Following the horrendous vote in the House of Representatives favoring the Cap and Trade bill, eight Republicans who voted for it have been identified (HT to Michelle Malkin). For those of you who see in this bill the erosion of our freedoms and the stifling of our economy in favor of a suffocating federal government, I suggest you call the following members of Congress who voted for it and let them know how you feel:
Mack, CA, 202-225-5330
Castle, DE, 202-225-4165
Kirk, IL, 202-225-4385
Lance, NJ, 202-225-5361
LoBiondo, NJ, 202-225-6572
McHugh, NY, 202-225-4611
Reichert, WA, 877-920-9208
Smith, NJ, 202-225-3765
Why pick on these particular eight representatives? As mentioned, they’re all Republicans, and the only Republicans who voted in favor of the Cap and Trade legislation. So-called “moderate” Republicans who vote on the side of bigger and more intrusive centralized government need to be put on notice that this is not acceptable.
Cap and Trade is an indicator of which side someone stands on. Either you stand with the Constitution and the decentralization of power to the states and the people, or you stand with those who believe in the power and supremacy of the state, and particularly the centralized federal state. The latter are typically called Democrats, and if you’re a Republican who votes for more federal control, please switch parties.
Cap and Trade is a watershed event in our nation’s history that defines the ever widening divide between conservative and progressive. The progressive believes there is nothing government can’t do (control the climate and save the planet!), whilst the conservative generally believes the government should be restricted to the duties enumerated in the Constitution.
Progressives are fascist, according to the classical definition of the term, and are unconcerned about personal freedom, unless the “freedom” in question has something to do with moral depravity, but that’s another topic for another time.
The point is that the Cap and Trade legislation that passed the House and is on its way to the Senate reveals the fascist agenda of the progressive movement in America. It is an agenda which seeks to control each individual’s behavior and restrict their consumption and mobility, all in the name of what is increasingly being proved as a myth of epic proportions.
The myth – climate change, global warming, global cooling, or whatever the hell is the most convenient term based on the current weather – is simply the mechanism or excuse whereby the fascist is able to exert control over his fellow citizens.
As mentioned in a previous post, the progressive fascist is typically insulated from the consequences of his pet policies. They’re either very wealthy, dependent on the government, work for the government or a union subsidized by government, or hipster dufuses (dufusi?) who follow the latest “cool” trend and blindly follow the pack (more on this voting bloc later).
So I understand why a Democrat would vote for the Cap and Trade bill. They have a defined constituency: the very wealthy, hipster dufusi (dufuses?), government dependents, government employees and union employees.
Republicans, on the other hand, are charged with representing the individual, and to put the individual’s freedom and liberty above the demands of the state and its special-interest constituents. Therefore, I have called all eight of those House Republicans who voted for Cap and Trade and left the following message:
Hi…
Just wanted to let you know that though I am a Republican and live in Colorado, I am going to do everything I can to ensure your defeat in the next election, including financial contributions to your opponents.
Your vote in favor of Cap and Trade displays scientific ignorance and a complete disregard for the liberty and freedom of average American citizens who will suffer under the further expansion of the federal government’s power.
I suggest you do two things before you vote on any more so-called climate change bills: re-read the Constitution and look up in the sky at the big burning orb that constitutes about 99 percent of the total mass of the solar system.
Thank you,
Club Soda
The past week has been an exciting time to be a US soccer fan. There aren’t very many of us, but hopefully there are a few more after this week. The US took a 2-0 lead into halftime against Brazil in the Confedreations Cup final, but in the end the men from Brazil were too much. It would be easy to beat up on the US for losing the lead, but Brazil is the world’s best team; just ask the world cup holders. Brazil scored 3 goals in the first half against Italy.
The United States can take a lot from this tournament. Their confidence grew immensely over the past week and and that should help in next summer’s world cup. I’m disappointed, but I’m very proud of the team.
The site has been experiencing problems the past two days so no comments or new entries have been able to be added. Movable Type is eating tons of memory so I’m currently testing the site over the next week to see how much it’s going to cost me to keep the status quo.
As of right now order has been restored.
“Rome is the mob. Conjure magic for them and they’ll be distracted. Take away their freedom and still they’ll roar.”
-Gracchus in Gladiator
I absolutely resent the news media’s round-the-clock coverage of Michael Jackson’s death. I was hoping he would continue to fade into obscurity, become less crazy and die of old age at Nevemind Ranch. Why his death matters so much to the media is beyond me, but I also wonder why the media pays attention to what anyone in Hollywood has to say about politics or anything else of importance.
I’ll admit to a certain bias here: I hate Celebrity and the worship of Celebrity in America. Celebrity, not religion, is the opiate of the masses. But I suppose Celebrity is a religion in its own right with its own rites, altars and priesthoods, not to be confused with Jason Priestly, formerly of Beverly Hills 90210 fame.
The rise of Celebrity in America coincides with the willingness of the American people to cede their liberties to the state. Americans believe all kinds of myths because the celebrity culture anesthetizes them to the truth. Celebrity offers easy, pre-packaged answers that require little intellectual effort. Why look into an issue on my own when I’ve got Oprah, George Clooney, Pamela Anderson and Michael J. Fox doing the research for me?
For instance, it has become a truism via the Celebrity culture that embryonic stem cell research, of course funded by the taxpayer, is the only way to cure diseases like Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s. In reality, the most successful research and actual progress has been made with adult stem cells. But let’s not let facts get in the way when said “facts” have already been cherry-picked for us, and when they happen to coincide with one of Celebrity’s favorite causes, abortion. Yeah for the death of those that are inconvenient to us!
“The science is settled” on any number of topics, according to Celebrity and its minions in Congress. All of the bad weather anywhere in the world is caused by man’s selfish consumption, and must be stopped. Of course, as a Celebrity (or a member of Congress), and because I’m so important, I cannot possibly curb my consumption. “Let them eat cake” has been replaced with, “Let them drive clown cars!”
That is why our spoiled aristocracy – the 21st Century Marie Antoinette – is in favor of the supremacy of the state over the individual. It’s very similar to the feeling a lot of Coloradoans have about their state, best summarized by the bumper sticker fashioned like a Colorado license plate that says, “No Vacancy“. I freely admit to feeling the same way. Now that I’m here, I’d like to fence off the state and not allow another person to darken its borders.
In the same way, celebrities and other hyper-rich, powerful people (such as Avon’s Andrea Jung mentioned in a previous Club Soda post) want to fence off the American Dream and keep the bounty and freedom of America to themselves. It’s a form of arrogance that says they’re individuals while the rest of us are simply numbers in a census (conducted by ACORN, of course).
So, while the media devotes itself to non-stop coverage and posthumous tributes to the King of Pop, Americans are being screwed by another unreadable, voluminous, multi-trillion-dollar bill that will finally defeat climate change and the American economy in one fell swoop.
The media, once again, is asleep at the wheel, celebrating celebrity and accepting at face value the pronouncements of the aristocracy that something “must be done.” Bread and circuses, if you will. When this monstrosity of a bill passes, Denver’s weather better be like San Diego’s year-round, or I’m going to be pissed.
As Sam so eloquently stated at the end of the Lord of the Rings “well, I’m back.” It appears as Club Soda has managed to keep things going well. I wonder if he had an awkward altercation with an Avon salesperson. My wife and I had a wonderful time on our honeymoon cruise. We took the Monarch of the Seas to the Bahamas. The weather wasn’t all that great but we still had a great time.
We walked around Nassau on Wednesday afternoon. I saw an Obama sticker on one Nassau plate. It’s great that hope and change made it to the islands as well. I know they’re not US citizens but they probably voted anyway.
The wedding went perfect. There were over 400 people in attendance. My wife is very popular it seems. July marks five years since I moved to Florida and I came here for the wrong reasons, but everything has worked out very well. I’m a very lucky man.
John Edwards was right. There are two Americas. The problem is that those two Americas make up the constituency of his party. The very rich are attracted to the Democratic Party because they’re able to “do something” to help others without lifting a finger themselves. Plus, their wealth insulates them from the consequences “progressive” policies have on the average American.
The poor, meanwhile, become dependent on the government, which is the way government and the aristocracy prefers it. It helps ensure the perpetual power and wealth of those in power as the rest of us are forced into dependency by the policies of the powerful.
I happened across a Q&A in USA Today with Andrea Jung, Avon’s CEO. As you may already know, Avon sells cosmetics. But more importantly, Jung is a big supporter of “change”, particularly since the consequences of change are unlikely to affect her since she’s taken home about $36 million over the past five years.
“Without being a political pundit, each one of us has come into a leadership role knows that the first 100 days will be looked at. President Obama’s 100-day plan is pretty impressive. I think it’s a Wow 100-plus days. The administration is not operating from fear, it is trying to drive change for the future, and that’s a good thing,” Jung said.
Good lord. Jung’s missive about the first 100 days totally misses the mark. What the hell is a “Wow 100-plus days” anyway? You mean ramming trillions of dollars in unnecessary spending down our throats without giving anyone a chance to read the 500-lb. bill? You mean the litany of tax cheats and other ethically-challenged people Obama tried to foist on our system?
Then she has the nerve to say “the administration is not operating from fear…” Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel said it best: “You never want a serious crisis go to waste.” It is obvious the administration was operating from fear, and playing on the fears of the American people in order to implement its left-wing agenda.
Given this foolishness (and the response to her foolishness could fill volumes), how can you possibly trust anything else she says, whether it’s about politics or business? But again, Jung represents the new narcissistic aristocracy in America. When cap-and-trade and a new health care program goes down, Jung’s millions will shield her from the consequences.
When energy prices double and triple all in the name of reversing mythical, magical “global warming” (now called “climate change”) through cap-and-trade, Jung will continue to jet around the world, burning petrol like no tomorrow. Meanwhile, everyone else better figure out how to squeeze into those freaking clown cars, or add another two hours to their commute as they mount their bike for the 20-mile ride downtown. It’ll be like China, but without good Chinese food!
But it’s all worth it… this change that Jung is helping foster through her support. We’re all going to have to make adjustments. Well, maybe Jung won’t have to make any adjustments. I very much doubt that Jung will face the same health care system enjoyed by the average American. There will be no rationing, no interminable waiting lists, and no being subject to the whims of a faceless bureaucracy for Jung.
In Jung’s brave new world, everyone else must pay the penalty to make her feel good about “doing something”. Jung gave $30,800 to Obama’s campaign in 2008. Something tells me that if you can throw around $30,000 you’ll probably do just fine when the inflation, high interest rates, skyrocketing costs of fuel and health care, and all the other you-know-what hits the fan when the Obama administration’s runaway spending starts to pay dividends.
What differentiates a baby from a fetus? Medically, the definition is the period of time between eight weeks after conception and birth. However, people usually disregard the medical terminology in favor of how they prefer to view the fetus/baby, either as an inconvenience that can be discarded like any other medical waste, or as a human being with all the rights given other human beings who happened to have made it outside the womb.
Even pro-choicers carrying their own baby are not likely to refer to their baby as a fetus. A fetus is something other people carry around and can choose whether or not to abort: My baby is fully human, but others are not. Therefore, my baby is not a fetus… or, at least I’m not going to call it a fetus, because the term implies something less than human.
Therein lies the problem with and the hypocrisy of being pro-choice; you have to be willfully ignorant about what abortion truly entails – the painful dismemberment and death of a living thing that is certainly aware that something horrible is being done to it – while applying a different standard to your own children.
Barack Obama articulated this position best when he said it was above his “pay grade”. This is another way of saying, “I’m going to utterly close my eyes to the inhumanity and barbarism of this practice, and refuse to consider the implications of willfully killing what could very likely be considered a human being.” In short, it’s a cop-out.
If abortion is truly above your pay grade, wouldn’t it be far wiser to err on the side of protecting the baby in the womb? But Obama obviously doesn’t really believe the issue is above his pay grade, or anyone else’s pay grade. If he did, he wouldn’t support this wholesale slaughter.
Instead, Obama and anyone who’s pro-choice have decided that a baby still in the womb is less than human, much as slaveholders in early America decided that blacks were less than human. This justified, in the slaveholders’ minds, the inhumane practice of slavery, just as dehumanizing the “fetus” also justifies its killing.
The pro-choice movement is rooted philosophically in eugenics, a “progressive” movement popularized in the early 20th Century by the likes of Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood. Sanger and her ilk believed that inferiority in the human gene pool could be eradicated by sterilization, birth control and abortion.
The obvious problem with this philosophy is who chooses who lives and who dies. Unfortunately, people like Adolph Hitler embraced the philosophy and targeted “inferior” groups for extermination. Once again, these inferior groups were portrayed as less than human; Hitler was doing humanity a favor by eliminating them.
Ultimately, when you take a pro-choice position, you’re playing God. You’re saying, in effect, I am omniscient and can discern exactly when a human being actually becomes a human being. I would argue, on the other hand, that there is not one person on this earth who’s omniscient and thus qualified to render a death sentence on something that may be a human being.
As Sanger put it, “It is a vicious cycle; ignorance breeds poverty and poverty breeds ignorance. There is only one cure for both, and that is to stop breeding these things. Stop bringing to birth children whose inheritance cannot be one of health or intelligence. Stop bringing into the world children whose parents cannot provide for them. Herein lies the key of civilization. For upon the foundation of an enlightened and voluntary motherhood shall a future civilization emerge.”
Sounds like Utopia, but in Sanger’s and Planned Parenthood’s Utopian man-directed evolution, Utopia demands the extermination of others. Who those “others” are will be in the eye of the beholder; the beholder being the one who has the power to exterminate them.
Sanger’s philosophy and that of her intellectual progeny stands in utter contradistinction to the founding of America, in which “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights.” In other words, the founders correctly believed that rights are endowed by the Creator, and not by the whims of man, who has proven to be a very poor arbiter of his fellow man’s rights.
This is an issue that deserves vigorous debate, yet the American people are never given the full story. Perhaps they don’t have the stomach for it. Who can blame them? It’s an extremely ugly practice when you get down to the nuts and bolts of how it works, and it gets uglier as a pregnancy progresses.
We’re told by our betters in the media that the debate should be superficial because it’s so “divisive”. Then we’re told that only the “fringe” – those outside the mainstream – are pro-life, thus the debate is already over. Yet poll after poll shows that abortion truly is a divisive topic that stands at about 50/50, thus it deserves more scrutiny than it gets now, particularly since the debate cuts to the very core of who we are.
George Orwell, in his seminal novel Animal Farm, floated the proposition that “some animals are more equal than others.” And nowhere is this more obvious than in the dawning of the new era we call the Obama administration and its approach to the economy and certain sectors of it, such as the auto industry and health care.
In our current version of Animal Farm, the fox has been given complete jurisdiction over the hen house. Occasionally, the farmer asks the fox about the alarming number of hens turning up dead in the henhouse.
Though covered in feathers and blood, the fox insists it’s an inside job; the hens are turning on each other, causing hen house mayhem that the fox insists can only be staunched if the farmer would give him more authority.
The farmer relents and the fox then turns over control of the pigpen to the coyote, while the wolf is in charge of the sheep. The hapless pigs, sheep, and hens, meanwhile, wonder why the farmer is so sheepish. Spies are sent to the farmhouse to gain some insight into the farmer’s easy acquiescence.
Peering into the farmer’s window, it all becomes clear. The farmer is asleep in his recliner, iPod in hand, with Family Guy blaring in the background on the television. The surprise gifts given by the fox to the farmer of a hand-held constant Internet connection and a satellite dish have had their desired effect. The pony keg provided by the wolf didn’t hurt either.
Recent Comments