Saturday, December 4, 2010

Is the left bankrupt?

Global Warming as a political issue is dead

Scams die hard, but eventually they die, and when they do, nobody wants to get close to the corpse. You can get all the hotel rooms you want this week in Cancun.

The global-warming caravan has moved on, bound for a destination in oblivion. The United Nations is hanging the usual lamb chop in the window this week in Mexico for the U.N.'s Framework Convention on Climate Change, but the WASHINGTON GUESTS ARE STAYING HOME. Nobody wants to get the smell of the corpse on their clothes.

Everybody who imagined himself anybody raced to Copenhagen last year for the global-warming summit, renamed "climate change" when the globe began to cool, as it does from time to time. Some 45,000 delegates, "activists," business representatives and the usual retinue of journalists registered for the party in Copenhagen. This year, only 1,234 journalists registered for the Cancun beach party. The only story there is that there's no story there. THE U.N. ORGANIZERS GLUMLY CONCEDE THAT CANCUN WON'T AMOUNT TO ANYTHING, EVEN BY U.N. STANDARDS.

Rep. HENRY A. WAXMAN of California, who wrote and sponsored the cap-and-trade legislation last year, says he'll be too busy with congressional business (buying stamps for the Christmas cards and getting a haircut and a shoeshine) even to think about going to Cancun. Last year, he joined Speaker NANCY PELOSI and dozens of other congressmen in taking staffers and spouses to the party in Copenhagen. The junket cost taxpayers $400,000, but Copenhagen is a friendly town and a good time was had by all. This year, they're all staying home, learning to live like lame ducks.

The Senate's California ladies, cheerleaders for the global-warming scam only yesterday, can't get far enough away from Cancun this year. DIANNE FEINSTEIN says she's not even thinking about the weather. "I haven't really thought about [Cancun], to be honest with you,"

Every so often you’ll read that the GISS thinks 2010 will be the warmest year ever. Is seems just as they decided not to actually use thermometers in the Arctic but to estimated it from stations not in the arctic, the temperature estimates there have moved the average global temperatures into record warmth. If you believe their data, I have a bridge in Brooklyn that I can see to you and you can make a lot of money charging people to use it.

Immoral Progressivism Failing Miserably

In England, youths are rioting. In Portugal, labor unions staged a national strike last Wednesday. A little over a month ago, France and Greece were subjected to large, violent demonstrations and riots. A common thread? In each of these countries, the unrest was engendered by economic austerity measures proposed and/or enacted by government. A far more salient common thread? THE MORALLY CORRUPTIVE NATURE OF THE PROGRESSIVIST IDEOLOGY.
As the four recent examples, along with others occurring all over the world illustrate, a group of like-minded "thinkers" is emerging. IT IS A GROUP COMPOSED IN EQUAL PARTS OF ECONOMIC ILLITERACY AND PATHOLOGICAL SELF-ENTITLEMENT. Only an utter fool—or a dedicated progressive—would riot or strike because someone else can no longer afford to underwrite your lifestyle.

WHAT PART OF "RUNNING OUT OF OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY" DON'T THE COMPLAINERS UNDERSTAND? Such a complete disconnect from reality doesn't happen on its own.

It is where moral relativism, the cornerstone of progressive thinking, inevitably leads. DECADES OF TEACHING PEOPLE THAT THE STATE IS THEIR BOTTOMLESS BENEFACTOR HASN'T JUST RUINED ECONOMIES AROUND THE GLOBE. IT HAS RUINED THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES. Economies eventually recover.
Can people recover their dignity and character?

Let’s see, the TEA Party in the USA (a rightwing populace movement) demonstrates and leaves the area they are demonstrating in cleaner than when they arrived. In Europe, left wing groups demonstrate and people end up dead and property destroyed.

Liberalism: An Autopsy

In the tumultuous history of postwar American liberalism, there has been a slow but steady decline of which liberals have been steadfastly oblivious. The heirs of the New Deal are down to around 20% of the electorate, according to recent Gallup polls. Conservatives account for 42% of the vote, and in the recent election the independents, the second most numerous group at 29% of the electorate, broke the conservatives' way. They were alarmed by the deficit. They will be alarmed for a long time.

Liberalism's decline might appear, at first glance, to have begun with the 1961 inauguration of President John F. Kennedy—when historians noted the first glimmerings of what was to become liberalism's distinctive trait, overreach…..

The practical liberals won in the late 1940s, but in 1972 civil war broke out anew. This time the radicals won. In the meantime, LBJ's Great Society CAUSED EVEN SOME LIBERALS TO WARN AGAINST THE "UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES" of government programs. These were to be the first new recruits to modern conservatism. Jeane Kirkpatrick, Irving Kristol and, for a time, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, were in Kristol's WORDS LIBERALS "WHO WERE MUGGED BY REALITY." The radicals were seeking refuge from reality in a self-regarding fantasy. Only a crisis in the leadership of President Richard Nixon, Watergate, allowed them to hide from the American electorate their fantastic delusions….

From the Nixon administration on, THE NUMBERS HAVE NOT BEEN GOOD FOR LIBERALS. In 1972 only one state went for presidential candidate George McGovern, who even lost the youth vote. In 1976 liberalism did better, but Jimmy Carter ran as a moderate.

Then came 1980. Ronald Reagan benefitted from the ongoing electoral accretions that modern conservatism has attracted: the neocons, the evangelicals (aka the Christian Right), the Reagan Democrats. Liberals could claim nothing new….

Conservatism has steadily spread through the country since its larval days in the 1950s, and the reason is that THE VAST MAJORITY OF AMERICANS FAVOR FREE ENTERPRISE AND PERSONAL LIBERTY. Note the tea party movement. The Republicans just took the House of Representatives by over 60 seats and gained six seats in the Senate. The social democrat in the White House has been routed…..

AS A POLITICAL MOVEMENT LIBERALISM IS DEAD. They do not have the numbers. They do not have the policies. They have 23 seats in the Senate to defend in 2012 (against the Republicans' 10) and Republican control of state houses and legislatures will give them even more seats in the future. Liberalism R.I.P.

It's always dangerous to declare the opposition dead, but this is a good article. The last paragraph talks about the Senate in 2012. If the seats split 50-50, the Republican will win at least 6 seats and take control of the Senate as well as the House. In 2008 Republican won 67% of the Senate seats that were up for grabs.  As similar win would bring give the Republicans 12 seats and give them 59 overall. 

No comments:

Post a Comment