Showing posts with label Progressives. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Progressives. Show all posts

Sunday, July 18, 2010

Lessons from Nature.....



This article from National Review Online provides some interesting things humans ought to pay attention to in nature.

Westchester County, in the suburbs of New York City, was home to Hillary Clinton when she pretended to represent New York in the U.S. Senate, and its voters gave Barack Obama 63 percent of their ballots in 2008. It’s the sort of place that causes heavy breathing among the liberal faithful de­voutly awaiting the coming of the New Democratic Majority.

But Westchester County has a prob­lem more often seen in rural, Republican-leaning jurisdictions: coyotes. These ca­nine predators are a real menace, a fact that was dramatically illustrated in late June by the case of young Emily Hod­u­­lik, age six, who was attacked by a pair of coyotes on a leafy suburban street in the quaint town of Rye. The coyotes’ offensive proceeded along classically predatory lines as the canines ignored the other children in the group and targeted the smallest, weakest child. Miss Hodulik suffered serious bite wounds but escaped without life-threatening injuries.

Coyotes like to attack the little ones, human or otherwise. That was the case for one unfortunate coyote that attacked a puppy out for a jog with his master in Travis County, Texas, in the suburbs of Austin, where coyotes have it a little rougher than they do in suburban New York. That particular coyote had the bad luck to set his gaze on a puppy owned by Gov. Rick Perry, who produced a laser-sighted .380-caliber automatic pistol, loaded with hollowpoints, and sent it to the Happy Hunting Grounds.

People have a visceral reaction to guns, which is why the reactions to the Supreme Court’s recent decision in McDonald v. City of Chicago have been so emotional. One extraordinarily telling reaction came from David Ignatius of the Washington Post, whose response was headlined: “The Supreme Court Gun Decision Moves Us Toward Anarchy.” Mr. Ignatius wrote: “My biggest worry with Monday’s Supreme Court decision is that by ruling, in effect, that every American can apply for a gun license, the justices will make gun ownership much more pervasive in a society that already has too many guns. After all, if I know that my neighbor is armed and preparing for Armageddon situations where law and order break down (as so many are — just read the right-wing blogs) then I have to think about protecting my family, too. That’s the state-of-nature, everyone for himself logic that prevails in places such as Lebanon, Iraq and Afghanistan.”

Mr. Ignatius here is remarkably forthcoming: He is not worried about guns in the hands of criminals, but about guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens, people who are willing to apply for a permit and jump through the bureaucratic hoops re­quired of gun buyers

That is the essence of 21st-century progressivism: In matters ranging from financial derivatives to education to gun control, the Left believes that we face a choice between a masterful state and a Hobbesian war of all against all. For all of the smart set’s vaunted and self-congratulatory nu­ance, it is this absolutist vision, this Manichean horror, that forms the foun­dation of progressivism.

But the idea that individuals might use firearms lawfully to defend themselves is either anathema to progressives or inconceivable to them. President Obama’s reaction to the Heller decision, the predecessor to McDonald v. Chicago, suffered the in­evitable lacunae: “I have always believed that the Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to bear arms, but I also identify with the need for crime-ravaged communities to save their children from the violence that plagues our streets through commonsense, effective safety measures,” he said, unable to consider the possibility that citizens’ arming themselves against criminals is one potentially effective safety measure.

To use lethal force in self-defense is the ultimate declaration of independence, a kind of momentary secession from the authority of the government whose laws and prisons and police officers have, in that moment, failed the citizen.

Read it all; it basically records the horror of Progressives who find real life to be, well, "so very messy"!

Saturday, February 6, 2010

Jobs, Freedom, Wealth Creation

Nowhere are the battle lines between Progressivism and Conservatism more boldly drawn than in the area of Jobs creation for Americans. As Fox News reports, the continued loss of jobs in the current recession is bring the jobs issue front and center despite the Obama Administration's best efforts to keep it low key in 2009. What are the key differences between the two philosophies?

Progressives:
-believe Government can stimulate job creation by massive Federal spending
-believe that target economic stimulus is better than the seemingly helter-skelter approach of letting the market make spending decisions
-deficits don't matter if you are investing in infrastructure
-the economy can't do its best without some one looking over it
-Free markets are unfair, some people do better than others
-Government has an obligation to level the playing field

Conservatives:
-believe in limited central government per the Constitution
-people decide best how to spend their money
-private sector is the engine of economic growth and wealth creation
-deficit spending long term is bad monetary policy
-a rising tide of economic growth lifts all ships, everyone prospers
-individual opportunity and responsibility

Obviously the dynamics of each philosophy are far more complicated than this, but these basic principals shape the agendas of each movement. And, will shape the battle of the elections in 2010. Clearly, since the age of Reagen in the 1980's, the size of the Federal Government has grown to massive proportions. And yet the problems that big government is supposed to solve; economic inequality and poverty are by many measures just as bad or worse than they were back in the 1950's when the size of the Federal Government and its impact on the everyday lives of Americans was far less.

Friday, February 5, 2010

Punish the Successful, Punish the Prudent, Punish those who follow the Rules!!



In the story posted before this one, we cited statistics which show how open borders combined with rampant Progressive politics make for a fiscal ticking time bomb in California.

Progressives, instead of fixing the problem, want YOU to pay for it. How?? Read below.

Windfall Tax on Retirement Income by Nancy Pelosi
Adding a tax to your retirement is simply another way of saying to the American people, you're so darn stupid that we're going to keep doing this until we drain every cent from you. That's what the Speaker of the House is saying.
Read below................
Nancy Pelosi wants a Windfall Tax on Retirement Income. In other words tax what you have made by investing toward your retirement. This woman is a nut case! You aren't going to believe this.
Madam speaker Nancy Pelosi wants to put a Windfall Tax on all stock market profits (including Retirement fund, 401K and Mutual Funds! Alas, it is true - all to help the 12 Million Illegal Immigrants and other unemployed Minorities!
This woman is frightening.
She quotes...' We need to work toward the goal of equalizing income, (didn't Marx say something like this?), in our country and at the same time limiting the amount the rich can invest.' (I am not rich, are you?)
When asked how these new tax dollars would be spent, she replied:
'We need to raise the standard of living of our poor, unemployed and minorities. For example, we have an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in our country who need our help along with millions of unemployed minorities. Stock market windfall profits taxes could go a long way to guarantee these people the standard of living they would like to have as 'Americans'.'


Hat Tip: Tom S.