Thursday, December 14, 2006

Liberalism 101

This is a great analysis on liberalism:

The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness

By Lyle H. Rossiter, Jr, MD

Monday, December 4, 2006

Dr. Lyle H. Rossiter, Jr.,a forensic psychiatrist, explains the madness of liberalism in his new book The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness. You can read an excerpt below, and read more at his website

Like all other human beings, the modern liberal reveals his true character, including his madness, in what he values and devalues, in what he articulates with passion. Of special interest, however, are the many values about which the modern liberal mind is not passionate: his agenda does not insist that the individual is the ultimate economic, social and political unit; it does not idealize individual liberty and the structure of law and order essential to it; it does not defend the basic rights of property and contract; it does not aspire to ideals of authentic autonomy and mutuality; it does not preach an ethic of self-reliance and self-determination; it does not praise courage, forbearance or resilience; it does not celebrate the ethics of consent or the blessings of voluntary cooperation. It does not advocate moral rectitude or understand the critical role of morality in human relating. The liberal agenda does not comprehend an identity of competence, appreciate its importance, or analyze the developmental conditions and social institutions that promote its achievement. The liberal agenda does not understand or recognize personal sovereignty or impose strict limits on coercion by the state. It does not celebrate the genuine altruism of private charity. It does not learn history's lessons on the evils of collectivism.

What the liberal mind is passionate about is a world filled with pity, sorrow, neediness, misfortune, poverty, suspicion, mistrust, anger, exploitation, discrimination, victimization, alienation and injustice. Those who occupy this world are "workers," "minorities," "the little guy," "women," and the "unemployed." They are poor, weak, sick, wronged, cheated, oppressed, disenfranchised, exploited and victimized. They bear no responsibility for their problems. None of their agonies are attributable to faults or failings of their own: not to poor choices, bad habits, faulty judgment, wishful thinking, lack of ambition, low frustration tolerance, mental illness or defects in character. None of the victims' plight is caused by failure to plan for the future or learn from experience. Instead, the "root causes" of all this pain lie in faulty social conditions: poverty, disease, war, ignorance, unemployment, racial prejudice, ethnic and gender discrimination, modern technology, capitalism, globalization and imperialism. In the radical liberal mind, this suffering is inflicted on the innocent by various predators and persecutors: "Big Business," "Big Corporations," "greedy capitalists," U.S. Imperialists," "the oppressors," "the rich," "the wealthy," "the powerful" and "the selfish."

The liberal cure for this endless malaise is a very large authoritarian government that regulates and manages society through a cradle to grave agenda of redistributive caretaking. It is a government everywhere doing everything for everyone. The liberal motto is "In Government We Trust." To rescue the people from their troubled lives, the agenda recommends denial of personal responsibility, encourages self-pity and other-pity, fosters government dependency, promotes sexual indulgence, rationalizes violence, excuses financial obligation, justifies theft, ignores rudeness, prescribes complaining and blaming, denigrates marriage and the family, legalizes all abortion, defies religious and social tradition, declares inequality unjust, and rebels against the duties of citizenship. Through multiple entitlements to unearned goods, services and social status, the liberal politician promises to ensure everyone's material welfare, provide for everyone's healthcare, protect everyone's self-esteem, correct everyone's social and political disadvantage, educate every citizen, and eliminate all class distinctions. With liberal intellectuals sharing the glory, the liberal politician is the hero in this melodrama. He takes credit for providing his constituents with whatever they want or need even though he has not produced by his own effort any of the goods, services or status transferred to them but has instead taken them from others by force.

It should be apparent by now that these social policies and the passions that drive them contradict all that is rational in human relating, and they are therefore irrational in themselves. But the faulty conceptions that lie behind these passions cannot be viewed as mere cognitive slippage. The degree of modern liberalism's irrationality far exceeds any misunderstanding that can be attributed to faulty fact gathering or logical error. Indeed, under careful scrutiny, liberalism's distortions of the normal ability to reason can only be understood as the product of psychopathology. So extravagant are the patterns of thinking, emoting, behaving and relating that characterize the liberal mind that its relentless protests and demands become understandable only as disorders of the psyche. The modern liberal mind, its distorted perceptions and its destructive agenda are the product of disturbed personalities.

As is the case in all personality disturbance, defects of this type represent serious failures in development processes. The nature of these failures is detailed below. Among their consequences are the liberal mind's relentless efforts to misrepresent human nature and to deny certain indispensable requirements for human relating. In his efforts to construct a grand collectivist utopia-to live what Jacques Barzun has called "the unconditioned life" in which "everybody should be safe and at ease in a hundred ways"-the radical liberal attempts to actualize in the real world an idealized fiction that will mitigate all hardship and heal all wounds. (Barzun 2000). He acts out this fiction, essentially a Marxist morality play, in various theaters of human relatedness, most often on the world's economic, social and political stages. But the play repeatedly folds. Over the course of the Twentieth Century, the radical liberal's attempts to create a brave new socialist world have invariably failed. At the dawn of the Twenty-first Century his attempts continue to fail in the stagnant economies, moral decay and social turmoil now widespread in Europe. An increasingly bankrupt welfare society is putting the U.S. on track for the same fate if liberalism is not cured there. Because the liberal agenda's principles violate the rules of ordered liberty, his most determined efforts to realize its visionary fantasies must inevitably fall short. Yet, despite all the evidence against it, the modern liberal mind believes his agenda is good social science. It is, in fact, bad science fiction. He persists in this agenda despite its madness.

Lyle H. Rossiter, Jr, MD is the author of The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness. He received his medical and psychiatric training at the University of Chicago and served for two years as a psychiatrist in the United States Army. He is currently in private practice in the Chicago area

Thursday, November 09, 2006

Has the Country Drifted to the Left?

It may be tempting to conclude that the country has moved to the left after the 2006 elections. However, many of the Democrats ran as conservatives. In some races, the Democratic candidate looked more conservative than the Republican. Another way to look at the results is to study the statewide initiatives. Overwhelmingly conservative values were on display for these votes. Here is a recap of the initiatives:

Abortion – 3 ballot initiatives, 0 for 3 for the pro abortion crowd

Marijuana - 3 ballot initiatives, 0 for 3 for the dope heads

Banning same sex marriage – 8 ballot initiatives, 7 for 8 voted for traditional marriage and against same sex marriages

Illegal Immigration - 3 ballot initiatives, 0 for 3 for the illegals

English as Official Language – 1 ballot initiative, 74% yes for English

Restricting Affirmative Action (discrimination) – 1 ballot initiative, 58% for restricting affirmative action (anti-discrimination victory)

This affirms the fact that the country is conservative. The Democratic leadership is far to the left of the average American. The main stream media is out of touch as well. If you were to believe the main stream media output, however, you would have a far different picture of reality.

Below is a little more detail of the state initiatives as compiled by the Washington Post.

Key 2006 Statewide Ballot Initiatives and Referenda
Compiled By
Nov. 7, 2006
Marijuana | Marriage | Minimum Wage | Stem Cells | Others of Interest
The most-watched abortion measure this year is in South Dakota, where a ballot initiative seeks to repeal the state's strict new ban on abortion.
S.D. State Referendum 6 Abortion Ban Results
Approve Votes %
No 185,934 56%
Yes 148,664 44%
Key: * Incumbent | Winner
Precincts: 100% | Updated: 6:40 PM ET | Source: AP

Voters in two other states -- California and Oregon -- will consider proposals to place further restrictions on abortions for minors.
Calif. State Proposition 85 Notify Parent Results
Approve Votes %
No 3,577,051 54%
Yes 3,035,043 46%
Key: * Incumbent | Winner
Precincts: 100% | Updated: 6:48 PM ET | Source: AP

Ore. Ballot Measure 43 Parental Notification Results
Approve Votes %
No 606,659 55%
Yes 504,689 45%
Key: * Incumbent | Winner
Precincts: 83% | Updated: 6:42 PM ET | Source: AP

Medical marijuana and decriminalization initiatives will be under consideration in three states -- Colorado, Nevada and South Dakota:
Colo. State Amendment 44 Legalize Marijuana Results
Approve Votes %
No 819,579 60%
Yes 557,758 41%
Key: * Incumbent | Winner
Precincts: 98% | Updated: 6:51 PM ET | Source: AP

Nev. Ballot Question 7 Legal Marijuana Results
Approve Votes %
No 320,854 56%
Yes 252,776 44%
Key: * Incumbent | Winner
Precincts: 100% | Updated: 6:48 PM ET | Source: AP

S.D. Ballot Initiative 4 Medical Marijuana Results
Approve Votes %
No 173,184 52%
Yes 157,945 48%
Key: * Incumbent | Winner
Precincts: 100% | Updated: 6:40 PM ET | Source: AP

Ballot initiatives to ban same-sex marriage and/or define marriage strictly as a union between one man and one woman will be voted on in eight states:
Ariz. State Proposition 107-Define Marriage Results
Approve Votes %
No 585,885 51%
Yes 553,311 49%
Key: * Incumbent | Winner
Precincts: 100% | Updated: 6:49 PM ET | Source: AP

Colo. State Amendment 43 Marriage Results
Approve Votes %
Yes 768,700 56%
No 612,155 44%
Key: * Incumbent | Winner
Precincts: 98% | Updated: 6:51 PM ET | Source: AP

Idaho State Amendment HJR2 Marriage Results
Approve Votes %
Yes 275,686 63%
No 159,892 37%
Key: * Incumbent | Winner
Precincts: 98% | Updated: 6:52 PM ET | Source: AP

S.C. State Amendment 1 Define Marriage Results
Approve Votes %
Yes 815,601 78%
No 229,632 22%
Key: * Incumbent | Winner
Precincts: 100% | Updated: 6:40 PM ET | Source: AP

S.D. State Amendment C Define Marriage Results
Approve Votes %
Yes 172,237 52%
No 160,756 48%
Key: * Incumbent | Winner
Precincts: 100% | Updated: 6:40 PM ET | Source: AP

Tenn. State Amendment Define Marriage Results
Approve Votes %
Yes 1,415,810 81%
No 326,141 19%
Key: * Incumbent | Winner
Precincts: 100% | Updated: 6:42 PM ET | Source: AP

Va. State Amendment: Marriage Results
Approve Votes %
Yes 1,325,668 57%
No 1,003,967 43%
Key: * Incumbent | Winner
Precincts: 100% | Updated: 6:47 PM ET | Source: AP

Wisc. State Referendum 1 Same-Sex Marriage Ban Results
Approve Votes %
Yes 1,260,554 59%
No 861,554 41%
Key: * Incumbent | Winner
Precincts: 100% | Updated: 6:43 PM ET | Source: AP

Proposals to raise the minimum wage are on the ballot in six states:
Ariz. State Proposition 202-Minimum Wage Results
Approve Votes %
Yes 756,144 66%
No 393,393 34%
Key: * Incumbent | Winner
Precincts: 100% | Updated: 6:49 PM ET | Source: AP

Colo. State Amendment 42 Minimum Wage Results
Approve Votes %
Yes 725,700 53%
No 646,935 47%
Key: * Incumbent | Winner
Precincts: 98% | Updated: 6:51 PM ET | Source: AP

Mo. State Proposition B Minimum Wage Results
Approve Votes %
Yes 1,557,465 76%
No 495,180 24%
Key: * Incumbent | Winner
Precincts: 98% | Updated: 6:50 PM ET | Source: AP

Mont. Ballot Initiative 151 Minimum Wage Results
Approve Votes %
Yes 283,258 73%
No 106,777 27%
Key: * Incumbent | Winner
Precincts: 100% | Updated: 6:53 PM ET | Source: AP

Nev. Ballot Question 6 Minimum Wage Results
Approve Votes %
Yes 394,058 69%
No 179,388 31%
Key: * Incumbent | Winner
Precincts: 100% | Updated: 6:48 PM ET | Source: AP

Ohio State Amendment 2 Minimum Wage Results
Approve Votes %
Yes 2,080,648 56%
No 1,622,772 44%
Key: * Incumbent | Winner
Precincts: 100% | Updated: 6:53 PM ET | Source: AP

Missouri voters would protect the rights of scientists to conduct stem cell research and patients to receive resulting treatments.
Mo. State Amendment 2 Stem Cell Results
Approve Votes %
Yes 1,059,202 51%
No 1,013,850 49%
Key: * Incumbent | Winner
Precincts: 98% | Updated: 6:50 PM ET | Source: AP

Arizona: Two immigration-related proposals are on the ballot. One would prohibit a person who is in the country illegally from receiving damages awarded in a civil action.
Ariz. State Proposition 102-Civil Actions Results
Approve Votes %
Yes 840,582 74%
No 289,464 26%
Key: * Incumbent | Winner
Precincts: 100% | Updated: 6:49 PM ET | Source: AP

The other would bar illegal aliens from participating in several state-funded education programs.
Ariz. State Proposition 300-Public Program Results
Approve Votes %
Yes 809,655 72%
No 320,296 28%
Key: * Incumbent | Winner
Precincts: 100% | Updated: 6:49 PM ET | Source: AP

Also on the Arizona ballot is a proposal to declare English the state's official language:
Ariz. State Proposition 103-EnglishLanguage Results
Approve Votes %
Yes 849,772 74%
No 295,632 26%
Key: * Incumbent | Winner
Precincts: 100% | Updated: 6:49 PM ET | Source: AP

Colorado: One immigration-related proposal is on the ballot. It would direct the attorney general to initiate a lawsuit to demand the enforcement of immigration laws by the federal government.
Colo. State Referendum K Immig Suit vs Fed Govt Results
Approve Votes %
Yes 742,516 56%
No 582,977 44%
Key: * Incumbent | Winner
Precincts: 98% | Updated: 6:51 PM ET | Source: AP

Michigan: Voters will consider an initiative to bar the University of Michigan and other state universities, the state, and all other state entities from discriminating against or granting preferential treatment based on race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin.
Mich. Ballot Proposal 2 Affirmative Action Results
Approve Votes %
Yes 2,137,574 58%
No 1,552,459 42%
Key: * Incumbent | Winner
Precincts: 100% | Updated: 6:53 PM ET | Source: AP


Thursday, August 10, 2006

Beginning of the End?

The defeat of Joe Lieberman may be the beginning of the end for the Democratic Party. In years gone by, Democrats cared about national security and were not afraid to defend our country. Joe was a true liberal Democrat who made one mistake; he supports the war on terror. We just got a reminder yesterday of our war as a terrorist plot to blow up several jets was foiled by the Brits. And rather to profile travelers, we now cannot take our bottle of water or coffee on the plane. Welcome to the political correct world that we live in today thanks to the left.

The Late Sen. Henry "SCOOP" Jackson used to say, "I'm a liberal but not a damn fool." On domestic policy, he was indeed a liberal: a lifelong Democrat who enthusiastically backed the New Deal-Fair Deal economic agenda of Presidents Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman. But in foreign affairs, Jackson was, as one journalist put it in 1972, "the hawkiest hawk" around. This made him the quintessential Cold War liberal

Let’s examine the modern day Democratic Party vs the days of old:

Scoop Jackson Democrats

Scoop Jackson
F.D. Roosevelt
J. F. Kennedy
Harry Truman
Joe Lieberman (ousted by the Dems)
Zell Miller
Ed Koch (amazingly)

Michael Moore Democrats

Howard Dean
Nancy Pelosi
J. F. Kerry
John Murtha
Harry Reid
Jimmy Carter (World Diplomat)
Dennis Kucinich

Sunday, December 11, 2005

Then & Now: More Troops or Surrender?

The Democrats are trying everything to regain their power. Do you remember a few months ago when you could hear about every day from the left that we need more troops in Iraq? Well that did not work. Americans realize that Bush was right to rely on the military leaders to determine troop strength rather than politicians. Below are just a couple of quotes to remind us of that drumbeat. But now just a few months later the Democrats are calling for immediate withdrawal from Iraq. John Murtha, a military veteran considered by some as a war hawk Democrat said that we should “redeploy” troops immediately. Many Democrats jumped on his bandwagon but quickly jumped off when the polls showed that Americans were not in favor of surrender.

The Democratic leader Howard Dean made a mistake when he said what he (and many on the left) really believed. He said that we cannot win this war. He related Iraq to Vietnam (a favorite strategy of Dems). This made even lefties like Pelosi and Harry Reid to run from Dean’s remarks. One thing that Americans know is that our military never loses a war, politicians lose wars. We won every battle in Vietnam, but thanks to the main stream media and the politicians, we “lost” the war. We should never make that mistake again. As you can see from the quotes below, the Democrats have no core beliefs on Iraq (or for that matter just about anything). They sway with the polls and their entire motivation is to hurt Bush and regain power.

Do you ever want a Democrat to be “Commander in Chief” again? Think bout it. We could have had John Kerry or even Howard Dean if he didn’t do his famous scream. Kerry is even calling our troops terrorist. Disgusting.



Feb, 2005

Senator Kerry outlined his proposal in comments to the press Tuesday. He said he would try to attach a proposal to add 40,000 troops to the US military establishment, 30,000 to the Army and 10,000 to the Marines.

Senator Harry Reid, the Democratic minority leader in the Senate, said, “Getting our troops and their families what they need and deserve has always been a Democratic priority, and the first bill we introduced this Congress reflects the commitment of Sen. Kerry and the rest of the caucus to stand with our troops.” He said the Democratic caucus had adopted the proposed troop increase as one of its top 10 legislative priorities for the current session of Congress


November 17, 2005

John Murtha in a speech said: “My plan calls to immediately redeploy U.S. troops consistent with the safety of U.S. forces.”

November 19, 2005

"Our troops have become the enemy. We need to change direction in Iraq," said Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania,

Kerry said he has a plan to bring 20,000 troops home by Christmas. He said that if the election and referendum in Iraq are successful, troops should be brought home because the election would act as a benchmark of the troops' success.

December 2005

The United States needs to reduce its forces in Iraq by "at least 100,000" by the end of 2006, sending a message to the Middle East that Americans are not interested in maintaining a permanent military presence in that country, Sen. John Kerry said Thursday.

December 1, 2005

Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) became the first congressional leader to endorse a call to begin withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq, following the path laid out two weeks ago by Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.).

Pelosi said she was offering her own view, not speaking for the Democratic caucus, but added that her conversations with colleagues suggest that "clearly a majority of the caucus supports Mr. Murtha" and his plan to immediately bring home the 160,000 U.S. forces in Iraq.

December 5, 2005

“and there is no reason, Bob, that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the–of–the historical customs, religious customs. Whether you like it or not…”

December 6, 2005

Howard Dean -- Saying the "idea that we're going to win the war in Iraq is an idea which is just plain wrong," Democratic National Chairman Howard Dean predicted today that the Democratic Party will come together on a proposal to withdraw National Guard and Reserve troops immediately, and all US forces within two years.

"I've seen this before in my life. This is the same situation we had in Vietnam. Everybody then kept saying, 'just another year, just stay the course, we'll have a victory.' Well, we didn't have a victory, and this policy cost the lives of an additional 25,000 troops because we were too stubborn to recognize what was happening."

Dean made his comments in an interview on WOAI Radio in San Antonio.

December 8, 2005

The United States needs to reduce its forces in Iraq by "at least 100,000" by the end of 2006, sending a message to the Middle East that Americans are not interested in maintaining a permanent military presence in that country, Sen. John Kerry said Thursday.

In a speech before the Council on Foreign Relations, the former Democratic presidential contender said the goal should be to have a force of 30,000 to 40,000 in Iraq by the end of next year.

Thursday, November 24, 2005

Thanksgiving's Early Lesson

The Great Thanksgiving Hoax
by Richard J. Maybury
[Posted on Saturday, November 20, 1999]

Each year at this time school children all over America are taught the official Thanksgiving story, and newspapers, radio, TV, and magazines devote vast amounts of time and space to it. It is all very colorful and fascinating. It is also very deceiving. This official story is nothing like what really happened. It is a fairy tale, a whitewashed and sanitized collection of half-truths which divert attention away from Thanksgiving's real meaning. The official story has the pilgrims boarding the Mayflower, coming to America and establishing the Plymouth colony in the winter of 1620-21. This first winter is hard, and half the colonists die. But the survivors are hard working and tenacious, and they learn new farming techniques from the Indians. The harvest of 1621 is bountiful. The Pilgrims hold a celebration, and give thanks to God. They are grateful for the wonderful new abundant land He has given them. The official story then has the Pilgrims living more or less happily ever after, each year repeating the first Thanksgiving. Other early colonies also have hard times at first, but they soon prosper and adopt the annual tradition of giving thanks for this prosperous new land called America. The problem with this official story is that the harvest of 1621 was not bountiful, nor were the colonists hardworking or tenacious. 1621 was a famine year and many of the colonists were lazy thieves. In his 'History of Plymouth Plantation,' the governor of the colony, William Bradford, reported that the colonists went hungry for years, because they refused to work in the fields. They preferred instead to steal food. He says the colony was riddled with "corruption," and with "confusion and discontent." The crops were small because "much was stolen both by night and day, before it became scarce eatable." In the harvest feasts of 1621 and 1622, "all had their hungry bellies filled," but only briefly. The prevailing condition during those years was not the abundance the official story claims, it was famine and death. The first "Thanksgiving" was not so much a celebration as it was the last meal of condemned men. But in subsequent years something changes. The harvest of 1623 was different. Suddenly, "instead of famine now God gave them plenty," Bradford wrote, "and the face of things was changed, to the rejoicing of the hearts of many, for which they blessed God." Thereafter, he wrote, "any general want or famine hath not been amongst them since to this day." In fact, in 1624, so much food was produced that the colonists were able to begin exporting corn. What happened? After the poor harvest of 1622, writes Bradford, "they began to think how they might raise as much corn as they could, and obtain a better crop." They began to question their form of economic organization. This had required that "all profits & benefits that are got by trade, working, fishing, or any other means" were to be placed in the common stock of the colony, and that, "all such persons as are of this colony, are to have their meat, drink, apparel, and all provisions out of the common stock." A person was to put into the common stock all he could, and take out only what he needed. This "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need" was an early form of socialism, and it is why the Pilgrims were starving. Bradford writes that "young men that are most able and fit for labor and service" complained about being forced to "spend their time and strength to work for other men's wives and children." Also, "the strong, or man of parts, had no more in division of victuals and clothes, than he that was weak." So the young and strong refused to work and the total amount of food produced was never adequate. To rectify this situation, in 1623 Bradford abolished socialism. He gave each household a parcel of land and told them they could keep what they produced, or trade it away as they saw fit. In other words, he replaced socialism with a free market, and that was the end of famines. Many early groups of colonists set up socialist states, all with the same terrible results. At Jamestown, established in 1607, out of every shipload of settlers that arrived, less than half would survive their first twelve months in America. Most of the work was being done by only one-fifth of the men, the other four-fifths choosing to be parasites. In the winter of 1609-10, called "The Starving Time," the population fell from five-hundred to sixty. Then the Jamestown colony was converted to a free market, and the results were every bit as dramatic as those at Plymouth. In 1614, Colony Secretary Ralph Hamor wrote that after the switch there was "plenty of food, which every man by his own industry may easily and doth procure." He said that when the socialist system had prevailed, "we reaped not so much corn from the labors of thirty men as three men have done for themselves now." Before these free markets were established, the colonists had nothing for which to be thankful. They were in the same situation as Ethiopians are today, and for the same reasons. But after free markets were established, the resulting abundance was so dramatic that the annual Thanksgiving celebrations became common throughout the colonies, and in 1863, Thanksgiving became a national holiday.

Thus the real reason for Thanksgiving, deleted from the official story, is: Socialism does not work; the one and only source of abundance is free markets, and we thank God we live in a country where we can have them.

Monday, September 19, 2005

Katrina Brings out the Best in Democrats

Tragedies such as 9-11 and natural disasters such as Katrina are opportunities for leaders to do great things. After the terrorists attacked us on 9-11, we saw great leadership from President Bush and Rudy Giuliano. Katrina gave state and local leaders in the long time one party (Democrat) state of Louisiana a chance to shine. Let’s examine what we observed.

New Orleans Mayor C. Ray Nagin refused to issue a mandatory evacuation order until President Bush urged him to do so.

Louisiana’s governor Blanko (aka BlankBrain) refused to allow the National Guard to be deployed until strong-armed by Bush.

FEMA and Red Cross were initially told not to bring food to the New Orleans Superdome because local leaders (see above) were worried that New Orleans residents would stay rather than leave town.

Hundreds of school buses were left parked and eventually flooded rather than deployed to help evacuate residents of New Orleans.

Senator Mary Landrieu, D-La, when asked why the buses were not used, said that it was hard enough to get drivers out on sunny days, let alone during a hurricane. I guess the marriage of Democrats and unions isn’t all that rosy.

Nagin, BlankBrain and Landrieu couldn’t wait to criticize FEMA and Bush for being late to the dance, even though they prevented federal action early on.

Race baiters like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton will never miss an opportunity to play the race card. Bush’s reaction was slow because the displaced residents were predominately black according to the poverty pimps.

Kooks like Robert Kennedy, Jr. blamed the hurricane on global warming. Of course Republican policies are the primary cause global warming.

Farrakhan uncorked his ugly theory, telling a North Carolina audience: "I heard from a very reliable source who saw a 25 foot deep crater under the levee breach. It may have been blown up to destroy the black part of town and keep the white part dry."

Kayne West said George Bush hates blacks.

President Bush announced a plan to rebuild New Orleans. Rather than to just throw money at the problem, Bush wants to create enterprise zones, use school vouchers, and allow displaced residents to buy homes with a mortgage using his ownership society model. This has stirred up the lefties in Congress who criticize Bush for using this as an opportunity to do “social experiments”. When will the Democrats learned that they are the ones who have been doing social experiments for 50 years, and their socialist model has failed miserably. Bush’s plan to empower individuals to succeed goes against the Democrats philosophy of creating segments of society completely dependent on them for their basic needs (and they dependent on them for votes).

Lastly, the Democrats, lead by their fearless leader Hilary Clinton, are crying for an independent investigation of Katrina. Why? Will eyes be on Governor Blankbrain, the incompetent Ray Nagin and the airhead Landrieu? Will the residents who refused to leave despite the warnings be blamed? How about asking why it was mostly blacks living in these flood-prone areas. Will we ask why 76% of black children in New Orleans are born out of wedlock? Will we ask why the levees were downgraded from level 5 to 3 because of environmentalist wackos threats and lawsuits?

Quick quiz, how many people have died in New Orleans as a result of Katrina?
A. 10,000
B. 5,000
C. 2,500
D. 579

To the great disappointment of some on the left, the correct answer is D.
How many people died in Chicago from the heat wave a few years ago?
A. 10,000
B. 5,000
C. 2,500
D. 739

The answer is D. When was that heat wave again? 1995. Did Hilary or anyone for that matter call for an investigation? Of course not. As you know, ole Slick Willey was the President in 1995.

I guess looking for leadership from the Democrats was asking a bit too much.

Sunday, August 07, 2005

The Highway Bill of 2005, A healthy dose of pork

There is one thing that legislators agree on and that is pork barrel spending. Lawmakers passed the pork laden highway bill by a 91-4 vote. The bill is worth $286.5 billion over six years, a 30 percent increase over the $218 billion program that expired in September 2003. The bill includes $24 billion in “special projects”, which is a kind way to say waste. These projects are referred to as “earmarks”. Below is a list of earmarks by State:


Earmarked $$$'s

# of earmarks


Per capita






































































































































































































































































Note that we are spending a whopping $1,501 per person in Alaska in this bill, and $544 per person in Vermont.

Some “Highlights”

$231 million for a bridge in Anchorage to be named Don Young's Way (sadly Don Young is a Republican)

$223 million for a bridge to Ketchikan (Alaska)

$15 million for a Juneau, Alaska access road, dubbed the Black Ice Highway by group analyst Erich Zimmermann because "that's all you'll see in the winter if this project is built."

$50 million for a bridge in Kansas City, Mo

$16 million for the eponymous Nick J. Rahall II Appalachian Transportation Institute at Marshall University

$1.9 million for a pedestrian bridge in California

$35.2 million for ferry boats, terminals and approaches in Alaska

$35.2 million for ferry boats, terminals and approaches in Hawaii

This type of wasteful spending is understandable for Democrats, but the Republicans should be ashamed of themselves. The sad fact is that voters look at these projects as a way to determine who to vote for. Until this changes, watch your wallet, the Congress wants to spend all of your money.

If you are interested in reading all the earmarks, the Taxpayers for Common Sense has the entire file, 365 pages

Brain Dump

· As I predicted (see December 2004 archives, “MLB’s Failed Answer”) the drug testing policy of the Major League Baseball is a joke and will not deter the use of steroids. Rafael Palmeiro was pitiful in his testimony to Congress. In Clintonesque fashion, he pointed is finger to Congress and stated emphatically “I have never used steroids. Period.” This was a few months before he failed a drug test. The 40-year-old Palmeiro became the seventh player to fail a test under the new major league policy that took effect in March, rules criticized by Congress as not being stringent enough. Palmeiro used the tired old excuse that he did not know he was using steroids. Yeah right. If baseball wants to eliminate steroid use, it should adopt the Olympic policy, first offense, a 2 year suspension, and second offense a lifetime suspension.

· Don’t be fooled by the seemingly calm and cordial treatment that the Democrats are giving John Roberts, President Bush’s nomination for the Supreme Court. The Dems are posing as open-minded, professional legislators who respect the fact that Supreme Court nominations are the job of the President. This is how the Republicans acted when Bill Clinton nominated the far left Ruth Bader Ginsburg. But to expect professionalism from the Democrats is asking too much. This is the calm before the storm. They are asking for tons of documents, many of which they are not entitled to and they know it. This will give them the ability to say later that they did not get the documents that they requested. This will not work, however, because the Republicans are ready to pull the trigger on the Constitutional option (sometimes referred to as the Byrd options named after Senator Robert “KKK” Byrd from WV). This is the option to change the rules of the Senate to disallow the filibuster for Supreme Court nominations. I am confidant that we can count on Teddy Kennedy, Chris Dodd or Charlie Schumer to begin to rant about John Roberts soon.

· Kudos to George Bush for his recess appointment of John Bolton as Ambassador to the United Nations. The Democrats tried every argument that that could think of or make up to railroad this candidate. Why? Because Bolton is a tough guy who may actually do some good in the corrupt UN. The Dems don’t wasn’t a nominee that might upset the despots and America haters of the UN. Of course the real answer to this is for the US to leave the UN and to kick them out of our country. A world body of democratic nations is much preferable to the corrupt United Nations of communists.

· The New York Times, once the flagship of the journalist world, is little more than a rag of the Democratic Party. They lost their objectivity years ago. But now they have gone beyond partisan reporting to the outrageous. In a desperate fishing expedition, they have asked the courts to unseal John Roberts’s adoption papers. John Roberts and his wife adopted two children, both under 6 years old. They are not asking for these papers because of some known fact or suspicion, but rather just to see if they can find something on Roberts. This is disgusting. Adoption records are routinely sealed to protect the parties involved. To open these records up to the New York Times would be a disgrace and disservice to the families and the young children.