Quotes of the day
posted at 10:00 pm on October 16, 2009 by Allahpundit
“The self-identifying conservative Republicans who make up the base of the Republican Party stand a world apart from the rest of America, according to focus groups conducted by Democracy Corps. These base Republican voters dislike Barack Obama to be sure – which is not very surprising as base Democrats had few positive things to say about George Bush – but these voters identify themselves as part of a ‘mocked’ minority with a set of shared beliefs and knowledge, and commitment to oppose Obama that sets them apart from the majority in the country. They believe Obama is ruthlessly advancing a ‘secret agenda’ to bankrupt the United States and dramatically expand government control to an extent nothing short of socialism. They overwhelmingly view a successful Obama presidency as the destruction of this country’s founding principles and are committed to seeing the president fail.
Instead of focusing on these intense ideological divisions, the press and elites continue to look for a racial element that drives these voters’ beliefs – but they need to get over it. Conducted on the heels of Joe Wilson’s incendiary comments at the president’s joint session address, we gave these groups of older, white Republican base voters in Georgia full opportunity to bring race into their discussion – but it did not ever become a central element, and indeed, was almost beside the point.”
***
“Now the national terrain is thick with federal programs, and with state, county, city and town entities and programs, from coast to coast. It’s not virgin territory anymore, it’s crowded. We are a nation fully settled by government. We are well into the age of the welfare state, the age of government. We know its weight, heft and demands, know its costs both in terms of money and autonomy, even as we know it has made many of our lives more secure, and helped many to feel encouragement.
But we know the price now. This is the historical context. The White House often seems disappointed that the big center, the voters in the middle of the spectrum, aren’t all that excited about following them on their bold new journey. But it’s a world America has been to. It isn’t new to us. And we don’t have too many illusions about it.”
***
“In a party conference address earlier this month, Osborne gave the speech that an American politician will someday have to give. He said that he is not ideologically hostile to government. “Millions of Britons depend on public services and cannot opt out,” he declared. He defended government workers against those who would deride them as self-serving bureaucrats: ‘Conservatives should never use lazy rhetoric that belittles those who are employed by the government.’…
Osborne’s speech was not an isolated event. The Conservatives have treated British voters as adults for a year now, with a string of serious economic positions. The Conservatives supported the Labour government bank bailout, even though it was against their political interest to do so. Last November, Osborne opposed a cut in the value-added taxes on the grounds that the cuts were unaffordable and would not produce growth. It is not easy for any conservative party to oppose tax cuts, but this one did it…
If any Republican is looking for a way forward, start by doing what they’re doing across the Atlantic.”
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3
This is not how it’s done in academia these days.
The verdict is far more important than any possible evidence.
Loxodonta on October 17, 2009 at 12:17 AM
Of course im not saying that. There happen to be very few republicans, let alone democrat heavyweights, that are committed free-marketers with a reverence for the purity of the electoral process. As for the free speech of his critics, i dont see a modicum of evidence that critics free speech is being infringed. He may have a more healthy political distaste for the opposition, but he hasnt exactly done anything about it.
ernesto on October 17, 2009 at 12:17 AM
And ObamaCare isnt or first raucous national debate.
ernesto on October 17, 2009 at 12:18 AM
This rule is perfect. In all matters of opinion, our adversairies are insane.
- Mark Twain
MB4 on October 17, 2009 at 12:18 AM
So since Obama being in control of who runs GM, the salary of the executives and the salary at AIG, I sure do not want Obama to not control my company.
Johan Klaus on October 17, 2009 at 12:19 AM
Ann does suck all the air out of a room. I think it all goes to her head…..
HornetSting on October 17, 2009 at 12:19 AM
They’re definitely pushing on all fronts. The more of the economy that comes under state control, the more they control people’s livelihood, which means they can make or break your ability to work and feed your family. You start to toe the line pretty quick when that happens and can easily find rationalizations for abuses of power by those pulling the strings.
venividivici on October 17, 2009 at 12:19 AM
Oh neither would I.
ernesto on October 17, 2009 at 12:20 AM
Isn’t that evidence “herd say”?
Dr. Charles G. Waugh on October 17, 2009 at 12:20 AM
Thanks.
First, however, I’d really like to see some great knockers.
And then, put the candle back.
I could go futher, but I don’t want to get banned.
Loxodonta on October 17, 2009 at 12:22 AM
I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.
- Thomas Jefferson
MB4 on October 17, 2009 at 12:22 AM
I just saw your comment. You’re welcome for the quote & link. Thank you for your excellent follow up comment on the quote.
INC on October 17, 2009 at 12:23 AM
I haven’t exchanged posts with you in a long time.
But I always enjoy reading your silliness.
Thanks.
Loxodonta on October 17, 2009 at 12:25 AM
Oh, I don’t know. Aren’t wet Parisians “in Seine”?
Dr. Charles G. Waugh on October 17, 2009 at 12:25 AM
‘Judge me by the people with whom I surround myself.’ Communist/socialist.
Johan Klaus on October 17, 2009 at 12:26 AM
There is some “circular evidence” for that.
MB4 on October 17, 2009 at 12:26 AM
Exactly, and its very disturbing.
beachgirlusa on October 17, 2009 at 12:27 AM
There’s another one I like like that by Nietzsche.
“Madness is rare in individuals, but in groups, parties, nations and ages it is the rule.”
Socialism/collectivism is definitely the madness of this age.
venividivici on October 17, 2009 at 12:27 AM
Never say die.
beachgirlusa on October 17, 2009 at 12:28 AM
Thank you for your kine comment.
Dr. Charles G. Waugh on October 17, 2009 at 12:29 AM
That’s really all you had to say, my dear. The rest was drivel trying to justify drivel.
What are they teaching in school these days?!
Loxodonta on October 17, 2009 at 12:30 AM
“this is new politics, but im not sure its inherently nefarious, or inherent to liberals”
Thats all you needed to take out of that.
ernesto on October 17, 2009 at 12:33 AM
I dunno. The Obama administration has been rather bent on becoming a dominate force in, if not taking over entirely, America’s health-care, automobile and banking industries and just about every other aspect of American life. And then there is the almost always present demonization of opposition. And supporting dictators for life. And how many czars now? Well, need I go on? All that doesn’t exactly seem too Jeffersonian to me.
MB4 on October 17, 2009 at 12:34 AM
Fixed!
Milton Berle said “Education has gone from the little red schoolhouse to the little read student.”
Dr. Charles G. Waugh on October 17, 2009 at 12:35 AM
You are just so cranky.
I can offer cream, rock salt, sweetener, and chocolate sauce.
All you have to do is provide the cherry.
And we’ll make a sundae.
Loxodonta on October 17, 2009 at 12:38 AM
As ive certainly said here before, all of that fits within the range of the typical american pendulum swing of domestic policy. we’ve certainly had higher taxes, and more regulated industries, than we do today. Maybe on some of the communications stuff, as i said earlier, we’re seeing an administration lashing out in ways that are new…but so is the level of coverage, as GHW Bush pointed out in the headlines article.
And i never tried calling it jeffersonian
ernesto on October 17, 2009 at 12:39 AM
MB4 at 12:34AM
And I would say world government, world redistribution of wealth, and world “enforcement” are pretty “stalinist”. See
http://www.blacklistednews.com/news-5961-0-9-9–.html
Ernesto, do you think Obama will oppose the UN climate change treaty which would give the UN the power to do those 3 things and put the US under a UN communist world government? Why or why not?
This is coming up in December so you don’t have much time to think about it.
justincase on October 17, 2009 at 12:41 AM
If so then Obama has put a rather long extension on that typical American pendulum and I think that extension was built in Russia. Well, maybe thirties Germany or Italy.
MB4 on October 17, 2009 at 12:42 AM
I have been on H/A since Ed moved over here from his old CQ site; and I have to say I find the lack of wisdom among some of my fellow travelers here surprising a little more each day.
The GOP is a political party, not a political idiology. The party, like its primary opponent, shifts and spins and postures to try to bring in numbers of people to vote for their candidates. There are probably as many real conservitives in the Democrat party as there are in the GOP currently.
As for what conservitism is about, aside from the GOP, is freedom. It is not about big business vs small business as someone said on this thread. It is about the freedom to build any business, or pursue any goal your abilities and dreams propel you to. Conservitism is about having a deep and abiding faith in the power of the free human spirit to do the impossible, a million times a day, all over the world.
Liberalism, as opposed to Democrat, is about the freedom of the government to decide what each individual should produce for the government and what each individual should receive from the government.
I am a conservitive, because I believe that each of us has the power to do anything, accomplish any goal, and build any level of wealth and well being that we desire, but only if all the choices are ours. If the choices are not ours, quite frankly, we are slaves.
MikeA on October 17, 2009 at 12:43 AM
Since you’re offering take out, I’d really like some roasted peanuts.
So, if you wouldn’t mind stepping into the oven, we’ll start.
Thanks!
* nom nom *
* puh! *
Salt, please!
Loxodonta on October 17, 2009 at 12:43 AM
What a gift!
Ddrintn, if you’re still there, this is exactly what i meant about philosophical similarities being largely meaningless. The infowars crowd has arrived :-)
ernesto on October 17, 2009 at 12:44 AM
Why do they say ‘secret’….seems to me Obama’s pretty much out in the open with it.
ElectricPhase on October 17, 2009 at 12:45 AM
That’s a great line. Thanks!
Loxodonta on October 17, 2009 at 12:46 AM
Maybe a little off thread but has anyone seen a post on Atlas Shrugs concerning an upcoming Copenhagen Climate Change Conference concerning a treaty that Lord Monckton says “Dear Leader O” will be signing.??????
retiredeagle on October 17, 2009 at 12:46 AM
The fact that he’s not done one stalinist thing since in office?
ernesto on October 16, 2009 at 11:45 PM
Anita Dunn..Vann Jones.. Carol Browner… C’mon man you have got to be kidding me.
Dire Straits on October 17, 2009 at 12:46 AM
The federal government once set the price of every airline ticket sold in america. we once had a REAL progressive tax system. Pendulums swing.
ernesto on October 17, 2009 at 12:47 AM
I don’t know what you’re talking about, Ernesto, but I’d appreciate having you read the site I gave, look at the associated site with the actual treaty, and then answer whether you think Obama will oppose world government, world redistribution of wealth, and world “enforcement”.
And then tell me who is or isn’t stalinist.
justincase on October 17, 2009 at 12:47 AM
the site you linked to traffics in conspiracies. alternet and infowars are linked, i bet id find amy goodman too.
ernesto on October 17, 2009 at 12:49 AM
Don’t give Obama any more Stalinist like ideas. He’s got quite enough already.
MB4 on October 17, 2009 at 12:51 AM
retiredeagle at 12:46AM
I didn’t see the Atlas Shrugs article, but I posted this link: http://www.blacklistednews.com/news-5961-0-9-9–.html
I think it fits the topic very well. Conservatives thinking Obama is pushing a radical agenda? I think this treaty embodies what Obama has been all about in America and he would love nothing more than to sign this treaty and give up US sovereignty altogether.
He’s already given Russia permission to view our nuclear stuff, which he’s wanting to get rid of anyway. He’s already agreed to give up on a missile shield for Europe. He’s already given Syria what they wanted from us without negotiating for anything in return from them. He’s taking off where Clinton left off with letting the Chinese have our military technology. The dollar is going bye-bye. The only nation he or his administration have threatened with any force at all is Israel, for defending herself.
This guy has already surrendered America to the communist powers. All that’s left is the final signature on the paper.
justincase on October 17, 2009 at 12:54 AM
Ernesto at 12:49
So you didn’t read the UN treaty? Basic facts, Ernesto. There are none so blind as those who will not see.
justincase on October 17, 2009 at 12:55 AM
Honestly there is no point debating with liberals. Even if you on some ideological level believe in socialized medicine, if you haven’t realized by now that whatever Obama delivers will damage the country you aren’t fit to debate.
It will end up costing far more than claimed. It will provide far less coverage than it promises. It will very likely allow fewer people access to care than currently have care while costing us all more.
I give you porkulus as exhibit A. Cap and Trade is another fine example. The effect it will have on CO2 emissions has been determined to be negligible, while the damage to the economy not so much.
jhffmn on October 17, 2009 at 12:57 AM
I think you should seriously ponder the implications of that sentence.
I am a sovereign individual: my life, my rights, and my consent are not negotiable ‘vouchers’ nor toys to snatched away by some wiser adult [as though I were a naughty four year old].
I won’t be ‘dragged’ anywhere while I’m still breathing; we have rules in this Republic about changing things. Stick to those rules and we’ll get along just fine.
Treat those rules like they’re an inconvenient contract and you won’t like my response [or the people who think me].
Feel free to speak your mind, but weight the consequences of your words a bit more heavily. It will make for a more pleasant, and meaningful, discourse all around.
CPT. Charles on October 17, 2009 at 12:59 AM
regardless of your insinuations, Obama can’t simply decree a treaty ratification. it requires our elected representatives. But ive downloaded the treaty, and will try and go over all 181 pages. Have you? my twitter accounts linked, you can drop me a message with an email address so we can continue that conversation further…but im not doing this now.
mind you though, the guy who wrote the blacklistednews article is a conspiracy nut.
ernesto on October 17, 2009 at 12:59 AM
It too late once you’ve leap from the cliff.
Kini on October 17, 2009 at 1:03 AM
You make my dentist very happy.
MadisonConservative on October 17, 2009 at 1:07 AM
Go here for further details and discussion:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/10/16/obama-poised-to-cede-us-sovereignty-in-copenhagen-claims-british-lord-monckton/#comments
Don’t hold your breath waiting for discussion thread here.
CPT. Charles on October 17, 2009 at 1:08 AM
As evidence by who Obama surrounds himself with.
Kini on October 17, 2009 at 1:09 AM
Amen.
beachgirlusa on October 17, 2009 at 1:15 AM
For one thing, Obama praises this guy instead of firing him and apologizing for entrusting him with authority.
Chris_Balsz on October 17, 2009 at 1:18 AM
Yes. We know you have a large cavity that needs a lot of drilling.
Thanks.
Any time.
Loxodonta on October 17, 2009 at 1:20 AM
Conspiracy nuts online aren’t the ones scheming to take over large chunks of the economy.
ddrintn on October 17, 2009 at 1:21 AM
Watch for the restrictions of freedoms. Anything that could cause the government to enact controls on our freedoms.
I think the domino theory is all part of the setup. It takes hours to set up the pieces, and only a few minutes to watch them fall. Particularly from within.
Kini on October 17, 2009 at 1:25 AM
As a conservative, and a free thinker, I have to ask the question: How then did Barack Hessein Obama get elected?
Kini on October 17, 2009 at 1:34 AM
ernesto on October 17, 2009 at 12:59 AM
Thanks. There’s a lot of repetition and inane babbling in those close to 200 pages. The key buzzwords keep coming up though, just as the British guy summarized.
1. The classification of countries according to how prosperous they are so that the prosperous countries’ wealth is redistributed to the less prosperous. (Summarized by the Brit as the redistribution of wealth)
2. The “parties” and “nation-suitable” measures which are all LEGALLY BINDING – the “parties” (i.e. countries) being subject to the “Convention” (i.e. ruling body) (Summarized by the Brit as world government or the loss of national sovereignty)
3. The processes to measure and force compliance. (summarized by the Brit as enforcement)
Another thing I noticed was reference to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child – which also would put the UN above national law (i.e. supersede national sovereignty). That treaty includes things like parents not being able to control what internet sites their kids go on or to make them go to Sunday school, etc. Last I knew Obama was going to sign that treaty so he would be eligible to be on the UN Human Rights Commission. I don’t know if he’s done that yet or not.
justincase on October 17, 2009 at 1:44 AM
By singing Mmmmmmm mmmm mmmmm Barack Hussein Obama mmmmmmmmmm mmmmmm mmmmmmmmm
NathanG on October 17, 2009 at 1:50 AM
I don’t know why AP insists on posting this nonsense about libs trying to characterize conservatives. That Carville crap would have languished mostly unseen if it weren’t for our atheist friend here. Nobody cares what these morons think, end of story. Big government is a failure and more people every day are starting to realize it, that is good for Conservatism. Now if only the Republican establishment could get that through their heads….
echosyst on October 17, 2009 at 2:19 AM
OT: Juan Williams responds to Warren Ballentine:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d12_1255759179&p=1
Ugly on October 17, 2009 at 2:24 AM
Geeze, just how much RINO-osity can one stand in one day!
Why in the hell wasn’t something from THIS important piece the QOTD?
Sarah Palin: Drill
Petroleum is a major part of America’s energy picture. Shall we get it here or abroad?
Given that we’re spending billions of stimulus dollars to rebuild our highways, it makes sense to think about what we’ll be driving on them. For years to come, most of what we drive will be powered, at least in part, by diesel fuel or gasoline. To fuel that driving, we need access to oil. The less use we make of our own reserves, the more we will have to import, which leads to a number of harmful consequences. That means we need to drill here and drill now.
We rely on petroleum for much more than just powering our vehicles: It is essential in everything from jet fuel to petrochemicals, plastics to fertilizers, pesticides to pharmaceuticals. According to the Energy Information Administration, our total domestic petroleum consumption last year was 19.5 million barrels per day (bpd). Motor gasoline and diesel fuel accounted for less than 13 million bpd of that. Meanwhile, we produced only 4.95 million bpd of domestic crude. In other words, even if we ran all our vehicles on something else (which won’t happen anytime soon), we would still have to depend on imported oil. And we’ll continue that dependence until we develop our own oil resources to their fullest extent.
Those who oppose domestic drilling are motivated primarily by environmental considerations, but many of the countries we’re forced to import from have few if any environmental-protection laws, and those that do exist often go unenforced. In effect, American environmentalists are preventing responsible development here at home while supporting irresponsible development overseas.
My home state of Alaska shows how it’s possible to be both pro-environment and pro-resource-development. Alaskans would never support anything that endangered our pristine air, clean water, and abundant wildlife (which, among other things, provides many of us with our livelihood). The state’s government has made safeguarding resources a priority; when I was governor, for instance, we created a petroleum-systems-integrity office to monitor our oil and gas infrastructure for any potential environmental risks.
Alaska also shows how oil drilling is thoroughly compatible with energy conservation and renewable-energy development. Over 20 percent of Alaska’s electricity currently comes from renewable sources, and as governor I put forward a long-term plan to increase that figure to 50 percent by 2025. Alaska’s comprehensive plan identifies renewable options across the state that can help rural villages transition away from expensive diesel-generated electricity — allowing each community to choose the solution that best fits its needs. That’s important in any energy plan: Tempting as they may be to central planners, top-down, one-size-fits-all solutions are recipes for failure.
Continue reading my article for National Review by clicking here:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Nzc2ZjhjY2MwMWUyM2M4NTM5YWRjYTcwMTEzZTNjMTc
Man, I love Hot Air as much as anyone, but if I wanted to be a Frumian, I’d go hang out at his place instead of here!!
Get with it AP!
Give the people what they want!!
gary4205 on October 17, 2009 at 2:53 AM
Indoctrination is only beginning on our children.
Obama made promises he can not keep. That’s why he got elected. People in Louisiana were asking the Obama why are you nickle and dimeing us?
Obama said, I just can’t write a check. But he can, and he has, to AIG, GM, and anyone that gave him money….
That’s not his money. But people think it is.
Kini on October 17, 2009 at 2:54 AM
Ballentine also mentioned “real black people” in that clip.
Racism… it ain’t your daddy’s Oldsmobile.
Ugly on October 17, 2009 at 2:56 AM
lexhamfox on October 17, 2009 at 3:07 AM
Whoops. Posted this in the wrong thread a minute ago.
Ronald Reagan at the Frank Sinatra Celebrity Roast:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=102_1251591774&p=1
Ugly on October 17, 2009 at 3:32 AM
Thank you so very much for finding and posting this. With all the bad going on, it’s great to see and remember a truly great and funny man, that was President. My face has a strange feelingg just seeing the guy and remembering when we had a real President. I think they call it smiling.
Jeff from WI on October 17, 2009 at 5:29 AM
The very sad thing though, think of the gifted and funny stars that were on that show week after week, now look at the unfunny, untalented scum that is Hollywood today.
Jeff from WI on October 17, 2009 at 5:45 AM
Jeff from WI on October 17, 2009 at 5:45 AM
You mean that a slavish commitment to left wing ideology, no morals or substance and lots of surgery and drugs don’t make up for a lack of talent? Well, the Holly product keeps making money…
IlikedAUH2O on October 17, 2009 at 6:54 AM
I think that people all over the country are becoming more and more frustrated with what they perceive to be a growing tendency of government to expand for its own purposes. A drug prescription plan or something like that is different, they see a benefit from that and the costs has not been so great that they can not or will not tolerate it...but in all government, on all levels from the local zoning commissions to the state to the feds, they see more and more control and interference in their daily lives..and they do not like it.
Those people are not all part of some old white Republican base, they are all sorts of people. And there will be more and more of them as the socalled progressives continue their march to control more and more of the private sector.
Terrye on October 17, 2009 at 7:33 AM
Paranoid? Who, us? Naaah.
Grow Fins on October 17, 2009 at 7:48 AM
One reason Obama needs stopped on so many of his ideas is that it sets a precedent. Just read Ernesto’s posts. It allows him and others to simply say ho hum as we are dragged deeper into the pit.
CWforFreedom on October 17, 2009 at 7:49 AM
We’re not paranoid, guv, honest…
Grow Fins on October 17, 2009 at 7:49 AM
Grow Fins so you don’t think the amount of government control is a bad thing? Never been to the projects I see.
CWforFreedom on October 17, 2009 at 7:51 AM
I’m not a fan of “government control.” Never met a bureacracy that I liked.
But the thread here is about conservative paranoia (in response to the recent study, which is being dismissed out of hand here as baloney. As Hofstadter points out, paranoia starts out with justified skepticism at the excesses of the “enemy.”
Grow Fins on October 17, 2009 at 7:57 AM
See my 749 am post Fins
CWforFreedom on October 17, 2009 at 8:00 AM
The problem with that, is today’s movies are aimed at young people. You can’t blame the young for being unable to judge talent, since they weren’t born when the talented people were alive. How many young people would bother watching a movie or variety show/roast from that era. Very few, so they have nothing to compare todays worthless Hollywood to.
Jeff from WI on October 17, 2009 at 8:07 AM
Um, I don’t mind being out of the mainstream. I know what I know about Obama, and I couldn’t care less about the “majority” who get their news from the MSM. I could point to 100 things Obama has DONE, not said, DONE that prove who he is.
marklmail on October 17, 2009 at 8:19 AM
I noticed that he seems to think that this is the normal back and forth. Where would we be if no one stood up and said “Wait!”. I will admit that we should have stood up during the Bush administration, I hope I have learned my lesson.
Cindy Munford on October 17, 2009 at 9:18 AM
Wow – this is good!
Concise, powerful, and directly on target – nicely done, sir.
massrighty on October 17, 2009 at 9:20 AM
Not a study; a focus group study, commisioned by a group whose purpose is to politically weaken its’ oposition.
massrighty on October 17, 2009 at 9:23 AM
lexhamfox on October 17, 2009 at 3:07 AM
http://www.veritasbelt.blogspot.com
I gave up on updating it because I couldn’t keep up with all the communist stuff coming out of this administration, but even as it is there’s plenty there.
I might add the Obama administration’s suggestion that if Israel tried to fly over Iraq to hit Iran’s nuclear facilities we would shoot them down. Did you hear that? We would shoot down our allies if they protected themselves from the nutcases who have publicly said for a long time that they were going to pulverize both Israel and America.
How are you going to feel if/when Israel attacks Iran in December after Russia (who has reserved for itself the right to pre-emptive nuclear strikes) stops any sanctions against Iran – and then Obama shoots down the Israelis? This stuff has been publicly stated and the situation is imminent.
Add to that Obama’s insistence that Israel not settle in areas that were already agreed upon during Bush’s presidency, and his threats to not sell Israelis the equipment/ammunition needed for the systems we’ve been selling them as their allies for years, if they follow the terms of the actual agreement rather than Obama’s wishes.
We all know his wishes. He’s very loyal to the 57 states – per his Freudian slip. There’s one entity in the world that has 57 states: Islam.
And although he started with a very high percentage of Israelis who believed he was “for” them, he now has less than 10% of the Israeli population who believes he is with them, IIRC. I know it’s declined DRASTICALLY. These people are not fools.
But if you don’t think I document what I say, read through the veritasbelt posts (start with Part One) and get a small, small sampling of what I back my statements with.
justincase on October 17, 2009 at 9:59 AM
Milton Berle said “Education has gone from the little red schoolhouse to the little RED student.”
fixed it. :o)
IowaWoman on October 17, 2009 at 10:52 AM
The only reason that the leaders of the welfare left do not go full Stalinistic, is lack of power. They are still dependent on the power of the ballot box. Their militaries are still led by people that will not knowingly destroy their country’s liberty.
darktood on October 17, 2009 at 11:17 AM
It’s easier to arrive at the verdict when it’s also the starting point. With the verdict in hand, gathering evidence is easy.
Blacksmith8 on October 17, 2009 at 11:26 AM
If your point is that indoctrination hasn’t just started under the Obama administration, you’re right. Indoctrination has been going on for a very long time.
But since you yourself identified the thread topic as paranoia, I doubt that was your point. Yes, our children are being indoctrinated at school. Yes, it’s deliberate. Why exactly do you think Ayers decided to go into “education?” He realized it was a much more effective tool than bombs.
Indoctrination is how we get to the point of many students wearing Che Guevara T-shirts. Che Guevara was a bloody man, who could only be viewed as a hero by communists and communist sympathizers.
Indoctrination is how we wound up with the obviously unsuitable Barack Obama actually being voted into office. Even though most people don’t completely buy his radical agenda, they were indoctrinated enough to not see it as all that bad, or to believe he didn’t actually mean it.
There is probably no goal that could be more important to this country’s long term survival than breaking the hold the left has on education, because they don’t see it as just education, but as their chance to produce more leftists.
tom on October 17, 2009 at 11:36 AM
canopfor on October 16, 2009 at 11:48 PM
I haven’t exchanged posts with you in a long time.
But I always enjoy reading your silliness.
Thanks.
Loxodonta on October 17, 2009 at 12:25 AM
Loxodonta:
Silliness at your service Lox,hehe!:)
Hey, speaking of silliness,I watched Charlie Chaplins,
Modern Times.Nearly LMAO!!!
Part 1/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0XjRivGfiw
canopfor on October 17, 2009 at 8:13 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3