“Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates, and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible.”
Are these the words of a Saudi, disgusted at the cheering masses witnessing a public beheading? Are these the words of a Saddam ruled Iraqi whose relatives’ flesh had been burned off by chemical weapons? How about those of an unemployed Cuban or an embittered Muslim Chechnyan? Could be, but no, these are actually the words of Janice Rogers Brown, a Bush judicial appointee to the DC circuit court of appeals.
She’s been known to represent the law with a keen eye for opportunities to tattoo this worldview of hers on the backs of peasants who were unlucky enough to have been screwed over within her jurisdiction. Say you were a peasant employee who was upset that the boss had counted a federal holiday against your vacation tally, she’d insist it was none of her business and send the peasant back to toil as they should, back to wherever it was they crawled to her bench from.
Same for a peasant who happened to be injured due to a company’s negligence, as it would be wrong for her to infringe upon the will of nature and uphold any semblance of right from wrong, or a peasant’s role in life being any different than that of a slave. And with this facet of her ideology comes the stark, hideous truth of exactly where we’re at in 2005 with the crowbar of political power existing within the head of an African-American woman who favors the idea of ‘anything goes’ above the ideals that took over a hundred years to grow and finally bring her people equality within our society.
And this is the wisdom behind Bush and Rove in this chapter of American history. The skeleton key is the minority of high intelligence and suggestible idealism. Allow them to enjoy the same expensive scotch and cigar, with promises of a significant part of the kingdom as long as they remain loyal and do as they’re told. And with this, the label of racist can be shouted in the opposite direction, and if all goes as planned, nobody will listen to what they’re actually saying and instead focus on the color of their skin, think twice, and decide to fight another day.
Yes, it is the idea of limiting debate that lies beneath all of this. At some point they figured out that if you can make people uncomfortable enough from fear of losing their livelihood or credibility, they’ll go along with the program. At the start of the Iraq war this formula was used to perfection. For those who are left asking questions or happen to wise up, put up another barrier and pretend it’s not about the matter at hand at all, but instead about the deep seeded racism within the head of the infidel.
This political party whose predecessors shouted at the top of their lungs about ‘activist judges’ following the Brown v. Board of Education decision from the late 50s, is now masquerading their efforts to reduce the influence of the judicial branch with an African-American female judge whose ideology and politics would have matched up well with that of a slave owner from back in the day. But perhaps I’m overreacting. Just in case, I’ll let President Eisenhower, a Republican, finish this one off for me.
“Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are…a few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid.” – 11/8/54
Don’t forget if you are against this nominee you are also against people of faith.
Are you kidding there Karl?
Whatever the case, more insight into the hands off, not my problem GOP judiciary.
That would be ‘people with faith in the GOP’…it has nothing to do with God. I’ve surely made my feelings known on this score. The politics being played right now by Republicans is extremely dishonest. There are too many lies being told and laundered by our media.
I really think there has to be a movement in this country that forces a higher level of honesty across the board. If the FCC can be used to fine radio entertainers for saying a bad word, why can’t this agency be leveraged for ensuring a higher level of honesty in our government and media?
If Orin Hatch goes on a ‘news’ channel and states that the filibuster hadn’t been used prior to the past four years – and that lie is broadcast to millions of people who trust that politician and that ‘news’ channel to tell the truth – why is that any less offensive to us than a four letter word?
I love this system of government we have, but to make it viable in this new age of information, we need some creative oversight. There are Jr. Karl Roves in the making in political science programs across the country, and after this chapter, I for one would rather it be the last it’s kind!
Wow, that first paragraph was pretty energizing, someone who gets it, I mean, really gets it. This is so completely opposite of what Saudis, Castro, Muslims or Saddam would say.
Dictators rely on just what was being said in that paragraph. The more government rule the worse life is for the people, just look for your selves. Saudis, Castro and Saddam rule or ruled everything about their people’s lives. Islam is essentially a religious enslavement by a totalitarian group of clerics who claim to speak directly and exclusively for God.
With regards to Ike, his political history is just that, history. Social Security had a place in society once and was useful in it’s day but now it is just a huge anchor dragging us down. If the government wants us to be secure, forcing us to pay a ton of money for a benefit that most likely will not be there is not the way to go.
If I was allowed to put all my SS money away over 40-50 years I would be set for the rest of my life once I retired. I’d have an estate to pass onto my heirs and charities and I’d reduce a huge burden on society.
Many of these huge welfare programs alter the natural way of things. I’d love to be able to invest my own money but unfortunately democrats can’t see past their hatred of Bush to help the American people. Thus, I get screwed. My retirement will be jeopardized if I don’t get my private account and all the money I pay in to SS will just disappear.
What really bothers me about Bush is the growth of government and all these programs. I’d like to see a lot of this stuff slashed and moved to the states so the people have more control over their own government, like it was supposed to be. The phase out of SS, when it does come, will be a huge relief.
Don’t forget if you are against this nominee you are also against people of faith.
And women, and minorities and a better America. Does that sound about right?
At this point deception seems to work well, if I was a politician I would probably do it just to keep up with the competitiion. It is sort of like steroids in baseball, if everyone is doing it then you have to do it to stay even. On one level you have admire what the republicans have created, they are able to get most people to say the same word, for example the way social security lexicon has changed from privatization to personal accounts and I think some other terms as well. I always go back to social security because it proves that if people really care about something they are harder to scam. Have a good night.
I was riffing on the comment in terms of what a citizen of those countries would say. I know the leader wouldn’t be saying that. Her record matches that paragraph and it’s not a good thing. There have been many instances where she was the one dissenting vote in the California Supreme Court. She’s anti-worker, which is a no-go for me. The workers of this country are it’s greatest resource.
If it wasn’t for the worker, America would be nothing!
I think your view of Islam is offbase. There are extreme Christians who blow up abortion clinics, post the pictures and addresses of doctors who perform abortions on websites. Islam is prevelent in countries where poverty is widespread and that’s what creates the sense in people that their lives are worth more as suicide bombers.
Have you ever seen the movie ‘The Grapes of Wrath’? This point of view in regards to social security comes from not having lived through the Great Depression. I’ve been hearing since I was a kid – right-wing parents – that social security wouldn’t be around for them or me when we retired. It’s solvency is secure for at least twenty more years, so I don’t see how your statement is accurate.
I heard an interview with the custodian of the California Teacher’s Pension – and when Enron crashed, his fund lost over 1 billion dollars. It’s not a given that over 40-50 years your investment would be as secure as you think. What if your time to retire came at the moment the technology bubble burst? I know people who lost 100K in their mutual funds when the bubble burst. It’s not as simple as you and the President say it is. There has to be a safety net to protect those who are unable to work and provide for themselves.
Social Security is not just a retirement program. This fact is never mentioned in the President’s sales pitch.
By this logic, any time the Democrats disagreed with Bush, it wouldn’t be based on a difference of ideas, but due to a personal hatred. So every time he’s disagreed with it’s personal? Is that what you’re saying? I’ve heard this from someone else in the Political Paradise blog I have a link to on the right of the page.
This is the idea. The GOP won’t admit it, but you know what this is really all about.
Big government is in full effect with Bush in the White House. More important to me than how much in taxes comes out of my paycheck is where that money goes. The missiles deal I pointed out in the last article is a classic example of the wrong people getting the money. Halliburtion…I could write a book about this, but there are likely to be twenty or so out there already. Word is, they got a BONUS. The Wall Street Journal was documenting the sins of Halliburton from the beginning of the war. Their editorial page has highlighted the practice of overpaying for goods and services to get a higher commission. There has been zero oversight of any consequence with this that I’ve seen.
I think Exxon got a handout as well. During a year of record profits, how can Bush feel alright giving them something for free? While the health care system is eroding by the day, Exxon deserves some of my money?
Right – I saw a new comment on ‘Minefield of Quotas, Recruiters Beware’ – a new poster directed towards you…glad to have you here! Keeps the pot stiring!
Right thinker:
You can still invest additional funds for retirement, either in the form of a 401k that most companies offer or in an IRA, as well as numerous other investment vehicles. One good thing about the Social Security(SS) debate is that people are starting to think about retirement planning. The problem with the pro phase-out crew is that they keep trying to show it as a either or choice, implying that the only way to have a personal account is if SS is phased out. social Security should not be a persons only source of income during retirement but it provides a nice safety net.
If you really beleive the system is going broke then we should do something to fix it, not just break it earlier. The current fix, proposed by the administration reminds me of a lady who was on Nightline awhile back who was worried that she might get breast cancer so she had both her breasts removed. The logic on SS is the same, it might go broke so lets destroy it now.
If the FCC can be used to fine radio entertainers for saying a bad word, why can’t this agency be leveraged for ensuring a higher level of honesty in our government and media?
Because the ACLU would have run to the aid of Al Gore once he was indicted claiming his freedom of speach was being violated. Remember how his month sang him the union label song before it was written, his claim to have invented the internet, claims of co-sponsoring bills during a time he wasn’t in office and the fake people he made up with life problems. I know I’m forgetting some stuff but the I get the gist that anti-lie laws would apply only to Rebublicans who Democrats accuse of lying and Democrats would be exempt.
and when Enron crashed
The fund was still up from 30 years ago, even with this billion dollar hit. Now that the market is up a couple thousand points to over 10,000 they probably have recouped the losses and then some. Besides, No one ever said to put social security into junk bonds or tech stocks. Money place in the indexes is very safe over several decades and if the market collapses you have more tho worry about than your retirement because something like nuclear war, comet hitting the earth or civil war would make retirement unlikely.
By this logic, any time the Democrats disagreed with Bush, it wouldn’t be based on a difference of ideas, but due to a personal hatred. Is that what you’re saying?
That’s what I’m reading, liberals are thowing away decades of established political positions because Bush indicated support for them. All through Clinton I heard all the SS gloom and doom and within the span of a couple months the crisis suddeenly is SS is doing great. I get this from the left blogs and the media and from what liberals tell me to my face.
Liberals are even trying to gut the constitution, like our friend above trying to get the FCC to imprision Republican because of his opinion of their views and beliefs. Liberals have whipped themselves into such a fury they have their own mental disorder called PEST.
So yes, a majority of democrats hate bush so much they are opposed to anything he says. You read the NYT don’t you, it’s all in there.
Halliburtion
Just to keep the pot stirring, I think the reason democrats haven’t been all over this is national security is at stake. In Nevada there is a place called area 51 that isn’t there. It’s there but it’s not there and money that goes though a laundering process goes to Area 51 that’s not there and neither is the money, there was never any laundered money in the first place because Area 51 doesn’t exist. Following me still?
Democrats need to believe in these fraud and embezzelment stories to keep their moral high and to keep the dream world alive. You were in the military so I’ll ask you this. How do all the special ops and CIA people and their equipment get around? I never see them on any of Southwest airlines flights I’ve been on. How do the stealth planes and other top secret equipment get around? The only thing I know about my own brother over the last six years is something about Maryland, something about Iraq, something about submarines in Hawaii and something about wires and circuit boards. I picture his resume looking like one of those documnets released under the freedom of information act with all the black lines.
Maybe it takes a leap of faith to think that a possible reason Haliburton was getting all these bonuses and supposedly empty trucks were sent driving all across Iraq is for secret operations and general concealment of our strengths. If Haliburton was really engaged in all this fraud then a single democrat could wipe out the company but they bitch and then do nothing. Just a optomistic thought in a sea of pessimism.
I saw a new comment on ‘Minefield of Quotas, Recruiters Beware’ – a new poster directed towards you…glad to have you here! Keeps the pot stiring!
Yikes, one of my fans, thanks for the heads up, I shall proceed immediately.
Absolutely not – it would apply to both sides. If MediaMatters.org can manage to do it, the government surely can. Senate oversight is the key to having something like this actually work. A bi-partisan committee, with supenea power and oversight responsibilities over the agency. Statistics are kept on their work, fines levied…and where the agency misses the mark, there are millions of Americans to keep them honest.
Surely the wall to wall commentary shows cannot be aired on a channel that is supposedly committed to 24 hour news. It’s sexier, but it’s also dishonest. The radio and cable news are the two main culprits in spreading misinformation in our country.
It’s still a billion dollars spread out amongst everyone invested in the fund. It’s absolutely not true that funds have made up the money lost from the crash and then some. Most mutual funds are struggling to turn a profit. The business models that worked before the tech bubble burst are now proving to be ineffective.
How are liberals trying to gut the constitution exactly?
That was me calling for FCC oversight. I don’t think that with this site I’ve knowingly floated or used lies to further my positions. Honesty from our news organizations can’t be something we care about only when Karl Rove tells us to. The hypocracy of going after Newsweek for getting something wrong, when it happens every single day…multiple times, all over the airwaves…it just seems to be that if everyone was forced to respect the value of honesty, our country would be a better place.
Political campaigns are one thing, but the ‘news’ is another. Now it’s like everything can be played and covered in the way a campaign is run, which is not the way to do it. Let the politicians tell the lies and sensationalize…it’s up to the media to call them to task, and if it’s a Democrat or a Republican lying to promote their own or their party’s agenda – the media’s role is to vet what they’re telling us. The entire arena of cable news and radio is yellow journalism.
I’m basing my feelings on Halliburton on things I’ve read in Harpers, the Wall Street Journal, New York Times…it’s a rather transparent system of this monopolizing entity who really has the Pentagon by the balls. Who has the clearances to do that work already? If Halliburton was punted out of there, who would fill in?
The missing 8+ billions of Iraqi wealth is becoming a story now, and when it comes to the question of ‘who pumped all this unmetered oil and sold it?’ – my guess would be it has Halliburton written all over it. It’s curious that the administration has declined the opportunity to look in to all of this. Why wouldn’t they be all over finding out who stole 8+ billion from the Iraqis? This is a question I feel has only one answer that makes any sense…’somebody doesn’t want the facts to come out’.
I have faith that another right-winger will be here to help you out eventually. I’m hoping that Breaze can post some of his good stuff in the future. This poster is new to the site. You’re kind of having to fight a war on all fronts…something tells me you’re up to the challenge though. See you next time Right.
The hypocracy of going after Newsweek for getting something wrong, when it happens every single day…multiple times, all over the airwaves…it just seems to be that if everyone was forced to respect the value of honesty, our country would be a better place.
That’s the thing with freedom of speach you can get things wrong or lie if you want as long as it doesn’t harm anyone. They’ve been lucky so far with these things all over the airwaves but now people are dead because of it, now liability is involved.
Like yelling fire in a crowded movie theater, where there is none Newsweek botched a story again but this time people got hurt and/or died. The moment their negligence harms someone the speach issue is out the door and it switches to laibility.
That’s why it’s a big deal to me all of a sudden.
Why wouldn’t they be all over finding out who stole 8+ billion from the Iraqis?
I think it’s because the French, Russians and Chinese won’t let us inspect their shipping logs. It was the Chinese who developed a good amount of the infrastructure for the oil industry in Iraq.
You’re kind of having to fight a war on all fronts…something tells me you’re up to the challenge though.
Haha, I have a lot of family up in Washington State, this is where a “real” theft of an election just happened and they couldn’t be happier. I’m used to it and I like to have my views tested to see if they hold water. Give a yell if your ever in Vegas.
What exactally are you citing as ‘all over the airwaves’?
Would you agree that the Abu Gharib scandal had the same effect? The righteous indignation on the Newsweek article, while nothing along the lines of outrage on torture is a selective double standard. They both facilitate the same result, but one presents an opportunity to get the base riled up, while the other is just bad news.
I haven’t seen this reported. We were in control of the country after the invasion. Do you have a link?
I surely will. With twins on the way, I’m not sure that’ll be any time soon.
What exactally are you citing as ‘all over the airwaves’?
It was in the reply you had written here:
DI: The hypocracy of going after Newsweek for getting something wrong, when it happens every single day…multiple times, all over the airwaves…it just seems to be that if everyone was forced to respect the value of honesty, our country would be a better place.
Anyway, that’s where I got it.
Would you agree that the Abu Gharib scandal had the same effect?
Yeah, I think so, that story was blown so out of proportion and everything was Abu, abu, abu. This is what I was talking about the liberal media forgetting the important stuff like Nick Berg and Daniel Perl and focusing on something and making it anti-american.
I haven’t seen this reported. We were in control of the country after the invasion. Do you have a link?
You couldn’t have forgotten about oil for food already??
I surely will. With twins on the way, I’m not sure that’ll be any time soon.
DOHHH!!!
WHAT’D I TELL YALL?
Limbaugh: Opposition to judicial nominee Brown is evidence Democrats are “becoming racist and bigoted”
http://mediamatters.org/items/200505190004
Wow, I’ve been thinking that for a while. I was disgusted when Al Gore went to the black churches in southern states and did that fake southern baptist preacher accent. You know he wouldn’t ever go back if he didn’t have to.
Remeber, it was democrats who fought for slavery and republicans who always fought against it. Democrats fillibustered or defeated or whatever the 1930’s anti-lynching legislation proposed by republicans. Hell, a democrat in congress was in the KKK a hundred years ago, Byrd, right? I don’t recall.
Anyway, democrats use minorities when they need them and then it’s business as usual. That still bothers me to this day. The unions are beginning to figure this out.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,156994,00.html
Here’s the union story, I’d be pissed too.
Right – all politicians do this sort of thing. I still remember Lamar Alexander and his plaid shirt. What’s done on a campaign is often difficult for a politican to criticize, because just about anyone you’d ever meet has done something just as ridiculous.
Calling Democrats bigoted and racist is very wrong.
Let’s get down to facts if we’re going to wax historical. I’ve got a good deal of background when it comes to this (not racism, but the history of racism)…and the history surrounding the Supreme Court decision Brown v. Board of Education sums it up pretty well.
In terms of politicians and their racism…the voters of South Carolina take the cake on that score. Can you look up that bill you elude to above?
The Rove formula at work…promote a few ‘yes-men’ of color and get people to make statments like this. What exactally has Bush done for for the poor or the minorities?
Great quote at the beginning of the post. I was hoping you’d elaborate on it or maybe discuss it some more. I was sort of disappointed to see that you immediately veered away from it to launch into a rhetoric laden attack, complete with all the buzz words, that didn’t include all the facts.
An example would be the case of having vacation time docked for federal holidays. I worked for a company like that. They credited employees with two vacation days for every month worked. That’s 24 days/year from the start of employment. This was increased with longer service with the company.
Holidays were subtracted from this vacation allotment. IIRC there were 8 holidays/year. That left sixteen vacation days/year. Employees could take paid time off when they accrued the vacation time. Of course, they did reserve days for upcoming holidays. I found this to be a fair ane equitable system once I understood it.
The company I worked for before that gave you two weeks after a year’s service. You weren’t getting any time off until that year had been served.
Basically it’s a wash, with maybe a slight advantage (2 days/year) to the first company.
The worker’s comp case doesn’t include any facts at all, just your interpritation of the outcome.
I happen to agree with Justice Brown’s quote that you opened with. You don’t have to look any farther than (formerly) Great Britain today to see the truth in it. I take it from your title that you don’t agree with.
Can you look up that bill you elude to above?
I’ll try, it was another History Channel show. I think it was the one on FDR.
The Rove formula at work…promote a few ‘yes-men’ of color and get people to make statments like this. What exactally has Bush done for for the poor or the minorities?
It’s what he hasn’t done and that is be a fair weather friend, all bluster during an election and awol mid-term. Bush has essentially opened the border to Mexico, calling anyone who tries to enforce imagration laws “vigillantes.” Here’s a great liberal attack point on Bush, allowing a porous border for terrorists to slip though.
I happen to agree with Justice Brown’s quote that you opened with. You don’t have to look any farther than (formerly) Great Britain today to see the truth in it. I take it from your title that you don’t agree with.
I think this is the only part of your post I understood but I wholeheartedly agree. Ha, but seriously, we have examples to show us that she is right, and I sure hope she gets confirmed.
Nice! We truly liked this work .