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.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Tuesday, March 6. 2012
Everything has already been said about Sandra Fluke, Rush Limbaugh, supporters and opponents of each, and double-standards toward misogynistic public statements, except to thank Ms. Fluke and her supporters for setting a new standard for future misogynistic utterances by all politicians and celebrities.
From here on out, we should expect a loud and persistent opprobrium by all and the media against anyone using such excessively derogatory terms to describe their opponent. Or, is such an expectation hollow and the double-standard be allowed to continue? Will the Left be hoisted by its own petard? If so, again thanks to Ms. Fluke and her supporters for making that hypocrisy evident. As yet many undecided voters are watching and taking note.
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
Keep in mind that he not only called her a slut, but focused of a multi-day tirade, including that he would like to see sex tapes of her an other provided birth control. How perverted.
I can see why the Left wants to focus on Limbaugh, because he's the great rude distraction from what Ms. Fluke really was saying. And what she was really saying is not something the Left wants dwelled on, thought about, or chewed over.
What she was really saying was that she didn't have the courage or curtesy to ask her sexual partners to contribute to their fair share of the cost of her birth control; partners who presumably had no issues with how she conducted her sex life since they were participants in it. That she didn't have the willpower to adjust her behavior to fit within her budget.
But she was perfectly comfortable asking millions of strangers, many of whom had moral objections to her sexual choices, to be forced to pay for her contraception through the government's coercive power of taxation.
That is an example of immoral behavior on her part. Not morality about sex, but morality about taking of property against the property owner's will. It isn't any less immoral because costs can be distributed over many. It isn't any less wrong to steal a little than to steal a lot. And it isn't less wrong because you can conspire with a bunch of politicians to harness the threat and violence of government to do it.
At his first press conference of the year today, President Obama said he called Sandra Fluke in the wake of Rush Limbaugh’s attacks on the Georgetown Law student with his own daughters on his mind. “The reason I called Ms. Fluke is because I thought about Malia and Sasha and one of the things I want them to do as they get older is to engage in issues they care about, even ones I may not agree with them on,” he said in response to a question from USA Today’s Aamer Madhani.
“I don’t want them attacked or called horrible names because they are being good citizens. And I wanted Sandra to know that her parents should be proud of her and that we want to send a message to all of our young people that being part of democracy involves argument, and disagreement, and debate and we want you be engaged, and there’s a way to do it that doesn’t involve you being deemed and insulted, particularly when you’re a private citizen,” he explained.
“All decent folks can agree that the remarks that were made don’t have any place in the public discourse.”
Just to be clear, Limbaugh's attack wasn't a slip of the tongue or something said in the heat of the moment, but a consistent smear spread over two days.
Apologizing for his choice of words is absurd. He called her a slut, a prostitute, and demanded she provide him sex tapes, even though she never discussed her own personal life at all.
I don't know... maybe it's just me... but it seems that this post got hijacked.
I really don't much care about Ms. Fluke or Rush Limbaugh. Or the general uproar for that matter. I do care about another manufactured reason for The State to reach into my wallet and extract yet more to pay for what I believe should be a private expense.
I am unfamiliar with either then name or work of a Mr. Peter Schweizer but what he says here (follow the money) makes more sense than all the blathering and bleating about this that I've failed to avoid hearing so far.
Ideological skirmishes such as this are nothing more than merkins to the Obama administration. Everything they do is first and foremost about payoffs. The only other goal they care about is the eventual destruction of the United States. But that is a distant second to corruption.
knuck, this is Peter Schweizer's book, Throw Them All Out:
His previous book:
...a body could do woise with twenty minutes than reading the reviews on the two sites. Lord how we need a gigantic broom.
oops, missed one:
Architects of Ruin: How big government liberals wrecked the global economy---and how they will do it again if no one stops them
Here's the publisher's blurb:
Publication Date: October 6, 2009
Was the financial collapse caused by free-market capitalism and deregulation run amok, as liberals claim?
Not on your life, says Peter Schweizer. What we are really witnessing is a massive failure of social engineering by liberals.
Architects of Ruin, bestselling author Peter Schweizer describes in riveting detail how a coalition of left-wing activists, liberal politicians, and "do-good capitalists" on Wall Street leveraged government power to achieve their goal of broadening homeownership among minorities and the poor. The results were not only devastating to the economy, but hurt the very people they were supposedly trying to help.
The story begins in the 1960s with Saul Alinsky, the legendary Chicago rabble-rouser who trained his acolytes in highly aggressive techniques of community activism. Alinsky's disciples—along with race-baiting activists like Jesse Jackson—seized on the "redlining" controversy of those years to argue that banks were guilty of racial discrimination. In the 1970s, with the help of liberal senators like Ted Kennedy and William Proxmire, legislation was passed that put bankers under the thumb of local activists.
In the Clinton years, a new generation of liberal technocrats came to power in Washington and on Wall Street. Schweizer describes how a powerful phalanx of elite liberals, including Bill Clinton, Robert Rubin, Andrew Cuomo, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Janet Reno, Deval Patrick, Henry Cisneros, Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Ted Kennedy, Charles Schumer, and many others, aggressively pushed banks to make trillions of dollars in loans to individuals who should never have received them.
Meanwhile, Clinton forged a new form of state capitalism in which the big Wall Street financial companies were repeatedly bailed out—with their profits intact—from a series of costly errors, leading them to take ever larger risks. Both financial policies had profoundly distorting effects. The result was the bursting of twin bubbles in mortgages and mortgage-backed derivatives, in turn leading to a global economic collapse.
This tale of liberal "Robin Hood capitalism run wild" has never been told. But more than just a story about the past, it is also an urgent warning about the future. For today, the very same people who planted the seeds of the collapse are back in Washington, tasked with cleaning up the mess and determined to use the crisis they caused as cover for a massive overhaul of the American economic system.
These people have learned nothing from their past mistakes and are busy applying the same methods to other sectors of the economy—health care, the auto industry, real estate (again!), and above all the promotion of "green" technologies—inflating bubbles that are sure to bring about another crisis. Ordinary Americans who foot the bill for the last state-capitalist bubble have reason to be afraid—very afraid—of the inevitable result.
Tragic. That we are so helpless, and know it, is pure essence of tragedy.
Schweizer makes me feel that he's been reading luddy barsen over at the Belmont Club.
I'd swear there were more than a few postings WRT Central Planning and such.
I only hope that his points get a full airing.
He's no fluke.
blert! So glad you've noted how a few of those things have played out --"Macondo the name" finally broke out --see Peter Maas NY Review of Books, "What Happened at Macondo", the final paragraph. And just today, the Key (with-a-capital-'K') witness still won't ('can't') talk:
...and there's a fish story, too, a real one, involving ship ramming at sea, industrial warfare apparently beyond the ken of the police. More later when it taint so late and sleepy --
(PS, we who are no flukes salute thee who is no flipper) groan
Thanks, Buddy. I have some downtime coming up that I use a portion of for reading. I'll check into those suggestions.
If you Americans choose not to have children, millions of foreigners will be happy to come to America so that their children will inherit America.
By getting involved in a meaningless, silly public hissy fit over comments by a radio show host that are of no particular concern of his own, even while the Iranians plot the nuclear annihilation of Israel, Obama shows once again that he has no sense of proportion or propriety. By this foolish act, he lowers the office of the presidency to Rush Limbaugh's level. And haven't we been through something like this before with Obama? The next thing you know, he'll be trying to arrange a White House beer summit between Rushbo and Fluke. Obama continues to act stupidly.
I came across your page recently and I'm trying to find an email address to contact you on to ask if you would please consider adding a link to my website. I'd really appreciate if you could email me back.
Thanks and have a great day!
Ingraham: Barbara Walters Laughed When I Was Called 'Slut'
There's a significant difference between the cases. Laura Ingraham is a player in the industry, with personal access to the media. For a single word, Ed Schultz was immediately suspended, then issued an abject apology saying, "It was wrong, uncalled for and I recognize the severity of what I said... "the lowest of low for me... "I know I let a lot of people down."
Compare to Rush Limbaugh, who went on and on about it for two days, in very graphic terms, and only issued a half-hearted apology when forced to by the storm outside his studio.
--as for me, i've never listened to RL and know only that he is an invaluable describer of the threadbare leftist imperial raiment, and that he recently publicly lost his temper at yet another astonishingly mendacious staged demonstration of the left's astonishing mendacity.
Had Ingraham engaged the occasioning of Schultz' utterance via anything equally scurrilous 'n spurious, then and only then, IMHO, would the two events (RL & ES) be sufficiently equivalent to serve as equivalents.
Oh, puhleeze, Zachriel. If she did want the heat, she shouldn't have walked into the kitchen. At age 30 with her experience in rabble rousing, she should have known the consequences.
We can all safely surmise that Ms. Fluke was selected for this mission precisely for the reason that she was not a "public figure" despite her activism. That she might wind up excoriated in public was on no concern - gotta break some eggs to make omelets after all.
The left, the last one, are scum.
I'm sure she did know the consequences. So did Nancy Pelosi who wanted her to do this.