The Food-Stamp Crime Wave >The number of food-stamp recipients has soared to 44 million from 26 million in 2007. Not surprisingly, fraud and abuse are rampant. > H.L. Mencken quipped that the New Deal divided America into "those who work for a living and those who vote for a living." The explosion in the number of food-stamp recipients tilts the political playing field in favor of big government. The more people who become government dependents, the more likely that democracy will become a conspiracy against self-reliance.
Failing To Learn – The Lessons Of Vietnam, Obama Decides To Micro-Manage War In Afghanistan: If Obama wants to play big man on campus and call the shots; if he wants to take this war out of the hands of military commanders and presume to orchestrate the outcome himself; then come November 2012, we’ll not only hold fuel prices, food prices, high unemployment, the lousy housing market, and our skyrocketing debt against him when we head to the polls, but we’ll also hold a loss in Afghanistan against him too.
The Department of Food Subsidies: The Department of Agriculture no longer serves as a lifeline to millions of struggling homestead farmers. Instead, it is a vast, self-perpetuating postmodern bureaucracy with an amorphous budget of some $130 billion -- a sum far greater than the nation's net farm income this year
Civility = Obama's reelection: Former Governor of Utah Jon Huntsman, recently free of his position as Obama's ambassador to China, launched his campaign for president yesterday by promising not to attack the president. It seems he's taken Obama's call for civility to heart and believes you can save the country by praising the person who is destroying it.
Despite 2009's failed $814 billion economic stimulus and a continuing debt crisis, Democrats in the U.S. Senate on Wednesday called for even more economic stimulus as part of deficit-reduction talks.
Destroy a liberal's argument by exposing the underlying rhetorical cheat.
Argumentum ad Verecundiam, otherwise known as the "argument from authority." This is a favorite trick especially of the green movement—as in, "The National Academy of Sciences says that man-made global warming is real so it must be," or, "The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change represents the expert views of 2,500 of the world's top scientists: who are you to say they're wrong?" Reply that all it takes is one scientist to falsify a hypothesis: in fact, that's exactly how science is done, with one paradigm replacing another: think Copernicus (or Galileo) and the heliocentric theory of the solar system. Why is it, dear liberal, that you always want to close off debate whether it's about science or anything else in the name of your authorities and political correctness? Is it because liberals believe (as William F. Buckley noted) that everyone has a right to his own opinion—and then are shocked and outraged to find there is another opinion?
"When you subsidize poverty and failure, you get more of both."
-- James Dale Davidson
No comments:
Post a Comment