HOLDREN: There has been a strain of what many people call “US exceptionalism” in the United States, the notion that the United States is so big, so important, so powerful, so technologically advanced that it can and should do what it wants. I think this strain is misguided.
Q: Will Americans need to reduce their living standards? Is that politically viable, or will technology [unintelligible] do it?
H: I think ultimately that the rate of growth of material consumption is going to have to come down, and there’s going to have to be a degree of redistribution of how much we consume, in terms of energy and material resources, in order to leave room for people who are poor to become more prosperous.
Basic lefty "If you succeed someone else has to fail" bullcrap, but it's how Obama & Co. think. As Morrissey says
First, Holdren doesn’t know what “American exceptionalism” means. He can’t even get the term right. American exceptionalism has nothing to do with our size or our technological prowess, except in tertiary terms. Exceptionalism springs from the unique nature of our nation’s birth, the historical leadership in personal freedom that America has shown (with very notable failures, such as slavery and post-Civil War Jim Crow), and especially the role America inherited in the 20th century as the guarantor of Western security and international shipping.
This is no philosophical quibble, either. Part of the reason America consumes more relative to other nations on a per-capita basis is because we produce more for the consumption of others, and out of necessity for our role as global cop. That is a large part of the reason that our defense spending outstrips those of other Western nations, as they do not contribute nearly as much to that role. Seeing as how Holdren can’t figure out what he opposes, it comes as no surprise that he doesn’t see the connection between that role and consumption of resources, either.
And the lie that illegal aliens won't be able to get health care under the Obama takeover:
The Democrats' bill in the House, H.R. 3200, contains gaping loopholes that will allow illegal immigrants to receive taxpayer-funded benefits. And these loopholes are no accident.
The legislation contains no verification mechanism to ensure that illegal immigrants do not apply for benefits. Republicans offered an amendment to close this loophole -- it would have required verification using the existing methods that are already in place to verify eligibility for other federal benefits programs. But, when they were asked to put the language of the bill where their words were, in a party-line vote, House Democrats rejected the amendment to require verification and close this loophole.
This column appeared in The Hill, not World Net Daily. The Hill is the respected, influential publication of Capitol Hill. It fact-checks claims. And Smith is exactly right -- enforcement provisions were gutted.
OBAMA: "Don't pay attention to those scary stories about how your benefits will be cut. ... That will never happen on my watch. I will protect Medicare."
THE FACTS: Obama and congressional Democrats want to pay for their health care plans in part by reducing Medicare payments to providers by more than $500 billion over 10 years.
(image sto- borrowed from Ace)
And the President has been part of ACORN, which has been caught(on top of vote fraud and a bunch of other things) helping a pimp get money for a brothel and prepare to evade taxes:
Later, when the “pimp” asks what would happen if the organization is somehow connected to the scheme, the ACORN staffer replies, “First of all, it’s not gonna damage us because we not gonna know. And with your girls, you tell them, ‘Be careful.’ Train them to keep their mouth shut.”
“These girls are like 14, how can we trust them?” the pimp asks.
“Just be very, very careful,” the ACORN staffer says. “Whatever you do, always keep your eyes in the back of your head.”
Note that when he mentions having 14-year old hookers, their only problem seems to be keeping them quiet about the arrangement. Wonderful people, aren't they?
And we must take note- again- of all the corrupt politicians, like Rep. Charles Rangel:
Federal Election Commission reports show Rangel's campaign committee has forked over $2 million to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee since 1995.
Only Pelosi (Calif.), Democratic Leader Steny Hoyer (Maryland) and Democratic Whip James Clyburn (SC) have been more generous.
Rangel also has donated $3.8 million from his campaign and leadership committees to Democratic candidates directly since 1999, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
...
His money has helped the re-election efforts of 119 members currently serving in Congress and three members who sit on the ethics committee.
And Van Jones lands at a place run by Soros; anybody surprised?
For fallen White House aides, the rallying cry apparently is John Podesta to the rescue! The Obama administration’s former green jobs czar Van Jones is headed back to Podesta’s Center for American Progress after stepping down from his White House post four days ago amid controversy over his leftist affiliations, the Daily News has learned.
If you read the Jammie post, you'll read of all the major media people glossing over Jones' past, and pretending they actually covered the story. Downright pathetic.
Unrelated to the above is the Justice Department doing something- well, you can't call it 'to avoid doing something'; it's 'doing something stupid and trying to keep someone from talking about the stupid':
In December 2007, the U.S. Attorney's Office in Wichita unveiled a 34-count indictment against Haysville, Kansas, physician Stephen Schneider and his wife, Linda, a nurse who worked in his clinic. It charged Schneider with "illegally distributing prescription drugs to his patients, directly causing the deaths of at least four of them."
Convinced the Schneiders were innocent, Reynolds and her group, the Pain Relief Network (PRN), publicly disputed the charges. In January 2008, PRN announced a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of using the federal Controlled Substances Act to regulate the practice of medicine, traditionally a state function. PRN also tried to stop the state medical board from suspending Schneider's license, arguing that doing so would harm his patients.
...
The Tanya in question, Assistant U.S. Attorney Tanya Treadway, evidently was annoyed by the unusually balanced press coverage Reynolds helped arrange. In April 2008, Treadway took the extraordinary step of seeking a court order prohibiting Reynolds, who was neither a defendant nor a lawyer in the Schneiders' case, from talking about it. The prosecutor claimed Reynolds had "a sycophantic or parasitic relationship with the defendants," whom she was using "to further her own personal interests."
Nine months after a federal judge rejected Treadway's attempt to gag Reynolds, the activist learned she was the subject of a grand jury investigation into possible obstruction of justice. Reynolds and PRN received subpoenas demanding their communications with dozens of people, including relatives of the Schneiders and members of their defense team. Tellingly, the material sought includes correspondence related to a PRN-commissioned billboard in Wichita proclaiming "Dr. Schneider never killed anyone."
This has been one part of the fallout of the War on Some Drugs; doctors who prescribe 'too much' or 'the wrong kind' of pain meds to patients being charged with being a pusher; and it's freakin' insane. There've been documented cases of doctors providing 'improper' meds(morphine or heroin or some serious stuff) to patients with advanced cancer or similar disease because nothing else would help the pain being charged with crimes by these idiots; this is one of those cases where it's a good question to ask "Don't you have some actual criminals to chase? Everything is so under control you have extra time and money to do this crap?"
And now, to try to prevent someone from talking about it? How much money and time is Treadway wasting here?
Jeez, what a morning.
No comments:
Post a Comment