Tuesday, March 23, 2010

Talking points.

The front page of the Indianapolis Cat Box Liner yesterday had Smilin' Nan and her gavel under a headline saying, in a font only marginally smaller than the one used to announce moon landings or the sudden appearance of glowing craters where Japanese cities used to be, "LANDMARK MEASURE".

Dead center on page two was a photo of the big weekend rally in DC for immigration reform.

On the editorial page was Fran Quigley wringing his soft, sweaty hands about undocumented immigrants being denied their basic human rights, like subsidized education and health care.

Do you see a pattern?


Ken said...


Bram said...


Joanna said...

Used to be, if the people didn't like the government, they got a new one. Now the government just gets itself a new people. Fantastic.

Dave R. said...

Bastard progressives are going to need the votes. And, really, they've got little left to lose and tens of millions of votes to gain by pushing it.

Bram said...

While they are grasping immoral tyrannical Marxists, they aren't stupid. It is dangerous to assume your enemy is retarded.

TJP said...

The only things I see are price fixing and massive new taxes on working people and the employers who hire them. Or maybe I should say--between this and unemployment taxes--the employers that don't hire them.

Welcome to Nu America, where it's considered good economics to pay $13,000 for an insurance plan to cover $80 doctor visits, and where people act like they won the lottery when they get a dollar back from the five bucks they paid to the government.

I vote we replace the American Eagle with Baby Huey.

Fuzzy Curmudgeon said...

I liked my version of that front-page picture better than theirs.

Anonymous said...

Feh, I wonder if Kim Du Toit still thinks this is worth the lesson staying home in 2006 and 2008 may or may not have taught the Republicans?


Justthisguy said...

Yah, I see a pattern. This is where my nativist feelings trump my libertarian ones, though. With the exception of one great-grandmother from England, who may even have gotten here aboard a _steamship_ (shudder!), I am entirely descended from people of British ancestry who were here well before the Revolution.

staghounds said...

I'm waiting for the first defendant who calls forcible sodomy of a child "love reform".

fast richard said...

You link to Billy Beck. What I find extremely annoying about his pesimistic attitude, is that I sometimes think he might be absolutely right. If he is, we are on the verge of "interesting times" of epic proportions.

Most of my ancestors came here to escape the religious and civil wars of Europe. Many were devout pacifists. Unforturately, there is no place left to escape to.

That recent re-reading of 1984 was not at all reassuring. If there is any hope for the political process to turn things around, it has to happen quickly. I've never heard of positive political change that happened both quickly and peacefully.

WindRider said...

Connect the dots: Dems seem to have committed political suicide, but now watch them trumpet cap and trade in the press while sneaking 'immigration reform' through in time to have lots of new votes ready for November.

Will Brown said...

I've never heard of positive political change that happened both quickly and peacefully.

And yet, there are some 40% of the US electorate who adamantly proclaim Sunday's and this morning's events as shining examples of that very thing. Indeed, it is quite common for commentators to describe the US electoral process as a "bloodless revolution" involving neither riots nor tanks in the streets.

History, particularly political history, never moves quickly and is filled with examples of those who did, or tried to.

Do we want to achieve a particular result or just "win" a fight?

Anonymous said...

All Obama seems to worry about is his reputation and his place in history.

I think his place in history is safe. He is going to go down in history as the President who led us into our second civil war.

The Jack said...

In for a Penny in for a Pound.

They got the start of their Healthcare at the cost of public antipathy.

But that cost has already been paid. And who cares if the TeaBaggers hate it? Their central dogma is that they know better than you.

So, why not go for broke(sorry for the pun)?

They see all their dreams just there for the taking.

They feel that they'll either win in Nov' (by hook or by crook), loose but the GOP will be unable to do anything about it, or if, somehow, the GOP does unwind their dreams...

They'll just pass the laws again. The dems have shown that all they need is a President and bare majorities. So it's a waiting game.

Jenny said...

Used to be, if the people didn't like the government, they got a new one. Now the government just gets itself a new people.

Can I nominate Joanna for the internetz today? That's downright poetic in its simple clarity.

Anonymous said...

What Jenny said.

I'm afraid of how interesting this is going to become.


loren said...

"I think his place in history is safe. He is going to go down in history as the President who led us into our second civil war."
So who's going to lead the second civil war?
Where are the Thomas Paines, Jefferson's, Franklin s, Handcock's, Washington's of even Teddy Roosevelt?
All we have is Sarah Palin.
Compared to the FBI, ATF, Homeland Security, Secret Service, and a bunch of acronyms we never heard of, King George and all his men were pussies.
It takes more than a couple of AR clones and a big mouth to win against these guys.
Best to hunker down and wait till it all just stops running. Won't be long.

TJP said...

You know, Phil, at one time I might've smart-assed you about Hypothetical Republicans, but it seems something is passing through the previously impermeable layer of beggars that orbit Planet DC....


....even if it is just a little light falling on the surface.

Joanna said...

For all the talk about a second civil war, I keep thinking of Enjolras from Les Miserables -- he was so eager to right wrongs that he dove in headfirst and couldn't understand why no one rose up to join him -- and all he got was himself killed. Long story short, most people will take peaceful slavery over a free death any day.

Anonymous said...

Far too many of you are stuck in 1860s thinking. Our first civil war was fought with knives, guns and cannons. Our second civil war will be fought with lawyers, money and ballots. It will be fought in the court rooms, the voting booths and the legislative houses of the states.

When it takes to the streets the weapons will be signs, chants and ideals, not bullets and cannon.

The world has changed. Gandhi, Martin Luther King and Ronald Reagan taught us that we can overthrow tyranny and defeat our enemies without resorting to violence.

When enough States stand up and shout "NO MORE!" we will have civil war on our hands. But unlike the last one, this one will be civil. At least I pray it will.

Threats of violence and intimidation are the tools of the left, the are the tools of our oppressors. We cannot lower ourselves to their level. If we do, they win.

Even if we are better armed and more willing to fight than they are. We must save that knowledge and readiness for a dark future. Because if this does dissolve into a shooting war our country is truly lost.

Joanna said...

What he said.

Will said...


Do a little more research on Gandhi. He pointed out that his non-violent protests against the English was a special case, and would not work in most situations. His history after the English left should make that clear. I'm pretty sure that MLK had similar views. And again, the collapse of the Soviet Union is not the same as our situation here.

We have had two major shooting wars here over how two opposing viewpoints wanted to control things. Seems that if you wait too long to apply a correction to an off course nation, it gets very big and very violent. The founding fathers thought these sorts of things should be done a lot more often, to keep them from getting out of hand. So, maybe third times a charm? 8)
Question is, just how dark do you want to wait for? Read up on Churchill, he had a very good point to make on this. In a nutshell: the longer you wait, the harder it gets, and the odds of prevailing get slimmer. Wait long enough, you can't win. Which is exactly what the left is hoping we will do.
I'm all for trying it your way for the time being, but it won't take long before the left's willingness to rig the game makes it a moot point. They are going for a permanent win, and this close to the goal line, will resort to violence and rampant illegalities to win the game. It's an integral part of their playbook.