Get to Know the Loony Left Better…READ THEIR WRITINGS!

The following paragraph is from  part of an article written by one of the higher paid opinion gurus at the New York Times.  Naturally the loon is a lefty.     The reader must try to discover what points the writer is trying to make.     Try to answer the question,  what makes him a loon?   

The reader must  try to discover if the writer has written anything that might be accurate and might make sense.  A loony person simply writes nonsense.  At time nonsense is so cleverly written or spoken those so skilled decide to run for public  office or write for the New York Times.

Please read the following paragraph and review what has been written here:

“I think what is driving people’s pessimism today are two intersecting concerns. The long-term concern is that people intuitively understand that what we need most now is nation-building in America. They understand it by just looking around at our crumbling infrastructure, our sputtering job-creation engines and the latest international education test results that show our peers out-educating us, which means they will eventually out-compete us. Many people understand that we are slipping as a country and what they saw in Barack Obama, or what they projected onto him, was that he had both the vision and capability to pull America together behind a plan for nation-building at home.”

Comment:  Leftists in the news like to make statements complex and hedging, so know one listening or reading  can understand anything that has been said or written……..but, what has been said, or written, sounds  good.   It is called having style…..something Barack Hussein Obama reeked in 2008.    Progressives can NEVER rely on truth.   They rely on sweet talk….They know  that if one sweetens any sentence of a Lefty’s speech with sugar words, the young  will swoon and  females faint.  Being Left is falling for  feelings.

Read this lefty’s first sentence.  How many Americans would agree with this Obama fan that their pessimism regarding America’s future are from “two  intersecting concerns” ”"people intuitively understand that what we need most is nation building in America”………..and are you looking for the “intersecting” or confused about what is really intuitive?   What is ’intuitive’ about understanding “that what we need most is nation building”? 

 Who  looks around and sees  crumbling?  “Ah, there is crumbling so we need nation building”….so that is why we Americans are pessimistic about our future!! 

We see the stoned crumbling, yes, but Obamaman doesn’t mention moral concerns.  Which job-creation engines are sputtering and what are these “engines”?   The Obama government is sputtering but governments cannot created wealth.   How will we compete with our peers if the Obama government regulates  or nationalized corporations and cripples industry with carbon taxes based on a climate change, a left wing fraud.  (Another  fraud was how the  people were programmed not to see the real  Barack Hussein Obama, the incompetent one,  because the press fell in love with his voice and Party.  

 What does this lefty think the people ‘intuitively’ understand above all other matters?……….”But I think they understand something else: that we are facing a really serious moment. We have to get this plan for nation-building right because we are driving without a spare tire or a bumper. The bailouts and stimulus that we have administered to ourselves have left us without much cushion. There may be room, and even necessity, for a little more stimulus. But we have to get this moment right. We don’t get a do-over. If we fail to come together and invest, spend and cut really wisely, we’re heading for a fall — and if America becomes weak, your kids won’t just grow up in a different country, they will grow up in a different world.”

Yes, the people know we are facing a really serious moment….Obama is president!    Perhaps we would have more resources if we wouldn’t “have administered to ourselves” the bailouts and stimulus…..and according to the president  another costly stimulus package is being planned at the White House.

Lefty continues:  “We have to manage America’s foreign policy, and plan its rebuilding at home, at a time when our financial resources and our geopolitical power are more limited than ever while our commitments abroad and entitlement promises at home are more extensive than ever.

That is why I believe most Americans don’t want a plan for deficit reduction. The Tea Party’s vision is narrow and uninspired. Americans want a plan to make America great again, and at some level they know that such a plan will require a hybrid politics — one that blends elements of both party’s instincts. And they will follow a president — they would even pay more taxes and give up more services — if they think he really has a plan to make America great again, not just bring him victory in 2012 by 50.1 percent.”

“Americans don’t want a plan for deficit reduction”……where does he reach for this statement?    What vision of the Tea Party is narrow.  How do we know what was uninspiring?

Americans are deeply concerned, even pessimistic, because we have an incompetent president who is obviously interested in expanding government and crippling the private sector, the source of any nation’s ability to create wealth.   We have a FRAUD as a president who thus far has shown no interest in the nation returning to some kind of  financial stability.  He has his own Marxist agenda.

The people have seen and heard the style of Mr. Obama’s work and it has left us pessimistic.

Thankyou Bryan Glover and Ray Stevens for “Hammer” and “to the USA!”

For all of you Dennis Prager fans who might have missed two works of art created during the Tea Party activities over the summer,  I proudly present them together here for your entertainment and smiles.

Both are treasures……Both ‘sing’  very well for the heart and soul of today’s conservative movement.

“When You’re Holding a Hammer, Everything Looks Like a Nail”….Bryan Glover

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfH46DTAkxo

“Come to the U.S.A!”…..Ray Stevens

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgOHOHKBEqE

It is good to be a conservative in America these days!

California Not Alone Borrowing from the Federal Government

States Raise Payroll Taxes to Repay Loans

I received the following from the National Center for Policy Analysis:

“State governments are borrowing heavily from the federal government to keep paying unemployment insurance benefits and, even with the weak job market, most states are raising payroll taxes to pay off the loans, says the Wall Street Journal.

• Thirty-one states have borrowed nearly $41 billion from the federal government.
• California alone has borrowed nearly $8.8 billion as of mid-November, according to the Labor Department.

As states try to replenish the funds and begin to repay the loans, employers are facing increases in state and federal payroll taxes, a potential barrier to new hiring.

• A National Employment Law Project analysis found 41 states increased unemployment insurance payroll taxes this year by an average of nearly 33.9 percent.
• The largest was a 168.5 percent boost from 2009 in Hawaii.

Payroll taxes levied by states fund unemployment benefits for up to 26 weeks — longer in some states.  The federal government requires states to pay benefits even if their unemployment funds run out of cash, says the Journal.

In certain circumstances, Washington will increase its tax on companies in states that aren’t repaying loans from Washington.

• Employers in as many as 26 states will face tax increases of between $21 and $84 per employee per year if their state governments don’t repay Washington by November 2011.
• Employers in Michigan are already paying the added fee.

Source: Sara Murray, “States Raise Payroll Taxes to Repay Loans,” Wall Street Journal, November 20, 2010.

Is Blue State Oregon’s Portland City Council ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE?

The following article appeared at PowerLine today.  It was written by John Hinderaker.   It is a must read to hellp Americans understand the stupidity and seditious politics of Urban lefty Democrat Party partisans throughout the presidency of George W. Bush.   The case offered below concerns Portland in the blue state of Oregon.   It could have been a case in St. Paul in the blue state of Minnesota.

As you read this article, keep in mind the countless seditious acts of the New York Times which during a time of armed conflict in which Americans are being killed in war, again and again the Times gave comfort to our enemies by exposing government efforts to expose the enemy’s plots and weaken its ability to carry them out.

“Byron York supplements Scott’s observations on, and questions about, the attempted terrorist attack on Portland immediately below by pointing out that “Politically correct Portland rejected feds who saved city from terrorist attack”:

What is ironic is that the operation that found and stopped Mohamud is precisely the kind of law enforcement work that Portland’s leaders, working with the American Civil Liberties Union, rejected during the Bush years. In April 2005, the Portland city council voted 4 to 1 to withdraw Portland city police officers from participating in the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force. Mayor Tom Potter said the FBI refused to give him a top-secret security clearance so he could make sure the officers weren’t violating state anti-discrimination laws that bar law enforcement from targeting suspects on the basis of their religious or political beliefs.

Other city leaders agreed. “Here in Portland, we are not willing to give up individual liberties in order to have a perception of safety,” said city commissioner Randy Leonard. “It’s important for cities to know how their police officers are being used.”

Following Mohamed Mohamud’s attempted murder of thousands of Portland’s citizens–including at least one city Commissioner, who took his family to the tree lighting ceremony–current Mayor Sam Adams says he “might ask the city council to reconsider the decision to pull out of the Joint Terrorism Task Force. Has Mohamud’s attempt convinced Adams that Portland was wrong to disdain cooperating with the feds? Of course not!

Because he now realizes the city was wrong? Not at all. “[Adams] stressed that he has much more faith in the Obama administration and the leadership of the U.S. Attorney’s office now than he did in 2005,” the paper reported.

Portland’s city fathers are testing the limits of partisanship. Whether they are willing to help save their own inhabitants (and themselves) from mass murder depends on the partisan affiliation of the occupant of the White House. Portland’s voters might want to have a say in that judgment.”

---

George Will Analyzes the Puritan in Progressives and Comic Books

To censor or not to censor.  Is that the question?   or….is the question when and what should be censored? 

George Will wrote the following article, “Our Puritanical Progressives” in today’s Washington Post:

“An eminent Harvard law professor, James Thayer (1831-1902), argued that although the judicial function is “merely that of fixing the outside border of reasonable legislative action,” this still gives courts “a great and stately jurisdiction.” While patrolling that jurisdiction today, Supreme Court justices may be playing the video game “Postal 2,” whose rich menu of simulated mayhem provoked California’s legislature to pass a problematic law.

During the oral argument about whether the law restricting children’s access to violent video games violates First Amendment guarantees of free expression, the lawyer representing game manufacturers urged the court to remember America’s history of moral panics, which he said included one in the early 1950s about comic books. Really? Yes, and the episode remains instructive.

An estimated 90 percent of children 8 to 13 then read 10-cent comic books, of which scores of millions were sold weekly. The worry du jour was juvenile delinquency. By 1957, delinquency – how quaint the term sounds – would be romanticized in “Romeo and Juliet” recast as “West Side Story.” But by 1953, delinquency was considered an epidemic symptomatic of national decline, so the U.S. Senate established a juvenile delinquency subcommittee. It included Estes Kefauver, the spotlight-seeking Tennessean whose 1950-51 hearings on organized crime – the first congressional hearings to have a mass television audience – made him a presidential candidate and, in 1956, the Democrats’ vice presidential nominee.

In 1954, Fredric Wertham brought science – very loosely defined – to the subject of juvenile crime. Formerly chief resident in psychiatry at Johns Hopkins, he was politically progressive: When he opened a clinic in Harlem, he named it for Paul Lafargue, Karl Marx’s son-in-law who translated portions of “Das Kapital” into French, thereby facilitating the derangement of Parisian intellectuals.

Without ever interviewing the convicted spy Ethel Rosenberg, Wertham testified on her behalf concerning what he called her “prison psychoses.” Since 1948, he had been campaigning against comic books, and his 1954 book, “Seduction of the Innocent,” which was praised by the progressive sociologist C. Wright Mills, became a bestseller by postulating a causal connection between comic books and the desensitization of young criminals: “Hitler was a beginner compared to the comic-book industry.”

Wertham was especially alarmed about the one-third of comic books that were horror comics, but his disapproval was capacious: Superman, who gave short shrift to due process in his crime-fighting, was a crypto-fascist. As for Batman and Robin, the “homoerotic tendencies” were patent.

Even before Wertham’s book appeared, a committee of New York’s legislature considered government licensing of comic-book publishers. More than a dozen states passed laws restricting sales of comic books – laws similar to the California one pertaining to video games. Some civic groups staged comic-book bonfires.

Comic-book publishers fended off such pressures by adopting a severe code of conduct. Soon even Betty and Veronica, those less-than-wanton femme fatales of the “Archie” comics, had their supposedly provocative protuberances made less so by donning looser-fitting blouses.

In 1956, fear of comic books was suddenly eclipsed by fear of Elvis Presley, whose pelvis would not be the last cause of moral panic. Pre-Presley panics had concerned ragtime music, “penny dreadful” novels, jazz, “penny theatres,” radio and movies. By 1926, seven states and at least 100 municipalities had censors who pre-screened movies. In 1940, NBC radio banned more than 140 songs that were thought to encourage, among other evils, “disrespect for virginity.” NBC would broadcast only the instrumental version of Cole Porter’s “Love for Sale.” Post-Presley panics about threats to children have concerned television (broadcast, then cable), rap music and the Internet.

Concern for children’s sensibilities is admirable. The coarsening of the culture is a fact with many causes, but its consequences are unclear. And it can bring out a Puritan streak in progressivism.

The lawyer for the video-game industry warned the Supreme Court that “the land is awash” with contemporary versions of Anthony Comstock (1844-1915), the crusader for censorship of indecency, as he spaciously defined it. “Today’s crusaders,” the lawyer said, “come less from the pulpit than from university social science departments, but their goals and tactics remain the same.”

Progressivism is a faith-based program. The progressives’ agenda for improving everyone else varies but invariably involves the cult of expertise – an unflagging faith in the application of science to social reform. Progressivism’s itch to perfect people by perfecting the social environment can produce an interesting phenomenon – the Pecksniffian progressive.”

Comment:  I can’t argue against the  principal of George Will’s review of the Puritan in America’s ages.   It is an accurate and appropriate argument favoring the freedom of expression.   

 Call this conservative,  a Puritan, and in some manners, a Progressive as well, if you wish, but I have lived long enough to have developed a measure of  depth of the cultural decay in our every day American life….its language, its violence, the isolation one civil person from another, its values as defined by its educators and scientists, the empty souls of so many numbed by drugs and obsessed with sex, and the disappearance of knowledge and understanding by ‘the masses’.  

I am a comic book suvivor.   Porky Pig, Tom and Jerry, Batman, Mickey Mouse,  Donald Duck, Superman, Tarzan, Daffy Duck, and Classic Comics and probably had collected several  hundred before my mother threw them out, not to censor, but while cleaning the house.  However disjointed my own upbringing might have been, our family was one and it was secure.   My mother was a mother, my dad, a dad, who provided a safe place for me to survive as long as I could survive my bipolar female parent.  Most people believe I succeeded. 

The violence in these comics was never beyond “POW!” and never beyond knowing the ‘POW’ was unreal.  Murder was unknown except from Bible studies stories at Sunday School.   No one paraded seductively naked across any television screen and the human female at roughly age 18 was in training to become an adult, a  woman, not a teeny bopper bimbo for the rest of her life frothing at the mouth for attention, sex and drugs.  

Narcissism was considered a sin.  Christian rules of good behavior were known and obeyed, or at the minimum attempted to be obeyed, nearly universally.  We lived in a world where failure was at tomorrow’s door, if  we didn’t conserve and perform responsibilities.   The goal in life was to become and adult, a thinking animal who would be able to make adult decisions, decisions based on an ability  to look ahead to foresee the likely consequences of ones behavior.   One was expected some day to become a parent, not a drug addict.  

Feelings were to be under control at all times.  (The ultimate feeling….the fear of  God….of doing wrong….was a powerful fear and superior feeling, a drive not to cause harm.)

I never used to believe in censorship, but that was before the Bill Ayers-Black Panther-LSD-meth- Islamic fascism and  sexual revolution  era of American values….this return to paganism and the fall of democratic senses.

Scanning a comic book where Batman “Pows” bad people with his fist, at age 12 in 1946 is not the same as  viewing “reality tv”, MTV, or   wanton sadistic slaughter  of video games  in 2010, George Will.   

Some folks agree with Will, that America has a Puritan problem.   Yes, Progressivism is faith based……so is “goodness”.  A healthy culture must always strive to discover what ”goodness”  means and disseminate its meanings in the most civilized manner possible.    That is the void in today’s America which bothers this Puritan most.

California Democrats’ Drug Habit Will Come to a Bitter End Some Day!

 The child the editor of the Orange County Register, Steven Greenhut is referring to below is his beloved state of California run by the Democrat Party-Service Union combo.

“Anyone who has dealt with a loved one deeply involved in some destructive behavior understands that there’s only so much you can do until the person hits whatever low point is necessary to spark a commitment to turn things around.

I think of my beloved California in the same light. What a great state, but it remains on a collision course with reality. We can’t keep spending money we don’t have, punishing those who pay the bills and ignoring the advice of truth tellers. Californians are known for crafting new realities, but the financial markets are immune to Disney-like fantasies. Eventually, the fiscal self-destruction has to stop – and adults have to step in with an intervention to divert our state from its dangerous path.

In the midterm elections, California bucked the nation’s “let’s get our house in order” trend. This is the latest evidence, according to futurist Joel Kotkin at Chapman University, that “California has drifted far away from the place that John Gunther described in 1946 as ‘the most spectacular and most diversified American state … so ripe, golden.’ Instead of a role model, California has become a cautionary tale of mismanagement of what by all rights should be the country’s most prosperous big state.” Kotkin points to California’s soaring poverty and unemployment rates, its declining economy and to the governor’s call for a special budget session of the Legislature to deal with a relentless structural deficit now estimated at about $25 billion over the next 18 months.

The website Tech Ticker reported recently that “[m]unicipal bonds have plummeted in recent days, as investors have suddenly focused on huge state and city budget deficits that there’s no easy way to fix. Nowhere has this collapse been more visible than California.”

A federal bailout, Tech Ticker reports, is unlikely with Republicans gaining control of the House, which is a good thing given that bailing out destructive behaviors, in individuals or governments, only prolongs the misery. The financial industry analyst quoted in the story predicts that the state will eventually default on its debt, yet another sobering thought in a state desperately in need of sobriety.

Meanwhile, California’s pension debt for government employees is estimated as high as a half-trillion dollars, the state’s unemployment fund has gone upside-down, and a new Stanford University report pins the overhang for local government pensions at $200 billion. Yet the state’s spending addicts still don’t recognize their problem and treat those who try to help them as troublemakers.

In San Francisco, for instance, the city’s political establishment and public employee unions spent millions of dollars smearing a modest proposal by Public Defender Jeff Adachi that would have required increased contributions by city workers to pay for their generous pension and health care plans. Had Proposition B passed Nov. 2, San Francisco would soon have an extra $120 million annually to use toward closing its nearly $500 million budget deficit, but voters there rejected it, 57 percent to 43 percent, even though the 94 percent of working people in the city who do not work for the government have to pay these bills and rarely receive benefits anywhere near what the government employees receive. Chalk it up the value of a well-funded and one-sided “no” campaign.

But after three weeks of gloating, San Francisco officials and union leaders have started to sing a bit of a different tune regarding reform, thanks to the imposition of harsh reality. On Nov. 17, Moody’s Investors Service downgraded to Aa2 from Aa1 the rating on San Francisco’s general obligation bonds, which will cost the city additional millions of dollars to borrow money. Moody’s pointed to the city’s lack of a sufficient reserve fund and its gaping budget hole, but also to the failure of Adachi’s initiative: “[T]here are no indications that there is the political will or practical ability to bridge this still very large [budget] gap in a structurally sound manner. In fact, in the recent election voters defeated Proposition B … . [I]t appears clear that there is no political pressure to cut programs and services in order to achieve structural balance.”

The line about “political will” should apply to the entire state. The fiscal mess is bad enough, but Californians lack the will to do much about it. The financial markets see a state that has yet to recognize that its long-standing behaviors are going to lead to ruin. They see a spending addict who has not yet hit bottom, who still believes that the state can grow its way out of the problem. Perhaps the financial markets will provide some adult supervision, which will be even more lacking in Sacramento after Democrats consolidated their power and voters approved new rules (Prop. 25) that allow Democrats to pass budgets without input from the Republican minority.

The good news is that, in San Francisco, even the unions are paying lip service to pension and health care reform following the Moody’s downgrade. “We took an issue that’s a complicated one and brought it into the public debate and dialogue,” Adachi told me. “110,000 people voted yes. They got it. We have to continue our work.” He is working on a new initiative and talking about a more aggressive campaign next time.

Adachi understands the dire financial consequences of ignoring this problem and wants to keep explaining it to San Franciscans in a way that fits with their progressive politics – namely, that refusing to fix the problem will result in massive layoffs and the depletion of the public services they value so highly. Anyone who travels to San Francisco regularly, as I do, recognizes that the public spaces and infrastructure already are becoming noticeably shoddy.

Adachi hasn’t gotten anything but guff for his efforts to tell the truth, but, then again, how appreciative is that loved one while he’s still on a bender?”

Comment:  How bitter will the rebellion be when the forty or so red states who pay their bills and maintain their budgets wind up paying for California’s drug habit?

Which Is The Greater Nut America Has To Put Up With, Jimmy Carter or North Korea

Which American is the greatest champion of the enemies of America?    Jimmy Earl Carter, especially if a Democrat is in the presidency.  He usually plays the role of a grandaddy saboteur.  Claudia Rosett wrote this article about the sordid and sour ex-president found at Pajamas Media:

“For almost three decades now, it has been a regular feature of almost every U.S. foreign policy showdown that Jimmy Carter will jet in, or at least pipe up  –  almost always in ways that advance the interests of whatever despot, rogue regime, or terror group happens to be grabbing headlines in its quest to harm America and America’s allies. Drawing on the gravitas of his former office, ignoring his own disastrous record (for which Americans voted him out after a single term that brought Iran’s Islamic revolution, the Iranian hostage crisis, and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan — progenitor of the rise of al-Qaeda & cohorts), Carter has made it his stock in post-presidential trade to extend a hand to everyone and everything from Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, to the Hamas terrorists ruling Gaza, to the totalitarian regime of North Korea.

Thus did North Korea’s latest threats and attacks produce an op-ed in Wednesday’s Washington Post by Carter, “North Korea’s Consistent Message to the U.S.,” in which he reminded Americans that he had just visited North Korea this summer. Carter went there at the invitation of North Korea’s government, to obtain the release of an American, Aijalon Gomes, who had been imprisoned in North Korea and sentenced to eight years of hard labor for crossing illegally into the totalitarian state. But the grotesque brutality of North Korea’s system did not figure in Carter’s op-ed. Carter ignored such matters as North Korea’s prison labor camps, international criminal rackets such as counterfeiting U.S. currency, and a state system so rigid and controlling that under Kim Jong Il’s rule famine has killed more than one million North Koreans.

Instead, Carter informed his readers that “Pyongyang has sent a consistent message that during direct talks with the United States, it is ready to conclude an agreement to end its nuclear programs, put them all under IAEA inspection and conclude a permanent peace treaty to replace the ‘temporary’ cease-fire of 1953.” He urged that America respond to this offer, or else…

A small fraction of Carter’s claim is true. Pyongyang has indeed sent a consistent message to the U.S. But that message has consistently been the very opposite of any attempt to negotiate in good faith. If you look at deeds, not words (though even North Korea’s words veer often toward outrageous threats, such as “seas of fire” and war), Kim’s Pyongyang regime has sent a consistent message that it will cheat on any deal, violate any agreement, bully, threaten, extort, and — as Gordon Chang noted yesterday on Pajamas Media – kill people in the cause of sustaining itself in power. The vaunted Six-Party Talks deal in 2007 for denuclearization turned into a bonanza for Kim Jong Il, providing him with free fuel, food aid, and hard cash and leading to U.S. removal of North Korea from the list of state sponsors of terrorism. Then, in late 2008, with Kim enjoying his new hoard of pay-offs, the whole deal collapsed over North Korea’s refusal to allow any real verification. While the first load of goodies was flowing to Pyongyang, in the summer of 2007, North Korea — even while promising to give up the development of nuclear weapons — was secretly helping Syria build a clandestine reactor on the Euphrates River, a plutonium factory in the Middle East. What ended that, in Sept. 2007, was not a gesture of North Korean good faith, but a strike by the Israeli Air Force.

And, of course, there was the 1994 “Agreed Framework” nuclear freeze deal with North Korea, in which the U.S. and allies promised North Korea the gift of two modern nuclear reactors, plus loads of free food and fuel, if only Kim Jong Il’s regime would desist from pursuing nuclear weapons. North Korea took the goods for years, and while the foundations for the reactors were being poured, North Korea was cheating on the deal. The upshot was that the Agreed Framework, with its aid and de facto acceptance of the Pyongyang regime as an acceptable negotiating partner, helped Kim Jong Il consolidate his grip on power inherited in 1994 from his father. Those are the origins of the far greater danger posed by North Korea today — a North Korea which has conducted two nuclear tests (in 2006 and 2009), tested ballistic missiles, and continued its sanctions-busting traffic peddling weapons and nuclear technology to the likes of Iran, Syria and Burma (and beyond?). This spring, it sank a South Korean war ship; this past week, it shelled the island of Yeonpyeong; and  it feels free to threaten South Korea, the region, and the world with war.

Jimmy Carter was the godfather of that 1994 “Agreed Framework” — conceived during a trip he made to Pyongyang in 1994. Following his latest trip to North Korea, this past August, he would now have the U.S. defer again to North Korea’s threats and attacks, and offer — yet again — a similar deal. At this point, a lot of Americans may be inclined to dismiss Carter as simply a peripatetic crank who can’t resist anything that might still feed his own sense of self-importance. But the bigger question may be what the North Koreans made of his visit to Pyongyang this past August. However diminished Carter may be in U.S. policy circles, he still arrives in a place like Pyongyang wearing the mantle of a former president of the United States. We don’t know the full content of his discussions with what he describes in his piece as “top North Korean officials.” But we do know that Carter himself over the years has conveyed a consistent message. His decision to re-visit Pyongyang this past summer, as well as his Wednesday op-ed, conveyed the same old Carter message: That Americans are chumps. That’s a deadly dangerous message to be sending North Korea. What’s needed right now is a lot less consistency from the U.S., which needs to break the pattern of sending pay-offs to North Korea. One place to start, at no cost to any American except perhaps Carter himself, would be for Jimmy Carter to back off.”

Comment:  Don’t the Americans act like chumps when it comes to dealing with North Korea.  Don’t Americans act like chumps when it comes to dealing with sour and sordid Jimmy Earl Carter?    If he wants to be president again so bad, why can’t we make him president of  the Arizona border with Mexico?   He might accept.