Christopher Hitchens: An Obituary

                The philosopher Voltaire once said, “He was a great patriot, a humanitarian, a loyal friend; provided, of course, he really is dead.” 

                There is perhaps no better way to express the opinion one might have of the famous (or infamous) polemicist.  In his life as the world renowned essayist, author, speaker, and commentator the man was someone who was loathed by many and those who called him friend were probably quite hesitant in their announcement of it.

                As someone who called himself a Marxist, he said that he believed that Capitalism had its beauty.  As the anti-war Baby Boomer, he later called for intervention into Iraq and against Islamic Fascism.  A fan of the same Thomas Jefferson who obtained the Virginia Statue for Religious Freedom, he showed little tolerance for anyone who believed in a deity.

                 With this mongrel of ideology, the very verbal Hitchens assailed those on the Right and the Left.  To him neither Reagan nor Mother Teresa were above his assaults.  When asked in one interview what he thought of the death of Reverend Jerry Falwell he answered, “It’s a pity there isn't a hell for him to go to.”

                 Perhaps an act of cosmic irony, Hitchens developed cancer of the esophagus a year ago.  Now, he is dead.  Reverence is not something that I believe him deserving; he didn’t grant that even to the families of the dead he attacked. 

                 As Gore Vidal’s “heir”, he made the clown Vidal desirable.  As an author, he made illiteracy respectable.  And as a human being, he made the animals seem civilized.  If there is any emotion that we should shed for the man, it should be pity.  For it is a pity that he ever spoke at all. 

My Experience With the Occupiers in D.C.

    Recently I was in D.C. for the Defending The American Dream conference run by Americans for Prosperity.  It was really a great conference.  I met many very interesting people, discussed the issues, and got to hear speeches by some great speakers.  It was brilliant being able to meet the hundreds of other activists across this country who want to get rid the current "Change".  However, while the conference was going on, the rats of D.C. (no, not the politicians) decided they'd like to make a statement.

     Occupiers of the Occupy D.C. group actually crowded against the doors of the convention center on the night of Nov. 5th.  Unfortunately we Tea Partiers forgot our Guy Fawkes masks and thus these illiterates from the Occupy D.C. crowd thought we should be imprisoned in the Convention Center.  They locked arms and attempted to bar us from leaving.  I'd decided I'd watch Atlas Shrugged Part 1, which was being showed in the Center, and not waste my time trying to push through the unwashed masses (the smell lingered for while).

     Can anyone find the irony in the fact that these roaches are saying their rights are being taken?  I mean, does being forcibly imprisoned inside a convention center sound like something the Founding Fathers would have thought right?  But wait, I forgot, the 2000 people there are the 1% (though most are middle class).  They are the evil people, I included, who want to give corporations more power to destroy the rights of the poor.  Then it's okay to steal their rights. 

     Anyways....
     While I watched the movie, these Occupiers turned violent.  They surrounded an elderly couple and wouldn't let them out.  When the couple attempted to move, they were pushed down by the protesters.  These two were later taken to the hospital by an ambulance.  Peaceful my ass.

     Later on during the night, the morons decided to stand in the middle of the street.  Funnily enough, a driver was given the greenlight (literally, there was a traffic light on one end), and instead of letting the protesters get into his car like they tried to do, he ran through them.  Yes, he hit 3 of the occupiers with his car and kept going, still doing the proper speed limit.  None of them suffered any major injuries.  Lucky for them I wasn't the driver.

     What is the point of this?  Quite simple.  I have discovered that I can't write these people off so easily.  They are now controlled by the radical left irrevocably.  They are violent.  They are the Mob.  They are a group of self-entitled social leeches.  I am now counting down the days that snow hits D.C..  My new Christmas wish is that frostbite finds each of these people.

Herman Cain "Knows His Place

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/msnbc-analyst-herman-cain-black-man-who-knows-his-place_604145.html

     (Sorry for the time away, been very busy)

     Whenever a strong man, or woman of a different ethnicity decides they are Conservative or Libertarian, you know there is going to be trouble.  Why?  Quite simply because the Democrats have claimed themselves to be the "protectors of the little guy".  They thrive off the idea that they are somehow the only ones who care for minorities.  The idea that a black man or woman  is a Republican or wants a free market is so shocking to them, they are simply stunned, until he or she doesn't retract their statements.  Then, they go on the offensive. 
    
     This is what's happened here.  No longer are they stunned, they are either seeking damage control or trying to explain it to themselves why someone who is part of a minority would be a conservative.  This is where the racism of the Elites comes out.  They think that because Cain is acting outside the generality of most blacks in America it gives them the clear to make him out to be the white man's puppet.  Instead of giving him any intellectual credit to speak of, they cast him as someone who is simply doing what the "White" people want him to.  Tell me again who the racists are?
   
     But then let's be honest with ourselves.  Does it surprise us in the least bit that such ilk is coming from our media?  

Rep. Jesse Jackson's Patriotic Jobs Plan

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/10/14/rep-jesse-jackson-calls-on-government-to-hire-all-unemployed-americans-for/

     Oh how I love the Democrats in Congress.  They show how most of us Americans are incredibly normal. 

     So apparently Jesse's gotten the great idea of hiring ALL the unemployed in America.  Sounds great right?  And get this, for $40,000 a year.  Why stay on unemployement?  You can be so much more in our buddy's plan here.

“We put people to work cleaning up communities. We put people to work through a civilian conservation corps, through a Works Progress Administration because the hour demands it,”

     Makes sense, no?  I mean employing around 15 million people for nearly twice as much as minimum wage has got to get the economy going.  It's only going to take a measly $6,000,000,000 (billion) dollars, from the Federal Government of course.  Ohhhh, but it just gets better!

“It could be a five-year program,” he said. “For another $104 billion, we bail out all of the states. For another $100 billion, we bail out all of the cities.”

     God, that almost, almost sounds Utopian no?  Everyone has decent jobs, indefinite Job security, all the states are in no fear of default as well as the cities.  I wonder, if perhaps this guy has a few philosophers in mind who make him feel all warm and funny about this plan???? 

     Of course this is just speculation.  I could be totally wrong.  I mean the guy could really be a big fan of Stalin, or Trotsky, maybe even Lenin.  He could simply be a follower of all those Valiant men.  What isn't there to admire in these guys?

Why Liberals Can't Fix the Economy

     Well, Today I decided I'd write an article on this Whacko and why's she's wrong on the economy (more than just "She's a Liberal").

     Elizabeth Warren's message is quite simple.  We are but lucky people who are should worship the government because it has enabled us to achieve amazing goals and that NO ONE is Self-Made. 

"There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own."

     First off, I dare to differ Liz.  With the passing of Steve Jobs I don't know if there is any contention that a man can't get rich on his own.  In that, I mean that we are all sellers of our own labor.  Yes, human cooperation has become necessary to achieve our goals, but that doesn't mean that a Man didn't do it on his own.  There are many Men who have worked their hearts out to create a strong business with little help. We LIVE in society, therefore to get things done here, we have to work with others.  That doensn't mean that we aren't Self-Reliant, Self-Assured, or Self-Made.  It merely means that we did it PASSED all the crap and fools you have to deal with to be Successful.  

You built a factory out there, good for you.  But I want to be clear, you moved your goods to market on the roads the Rest of us paid for.  You hired workers the Rest of us paid to educate.

     Somebody apparently did too much crack in the 60's.  Since when was there a choice to use Public or Private roads?  How is it the fault of the Companies that the Government has a monopoly over the infrastructure of this country?  They pay taxes just like everyone else.  When there is a CHOICE between using Public or Private roads, then you can address the issue of using state roads.  Also, how do you know the workers didn't go to Private school?  What if they came from England, Germany, or China?  Then "the Rest of us" didn't pay for them.  But even besides that, do parents pay taxes for nothing?  The education that is recieved in the Public school arena is mediocre to a large degree.  If we were to follow this kind of logic I think I should get reinburst from the Taxpayers for the Crappy education that was forced on me. 

You were safe in your factory, because of the police forces and fire forces that the Rest of us paid for.  You didn't have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory and hire someone to protect against this because of the work the Rest of us did.

    *Facepalm*  I'm seriously considering bringing back the drinking game.
Once again, they don't have a choice.  May I remind everyone however, how GREAT the police did when it came to the Mafia?  I mean they were never crooked and corrupt or anything.  It's not like they would sell out informants and squealers for a price.  Yeah, that never happened.  But like I've said, you can't hold something that the Businessmen didn't have a CHOICE in over their heads. 
     I would say that this rant simply isn't logical, but then we are talking about a Liberal, it's implied.  Alice in Wonderland makes more sense than these people do.

"Occupy Wall Street" The Left's Tea Party?

     Recently I was surfing the net and found that "Occupy Wall Street" is being compared to the Tea Party Movement.  I couldn't help but find it funny but then realized that there are many people who are beginning to believe this.  First of all, Stop.  They are nothing alike.  If they hold any resemblance to anything in history, look to the 1960's. 

     During the 1960's the Youth had become upset with the Vietnam War (understandibly) and the authority of the College Administrations.  However what many don't know about these movements is that contrary to the Liberal flavor they were given, these Groups had NO exact ideology.  As Ayn Rand points out in her essay, "The Cashing-in: The Student "Rebellion"", the leaders of these movements were calling for "Changes".  One article from The New York Times was headed with the following, "The New Student Left: Movement Represents Serious Activists in Drive for Changes".  Never did these people say what the "Changes" were.
   
     Yes there were your Communists, Socialists, Trotskyists.  One student from Berkeley (go figure) was quoted as saying, "At present the Socialist world, even with all its problems, is moving closer than any other countries toward the sort of society I think should exist.  In the Soviet Union, it has almost been achieved."  (yeah, the whole Soviet thing worked out GREAT, that's why their still our #1 competitors)
       
     However, that wasn't the True feeling of all the Students.  Most of them were simply Anti-.  A young man was spoken to by The New York Times about the Communists section of the movement, "You might say we're A-communist, just as you might say we're A-moral and A-almost everything else."  This was the majority of the ideology, or rather Anti-ideology. 

     This is why I say "Occupy Wall Street" is like the 1960's Student Rebellion.   Many of the protesters when asked how much the top % of income earners should be taxed have replied, "I'm not the one who should decide that."  When asked what they want in Government, they simply respond that they want a "New" form of government.  They don't HAVE an ideology, the are A-ideological.  They lack a set of goals and desires to the point that they're having the agenda being voted on the INTERNET.  Yes, they stand against Wall Street, but NOT against any certain company, no certain person, no idea except "They have too much money."

     But then these are the Result of the 1960's "Rebellion".  Who do you suppose has been in College classrooms since then?  Who do you think took the opportunity to spread their ideas to the Future Generations by taking control of the Universities of this country?  It's the former Leaders of the "Rebellion" in the 1960's.  Francis Fox Piven, Bill Ayers, and Cass Sunstein.

     Now to why the Tea Party is Different.  Well, first of all, they actually have IDEALS.  They have their beliefs written out, to see it just type "U.S. Constitution" into your google search bar.  They have again and again stated what they want;
1.  Smaller and more Constrained government.  2.  Free markets with no subsidies, tax breaks, tax cuts or Bail outs.  3.  Legal Immigration.  4.  Equality rights for EVERYONE and no 1 race recieving more benefits than others.  

Unlike the "Occupy Wall Street", the Tea Party has a Goal.  They have an end Result.  They want the American Dream Back, they want their Liberties back, and they want their Constitution to be adhered to.  That is the Difference.  Like I said, "Occupy Wall Street" is nothing but the resurgence of the Student "Rebellions" of the 1960's.  Need I remind you how those worked out?

More Delusions on the "Occupying Wall Street"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/emma-rubysachs/what-occupy-wall-street-w_b_996412.html

Whenever I find a column that really makes me laugh I have to post a Review of it.  If you find one please email it to me and I will check it out!

Now, according to Emma Ruby-Sachs (yes that's her real name) "Occupy Wall Street" is just the American spinoff of the Arab Spring.  She claims that the Rich have control of the governments of the World and that the protesters are just sweet, pro-democracy protesters.  First off, I want to start a drinking game, every time you see the words "Rich" and "Powerful" take a shot.  Let's start:

Almost a year ago, a revolution began in Tunisia and sparked a domino of uprisings across the Middle East. Their call was simple: end the dictatorship, usher in accountable government. Through occupation and all out war, countries in the Middle East attempted to topple leaders who clung to power despite representing the interests of the richest and most powerful to the detriment of the public good.

I got one.  Now she's wrong first because the Middle East was toppling Leaders who virtually didn't HAVE elections.  Also these leaders were cruel and vicious to their own people, they were recieving monstrous checks from foreign governments and either gave it to themselves or their military.  They weren't representing the richest.  There were many Rich people AGAINST them! 

Months later, Europe exploded. Sit-ins in Spain and ongoing rallies in Greece protested economic policies that rewarded the richest 1% while punishing the other 99%. Then London and the surrounding areas erupted into riots: an expression of outrage at rising housing and food costs. Israelis established a massive tent city in Jerusalem protesting the same rise in the cost of living, and the government's stubborn refusal to pass laws that promote the common good and support the survival of the other 99%. Now, the United States and Canada have joined the fray.

Really?  These countries were notorious for welfare spending!  Most of their people weren't PAYING taxes.  How can you honestly expect economic growth or societal advancement when many of your people are living on Government assistance?  England's Riots were nothing more than Thuggery physically manifested.  Those people were uneducated, welfare baby, gangsters with NO ideology except "What's yours is mine, and what's mine is mine,"  with the barrel of a gun pointed at everyone.  As for the drinking game, we were safe this time, maybe there's something redeemable in here....

Each and every demand in the occupy Wall St. protests and their kin relate to accountability. It is the latest in a global realization that our governments are held hostage by the rich and powerful, our laws and safeguards protect those rich and powerful rather than protecting the rest of us, and our leaders have no motivation to change the status quo.

Can Somebody call a cab??? 

Democracy is a word we throw around a lot, but it's not one that is very well understood. It's not enough to cast a ballot every four years. Democracy is a system of accountable governance -- a pledge that leaders will represent the interests of those they govern, will protect the weakest in society, and will steward collective resources (like our water and air) to ensure a sustainable future for all of us. It relies on a free press to help inform citizens of governmental action. It relies on freedom of assembly and movement to allow citizens to communicate directly with their representatives.

Does the woman not know we're a Republic?  There is a REASON why we aren't a Democracy.  A Democracy has always descended into The Mob Rules.  Citizens can't always be informed and can't always be smart voters.  A Republic, with the proper Constitution, ensures that Individuals don't have their rights stolen by the Majority.  Freedom is about letting people do as they WANT as long as they don't harm anyone else in doing so.  A Democracy crushes that for the "Greater Good".  Yes, free press and freedom of Assembly are parts of the Republic, however, those wouldn't exist if we had a Democracy.  People are smarter than most of the politicians, but the Mob Mentality has changed the strongest of men to dogs of the Mob.

And seriously, is the cab here yet?