  Good, I am glad that we bagged Osama and that Obama called the ball and watched it go down.  The truth is that Obama doles out blame and hoards credit like a sniveling child.  Don’t be confused or manipulated.

The truth is that Obama will not put in place policies and systems necessary to prevent future attacks and capture and kill future threats.  Every indication is that Obama is weakening our military and intelligence operations.  I have no confidence in Leon Panetta’s ability to protect this country.  In fact I believe his is doing his twisted level best to dismantle the broad shoulders of our national defense.

If this is true then Petraeus has his work cut out in the wake of Panetta at the CIA and Panetta moves on to tinker and toy with the DOD at the Pentagon.  Panetta will be playing with the very systems that Rumsfeld developed with his team.  These systems and processes are what lead to Osama’s death.  It just took 6 long years to bring this manhunt to a conclusion.

As we celebrate the demise of a truly evil villan let us not forget that our long term goals of national security and defense are not aligned with that of the enemies within the organs of power.

If nothing else we can praise the men in uniform and out of uniform that made this happen.

Give credit where credit is due, alone.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0511/54093.html#ixzz1LCxBbsDu

As I watched Bachmann on Fox News Sunday this morning on hulu she held herself well.  Chris Wallace took it upon himself to draw her out and basically provided a disagreeable front.  This is fine, I would expect a desk interviewer to do nothing less.  Chris is generally good at his job and does challenge representatives of both the left and the right.

However in the discussion about the debt ceiling Chris Wallace was pushing Michele about the prospect of default as described by the Sec. Treas., Fed Chair and others.

WALLACE: Top officials and everyone from Ben Bernanke, the Fed chairman, to Republican House Speaker John Boehner say this: Default will raise interest rates on our debt, which will therefore not lower the deficit, but increase the deficit because we are going to have to pay higher interest rates. It will raise interest rates for mortgages and loans for individuals, and it will threaten our recovery.

I want you to give me a single piece of hard evidence that defaulting would not be a disaster.

BACHMANN: Who is advocating defaulting? I’m not. No one is advocating defaulting. That’s why Senator Pat Toomey and Representative Tom McClintock have a bill that would direct the treasury secretary to first pay off all obligations, and after that, prioritize spending.

WALLACE: But you just heard the deputy treasury secretary say that’s default by another name.

BACHMANN: Well, that is his opinion. My opinion is we could go with the Toomey-McClintock plan. We could pay off the debts first and prioritize. What a shock to the ruling class in Washington, D.C. They don’t have all the money they want to spend. We never did have that ability to be able to spend all that money.

WALLACE: Don’t you worry , I mean, what our creditors would say, what the financial markets would say if we don’t raise the debt ceiling and we have to start doing that? As I say, everybody from Ben Bernanke to your speaker, John Boehner, say it would be a financial disaster.

BACHMANN: Well, I don’t know if you heard what I said. I am not calling for default.

WALLACE: But if you don’t raise the debt ceiling, that is what is going to happen.

BACHMANN: But that’s not true…

Michele could have said “Well, I don’t know if you’ve heard but Standard & Poors rating agency has down graded American credit from neutral to negative.  The other two agencies that make up our bond rating are looking at the same data and coming to the same conclusions but are unwilling to put it in on paper.  If we raise the debt ceiling we will continue down this path of financial destruction and there is no political cover for it.  I call this irresponsible, corrupt and wasteful spending and massive inflation default on the social contract with the American people.

…this is my immediate reaction.  I think that Michele could have been prepared with some facts to dispute a mistaken notion of default.  Her press crew had better get on that.  And I hope she is prepping more before going on TV.  Chuck Shummer makes sure he can lace some twisted facts when needed…

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/fox-news-sunday/transcript/rep-michele-bachmann-debt-ceiling-debate-sens-lindsey-graham-kent-conrad-air-strikes-liby?page=2#ixzz1LCNMeSbn

www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRtATSP5hF0

Don Trump needs to be used by the Republicans and not the other way around. He may be the worst stereotype of a country club, ostentatious, flip-flopping northeast Republican. Hey, I’ve got nothing but love for the business men and women who pretend that their Atlas shoulders hold up the world. However Trump gets high on his own supply. And that is bad for business.

Follow this chain of events:

· Donald Trump floats the idea that he may run for president,

· he shows up on a number of shows including Rush Limbaugh,

· he goes “birther” and strategically positions himself as the man who is taking it to Obama,

· he projects his intention to tax China 25% and put the screws to OPEC,

· he delays and strings out the Presidential exploratory committee,

· he touts his business success and savvy dangling the red herring of his financial records,

· once Obama “blinks” and shows his alleged long form birth certificate Trump crows that he is the one that final got Obama to attempt to prove his birthplace,

· then he proceeds on a vulgarity laced tirade in Sin City to alienate or compromise any support from the traditional or social conservatives.

All he has accomplished is raising his profile. Any publicity is good publicity and Trump knows it.

I fault no one for paying attention to Trump as a news item. He’s making news. But jumping on the Trump express to nowhere is making yourself and Red State into a joke. There needs to be an objective distance with these hucksters like Trump. He is demonstrably egomaniacal and opportunistic. These are traits of Vladimir Lenin and Jim Taggert not the leader of the Republican Party.

Don’t be taken in by this consummate salesman. The Donald is witty, charming and charismatic. Again these are fine traits for an entrepreneur and real estate tycoon and positive traits in a presidential candidate but not sufficient to warrant my consideration. I’d say that his clarity and folksy nature are refreshing, especially coming from a plutocrat from the Empire City.

However, therein lies the problem, he’s unreliable at best. We don’t need a political chameleon no matter how big his pocketbook.

Don, we are not for sale. Go find another hooker to twist.

She gives the best stump speech.

Sarah Palin is feisty on the podium in an engaging, polemical and humorous way.  She’s unabashedly conservative.  Tea Party Grass Roots Americans across the country love her. This is our base. We need to combat the slander of media hatred with our enthusiastic support and passionate commitment to our best candidate. Will she convince everyone that she is the best candidate? No. She probably will not win the New Hampshire primary, and that is fine with me.

A round victory in Iowa and decent showing in one of the most confused New England states (“live free or die?” really?) will lead to a run to South Carolina where the Palin Express will pick up steam. The primary system is designed to ebb and flow. It’s a horse race and the media will do everything in their power to destroy Sarah in the process. Her campaign will have to be nearly flawless. However any republican nominee will face sabotage and espionage. This is the internal Cold War era of American politics. I believe that Sarah can run a clean campaign that also unrelentingly attacks the liberal axis with the power of truth.

She is willing to trade punches.

In her 3 years of national prominence she has taken more barbs than Ahab’s blue whale.  Sarah has survived the onslaught of media character assassins. This is the reason why they continue to marginalize her in push polling. She has no skeletons in her closet. 0. Do you understand the power of a person with integrity? She does not fear taking strong positions because she knows what she believes and she lives a life consistent with her beliefs. This level of character used to be the currency of American politics. It can be again, if we hold up our values and duties and demand that our politicians do the same.

She is able to deflect and rebut attacks.

Palin is excellent in verbal sword play.  Her competitive instincts came out in the VP debates. She demolished “Say it ain’t so Joe.” She laid the traps and took advantage of his foot-in-mouth disease. Her strategy with Obama will be different but equally effective. She can use Obama’s tendency to defer to strong women and fear of being viewed as chauvinistic. Her ability to contrast her positions and our principles with Obama’s lies and the liberal gospel is what we desperately need.

What she has learned is that she needs to control the venue.  This is a significant lesson for any politician to learn.  Most of our congressmen don’t get this…  Many former congressmen didn’t get this…  McCain never really got this.  GWB was better at this, but he avoided contact with the liberal lepers a little too much.  Sarah is able to reach into the lives of ordinary American’s through the channels provided.  She has learned that taking a (staged) stroll with a so-called reporter is tantamount to walking right into an ambush.  And the only reason to do that is if you want to draw them out in order to call in air support.

She is exactly what the media fears – a strong conservative woman.

This is the key point we need to understand: if we want to WIN we need to offer the country both a stark contrast to the liberal agenda and a transformational, charismatic leader who is called to fight this greatest battle in American history.

Palin is the best example of what made America great.  She is a wonderful mom and ardent patriot.  Sarah has dealt with the demands of raising 5 children in an admirable way.  Sure there have been challenges, what parent does not come face to face with their own limitations?  Her children are a tribute to her and Todd’s parenting; they are loved unconditionally and respond to her grace and instruction.  She works as a mom, sportsman, writer, and statesman.  She loves America.  This cannot be understated.  We have an opportunity to elect the most outspoken supporter of American exceptionalism in a generation.  She has no equivocation in political baggage that waters down her support for the country.  We can count on her to raise the banner of the United States and restore the discipline of our fiscal integrity and resurrect the spirit of American interests abroad.

Sarah Palin drives a stake in the heart of liberal stereotypes.  In this politically correct media driven era, Sarah Palin represents the antithesis of liberalism.  She will call out their hypocrisy.  Every attack on her is an attack on their bias.  She can shield their slings and arrows, and return fire.  And when she returns fire it is with a laser guided missile.

Now is your chance.

Conservatives unite.

If you want to revitalize America we need a leader who will point the right direction and get out of our way.

Sarah Palin has a vision consistent with America’s founding. She wants to reincarnate the pioneer spirit. This is what we need.

Now is your chance Republicans. Do the right thing – as Spike Lee would say.

She is young (47) and attractive.  Pictures are worth a thousand words and her picture says that she is confident and unashamed to be who she is.  Visuals matter.  Stop this incessant insistence on old white dudes. I will be an old white dude in a few years and I recognize that we need to take a supporting role right now. We need to attack the walled city of liberalism – identity politics. To do this we need to prove that a real woman is not a ward of the state or a hyperactive feral cat. A real woman is willing to lead, serve and step aside when warranted.

The nature of the tea party movement is from the ground up! Sarah will not make this about her. She sees the bigger picture. I believe that she is willing to cast a vision and find the best people to bring our country back to life.

The state of political discourse in our country has become polarized to the point where if we don’t fully embrace the inherent contradictions in avoiding the media scrutiny and attacking their hegemony on their terms we will lose this generation. If we do not nominate and elect Sarah Palin in 2012 she will fade away.  She is electable because she doesn’t fit the mold.

Now is our chance to support Sarah Palin.  If we do not nominate her we will have missed what may be the greatest opportunity to turn back the tide of statism in the 21^st century.

(Simi Valley, CA) — The first debate between 2012 Republican presidential hopefuls will be held May 2nd at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and Museum in Simi Valley.

Library officials made the announcement this week after consulting with national Republican leaders to finalize a date.

The library earlier announced that, like in the 2008 presidential election cycle, it planned to host two GOP presidential debates leading up to the 2012 election.

The Reagan Presidential Foundation said it still plans to host a second debate on the eve of the Super Tuesday primaries in March 2012, but for now, no firm date has been set for that occasion.

I view the recent Gallop poll as a deliniation between the Final Four Presidential prospects and the rest of the pack.  I don’t consider it predictive of real support or electoral success, it’s too early to consider the next stage.  Too many things can and will change.  But I think that at this point in the pre-primary run-up (isn’t that a perfect 24-hour news cycle phrase) we can separate the pretenders from the contenders.

The chief prospects worth of consideration regardless of their decision to run as of today are: Huckabee, Romney, Palin and Gingrich.

Everyone else is playing games.  As much as I like what some of the pretenders are saying they will not emerge in the end.  Sure we could have Bachmann or Paul muddy the waters, and I’d appreciate their role in holding the Party’s feet to the fire, however our candidate will come from these Final Four.  I guarantee it.

Look at the past nomination races and there are really no surprises.  In reverse order – McCain (in open field he didn’t give up), Bush (top Governor with strong name against incumbent VP Gore), Dole (stoic patriot who was part of the beltway machine and a sacrificial lamb), Bush I (incumbent VP strong Nat. Def. and steady hand), Reagan (transformational leader who diligently worked his way into the conversation).

I say thank God that we will not have a Bob Dole or John McCain in the field.  These men were insiders, waiting their turn, serving in Congress as presumptive candidates with honorable war hero records but they lost their taste for modern media-based battles.  Say what you will about this narrowed field, but do it on another post.  What I want to discuss is another route to a President/VP ticket.

The super ticket (or manufactured/partnership ticket) is a theme that reemerges every year.

Please look at these 4 candidates: Huckabee, Romney, Palin and Gingrich.  And describe what a joint ticket would look like – the benefits of two of the Final Four working together.  Who would be on top?  Uh, you know what I mean, who is the Presidential candidate and Vice-Presidential candidate.  How one may compliment the other and most importantly the reasoning behind your endorsement of the executive experience and presidential potential of each.

My Proposal: Palin : Gingrich.  The transformational charismatic leader and the intellectual policy wonk.

Palin is hands-down the best Presidential candidate and the lamestream media knows it.  Her last 2+ years have prepared her to take on the rigor of scrutiny and speak intelligently about the issues of our time.  Sarah has picked her spots and scored touchdowns with direct attacks on Obama and the liberal infestation.  She made a brilliant decision to avoid getting bogged down in Alaskan politics while parleying her notoriety into national prominence.  The fact that she is a strong Christian gun toting woman gives her the trifecta of positions – she is evangelical (a must-have in the Republican party), middle american (will play well in the Midwest and blue collar states) and female (she will execute personal appeals that will peel away the women vote from democrats who foolishly play identity politics).  In essence Palin draws out the hypocrisy of the media and our population.  This is the key to victory: Sarah will pull no punches and offer America a path to redemption.

No one could work the hill like Newt Gingrich.  He wants power and influence but would need to be convinced to take a back seat.  If and when he realizes that the only way to regain a position at the table is by working with Palin he will be truly formidable.  Newt needs to see that he has a significant role to play – part Queen maker, part Knight of the first order.  He can defend the position of fiscal discipline and articulate the philosophical underpinnings of Constitutional Republicanism.  I believe that one of the most powerful speeches and endorsement that can be made to unite the divergent social and fiscal conservatives is Sarah Palin stating “Newt screwed up personally.  He knows it.  We all make mistakes.  But he owned his mistakes and has made it right.  He talked to me about marriage and divorce and the fact that he has asked for forgiveness from individuals and God.  Thank God for his son Jesus Christ, whose blood covers all of our sins.”  I’m telling you a speech that included that would send the media and fake conservatives through the roof!  And if the agnostic libertarian crowd get past their aversion to God and accept that Biblical morality is a large part of our cultural heritage it would clear the air and rally the troops like nothing else.  Then our focus would be cleanly on Obama and nothing else.

Do you have a better idea?  What’s your Super Ticket from the Final Four?  Tell me.

I feel like watching Braveheart again.  When William Wallace reaches out to Edward the Bruce, “Unite the clans! Unite us!”  Right now the Republicans have waring factions that face a much greater menace.  We know that we agree about more than we disagree.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Sa_OQgWiPA

Unite Us!  Join Sarah!  One man who says “right” and will follow the warrior – one man who will not stab her in the back.  One man who is truly honorable.  Now is the time.  Without joining Sarah you may advance your career but you will have sacrificed the freedom of all Americans to do so.  Mitt, Huck, Newt – who will it be.

Consider the following article by Joel Brinkley, published Sunday, April 25, 2010:

This month, federal auditors published a study on “efforts to quantify the economic effects of counterfeit and pirated goods.” Over 36 single-spaced pages, the Government Accountability Office demonstrated that it’s impossible to know how much money is lost, how many jobs are eliminated, how much economic damage piracy actually causes.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/sundayarchive/s_677886.html

What are the implications of a large, powerful, expansive country that conducts orchestrated attacks via economic means on its largest trading partner? It would seem a precursor to war. And yet, that same nation supplements its crippled foe with trillions of its own currency designed keep afloat a sinking ship. Prolonging the agony of a beaten man is cruel punishment. See Anderson Silva vs. Demian Maia. China is moving in for the knockout.

All of that raises the question: How many diplomatic, political and commercial affronts is the rest of the world expected to accept from China before deciding that it is simply a renegade state?

There is a term for this: Hush money - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia which describes a criminal enterprise built on bribery. I’m sure you are familiar with the mafia-mentality and these tactics.

What is the solution to bribery? There is only one. Expose it. Refuse the play the game and expose the lie for what it is. Demonstrate power while you still have it because the lie is predicated on the illusion of weakness in the opponents mind. As long as you still have leverage you may use it. Once you are compromised there is no going back. Checkmate is only a matter of moves.

China is paying the US government hush money to shut up and allow US private industry to be destroyed. This is not a matter of individuals downloading music. This is state sponsored piracy the kind that was Casus belli 200 years ago. See First Barbary War – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Will we continue to go along to get along?

Good job Joe Wilson, thank you for shouting our sentiments. ‘YOU LIE!’ You are right… Now what were you doing in the room?

Why did the Republicans even show up for the Obama Speech to a Captive Audience last night?

I would have much rather seen an empty side than pretend that this Health Care push is legitimate. Sometimes silence is deafening and in our absence the presence of our disdain would be made known. We have to stop playing their game by their rules.

Politicos will point out that there are ramifications for not attending a state address.  When the almighty President Obama calls you on the carpet you better cower in fear.  The congress would exert it’s pressure as a body on those that abstained from this spectacle.  And more subtly, many in our congress just couldn’t possibly pass up free food and airtime.  It’s not politically feasible.

Of course it is.  You are men and women of principal.  At least some are, and a few can act like it.

Likewise, if you live by polls you die by polls.

You need to change your mentality when it comes to how you view the national polls even from “reputable sources” such as Rassmussen.  Daily Presidential Tracking Poll - Rasmussen Reports™ We can cheer the 53% disapproval of government run health care. However I never put stock in polls and will not pretend that these agencies are credible. Even looking at the internals, while these organizations claim a statistically accurate sample size the polls to not accurately reflect the population as a whole.  ”Data for this daily update is collected via nightly telephone surveys and reported on a three-day rolling average basis.”  This sample is skewed toward the elderly and the heavily influenced by MSM.

Don’t ever get sucked into claiming that the American Public has turned against Obama solely based on polls, quoting agencies that will turn on us in a moment. Maintain a critical eye and strong voice of opposition to all forms of State Controlled Media products!

Arthur C. Brooks, a professor at Syracuse University, published “Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism.” The surprise is that liberals are markedly less charitable than conservatives.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html

I can’t go on right now…

For all the talk about the distortions that will take place in the system, from hospitals and doctors to patient care and death-treatment… who among us will not be assimilated into the great collective of Obama-care?

I for one know that when I negotiate I always work from a position of strength (relative to my bargaining power).  Sun Tzu said (paraphrase) “Do not start a battle you are unwilling or unable to finish.”  Are you or I going to opt-out of this Socialized Medical Plan, when we have no other options?  I can’t see that happening. Honestly, this is going to come faster and more furiously that you or I can imagine.  Right now the Democrats are holding their breath, knowing that the Blue Dogs and RINOs will roll (as part of the machine) and the plan will be enacted.  Then in a fury unseen in American domestic policy the Obama Administration will destroy our existing Health Care system with brutal efficiency.  These are lifelong bureaucrats we are talking about.  While the may be unskilled in the art of creation, destruction is another story…

In the end that I call Inordinate Pricing Distribution will take place.  The masses will be force into a low-income, low-provision plan while our superiors in Government and their Corporate Lapdogs will have an add-on to the economic model, the outside pricing that will actually be less costly relative to their income and expenses…  Think about it.  A doctor, general practice, is going to be forced to earn 125K/yr.  (or some such number).  Any additional fees they collect will have to be outside of the system (paid for by the few that govern the billions).  These fees will be relatively nominal to high income high net worth individuals and entities.  The fees are still outside our ability to pay but not overwhelming to the rich considering that the doctors are essentially charging for bonuses.  Think about this twisted interlocking directorate of unfree market activity and ill negotiated power.

]]> http://www.redstate.com/archtriumph/2009/08/09/never-negotiate-in-weakness-the-inordinate-pricing-distribution/feed/ 0 http://www.redstate.com/archtriumph/2009/07/25/lets-talk-about-race-gates-obama-and-keyes/ http://www.redstate.com/archtriumph/2009/07/25/lets-talk-about-race-gates-obama-and-keyes/#comments Sat, 25 Jul 2009 13:25:37 +0000 ArchTriumph (Diary) http://www.redstate.com/archtriumph/?p=61 Read More »]]> Racism has reared its ugly head once again, haunting America as if from the great beyond.

At least that is what El Presidente Barak (sp) Obama would have us believe. I for one don’t buy it. Prejudice has always existed in one form or another in every geographic area throughout history. To imply that America is unique in our relationship to intramural fighting among groups is folly.

To call a police officer “stupid” before knowing the facts of the case is a pot-kettle case-study.

However considering that the Health Care Reform Bill is off the table, why not tie up the El Duce with a defensive position around his misspoken “un-calibrated” words. (Don’t you just love how Obama can sound smart even while being the opposite – he epitomizes a talent I’ve seen on display many times). Then again, it could be a case of the magicians movements – never underestimate the realpolitik mentality of these folks. In many ways Obama would rather have us talk about race relations and even his tussle and making nice with the Sergeant Crowley than pay attention to the ramrod of the Socialized Medicine Universal State-run Health Care bill. Obama would rather talk about race himself.

Let’s talk about Race.

Alan Keyes is one of the most outspoken men of any colored skin, he addresses the core psychological issues involved in this episode.

Which ‘ism’ on display at Harvard arrest?
Friday July 24, 2009 by Alan Keyes — Though now scrubbed from the Boston Globe website where it was originally posted, what appears to be a .pdf copy of the incident report (#9005127) filed by the officer involved in the arrest of Harvard professor Henry Gates.

To which I would add, the real –ism we see on display here is liberalism. Cambridge is nearly homogonously liberal, and Gates was merely exercising his right to be belligerent without recourse. These actions are the practical out workings of years of his believing what he had been teaching. He is a professor of African American Studies who found the incident an opportunity to vent his frustrations with being a very well paid blow hard at one of the most historically (if no longer) significant institutions of higher education in the world.

However let’s turn the microscope on ourselves, in keeping with good analysis.

What does Alan Keyes recent campaigns for the president (2000,2008) tell us about Conservatism?

How has his experience in politics demonstrated the distance between Conservative principals and the Republican Party?

Why has he been summarily dismissed by the Republican Party elites?

Is there another deeper issue here besides simply getting money and votes?

Are we racist because we did not nominate Alan Keyes to run for president?

Are we (the grassroots and the elite together) so practical to recognize that George W. Bush was the better candidate in 2000?

What would have moved Alan Keyes to the forefront in 2008?  (At 59 years old he is at his presidential prime).

Or, are we not racist because we did not nominate Alan Keys and instead sought the best candidate regardless of race?

Something tells me those in our party who claim moderate positions couldn’t stomach a strong conservative because he was black. These interlopers once again demonstrate the liberalism that infests our political system within Democrats and Republicans from Gates to Obama – “do unto others what you would not have done to you.” I would not call this the Black Rule – but the Dross Rule will do.

Keyes is an example of a Conservative who could have vehemently pointed out racial hypocrisy from a large stage and rallies intellectually astute and morally zealous patriots to the cause of freedom and justice. Instead enough of us balk at the fact that here is a black man who won’t back down from a fight and distinguishes wrong from right. If nothing else, the opportunity to have Alan Keyes hold many of our spineless elected officials feet to the fire was missed.

Gates-Obama fiasco highlights how even in nonsequitor double speak liberals love talking about race mainly because we have not taken the issue away from them with strong traditional hands like Keyes.

At first it is apparent that religion consists of laws, rules for behavior. For those of you who would like to explore the difference between religion about God and a relationship with God – this is not the space. A worshipful person will obey God’s laws because of love and even duty rather than fear or strictly obligation. I’m simply considering firstly, that religion as a historical and social phenomenon is tied closely with restrictions on people’s behaviors.

There is a separate and highly important issue of authority, however if we generalize the effect of religion it tends toward limits and boundaries.

Functionally, how is this different that modern secular law?

It is not.

Past ages had judges who applied the cultural law, a codified expression of morality. Interestingly enough rather than considering geographic or ethnic differences if we look to similarities we see a consistent pattern emerge. No culture encourages cowardice, as C.S. Lewis points out in his moral argument. Also, most cultures write laws which punish theft, murder and lying – even if they in practice endorse these morally reprehensible actions.

These judges normally came from the ranks of priests and religious men. Their judgment was seen as an extension of their understanding of the supernatural, and their adherence to it, at least in the eyes of other men, made them qualified to issues their rulings.

This patterns holds true in many countries in the world, the case of Imams who sit in the highest court.

Why has the united states secularized the law to the point where soulless J.D.s are running our system of courts with their only qualification that they can sit through hours of mindless drivel and recall mountains of useless trivia? Have we gotten to specialized in our legal education to the point of irradiating common sense let alone a higher purpose? Who is it suggesting that we abandon the standards of law for empathy? Instead lets combine a healthy respect for truth and God with a understanding not only of the law itself but it’s meaning.

Thinking recently about these torture memos and something doesn’t smell right, and it’s not the stench coming from Eric Holders office. I’m thinking about the Senators and Congressmen sanctimoniously sitting in their leather chairs smiling pitilessly at reporters and cameras and witnesses. They are twisted individuals; we must understand this about our elected representatives.

Politicians have a bad reputation for a reason, many are hard core liars — and those are the one’s with integrity. But, seriously – it is rare to have a statesman or stateswoman who is consistent, especially when it comes to matters of character and truth telling. Who was the last statesman you can remember? This just might be a function of our politicians coming from the ranks of lawyers. No offense to lawyers but most of them are training to lie as a matter of course.

This is our standard MO, getting around the truth through spin. What is it that Bush and Cheney are unwilling to say? Bush obviously will not soil his already beaten and bloodied reputation because he will let history judge his record. Cheney on the other hand has nothing to loose, and is willing to say what is necessary, go on the offensive offensive. Yet, I get the impression that Cheney is wining the battle of words because he is framing the argument in terms he can use and in a way he can win.

What about John Yu, why doesn’t he speak up? Really, he could get a WSJ op-ed in a heart beat. Why doesn’t he go on the offensive? Is it because he knows that even though he is a lawyer he’s not the skilled liar he would need to be in order to prevent state secrets from being leaked. Or, does he believe that in order to make his case he would need to draw on certain facts that are classified, top secret.

To tie a not on this idea – consider Nancy Pelosi (I know it hurts, but try it…)

The arrogance of someone who believes they can stare you in the face and lie, because they know more than you and hold their cards and bluff their way through any and every conversation, because they control the questions they are asked. Or at least they want to control the conversation and they seem to get a bit agitated when they can not control a conversation.

So what did she know? What exact are AIT? I mean the full gamut of Advanced Interogation Techniques.

EIT – Enhanced Interogation Techniques.

Magic is redirection, making people believe one thing while another is happening behind the scenes. It is a matter of mis-definition and framing, if you define a word or an event for someone you can convince them to follow you down any path. We’ve bought the notion that water boarding is an EIT. While it may be part of interrogation it does not strike me as extraordinarily advanced.

Consider, if you speculate and let your mind wander what are the conditions and goals for torture. Let’s go back to basics, the goal of interrogation is the extraction of information, from unwilling subjects using some form of leverage to brake off resistance and create an opening through which reliable and accurate data can flow. We know more about torture from movies like Mission Impossible and shows like 24. Now think about what these speculations tell us about torture and what we are capable of. Technology has allowed us to plumb the depth of human pain and as much of the mind as we can currently comprehend.

MIght EIT really be monitoring psychosomatic stimuli and response, directly inducing pain and disorientation in a nondescript untraceable fashion through the altercation of time lines to the point where the subject would have no other hope that this would cease and desist, no other option but to talk – and even to tell the truth?

Does that sound like something no one would want to talk about?

These dopes in the AP seem to think that by Obama taking decisive action against these terrorists (whether or not that’s what he calls them) they are going to be more aggressive.  Are they brain dead?  Okay we know the answer is functionally yes.  Let me rephrase: how brain dead are they?  These people are imbecilic; we need to ban assault writing devices, input devices and communication transmission devices.  Computers are dangerous in the hands of these idiots. 

When armed men are high jacking ships off of their native coast trust me – the stakes are about as high as they can go.  They were not out for a midnight float and randomly decided to take this boat.  These men premeditated the capture of this ship.  They have little to live for and obviously died for the money they thought they could extort.  The stakes are HIGH.  On a scale of 1-10, I’d rate the stakes a 10 for the men involved.  Trust me the stakes could not be much higher for Captain Phillips.  Yes, his family could have been threatened, but how is killing him not threatening his family?  AP, you do realize that if he dies his wife is widowed and children orphaned, don’t you? 

We live in world with such an impotent and emasculated press that any show of force is seen as escalation.  It is reported as the least desired outcome.  I want bad guys to get whacked by our Navy SEALs.  The more the better.  Anyone who is dumb enough to directly confront our armed forces (by extension of those they protect) deserves to die.  Is that hard to understand?

Would someone please smack some sense into these dolts?  And, yes smack them nicely so that the stakes don’t get out of hand.

NEWSPAPER REVITALIZATION ACT: CONGRESS MOVES TO SAVE PRINT; OUTLAW POLITICAL ENDORSEMENTS…

Cardin’s Newspaper Revitalization Act would allow newspapers to operate as nonprofits for educational purposes under the U.S. tax code, giving them a similar status to public broadcasting companies.

Under this arrangement, newspapers would still be free to report on all issues, including political campaigns. But they would be prohibited from making political endorsements.

We, the Redstate…  I’ve always disliked the fact that the Press used to flip the map colors of Red and Blue between elections but in 2000 the Republicans became permanently the color of communism – a coincidence, I don’t believe in them.  We, the Redstate are an insurgent movement now.  In many ways this is a better position for us because it opens the door to take risks and relies more heavily on independent thought and action.  As the opposition to the incumbent and soon to be entrenched Party superstructure we now have the opprotunity to act as the statists did to acquire this power.

We must look to use the litigation driven Saul Alinsky-type activism to combat these abuses of power.  These methods while desetable to our senses are modern suburban terrorism in democratic republics.  The rules of engagdement dictate that we must turn the tools of our demise into the weapons of our reassertion.

When we consider this bill it presents a tax shelter for newspapers not unlike religious institutions.  Our churches are under watch and survailence by the Left.  Many churches and pastors fear for their existance because of the threat of leagal ramifications for speaking the truth.  While I have my position on the degree of faith and committment one demonstrates when they are willing to take on the leadership of a church but will not speak out on crucial issues being kowed into submission to the beuracratic behemouth this fear is our present reality.

Therefore I propose using the laws, interpretations of law, case law in place and public awareness and response to put unbearable pressure on these cross-bred Naga (man-snake).

The key is for the people who want their pound of flesh to have a ounce of patience.  We need to think like a detective and a prosecutor building a case.  One offense, an article or opinion that clearly endorses a political canidate is one piece of evidence.  But we are building a case and will have a stronger one if we keep our powder dry and gain a proponderence of evidence.  This is done by collecting many articles in addition to patterns of ad acceptance and rejection, donations by these corporations, events attended by writters and executives and many other aspects of newspapers explicit and implicit political activities.  There will be numberous subsections of law that we need to explore and understand to make our case airtight and stick.

Now, I say all this with the understanding that this bill probably won’t see the light of day.  However, if it does – we need to be ready.  To those who think that using the legal system to beat liberals is like fighting fire with fire – it is.  And that’s why it works.  We need to burn out the incendiary underbrush in order to frame in the wildfire these political arsonist have unleashed.  Get on board or abandon ship!

1. The job is catching up to him.  His teleprompter was having an off day – Obama was stumbling through his opening remarks.  His eyes look more shadowed, the glimer and glint are gone.
2. His references to Bush (or the Bushes’) gave me a perspective on the job of president.  I picture GWB sitting around with his staff (Rove, Rummy, Chaney, Condi and many others) thinking and talking through what is the areas where he has the greatest opprotunity for long term positive impact.
3. Essentially, I see GWB saying (post 9/11) our national security is job one.  Everything is subserviant to that.  Getting re-elected as president is a strong political and professional accomplishment in and of itself.  Rove did his job, keeping his boss employed.  Yes, we the voters got played by a team of governers that were much less ideologically pure than we were lead to believe – what’s new!?
4. GWB realized that the structrual deficent that Obama referenced multiple times was beyond the scope of his adminstration.  This is a reliving moment of understanding for him.  Obama now realizes the problems he faces will take a political toll on him.  Even if the Party benefits from statist control grabs Obama will have to answer for it’s largess.  The problems with our aging population and massive entitlement including Social Security (which he didn’t mention) and Medi-Care/Aide.
5. Obama is cold.  Nothing in his response to Wayne’s “tent children question” to Vetran’s concerns and citizens sacrifices gave me any sense that he could give a rat’s rearend about them.  The dude is Ice Man – Jack Frost – Frosty the Snowman… Santa’s Number 1 Elf.

That’s enough for now.  I’ve got some Golden Oreo’s to eat… Thanks Senor Barack for taking over my TV:

What are you going to take over next?

There is enough blame to go around concerning our “financial crisis”. While the efficient (or inefficient) cause of this collapse is expressly government the material causes reverberate throughout the business class and all corporations. I’ve criticized Congress and its circus of clowns, idiots and bearded women, the regulations and bureaucracies that impose mod squad-rule, along with LBJ, WJC, GHWB, GWB and now BHO until I’m blue (State) in the face. It does nothing to address the systematic disease within our economic system.

Is this the end of America? Is answered by Terence Corcoran with a qualified and hopeful no.

One test of whether we are witnessing the end of America is how many more times Americans put up with congressional show trials of individual business people and their employees, slandering and vilifying them for their actions and motives. And for how long will they tolerate a President who berates business and corporations as dens of crime and malfeasance? If the majority of Americans come to accept the caricatures of business as true, then America is closer to the end of its life as a global leader, as a champion of markets and individualism.\

No one is clean and pure as the wind driven snow. If only business were able to distinguish itself from government in some significant fashion. As far as I am concerned our economy has slowly been co-opted by the State. While we were battling for the soul of our country her arms and legs were severed. Our large business superstructure is as corrupt, if not more so as the government leach who sucks the life out of our marketplace. There is no difference between parasite and host at this stage.

When Obama and so many others dip into the troth of populism they draw on our national pastime – a critical eye on power brokers and elites. By spinning a lie with some truth they can construct further disillusion with our managed economy. Ingratiating themselves with the masses they address inequity with further slanted and disproportionate responses that drive us further into the lap of the mega state. Leviathan is right around the corner…

It was the keepers of the shop that accepted the extortion of the street thugs instead of fighting back who are ALSO responsible for our present demise. Haven’t you seen this pattern repeated throughout history?

I’m sure each of you had similar experiences, unless you are holed up in some enclave of patriotism.  A few of my friends were taken in by Obama’s rhetoric and the MSM’s fawning coverage of his campaign.  A couple came around thankfully.  But I got to the point of shrugging my shoulders in disgust when discussing the 2008 Presidential Campaign with the dense fence of pseudo- intellectualism that personified the clueless supporters of the Messiah. 

Their reasons for support were always convoluted and circular.  And at this point I’ve decided not to pursue further debate with them, mainly because my seething anger might rear its ugly head and destroy any future dialog.  Honestly there may be little future dialog to be had anyway – I refuse to be PC’d into acquiescence and made my strong views known time and time again.  More to the point, there is no convincing or persuading these sycophants.  Why bother in an exercise in futility. 

Instead I hope that they hit “Rock Bottom.”  Like any addict or criminal only when you stop the charade and want to change does the light of day shine into your life.  Or you have to be caught in your lies. 

So I hope that reality will set in.  With each passing day I pray that somehow these men and women will realize what they have done to this country.  Is it too much to ask that Obama’s over reaching creative destruction of this country will result in rubble landing on the heads of my friends?  Might some wake up with a glimpse into the future dystopia that is being wrought before our eyes?  Unfortunately I fear that the barriers to truth are too great. 

They don’t get any disconfirming evidence outside of their sphere of liberalism.  They are functionally wedded to the agenda of liberalism.  What do they say about a liberal that is mugged…?  I can only hope that enough muggers are still around after all the tax payers money is redistributed to the homeless, downtrodden and marginalized of society.