• Pragerisms

    For a more comprehensive list of Pragerisms visit
    Dennis Prager Wisdom.

    • "The left is far more interested in gaining power than in creating wealth."
    • "Without wisdom, goodness is worthless."
    • "I prefer clarity to agreement."
    • "First tell the truth, then state your opinion."
    • "Being on the Left means never having to say you're sorry."
    • "If you don't fight evil, you fight gobal warming."
    • "There are things that are so dumb, you have to learn them."
  • Liberalism’s Seven Deadly Sins

    • Sexism
    • Intolerance
    • Xenophobia
    • Racism
    • Islamophobia
    • Bigotry
    • Homophobia

    A liberal need only accuse you of one of the above in order to end all discussion and excuse himself from further elucidation of his position.

  • Glenn’s Reading List for Die-Hard Pragerites

    • Bolton, John - Surrender is not an Option
    • Bruce, Tammy - The Thought Police; The New American Revolution; The Death of Right and Wrong
    • Charen, Mona - DoGooders:How Liberals Hurt Those They Claim to Help
    • Coulter, Ann - If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans; Slander
    • Dalrymple, Theodore - In Praise of Prejudice; Our Culture, What's Left of It
    • Doyle, William - Inside the Oval Office
    • Elder, Larry - Stupid Black Men: How to Play the Race Card--and Lose
    • Frankl, Victor - Man's Search for Meaning
    • Flynn, Daniel - Intellectual Morons
    • Fund, John - Stealing Elections
    • Friedman, George - America's Secret War
    • Goldberg, Bernard - Bias; Arrogance
    • Goldberg, Jonah - Liberal Fascism
    • Herson, James - Tales from the Left Coast
    • Horowitz, David - Left Illusions; The Professors
    • Klein, Edward - The Truth about Hillary
    • Mnookin, Seth - Hard News: Twenty-one Brutal Months at The New York Times and How They Changed the American Media
    • Morris, Dick - Because He Could; Rewriting History
    • O'Beirne, Kate - Women Who Make the World Worse
    • Olson, Barbara - The Final Days: The Last, Desperate Abuses of Power by the Clinton White House
    • O'Neill, John - Unfit For Command
    • Piereson, James - Camelot and the Cultural Revolution: How the Assassination of John F. Kennedy Shattered American Liberalism
    • Prager, Dennis - Think A Second Time
    • Sharansky, Natan - The Case for Democracy
    • Stein, Ben - Can America Survive? The Rage of the Left, the Truth, and What to Do About It
    • Steyn, Mark - America Alone
    • Stephanopolous, George - All Too Human
    • Thomas, Clarence - My Grandfather's Son
    • Timmerman, Kenneth - Shadow Warriors
    • Williams, Juan - Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America--and What We Can Do About It
    • Wright, Lawrence - The Looming Tower

Obama’s War against the American Catholic Community

 by Scott Johnson in Obamacare   at PowerLine:

 

The Church against Obamacare, cont’d

“Michelle Malkin devotes her column to the Obamacare regulations requiring Catholic institutions to provide health insurance to employees including coverage for contraception, sterilization and abortifacients. (I’m linking to the version of Michelle’s column posted at her site because it is full of links providing relevant background.) Michelle traces the new regulations back to December 2010:

How did we get here? The first salvo came in December 2010, when the American Civil Liberties Union pushed HHS and its Planned Parenthood-championing secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, to force Catholic hospitals to perform abortions in violation of their core moral commitment to protecting the lives of the unborn.

The ACLU called for a litigious fishing expedition against Catholic hospitals nationwide that refuse to provide “emergency” contraception and abortions to women. In their sights: Devout Phoenix Catholic Bishop Thomas Olmsted, who revoked the Catholic status of a rogue hospital that performed several direct abortions, provided birth control pills and presided over sterilizations against the church’s ethical and religious directives for health care.

The ACLU and the feminists have joined with Obama to threaten and sabotage the First Amendment rights of religious-based health care entities. The agenda is not increased “access” to health care services. The ultimate goal is to shut down health care providers — Catholic health care institutions employ about 540,000 full-time workers and 240,000 part-time workers — whose religious views cannot be tolerated by secular zealots and radical social engineers.

Obamacare is an assault on the rights of all Americans. It represents one form of the “soft despotism” that Paul Rahe explores in his book on the subject. What is needed is not just an exemption for Catholic institutions, but rather repeal of the law. The whole damn thing has to go. The assault on Catholic institutions reveals the rot at the core.”

(The following is last week’s article be Scott Johnson at PowerLine on the same topic:)

The Church against Obamacare

We’ve noted many times that Obamacare amounts to an assault on limited constitutional government. One small prong of the assault: the Obama administration’s recent announcement that all employers (with few exceptions) are required under Obamacare to provide health insurance to their employees which includes subsidized contraception, sterilization and coverage for abortion-inducing drugs.

At Business Insider, Michael Brendon Dougherty comments: “This mean[s] that religious institutions, like Catholic colleges and hospitals, or other Christian institutions would be compelled to violate their conscience by cooperating with that which they believe to be wrong. Currently many of these institutions purchase health-insurance plans which do not provide free coverage of these services.” Dougherty reports that in thousands of parishes this weekend, Catholic priests read a version of the following letter to their congregation denouncing this decision as an attack on their religious freedom. Each bishop personally sent the letter out, and so there were some local variations. Here’s the one read in the Phoenix Archdiocese. Here’s another from the Bishop of Trenton. What follows is from the Bishop of Marquette:

Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ:

I write to you concerning an alarming and serious matter that negatively impacts the Church in the United States directly, and that strikes at the fundamental right to religious liberty for all citizens of any faith. The federal government, which claims to be “of, by, and for the people,” has just been dealt a heavy blow to almost a quarter of those people — the Catholic population — and to the millions more who are served by the Catholic faithful.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services announced last week that almost all employers, including Catholic employers, will be forced to offer their employees’ health coverage that includes sterilization, abortion-inducing drugs, and contraception. Almost all health insurers will be forced to include those “services” in the health policies they write. And almost all individuals will be forced to buy that coverage as a part of their policies.

In so ruling, the Obama Administration has cast aside the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, denying to Catholics our Nation’s first and most fundamental freedom, that of religious liberty. And as a result, unless the rule is overturned, we Catholics will be compelled to either violate our consciences, or to drop health coverage for our employees (and suffer the penalties for doing so). The Obama Administration’s sole concession was to give our institutions one year to comply.

We cannot—we will not—comply with this unjust law. People of faith cannot be made second class citizens. We are already joined by our brothers and sisters of all faiths and many others of good will in this important effort to regain our religious freedom. Our parents and grandparents did not come to these shores to help build America’s cities and towns, its infrastructure and institutions, its enterprise and culture, only to have their posterity stripped of their God given rights. In generations past, the Church has always been able to count on the faithful to stand up and protect her sacred rights and duties. I hope and trust she can count on this generation of Catholics to do the same. Our children and grandchildren deserve nothing less.

And therefore, I would ask of you two things. First, as a community of faith we must commit ourselves to prayer and fasting that wisdom and justice may prevail, and religious liberty may be restored. Without God, we can do nothing; with God, nothing is impossible. Second, I would also recommend visiting www.usccb.org/conscience,to learn more about this severe assault on religious liberty, and how to contact Congress in support of legislation that would reverse the Obama Administration’s decision.

Sincerely yours in Christ,
+Alexander K. Sample
Most Reverend Alexander K. Sample
Bishop of Marquette

Let’s just say the whole damn thing has to go.

, “Have you Ever Been in Cahoots?

Fellow Republican and friend, Regina Reed sent me her following thoughts  Contemplating a trip:.

Cahoots………
>
>
> I have been in many places, but I’ve never been in Cahoots.
>
> Apparently, you can’t go alone. You have to be in Cahoots with someone.
>
> I’ve also never been in Cognito. I hear no one recognizes you there.
>
> I have, however, been in Sane. They don’t have an airport; you have to be
> driven there. I have made several trips there, thanks to my friends,
> family and work.
>
> I would like to go to Conclusions, but you have to jump, and I’m not too
> much on physical activity anymore.
>
> I have also been in Doubt. That is a sad place to go, and I try not to
> visit there too often.
>
> I’ve been in Flexible, but only when it was very important to stand firm.
>
> Sometimes I’m in Capable, and I go there more often as I’m getting older.
>
> One of my favorite places to be is in Suspense! It really gets the
> adrenalin flowing and pumps up the old heart! At my age I need all the
> stimuli I can get!
>
> I may have been in Continent, and I don’t remember what country I was in.
> It’s an age thing.
>
> Please do your part!

Today is one of the many National Mental Health Days

> throughout the year. You can do your bit by remembering to send an e-mail
> to at least one unstable person. My job is done!
>
> Life is too short for negative drama & petty things. So laugh insanely,
> love truly and forgive quickly! From one unstable person to another… I
> hope everyone is happy in your head – we’re all doing pretty good in mine!

> (Don’t be in Decisive, though …..Go ahead….Send this notice to a Democrat.  It might give one  a Kick.)

Gentrification and Immigration reducing Segregation

Racial Separation in America’s Neighborhoods, 1890-2010

from the National Center for Policy Analysis:

“Following every census enumeration since 1890, the Census Bureau has released neighborhood-level data on race.  A new report by Edward Glaeser, senior fellow, and Jacob Vigdor, adjunct fellow, at the Manhattan Institute presents an analysis of the data from 13 consecutive census administrations on the long-run path of racial segregation across American cities.

The main findings include:

  • The most standard segregation measure shows that American cities are now more integrated than they’ve been since 1910. Segregation rose dramatically with black migration to cities in the mid-20th century. On average, this rise has been entirely erased by integration since the 1960s.
  • All-white neighborhoods are effectively extinct. A half-century ago, one-fifth of America’s urban neighborhoods had exactly zero black residents. Today, black residents can be found in 199 out of every 200 neighborhoods nationwide. The remaining neighborhoods are mostly in remote rural areas or in cities with very little black population.
  • Gentrification and immigration have made a dent in segregation. While these phenomena are clearly important in some areas, the rise of black suburbanization explains much more of the decline in segregation.
  • Ghetto neighborhoods persist, but most are in decline. For every diversifying ghetto neighborhood, many more house a dwindling population of black residents.

The decline in segregation carries with it several lessons relevant to public policy debates:

  • The end of segregation has not caused the end of racial inequality. Only a few decades ago, conventional wisdom held that segregation was the driving force behind socioeconomic inequality. The persistence of inequality, even as segregation has receded, suggests that inequality is a far more complex phenomenon.
  • Access to credit has fostered mobility. At a time when proposed regulations threaten to eliminate the market for lending to marginal borrowers, it is important to recognize that there are costs and benefits associated with tightening credit standards.
  • The freedom to choose one’s location has helped reduce segregation. Segregation has declined in part because black Americans left older, more segregated, cities and moved to less segregated Sun Belt cities and suburbs”.

Source: Edward Glaeser and Jacob Vigdor, “The End of the Segregated Century: Racial Separation in America’s Neighborhoods, 1890-2010,” Manhattan Institute, January 2012.

For text:

http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/cr_66.htm

For more on Government Issues:

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=33

JUAN WILLIAMS’ BLACK RACISM CLOUDS HIS THINKING

 

Racial code words obscure real issues

By Juan Williams   at   the   Hill:
Two weeks ago at the Fox News/Wall Street Journaldebate in Myrtle Beach, S.C., I asked each GOP presidential candidate some pointed questions about the racial politics that will play a big role in the presidential campaign.Race is always a trigger in politics, but now a third of the nation are people of color — and their numbers are growing. With those minorities solidly in the Democratic camp and behind the first black president, the scene is set for a bonanza of racial politics.

The language of GOP racial politics is heavy on euphemisms that allow the speaker to deny any responsibility for the racial content of his message. The code words in this game are “entitlement society” — as used by Mitt Romney — and “poor work ethic” and “food stamp president” — as used by Newt Gingrich. References to a lack of respect for the “Founding Fathers” and the “Constitution” also make certain ears perk up by demonizing anyone supposedly threatening core “old-fashioned American values.”

The code also extends to attacks on legal immigrants, always carefully lumped in with illegal immigrants, as people seeking “amnesty” and taking jobs from Americans. 

But the code sometimes breaks down.

Last week a passionate Republican told GOP candidate Rick Santorum: “I never refer to Obama as President Obama because legally he is not [president]. He constantly says that our Constitution is passé and he ignores it. … He is an avowed Muslim and my question is, why isn’t something being done to get him out of government? He has no legal right to be calling himself president.”

Santorum did not blink. The man who recently said he meant “blah people” — when the world heard him say “black people” — as  he spoke about parasitic Americans who get better lives by taking “somebody else’s money,” did not correct the assault on the truth. Instead he agreed that Obama is attacking the Constitution and said: “Well, look, I’m trying my best to get him out of office.”

Santorum did not follow Sen. John McCain’s example in 2008 when a Republican called Obama an “Arab.” McCain responded that while he had policy differences with Obama he is a “decent, family man [and] citizen.”

At the Myrtle Beach debate the question I asked Rick Perry was about the GOP push for a new voter identification law in South Carolina, a state with a history of denying black people the right to vote.

I asked Romney about his vocal opposition to parts of the DREAM Act, which would give the children of illegal immigrants an earned pathway to citizenship. I asked Ron Paul about the racial disparity in our legal system with respect to enforcement of drug laws.

But the question that caused the most controversy was the one I posed to Gingrich.

The former Speaker has declared that black people should demand jobs instead of food stamps. And he has proposed having poor students work as janitors in their high schools. Regardless of how they were intended, poor people and minorities sense that with those comments Gingrich is winking — some call it “dog whistling” — at certain white audiences by intimating that black people are lazy, happy to live off the government and lacking any intellect.

Gingrich did not answer my question but rather threw red meat to Republicans in South Carolina, a state with a long history of racial politics.

He used the same rhetorical technique of the segregationist politicians of the past: rejecting the premise of the question, attacking the media and playing to the American people’s resentment of liberal elites, minorities and poor people.

In the days since the debate, people have asked if I regretted the way I phrased the question. I do not. I do not know anyone on food stamps who would prefer them to gainful employment.

Just last week, the Labor Department reported that while the national unemployment rate fell slightly, black unemployment rose again from 15.5 percent to 15.8 percent and from 39.6 percent to 42.1 percent among young black people. The same report showed 11 percent of Hispanics are unemployed.

The problem is not a lack of work ethic on the part of the poor, who are disproportionately minorities. The problem is there are few good jobs for blue-collar people with the best work ethic.

Let’s have an honest debate about why this is the case and what we can do to fix it.

But I regret that our political discourse has become so fragmented and combative that the point I was trying to make was obscured by pro-wrestling theatrics and post-debate spin.

Poverty, unemployment and the hopelessness that pervade minority communities are real issues that the GOP nominee, and President Obama for that matter, should address in this campaign.

Juan Williams is an author and political analyst for Fox News Channel.

Comment:   The first time I met Juan Williams’ public performing  was around the mid to late 1980s.   He was host of national public radio’s weekly  afternoon  left wing ‘educational’ program.    He was  an angry,  grouchy,  and sour lefty with no sense of humor who carped against ‘white’ society.    He filled a vital spon on the NPR political agenda.

From my own experiences teaching  in an urban  black public school, it was almost humanly impossible to avoid black racism.   It was taught at home, usually at black churches, in schools,  on the street most  anywhere where the inner city black met  to eat and drink.     All woe was and is white caused.    One must understand why blacks were so criminal and poorly educated, was the LEFTY APPROVED  prejudice of the day. 

Many teachers of this black racism in the local public schools were white.   Black violence, as normal an occurence  as eating lunch in this  inner city community at the time, was less racist in  practice.  It picked on whoever was “at hand”.

I am not surprised at Juan’s paranoia.   Paranoia has been a vital part of the community’s racism for over a generation to blame others for  the maladies arising from the collapse of the inner city black  family structure.   

That the American  inner city  became a Marxist-type  “One  Political Party”    plantation society bossed and controlled by the Democratic Party was as black in its evils as any other color of tyranny.

Juan occasionally rises above his  racist wounds.   He wrote  “Enough”,  a book exposing real issues within his racial community.   If the text had been written by a white at the time, it would not have been published, or its author would have been threatened and run out of town.

Mr. Williams, I believe, is crippled by his racism.   Nevertheless, he has grown far beyond the black racist  grouch he used to be on National Public Radio those years ago.

Perhaps Juan should review his own racist code word.    They are there, but all Americans expect that from American blacks.    It’s become an American habit.


Romney, the Better Man, the Better Candidate Wins Big in Florida

Romney leaves Gingrich

in his Florida rearview mirror

By     at   the National Review

“Carpetbombing works.

That’s the lesson of Florida, where Mitt Romney overwhelmed Newt Gingrich on the air and in every other aspect of the campaign. He out-organized him, out-messaged him, and out-researched him, if an exchange in the last debate where Romney seemed to know more about Gingrich’s investments than Gingrich himself is any indication. 

Gingrich the historian has any number of analogies he can draw on — he was the Persians at Marathon, the French at Agincourt, the Zulus at Rorke’s Drift. In short, he got wiped out.

Florida shows why when running for president, you usually need to have a presidential campaign to be successful. Gingrich was a lone man raging — often quite literally — against the machine arrayed against him. It turns out that all those aides who quit on Gingrich way back at the beginning of his campaign, for all their disloyalty, were right that he needed to build a traditional campaign infrastructure. He got far on his native wit, his imagination, and his gutsiness, but you can’t buy TV advertising with any of those qualities.

After South Carolina, the cyborg that is the Romney campaign locked Gingrich in its sights and marked him for destruction. It wasn’t particularly inspiring, and at times, it wasn’t even fair. The Romney team made ready use of the old ethics charges against Gingrich that were a Democratic smear job. But Gingrich has so many vulnerabilities he is practically the personification of a target for negative ads. He reacted in Florida exactly as he did to a similar assault in Iowa: badly.

He struck out wildly. He called Romney names. He lamented his fate. By the end, his campaign was disgracing itself with a laughably crude robocall accusing Romney, as governor of Massachusetts, of denying kosher meals to Holocaust survivors.

To counteract Romney’s money and organization, Gingrich needed electrifying debate performances but didn’t deliver them, a blow to his chances in Florida and to his electability argument, which is heavily dependent on the notion that he would effortlessly flatten President Obama on the debate stage.

All this created the predicate for Romney’s across-the-board sweep. According to exit polls, he won by 20 points or more both among voters who cared most about the issue of the economy (60 percent of the electorate) and voters who cared most about defeating President Obama (45 percent of the electorate). He held Gingrich’s margin of victory among voters who strongly support the Tea Party down to 46-34. In a sign that Marianne Gingrich’s ABC interview may have had a delayed effect, Gingrich had an astonishing gender gap, losing women by about 20 percent.

Romney is now the dominant frontrunner again without having yet made a compellingly positive case for himself, although his victory speech promising “a new era of prosperity” was a start.

His nemesis Newt Gingrich isn’t going anywhere. The former Speaker vows to take his fight all the way to the convention and his campaign has its eye on Super Tuesday states in the South. While Romney began to pivot toward the general election in his speech, Gingrich hit Romney again as a “Massachusetts moderate” and rallied the forces of “people power” versus “money power.”

Conventional wisdom holds that the stiff challenge from Gingrich has made Romney a better candidate. If that’s true, he’s going to get the chance to get better still.”

Rich Lowry is editor of The National Review and a Fox News contributor.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/01/31/romney-leaves-gingrich-in-his-florida-rearview-mirror/#ixzz1l9O9fhVx

Comment:    There is so much I do like about Newt Gingrich…..not least of which is that he is a real conservative and is human, unlike the present president…..a slight exaggeration on one of these Obama shortcomings.    As with us all, (I write as a male, of course) we are our own worst enemies.    Newt  never seems to be bothered about keeping his worst enemy under control.   

One of the reasons I  like Mitt Romney very, very much is he seems in a very classy way to recognize his own worst enemy……and when things are not going well, he is still in control of himself.   

Sorry folks……he seems to be a very old fashioned guy, the gentleman kind, like my dad and my father-in-law of years gone by.     He is a full blooded adult despite all of the assaults on the modern American male.

He seems to be well  trained as a problem solver, has his hair well combed, has a stellar family which includes a bright, attractive wife,   and is still a normal enough human being to be surprised when  unfairly verbally assaulted rather than to become  petulant like Obama and Newt.

The problem here might be that so many Americans have been hardened by the cultural leftwing vulgarities of the past generation or two, they no longer can recognize an honest,  decent human being  living in the contemporary American  political world.     It could be that Mr. Romney has been well formed by his family and religion.

We men are all flawed.    With the exception of president Obama, most of us do recognize this fact of human  life.

The Marco Rubio Factor…….Who Better Offers America the Conservative Solutions?

A True Conservative, A True American, A True Winner,

Marco Rubio for Vice President!

(The following article was written last summer referring the the possibility Marco Rubio might be available to become a candidate for the American presidency.
 
Click on below to refresh your American memories why Marco Rubio is a rising American star in its political arena.   Charles Schieffer, a standard, limited thinking, lefty of the usual mass media style is interviewing Marco Rubio during the time of one of the recent debt ceiling crises facing Congress while the president, the Obama one, was playing golf.
 
Please insert “Vice President” wherever appropriate as an office Marco Rubio would enhance to strengthen the Mitt Romney ticket and  restore leadership, honor, and America from the White House!)
 
The July article:

“This is the conservative candidate who can defeat the Obamalings in 2012 to become the 45th President of the United States of America.   Click on to the following video to appreciate his abilities, his convictions, his conservatism, his Americanism who  even bothers to ask the Obamalings…..Where is the Obama plan for debt relief and economic solvency?   Why is he the first among candidates to ask the Obamalings for the Barack Plan for debt relief and economic  recovery?

Marco Rubio for President in 2012…..He will ask the right questions and answer them the American Way! 

 Introduce yourself to Marco Rubio”…….Click on this video  interview with Obamaling Bob Schieffer on CBS’s Face the Nation, July 17:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZ6VeLOoWGw

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 374 other followers