Pitcher, Gil Meche, Turns Away from $12,000,000. “I don’t deserve it.”

“Okay, Gil Meche hasn’t been great since signing a big contract with the Kansas City Royals. But not many players would feel so badly about their performance that they would walk away from a guaranteed $12 million.

Meche announced last week he will retire, giving up the payday due on the last year of his deal. Meche has always been known for his integrity, according to The New York Times, but this move left the baseball world stunned. Meche said he just didn’t like the idea of not earning his keep.

“When I signed my contract, my main goal was to earn it,” Meche told the paper from his temporary home in Lafayette, La. “Once I started to realize I wasn’t earning my money, I felt bad. I was making a crazy amount of money for not even pitching. Honestly, I didn’t feel like I deserved it. I didn’t want to have those feelings again.”

(Above article from NBC Washington found at Drudge Report and was written by Greg Wilson.

Meche made more than $50 million playing baseball, with most coming in the five-year, $55 million deal he signed with the Royals when he left Seattle in 2007.”

Matt Drudge’s Website Reaches More Americans Than CBS’s Katie Couric

Victor  Davis Hanson writes about this revolution in communicating in the following article:  “The Waning of Our Established Order:”

“American reality has been turned upside down in just 20 years.

Americans no longer count on their news to be filtered and shaped by the Associated Press or the New York Times. Nor do millions have it read to them in the evening by CBS, ABC or NBC anchorpersons — not with the Internet, cable news and talk radio. Matt Drudge’s website, “The Drudge Report,” reaches far more Americans than does CBS anchor star Katie Couric.

The old notion that America’s most successful citizens are turned out by prestigious four-year universities — the more private and Ivy League, the better — overseen by disinterested professors is also nearing an end. Private for-profit trade schools and online colleges are certifying millions in particular skills.

Meanwhile, the high jobless rate among recent college graduates, who are burdened by thousands of dollars in student loans, is starting to resemble the Freddie Mac- and Fannie Mae-spawned financial bubble of 2008, in which millions of indebted and unemployed borrowers could not pay back exorbitant federally insured home loans. The notion that parents are going to keep borrowing $200,000 to certify their children with high-prestige BA degrees that don’t necessarily lead to good jobs seems about as wise as buying a sprawling house that one can’t afford. James Cameron, Bill Gates, Sean Hannity, Tom Hanks, Steve Jobs, Rush Limbaugh, Tiger Woods and Mark Zuckerberg all made a good living without earning BAs.

A therapeutic college curricula and hyphenated “studies” courses have not made graduates better-read or more skilled in math and science. For many employers, the rigor of the new BA is scarcely equivalent to that of the old high school diploma. The global warming/climate change/climate chaos “crisis” has reminded Americans that careerist university Ph.Ds can be just as likely to fudge evidence and distort research as political lobbyists. The old blanket respect for academia and academics is eroding.

After the Greek financial fraud and collapse, the European Union identity crisis, and insolvency in California, there will be no more new defined-benefit retirement programs. A shrinking and debt-ridden youth cohort cannot and will not continue to subsidize an expanding and more affluent retired generation. Soon, 65 will be the new 50. We are going to see lots more seniors working well into their 70s.

Few believe that Detroit’s problem is too few unionized autoworkers, or that the SEIU has resulted in far better public service and efficiency from government employees. A government conspiracy or an ignorant public does not explain why union membership has now fallen to 12 percent of the American workforce.

The welfare-entitlement state is likewise a relic. Only a few political dinosaurs are calling for more spending, more entitlements and more taxes. Fairly or not, most Europeans and Americans accept that the limits of redistribution have been reached. President Obama’s talk of “spread the wealth” and “fat cat” bankers has not done much to lower $1.3 trillion deficits and 9.4 percent unemployment. So he has dropped the high-tax, more-benefits, class-warfare rhetoric in favor of writing editorials in the Wall Street Journal assuring business of less regulation and more government help.

Race relations are being redefined as never before. Interracial marriage, integration and immigration have made the old rubrics — “white,” “black,” “brown” — obsolete. Rigid, half-century-old affirmative action preference programs have not caught up with everyday reality. Their overseers are likewise ossified, now that millions in an interracial America do not fit into their precise racial slots, and being white — to the degree that it can be easily defined — is not synonymous with innate privilege. The notion that Tiger Woods’ children need an admissions or employment edge over natives of Appalachia or immigrants from India is surreal.

Abroad, things are just as upside down. Russia is no longer the avatar of global communism but the world’s largest cutthroat capitalist oil producer. China‘s cultural revolution is now about making tons of money and driving a luxury car. The European Union has been reduced to finger-pointing and standing in line to beg Germany for cash — a far cry from its advertised 21st century utopian brotherhood. Our old neighbor Mexico is now a near-failed narco-state, bearing a greater resemblance to Afghanistan than to its brethren North American nations.

In response to this topsy-turvy world, the traditional media, tenured professors, well-paid public employees, rigid ethnic and racial lobbies, unions, organized retirees, open-borders advocates and entrenched politicians all are understandably claiming that we live in an uncivil age.

We well may, but we also are seeing the waning of an old established order. And the resulting furor suggests that the old beneficiaries are not going quietly into that good night.

Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and author, most recently, of “A War Like No Other: How the Athenians and Spartans Fought the Peloponnesian War.” You can reach him by e-mailing author@victorhanson.com.”

Comment:  Unfortunately Marxism is not only still with us but has become active in the White House.

From the Gates of Vienna a Warning about the Future of Canada

 

The title of the article of warning is, “Islam by the Numbers”.   

The site, the Gates of Vienna has been closely  following  the withdrawals from  democratic processes now dotting the European communities threatened by Islamic intimidations.   The two ongoing trials conducted by the leftwing courts bureaucracies of Denmark  and the Netherlands against Lars Hedegaard and Geert Wilders respectively should shock civilized peoples throughout the world.   These defendants are charged with ‘insulting’ Islam.

Canada has already committed crimes against free speech and continues to restrict free speech through its Human Rights Agencies.    In the United States universities have joined this antifreedom crowd with codes of their own.

Click on below to connect to a blogsite, Gates of Vienna, article warning Canada of its freedom’ future with the advent of Islam tyranny against democracy.

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/

How Marxist Bigotry Enters The American University World…….. Trouble at Temple U.

Temple Student Government Backs Down from Discriminatory

Funding Policy

by Adam Kissel

 

“Temple University’s student government has backed down from a viewpoint-discriminatory funding policy for student events. Temple Student Government (TSG) had told all student organizations that speakers who are “offensive”—or not “inclusive” and “friendly”—would not be funded. A student government leader also stated that the new rule would “not be found in any documents, but will be enforced by the [allocations] committee.” Less than 24 hours after the student group Temple University Purpose (TUP) challenged the policy with FIRE’s help, the policy was rescinded.

On Saturday, September 11, 2010, at a meeting for student organization leaders, TUP President Alvaro Watson was told by TSG Allocations Committee Chair Mark Quien about a new policy governing funding for student groups out of the General Activity Fee (GAF), which is paid by all Temple students. As Watson recalled hearing, Quien informed the group leaders that under this new policy, funds would not be allocated for student group events featuring speakers whom Student Activities Program Coordinator Maureen Fisher found controversial.

Given that Temple has violated the rights of TUP for hosting outside speakers twice in the past year and has shown no concern about fighting against the First Amendment and one of its own students in federal court only to suffer a shameful speech code defeat, it is easy to see why Watson and TUP were concerned about the new policy. On Sunday, September 12, with support from FIRE, Watson e-mailed Quien and copied Fisher and other administrators, asking Quien to verify the existence of this strange policy. Watson also asked Quien if a written copy of this new policy existed and if he would be able to see it. Quien responded to Watson’s e-mail later that evening, stating:

I do recall speaking with you yesterday, and you are correct in your understanding of the policy. However, it is not the program coordinator (Maureen) who enforces this “rule” but rather the student body being represented by the committee. I understand your concern for the “constitutionality” of this policy but quite frankly when speaking about such philosophical issues the matter becomes moot. Student Organizations have been provided with the privilege of GAF funding, which was provided even further by the student body. If an honorarium insults or offends a large portion of that student body, that speaker will not be funded by Allocations, because the money used was provided by everyone not a special interest group. If a special interest group wishes to bring a speaker to campus, that group has the right to do so. We are not restricting a groups [sic] right to freedom of speech but rather enforcing a de facto principle that all events on campus should  be inclusive, friendly, and appropriate for all students on campus. The rule will not be found in any documents, but will be enforced by the committee. If you wish to apply for allocations for any event, you have the right to do so.

Enforcing a rule that “will not be found in any documents”? Really?

Adding further uncertainty to the status of any such unwritten policy at Temple, Fisher herself responded to Watson, writing, “I believe you misunderstood. There is no such policy for TSG Allocations nor would I or any other staff person deem a speaker ‘controversial’ or not.”

A few hours later, Quien backed down. He e-mailed his list of “Student Organization Representatives,” stating,

Contrary to what was stated on Saturday, allocations’ proposals are not reviewed based upon the content of the program. Please refer to the criteria listed above before submitting your applications.

Quien’s blithe initial dismissal of Watson’s concerns about the constitutionality of Temple’s unwritten policy is flatly unacceptable. Had it been enforced, TSG’s unwritten policy would have violated the constitutional rights of student groups in multiple ways. Temple is a public university that is legally and morally bound by the First Amendment and the decisions of the Supreme Court concerning freedom of speech at public colleges and universities. Furthermore, Temple has a non-delegable duty to ensure that the First Amendment rights of its students are protected and is legally liable if these rights are not respected by TSG as an authorized agent of the university. Thus, Temple must ensure that any delegation of its duties to the student government comes with full protection of the First Amendment rights that Temple is bound to uphold. It seems that TSG needs some remedial training in the principles of the First Amendment.

Temple University escaped another humiliating defeat last week, but students now need to be on the lookout for violations of their rights by TSG—an organization that ought to be protecting the rights of fellow students, not violating them. FIRE is on the lookout, too.

TSG should remember that people come to college for an education. If you make it through college without ever having been offended, without ever having your deepest views and the deepest sources of your identity challenged and evaluated, you should ask for your money back. TSG should be promoting the widest diversity of conflicting views—even controversial ones, and even those that might seem offensive—not standing between students and their education.”

Article was written Sept. 21, 2010

Comment:  FIRE is Federation for  Individual Rights in Education.

The Danish Witch Hunt…..The Convenient Marriage of Left and Islamofascism

Melanie Phillips wrote the following article at Spectator, titled, “The Danish Witch Hunt.”

“A couple of weeks ago, I wrote here about the witch-hunt in Denmark against Lars Hedegaard, President of the Danish Free Press Society and The International Free Press Society. Along with a Danish MP, Jesper Langballe, Hedegaard has been prosecuted for ‘racism’ after he drew attention to ‘honour’ violence among Muslim families. He is now on trial, and this is the speech he made to the court in Frederiksberg two days ago. Here’s a flavour:

My counsel has instructed me that in cases brought under Article 266b, the only thing that determines whether one is convicted or not is a matter of the perceived insult whereas one is barred from proving the truth of the statement. The article deals with public statements whereby a group of people are ‘threatened, insulted or degraded’. But as my lawyer has already noted, I have made no public statement.

When it comes to Article 266b, there is no equality before the law. I am daily insulted and degraded by something I read or hear and I am sure that most people have the same experience… As jurisprudence shows, not only in Denmark but in all European countries with similar insult articles in their penal code, these insult articles open the gates to inequality before the law. There are insulted who enjoy the tender graces of the public prosecutor, and there are the less favoured who must endure insults directed at them.

…What does the public prosecutor hope to accomplish by my conviction? He may drag me in front of a court. He may portray me as a racist, a right-wing extremist and a non-human. He may do the same to hundreds and thousands of others who insist on their right of free speech to describe Islam and Muslim culture just like we would deal with any other phenomenon in a free society.

…In conclusion permit me to mention the true victims in this case. The public prosecutor has not considered the 20,000 women in the Muslim world who every year fall victim to so-called honour killings, or the 50,000 Muslim girls in Germany who the federal police consider threatened with genital mutilation, nor the hundreds of thousands of little girls in Muslim majority societies who have been sold into marriage with much older men and who must therefore live a life of constant rape, while Islamic scholars preach that this is in complete accordance with religious orthodoxy.

I hope that the judge as opposed to the public prosecutor will consider the fate of these unfortunate human beings. Likewise I hope that the judge will realise the absurdity of prosecuting me for statements made within the confines of my own four walls.

As Mark Steyn notes in a fine and savage piece about this obscenity in Denmark:

His is merely the latest in a long line of the western world’s new heresy trials —Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff in Austria, Geert Wilders and Gregorius Nekschot in the Netherlands, Michel Houllebecq in France, Michael Smith in Australia, Ezra Levant and me in Canada.

As in Canada, as in the Netherlands, so in Denmark the defendants in such cases are informed that the truth is no defense. …That’s why these are heresy trials, and only the first of many. The prosecutors think Hedegaard, Langballe, Wilders, Mrs Sabbaditsch-Wolff et al are apostates from the new state religion of multiculturalism. Thuggish Muslim lobby groups, on the other hand, consider them heretics against Islam. In practice, it makes little difference, and multiculturalism is merely an interim phase, a once useful cover for an Islamic imperialism so confident it now barely needs one. The good news is that European prosecutors are doing such a grand job with their pilot program of show trials you’ll hardly notice the difference when sharia is formally instituted. …

This trial shames Denmark. If Lars Hedegaard is convicted, another light in Europe will have been extinguished, and the remainder will follow, very fast. In their folly, the multiculti enforcers are setting the stage for great violence, and a descent into barbarism.

Read Hedegaard’s speech, and weep for Europe.”

The Balloon Head Thinking of Chris Matthews, A Leading Leftwing Pundit

Female  hysterics cannot  be better demonstrated than those displayed almost daily and the best recently  by Chris Matthews via his television entertainment show on MSNBC.

This Chris happens to be a Christopher, and I believe without sex change to date.

This Christopher is a vulgar, lie spewing leftwing radical who often purports to be the final word examining modern American life.    In some unfortunate ways, he is.    His ignorance dominates  his vulgarities, lies and emotions…..but he is sharp and quick mouthed, a terrific weapons of today’s American leftwingers featuring television shows.

He hates Michele Bachmann.    Most recently, yesterday, that is, he called her a balloon head amongst other such nouns and similar adjectives for emphasis.   He is planning to interview a  civil and respectful, Sol Russo, a leader in  the Tea Party, to know why the Tea Party would allow such a balloon head to speak to the nation.

I admit I admire these Tea Party balloon heads  and envy them for their courage, energy, fortitude and ability to be so ubiquitously berated and insulted for practicing being American.   I admit I believe Chris Matthews is a snake related to cobras.  The evidence of this is overwhelming…..but that route is for another day. 

He pretends, or demonstrates the best he can, that he is well educated.   The speed of his tongue and vigor of his emotions make most leftwingers comfortable that he is a true lefty, one well rehearsed in Lefty Truth.

Lefty truth in these Obama years includes the vital premise that these United States of America are the most racist in the entire world……and that the Republican Party is the villainous evil which sustains this hateful condition.   Mr. Matthews, is religiously  a devotee of “Progressivism on the progressive road to Marxism”.

Michele Bachmann spoke in Iowa a few days ago.   She is proud of her country which makes her proud to defend it.

That is enough to rile Lefties all around our country and nearly everyone overseas.

Yet, no  country in the history of the mankind  has cleared the way for more human liberty, dignity and achievement.

The hysterical Mr.  Matthews doesn’t like such thoughts and words.   Last evening, he lost his mind again and began to shout……”Balloon head…….”..and much more.

He fed the audience the number… “3/5ths”…….so quickly, so pompously, so hysterically, so assuredly, one might miss the number entirely.

Representative Bachmann, the  “Balloon Head”, had told her audience in Iowa that the American founders “worked tirelessly until slavery was no more in the United States.”   She named John Q. Adams as she proudly reviewed “the contribution of  our forebearers who would not rest until slavery was ended in our country.”

Matthews raled by now….”Balloon Head” and  pronounced royally that Michele didn’t know her country’s history…..and nearly choked as he shouted disdain for the Constitution, “the Constitution that treated slaves as 3/5ths of a person” in this country.

“Did you hear that!” he screamed….”This Balloon Head!”  ….”She said the Founding Fathers got rid of slavery!….Did you just hear this stuff?”   Citizen Bachmann never said that.  Entertainer Chris imagined she did.

My dear fellow Americans.  PLEASE  click on the video below.   Chris Matthews, despite his hysteria is NOT a stupid man…..He is stupid about his country.   Almost all Americans under the age of 60 have been programmed to believe Christian America is the scourge of the modern world.   Almost no American whether a college graduate or graduate from high school has been taught AMERICAN HISTORY.

It has been taught its disorders, not its accomplishments.  Our children  know the story of Wounded Knee and Medger Evers.  It has been told president John F. Kennedy was a victim of racial hatred.  It has not been taught the glorious stuggles of the American people (primarily through its Christian devotions) in the past generation because it does not fit well into the Marxist=-Progressive religion of forced equality……….the religion of fanatics such as Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews, Van Jones, Anita Dunn, Charlie Schumer, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Arlen Specter, and unfortunately the religion that has been taught to Barack Hussein Obama.

Our children do not know the story of the Civil War anymore…..and nothing about the Federal Constitution.  It certainly knows nothing about the 3/5ths amendment to the Constitution.   

NEARLY EVERY MEMBER OF TODAY’S AMERCAN DEMOCRAT PARTY ARE PROGRAMMED  BY MARXIST DECONSTRUCTION OF AMERICAN HISTORY  as on can test by how they view and treat one of the greatest documents ever created by the human mind, the American Constitution.

MICHELE BACHMANN IS JUSTIFIED TO BE WORRIED ABOUT AMERICA LOSING ITS FREEDOM.   Obama, the Marxist, is devoted to enlarging government at the expense of the citizen.   So is his Democrat Party.

The number “3/5ths” referring to a Constitutional compromise between Northern and Southern states, was proof to “Balloon Head” Chris Matthews claim of the racism of the document.   

  I am pulling my knowledge of the number from my 76 year old brain from what I learned in the 9th grade……Even before the American Constitution was ever written there was a battle between slavery holders of the country’s South and those Northerners who opposed, even hated slavery.

During the 1770s because of England’s need to pay for its wars against France, it turned to its colonies for more collections.   Most Americans probabaly recognise this bit of history.  The political battle which followed the American Revolution victory was to create one united country based on certain principles of purpose in community life.

The Union of the country was the political battle above all political battles from its beginnings in 1776 and 1767 to the end of the War Between the States.   Naturally, it would require compromises.

The political battle in second place centered around the institution of slavery.  War could have broken out among the States just about at any time  until 1860 when, indeed, it finally did.   

The most important issue in 1787 was uniting the states by establishing a National Constitution, a set of laws all the states would accept.

Because the new nation was to be a representative democracy is had to declare who would be eligible to vote.   Men of a certain age….Free men of a certain age…..what about slave men of any age….was to be a built in bloody battle.  

Southerners, the slave states, demanded that Negroes be counted according to Constitutional law, but, being slaves, they would not vote.   Northerners were fearful of southern political strength and opposed.   As a compromise the southern black population would be given 3/5ths of a vote  when determining the number of representatives southerners were allotted for seats in the House of Representatives.

The number 3/5ths  had nothing to do with diminshing the value of a human being by 2/5ths…..as Chris Matthews had screamed.    Please click on and listen to Chris Matthews yourself.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/25/chris-matthews-michele-bachmann-balloon-head_n_814033.html

More Democrat Rhetoric “Improvements” Jim Moran Claims GOP Victories Matter of Racism to the Arab World!!

Virginia’s Rep. Jim Moran — beyond uncivil

By Jennifer Rubin

Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.) has been roundly criticized in the past for his noxious comments about Jews and Israel. On an al-Hurra broadcast last night, he surpassed himself in calling much of the country a bunch of racists.

The Republican victories in the midterm elections, he said:

happened for the same reason the Civil War happened in the United States. It happened because the Southern states, the slaveholding states, didn’t want to see a president who was opposed to slavery. In this case, I believe, a lot of people in the United States don’t want to be governed by an African-American, particularly one who is liberal, who wants to spend money and who wants to reach out to include everyone in our society.

I am not going to try to unravel that obnoxious sentiment, or the political wisdom of calling his own state (which elected three Republican congressmen in November) racist. But, once again, this is a perfect time for the Democrats to police one of their own. Will they? What about the liberal pundits? I’m waiting.

I asked for comment from the offices of Democratic Sens. Jim Webb and Mark Warner and from Democratic Rep. Gerry Connolly. So far, none of these colleagues from Virginia, one of the former “slaveholding states,” have responded.

(The above article from the Washington Post was written by Jennifer Rubin.  Click below for the Democrat Representative’s interview on Alhurra Arab Television: 

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/virginiapolitics/2011/01/moran_2010_gop_victories_happe.html

“Representative Moran is a Democrat from Virginia.   Last year during the fall elections he referred to the Republican slate as the      “TALIBAN TICKET”…..but that was before president Obama’s call for kinder rhetoric in American political discussion. 

The Democrat Party establishment throught its agencies overseeing   America’s news, education,  entertainment, and  the victimhood  populations of the country,  consider  rhetoric  “vile” or even “irresponsible”,   if  rhetoric is in any manner negatively critical of the Obama administration.  

Moran’s  Taliban Ticket speech could still be given today for it withstands the Obama test of  ‘responsible’ rhetoric.

The following article by Amy Gardner of the Washington Post  reviewed the Taliban Ticket’ Jim Moran speech:

“Always good copy, U.S. Rep. James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.) likened the Republican ticket in Virginia this year to Afghanistan’s radical Taliban movement in comments broadcast Sunday by WAMU radio.

At a get-out-the-vote rally in Fairfax County, Moran said: “I mean, if the Republicans were running in Afghanistan, they’d be running on the Taliban ticket as far as I can see.”

Moran was talking about Republicans Robert F. McDonnell for governor, Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling and state Sen. Kenneth T. Cuccinelli II, who is running for attorney general. By some accounts, the three represent the most conservative Republican ticket to run in Virginia in many years. Moran’s comments clearly were aimed to motivate Democratic voters to turn out on Tuesday and vote blue.

According to WAMU, McDonnell spokeswoman Crystal Cameron called Moran’s remarks “negative” and “vicious.” She also said Moran was seeking to rally voters who are unexcited by their own candidates, Democrats R. Creigh Deeds for governor, Jody Wagner for lieutenant governor and Stephen C. Shannon for attorney general.

“Creigh has had a very difficult time rallying his base,” Cameron said, “and they’re trying to do anything they can to get out the vote on their side.”

This is not the first time McDonnell has been compared to the Taliban; in 2003, a liberal columnist for the Daily Press of Newport News dubbed him “Taliban Bob” for his role in ousting a female Circuit Court judge who had been accused by another woman of sexual harassment.”

Daily Beast Meeghan McCain Uplifts Political Rhetoric on MSNBC, Calls Bachmann “A Poor Man’s Sarah Palin!”

Meghan McCain, the leftwing, light-headed  daughter of the Republican candidate for the American presidency in 2008 has become a pundit on “Daily Beast”.   She is from Arizona, where her father is still the quixotic, John McCain, the former true American   military hero, and a hero of the first class.   Her  geography, her own quixoticness, her lack of base but  gift of the quick tongue, her name and the shallows of her thinking  made her a quick star to be featured on MSNBC’s  Lawrence O’Donnell’s “Story Time News”.

Meghan was featured to express worries about political rhetoric and was led to talk about the Arizona “shootings”, expanding the concept of the word “shooting” by adding an ‘s’……for impact.  (Several were shot, yes, but there was one shooter, well at this point, for  Oliver Stone or Michael Moore might be reviewing the script at this very moment to ‘correct’  the truth with religious leftwing interpretations.)

Uplifting the political rhetoric on MSNBC is not easy to do.   The youthful Meghan McCain managed  no swearing  and didn’t   refer to objections conservatives have listed about Obama’s Marxist takeover of the American health industry as examples of conservative “acts of violence”.  

 Meghan McCain  raised the bar of political rhetoric and claimed with the certainy of an ancient goddesses of Greek mythology:

“Michelle Bachmann is a poor man’s Sarah Palin!”   I perked up.  McCain brought me into her scenery.

I am a poor man.  McCain insisted Bachmann is my Palin…….McCain clarified  I could  never have  owned a ‘Palin’ because of the unequal distribution of wealth in America.    That is probably  true.  (There may be other causes in play as well, but we’ll pass on them, but this McCain may be on to something here……I shall try to ‘suffer’ the moment .) 

So now I get Bachmann for nothing at all….a tax free gift to the victimized underpriveleged.   How Liberal, How wonderfully the Marxist this  tongue from  the glib, shallow,  but well oiled  motor-mouthed Meghan McCain who never let a serious thought get in her performance on Larry O’Donnell’s MSNBC’s “StoryTime News” program.    Take a look at this exciting young star for MSNBC’s Story Time News channels:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/41283661#41283661

I am a fan of this wonderfully ‘native’ American grass roots movement called “Tea Baggers” by the Lawrence O’Donnells of the world.  Old folks who still remember American before the nation went drugged.   I am not active in the movement, but if I were 50 years younger and know all  I know today, I would be.

I admire Michelle Bachmann.  I do not want her to run for the American presidency unless she can defeat the  obsessive Marxist presently occupying the White House.   Even then I probably would  prefer someone else to defeat this president in 2012……even Hillary for the Democrat Party nomination.   She is an American and still on the Progressive side of Marxism.

Ms. McCain did not mention that Michelle Bachmann is a major player representing the Tea Party movement.   Yet she condemned CNN for allowing Representative Bachmann time for her response to the SOTU festivities  led by president Obama.   The Representative spoke well.   She had a tremendous advantage over president Obama. 

She tells the truth as she views the truth,  Mr. Obama is an obsessive liar on behalf  of his Marxist religion.  In his world lying is not a sin, but a virtue if it accomplishes a quicker reach for the Marxist State.

“The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen!”….Dennis Prager.   (I like big citizens…..even a  Marxist one, as long as her or she is not president ruining democratic institutions.

Obama….”A President to Nowhere!”…..by Dan Henninger, WSJ.

“No president before Barack Obama has been so right and so wrong.

When in his State of the Union speech Mr. Obama said, “This is our generation’s Sputnik moment,” citing the emergence of global competition from the likes of China and India, he was right.

Minutes later he proposed to cover the country with high-speed rail and companies making solar shingles.

High-speed rail and solar shingles? If that’s the president’s idea of meeting our Sputnik moment, then Houston, we have a problem.

About halfway into the speech, I began to wonder: What is John Boehner thinking? Let’s first welcome back the tradition of House Speakers who bring nothing but a poker face to the State of the Union. (The vice president re-tightening his tie in the middle of the speech was a minor Biden classic.)

I’m guessing that about the time the president was calling investments in clean energy “the Apollo projects of our time,” the new Speaker was thinking: “This is bunk,” or some word to that effect.

That probably wasn’t Mr. Boehner’s first thought. Before the bunk arrived, his first thought was: “We’re in trouble.”

If Barack Obama had come even close to matching policies with the sentiments he spun across the House chamber in the first sections of that speech, the Republicans would have been dealing with a formidable new centrist president.

The speech’s prelude could have been delivered by Ronald Reagan or written by the conservative entrepreneurial Utopian George Gilder.

In a single generation, “the rules have changed,” he said, propelled by technology. “The naysayers predicting our decline” are wrong. When moments later Mr. Obama said, “We are the first nation to be founded for the sake of an idea,” one felt the ghost of the Gipper hovering nearby. The president called forth more of those spirits, praising “the idea that each of us deserves the chance to shape our own destiny. That’s why centuries of pioneers and immigrants have risked everything to come here.”

And: “We need to out-innovate, out-educate, and out-build the rest of the world.” Yes!

And: “Our free enterprise system is what drives innovation.” Oh, yes!

Even an Obama naysayer was thinking, Go for it, Mr. President. Unleash our nation of pioneer entrepreneurs with incentives to work, save and invest. (But why the weird slap at the all-American competitiveness of the Super Bowl?)

For a while Tuesday night, it appeared Mr. Obama would replicate Bill Clinton’s almost sci-fi ability to absorb his opposition’s best ideas, such as welfare reform, and re-infuse them into the body politic as his own. But no. We got high-speed rail and solar shingles.

Barack Obama believes what he believes. The ideas he came in with are the ideas he will go out with, and nowhere in that speech was there a fully formed policy idea reflecting authentic belief in the private economy.

The recently promised and much-needed regulatory review was offset with a paean to regulation. “It’s why we have speed limits.” He somehow felt compelled to tell productive suburban families that he’ll try to rescind the tax cut for them, the $250,000 “millionaires.”

Once past the Reagan moment, the Obama policy menu had three entrees: clean energy, education and infrastructure. This was lifted, almost verbatim, from the Obama budget message two months into his presidency: “Our budget will make long overdue investments in priorities—like clean energy, education, health care, and new infrastructure.” He extolled “new jobs that pay well” such as “installing solar energy panels and wind turbines.”

This isn’t a vision. It’s an obsession.

Sending the completed trade agreements with Colombia and Panama to Congress for ratification should have been a lay-up for a president seeking the center. That’s not happening.

What’s ahead? Mainly one thing: November 2012.

If the State of the Union disappointed policy wonks, it’s because the Obama presidency has entered full campaign mode. His State of the Union was a road map to a second term. Draw the Republican Congress toward the post-November spirit of reform on spending, entitlements and taxes, let these ideas twist in the wind of endless negotiation, pocket the “bipartisan” effort, and run out the clock to a three-point November victory.

Then what?

After ObamaCare and financial re-regulation, the remaining Obama years are looking like a presidency to nowhere. Even if you believe in green jobs, that’s an industry off in the future. Beyond the Keynesian liniment oil of public spending, he’s offering almost nothing for the here-and-now economy.

Rep. Paul Ryan, in his response, was right that “our nation is approaching a tipping point.” Either the government leads the economy, as proposed in the last two-thirds of Mr. Obama’s State of the Union, or it will be driven into the 21st century by the nation’s pioneer legacy of individual innovation, as he seemed to say in the first third of the speech.

If you belief it’s the latter, six more years of chasing Mr. Obama’s idea of investments will be a waste of precious time. The Super Bowl of global competition is well into the first quarter. The future is now.”

Comment:  This president has been consistent in his obsessions.   He is a Marxist kid still at Harvard focussing on satisfying the requirements laid out by his Marxist professors.   This president  has never known America.  He has never worked at MacDonald’s.   Worse yet, he is from “the entitled” and a graduate from Jeremiah “Goddamn America” Wright’s ‘church’ in Chicago.  

As with most True Believer Marxists he is devoted to this religion, no matter what the cost, no matter what facts and truth might get in the way.

TNR Left: “Snore or Snare”, ObamaSpeech Entrapped Republicans

“Snore or Snare”  by Ed Kilgore at the New Repblic:

“The ideas and policy proposals in Barack Obama’s 2011 State of the Union Address were anything but fresh and original. Much of it could easily have been harvested from any number of interchangeable speeches given during the last 20 years—not just by presidents by members of Congress, governors, mayors, and CEOs—from both parties. Yet that may have been exactly the point. By staking his claim to decades of well-worn political detritus, I think Obama has set a cunning political trap for his enemies.

A crash program for economic competitiveness? We’ve heard it dozens of times, and Obama’s speech mainly substituted new global rivals for old ones. Harrumphing about how education and a skilled workforce are they key to national prosperity? Obviously an old theme. Reorganizing major federal departments was one of Jimmy Carter’s signature initiatives. Tax simplification was one of Ronald Reagan’s. Making government a lean, mean efficiency machine has been promised many times, most notably by Bill Clinton. Across-the-board spending freezes, support for small business entrepreneurs, growing green jobs, better infrastructure, boosting exports (without, presumably, those pesky imports)—we’ve heard it all. One conceit—the “Sputnik Moment”—was so old that you wonder if the president’s young speechwriters just found out about it.

And that’s the beauty of Obama’s address. He basically put together every modest, centrist, reasonable-sounding idea for public investment aimed at job creation and economic growth that anyone has ever uttered; and he did so at the exact moment that the GOP has abandoned the very concept of public investment altogether. He’s thrown into relief the fact that Republicans no longer seem interested in any government efforts to boost the economy, except where they offer an excuse to reduce the size and power of government.

Paul Ryan’s deficit-maniac response played right into Obama’s trap: Ryan barely mentioned the economy other to imply that every dollar taken away from the public sector will somehow create jobs in the private sector economy (a private sector economy wherein, as Obama cleverly noted, corporate profits are setting records). For those who buy the idea that government is the only obstacle to an economic boom, this makes sense. But for everybody else, the contrast between a Democratic president with a lot of small, familiar ideas for creating jobs and growth, and a Republican Party with just one big idea, is inescapable. It’s a vehicle for the “two alternate futures” choice which Obama will try to offer voters in 2012.

Moreover, Obama’s tone—the constant invocation of bipartisanship at a time when Republicans are certain to oppose most of what he’s called for, while going after the progressive programs and policies of the past—should sound familiar as well. It was Bill Clinton’s constant refrain, which he called “progress over partisanship,” during his second-term struggle with the Republican Congress. During that period, the Republicans being asked to transcend “partisanship” were trying to remove Clinton from office. And Clinton wasn’t really extending his hand in a gesture of cooperation with the GOP but, by creating a contrast with their ideological fury, indicating that he himself embodied the bipartisan aspirations of the American people and the best ideas of both parties. It was quite effective.

By playing this rope-a-dope, Obama has positioned himself well to push back hard against the conservative agenda. Having refused to offer Republicans the cover they crave for “entitlement reform,” while offering his own modest, reasonable-sounding deficit reduction measures, he’s forcing the GOP to either go after Social Security and Medicare on their own—which is very perilous to a party whose base has become older voters—or demand unprecedented cuts for those popular public investments that were the centerpiece of his speech. Either way, in a reversal of positions from the last two years, Obama looks like he is focused on doing practical things to boost the economy, while it’s Republicans who are talking about everything else. Boring it may have been, but as a positioning device for the next two years, Obama’s speech was a masterpiece.”

Ed Kilgore is a special correspondent for The New Republic.