Showing posts with label Demagoguery. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Demagoguery. Show all posts

2020-12-04

The Coming Environmental Disaster




For about 10 months now we have been watching public officials openly flip and flop and prevaricate with little or no shame. From locations as diverse as French laundromats, they have violated their own diktats with reckless disregard. Their actions have resulted in great damage to the economy and brought about the failure of countless businesses. All of this has been dismissed as collateral damage and the regrettable - albeit, unavoidable - side effects of fighting a pandemic. All the while, these open hypocrites have been poo-pooing the damage done by their meddling while acting as though the entire edifice of science supports their every whim. They turn an ounce of truth into a pound of overreaching cure. If you didn't think demagoguery could bring us this far, well now you have learned what the founding documents sought to push against.


Enter climate change. Do you think that, given what these demagogic prevaricating pols have learned thus far, that there will be any restraint to imposing draconian solutions while cloaked in the liturgical vestments of climate change? Even the IPCC acknowledges that if the most oppressive Kyoto-cap and trade-Paris solutions are implemented, only negligible reductions in greenhouse gases will result. But it comes at the cost of devastating economies - which will lead to far greater environmental damage.

But who will win in such an Orwellian power grab? Not the individual or small business but rather large corporations and the wealthy. Just as with covid, the ruling class doesn't care how much damage is done to your livelihood, the poor, minorities, the sick, or whoever as they, with religious fervor, spool up legitimate issues into apocalyptic catastrophes that only they can fix. And oddly, the only fix is more government control and power for them.

If you don't think we are going to see this dress rehearsal replayed over the next four years with John Kerry and his lackeys shame-fucking each and every one of you that dares to ask a question, you are either rooting for statism or you are unquestioningly naive. 

2015-12-08

Ameriphobia A Hate Crime?



Since many of the mass murders seem to be motivated by Ameri-phobia and the hatred of a particular culture, why aren't they considered hate crimes?

2015-12-02

It Wasn't A Disgruntled Movie Critic?


Benghazi was first dismissed as a movie review gone bad. Then it took years for her to finally admit that the murders and invasion of an embassy wasn't just the thoughtful outrage of dissatisfied movie buffs. And then she brushed it all under the rug by asking, "What difference, at this point, does it make?”

With the Colorado Springs shooting, she tweets at 3:36 PM, 1 hr and 16 mins before the shooter was even taken into custody, that "Today and every day, we #StandWithPP." How did she so quickly divine the motives of this shooter? And why didn't she first assume that he was an angry movie critic?

2015-07-07

Who Are The Neanderthal Bigots?


It really isn't about a black man's way of thinking or a Latina woman's perspective, it is about who is a leftist. More on this here.
The left isn't really interested in women's advancement, they are interested in leftist women's advancement. The left isn't really interested in black's advancement, they are interested in leftist black's advancement. The left isn't really interested in homosexual's advancement, they are interested in leftist homosexual's advancement. This is why any of these groups and others on the right are mocked and ridiculed by the left. This is why the left feels comfortable mocking and making racist comments about blacks such as Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Shelby Steele, JC Watts, Juan Williams, Clarence Thomas. (Juan Williams being a particularly pertinent example since he is a man of the left.) Similarly, leftists feel no guilt or shame about their own sexist impulses when they dismiss the woman of the right, or their homophobic comments about right leaning gays, or any other group they claim to care about when it deviates from the leftist mantra.

...the left is not interested in intellect per se, but is interested in leftist intellectuals.

The most vile, sexist and racist epithets are hurled at anyone on the right no matter what their educational pedigree is. Feminism, racial sensitivity, decency, nuance and any number of other concerns are kicked to the curb when leftism is jilted.

Anything can be said about those on the right. And leftists can be as sexist, homophobic, racist, bigoted, mean-spirited and repugnant as they want. They claim to be none of it while doing all of it.

Jonah Goldberg's article deals with the inanity of the racial aspects of this double standard.

2014-09-14

War on Language


"We’re engaged in a major counterterrorism operation,” he told CBS, “and it’s going to be a long-term counterterrorism operation."

Pop quiz: who uttered that quote?

    A) George W. Bush
    B) Dick Cheney
    C) Don Rumsfeld
    D) John Kerry.

Time's up. The answer is D. So, had the Bush administration prevaricated and equivocated, er, I mean, been more careful about the words chosen to describe the goings on - and the press let him get away with it - everything would have somehow been better?

And, as Jonah notes, it is a bit odd that an administration that has no trouble identifying domestic issues as a war on women, war against the poor, war on science, war on reproductive rights, war against the middle class, war on unions, race war - just to name a few - is squeamish about identifying sustained drone attacks, bombing and coordinated ground offensives as war.

So we can be comforted. As Asawin Suebsaeng informs:
According to Secretary of State John Kerry, President Obama’s newly announced (and possibly illegal) war on ISIS in Iraq and Syria is not a war at all—it’s merely a large-scale act of counterterrorism.

2014-08-13

Obama v Obama

              [Click image to enlarge]

In 2011, President Obama had this to say:
After taking office, I announced a new strategy that would end our combat mission in Iraq and remove all of our troops by the end of 2011. So today, I can report that, as promised, the rest of our troops in Iraq will come home by the end of the year.

And in 2012 his own Twitter post was pretty braggadocios about his involvement:


But now he is perplexed about how this all transpired:
What I just find interesting is the degree to which this issue keeps on coming up, as if this was my decision.

This video shows how he hasn't been entirely clear over the years about whether he has had anything at all to do with ending American involvement in Iraq:




As Jonah Goldberg notes:
It’s only now that the downside critics warned about for years is materializing that he suddenly feels the need to explain the invisible asterisk he put on all of his statements. It reminds me of the years he spent going around telling everyone they can keep their health plan if they want.

None of this was too difficult to decipher. This thought about leaving from 2011. One wonders if he will disavow the Afghanistan drawdowns too.

2014-07-15

On The Border



Granted, this is pretty rich humor. But it could have been so much better if hordes of Central American chiquillos were running past in the background. And if he could have knocked a laptop off the lectern while gesticulating so that the hard drive popped out and shattered followed by a dryly delivered, "Oh. I guess those emails have been lost too.", that would have been icing on the cake. That would have been comedy gold. But I'll give him props for a straight delivery.

There is no way in hell this issue will be resolved before election day. This is political manna from heaven. Anybody who does anything other than coddle and suckle these poor children will be painted as not just a racist (because expecting people to obey the law is inherently racist), but a horrible, heartless sub-human who hates children and wants to feed them to the wolves or catapult them into a fiery furnace. Its one thing to want to deport adults or push granny and her wheelchair over a cliff. But to want to drive busloads of children into the river or turn them over to drug lords - who just happen to be armed with some pretty sweet US supplied toasters? Oh the humanity.

If the buses weren't bought and paid for by Reid and his friends, they should have been, because this is political genius. When faced with answering for spying on the press, the Bergdahl-Gitmo house cleaning, the law is whatever I say it is, murder for movies, the VA crap care is what you can expect for all, "if you like your healthcare plan, you can keep it", IRS thuggery, the mysterious hard drive massacre - just to name a few - its just a lot easier to say that your opponents want to deport these dear, innocent, little lambs. The choice is pretty simple - those other guys just hate brown children.

That and another October surprise that shuts down your favorite park, museum or fishing hole, and this could turn out to be a pretty good year for Harry's friends.

Saving the kiddos FTW.

2014-07-12

Democratic Sophism

Democrats are good at wording things in the worst possible light to paint their opponents as dark-hearted haters who are racist, sexist and homophobic to boot.  The headline below is just such an example:


The story in HuffPo.

Of course this all assumes that the economy is static and not dynamic.  But couldn't a similar headline have been written for Obamacare:


Source: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/341589/gao-report-obamacare-adds-62-trillion-long-term-deficit-andrew-stiles