-
Recovery Now
November 6, 2010 | 1 comment
Special Report
In Washington, But Not Of Washington
Rep. Michele Bachmann’s keynote remarks, as prepared for delivery Tuesday evening at The American Spectator’s annual Robert L. Bartley Dinner.
Rep. Michele Bachmann’s keynote remarks, as prepared for delivery Tuesday evening at The American Spectator’s annual Robert L. Bartley Dinner.
It’s a pleasure to be here tonight. This is the last thing Bob Tyrrell would want to hear, but he has managed over the past 40 or so years to turn The American Spectator into an institution. But to his and Wlady Pleszczynski’s credit, the magazine has always stayed true to its Hoosier roots. While it may be a magazine that covers issues in Washington, the Spectator has never been a magazine of Washington. And as this past election has shown, not being a product of Washington is a good thing.
I also want to congratulate Fred Barnes on the honor of winning the Barbara Olson Award. Long before he helped found the Weekly Standard, Fred was reporting for the Baltimore Sun and writing stories for The American Spectator. Just like Bob Novak, Fred’s made his mark not as a Fox News commentator, but as a shoe-leather reporter. In times like these, where vigilance is absolutely critical, we need more Fred Barnes’, and it’s heartening to know that magazines like The American Spectator are developing them.
It’s fitting that all of us are gathered here tonight under the banner of a dinner named for Wall Street Journal editor Robert Bartley. I have to wonder what Bob Bartley would be writing nowadays. After all, this was a man who in his lifetime, and on more than one occasion, saw his ideas on economic growth and tax reduction subsumed by statist economics, and his support of a vigilant foreign policy replaced by accommodation and indecision, only to see his philosophy of free men and free markets ascend once again.
There has never been a time when we needed Bob’s intellectual and philosophical leadership more, and thankfully, his vision is alive and well at the Journal editorial page and The American Spectator, which has inspired up-from-the-grassroots conservatism for almost half a century. Just this past July, the Spectator’s cover story on the ” ruling class” synthesized exactly why it was so important for conservatives to rise up this election year. And what an election year it was.
Joe Biden liked to tell audiences this election cycle that, quote, “This is not your father’s Republican Party.” Well, for once he was right. It’s a lot closer to being our Founding Fathers’ Republican Party.
We have witnessed the birth of a true, grassroots uprising of citizens and Constitutionalists, and we saw this uprising grow into a full-blown social and political movement that literally rewrote the political map of the United States.
The Republican Party did well this election cycle. But no one should misunderstand or misinterpret what has just taken place. The successes of the Republican Party have little to do with a national or a House or a Senatorial committee, and much to do with the men and women across this country willing to put everything on the line in town halls and rallies, on the campaign trails and in voting booths, to defend our exceptional American principles. They were Republicans, conservatives, Libertarians, Independents. They were moms and dads and students of all ideological stripes.
What has come to be known as the Tea Party is not a red party or a blue party. It’s a red, white, and blue party that has everything to do with our nation’s founding principles of free men, free markets, the rule of law, and respect for every human at every stage of life. Those are our principles. Those are the principles we know are worth fighting for and defending.
In a time when our nation is in trouble, broke, and weighed down by bloated and over-reaching government, less respected in the world and seemingly incapable of keeping the American Dream alive, our fellow citizens made it clear they’ve had enough of Chicago-style community organizing repackaged.
They are tired of the same old Washington parlor tricks of 2,000-page bills that nobody reads, and the backroom regulatory deals that nobody understands that punish the American taxpayer, our economy, and our way of life.
They’ve had it with the constant threat of tax increases and intrusive regulations that create uncertainty in the marketplace and kill investment and economic growth.
They’re done with bailouts and trillion-dollar stimulus packages that create not a single private sector job, but instead grow the size of government, all the time seeing our national employment rate hover at ten percent.
They are weary of a health-care plan that puts a fifth of our economy in the hands of yet more Washington bureaucrats.
They’re finished with giving trial lawyers and organized labor and the leftist political class free passes, while the private sector small business community sacrifices to stay afloat.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (66) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Michele Bachmann
More Articles From Special Report
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/11/11/in-washington-but-not-of-washi
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Ailes: A Voice for the Silent Majority
- The Continuing Crisis
- Eugenic Abortion 2.0
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
wodiej| 11.11.10 @ 6:51AM
Great speech Michele. Go get 'em!
ルイヴィトン財布 | 11.11.10 @ 7:18AM
Go get 'em.thanks...www.vuittonjp.com
Kelly Staples| 11.11.10 @ 7:39AM
Bachmann for Speaker of the House! That would be change we can believe in.
Bruce | 11.11.10 @ 11:50PM
I would agree, Kelly - but as long as the Old Boys Club is still entrenched (for a while) in the House, that is not likely to happen, mores the pity. I'm already - as I'm sure many here are - of what I hear from Boehner. I don't trust him at all to hold to conservative principles. I'm also leery of cantor after hearing some of his latest comments. I think it's going to take at least one more election cycle before we rid Congress of the dreck.
Cory| 11.13.10 @ 9:17AM
I agree Kelly. I'd like to see for 2012 a Brewer-Bachmann ticket.
Yosemeti Sam| 11.11.10 @ 8:17AM
Strange - how Minnesotans' electorate can at once have elected a Brainiac to the HR while earlier Ushering a Frankenstein to the Senate.
Franklin| 11.12.10 @ 1:52AM
But we DIDN'T elect Franken - it was stolen. They "somehow" kept finding more Franken ballots until he "won".
Yosemeti Sam| 11.12.10 @ 10:00AM
You are right!
Although, tragically, the bottom line in political lore will be that Frankenstein was 'elected' by Minnesotans.
GKPAL| 11.11.10 @ 8:21AM
Michele it was a great speach and my hope is that the Republicans, this time, will stand up and do what's good for America. If you don't, America will pay a very high price.
Ken (Old Texican)| 11.11.10 @ 8:42AM
Michele,
Most of us out here KNOW that this is not a "second chance", for Republicans, but rather the Last chance for our country.
Personally, I want to see the Tea-party Caucus on the steps of the Capitol, raising hell and waving the constitution on a weekly basis at least.
Fox News at least will be there, and Rush will monitor those pressers too.
Who are you trying to kid| 11.11.10 @ 8:53AM
Michelle is a terrorist. It scares the h*** out of me that someone as loony as she could have so much influence.
Louis Jenkins| 11.11.10 @ 9:01AM
What are you? Some sort of leftist looney bin name calling jack off? If she's a terrorist then what do you call Obama, Pelosi, and Reid? Freedom fighters? They've led this nation down the road of insolvency for several years, and yes the GOP has too. It's time to regain the ground we've had dug out from under us, and if it takes Michelle, then so be it. I would trust her before I'd trust the Three Horsemen of the Apocolypse name above.
Oh yeah, good speech Michelle. Now go out and do it before it is too late. I fear this was the last good election, and we may be in for interesting times.
Who are you trying to kid| 11.11.10 @ 9:06AM
Louis, you scare me too.
DaveS| 11.11.10 @ 12:24PM
It's 'whom' are you trying to kid?
Besides that, I am going to depart from my usual restraint and declare you insane.
Carl E.D.| 11.13.10 @ 9:39AM
You are just a degenerate fool that can hide behind a key board. The ilks of you and your kind is why we are in fact where we are today. You have no heart and certainly a black soul. May your days be shortened and your poisonous lips and finger tips be silenced.
Redstateboy| 11.11.10 @ 9:16AM
don't you just love the anachirst Liber-ul bomb throwers? Senseless, no ideas of their own, no debating of ideas, no reasoning.. your prototypical Liber-ul Obamabot - product of a Liber-ul infested educational system. I actually pity them.. they're pathetic sad wastes of humanity and they are the waste products of Liberalism.
Puzzled| 11.11.10 @ 9:52AM
RSB, no matter how many times I read the short comment that "Who are you trying to kid" wrote, I just cannot see how you deduce that he is a "Liber-ul". The words just don't seem to imply all that you said.
Please enlighten us from your inexhaustible fount of wisdom and penetrating insight.
MacDaddy| 11.11.10 @ 12:36PM
I'll explain it to you, Puzz...and I'll use small words so that you might understand. "Who are you trying to kid" (WAYTOK from now on....) called Michelle Bachman a "terrorist" for espousing her conservative principals. Deductive logic and reason (something you apparently lack) allow the sane among us to infer that WAYTOK is therefore 180 degrees removed from conservative. That would be a "Liberal." See how easy it is?
That is my penetrating insight. Thanks for dropping by, Puzz. Stick around and pay attention. You might learn something, as long as you keep an open mind. Have a nice day!
Jim| 11.11.10 @ 1:25PM
Stop it, you silly child! A "terrorist"? I what way? Obama consorted with an ACTUAL terrorist; Ms. Bachman has not. Perhaps you mean she scares momma's boys and girls who want someone else to make their way for them, instead of striving for themselves.
Christopher Holland| 11.11.10 @ 5:47PM
If this is your idea of lunacy then your concept of sanity leaves a lot to be desired.
Personally, I want to be as mad as a hatter. Lunacy has a lot going for it, as far as I am concerned.
Bruce | 11.11.10 @ 11:54PM
Thank you for proving Ann Coulter's assertion that the 26th amendment should be repealed. Now piss off and go back to Kos where you belong - your mommy is calling you.
Erling| 11.11.10 @ 9:09AM
A balanced budget in 2011? I think I'm in love. (Presumed Speaker Boehner has not come close to discussing a balanced budget.) I think an appointment to the Supreme Court in 2013 would be terrific for this thoughtful, conservative Congresswoman (and jurist).
Who are you trying to kid| 11.11.10 @ 9:10AM
Maybe she should be President?
Redstateboy| 11.11.10 @ 9:19AM
surely your brain can generate some electrical current and offer some reasoning and logical thoughts as to how specifically Michelle Bachmans arguments are incorrect. Please.. enlighten us... share with us the brilliance of the quintessential Liberal mind.
Who are you trying to kid| 11.11.10 @ 9:40AM
Better yet, Boy, perhaps you could come up with some cogent explanation of how Michelle and those like her are going to deal with:
the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and Yemen
the Israel-Palistine problem
the decline of the middle class
excessive income and wealth inequality
nuclear weapons
the threat of Islamic terrorism
climate change (or not)
In case you didn't know, there's more to running a country than just defending the Constitution. Or, I should say, your narrow version of it.
Christopher Holland| 11.11.10 @ 5:57PM
Yes, there certainly is more to running the country than defending the constitution, but defending the constitution is a pretty damn good start, and it is one liberals have manifestly failed to do. If you can't, or more correctly wont, defend the constitution, then none of the other things on your shopping list are likely to happen either. Defending the constitution is the fundamental building block of government action - from it, everything else follows. It is the same as getting out of bed in the morning and putting your pants on - very little happens unless you can get past that stage.
That is liberalism for you- it attracts people who think they can get away without wearing underwear and still be the best dressed, smartest people in the room.
victor| 11.12.10 @ 10:19AM
"the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and Yemen
the Israel-Palistine problem
the decline of the middle class
excessive income and wealth inequality
nuclear weapons
the threat of Islamic terrorism
climate change (or not)"
Who are you trying to kid pretending you're a liberal, when you're a bloody libertarian.
Scott*| 11.15.10 @ 9:57AM
Any one else notice how this LIBTURD puts defending the Constitution at the bottom of the priority list? Without supporting the foundation of democracy you have nothing.
But I would not expect you to get that, after all, the Constitution is one of those things that just get in Progressives way.
Redstateboy| 11.11.10 @ 9:22AM
A Liber-ul proposing thoughtful and concise economic ideas for creating growth...
"Man who stand on side of mountain with mouth open waiting for Roast Duck to fly in have long wait."
DonDuke| 11.11.10 @ 9:22AM
No thanks. Nothing new with this one, just another boilerplate politician.... maybe worse. After hearing her dance around O'Reilly the other nite she convinced me that she was nothing but more of the same. Nothing new here at all!
Christopher Holland| 11.11.10 @ 6:02PM
Reducing the tax code to 50 pages is your idea of nothing? Have you seen it, do you realise that that is what Joe Biden says is really effing big?
Bill| 11.11.10 @ 9:30AM
Well thought out points and a great speech. The Constitution and Bill of Rights are still valid and the ingrained freedom in the hearts of Americans still burns and must continue to be the light shinning out to the rest of the world. We the people must make sure that the ones elected to represent us do in fact represent us. There are some in congress that need to be impeached or thrown in jail for there past infractions of the law.
Michele, I thank you and my concerned family and friends thank you for your stand and for speaking on behalf of this great God given country.
Redstateboy| 11.11.10 @ 9:32AM
Bachman is absolutely right and many of us have been calling for the systematic dismantling of the Federal Government to what the Constitution enumerated its role to be. EPA? HEW? HUD? Gone! Simplifying our rediculous tax code - a absolute necessity. We are at a National crossroads... We are either going to be a people willing to accept personal responsibilty for our own lives or a people (as the Slave Party would have it) dependent upon a Government bureacrat for our livelihood.
Redstateboy| 11.11.10 @ 9:37AM
No wonders the Leftist despise Michelle Bachman to such a degree.. She's attractive, she's a woman, she's a Conservative and she advocates the advancement of timeless concepts and ideas in a coherent way that are in direct contradiction to billious Liber-ul philosophy.
Christopher Holland| 11.11.10 @ 6:04PM
I would like to see her mud wrestle Hillary Clinton. That and cutting taxes too!
maximumrndb| 11.12.10 @ 9:36AM
Me, I'd like to see her mud wrestle the pulchritudinous Sarah Palin.
charie| 11.14.10 @ 11:27PM
If women would comment on male candidates the way you two have commented on Michele, Hillary and Sarah, we'd be accused of having no brains.
How about I do you two that favor?
CharlieEcho| 11.11.10 @ 10:12AM
It's great to have someone who speaks to what I believe is the majority in this country. I am ready to stand along side such a speaker. I will give my support as to the extent possible. I'm from Ill-noise and the odds are against us in Ill-noise.
Margie| 11.11.10 @ 1:47PM
Dear Michele,
You really get it when you said this:
"What has come to be known as the Tea Party is not a red party or a blue party. It's a red, white, and blue party that has everything to do with our nation's founding principles of free men, free markets, the rule of law, and respect for every human at every stage of life. Those are our principles. Those are the principles we know are worth fighting for and defending."
Keep up the great work!
And please get that pro-Israel Resolution passed in the House. True conservatives who are pro-Israel are counting on you. We know, like Ronald Reagan did.
“In Israel, free men and women are every day demonstrating the power of courage and faith,” Reagan once remarked. “Back in 1948 when Israel was founded, pundits claimed the new country could never survive. Today, no one questions that. Israel is a land of stability and democracy in a region of tyranny and unrest.”
God bless you, Michele.
Tim*| 11.11.10 @ 9:37PM
Ronald Reagan:
"I continue to believe that a just and lasting settlement, based on United Nations Security Council Resolution 242, is within reach. The security of Israel and other nations of the region and the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people can and should be addressed in direct negotiations. It is time to put this tragedy to rest and turn the page to a new and happier chapter."
victor| 11.12.10 @ 12:24AM
From the book, " Reagan: A life in Letters: a letter to a Ms. Shirley I. Leviton dated October 25, 1982 on page 454 assering his commitment to Israel:
Dear Ms Leviton,
I'm sorry to be so late in answering your wire. It takes a while before things make their way through the system to my desk.
I just want you to assure you we do intend that negotiations should be within the framework of Camp David, and U.N. Resolutions 242 and 338.
This of course requires acceptance of Israel's RIGHT to EXIST as a nation. I have so informed a meeting of Arab leaders in a White House meeting.
We have NEVER and will NEVER retreat from that position.
Sincerely
Ronald Reagan,
Tim*| 11.12.10 @ 1:44AM
Ronald Reagan:
“The United States has thus far sought to play the role of mediator. We have avoided public comment on the key issues. We have always recognized and continue to recognize that only the voluntary agreement of those parties most directly involved in the conflict can provide an enduring solution. But it’s become evident to me that some clearer sense of America’s position on the key issues is necessary to encourage wider support for the peace process. . . . the immediate adoption of a settlement freeze by Israel, more than any other action, could create the confidence needed for wider participation in these talks. Further settlement activity is in no way necessary for the security of Israel.”
Tim*| 11.12.10 @ 1:55AM
Ronald Reagan:
“I want to make the American position well understood, the purpose of this [initiative] is the peaceful and orderly transfer of authority from Israel to the Palestinian inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza.”
victor| 11.12.10 @ 2:00AM
Address to the Nation on United States Policy for Peace in the Middle East
September 1, 1982
"I call on the Palestinian people to recognize that their own political aspirations are inextricably bound to recognition of Israel's right to a secure future.
And I call on the Arab States to accept the reality of Israel—and the reality that peace and justice are to be gained only through hard, fair, direct negotiation."
victor| 11.12.10 @ 2:27AM
The Reagan Plan was finally rejected by Jordan and the PLO in April 1983 -- a development that discouraged Washington about prospects for settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict and the reliability of Arab "moderates".
Consequently, the US-Israel alliance was strengthened, recovering from the blows it had suffered during Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon, and Syria was again identified as the prime obstacle to regional stability.
Tim*| 11.12.10 @ 2:51AM
Consequently, The Bush "Road Map For Peace" :
"The "road map" for peace is a plan to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict proposed by a "quartet" of international entities: the United States, the European Union, Russia, and the United Nations. The principles of the plan, originally drafted by U.S. Foreign Service Officer Donald Blome, were first outlined by U.S. President George W. Bush in a speech on June 24, 2002, in which he called for an independent Palestinian state living side by side with Israel in peace: "The Roadmap represents a starting point toward achieving the vision of two states, a secure State of Israel and a viable, peaceful, democratic Palestine. It is the framework for progress towards lasting peace and security in the Middle East."
Tim*| 11.12.10 @ 3:02AM
“Consistent with the Mitchell plan, Israeli settlement activity in occupied territories must stop, and the occupation must end through withdrawal to secure and recognized boundaries, consistent with United Nations Resolutions 242 and 338.” President Bush’s Rose Garden Address – April 4, 2002
victor| 11.12.10 @ 10:16AM
Bush's Road Map for Peace: The First Speech
April 4, 2002
"The recent Arab League support of Crown Prince Abdullah's initiative for peace is promising, is hopeful, because it acknowledges Israel's right to exist."
The Initiative's current status:
"Jordan and Egypt" were appointed by the Arab League as its representatives to meet with Israeli leaders to promote the Initiative. These countries were chosen because Egypt and Jordan are the only Arab countries that have diplomatic relations with Israel. Jordanian Foreign Minister Abdul Ilah Khatib and Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit met with former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, and Defense Minister Ehud Barak in Jerusalem on 25 July 2007, which was the first time that Israel received an official delegation from the Arab League.
dadfly| 11.11.10 @ 10:20PM
it can only be divine providence, michele, that you were already there fighting for us and mark levin was telling us on the radio more than two years ago telling us that you needed help. i took out my wallet and contributed directly on the internet to a candidate for the first time in my life, despite the persistent thought that this was a total waste of money. that and the many hard-earned dollars i have sent to you and other conservatives since are among the best i have ever spent in my life. thank you for what you are and what you are doing.
charie| 11.14.10 @ 11:33PM
Two thumbs up, dadfly. My personal awakening came in 2004 and I just hope my pittance helped John Thune to win over Tom Daschle.
Dacron Mather| 11.12.10 @ 4:38AM
Bachmann has established her Age of Stupid credentials by asking what Robert Bartley might write for Rupert Murdoch
charie| 11.14.10 @ 11:39PM
Oh Possessor of the Mighty Brain, please point out to this lowly peon where Rep. Bachmann asked what Robert Bartley might write for R. Murdoch, for I am too miserably unintellectual to have seen and processed this amazing thing!
That darned woman will probably be saying we have 57 states, next, or that you pronounce corps "corpse". There's no end to her stupidity!
Dan| 11.12.10 @ 11:56AM
I'm so glad to have Rep Bachmann represent me in Washington. This is only a small sample of her good work, and common sense ideas. I know she will help to create a better America for us and our children.
Joe D.| 11.12.10 @ 1:32PM
Michele Bachmann for Speaker of the house would be great. It would be better than the one we just kicked out, or the one we are about to get.
Larry| 11.12.10 @ 1:42PM
Well said, Michelle. You laid it out crystal clear, better than i could have said it. Congratulations for being invited to speak at a Spectator dinner; these guys are pretty good judges of character. And very smart. I used to donate $1000's to American Spectator Education foundation when I had money in the 80's, before my ex-wife got a hold of it. I recommend anyone who still has money to donate it to TAS.
Wally| 11.12.10 @ 11:41PM
Haha! "Not of Washington." Why does she want a leadership position? Because she is a power hungry demagogue, just like all the authoritarian leaning wing nuts like DeMint and Inhofe and Issa. But even that sad group wouldn't let kooky Michelle in.
BTW, I lost my black helicopter. Has anyone seen it? I think I left it at George Soros house before I jetted to the Trilateral Commission meeting and met with Fidel Castro.
Charie| 11.14.10 @ 11:45PM
Are you saying you want her to stay home? Why? So she can clean house, cook meals and not show what crooks the Chicago mob in the White House are?
Hmm, we're discussing a conservative representative and you're discussing fanatics. You must have an affinity for them.
Tom of the Missouri| 11.13.10 @ 7:56AM
Hey Wally,
How exactly does a politician increase her power by advocating drastically cutting the money and regulations and laws she and other Washington politicians have to throw around to the public and to each other.
Michelle is fighting for our freedom and less not more Washington power
You clearly don't value freedom and don't understand this basic idea. You obviously fear the idea of being a free man able to make your own decisions and being responsible for yourself. What a pathetic example of a human you are.
Please take your little black helicopter jokes and go back under the rock you came from and tell the one under the rock that gave you your marching orders he is wasting his time and his troopers like you by having you spout your nonsense at the American Spectator.
Osamas Pajamas| 11.18.10 @ 12:36AM
What this country needs is a truly LIBERAL president and congress and judiciary! And I forgive the reader for suspecting that this must be some kind of bad joke!
But the Democrats believe in "statism" --- not "liberalism."
They benefit from the imprecise American political terminology ---- we say "the government" here in the USA ---- rather than "the state." And that's a dangerous problem. Famous brands of statism in recent centuries have been Nazism, socialism, fascism, communism, and welfare statism ---- this last is sort of a mix of fascism and socialism.
Liberalism, on the other hand, is a political philosophy of small, cheap government ---- it is a constabulary ---- and the job of a liberal government is to enforce human rights within its own jurisdiction. I speak of the unalienable and perfectly-natural and universally-valid human rights of life, liberty, private property, and the pursuit of personal happiness.
The first article of private property is "the self" and all other rights are derivatives of and flow from these cardinal rights. These rights ---- The Rights of Man ---- are the gift of nature or of nature's god ---- and they belong to all human beings, everywhere.
Show me a Democrat who subscribes to all of the above, without qualifications or weasel words. The words "liberal" and "liberalism" were hijacked by the Democrats and socialists and fascists long ago ---- and it was the mistake of conservatives and libertarians to let them get away with it.
It is long past time that liberalism be reclaimed, defined, and explained by its rightful owners ---- by the champions of freedom, i.e.: not by Democrats.
Well, how about "progressivism?" Whuzzat?! “Cancer” is “progressive,” too. Isn't “progressivism” just another statist cancer? It chews you up, piece by piece, in the name of Da Peepul? Eat Da Rich? Moral cannibalism, anyone?
Friends of freedom! Friends of peace-through-strength! And friends of prosperity! Declare yourselves to be "liberals," then ---- and kick over the bloody coffee tables --- and overthrow and trounce the Democrats in 2010 and 2012!
Osamas Pajamas| 11.18.10 @ 12:37AM
SAM ADAMS IS MORE THAN JUST A GREAT YANKEE BEER!
TAX HATER SAMUEL ADAMS, ON A ROLL AND ARMED TO THE TEETH, AUGUST, 1776……
"You darkeners of counsel, who would make the property, lives and religion of millions depend on the evasive interpretations of musty parchments; who would send us to antiquated charters of uncertain and contradictory meaning, to prove that the present generation are not bound to be victims to cruel and unforgiving despotism, tell us whether our pious and generous ancestors bequeathed to us the miserable privilege of having the rewards of our honesty, industry, the fruits of those fields which they purchased and bled for, wrested from us at the will of men over whom we have no check.
"Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say, What should be the reward of such sacrifices? Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, and supplicate the friendship, and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If you love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom – go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.
“Courage, then, my countrymen, our contest is not only whether we ourselves shall be free, but whether there shall be left to mankind an asylum on earth for civil and religious liberty. Dismissing, therefore, the justice of our cause, as incontestable, the only question is, What is best for us to pursue in our present circumstances?”
“It does not take a majority to prevail….but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.”
“Among the natural rights of the colonists are these: first a right to life, secondly to liberty, and thirdly to property; together with the right to defend them in the best manner they can.”
“The Constitution shall never be construed… to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.”
Osamas Pajamas| 11.18.10 @ 12:40AM
The Democrats have this "enemies list" --- denominated in epithets aimed at the people whose wallets they wish to hijack and take up residence inside. You can be a “Racist!” and you can be a “Homophobe!” and you can be a “Teabagger!” --- a homosexual man taking his partner’s scrotum into his mouth. You can be “Selfish!” and you can be a “Wacko!” and you can be a “Hick!” and you can be a “Rube!” You can be a “Right-wing-nut!” and you can be “Mentally Ill” and you can be a “Warmonger!” and you can be "Unenlightened!" and you can be a “FatCat!” and you can be a “Fascist!” --- although no one more closely approaches the precise description of “Fascist!” than the usual Demo propagandist --- either official, or self-appointed.
So all you have to do to occupy multiple epithets on the Demos’ enemies list is to insist that they take their hands off yourself, off your wallet, off your property, off your kids, off your diet, off your healthcare, off your household appliances, off your car, off your bank account, off your weapons of self-defense, off your liberty, and off your freedom of speech. Insist on all these good things - and that qualifies you to be spat upon by nasty, mean-spirited scum --- by The Friends of All Mankind --- by a gang of lying, thieving, dope-smoking, pill-popping, coke-snorting, sticky-fingered, bloodsxcking, tax-eating, gun-stealing, predatory humanitarian thugs --- by the Democrat party, in other words. No political party in the history of America more profoundly deserves absolute and outright destruction.