Monday, November 21, 2011

It's the Statism Stupid, Coming To Pass

The drum beat begins. Over the last few days there have been calls from the Left for Obama to step down as Harry Truman and LBJ did before him.

I've said it often, most recently in early September with It's the Statism Stupid, that the Right has been running a terrible, non-conservative risk by focusing all its concerns on Obama. By not putting the focus on the Democratic Party's Statist agenda, the risk was always there that the Left would seek to remove Obama from the running one way or the other.

Now the Left is blaming Obama for inconsequence and lack of vision and follow-through (Pat Caddell), and incompetence (Chris Matthews). More are sure to follow. They want a fresh leader to push their agenda forward. They are envisioning that leader to be Hillary. She is now with an unprecedented 69% approval rating. Oh, Oh -- and the GOP seems to have been helping her every way they can too. I just love its judgment as proven by its choices of venues for the debates, don't you? /s

Gee, who could have seen this coming? /s

So now we're told that we may be faced with another Democrat Statist running for President come November of the next year, you still think Romney is a real alternative? Why should conservatives give up to the SKUNCs in the GOP? Because they'll tell us that the independents won't buy a real conservative? Stand by your convictions and insist on giving the independents a not very difficult choice.
"Do you want a real conservative or another rotten Alinksyite?"
Dammit folks, both Obama and Hillary are Alinsky radicals! Make the case that any Dem would be as bad as a second Obama term. And make the case to those voting in the primaries: A soft Left-leaning pubbie, even if elected, will only be a caretaker president until the Dems take over or the country collapses.

Those same fools or Quislings in the GOP and punditry would have insisted on offering George H W Bush to the independents in 1980 instead of Reagan. (And there would have been no Reagan Democrats.) This country and the world would have had lost then too if we listened to the SKUNCs then instead of following our convictions. Get some nads you wimps.
I don't know who of the current crop of candidates is a good choice. We need a cultural Churchill to come out of obscurity or something. Most of all, we need help. You know Where to ask for it.


  1. I'm pretty sure I left a comment at 4am.
    Maybe I only I only dreamed it, but if I could dream then, I'd'a been sleeping instead of commenting,
    I think I said something about dropping Cain. Just too vague when asked pointed questions.
    People are stupid enough to vote for Hillary: "Oh! There's a name I know!"

  2. Check your email. I bet it kicked back. ;)

  3. Hey! You're right! How'd you know?
    I just remembered something else might have said in that comment.
    "You know Where to ask for it."
    "Where" is right. As in "Who".
    Unfortunately, a lot of conservatives are "libertarians" which in time past was "libertine".
    They want freedom to do whatever they want: sex, drugs and rock'n'roll.
    Our Founding Fathers would not have tolerated their position, ie: gay marriage/activity, licentiousness, drug use (they were not teetotalers, but not alcoholics) or dis-attachment from foreign affairs (Tripoli comes to mind, and they were grateful for France's involvement in our liberty, and was Normandy wrong?).
    Darn, I feel a post coming on.


View My Stats