We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
A sucker born every minute. But that's not really the point. I think the faux deals just provide an excuse, or rationalization, for the immediate-gratification fun of going out and getting shiny new stuff.
"Take the New York Times. In a fit of candor, it now agrees with what we've said all along — "redistribution of wealth lies at the heart of" the Affordable Care Act.
The paper reported that "economic justice" was Obama's real goal in taking over a sixth of the economy. But to make his plan "palatable" to "middle-class voters," he had to mislead them into thinking nothing would be taken from them."
I don't think so. I don't think that the Senate Democrats would go against their own recent rhetoric on the subject for the reasons given. Rather, I think it's obviously about greasing the skids for Obama's nominees.
I expect that some truly awful nominees are coming down the pike. Among the hundreds of backed up appointments, most are to the Federal Courts. Spreading the pain and cementing Obamas influence for decades to come.
The political litmus test that seems to be most often used and passed by the judicial appointees is unrestricted abortion.
Exactly. It is a naked power grab to push through the nominees that would never be accepted if the public knew what they were in their hearts. It will get worse if the Democrats become lame duck congressmen. Watch for some serious hijinks if that happens. This is what fundemental change looks like.
It's sad, but predictable, to hear the new Pope repeating that silly nonsense about the tyranny of the free market. It takes consent to make a transaction happen in a free market, which is the basis for a decent society, not tyranny.
People who talk this way normally are thinking of tyranny in the sense that someone in great need can't count on having his need fulfilled out of kindness and mercy. In other words, the need is tyrannical, and one's neighbors are heartless.
Most societies are in a lot more danger from the tyranny of needy people parading both their needs and their inability or unwillingness to fulfill them, and preying on the discomfort of their audience, than they ever were from the habit of most people to require some kind of quid pro quo in their dealings with ordinary strangers.
Don't know that reminding us of the Great Teacher's warning that one can serve G_d or Mammon but not both. Though OTOH, Paul supported himself by making and selling tents, many were told to sell all they owned and share the proceeds, etc.
To other matters, see Rangel has found an unguarded microphone, Che is still a bloody minded revolutionary, obamacare is past the bubble gum, duct tape and bailing wire repair and I need to get a case of sangria and port.
Pope Francis appears to be a good person who truely cares about others. His problem and misunderstanding of reality stems from his roots in South American Marxism. If he truely believes that consumerism is bad then he should give away the trillions in art and other booty the Catholic church owns. He could sell it and use the money to help the poor but of course that woulb be capitalism so it must be given away to be true to his Marxist roots. I await his putting his money where his mouth is...
I think the commentary on the Pope's EVANGELII GAUDIUM got it wrong. He's not advocating Marxism, forced redistribution, or any thing of the kind. He is advocating less cut throat, ethics-free, money/goods worship.
We got a challenge at our church to donate more to the Philippines recovery efforts, by buying each other a few less items this Christmas that will just wind up in a garage sale in May. (there goes the Ferrari I wasn't going to get).
Pope Francis simply wants us all to love people more and like money a bit less.
"People who talk this way normally are thinking of tyranny in the sense that someone in great need can't count on having his need fulfilled out of kindness and mercy. In other words, the need is tyrannical, and one's neighbors are heartless."
which is exactly how the pope would see it. The free market is heartless because it doesn't give people for free everything they need (which for a leftist translates into "everything he desires") over the backs of the labour of others.
Popes have, almost to a man, been leftists for a long time. It fits well with their religion, after all the very core of the catholic (and indeed any) church is that the church decides everything, people should work their ass off and donate all their money for the church to then redistribute "to the needy" (meaning itself and its clergy, the ruling class).
Yes, changing the filibuster 'rules' is about greasing the skids. And yes, placing a bunch of ideologically pure administrators in place as quickly as possible will infuse the stench of Obama into the bones of government and the American culture for years to come. But, Obama has been ruling substantively by executive decree for years. His temporary administrators work just as effectively as any permanent appointee might. Further, the federal courts and the bulk of the entire federal bureaucracy have long since tipped far to the left. One needn't look further than the recent Supreme Court decision justifying Obama-care to understand which way the wind is blowing, and strongly. So, while it is slightly interesting to see the filibuster rules changed, those rules are meaningless and the changes are beside the point. Obama ignores the rules, or makes them up, when it suits him. And that is the real story. Which most pundits, persuaders and politicians strenuously pretend not to notice. And which so many Senators on the so-called right, in the so-called opposition party are afraid to mention. I don't blame them, they know they can be replaced by a horse at any moment.