My Generation is complex...

Normally I could care less about Red Star (Star Tribune) editorials. But the"Talkin bout 'my' generation by Alexandra Petri really got me going... below is the editorial in full, below that will be my response.

Millennials don't go to rallies. ¶ Sign petitions? Please. ¶ Once we were in a protest, but only because we had to walk through it to get to a Lady Gaga concert. March for a cause? Only if "march" means "walk in a determined fashion" and "cause" means "to buy that new frozen yogurt that is so popular these days." Call us Generation I. I for irony, iPhones and the Internet. I for instant gratification. I for idiosyncratic, inventive, impertinent. We're all these things, and so are our idols -- the Onion, "The Colbert Report," "The Daily Show."

That's why we're pouring onto the Mall on Saturday to celebrate the restoration of all things sane, sarcastic and Stewart. Recently, pundit Charles Murray accused us of being part of the "New Elite." Yet what binds us is not a common experience or similar genetic stock, as he claimed, but our mind-set -- a staunch and unstinting refusal to take anything seriously.

It's not that Millennials don't believe some things are serious. We'll make It Gets Better videos or perform comedy for disaster relief. But sum up our lives in a phrase? The Importance of Never Being Too Earnest. We know what happens to people who take themselves seriously. They become bent and broken with care and develop arterial plaque. Sometimes they're elected to political office. "In America, any boy may become president," Adlai Stevenson noted. "And I suppose it's just one of the risks he takes." We don't like the sound of that. Forget the years in which people in sweater-sets earnestly pushed toward the front of the class. These days, the whole class wants to sit in the back row and lob spitballs. After someone discovered the mystical secret of doing things ironically, we felt a great weight lift from our shoulders. Now, we dwell in thickets of inverted commas. Want us to come to a rally? Better make it a "rally." Want us to testify before Congress? Only if we can do it in character. Someone more cynical than I might say our salient characteristic can be reduced to an overwhelming desire to avoid looking silly. But there's more to it than that.

As a Millennial, my greatest fear is that someday I might accidentally say something that offends someone. I am so aware of this that the only group I feel safe writing vaguely offensive generalizations about is illiterate people. (If you are reading this aloud to an illiterate friend, please, stop two sentences ago!) That's the unforgivable sin in our book. Affairs? We'll cope. Addictions? Sure. But say something earnestly racist, homophobic or misogynistic, and watch everyone's affection evaporate. "I'm just quoting Mel Gibson," you scream. But it's too late. Throw quotations around it, however, and everyone heaves a sigh of relief. That's how satire has risen to the top of the food chain. Millennials give comics the kind of adulation past generations reserved for musicians. We respect Lady Gaga. But we'll travel hundreds of miles to touch the hem of Jon Stewart's robe. That's why my demographic is coming, en masse, to Washington for the Stewart-Colbert rally. More than 200,000 have RSVP'd on Facebook (almost as many as have registered to vote). You may have heard a Millennial say, "Ah, I'm not voting this year." But have you ever heard one say, "That Jon Stewart guy is not funny at all"? Never. The Earth might explode! Woodstock didn't define a generation because everyone showed up or those who did were a perfectly representative sample. It defined a generation because, for a few days, it bottled its peculiar zeitgeist.

To Generation I, for whom life exists so we can put as many things as possible in quotes, this "rally" is the closest we will ever get to a love-in. It's a "like-in." For Millennials -- wearing properly supportive bras, which they will not burn, and carrying reasonable signs -- it's the ultimate antiprotest. Still, there's a nervous frisson of truthiness behind all this. The Post recently quoted a media professor saying of Stewart, "He's a progressive, but his bias is towards reasonableness." When it comes to opinions, that's about as far as any of us can go. We're clinging to our satire as we've heard some people cling to their guns and religion. The problem is that great ages of satire are seldom great ages of, well, anything else.

Ok wow where to begin...

I am stuck with my millenial generation whether or not I like it. I look at my generation the way I imagine people growing up in the 1960's looked at the idiots going to Woodstock and thinking, wait these people are going to be involved in running this country 10 or 20 years from now?! Were DOOMED! But they "normalized" and became part of society but will we? I am not convinced that some of my generation will, they care too much about reality tv, celebrities and who they are screwing and why, and Facebook (I say this as a Facebook addict since 2005 myself).
I am proud to say that I went to Tea Party rallies back in April 2009 and 2010. No, I didn't dress up in colonial garb but I did feel refreshed that some people on the right side of the political spectrum finally cared enough to show up and voice their concerns. I was very discouraged after the 2008 elections. "Hope and Change" "Yes we Can!" I never bought any of that shit. I actually listened to what Obama was saying and who he hung out with (Billy Ayers and Rev. Wright) because I remember the old Chinese proverb: you can tell the character of a man by the company he keeps. And the company he kept didn't concern me, it scared the ever living shit out of me. But debating with kids my age was useless. They just didn't care, and they still don't which is frieghtening. Obama and company are selling, or should I say spending, our futures in some deluded Keynesian fantasyland to get us out of the recession we now see us in.
As a Millenial my greatest fear is not offending someone. I have been called a racist, homophobe, intolerant, etc, so many times that the words have lost all meaning to me. They are thrown around by the Left so much that anyone called that just laughs in thier faces now, because they cannot debate which is sad. I love debating and even when it gets heated I still get enjoyment out of it. My concern is is that by the time my generation wakes up to what is going on it will be too late. College graduates are having trouble finding jobs because they are applying along with millions of laid off workers that have experience. Unemployment among 16-24 year olds was at 19.1% and that was in July! No wonder a lot of kids are moving back home after they graduate. The one good thing I can say is that at least were not France. Imagine kids protesting the raising of the age at which you can get social security benefits, because I cannot. I think our generation is at least smart enough to recognize that by the time they retire Social Security will be a distant memory, something our elders had and frittered away because they liked raiding it for their special pet projects. And I'm not just blaming Democrats on this one, Republicans are just as much to blame.
I watch Stewart and Colbert and I do enjoy their shows but their views on things are so clearly slanted but I recognize that. Do other kids? They are being unintenionally indoctrinated and thinking that Colbert is the sterotypical Republican (even if I do kind of agree with him on some things) and not a caricture of many different (ok maybe mainly Bill O'Rielly) personalities. I listen to talk radio, I watch Fox News too so I get the opposite ends of the spectrum. I try to watch MSNBC but can't, its just too vicious. I do watch CNN sometimes because they have toned it down and are fair. And Fox News is a lot more fair than people give it credit for, people get into big verbal fistfights on there and it is fun and educational.
The election on Tuesday will be the most important in my lifetime, I mean that as in there will never (probably) be another election this important as long as I live. My message to my generation is, stay home, get high and watch The Daily Show. Leave voting to those who know what's at stake since you clearly don't.

SOTW #20 Porn Star Dancing (Extended Uncensored)

When I say I'm conservative I don't usually include the social aspects of it. Oh and if you can't tell by the title this is NSFW unless you have a really cool boss.

bullying...

Ok so it seems EVERYONE has an opinion about bullying these days and the recent suicides of gay teens has brought national media attention to it. I am sad that it took a couple of gay kids offing themselves for people to pay attention finally, this has to have been a major issue for at least a decade and has only gotten worse since technology has advanced. You may sense a little tension in my tone and you would be right. I was bullied as a kid growing up, I have told very few people this (I'm not sure if I've even told my parents) but from ab out 12-14 I thought about suicide CONSTANTLY. My friends at school, the few that I had, were little help and my life was a living hell. Honestly the only reason I didn't attempt it is because I am an only child and I thought it wouldn't be fair to my parents leaving them childless. Yes that is exactly what I thought, if I had a brother or sister I could very well not be here writing this today. Let me be clear while I view the gay kids commiting suicide as tragic I think a person who is being builled for being fat, tiny, geeky is JUST AS TRAGIC. I have never been a fan of the LBGT community and it seems that they are mostly using these suicides as a tool to push their agenda. I will not let them co-opt this. BULLYING OF ANY TYPE IS 100% WRONG AND NEVER EXCUSABLE PERIOD END OF STORY.
Some tips I have for kids out there if they are reading this is to get a support group. The next bit of advice I never totally went through but I wish I had because it could have made my life a lot easier in the long run, knock the fucker out. Yeah you heard me, if a kid is bullying you take a stand and punch him/her. This will draw attention to this and it will help in the long run trust me. Finally go to your parents and a teacher if nothing else works.
And honestly guys and girls who are being bullied it may not even seem to make sense what I am about to say but trust me it usually works out this way. You WILL be stronger for this in the end, ok I know there are a few amount of people who crawl up and be pushed around for the rest of their life but they are just weak. I know that may seem cold but whatever, if you have read this blog at all you know I am not PC. You will have so much self-confidence that its almost hard to describe.
Also, you have to stand up for other people too, if you see bullying happening go over and stop it because remember how you felt? It sucks doesn't it and how great would it have felt if someone came to your aid? You probably would have made a new friend and by doing this you may make a new friend possibly.
Folks, take a stand against ALL BULLYING. Don't let the fags co-opt this thing that would be wrong.

They hate us, they really do...

One thing I have found amazing in my time in politics is how insulting the left can be with people they disagree with. Republicans aren't perfect either but at least they don't insult you. This is a great little dialogue between the American people and the Democrats thats sums up perfectly the last 21 or so months.

AMERICANS: “So, the economy is pretty bad and there’s high employment. You think you can do something about that?”

DEMOCRATS AND OBAMA: “We can spend a trillion dollars we don’t have on pork and stuff.”

AMERICANS: “No … that’s not what we want. We’d really like you not to do that.”

DEMOCRATS: “You’re stupid. We’re doing it anyway.”

AMERICANS: “That’s not going to help us get jobs!”

DEMOCRATS: “Sure it will; millions of them … though they may be invisible. You’ll have to trust us they exist. And guess what else we’ll do: We’ll create a giant new government program to take over health care.”

AMERICANS: “That has nothing to do with jobs!”

DEMOCRATS: “We don’t care about that anymore. We really want a giant new health care program. We’re sure you’ll love it.”

AMERICANS: “Don’t pass that bill. You hear me? Absolutely do not pass that bill.”

DEMOCRATS: “Believe me; you’ll love it. It has … well, I don’t know what exactly is in the bill, but we’re sure it’s great.”

AMERICANS: “Listen to me: DO. NOT. PASS. THAT. BILL.”

DEMOCRATS: “You’re not the boss of me! We’re doing it anyway!”

AMERICANS: “Look what you did! Now the economy is way worse, we’re even deeper in debt, and we have a bunch of new laws we don’t want!”

DEMOCRATS: “You’re racist.”

AMERICANS: “Wha … How is that racist?”

DEMOCRATS: “Now you’re getting violent! Stop being violent and racist, you ignorant hillbillies! And remember to vote Democrat in November.”

Yep that about sums it up, but here is something from the Telegraph (got to have an outsiders view looking in on this) about the view Obama and the dems have of the American people.

So what is the closing argument of Barack Obama's Democrats before next Tuesday's midterm elections? The President is no longer the self-proclaimed "hope-monger" of 2008, who vaingloriously declared that his vanquishing Hillary Clinton marked "the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal". He has stopped patting voters on the back for choosing, by voting for him, to listen not to their doubts or fears but to their "greatest hopes and highest aspirations". Instead, he is berating Americans (most of whom now do not believe he deserves a second term) for not being able to "think clearly" because they're "scared". Having failed to change Washington or, as he promised that night in St Paul, Minnesota in June 2008, to provide "good jobs to the jobless" (unemployment was 7.7 per cent when he took office and is 9.6 per cent now), Obama is changing tack. Boiled down, the new Obama message to Americans is: you're too stupid to overcome your fears. To be fair, it's not entirely new. During the 2008 campaign, Obama was caught on tape at a San Francisco fund-raiser saying it was not surprising that voters facing economic hardship "get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them". At a fund-raiser in Massachusetts this month, Obama spoke of Democrats having "facts and science and argument" on their side. As opposed, presumably, to the lies, superstition and prejudice that Republicans rely on.
This year, Democrats have embraced with gusto the notion that Republicans, and by extension anyone thinking of voting for them, are dimwits. Their mirth over the likes of Tea Party figures like Christine O'Donnell, the former anti-masturbation activist who once she had "dabbled" in witchcraft and is now a no-hoper Senate candidate in Delaware, seems to know no bounds. The most chortling of all about the populist Tea Party and its anti-tax, anti-government uprising against the Republican establishment can be found on the shows of Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, the edgy liberal satirists on Comedy Central. Mocking Republican candidates last week, Stewart declared the midterm elections as "the best chance ever for a bowl of fresh fruit" to be elected. Three days before the elections, Stewart will hold a "Rally to Restore Sanity" in Washington on the same day as Colbert, who adopts the character of a Right-wing talk show host, leads a "March to Keep Fear Alive". The thinly-disguised message: Republicans are crazies who trade on fear.
In choosing California and Massachusetts, two of the most liberal states in the union, to demean ordinary Americans during election campaigns, Obama did not display a whole lot of his much-vaunted intelligence. But Obama's decision to plug Stewart's rally approvingly and appear on his show three days beforehand is even more foolish. In the 1990s, Democrats managed to get away from their image as "eggheads" in the 1950s or "pointy-headed liberals" in the 1970s. Bill Clinton spoke like a Good Ol' Boy from the Deep South, ate junk food and enjoyed trashy women. He was clever, but he did not look down on people.
Obama, by contrast, has become a parody of the Ivy League liberal smugly content with his own intellectual superiority and pitying the poor idiots who disagree with him. It is an approach that shares much with the default anti-Americanism of British and European elites, who love to mock the United States as a country full of gun-toting, bible-clutching morons. David Cameron has made nods to this sniffy condescension, speaking of the Sarah Palin phenomenon as being "hard for us to understand" (how about giving it a go, Dave?) and describing American conservatism, inaccurately, as moving in a "very culture war direction". This might be part of the reason why he seems to have hit it off with Obama.
The problem for Obama and the Democrats is that belittling the Tea Party movement, which is taking hold of much of Middle America, merely fuels the popular sense that the party in power is out of touch. It also highlights the reluctance of Obama and the Democrats to discuss the Wall Street bail-out, economic stimulus and health care bills because they know they are not vote winners. Joining the Europeans in mocking ordinary Americans for their supposed idiocy may play well at big-dollar fund-raisers. In adopting this as a political strategy, however, the Democrats could be the ones who end up looking stupid.

the Multiculturalism cult...

I was going to write a scathing article about how "multiculturalism" has failed like Angela Merkel so acutely noted over the weekend. I have known this since my 97-98% white, catholic, private school hired a "diversity coordinator" it made me sick. I made the argument that if the school was serious about it they would be funding scholarships to kids rather than pay some retard to teach one class and lecture us about how we are all a bunch of hicks. It was really insulting actually and I think they eventually got rid of him. Anyway, Thomas Sowell does a much more better job of talking about this than I ever could, here is his RCP article from yesterday...


Somebody eventually had to say it -- and German chancellor Angela Merkel deserves credit for being the one who had the courage to say it out loud. Multiculturalism has "utterly failed." Multiculturalism is not just a recognition that different groups have different cultures. We all knew that, long before multiculturalism became a cult that has spawned mindless rhapsodies about "diversity," without a speck of evidence to substantiate its supposed benefits. In Germany, as in other countries in Europe, welcoming millions of foreign workers who insist on remaining foreign has created problems so obvious that only the intelligentsia could fail to see them. It takes a high IQ to evade the obvious. "We kidded ourselves for a while," Chancellor Merkel said, but now it was clear that the attempt to build a society where people of very different languages and cultures could "live side-by-side" and "enjoy each other" has "failed, utterly failed."
This is not a lesson for Germany alone. In countries around the world, and over the centuries, peoples with jarring differences in language, cultures and values have been a major problem and, too often, sources of major disasters for the societies in which they co-exist. Even the tragedies and atrocities associated with racial differences in racist countries have been exceeded by the tragedies and atrocities among people with clashing cultures who are physically indistinguishable from one another, as in the Balkans or Rwanda.
Among the ways that people with different cultures have managed to minimize frictions have been (1) mutual cultural accommodations, even while not amalgamating completely, and (2) living separately in their own enclaves. Both of these approaches are anathema to the multicultural cultists. Expecting any group to adapt their lifestyles to the cultural values of the larger society around them is "cultural imperialism" according to the multicultural cult. And living in separate neighborhoods is considered to be so terrible that there are government-financed programs to take people from high-crime slums and put them in subsidized housing in middle-class neighborhoods. Multiculturalists condemn people's objections to transplanting hoodlums, criminals and dysfunctional families into the midst of people who may have sacrificed for years to be able to escape from living among hoodlums, criminals and dysfunctional families. The actual direct experience of the people who complain about the consequences of these social experiments is often dismissed as mere biased "perceptions" or "stereotypes," if not outright "racism." But some of the strongest complaints have come from middle-class blacks who have fled ghetto life, only to have the government transplant ghetto life back into their midst.
The absorption of millions of immigrants from Europe into American society may be cited as an example of the success of multiculturalism. But, in fact, they were absorbed in ways that were the direct opposite of what the multicultural cult is recommending today. Before these immigrants were culturally assimilated to the norms of American society, they were by no means scattered at random among the population at large. On New York's lower east side, Hungarian Jews lived clustered together in different neighborhoods from Romanian Jews or Polish Jews -- and German Jews lived away from the lower east side. When someone suggested relieving the overcrowding in the lower east side schools by transferring some of the children to a school in an Irish neighborhood that had space, both the Irish and the Jews objected. None of this was peculiar to America. When immigrants from southern Italy to Australia moved into neighborhoods where people from northern Italy lived, the northern Italians moved out. Such scenarios could be found in countries around the world.
It was in later generations, after the children and grandchildren of the immigrants to America were speaking English and living lives more like the lives of other Americans, that they spread out to live and work where other Americans lived and worked. This wasn't multiculturalism. It was common sense.

Wait what?

Ok being part of the campaign for a massive Republican underdog has caused me to become somewhat jaded and managing expectations, even in this heavily Republican cycle, but when ABC news has the 8th district as leaning Democrat you know this is going to be something. The advantage we have over the 8th district in our race is that were about 1/20 the size of it so the GOTV activities will be easier to coordinate and we have just as strong a candidate in Teresa as Chip is up against Jim Oberstar. The big difference is that Oberstar actually has brainpower, unlike the current congresscritter that represents (and I use that term loosely) the 4th CD. Folks were in for an amazing wave. Keep on attacking the Chamber of Commerce Obama, please.

Can it get worse for the Dems?

Back in 2006 imagine if some big Republican donor and financier had said "I can't stop the Democrats and the wave they are generating" that would have been deflating right? Well George motherfucking Soros just basically said that to the New York Times of all places. Looking good for us Republicans to take over in about 23 days

Why Repulicans are (probably) going to clean House Nov. 2nd

In trying to figure out how to gauge the mid-term elections now I have read a Dick Morris piece that is super optimistic about Republican prospects and a piece linked on Drudge that someone said the Dems will keep both the House and Senate. I didn't want to use either article as a source because they were the extremes of each opinion. This piece on RCP by Arnold Ahlert articulates mine, and a lot of conservative/independent/tea party opinions about how the last 4 years have played out. Here it is...

Unless something totally unforeseen occurs, Democrats are poised to take a real beating in November. Their response to the impending disaster has run the gamut. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is in denial: "One thing I know for sure is that Democrats will retain their majority in the House of Representatives." Massachusetts Senator John Kerry is condescending: "We have an electorate that doesn't always pay that much attention to what's going on, so people are influenced by a simple slogan rather than the facts or the truth or what's happening." President Obama is angry: "It is inexcusable for any Democrat or progressive right now to stand on the sidelines in this midterm election." Why is the electorate ready to kick Democrats to the curb? Here's why:

* An "unstimulated" economy. The original Mother of All Stimulus packages, $787 billion dollars, quickly grew to an astounding $865 billion. It wasn't enough. Congress pumped out another $26 billion in "supplemental" stimulus in August. The results? Unemployment in the private sector remains well above the eight percent Democrats promised, even as public sector workers who support Democrats were rewarded; our Democratically-controlled Congress has amassed more debt in the last four years than nearly the previous two hundred and thirty combined; the Keynesian economic model Democrats stand by is a colossal failure; the Summer of Recovery was a propaganda fiasco.
Wow there is the understatement of the year, I actually have some liberal friends that say the "stimulus" wasn't big enough. I have no response to that, I can only shake my head.

* The health care bill. The absolute epitome of ideological, public-be-damned arrogance. A horrendous compendium of bribes, exploding bureaucracy, runaway costs, written in secret and unread by those who passed it. It includes a mandate, likely un-Constitutional, forcing people to buy health insurance or pay a fine. The same administration which originally claimed the commerce clause of the Constitution made such a fine possible is now saying that the federal governments's "power to tax" justifies it. Irrelevant. 60% of Americans want this monstrosity repealed, ASAP.
60% didn't want it in the first place. I still can't believe the arrogance the Dems showed in this. They knew better than us, their stupid subjects. I have never understood the left strategy of calling people dumb. How is that supposed to help get you elected, sure some people are dumb but they usually don't like to be called it to their face and in politics isn't the goal for people to like you to get elected? And in debating people calling them dumb because they don't agree with you is not only arrogant but poor arguing technique. It probably means the "dumb" person is winning the debate.

* The federal lawsuit against the state of Arizona. Again, it's the arrogance, stupid. Despite all the hectoring from Democrats and the Obama administration about racist this, and xenophobic that, fair-minded Americans recognized four things: people have a right to protect their life and property, and if the federal government can't or won't do it, they have a right to do it themselves; the idea that anyone opposing the "rights" of illegal aliens is a bigot is nonsense on stilts; the ruling class in Washington, D.C. is holding genuine border control hostage to "comprehensive reform;" the glaring double-standard of suing Arizona for violating federal immigration statues, even as the feds turn a blind eye to hundreds of "sanctuary cities" with illegal protection directives unquestionably in conflict with federal law.
Not to mention they ratted them out to the U.N. There's a way to win people over.

* The demonization of the Tea Party movement. Take your pick: teabaggers, racists, angry white men, fringe elements, bigots, Astro-turfers, etc. etc. Democrats and the media have tried every one, and every one has been a miserable failure for one overwhelmingly simple reason: decent Americans know they're decent, and getting insulted by Democrats running the country into the ground has only stiffened their resolve. Progressives want to demonize people who believe in smaller government, fiscal responsibility and a desire to return to Constitutional principles? Why not attack people who believe in guns, and religion too? Oh wait. The president already did that as well.
Can't say enough about this. This movement could not only make dems a permanant minority party it could also kill the Republican party if they don't come through these next couple years.

* A hopelessly compromised media. Air America tanked, CNN is tanking, and ABC, NBC and CBS news programs have been shedding viewers at historically unprecedented rates-even as Fox and the Wall Street Journal prosper. Americans don't mind people in the media expressing their opinions, as long as they're characterized as opinions, but they seethe when such opinions are portrayed as "hard news." They get even angrier when certain stories are "omitted" by those same organizations, especially when Americans recognize such omissions are calculated to protect the progressive agenda. I wonder if it occurs to either Democrats or their media water-carriers that a majority Americans may savor whacking both groups in November. Depressed looks on the faces of Nancy Pelosi and Katie Couric? In theater circles, that's known as a "two-fer."
It's a joke, can't wait to look at the liberals on TV November 2nd watching their majorities slip away.

* The Ground Zero mosque. Yet another reminder of the contempt progressives and their media enablers have for ordinary Americans who had the "temerity" to allow their feelings to be known. Despite every attempt to characterize these Americans as Islamo-phobic bigots, the public wasn't buying, again for one overwhelmingly simple reason: decent Americans once again demonstrated their decency by separating the legality of the project from the appropriateness of it.
It's simmered down but I can't believe Obama even bothered to comment on it.

* The complete disconnect between the First Family and ordinary Americans. The golfing, the soirees, and the high-priced vacations have created the perception that we are living through another "let them eat cake" moment in history. On Tuesday, the president called the public schools in Washington, D.C. a "'struggling' system that doesn't measure up to the needs of first daughters, Sasha and Malia." Those would be the same public schools Congressional Democrats tossed 3,300 low-income kids back into when they killed funding for vouchers that had freed those kids from D.C.'s educational ghetto. The First Lady is hectoring Americans to eat healthier. Perhaps more Americans would if they could afford to: the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) stated in their Producer Price Index that the price of food increased 2.4% for March 2010. That's the biggest increase in almost 30 years.
And people said Bush was bad.

* The war on terror. A politically correct contingency operation against unnamed insurgents with a specific draw-down date? Democrats once again prove that all the talk about Afghanistan being the "good war" was complete rubbish. They want out, and victory-along with the heroic efforts of our men and women in harm's way-be damned. Once again: has America ever fought another war where they knew the exact location of the enemy, had the ability to inflict possibly irreparable damage on them-and decided to split the difference instead? If you answered "Vietnam," another progressively-instigated catastrophe resulting in the deaths of fifty-eight thousand American soldiers and three million innocent Asians, go to the head of the class. And when is that civilian trial of the 9/11 perpetrators scheduled to begin?
And the fact he said "we can absorb another terrorist attack" to Bob Woodward creeps me the fuck out.

* Czars and nationalization. The Obama administration and Congressional Democrats may bristle when Americans call them socialists, but the nationalization of banks, car and insurance companies, student loans and healthcare sure isn't free-market capitalism. Neither is wiping out oil jobs in Louisiana with a government-mandated ban on offshore drilling-after the feds completely bungled their role in cleaning up the spill which engendered it. Unelected czars who answer to no one but the president, along with out-of-control government agencies such as the EPA have made it clear to many Americans that this administration often considers Congress a completely unnecessary component of governance, especially if they don't kowtow to the president's agenda.
I can't wait for the supbeonas that will be issued to drag these czars before committees to testify about what they actually do.

* "Unexceptional" America. Progressive contempt for the values and traditions which make this the greatest country on earth can no longer be disguised. An American president who "believe(s) in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism" has made it plain that this is not a great nation which needs tweaking, but a fundamentally flawed one needing a complete progressive make-over. Once one understands this basic premise, everything this administration and Democratically-controlled Congress does makes sense. All of it centers around the ridiculous premise that America owes the world an apology for any number of shortcomings, many of which can only be alleviated by government-mandated "social justice." That would be the same social justice which demanded-and still demands-that Americans manifestly unqualified to own homes be given mortgages, regardless.
Fuck you Obama, we are great and we can survive even you, hopefully.

Unknown to the majority of Americans, this precise mindset was part of the financial "reform" bill which also requires banks to lend a certain percentage of capital to minority-owned businesses, even if it means lowering their lending standards. Apparently progressives won't be satisfied with their odious social-engineering schemes until every sector of the American economy bears a striking resemblance to the housing sector. So far, Americans support financial reform because it's been framed as "Main Street versus "Wall Street." It's not. Like every other initiative undertaken by this Congress and this administration, it's the elevation of irresponsible and dishonest Americans over those willing to accept the consequences of their own behavior.

There you have it. Democratic control for four years in Congress, and two in the White House has been exactly what many predicted: an ideologically-driven disaster of epic proportions. For years, progressives obfuscated their true intentions, because even they knew most Americans couldn't stomach them. The elections of 2006 and 2008 changed everything. Progressives bought into their own hype, believing they had pulled off a multi-generational transformation of the American mindset. As a result, they showed Americans their true colors: unbridled arrogance, utter contempt for the average citizen's intellect, and a ham-fisted, never let a crisis go to waste determination to bend the electorate to their will, using government as a club.

That's why they're going down in November. And the most satisfying aspect of the whole scenario is this: despite every attempt they've made to blame anyone and everyone else for their problems, they brought it on themselves.

I couldn't agree more. They showed their true colors and now we can crush them. Potentially forever. Well the progressives at least.