Posted by
The Hermit Crab on Sunday, October 11, 2009 2:46:23 PM
Welcome to the second edition of Impolite Thoughts. I'm at work again, and reading between calls (we can do that on weekends), so I just thought I'd share some short thoughts I've had recently.
I think I know why President Obama is so determined to return Jose Zelaya to the presidency of Honduras. Zelaya, as you may remember, was ousted by the Honduran Supreme Court, legislature, and military for attempting to violate the constitution of that country (the constitution calls for the immediate ouster of any president who attempts to violate it). All quite legal, except perhaps for the exile part. In this lies the solution to the riddle.
The people of Honduras chose to oust a president for violating a constitution. You can see why President BO can't let a precedent like that stand.
Speaking of Honduras, does anyone know how or where we can stand up for our democracy-defending brothers there (and in Israel, as well) who are being bullied by BO and Secretary of State Evita Clinton? We need to let them know that many (I pray most) Americans still believe in democracy here and abroad, even if the leaders of our anti-Democratic Party don't .
All these weeks and months of the debate over the Democrats' various health-care hostile take-over proposals, and I have yet to hear one obvious (obvious to me, anyway) argument. We keep hearing about how we must carefully use "our" health care assets. Every time I see someone making that argument on the news, I want to scream at them "That's right, they're OUR assets! They do NOT belong to the government! "We the people" own the health care of this country. SO BACK OFF!!"
President Reagan used to say that we are a people who have a government -- not the other way around. I still believe in that. Does anyone else?
Libertarian Tony, call your office.
I am somewhat puzzled by the Democrats' new-found affection for "czars". When their intellectual forebears in Russia had a czar in their sites early last century, they shot him full of holes.
Another truth I thought was transparent, but which I haven't seen elsewhere, is what I believe was the real reason that the Cash for Clunkers program mandated that the old cars traded in had to be destroyed. It seemed to make little economic sense, and several smart people pointed out that destroying capital assets is never the way to increased wealth, and that this action would have a crippling effect on the supply of spare parts as well as the supply of cheap used cars for poor people who can afford no better. All true, if you assume that the Democrats really care about poor people, or even the American people in general.
What happens when you assume?
The reason that the used cars ("clunkers", many of them being in perfectly good condition) had to be destroyed was for the benefit of BO and the Democrats' masters, the unions. Just think -- no used cars, people would have to buy new ones -- made by the UAW workers, many of whom work for Government Motors now, thanks to BO's meddling in the bankruptcy process. (Please remember that by handing the UAW preferred stock in GM and Chrysler, the administration guaranteed the UAW a nine-figure annual income from that section of the bankruptcy agreement alone.) No used parts, people will have to buy new parts -- made by the UAW and other union workers. Make sense now?
It helps if you recognize the Democrats and the unions as partners in crime...
I previously wrote in this space that the awarding of the Nobel Prize for Soft-Headed Peacenick Blather, er, I mean Peace to Barack Obama was a bribe. Today I wondered if the bribe will come in yearly installments. As long as BO is willing to keep selling America's interests and its allies out to one-worlders and America-haters, is there any rule that says BO can't keep right on receiving this award again and again? It would feed his grandiosity, and confirm him in his ruinous fantasy that all of the world adores him. He would never dream (or perhaps care) that he would be enriching his own ego at the expense of his country's future. Let's wait and see.
One of the reasons I deplore the failure of schools to teach American History (the real thing, not the Howard Zinn perversion) is that it deprives otherwise intelligent people of any sense of perspective. I even read in a column by
Ben Shapiro (whose work appears on this site) that casualties in the "mini-Tet" in Afghanistan were heavy -- 8 Americans killed.
My wife and I traveled to Antietam National Battlefield recently. In one dreadful day's battle, 3,650 Americans (North and South) were killed, while thousands more died of their wounds in the following days. I mourn for all of the Americans killed in the service of their country, but 8 lives lost is not "heavy casualties". Everyone who has more than a rudimentary knowledge of history knows this, but their are too few of us,and the problem grows worse with every passing generation.
Learn history, or at least what Santayana said about it. It'll pay you.