Robert Stacy McCain reports in the American Spectator; “Lauren Valle wanted to create bad publicity for Rand Paul's Senate campaign by having herself photographed next to the candidate while displaying a sign that mocked him as a tool of corporate interests.”
“Miss Valle's stunt didn't go off as planned, but the 23-year-old MoveOn.org activist certainly succeeded in her larger goal of creating bad publicity for the Kentucky Republican's campaign. After she shoved her way through a crowd awaiting the candidate's arrival for a debate at a TV studio Monday in Lexington, some of Paul's supporters grabbed Miss Valle, pulled off the blonde wig she was wearing as a disguise and wrestled her to the ground. At least two TV news cameras recorded the most outrageous moment of the melee, when a man wearing a "Rand Paul for U.S. Senate" T-shirt stomped his foot on Miss Valle's shoulder as she lay helpless on the pavement.”
McCain continues; “Miss Valle appears to be an itinerant all-purpose protester. Two years ago, while a student at Columbia University, she was the youngest of five Americans detained by Chinese officials after unfurling a "Free Tibet" banner at the Beijing Olympics. In May of this year, she was charged with felony trespassing in Louisiana when she and other Greenpeace activists illegally boarded a ship, unfurled a banner, and painted the ship with slogans, a protest evidently timed to coincide with an appearance in the area by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. (Their banner read: "Salazar Ban Arctic Drilling.") Law enforcement officials said the Greenpeace group had been in the area for two weeks and "had been repeatedly warned not to hamper clean up operations and not to trespass." A local news account of that incident noted that none of the Greenpeace activists was from Louisiana -- four were from Washington, D.C., one was from New York, one was from California, and Miss Valle is from Massachusetts.”
“From Beijing to Louisiana, this Ivy League radical somehow ended up in Kentucky. On MSNBC Tuesday evening, Keith Olbermann told the story of the Lexington incident with the label "Thuggish Behavior," interviewing Miss Valle. She explained that she had been hired two weeks earlier by MoveOn.org to appear in costume as an "executive" of a phony organization called RepubliCorp with the slogan, "We buy democracy, one race at a time." MoveOn, a liberal organization that is non-partisan in name only, issued a "Bird-dogging Guide" instructing activists: "Research your Republican target's schedule" and "Stage your RepubliCorp stunt and attract media attention." In this mission, professional protester Lauren Valle was eminently successful. Olbermann overlooked the irony that, while MoveOn declared that its protests were intended to "expose the unprecedented flood of corporate cash to Republican campaign coffers," Valle was paid to travel to Kentucky for her stunt, while her assailant Tim Profitt was an unpaid local volunteer. Indeed, Profitt had donated $1,900 to the Paul campaign, according to FEC records.”
NPR’s president and CEO, Vivian Schiller, said "Juan Williams' remarks were inconsistent with our editorial standards and practices, and undermined his credibility as a news analyst with NPR.”
So how do others at NPR measure up to those standards?
"I think he ought to be worried about the -- about what's going on in the good Lord's mind, because if there's retributive justice, [Sen. Jesse Helms will] get AIDS from a transfusion, or one of his grandchildren will get it." --NPR's Nina Totenberg, July 1995
"I just want to say: Who are we? We are people who have always been for inspections of prisons, for some degree of human rights, and now we're defending neither.... We have now violated everything that we stand for. It is the first time in my life I have been ashamed of my country." --Nina Totenberg discussing secret CIA prisons for captured terrorists, Nov. 4, 2005
"[Glenn] Beck is worse than a clown. He's more like a terrorist who believes he has discovered the One True Faith, and condemns everyone else as a heretic. And that makes him something else as well -- a traitor to the American values he professes loudly to defend." --Cokie Roberts, March 2010
"It made me feel pretty good. I thought it was a great speech.... You know, a friend of mine said, 'Oh my God, we have a President again!' Now, in some ways, that's not fair to Bush, but that's the way you felt. You felt this was a guy who was totally in charge." --Nina Totenberg discussing President Obama's address to Congress, Feb. 27, 2009
"Israel has used Gaza as a bombing target practice." --NPR's foreign editor Loren Jenkins
These are just a few of the examples of the progressives and radical left bashing conservatives for their own profit and grandizement. What on earth would they do to draw attention to their high intellect and brilliance of thought without conservatives and tea partiers? They need us, we don’t need them.
Progressives need the collective, conservatives don’t. Progressives need someone to pay the bill, conservatives don’t. Progressives need someone to take care of them, conservatives don’t, and progressives need someone to blame for their malaise. You may find a few wealthy progressives, like George Soros or Bill Gates who can exist by themselves, but by and large most progressives need some sort of a collective to ensure their existence.
Progressives, or those who vote in support of progressives, need things like public housing, rent control, aid to dependent children, government sponsored education, and other government programs to feed the collective. They expect the rest of hard working citizens to pay the bills for them. This grows government to the extent it becomes oppressive to the conservative and promotes a soft tyranny.
This condition is further exacerbated when the progressives take control of the government and promise more of the conservatives’ resources to stay in power. More money for the collective, more power for the collectivist.
What would happen if all of the conservatives were located in one part of the country, say in middle America and all of the progressives were located on the coasts — sort of like the way it is now. The conservatives would take care of themselves and the collectivist would wither and die — it’s the law of nature.
The progressive demands more and more from the conservative while giving less and less. Take public housing as an example. The government (municipal and federal) provides the funds for public housing projects for the purpose of providing housing to member of the collective. The people who occupy these housing units are promised by the progressives that they will be provided this housing at little or no cost. They pay no rental deposit the same that would be required if they were renting on the commercial market. They are expected to take “reasonable care” of these units while they are living there, but in most cases don’t. Just check out a few public housing projects if you doubt me.
People need this housing because they have lived irresponsible lives. They have not taken advantage of the government education provided by the progressives and are therefore not qualified for employment beyond a minimum wage job. (In the urban areas of the United States the high school dropout rate exceeds 50%). There are multiple generations of children having children so you can have a grandmother, mother and child, all with fatherless children living in the same unit. They receive various amounts of government aid ranging from aid to dependent children to food stamps. They take what monies they do have and purchase consumer goods such as iPhones, TVs, play stations and worse, drugs.
They are not expected to maintain these units or the surrounding grounds and they usually look like a trash dump as soon as they are built. Even if they wanted to make repairs on the unit they are prohibited from doing so. This is the responsibility of the municipality, usually performed by municipal employees who are members of the SEIU. In this manner the progressives can manage both the demand and the supply.
These public housing units are in dense urban areas where the progressive politicians control the vote by promising the members of his local collective more and more. Because the municipality does not have enough money to fulfill the promises of the progressive politicians the municipality has to look to the state and federal agencies like HUD for assistance. Where does HUD get the money from? Here is where the conservative enters the picture.
Beginning with the New Deal policies of Franklin Roosevelt the progressives have played on the Christian conscience of the conservatives convincing them that the resources they were being asked to surrender to the progressives was for the greater good. At the beginning most citizens bought this argument and believed they had an obligation to look after the more unfortunate members of society. They did not realize they were creating a massive collective, which over the ensuing years would grow to the size it is today. A collective controlled by the progressives and paid for by the conservatives.
On a personal note I never was a member of the collective. I led a responsible life by taking advantage of the education that was offered me — some public and some paid for private. I was gainfully employed my entire life, paid taxes, obeyed the laws of the land and contributed to the employment of others — sometimes at the expense of my personal income.
Over the years the conservatives have gotten wise to the tactics of the progressives and realized that all of this “greater good” was nothing but a sham to insure power for the progressives and grow the collective. Today we are adding somewhere between8 to 12 million illegal immigrants to the collective. We are given many reasons by the progressives why we must support these immigrants for the greater good of society. Lenin could not do better.
Today, to quote General Eisenhower the allied supreme commander in Europe during WWII, “We are engaged in a great crusade” — a crusade fuelled by tea. No other domestic movement since the New Deal has frightened the progressives like the Tea Party. To counter this rising movement the progressives and their media minions have mounted an attack against conservatives and tea party supporters. They call us selfish, bigoted, racist, fascists, NAZIs, uncaring and unpatriotic because we want to withdraw from the collective and allow it to die on the vine. We have seen the failed results of 75 years of progressive New Deal policies. Everything from farm aid and public housing to welfare and government schools has failed. In each of these 75 years the collective has sucked more and more money into a black hole of failure. We still see the same people living in public housing and receiving food stamps. We still have a bloated government school system that fails to educate the urban poor — a school system now controlled from Washington, D.C. and by the teacher’s unions.
As I write this blog post I am watching a TV ad for Jerry Brown sponsored by the California teachers unions that is telling me to vote for the progressive Brown because he will be good for education. I cannot count similar ads I have heard over the past 50 years that urge me to vote for a candidate or a proposition that will supposedly make our government education system better. More money, higher teacher pay, greater pension liabilities, more power for the teacher unions and more federal government regulations from Washington, D.C. I ask you if any of these candidates or initiatives have added one scintilla of value to our system of government schools. In fact if you take the technology away the education I received at a government school from 1950-1954 is the same as offered today in most areas, if not better because of the discipline and peer pressure.
Next Tuesday the people of this nation will vote to Congress and their state houses. We are being deluged, on an hourly basis, by ad urging us to vote to this candidate or this initiative because they are good for the children, god for the public safety employees (unions), good for the environment, good for seniors or just the greater good of the collective. Remember that the progressives want you vote and they want your money — all for the greater good of the collective. Once they are returned to power they will turn around and ignore your wishes and protests and once again begin to bash you as selfish, racist, bigoted conservatives and get ready for the next election. This is the way it has been going for the last 75 years. At some point conservatives and independents, who are not in favor of the collective, have to say no, and that means no to everything.
Footnote: In the spirit of equality I propose that if the Texas Rangers win the World Series by 4 games to 3 (or visa versa) that the winning team give one-half of a game to the loser. I am sure this will make every concerned progressive feel very good.
“Miss Valle's stunt didn't go off as planned, but the 23-year-old MoveOn.org activist certainly succeeded in her larger goal of creating bad publicity for the Kentucky Republican's campaign. After she shoved her way through a crowd awaiting the candidate's arrival for a debate at a TV studio Monday in Lexington, some of Paul's supporters grabbed Miss Valle, pulled off the blonde wig she was wearing as a disguise and wrestled her to the ground. At least two TV news cameras recorded the most outrageous moment of the melee, when a man wearing a "Rand Paul for U.S. Senate" T-shirt stomped his foot on Miss Valle's shoulder as she lay helpless on the pavement.”
McCain continues; “Miss Valle appears to be an itinerant all-purpose protester. Two years ago, while a student at Columbia University, she was the youngest of five Americans detained by Chinese officials after unfurling a "Free Tibet" banner at the Beijing Olympics. In May of this year, she was charged with felony trespassing in Louisiana when she and other Greenpeace activists illegally boarded a ship, unfurled a banner, and painted the ship with slogans, a protest evidently timed to coincide with an appearance in the area by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. (Their banner read: "Salazar Ban Arctic Drilling.") Law enforcement officials said the Greenpeace group had been in the area for two weeks and "had been repeatedly warned not to hamper clean up operations and not to trespass." A local news account of that incident noted that none of the Greenpeace activists was from Louisiana -- four were from Washington, D.C., one was from New York, one was from California, and Miss Valle is from Massachusetts.”
“From Beijing to Louisiana, this Ivy League radical somehow ended up in Kentucky. On MSNBC Tuesday evening, Keith Olbermann told the story of the Lexington incident with the label "Thuggish Behavior," interviewing Miss Valle. She explained that she had been hired two weeks earlier by MoveOn.org to appear in costume as an "executive" of a phony organization called RepubliCorp with the slogan, "We buy democracy, one race at a time." MoveOn, a liberal organization that is non-partisan in name only, issued a "Bird-dogging Guide" instructing activists: "Research your Republican target's schedule" and "Stage your RepubliCorp stunt and attract media attention." In this mission, professional protester Lauren Valle was eminently successful. Olbermann overlooked the irony that, while MoveOn declared that its protests were intended to "expose the unprecedented flood of corporate cash to Republican campaign coffers," Valle was paid to travel to Kentucky for her stunt, while her assailant Tim Profitt was an unpaid local volunteer. Indeed, Profitt had donated $1,900 to the Paul campaign, according to FEC records.”
NPR’s president and CEO, Vivian Schiller, said "Juan Williams' remarks were inconsistent with our editorial standards and practices, and undermined his credibility as a news analyst with NPR.”
So how do others at NPR measure up to those standards?
"I think he ought to be worried about the -- about what's going on in the good Lord's mind, because if there's retributive justice, [Sen. Jesse Helms will] get AIDS from a transfusion, or one of his grandchildren will get it." --NPR's Nina Totenberg, July 1995
"I just want to say: Who are we? We are people who have always been for inspections of prisons, for some degree of human rights, and now we're defending neither.... We have now violated everything that we stand for. It is the first time in my life I have been ashamed of my country." --Nina Totenberg discussing secret CIA prisons for captured terrorists, Nov. 4, 2005
"[Glenn] Beck is worse than a clown. He's more like a terrorist who believes he has discovered the One True Faith, and condemns everyone else as a heretic. And that makes him something else as well -- a traitor to the American values he professes loudly to defend." --Cokie Roberts, March 2010
"It made me feel pretty good. I thought it was a great speech.... You know, a friend of mine said, 'Oh my God, we have a President again!' Now, in some ways, that's not fair to Bush, but that's the way you felt. You felt this was a guy who was totally in charge." --Nina Totenberg discussing President Obama's address to Congress, Feb. 27, 2009
"Israel has used Gaza as a bombing target practice." --NPR's foreign editor Loren Jenkins
These are just a few of the examples of the progressives and radical left bashing conservatives for their own profit and grandizement. What on earth would they do to draw attention to their high intellect and brilliance of thought without conservatives and tea partiers? They need us, we don’t need them.
Progressives need the collective, conservatives don’t. Progressives need someone to pay the bill, conservatives don’t. Progressives need someone to take care of them, conservatives don’t, and progressives need someone to blame for their malaise. You may find a few wealthy progressives, like George Soros or Bill Gates who can exist by themselves, but by and large most progressives need some sort of a collective to ensure their existence.
Progressives, or those who vote in support of progressives, need things like public housing, rent control, aid to dependent children, government sponsored education, and other government programs to feed the collective. They expect the rest of hard working citizens to pay the bills for them. This grows government to the extent it becomes oppressive to the conservative and promotes a soft tyranny.
This condition is further exacerbated when the progressives take control of the government and promise more of the conservatives’ resources to stay in power. More money for the collective, more power for the collectivist.
What would happen if all of the conservatives were located in one part of the country, say in middle America and all of the progressives were located on the coasts — sort of like the way it is now. The conservatives would take care of themselves and the collectivist would wither and die — it’s the law of nature.
The progressive demands more and more from the conservative while giving less and less. Take public housing as an example. The government (municipal and federal) provides the funds for public housing projects for the purpose of providing housing to member of the collective. The people who occupy these housing units are promised by the progressives that they will be provided this housing at little or no cost. They pay no rental deposit the same that would be required if they were renting on the commercial market. They are expected to take “reasonable care” of these units while they are living there, but in most cases don’t. Just check out a few public housing projects if you doubt me.
People need this housing because they have lived irresponsible lives. They have not taken advantage of the government education provided by the progressives and are therefore not qualified for employment beyond a minimum wage job. (In the urban areas of the United States the high school dropout rate exceeds 50%). There are multiple generations of children having children so you can have a grandmother, mother and child, all with fatherless children living in the same unit. They receive various amounts of government aid ranging from aid to dependent children to food stamps. They take what monies they do have and purchase consumer goods such as iPhones, TVs, play stations and worse, drugs.
They are not expected to maintain these units or the surrounding grounds and they usually look like a trash dump as soon as they are built. Even if they wanted to make repairs on the unit they are prohibited from doing so. This is the responsibility of the municipality, usually performed by municipal employees who are members of the SEIU. In this manner the progressives can manage both the demand and the supply.
These public housing units are in dense urban areas where the progressive politicians control the vote by promising the members of his local collective more and more. Because the municipality does not have enough money to fulfill the promises of the progressive politicians the municipality has to look to the state and federal agencies like HUD for assistance. Where does HUD get the money from? Here is where the conservative enters the picture.
Beginning with the New Deal policies of Franklin Roosevelt the progressives have played on the Christian conscience of the conservatives convincing them that the resources they were being asked to surrender to the progressives was for the greater good. At the beginning most citizens bought this argument and believed they had an obligation to look after the more unfortunate members of society. They did not realize they were creating a massive collective, which over the ensuing years would grow to the size it is today. A collective controlled by the progressives and paid for by the conservatives.
On a personal note I never was a member of the collective. I led a responsible life by taking advantage of the education that was offered me — some public and some paid for private. I was gainfully employed my entire life, paid taxes, obeyed the laws of the land and contributed to the employment of others — sometimes at the expense of my personal income.
Over the years the conservatives have gotten wise to the tactics of the progressives and realized that all of this “greater good” was nothing but a sham to insure power for the progressives and grow the collective. Today we are adding somewhere between8 to 12 million illegal immigrants to the collective. We are given many reasons by the progressives why we must support these immigrants for the greater good of society. Lenin could not do better.
Today, to quote General Eisenhower the allied supreme commander in Europe during WWII, “We are engaged in a great crusade” — a crusade fuelled by tea. No other domestic movement since the New Deal has frightened the progressives like the Tea Party. To counter this rising movement the progressives and their media minions have mounted an attack against conservatives and tea party supporters. They call us selfish, bigoted, racist, fascists, NAZIs, uncaring and unpatriotic because we want to withdraw from the collective and allow it to die on the vine. We have seen the failed results of 75 years of progressive New Deal policies. Everything from farm aid and public housing to welfare and government schools has failed. In each of these 75 years the collective has sucked more and more money into a black hole of failure. We still see the same people living in public housing and receiving food stamps. We still have a bloated government school system that fails to educate the urban poor — a school system now controlled from Washington, D.C. and by the teacher’s unions.
As I write this blog post I am watching a TV ad for Jerry Brown sponsored by the California teachers unions that is telling me to vote for the progressive Brown because he will be good for education. I cannot count similar ads I have heard over the past 50 years that urge me to vote for a candidate or a proposition that will supposedly make our government education system better. More money, higher teacher pay, greater pension liabilities, more power for the teacher unions and more federal government regulations from Washington, D.C. I ask you if any of these candidates or initiatives have added one scintilla of value to our system of government schools. In fact if you take the technology away the education I received at a government school from 1950-1954 is the same as offered today in most areas, if not better because of the discipline and peer pressure.
Next Tuesday the people of this nation will vote to Congress and their state houses. We are being deluged, on an hourly basis, by ad urging us to vote to this candidate or this initiative because they are good for the children, god for the public safety employees (unions), good for the environment, good for seniors or just the greater good of the collective. Remember that the progressives want you vote and they want your money — all for the greater good of the collective. Once they are returned to power they will turn around and ignore your wishes and protests and once again begin to bash you as selfish, racist, bigoted conservatives and get ready for the next election. This is the way it has been going for the last 75 years. At some point conservatives and independents, who are not in favor of the collective, have to say no, and that means no to everything.
Footnote: In the spirit of equality I propose that if the Texas Rangers win the World Series by 4 games to 3 (or visa versa) that the winning team give one-half of a game to the loser. I am sure this will make every concerned progressive feel very good.
No comments:
Post a Comment