About Me

Name: Dave Perkins
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Obama IS a socialist

Barack Obama, in his own words, says it's a tragedy that the supreme court stopped short, in its drive to advance civil rights, at the point of forbidding discrimination. 

He believes the court should have addressed a flaw in the constitution in which redistribution of wealth was not addressed.

He thinks the courts should legislate, from the bench, redistribution policies.  They should create 'rights' of some people to get other people's money.

I have always said that my obligation to be charitable does NOT translate directly into your right to take my money.  Obama, clearly, is ready for this translation to become law.

In the same week during which Bill Ayers invoked property rights against Fox News with the words "get off my property", and called police to enforce those rights (ironic, as he once called for killing 'the pigs'), Barack Obama is now heard speaking the words which would mean Bill Ayers really doesn't OWN the house, that his wealth belongs to other people and if he has to sell the house to pay others the money he owes them, that's just too bad.

Obama is a socialist, or a communist.  Socialism stops at the point where the State has the right to determine who owns what.  Communism takes one further step, and says that everyone must 'own' the same amount of wealth and that redistribution has this specific goal in mind.

Either ideology uses the same principle, that ownership of wealth is an illusion, that the state has the right to say 'you have too much' and take what it wants for the high moral purpose of handing it to other people.

I have only one question for those who see the world this way:

What in God's name would make a productive person want to continue to be productive in a world where nothing they earn is safe from being seized by government and handed to people who didn't earn it?

And if people who are normally productive cease to be so, and revenues decline, what will government do about this?

Two choices are clear; they can simply take less and give out less and tell people that's all there is, thus reducing lifestyles and making huge numbers of people ever more poor, or--

They can FORCE the productive to continue to be productive, i.e. slavery.

This is truly a turning point for this nation the likes of which it has not faced since 1939, perhaps ever.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Front page news...

Well, it's front page news when gasoline prices hit highs.... 

But now gasoline prices are lower than a year ago.  First time for that since the Democrat congress was sworn in.   And no swarms of reporters are besieging the stations reporting each penny of change.... 

Remember, Obama said he wasn't troubled by the $4 per gallon prices, only bothered that the increase had come so quickly.  He seems to want his consumers to slowly increase their economic pain, like frogs in a slow-heated pot, and thus they would not notice they were being cooked and served by liberal energy policy. 

Remember, Pelosi is (undoubtedly many Dems are) financially vested in the success of alternative energy programs, which rely on high gasoline prices to force consumers to try something else out of desperation.  Pelosi is a stockholder in the T. Boone Pickens companies that are trying to force us to use windmills for electricity.  And never mind how much money Algore is going to make in the switch to green energy.

The entire basis for that 'force', the compulsion of the consumer to switch, disappears when gasoline prices drop far and fast as they recently have.

Dems are enjoying the economic disaster of the past couple of months.  It's polling as part of the reason voters want Obama.  But it also is reducing demand for gas, thus crashing the prices right when they were gaining momentum from those prices in the greenie movement.

conflicted emotions doubtless abound on the left.  :-)

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

on political violence in America....

I got into an unwinnable argument this week with a fellow forum member, on a GOLF forum of all places, about violence linked to politics.

I had mentioned, upholding my part of the argument, the example of the grown man who had ripped McCain signs out of the hands of a little old lady in the street; when she complained, he began to hit her in the head with the stick from one of the signs.  She has some bruises to show for it, but she gamely chased him when he ran, shouting for police, and eventually they showed up, he gave up, and was arrested.

My opponent's response? 

"That's an exaggeration.  She wasn't old, she was middle aged, and game enough to chase him and have him arrested."

He did add the obligatory "I don't condone what he did", but for me that wasn't good enough.  It was too placid, too limp.  I told him I was glad I was not a woman in his family, as I would have good reason to suspect that he would not defend me in such an attack. 

The left always seems to find ways to diminish or excuse lefty violence, all the while calling us mean and racist.  I challenged him to find ONE extant example of RIGHT WING campaign violence, just ONE, to balance the scales.  Of course, he could not.

I was surprised he didn't trot out the old canard, 'abortion doctors'.

Here's a story that tells the truth about abortion clinic violence.  THERE ISN"T ANY.

Today is the tenth anniversary of the last abortion clinic murder. 

It was never a lot.  Maybe twenty or so in the last two or three decades.  But, for some reason, that last one was in 1998.

Here's hoping it's because Christians should know the ends do NOT justify the means.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Required reading for everyone

Everyone in America, BEGINNING with people who say Ayers is irrelevant, should read this post over at Zombietime.

He's got a copy of the manifesto of the Weather Underground, written by Ayers and Dohrn and two others, published thirty years ago and very hard to find today.  It's called Prairie Fire.

There is also video of the interview with Larry Grohnwahl, who was sitting in the meetings when Ayers and Dohrn planned the future of America.  Grohnwahl describes the ludicrousness of listening to a roomful of people with graduate degrees discussing seriously and earnestly how they will 'eliminate' 25 million people in America who refuse to go along with the new regime, THEIR regime.

Gulags, extermination of the opposition, etc.  Same old commie garbage.  As I've said, the inevitable result of switching over to socialism is that groups of people will soon be 'more trouble than they're worth' to the government.  Literally. 

Stalin solved his problem of producing enough food to feed everyone by having millions of peasants killed under the rubric of 'traitors to the state', when many were not even talking politics, just demanding food.

The Chinese communist revolution topped Stalin's 30 million victims easily.  Today some suspect as many as 100 million died under Mao and his successors.  And who can forget Pol Pot, making sure he had no opposition by eliminating 'intellectuals'.  What was his definition of an intellectual?  I kid you not-- if you wore glasses in Cambodia, that made you an intellectual and a potential political opponent.  Everyone who wore glasses ended up at the killing fields. 

Sickening.  At least Hitler had solid definitions of the people he wanted killed.  Jews, Poles, peasants, Christians, enemies of the Nazi regime...  but Pol Pot killed people for WEARING GLASSES!

This is where communist and socialist leanings take us, always.  And Bill Ayers didn't even wait to achieve power; he was planning how to kill 25 million Americans while still an underground terrorist group!

If you doubt Ayers is a communist, if you doubt he wants total change in American and world government, if you doubt he's ruthless and murderous and has no compunctions about whatever he has to do to succeed at his goals, just read it.  It's all there, most of it in Ayers' own words.  Even recently he's appeared on videotapes happily declaring he's never changed, that anyone who knows him knows what he believes, that he's part anarchist and part this and part that... 

And never forget, Obama came to town and sought him out.  Obama came to town LOOKING for the hardcore leftists and revolutionaries.  HE CHOSE THEM.



Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Couldn't happen to a nicer group of people

Looks like the ultimate justice is about to be dispensed--

The New York Times is being reviewed by Moodys.  Their debt picture is so bad, Moodys is considering kicking them downstairs to junk bond status.

I wonder if Bill Keller will order a hit piece for the front page on the 'evil free-market parasites at Moodys, growing rich off declaring other people's debt unmanageable.'

We already know, in Keller's own words, that his response to a McCain complaint about media bias was to pull out another McCain hit piece and put it on the front page, 'just to show him'.  Will he display the same petty tyrannical instincts in his coming battle with Moodys?

Will little Pinch ever realize that the customer isn't always wrong?  Will any conservative points of view ever creep into the pages of the old Gray Lady?  Or will she end up stinking, homeless and hungry, sleeping on a subway grate?

Don't get me wrong; I have absolutely NO sympathy for them.  They've run a business on a 'not for profit, only for political power' model for far too long, and the price was going to be paid eventually. 

Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of people.  Good riddance, in advance... just so I can be the first to say it...  :-)

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

un freakin' believable

I've said on this blog that I fear the modern American generation does NOT understand the dangers of socialism and communism, the fact that such schemes always lead to the devaluing of human life on a mass scale.  Socialism and communism always runs against a 'block of people' problem, people who won't cooperate or won't join the movement or what have you.

And, because having a dissenting minority of citizens is always beyond the level of effort and attention such a government wants to put forth, their solution inevitably comes down to two choices--

Gulags, or death.

It's impossible to imagine a gulag full of Americans under Barack Obama.  It's impossible to imagine mass graves under Obama (although it seems lots of his supporters had no problem believing such a thing of the evil Bush).

But wherever you look, whatever time in history, if socialism or communism goes 'totalitarian' and dissent is suppressed, there are eventually mass graves and gulags.  In North Korea today, over a quarter of a million people are in gulags, and that is only an estimate.  You can find the gulags on Google Earth (are they Google-ags?) if you take the time to look.  You can find Russian ones too, in out of the way places.

For years I've defended Bush with this: 

"when you can show me the Bush mass graves, when you can show me the beheading videos with Bush or Cheney or Rove sawing off somebody's head and holding it up, when you can show me the torture chambers in Crawford, the rape rooms in DC, the piles of skulls like the Cambodian museums now display, then I'll look into Bush as a totalitarian dictator."

Now the Confederate Yankee reminds us, and Zombietime SHOWS us, why such things cannot be considered impossible under Obama.

Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn had quite a bit of attention from the FBI back in the day.  Dohrn was the first woman on the Ten Most Wanted list.  The Yankee has a video clip from a 1982 interview with Larry Gronwahl, an FBI informant, a member of the Weather Underground.  In the clip he describes sitting in on a meeting of WU leaders, all with graduate degrees, the best and brightest of the hard left in the 1960s.  They were discussing events that would follow their takeover of government.

Larry says it's bizarre to sit in a room full of such people and hear them discussing what to do with the people in America who refuse to be 're-educated' and won't 'get their minds right', as the warden famously told Paul Newman in Cool Hand Luke.

Larry says re-education camps were on the agenda, but as to the hardcore traditional Americans who wouldn't go along?

They'd be killed.  25 million people, that was the number discussed by Dohrn, Ayers and the rest.  Calmly, earnestly, dead serious about KILLING 25 MILLION AMERICANS.

Follow the link and get some more chills up your spine.  Ayers is not only unrepentant of his attempted murders, he's got some lofty goals in that department.  Do not think for a MOMENT that his views have changed one iota.  He's in it for the long haul, proud of himself and unswerving in his glossy vision of a future without capitalism.

The man we are about to elect as president has as a friend and colleague and neighbour somebody who firmly believes that after the change to communism 25 million Americans are going to require elimination.

Follow the link, read the relevant quotes from the Ayers pamphlet which Zombie has up, watch the Gronwahl interview.

And remember, Soros' company called Catalist now has the full government database of registered voters AND the list of Americans of voting age who have not registered.  The list has addresses, phone numbers and other relevant information.  Obama is paying Catalist hundreds of thousands to 'work the list'. 

We know where you live
.  We know which party you registered with.  We're working on the gulag plan.  And the mass grave plan. 

We know where you live. 

Gawd almighty.  They do. 

I wonder which of the narrow shouldered, high voiced, unathletic and unmanly Beta male campaign types and bureaucrats will be chosen as our Eichmann.  You know, the unimpressive little guy who gets the job of documenting, planning and reporting on how the holocaust is going?

I pick Sidney Blumenthal.  OR Rahm Emmanuel.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Rendell to Obama - come back to PA!

And that isn't dear old dad, it's the state of Pennsylvania.

Dem pollsters have tried hard to convince us that Penn will go for Obama easily, but inwardly they're nervous as a cat by a rockin' chair.... 

Internal polling shows the state is neck and neck on the presidential candidates...  but here's a brand new poll over on Michelle Malkin's site showing Mad Jack Murtha, The Prince of Pork, down by THIRTEEN POINTS in his race against William Russell. 

And that poll, as Michelle points out, is BOUND to have some resonance statewide. 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Dems want jobs to stay in America...

Unless they're temporary election caller jobs.

Anti-Republican phone calls, not robo but live human beings, are originating in Romania.

I wonder if the local Dems who set this up have checked first with His O-liness to make sure exporting those jobs was acceptable under the new Obamanomics plan?

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Just got back from the gas station

Dallas, Texas.

Regular unleaded, $2.59.

Where did the conspiracy wankers go?  Can't find one.  None of them want to try to explain the dramatic price drop since summer.

They're right in your face explaining price increases, but they don't seem to want to talk when it goes the other way.

How does this 'price drop conspiracy' benefit any of the evil rich oil men who were so responsible for the high prices?  Surely their nefarious skullduggery in RAISING the prices is equally powerful at preventing a decrease? 

Or else it could just be market forces at work.  Imagine that.  Supply and demand.  What a notion.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

thoughts on Marx

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."  Karl Marx, 1875.

Sounds great!  Unless you're the guy with ability.  To be productive, to earn, to improve yourself and your family.

When you obligate, by force of law (tax law in this case), a person to produce according to his ability, you have taken away all choice from that person

He is a slave -  in the worst sense of the word, forced to do something for the benefit of others who have no moral claim on him.  They are not family, they are not friends, they are not even acquaintances; they are complete strangers sharing only humanity and citizenship, and sometimes not even the latter.  The productive people might as well be picking cotton on a plantation for massa (and the ancestors of some of our future slaves probably did just that; not all taxpayers with ability are white, you know).

But the person with ability must provide for the person with need.  MUST.  That is the law of Marx and that is the foundation of communism.

I would like to ask Obama, in the manner of Joe the plumber, if he believes in Marx' statement, if he finds the 'moral compulsion of handing one's produced wealth to government' to be inherent in the ability to be productive.

He would certainly not answer that question plainly, probably not truthfully.  Not after Joe the plumber.  Not again.

But know this:

Marx' statement is the epitome of unfairness.  It ignores the questions--

does the person with the need bear any personal responsibility?  Is the need a result of his choices?  Could he meet his needs himself if he would improve his life choices or behaviors?

Before committing my money to charity, I take the time to make sure I'm giving to legitimate causes.  I will not give to a charity which makes less than a full effort to use my money efficiently, and I will not commit to a charity which gives money to people who could solve their own problems with a simple change in choices. 

I say I will not do these things, but I reckon soon I will be doing them.  Because His O-liness will more than ever make government the single largest dispenser of charity in the history of the world, and it will certainly NOT be investigating the recipients of the largesse as to whether they could stand on their own if they tried. 

Instead, as for so many years, they'll be told they cannot, and that it's not their fault, and that if they'll only keep voting Democrat the money will be taken from those evil rich and sent straight to them, thanks for voting, get out the vote, rock the vote, vote or die, etc.

Socialism and communism makes slaves of us all.  Whether worker or non-worker, everyone will owe their entire lives to government.  The non-worker who puts government in power with his vote will be marked for life, and if he ever tries to make his own life better or, God forbid, change his vote to a different party, he'll be quickly dealt with.  The people who send him money, they know where he lives. 

Once you commit to support the entity that puts food on your table, it is hard to find the courage to change that even if you see that you should.  It's an addiction of sorts.  If you cut off your 'supply', you'll have to go find another one.  It's up to you now.  It is only human to fear taking a chance and failing.  Once you're in, you'll never get out.  One man, one vote, once. 

And the worker will one day be asked by government, "why aren't you making as much?  You made more last year.  There are tax penalties, you know, for people who start producing less.  I'd advise you to keep up the good work, Mr. Smith, for your own good.  If you continue to produce less, your rates will rise so the difference is made up.  You'll have to get by with less, Mr. Smith, unless you increase your productivity."

If you don't see this coming, you're blind.  :-)



Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (1) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Useless scientific discovery #2,125

Wierd, and useless.

Apparently, if you peel Scotch tape off its roll, or off a piece of glass or what have you, it emits X rays in surprisingly high levels of power. 

A researcher even shot an X ray image of her thumb by doing this, and it shows the bone outlined inside the lighter flesh, just like a regular X ray pic.

Only trouble is, THIS ONLY HAPPENS IN VACUUM.

So unless they figured a way to get patients into, and stay alive in, a vacuum, it's pretty much useless.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Gore effect AGAIN!

Wherever Algore goes to talk about global warming, it seems to get COLD.  This has happened now at least three times in past news stories, some of which I've blogged about, although I have far too many posts now to bother researching it; my IT and database skills are zero, not much below my writing skills.  :-)

Yesterday he was in Cambridge, Mass,  at Harvard, talking about how we've got to do something about Global Warmening or we're all going to die, yada yada, etc.

The average high for this day in Cambridge is 60.  In 1979, height of the COLDENING TREND which led to mass scientific predictions of 'the coming ice age", the high this day was 83.

Today's high is to be 44, tonight's low 34.

The low record temp was 28, set in 1940 (right after the last bout of 'global warming' which gave us the Dust Bowl and even some unbroken records of high temps in various US locales in the early 1930s), so no risk there.  But the average temps are said to be at 125 year lows for this area.

The Gore Effect strikes again.  I propose that, if the world does become uncomfortably warm at some point, we simply send Gore on a worldwide speaking tour that we don't allow him to stop until every small town on every continent has had a visit from him.

That should cool things down right quick.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Lots of frightening stuff here...

But for me, the most frightening part of this Atlas post?

Down toward the end, when Pamela demonstrates that Obama's campaign has been paying a George Soros company hundreds of thousands of dollars to develop software that already has, and works over, the databases of registered voters and voting age Americans.

Yep, Soros has all the access he needs to your personal voting information, as well as everyone else's.  That means this company, Catalist, has all it needs to know on who's registered, addresses, phone numbers, party affiliations, and who ISN'T registered also.  They can use ACORN to blanket neighborhoods targeting unregistered folks with Obama stuff, and making sure by any means available that Democrats vote.  It also means they'll know who in a neighborhood is registered Republican.  Whe know where you live.

This level of party and candidate ownership (vastly illegal, but nobody's enforcing anything anymore) of the personal data of hundreds of millions of Americans, from a GOVERNMENT database, is a recipe for totalitarianism. 

Support us or feel our wrath.  We know where you live.

I can live with people GIVING their info to party organs, but for a party to have the national database is appalling.  The defense will be, if asked, that they are nonpartisan.  But they are being paid by OBAMA's campaign! 

But nobody will ask.

I'm afraid that McCain's and Palin's warnings of 'socialism' mean NOTHING to far too many people.  Nobody in this country has any real understanding, save the sufferers like McCain himself, of the monstrous evils of totalitarianism.  In fact some of our people appear to want it, so long as their group is the one with the power.  Bloody frightening. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

These figures don't add up

Here's a news story about the dedicated Obama campaign staff busily rooting out questionable donations and refunding them.

These people are certainly strolling the high road, ethics above all, nothing to see here, please return to your homes, etc.

In fact, the WaPo writers saw fit to include an Obama spokesperson's comment that "John McCain was forced to refund more than $1.2 million in contributions and has accepted contributions from non-existent donors like 'Jesus II' -- our review system caught and rectified this issue." .  How wonderful of them, to be so attentive to ethical fundraising and so aware that others are less so.

But I have some questions.

IF this little old retired lady was the victim of a genuine stolen identity, how is it that her credit card company allowed her to donate $175k?  I have some nice high credit limits, but I'm not Ted Turner for pete's sake. 

And if she's not a victim of stolen identity, that is to say if her name was all that was used and the donations got in there some other way than with her 'stolen credit', then how could the Obama campaign refund the money?  From whence, I ask, did it originate, and if the campaign knows where it came from, shouldn't they give that info to, I don't know, LAW ENFORCEMENT or someone?

The campaign says it refunded the money.  It came from over 70 different sources all in the same day, they say.  More questions.  Did over 70 donations all have the one lady's name on them?  But if they know how to refund the money, they must know where it came from...  right?  So they knew it wasn't hers...  didn't they?  So why even bring her into it? 

Perhaps the clue is at the end, when she bashes Bush and endorses Obama.  :-) 

This money thing is just a little to iffy a proposal for me...  the McCain bashing I can understand in the WaPo, but I cannot understand the timeline and pertinent facts here.  The assembled quotes in the story appear to be chosen to obscure enough of the facts that no reader can come away comfortable that he knows what happened here.

But that doesn't stop the Obama folks from accepting credit for being ethically superior.  :-)



Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The press NEVER gives up...

Here's a Yahoo News story today, asking the innocent question, "could it be that Palin is a drag on the McCain ticket?"

NBC and the WSJ have a new poll that seems to show this. 

Of course, we know they can get polls to say anything the media wants them to say.  It's about how you frame the questions.  And they do this kind of thing all the time--  they survey the political landscape, identify problem areas (Palin's popularity), then craft a poll so the answers say what the media wanted them to say, then immediately publicize it in the hope that the unthinking masses will gulp and say to themselves, geez, maybe I was wrong about her, if people really don't like her, then maybe I shouldn't either, yada yada.

Meanwhile, where Palin actually was granting an interview with questions she didn't know in advance (unlike Biden or Obama), CNN quoted a National Review story falsely, leaving out the part where Byron York was criticising the MEDIA for representing Palin as "corrupt, incompetent", and so forth, and presenting it to her as if it was the author's opinion that she was those things.  Then the reporter asked her for a response to that.

I hesitate to say it, but CNN has hit a new low.  If that reporter, Drew somebody or other, didn't KNOW what Lowry had actually said in his article, then Drew is INCOMPETENT, not Sarah.  But if he DID know, which I believe to be the case, then he was deliberately misleading her to provoke a response. 

There must be a special place in hell for the openly, brazenly corrupted "fourth branch of government, guardian of the free press, watchdog to the corrupt, etc."  If there isn't, then somebody sacrifice a goat and demand of hell that the place be prepared for those people.

Or I could just punch them repeatedly instead.  :-) 

When I was young and strong, I never wanted to fight.  Now that I'm old, fat and weak, I want to punch all the leftists and reporters (but I repeat myself) I can find.  One of life's mysteries.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous12Next »