Via Redstate
We have well documented Barack Obama's Marxist underpinnings. His wife, his preacher, his mother, his father, his childhood mentor, and his neighbor Bill Ayers all have underlying beliefs in marxism. They share a disdain for capitalism, capital, and job providers. They are all swept up in the call for social change. And Obama has been right there with them.It's amusing to think that in a marxist state, Obama and his pals would be lucky to be minor functionaries in a remote area of the land while Hillary would be one of the many toss away women sweeping the streets or standing on long lines to get cabbage for the soup. The world has indeed gone mad.
More from Redstate
It's so difficult to serve two masters: the saga of the Flag Lapel Pin.
6 comments:
It is astonishing how the Democrats can continuously forward such lame candidates.
The Dems should run the board this year; I bet they will still manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in the Presidential race.
Skipper, why do you think the dems should run the board?
Because the Republicans completely abandoned small government conservatism.
In power they have spent and regulated every bit as assiduously as Democrats.
And, along the way, Bush has failed to continually and forcefully articulate his Iraq policy. What is worse, Katrina handed him a brickbat with which to bludgeon Democrats.
Unfortunately, since he saw fit to assign self-propelled wastes of gravity to positions that actually required expertise and leadership (Brownie, I'm looking at you), he focussed the stench of failure on himself and, by extension, the Republican party.
I agree with what you say, but I still think he's done a magnificent job negotiating the mine field of opposition from the left and relentless drum beat of lies and spinning from the media.
My husband is like you. Perhaps it's a guy thing. Naturally I would have liked him to come out swinging, but then he wouldn't have gotten anything done.
Politics is the art of the possible.
erp:
I am not advocating he "come out swinging". Rather, I would hope that someone in his position would either have the savvy, or hire those who do (after all, one of marks of an excellent executive is spotting true expertise, then relying upon it), to find victory in a wide range of outcomes.
For example, with respect to Iraq: define what victory looks like -- say, a self-governing, secure state along the lines of Turkey -- while making sure the blame falls upon Islamic sectarianism and nihilism if that doesn't happen.
Had he the sense to do so from the beginning, then one exit strategy would be: we gave it our best shot; we got rid of the tyrant for you, because there was no way you could do it yourselves. After that, building a decent society was up to you. Unfortunately, it turns out you would rather kill each other.
etc...
Doing so would give us the credit for success, and them the blame for failure, while appealing to the altruistic streak widely shared among Americans that do not belong to the left.
Anyway, between budgetary profligacy and big government, along with the whiff of incompetence and political scandals due both to corruption and immorality, the Republicans started looking far too much like Democrats on a bad hair day.
BTW, I am sure you remember the Title IX discussion on TDD.
Just in case you are curious, and have a fair amount of time on your hands, here is a recent attempt of mine to suss how the left, in the person of lonbud, thinks.
Perhaps that last word deserves scare quotes.
Skipper, Wow. I just read your "conversation" with lonbud at Of Tides, Boats, and Risings Up. What tour de force!
The hard left, especially those who came of age in the 60's/70's believe feelings trump facts and are, IMO, not salvageable.
PS: David Corn, a truly despicable person, was on the author's blogroll -- 'nuf said.
Post a Comment