<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>FrontPage Magazine &#187; Pelosi</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/tag/pelosi/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2014 16:20:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>How Many Lies Have Democrats Told  To Sabotage The War on Terror?</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/david-horowitz/how-many-lies-have-democrats-told-to-sabotage-the-war-on-terror-1/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=how-many-lies-have-democrats-told-to-sabotage-the-war-on-terror-1</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/david-horowitz/how-many-lies-have-democrats-told-to-sabotage-the-war-on-terror-1/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2014 05:58:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[David Horowitz]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jihad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[terror war]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=245916</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Too many to count.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/obama_pelosi.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-245878" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/obama_pelosi-450x252.jpg" alt="obama_pelosi" width="307" height="172" /></a><strong>[To order<em> David Horowitz&#8217;s new book, “The Black Book of the American Left, Volume III: The Great Betrayal,”</em> <a href="http://horowitzfreedomcenterstore.org/collections/books/products/the-black-book-of-the-american-left-volume-iii-the-great-betrayal"><em>click here.</em>]</a> </strong></p>
<p>Start with Obama’s claim that the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (or ISIS) is not Islamic. Say what? In fact, the so-called war on terror is clearly a war that Islamic<em> jihadists</em> have declared <em>on us</em>. Yet Obama is so hostile to this war that even the subterfuge “war on terror” was too much for him and he purged it from official government statements and replaced it with “Overseas Contingency Operations,” which describes nothing. Why would he do this? To avoid confronting the actual threat from what is obviously the most dynamic movement in Islam today: the <em>jihadist</em> war to purge the world of infidels and establish a global Islamic state. The same impulse to deny this threat can be seen in the Obama administration’s characterization of domestic acts of Islamic terror like the recent beheading in Oklahoma and the Fort Hood massacre as “workplace violence.”</p>
<p>The origin of the Democratic lies that fog the nature of the war against the Islamists and make us vulnerable to their attacks can be traced to the Democrats’ defection from the war in Iraq, the second front in the so-called “war on terror.” “Bush Lied People Died.” This was the disgusting charge with which progressives and Democrats sought successfully to demonize America’s commander-in-chief and demoralize the nation as it went to war to take down the terrorist-supporting monster regime of Saddam Hussein and eventually defeat Ansar-al-Islam and al-Qaeda in Iraq. In fact, Bush didn’t lie about the reasons for taking on the terrorist regime in Iraq, as the Democrats claimed. Democrats, including senators John Kerry and Diane Feinstein sat on the intelligence committees and had access to every piece of data about Saddam Hussein’s weapons and the reasons for going to war that George Bush did. If they had any doubts about these reasons all they had to do was pick up the phone to CIA director George Tenet – a Bill Clinton appointee – and ask him. The reprehensible claim that Bush lied was concocted by Democrats to justify their defection from a war they had just authorized betraying their country in time of war along with the young men and women they had sent into the battlefield.</p>
<p>The Democrats lied in claiming that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and that therefore the war was unnecessary and therefore immoral. This was actually two lies in one. In the first place the decision to go to war wasn’t about Saddam’s possession of weapons of mass destruction. It was about his determination to build and use weapons of mass destruction and his violation of 17 Security Council resolutions designed to stop him from doing just that. Saddam violated all 17 of the UN resolutions, beginning with those that constituted the Gulf War Truce and culminating in the ultimatum to disclose and destroy all his weapons of mass destruction. His defiance of that ultimatum is why we went to war with him.</p>
<p>But it was the second lie – that Saddam did not have weapons of mass destruction – that the Democrats used to discredit the president and the war we were fighting. In fact, the Saddam regime did have weapons of mass destruction, including a chemical weapons storage plant recently discovered by ISIS along with 2200 rockets filled with deadly Sarin gas. Here’s <a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/isis-seizes-chemical-weapons-depot-baghdad-sarin-gas-rockets-article-1.1859934">the report</a> from the <em>Daily News</em> of July 9, 2014:</p>
<blockquote><p>“A terrorist group bent on turning Iraq into an Islamic state has seized a chemical weapons depot near Baghdad stockpiled with sarin-filled rockets left over from the Saddam Hussein era…. The site, about 35 miles southwest of Baghdad, was once operated by Saddam’s army and is believed to contain 2,500 degraded rockets filled with potentially deadly sarin and mustard gas.”</p></blockquote>
<p>Not a single Democrat has apologized for the monstrous defamation campaign they conducted around this lie to cripple their president and their country in a time of war.</p>
<p>The Democrats began their sabotage campaign against the war in Iraq in June 2003, claiming that Bush lied when he cited a British report that Saddam was seeking fissionable uranium in Niger for his nuclear weapons program. Two official reports, one by the British and the other by the U.S. Senate confirmed that Bush’s statement was correct, but this was long after the Democrats had so demonized America’s commander-in-chief as a cynical and dangerous liar that his ability to mobilize American citizens to support the war against the Iraqi terrorists was severely damaged. No apologies from Democrats or the media, which abetted their lies, in this case either. Here is a <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/carter-andress/we-drove-saddams-yellowcake-to-the-baghdad-airport/">recent testimony</a> about the facts of Saddam’s quest for fissionable yellow cake uranium:</p>
<blockquote><p>“As someone who led the company that transported 550 metric tons of yellowcake uranium—enough to make fourteen Hiroshima-size bombs—from Saddam’s nuclear complex in the Iraq War’s notorious &#8216;Triangle of Death’ for air shipment out of the country, I know Baathist Iraq’s WMD potential existed.”</p></blockquote>
<p>Not content with these lies, the Democrats reached into their Marxist pocket for another. The progressive slogan “No Blood For Oil” was a maliciously false claim designed to undermine the moral basis for the war by accusing President Bush of serving the interests of his Texas oil cronies beginning with Vice President Cheney, former president of Halliburton, instead of the American people. In the Democrats’ telling, evil corporations in the Republicans’ pocket pushed the country into a needless and “imperialist” war that cost thousands of American and Iraqi lives. But the fact is that despite spending trillions of dollars on a war that cost thousands of American lives, America got no oil out of the war in Iraq, which has wound up in the hands of ISIS terrorists and the People’s Republic of China. No apologies for this myth either.</p>
<p>Perhaps the most destructive lie that Democrats have used to sabotage the war against the Islamist fanatics is that fighting terrorists creates more of them. Nancy Pelosi actually told 60 Minutes’ Steve Croft that if America left Iraq the terrorists would leave too. The argument has been used by progressives to oppose a serious military effort to stop ISIS in Syria and Iraq rather than having to fight them here at home. But aggressive pre-emptive war against the terrorists in their homelands rather than ours has the opposite effect as the victory in Iraq showed before Obama undid it.</p>
<p>The six-year retreat of the Obama Administration from the battlefields in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, and appeasement of the terrorist state of Iran, has created more terrorists than we have ever seen. The weakness displayed by the chief defender of freedom under the leadership of an anti-American president has been a provocation to terrorists. The terror threat diminished under Bush but has grown dramatically under Obama. That is because fighting terrorists does not produce them. ISIS is able to recruit thousands of new terrorists because Islamist radicals are inspired by what Osama bin Laden called “the strong horse,” by beheadings and the slaughter of Christians without a serious reprisal. This is the face of the evil that confronts us, and we better wake up to that threat before it is too late.</p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </strong><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank"><strong>Click here</strong></a><strong>.   </strong></p>
<p><a href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf"><strong>Subscribe</strong></a><strong> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <em>The Glazov Gang</em>, and </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><strong>LIKE</strong></a><strong> it on </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><strong>Facebook.</strong></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/david-horowitz/how-many-lies-have-democrats-told-to-sabotage-the-war-on-terror-1/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>44</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Pelosi Abused Pregnant, Wounded Vet for Green Energy Cash</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/pelosi-abused-pregnant-wounded-vet-for-green-energy-cash/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=pelosi-abused-pregnant-wounded-vet-for-green-energy-cash</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/pelosi-abused-pregnant-wounded-vet-for-green-energy-cash/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2014 16:36:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[The Point]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pelosi]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=245588</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[How dirty is the Democrat Party? This dirty.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/download1.jpg"><img class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-245589" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/download1-450x253.jpg" alt="download" width="450" height="253" /></a></p>
<p>How dirty is the Democrat Party? <a href="http://thehill.com/homenews/house/224569-dems-anger-flares-over-pregnant-lawmaker">This dirty.</a></p>
<blockquote><p>Democratic leaders, including Rep. Nancy Pelosi (Calif.), have denied a request from Rep. Tammy Duckworth (Ill.), who lost both of her legs in the Iraq War, to waive the Democratic rule barring proxy votes. Duckworth, 46, is in the last stages of a pregnancy and her doctor won&#8217;t allow her to travel back to Washington to vote in person.</p>
<p>“A lot of people felt that Tammy&#8217;s patriotism and sacrifice to this country warrants special consideration. And I&#8217;m one of those people who think it&#8217;s hard to make an argument that it does not require special consideration,” Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) said afterward. “She&#8217;s given parts of her body for her country, and if it came to a vote, I would vote to give her a proxy.”</p>
<p>“The fact is that we don&#8217;t know what&#8217;s going on in the lives of many people,” Pelosi told reporters on Monday. “You&#8217;re going to establish a situation where we&#8217;re going to determine who has a note from the doctor that&#8217;s valid or not. It&#8217;s really a place we shouldn&#8217;t go.”</p></blockquote>
<p>Pregnancy doesn&#8217;t seem like a &#8220;note from a doctor&#8221; type of issue. It&#8217;s the sort of thing that Dems claim is a War on Women until they&#8217;re the ones fighting it.</p>
<p>But what is this really about? Green energy subsidies and money.</p>
<blockquote><p>Behind closed doors, many Democrats suspect Pelosi&#8217;s denial could be related to her support for Rep. Anna Eshoo (D), a close friend and fellow Californian, in her race against Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) for the ranking member position on the powerful Energy and Commerce Committee.</p>
<p>That race is expected to be tight — both sides claim to have the numbers to win — and Duckworth had sided with Pallone.</p>
<p>“That&#8217;s the root of all of this,” Rep. John Yarmuth (D-Ky.) said as he left Tuesday&#8217;s meeting.</p></blockquote>
<p>Big <a href="http://www.nationaljournal.com/congress/race-for-top-energy-committee-seat-brings-windfall-to-democrats-20141030">money was being pumped into this </a>porkfest.</p>
<blockquote><p>For a lawmaker hoping to land a top party seat on a key congressional committee, which matters the most? Seniority? Policy expertise? Legislative skill?</p>
<p>Or is it the ability to raise staggering sums of money—including from interests and industries they hope to oversee—that can be funneled to their colleagues?</p>
<p>The latest campaign finance filings from Reps. Anna Eshoo and Frank Pallone—veteran lawmakers vying to succeed retiring Rep. Henry Waxman as the top Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee—show that since last year and through Oct. 15, they have combined to distribute more than $1.2 million in direct contributions to the campaign coffers of House Democratic incumbents and challengers across the country.</p>
<p>And thus, Eshoo (who has the backing for the post of fellow Californian and Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi) and Pallone of New Jersey (who has Minority Whip Steny Hoyer&#8217;s support) have been delivering chit-seeking donations to colleagues out of their personal reelection stockpiles, as well as their separate &#8220;leadership&#8221; political action committees. Many recipients have received money both from Pallone (totaling about $684,500) and Eshoo ($593,200)—and the donations continue to flow this week.</p></blockquote>
<p>The money comes from special interests, ranging from pharmaceutical companies to Google to Green Energy. And despite Pelosi, Pallone outraised Eshoo <a href="http://www.nationaljournal.com/congress/in-blow-to-pelosi-pallone-beats-eshoo-for-top-energy-committee-slot-20141119">which means he took home the big prize</a>. (And so did his donors.)</p>
<blockquote><p>Rep. Frank Pallone of Nerw Jersey beat out Rep. Anna Eshoo of California on Wednesday for the top Democratic seat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, a public defeat for returning Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and a victory for seniority as a primary factor driving committee races.</p>
<p>Eshoo had been Pelosi&#8217;s choice to succeed retiring Rep. Henry Waxman as the panel&#8217;s ranking Democrat, but was edged out by Pallone 100-90 in secret balloting by the entire Democratic Caucus. The Pelosi-controlled Democratic Steering and Police Committee had endorsed Eshoo for the post on Tuesday, 30-19.</p>
<p>In the lead-up to Wednesday&#8217;s closed-door voting, Pallone promised his colleagues that he&#8217;d fight to defend the health-care law from Republican repeal attempts, and said, &#8220;We have to be seen as the defender of the little guy,&#8221; according to a staffer in the room.</p></blockquote>
<p>The little guy. And all the little guys who helped him get all that cash to spread around to his fellow Dems for a secret ballot.</p>
<p>Despite Pelosi&#8217;s attempt to suppress Duckworth&#8217;s vote, she lost. And America lost whoever won because corrupt special interests running the government means that we all lose.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/pelosi-abused-pregnant-wounded-vet-for-green-energy-cash/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Dems Lost and It’s Not Their Fault</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/the-dems-lost-and-its-not-their-fault/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-dems-lost-and-its-not-their-fault</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/the-dems-lost-and-its-not-their-fault/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2014 05:57:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[loss]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[midterm election]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=244865</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Irresponsible Party can’t take responsibility.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/0719-CPELOSI-05-PELOSI-US-POLITICS-GOVERNMENT-CONGRESS-PELOSI_full_600.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-244887" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/0719-CPELOSI-05-PELOSI-US-POLITICS-GOVERNMENT-CONGRESS-PELOSI_full_600-450x344.jpg" alt="0719-CPELOSI-05-PELOSI-US-POLITICS-GOVERNMENT-CONGRESS-PELOSI_full_600" width="357" height="273" /></a>The Democrats lost and no one is resigning. Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi intend to stay on even after overseeing the largest political catastrophe for their party in decades. In six years, Pelosi went from a House majority of 257 seats to a current running total in the 180s. Harry Reid took a Senate majority and turned it into a minority and all he has to show for it are a lot of donations from out-of-state law firms.</p>
<p>Not only aren’t Harry and Nancy resigning, but they aren’t even taking any responsibility. Irresponsibility is the Democratic word of the day and the decade. Harry is blaming Barry. Barry is blaming Harry. No one is even paying attention to Nancy ever since she became irrelevant four years ago.</p>
<p>The Democrats don’t just preach irresponsibility and pander to the irresponsible. They are irresponsible.</p>
<p>Democrats often point to Congress’s low approval ratings as proof that the public doesn’t support the Republicans. They neglect to mention that its present low approval rating of 14 matches its low point of 14 under Pelosi and Reid’s Democratic majority. The last time Congress had an approval rating above 40, there were Republican majorities in the House and Senate.</p>
<p>It isn’t Republican obstructionism that keeps the approval ratings low. That’s just the narrative that the real Democratic obstructionists used once they lost their majority in order to give Obama sanction for unilateral rule. Now Senate and House Democrats have paid the price for the damage that they inflicted on their party by allowing Obama’s unilateral and incoherent policymaking to define them.</p>
<p>Obama “won” by locking in an opposition Congress that leaves him as the only significant elected member of his party. He has achieved what he sought all along by reducing his entire party to him. By completely isolating himself politically, Obama has eliminated any dissent from within his own party.</p>
<p>He has become a “Party of One.”</p>
<p>It’s not much of a victory for any politician who isn’t a wannabe dictator or a hopeless narcissist.</p>
<p>Like his congressional leaders, Obama refuses to concede that the election had anything to do with him, despite claiming beforehand that it was all about his policies. During the election, his inner narcissist wanted to make the election about him, even though his own party begged him not to.</p>
<p>But now that the election is lost, he isn’t responsible and is blaming the “map” which is his way of saying that he didn’t lose the game. The game was unfair.</p>
<p>The most powerful man in the world is making the same excuse as a little boy losing at Monopoly. But he has a point. There was no way to win on his terms by maximizing the turnout of the base with ugly polarizing identity politics. The closest thing to that effort came from “Senator Uterus” and his off-putting “War on Women” rhetoric and it failed. If Obama can’t win with identity politics, then the election is unfair… and the only way to fix it is with illegal alien amnesty for demographic change.</p>
<p>Illegal alien amnesty is the adult political equivalent of overturning the board of the United States, tossing all the American voters on the floor, and remaking the country with new majorities.</p>
<p>That way identity politics will always be a winning move.</p>
<p>That’s why Obama isn’t offering any actual compromises. Instead he came out and threatened executive action on illegal alien amnesty. Then he offered the possibility that he might consider giving the Republicans some of what they want if they give him everything he wants. That’s not how he negotiates with Iran, but he obviously has warmer feelings for the Ayatollahs than he does for the Republican Party.</p>
<p>It’s not as if there are any adults in the room.</p>
<p>Joe Biden prepped for the election by getting blonde hair plugs so he can seem younger than Hillary when he runs against her. He’s polling at 21% among Dems 18 to 29, the only age group in whose support for Hillary he has managed to make a serious dent.  Biden may be four years older than Hillary, but with enough caps, implants and procedures, he can appear young enough for a mid-life crisis.</p>
<p>Biden predicted that the Dems would hold the Senate. Had he spent less time looking in the mirror and styling the new scalp that he had gotten stapled to his skull and more time looking at the polls, he might have had been able to prepare his party for the actual outcome.</p>
<p>On the party side, Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz will launch a review to see what went wrong. It’s a safe bet that the thing that went wrong won’t involve her. But maybe Debbie should have paid more attention to what the voters thought of her party instead of trying to find new arguments to get it to pay for her dresses.</p>
<p>At least Biden wasn’t sending the DNC the bill for his hair plugs. Or so we hope.</p>
<p>Barry and Harry, Nancy and Debbie have one real skill between them and that’s raising money. All of them are good at parting billionaires from big checks in exchange for specified and unspecified favors. None of them are any good at actually running things or at accepting responsibility when they go wrong.</p>
<p>And then there are the Clintons, the 2016 frontrunners whose fundraising skills are unparalleled, but who couldn’t stop Arkansas or West Virginia from going GOP and whose aggressive campaign strategy fizzled. Like Harry and Nancy, Hillary isn’t about to step back. Like Obama, she isn’t accepting responsibility for the defeat; instead her backers say she’ll benefit from a Republican House and Senate.</p>
<p>It’s not bad enough that the Dems torched their own legislative majority to make it easier for Obama to blame Republicans, but now they’re celebrating losing the Senate because that makes it even easier for Hillary Clinton to blame Republicans.</p>
<p>And if Hillary loses in 2016, think how easy it will be for the Dems to finally be able to blame Republicans for everything.</p>
<p>This isn’t how serious political leaders act. This is how children behave.</p>
<p>The winning Dem strategy is to have the most power and the least responsibility. They want to rule unilaterally and blame the Republicans for everything that goes wrong. They want to nuke the filibuster, the power of the legislature and then claim that their man is acting like a dictator because of the GOP.</p>
<p>They need the Republican Party as a scapegoat for their policymaking failures, but they can’t blame it for their political failures. That’s too much like admitting defeat.</p>
<p>If the Democrats didn’t lose because the Republicans offered a compelling vision or because of their own incompetence, then why did they lose? The only remaining excuse is racism. The Democrats have taught a chunk of their base to blame their own failures on racism. Now they want to do the same.</p>
<p>Harry and Barry, Nancy and Debbie can stay in their old jobs and ride their party off the cliff. And it won’t be their fault. No one will have to be fired. No policies will have to be rethought.</p>
<p>It will be because the map was unfair. Because America is racist. Because the dog ate their homework and the Koch Brothers unfairly ran the same attack ads that they had been running and it was raining outside and some states had Voter ID and there wasn’t enough early voting and the lines were too long and their shoelaces broke and everything out of their control conspired unfairly to make them lose.</p>
<p>The only thing that can save the Dems is responsibility. But after so many years of preaching irresponsibility, the irresponsible party has poisoned itself with its own product.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/the-dems-lost-and-its-not-their-fault/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>61</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>America&#8217;s Birthday</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/thomas-sowell/americas-birthday/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=americas-birthday</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/thomas-sowell/americas-birthday/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Jul 2014 04:10:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Thomas Sowell]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[4th of July]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[America]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[border]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Independence Day]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IRS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pelosi]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=235419</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Can the American spirit be kept alive?]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/america.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-235420" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/america.jpg" alt="Honduras v United States - FIFA 2014 World Cup Qualifier" width="300" height="205" /></a>Birthdays are supposed to be times for celebration and gift-giving. But America&#8217;s upcoming birthday on the Fourth of July is a time when the gift most needed is an urgent warning about the dangers of losing the things that have made this country America — and have long made &#8220;America&#8221; a ringing word of freedom, not only in this country but to people around the world.</p>
<p>All is not lost. But all could be lost — especially if too many of us take freedom for granted and focus our attention on other things, like electronic gadgets and the antics of celebrities, while ignoring such dangers as nuclear weapons in the hands of suicidal fanatics, with a track record of savagery, whom we are too squeamish to call anything stronger than &#8220;militants.&#8221;</p>
<p>Nor are all the dangers abroad. Within our own country there are all too many signs of people blithely ready to sacrifice the interests or freedom of Americans for the sake of symbolism or passing fashions.</p>
<p>When a former Speaker of the House of Representatives announces that she is going down to our border to greet and welcome masses of people crossing that border illegally, you know that something is fundamentally wrong.</p>
<p>No one knows, or apparently cares, what diseases these floods of illegals are bringing into the country, including diseases that have been largely stamped out in the United States, and which American doctors have seldom seen enough to know how to spot them or treat them.</p>
<p>No one knows, or apparently cares, how many of these &#8220;children&#8221; include teenage criminal gangs to whom murder is no big deal. Worst of all, no one knows, or apparently cares, that the elected representatives of the American people were cut out of the loop when it came to making these decisions.</p>
<p>All that matters to people like Nancy Pelosi is the symbolism of welcoming the oppressed, especially if they represent more votes for Democrats, who will shower the taxpayers&#8217; money on them.</p>
<p>As if to make clear the elite&#8217;s contempt for ordinary Americans&#8217; intelligence, President Obama tells us that the people crossing the border &#8220;love&#8221; America.</p>
<p>How could he possibly know that, any more than he could know how to &#8220;invest&#8221; the taxpayers&#8217; money in &#8220;the industries of the future,&#8221; which have in fact gone bankrupt?</p>
<p>What is involved are not just bad policy choices. What is involved are policies imposed unilaterally by the president, in defiance of Congress&#8217; authority to legislate and in contempt of the Constitution&#8217;s separation of powers — on which all our freedoms ultimately depend.</p>
<p>The people who wrote the Constitution of the United States understood what dangers there are to the freedom of the people — and that freedom can be quietly eroded by degrees, rather than taken all at once.</p>
<p>Too many people today seem oblivious to such dangers. So what if the government used the muscle of the Internal Revenue Service to keep groups opposed to the Obama administration tied up in red tape or litigation in an election year? Enough games like that can make our elections meaningless.</p>
<p>This arrogant abuse of power does not end with the federal government. In Massachusetts, teenager Justina Pelletier was taken from her parents&#8217; custody and held virtually incommunicado for over a year, because her parents preferred to continue to have her treated as the physicians at a medical facility associated with Tufts University had treated her, even though shrinks at Children&#8217;s Hospital in Boston said her problems were in her head, and took her off some of her medications.</p>
<p>This difference of opinion as to the best medical treatment for Justina Pelletier was enough to get a judge to side with headstrong bureaucrats and override her parents&#8217; rights. So a girl who was ice skating before ended up in a wheelchair under the &#8220;care&#8221; of shrinks.</p>
<p>Fortunately, enough media attention, especially by former governor Mike Huckabee on Fox News Channel, finally got this child freed. Perhaps we can hope that all is not lost — yet. But if this case is a symbol of Americans fighting back, it is also a symbol of why it is desperately important to fight back.</p>
<p>That spirit is the best birthday present for America.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/thomas-sowell/americas-birthday/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Pelosi: &#8220;We Don&#8217;t Have a Policy Problem. We Have a Website Problem&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/pelosi-we-dont-have-a-policy-problem-we-have-a-website-problem/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=pelosi-we-dont-have-a-policy-problem-we-have-a-website-problem</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/pelosi-we-dont-have-a-policy-problem-we-have-a-website-problem/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Nov 2013 14:01:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[The Point]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nancy Pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obamacare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ObamaCare website]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pelosi]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=210853</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Only a liberal progressive could be this stupid.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/pelosi.jpg"><img class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-73803" alt="pelosi" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/pelosi-300x208.jpg" width="300" height="208" /></a></p>
<p>Only a liberal progressive could be this stupid.</p>
<p>If you lack the competence to execute your policies, that&#8217;s a policy problem. Government is not the proper tool for selling insurance. It&#8217;s barely the proper tool for selling people anything.</p>
<p>A policy that depends on government <a href="http://weaselzippers.us/2013/11/15/pelosi-does-her-best-baghdad-bob-impression-for-fellow-dems-on-obamacare-we-dont-have-a-policy-problem-we-have-a-website-problem/">trying to go Amazon is a policy problem</a>.</p>
<blockquote><p>House Minority leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and other party leaders discussed options for a bill with Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius just before McDonough arrived to address the full caucus. She is trying to help the White House stem a tide of House Democrats who are leaning toward voting for a GOP bill, due on the House floor Friday, that would address the cancellation issue in much broader fashion than Obama would like.</p>
<p>“We don’t have a policy problem,” Pelosi told her Democrats in the private meeting, a defense of the law written by Congress. “We have a website problem.”</p></blockquote>
<p>Much of the backlash actually now has to do with the cancellations, the website has become icing on the cake. But Pelosi is predictably too out of touch to know that.</p>
<p>But it takes a liberal progressive to think that policy is the ideal and that problems that take place in the realm of the real don&#8217;t affect it.</p>
<p>To Pelosi, policy is an idea that remains legitimate no matter how badly the implementation is flubbed. This is why the left still thinks Communism can work. The implementation was the problem. Not the idea.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/pelosi-we-dont-have-a-policy-problem-we-have-a-website-problem/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Nancy Pelosi Abandoning Obama on Syria Vote</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/nancy-pelosi-abandoning-obama-on-syria-vote/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=nancy-pelosi-abandoning-obama-on-syria-vote</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/nancy-pelosi-abandoning-obama-on-syria-vote/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Sep 2013 00:57:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[The Point]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nancy Pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Syrian Civil War]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=202933</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It's hard to believe that Pelosi wouldn't be reporting for duty unless Obama is not really interested in winning the vote in Congress.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/obama_pelosi_0202.jpg"><img class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-202935" alt="obama_pelosi_0202" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/obama_pelosi_0202-450x252.jpg" width="450" height="252" /></a></p>
<p>When you&#8217;ve lost Nancy Pelosi, <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/syria-resolution-will-be-a-very-tough-sell-in-congress-lawmakers-say/2013/09/01/a7f8b97e-132a-11e3-880b-7503237cc69d_story_1.html">there&#8217;s no one else left to lose</a>.</p>
<blockquote><p>The Syria deliberations will not fall along the normal ideological fault lines. Obama cannot count on the near-universal support he usually has among the 201 House Democrats, a caucus in which doubts are plentiful.</p>
<p>Aware of the growing bloc of Republican isolationists, senior GOP aides warned Sunday that a large number of Democrats will have to support the use-of-force resolution for it to have any chance. Advisers in both parties described the measure as a “vote of conscience” that House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) and Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) will not be lobbying lawmakers to support.</p></blockquote>
<p>It&#8217;s not entirely surprising that Boehner will sit this one out. Slightly more surprising is that Nancy Pelosi will be sitting it out too. Granted the strikes are unpopular in general and especially unpopular on her home turf.</p>
<p>Still Pelosi <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/08/30/pelosi-urges-military-response-to-syria/">has issued a statement in support of military action</a>. The Democrats in Congress need support from the left in 2014 and a lot of the wealthier left-wing donors also lean really left. But it&#8217;s still hard to believe that Pelosi wouldn&#8217;t be reporting for duty unless Obama is not really interested in winning the vote in Congress.</p>
<p>And as I discussed in my article<a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obamas-plan-to-blame-syria-on-congress/">, Obama’s Plan to Blame Syria on Congress</a>, that&#8217;s entirely possible.  Obama may want to use Congress as an excuse and be deliberately throwing the vote.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/nancy-pelosi-abandoning-obama-on-syria-vote/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>18</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Confronting Pelosi’s Obamacare Propaganda &#8216;Toolkit&#8217;</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/howard-hyde/confronting-pelosis-obamacare-propaganda-toolkit/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=confronting-pelosis-obamacare-propaganda-toolkit</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/howard-hyde/confronting-pelosis-obamacare-propaganda-toolkit/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Jun 2013 04:49:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Howard Hyde]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[choice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obamacare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tool kit]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=191831</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The more Americans learn about the law, the more they hate it. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/pelosi.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-191835" alt="pelosi" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/pelosi.jpg" width="299" height="225" /></a>Nancy Pelosi, Democratic congresswoman and House Minority Leader, has published a 78-page &#8220;toolkit&#8221; to help supporters of Obamacare sell the law to the public. Colleagues and fellow travelers are exhorted to focus especially on the elderly, young people and women.</p>
<p>Maybe they should focus especially on… <i>Democrats</i>. It is the rank and file of the United Union of Roofers, Waterproofers and Allied Workers International and the SEIU United Healthcare Workers of New York who are getting murdered by the real-world effects of the law, losing plans that were working before and petitioning for redress (and in the case of the not-so right-wing Roofers, outright repeal of the law).</p>
<p>The fact is that the more that people, including Democrats, learn about the law, the less they like it. Many sincere citizens thought they were just doing the right thing by their fellow man, especially the poor, by supporting universal healthcare, and they assumed there would be no cost to themselves, as promised by Obama. But they are waking up to the fact that Medicaid is the model for Obamacare, that Medicaid has been exposed as statistically no more beneficial than no insurance at all, and that <i>everyone,</i> themselves included, is now to be herded into a Medicaid-type plan designed by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and enforced via increasingly frequent encounters with that most beloved and trusted of agencies, the IRS. Seeing what is coming, alarmed citizens are having second thoughts; Democratic senators are voting with Republicans to repeal parts of the law (like the medical device tax) when they aren’t outright stampeding for the exits shouting, “Train wreck!”</p>
<p>Among the talking points are: “If you like your doctor, you can choose to keep your doctor.” Notice the weasel-word difference – the legalistic plausible deniability – from the original promise? Yes, you can <i>choose</i>, but if your doctor chooses otherwise (such as to retire early, as 80% of physicians are contemplating) because of the burdens put on him/her by the law, or if he or she is no longer in practice as before because the law has forced him/her out of business and into an employee role in a corporation, your &#8220;choice&#8221; will have no meaning.</p>
<p>As it happens, this author published in February a 100-page toolkit (I called it a pamphlet, but in the spirit of bipartisanship and compromise, &#8220;toolkit&#8221; will do) to help citizens, including Republicans, to refute the arguments of Obamacare’s hucksters. Here are some of the key issues that were pointed out:</p>
<ul>
<li>The PPACA was sold under false premises, such as that there were 50 million Americans without health care and that America lags behind other more enlightened nations.</li>
<li>It is destructive: of liberty, of the privacy and sanctity of the patient-family-physician trust relationship, of public finance, of your ability to keep the plan or the doctor that you like, of the economy and employment, and just about anything else it touches.</li>
<li>It cannot and will not work, because it contradicts fundamental laws of economics, liberty and constitutional government.</li>
<li>And we have plenty of positive alternatives previously proposed by Sally Pipes, Betsy McCaughey, John C. Goodman, Michael F. Cannon, Milton Friedman and many others, even if the Republican Party hasn’t been particularly articulate.</li>
</ul>
<p>Of course it’s doubtful how effective such pamphlets written by mere citizens (without non-profit status) can be in the face of a publicly-funded propaganda machine backed by almost unlimited resources (how many more times bigger than the Pentagon’s budget is the HHS budget again?). After all, all the opponents of Obamacare have on their side are facts, logic, history, economic science and the Constitution, without pandering to mascots. Pelosi and her fellow travellers have at least three trump cards in their hand: unbeatable organization, the irresistible emotional tug of the sob story, and (they hope) the enduring belief on the part of a large swath of the voting population that there really is a Santa Claus, and his name is Uncle Sam.</p>
<p><strong>Howard Hyde is author of &#8220;<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Pull-Plug-Obamacare-Citizen-Pamphlet/dp/0615765939">Pull the Plug on Obamacare</a>,&#8221; available in <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Pull-Plug-Obamacare-ebook/dp/B00BNXX4F6">Kindle</a> and <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Pull-Plug-Obamacare-Citizen-Pamphlet/dp/0615765939">paperback</a> editions from <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Pull-Plug-Obamacare-Citizen-Pamphlet/dp/0615765939">Amazon.com</a>. More information, bibliography, table of contents and notes are available at his website: <a href="http://www.hhcapitalism.com/p/obamacare.html">http://www.hhcapitalism.com/p/obamacare.html</a>.</strong></p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank">Click here</a>.  </strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/howard-hyde/confronting-pelosis-obamacare-propaganda-toolkit/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>12</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>S*** Pelosi Says</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/bosch-fawstin/s-pelosi-says/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=s-pelosi-says</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/bosch-fawstin/s-pelosi-says/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Feb 2013 04:41:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bosch Fawstin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cartoon Corner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dignity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[statements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stupid]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=178633</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Only politicians can express concern about losing a dignity they don't possess.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nancy Pelosi revealed how precarious <a href="http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2013/02/haggard-botoxed-would-be-empress-170k.html?m=1">the politician&#8217;s pretense at dignity</a> is when she argued that the reason a pay cut for members of the house would not be good is because it would make them feel bad about themselves. Part of the problem with today&#8217;s America is that politicians are not reminded <em>enough</em> that they&#8217;re the least respected members of our society. Case in point, my below cartoon. In putting together Pelosi’s quotes, I thought of <a href="https://twitter.com/shitmydadsays">this popular twitter account</a>. Sometimes, the most effective way to discredit someone is to allow him or her to speak uninterrupted&#8230;</p>
<p><a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2013/bosch-fawstin/s-pelosi-says/pelosi-small_edited-1/" rel="attachment wp-att-178636"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-178636" title="Pelosi-small_edited-1" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Pelosi-small_edited-1.jpg" alt="" width="500" height="617" /></a></p>
<p>P.S. I&#8217;m thinking of a similar cartoon with Joke Biden.</p>
<p>PP.S. Make that a Series with Joke Biden.</p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank">Click here</a>.  </strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/bosch-fawstin/s-pelosi-says/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>41</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Democrats and Big Money</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/janice-fiamengo/the-democrats-and-big-money/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-democrats-and-big-money</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/janice-fiamengo/the-democrats-and-big-money/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Dec 2012 04:45:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Janice Fiamengo]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Horowitz]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[soros]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the new leviathan]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=168800</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Democrats’ professed moral scruples about corporate money have never prevented them from using it.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2012/janice-fiamengo/the-democrats-and-big-money/georgesoros/" rel="attachment wp-att-168802"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-168802" title="GeorgeSoros" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/GeorgeSoros.jpg" alt="" width="257" height="183" /></a><strong>To order David Horowitz&#8217;s and Jacob Laksin&#8217;s <em>The New Leviathan</em>, <a href="https://secure.donationreport.com/productlist.html?key=DBERMFBVMXYH">click here</a>.</strong></p>
<p>According to a recent report in the magazine <em><a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/84205.html">Politico</a></em>, high-ranking Democrats are now energetically wooing big-money donors in the wake of President Obama’s re-election. It appears that the moral reservations expressed not so long ago by some Democratic leaders have ebbed, and that plans are already underway to consolidate their funding infrastructure for the future.</p>
<p>Even in the mercurial world of politics, the pronounced softening on big money is a notable reversal. In January 2010, when the Supreme Court ruled that political action committees (known as super PACs) could accept unlimited donations to fund advertising campaigns, President Obama went immediately on the <a href="http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/01/21/obama-criticizes-campaign-finance-ruling/">offensive</a>, castigating the Court’s decision as a threat to democracy.</p>
<p>Positioning himself as the defender of “<a href="http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/01/21/obama-criticizes-campaign-finance-ruling/">average Americans</a>” against (Republican) big money, he described the Supreme Court’s “devastating” decision as a “major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies and the other powerful interests that marshal their power  every day in Washington to drown out the voices of everyday Americans.” Obama’s angry lament played into a tried and effective Democratic strategy:  whatever their personal wealth and elite connections—and Obama certainly has both, if not to the extent of super-rich politicians like Senator John Kerry and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi—Democrats have always declared themselves to be on the side of ordinary working Americans and against the unscrupulous rich.</p>
<p>Like much in the Democratic playbook, Obama’s self-righteous complaint about the rising tide of big money in politics told a certain truth, but it did not tell the whole truth, and the story of Democrats’ moral posturing about money illuminates the hypocrisy and deception at the heart of the party’s most cherished self-image.</p>
<p>It is true that in 2010, Republican super PACs outspent their Democratic rivals to help shift the balance of power in Congress—with big wins. Divided over tactics, the Democratic response was at first slow. By the end of 2011, according to <a href="http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/02/07/146526097/for-obama-the-superpac-rubber-has-met-the-road">Scott Neuman</a> of NPR, pro-Democratic groups had amassed nearly $20 million, not enough to compete with the $50 million of pro-Republican groups. It was this significant imbalance that led the Obama team in early 2012 to reverse course publicly, <a href="http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012-02-07/news/31035801_1_super-pac-super-pac-president-obama">encouraging donors to contribute</a> to the super PACs, especially Priorities USA Action, that were supporting Obama’s re-election campaign. Questioned about the apparent inconsistency, the team insisted that Republicans had forced their hand and that they could not be expected to “<a href="http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/americas/united-states/120207/obama-reverses-stance-super-pacs">unilaterally disarm</a>” while the enemy enjoyed such an advantage.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.politico.com/arena/archive/obama-super-pac---hypocritical-or-common-sense.html">Bill Burton</a>, the former Obama aide who helped found Priorities USA Action, framed the Democratic embrace of super PACs as a reluctant defensive manoeuvre. Writing on Politico’s “The Arena” forum on February 13, 2012, he commented that rather than watch helplessly “as the candidates we care about and the values we cherish come under wave after wave of assault backed by billionaires in the oil industry,” Democrats were forced to “play by the rules as they are, not as we wish they were.” Obama too, in an <a href="http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/02/07/matt-lauer-lets-obama-claim-he-didnt-run-negative-ad-campaign-">interview</a> with NBC’s Matt Lauer, claimed that he would love to “take some of the big money out of politics,” but simply couldn’t do so in the present electoral landscape.</p>
<p>Throughout 2012, the Democrats saw their super PAC arsenal grow, particularly in October when billionaire George Soros <a href="http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/27/soros-gives-1-million-to-democratic-super-pac/">donated 1.5 million</a> to Democratic super PACs. His donation encouraged others in the closing weeks of the campaign, and by the time of the election, Democratic super PACs were drawing nearly even with Republican groups. The <em>New York Times</em> reports that the conservative advantage in outside spending <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/c/campaign_finance/index.html">shrank to about 10 percent</a> by the day of the election.</p>
<p>All signs indicate that Democratic super PACs are now an entrenched adjunct of the party. According to <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/84205.html">Kenneth P. Vogel and Tarini Parti at <em>Politico</em></a>, the fresh-from-victory Democrats are already preparing for the 2014 and 2016 campaigns. A recent three-day conference of the Democracy Alliance, a George Soros-founded network of deep-pocketed liberals and representatives of outside groups, heard presentations from Nancy Pelosi and Obama campaign officials, who thanked them for past campaign contributions. The question facing Democrats now, it seems, is not whether to solicit super PAC support but how to solicit it most effectively.</p>
<p>Not all present at the Democracy Alliance conference were comfortable with the new direction being taken by an organization that once focused on grassroots activism rather than political advertising. Regardless, the Democratic narrative of higher morality and unwilling (but necessary) accommodation to Republican tactics continues to be broadcast. <a href="http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/27/soros-gives-1-million-to-democratic-super-pac/">George Soros</a> has himself declared that his about-face on super PACs came because he couldn’t stomach the Romney campaign’s “openly soliciting the money of the rich to starve the state of the money it needs to provide social services.” Democracy Alliance chairman <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/84205.html">Rob McKay</a> alleged that he and others remain committed to campaign finance reform, aiming to use big money to “limit the effect of money on our political system” in the future.</p>
<p>At the same time, according to Rodell Mollineau, president of American Bridge 21<sup>st</sup> Century, “there is now a sense that we need to compete with super PACS,” and that an increasing number of progressives are comfortable fighting Republicans on their own ground.  One new donor interviewed by <em>Politico</em> called super PACs “a reality that I wish would go away” but recognized the necessity of engaging Republicans “on their own terms.”</p>
<p>What all the pious justifications elide, however, is that at the very time that President Obama was lamenting the crippling of democracy by Republican super PACs and then ruefully conceding that his team would fight fire with fire, big money on the left was already playing a decisive role in the American political process—all the more decisive, in fact, because it was so skilfully hidden from public view, cloaked by innocent-seeming philanthropic and social justice mandates. As David Horowitz and Jacob Laksin have shown in their extensively documented <a href="http://www.amazon.com/New-Leviathan-Left-Wing-Money-Machine-Threatens/dp/0307716457/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1354987667&amp;sr=1-1&amp;keywords=the+new+leviathan+how+the+left-wing">The New Leviathan: How the Left-Wing Money Machine Shapes American Politics and Threatens America’s Future</a> (2012), a large and wealthy cross-section of tax-exempt foundations and advocacy groups work in concert with overtly political organizations to influence the outcome of elections; they do so not by campaigning directly for candidates but by working on a variety of cultural, legal, and educational fronts to reshape public policy and mainstream opinion.</p>
<p>Such foundations pursue the neo-Marxist strategy of transforming the culture from the ground up in order to win and maintain power. Claiming to be politically non-aligned by virtue of the fact that they do not lobby for a specific candidate or party—and able to maintain tax-exempt status and donor anonymity for that reason—they nonetheless work to bring about profound political change in American life, targeting everything from national defence to immigration law and social mores. Financed by such high-flyer billionaires as Bill and Melinda Gates, the foundations pack a fiscal wallop that dwarfs the resources available on the conservative side for similar lobbying.</p>
<p>In fact, as Horowitz and Laksin discovered by examining the foundations’ yearly financial statements, left-wing spending outweighs conservative spending by an astonishing ten to one factor. In 2009, progressive funds totaled a hefty 104.56 billion dollars. A single left-leaning philanthropy, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, had an endowment of over 33 billion, which alone is three times the total of funds accessible to the 75 viable conservative groups. On individual issues, the left swamps its opponents; 117 progressive organizations devoted more than 50% of their programs to supporting open borders and the extension of citizens’ rights to illegal immigrants, with a total of 306.1 million dollars at their disposal. They are opposed by only nine conservative organizations that address immigration, with a comparatively small financial base of 13.8 million.</p>
<p>It seems that when liberals speak of having to play by the big-money rules of conservatives, they conveniently overlook the fact that an avalanche of their own money, far “bigger” than their opponents can command, has been at work for years entrenching left-wing ideas in the culture by stealth, moving ideas from the radical fringes to the centre by dint of insistent repetition and aggressive advocacy. It is worth asking which strategy is more transparent: one in which outside groups fund political advertising campaigns that clearly and unambiguously declare their support for or opposition to a particular candidate or policy? Or one that wages an undeclared war on rival ideas and assumptions through a blizzard of media campaigns, lawsuits, and public school initiatives? If big money has an unfair advantage with voters when they choose their congressional representative, how much more of an unfair advantage does big money have with school children when they are taught about the evil of oil pipelines or the necessity of unions?</p>
<p>The question, then, is this. Which situation is more harmful to democracy: one in which hyperbolic and emotionally-charged political ads clamour for viewers’ attention, or one in which foundation-funded left-wing lawyers obtain the release of terrorists from Guantanamo and charity money funds Occupy Wall Street thuggery? However one answers the question, it is risible to suggest that the big money is all on the conservative side, or that the lofty moral principles are all on the other.</p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank">Click here</a>.  </strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/janice-fiamengo/the-democrats-and-big-money/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Monica Crowley at Restoration Weekend</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/frontpagemag-com/monica-crowley-at-restoration-weekend/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=monica-crowley-at-restoration-weekend</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/frontpagemag-com/monica-crowley-at-restoration-weekend/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2012 04:45:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Frontpagemag.com]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Monica Crowley]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Restoration Weekend]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=166729</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A rallying cry for happy warriors everywhere. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>Editor’s note: Below is the video and transcript of the speech given by Monica Crowley at the David Horowitz Freedom Center’s 2012 Restoration Weekend. The event took place on Nov. 15th-18th at the Breakers Hotel in Palm Beach, Florida.</em></p>
<p><iframe src="http://blip.tv/play/AYOJ1i8C.html?p=1" width="550" height="443" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://a.blip.tv/api.swf#AYOJ1i8C" style="display:none"></embed></p>
<p>Monica Crowley:  (Applause)  Thank you.  Oh, thank you so much.  With that introduction Deborah already has me in tears.  I&#8217;ve already lost my composure and I haven&#8217;t even started yet.</p>
<p>This is the second time that Deborah has introduced me.  The first time was at a very wonderful lunch, very gracious lunch, that David threw for me back in June or early July when my book first came out.  And, Deborah, thank you so much for your very kind words.  These introductions keep getting better and better every time she gives them, so I think I&#8217;m going to have to, like, put her on my payroll or something and just bring her with me everywhere I go.</p>
<p>By the way, I&#8217;m very happy that when she introduced me and she was talking about my experiences working with President Nixon that she actually put the timeframe on my employment with President Nixon when she said I worked with him during the last years of his life, from 1990 until his death in &#8217;94.  Because sometimes people don&#8217;t hear that part of it and they think I was in the Nixon White House and I have to correct them and say, &#8220;Oh, no, no.  I was a mere embryo when he was elected President.&#8221;</p>
<p>In fact, I was giving a speech one time a couple of years ago.  And I noticed a woman in the front row and she was looking at me after I&#8217;d been introduced as having worked for President Nixon.  She was looking at me and she was sort of squinting.  And at the end of my talk she came up to me and she said, &#8220;Monica, I just love you.  I&#8217;m a big fan.&#8221;  I said, &#8220;Thank you so much.&#8221;  And she said, &#8220;Listen, can I ask you a question?&#8221;  And I said, &#8220;Sure, anything.&#8221;  So she leans into my ear and she whispered, &#8220;Girl, who is your plastic surgeon?&#8221; (Laughter)  True story.  I said, &#8220;No, no.  You misunderstand.&#8221;</p>
<p>Before we get started &#8212; and we have so much to talk about, because we are fighting for the life of the country.  And that is not an overstatement or an exaggeration.  We are fighting for the life of America.  Before we get started, I want to recognize a couple of people, first and foremost, David Horowitz.  (Applause)  David Horowitz and the Freedom Center, you are true patriots.  You are on the front lines of our college campuses and every other part of America every day, tirelessly fighting for this country.  This gracious event that you host us all every year, God bless you.  Thank you so much.</p>
<p>Elizabeth Ruiz, are you in the room?  This event would not come off without Elizabeth Ruiz (applause) or E, as I call her.  She&#8217;s such a good friend and she puts this all together.  Thank you so much.</p>
<p>Frank Gaffney, my good friend.  Frank Gaffney? (Applause)  Andrew McCarthy.  (Applause) Andrew McCarthy, where are you?  Be recognized, Andy McCar-…is he still in bed?  (Laughter)  Where is he? Andrew McCarthy, there you are!</p>
<p>Caroline Glick, who does incredible work.   I know she brought her two young children with her, so she might not be in the room today.  Want to recognize them.  Oh, Caroline, yea!  (Applause) All right.  You made it!</p>
<p>Everybody in this room is an American patriot.  We are all fighting for this country.  We are now relying on a dwindling group of conservatives on Capitol Hill and I want to single out three who are in the room today.  The true American hero, Allen West. (Applause) Is he here yet?  Is Allen West here yet?  Okay, he might not be here yet, but he needs to win this race.  He&#8217;s going to be speaking later this morning.  We need him.  Okay?  We need him.</p>
<p>The dynamite Louie Gohmert, where is he?  (Applause)  And the fearless Michele Bachmann.  (Applause)  God bless you.</p>
<p>And I know these are tough times for Conservatives, especially on Capitol Hill, given the Republican establishment, given our leadership on Capitol Hill.  Everybody is running scared.  These three American patriots are fearless.  They don&#8217;t care what their own leadership thinks of them.  They certainly don&#8217;t care what the other side of the aisle thinks of them.  And they do not care what the New York Times editorial board thinks of them.  They are out there with the truth and they&#8217;re fighting for America and they&#8217;re fighting for justice and they&#8217;re fighting for us every day.  So God bless you.  (Applause)</p>
<p>All right.  Let&#8217;s get this party started.  And by &#8220;party,&#8221; I mean, not just this room, although we are a party.  And I don&#8217;t mean the Republican Party, although God knows that needs a hell of a lot of help and a hell of a lot of work.  I mean the Conservative movement.  And we&#8217;ve got to get this party started, because I don&#8217;t know about you, but I&#8217;m sick and tired of being at a wake.</p>
<p>We have had a hell of a couple of weeks here.  We have had a hurricane of epic proportions.  We have had a sex scandal involving the person I would guess would be the least likely to have been caught having sex under a desk.  We have now the real housewives of Tampa straight across our television sets.  And last Tuesday night we had a national suicide.  And that is not overstating the case.</p>
<p>The title of my book, <em>What the Bleep Just Happened?</em> &#8212; now more than ever we need to ask that question, &#8220;What the bleep just happened?&#8221;  There are many parts to this answer and I want to break it down because we need to be armed with the truth because we&#8217;re facing at least, at least, another four years of this.  So we need to be reminded of what we are up against and what we are fighting against and what we are fighting for.</p>
<p>The short answer is that what the bleep just happened is that this country was taken over by the Star Wars Cantina. (Laughter) You know what I&#8217;m talking about, right?  This country is now being run by the Star Wars Cantina.  Every far left group, every radical, every Communist, every filthy Occupy Wall Street hippie, every abortion-on-demand sicko, every anti-American revolutionary who wants to take America down a notch or two or ten, every bearded anarchist &#8212; sorry, David (laughter).  He&#8217;s no longer an anarchist, but he&#8217;s still bearded.  Every aspect of America is now controlled by the Star Wars Cantina.</p>
<p>Alien forms, and I do mean alien forms because their philosophies, these people are fundamentally anti-American.  And we cannot be afraid to say it.  They are anti-…oh, are you calling the President anti-American?  I&#8217;m calling his philosophy anti-American, because it is.  (Applause)  And they now control every aspect of America.  They control the White House.  They control the State Department.  They control the Justice Department.  They control every aspect of the Executive Branch, of course.  They control the US Senate.  They control the media, which is now completely corrupt, with a few pockets of exception.  They control academia.  They control entertainment.  They control every part of the culture.</p>
<p>So when we now say we are outnumbered, we are.  We are.  Because over many decades the conservative movement was interested in just a couple of things &#8212; fiscal responsibility, the Constitution, you know, the really important stuff.  And while we were interested in the really important stuff, in trying to project and defend the Constitution, and those great foundational principles that have always made America great, the left was burrowing in through every aspect of our society and our culture, grabbing control of the college campuses, grabbing control of entertainment.</p>
<p>And that&#8217;s how you really weave their way in.  This is what the Communists did from the very beginning.  1950s Communist infiltration &#8212; what do you &#8212; everybody was focused on Alger Hiss.  Right, very important.  What they were doing under the radar was even more important, burrowing in to every aspect of our culture to bring us down from within.</p>
<p>And now what we have is that these people are no longer in the shadows.  These people are front &#8212; right in front of us.  They are leading us.  They are the President of the United States.  They are the Secretary of State.  They are running every major media organization, again, with a couple of exceptions.</p>
<p>And what are they doing with all of this power?  They are fundamentally transforming the nation.  Not my words, Barack Obama&#8217;s words &#8212; &#8220;the fundamental transformation of the nation.&#8221;  What Obama did that was so brilliant four years ago was when he started talking about fundamental transformation &#8212; and he used a couple of other phrases, too, all meaning the same thing.  He&#8217;d talk about remaking America.  He talked about achieving a, quote, more perfect union.</p>
<p>What he did was throw those phrases out and then stand back and allow the American people to supply their own meanings to what we thought he meant by that.  And so the American people, who don&#8217;t pay close enough attention to the reality, supplied their own meanings, thought, &#8220;Oh, we&#8217;ll finally get rid of George W. Bush,&#8221; or, &#8220;The economy is falling apart, so we&#8217;ll get somebody new who&#8217;s going to fix it.&#8221; Or the historical moment of the first black president.  People supplied their own meaning to fundamental transformation.</p>
<p>What we have to recognize is don&#8217;t pay attention to what you think he meant.  Pay attention to what he meant by fundamental transformation.  And now we have four years of evidence as to what he meant by that fundamental transformation.  And it is wholly anti-American.</p>
<p>For decades, the far left progressives have been at this &#8212; Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, straight up through 2008.  And they have made enormous progress in establishing huge redistributive pillars in this country &#8212; Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid.  But it wasn&#8217;t until 1968, and I write about this in my book, where the far left extremists took over the Democratic Party.  It&#8217;s a very important distinction that everybody in this room needs to be aware of so we can spread it far and wide. What you see with Barack Obama and Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and so many others &#8212; this is not your father&#8217;s or grandfather&#8217;s Democratic Party.</p>
<p>Barack Obama is not Harry Truman, who dropped the A-bomb on Japan to stop World War II.  Barack Obama is not John F. Kennedy, who lowered marginal tax rates to get economic growth and job creation.  Barack Obama and the far left, they are a completely different ball of wax.  Fundamentally anti-American to fundamentally transform America away from what has always made America great.  That&#8217;s the point.</p>
<p>And let&#8217;s not lose sight of that.  You know what&#8217;s driving me crazy?  I&#8217;ll go on TV &#8212; the Happy Warrior theme, and that&#8217;s my brand and that&#8217;s the brand that I&#8217;m trying to get out to the Conservatives, to be a Happy Warrior and it&#8217;s so necessary, now more than ever.  But on election night and the day after I was not a Happy Warrior.  I was a very unhappy warrior.</p>
<p>In fact, Tuesday night, when the election results started coming in, I thought, &#8220;None of this makes any sense.&#8221;  And I&#8217;m sure you had this &#8212; I&#8217;m sure you&#8217;re still experiencing this because it&#8217;s completely surreal.  But not a single election result that came in made any sense whatsoever.  From the reelection of Barack Obama, which was really weird, I mean, weird for all of us, but think about just on another level.  At Fox News, and I was there until about 6:00 that night, they were prepared for 4:00 or 5:00 in the morning.  They were getting prepared for days of recounts and legal challenges and so close and how are we going to do &#8212; 11:15, 11:30?  Okay, well the presidency, okay, we can call that now.  Barack Obama has been reelected.  Nothing to see here.  Move along.</p>
<p>What?  What the bleep just happened?  So from the reelection of Barack Obama all the way down to what Allen West is facing now here in Florida to Alan Grayson, who is the biggest far left kook you can ever imagine, and mentally unstable, by the way, getting his seat back, to not winning North Carolina, not winning the state of Florida.  To California &#8212; California voters voting to raise taxes on themselves and voting to water down their three strikes and you&#8217;re out law.  None of it made any sense.</p>
<p>And what I thought on Tuesday night before I went to bed, crying for my country, was that there was something bigger than voting going on here.  And we have to go about this &#8212; I mean, we will talk about what we need to do on the ground.  And we will talk about the grass roots and how we are now going to really struggle to get our country back.  Because, you know what?  The battle just got a heck of a lot tougher and that hill just got a heck of lot steeper.  That doesn&#8217;t mean we don&#8217;t fight.  We do.  But the battle in front of us now just got a lot worse, and a lot tougher.</p>
<p>But we now need to fight it on a whole series of levels, not just grass roots, not just politically in the Congress, but on a spiritual level, because, &#8220;There&#8217;s something bigger than Phil,&#8221; going on here, to quote Mel Brooks.  There&#8217;s something bigger than Phil happening here in the country.  And we all have to be attuned to it.</p>
<p>1968, the Democratic Party gets hijacked by the far left.  They always had the elements in it and, again, they had Teddy Roosevelt, they had Woodrow Wilson leading the charge.  So they did have power in the past.  But in 1968 they take full control of one of the two major political parties in America.  And after 1968 they start nominating far left extremists after far left extremists for the presidency.</p>
<p>So we get George McGovern.  We get Walter Mondale.  We get Michael Dukakis.  We get Al Gore.  We get John Kerry.  All kooks.  And none of them could get elected president because America has always been a center-right country.  Now, I&#8217;m exempting Jimmy Carter from this because Watergate was an aberration and that was a separate situation.  But from 1968 the only time the Democratic Party did not nominate a kook, they won the presidency not once, but twice, and that was Bill Clinton.</p>
<p>Now, Clinton was kooky in other ways. (Laughter)  And his wife is definitely a far left kook.  But Bill Clinton was a pragmatist.  Bill Clinton wanted to survive.  And Bill Clinton wanted to thrive, not just for himself, although that&#8217;s primarily what drives Bill Clinton.  He&#8217;s a classic narcissist. So of course he wanted to thrive and succeed.  But he also wanted America to thrive and succeed, which is why he worked with a Republican Congress.  He had to, but he did it, which is why he cut the capital gains tax rate, to get economic growth and job creation going.  Which is why, when the Republicans came calling he agreed to cut spending and he went down that road.  Okay?  Bill Clinton is a classic old school Southern pragmatic Democrat.</p>
<p>Barack Obama is a far-left extremist, of the kind that took over his party in 1968.  And from &#8217;68 on, again, none of these far-left extremists could get elected.  It wasn&#8217;t until they found their perfect marriage of man and mission in Barack Obama that they were able to grab the brass ring of the presidency, huge majorities in the Congress, and do what they had been dying to do for decades, which is complete that fundamental transformation of the nation.</p>
<p>Remember, they have been putting up these redistributive pillars throughout history &#8212; Social Security, Medicare, and so on.  The one thing that was missing?  Healthcare, in a broad way that would include every American.  You look at the history of socialist nations, one of the very first things the socialists do, as soon as they seize power is seize control of the healthcare system.  Why?  Because if the government controls your healthcare, the government controls you.  The government is in your eyeball, and your ear canal, and places where the sun don&#8217;t shine.  (Laughter)  The government controls you.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s why he spent the first year and a half doing this.  The American people were screaming for jobs and economic growth when he came in in January of 2009.  What does he do?  Classic leftist move; it&#8217;s all illusion.  It&#8217;s all Alinsky packets.  It&#8217;s all to keep people distracted.</p>
<p>So he sends Nancy Pelosi off to run wild in the Congress to come up with some stimulus bill that stimulated nothing but Democratic constituencies.  And then he signs it.  He didn&#8217;t even care what&#8217;s in it.  He signs it.  My work here on the economy is done.  And he turns immediately to healthcare, again, to control you, the crown jewel of the socialist state, healthcare.  That&#8217;s why they did it.  Not a big mystery.  None of this is a mystery when it comes to Obama and the far left, none of it.</p>
<p>And now we are in a situation where we have a much tougher battle ahead of us.  I came across this quote from Ronald Reagan.  You know, the choice that we had last Tuesday night was the choice between being enslaved by government or being the country that the founders envisioned, free.  And we chose badly &#8212; well, not us, but the moronic other half of the country chose badly.  And now we are all going to be stuck with this.</p>
<p>Ronald Reagan once said, quote, &#8220;Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn&#8217;t pass it to our children in the bloodstream.  It must be fought for, protected, and handed on to them for them to do the same.  Or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children&#8217;s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.&#8221;</p>
<p>Has that day arrived?  Are we here now?  Are we now looking in the rearview mirror at what once made America free and great?  I am a firm believer in dealing in reality.  It&#8217;s all nice to say, &#8220;Okay, you know, we&#8217;re still a central-right country.&#8221;  I&#8217;m not so sure we are.  I am not entirely convinced that we are.</p>
<p>The progressives have worked on this grand project for decades, as I said.  Barack Obama and the far left Alinsky-ites and Chicago thugs he brought in with him have moved us to that tipping point that they so &#8212; that they have strived for for so many decades.  What I mean by tipping point is, more people dependent on government than not.  Altering the balance between the private sector and the government sector.  It used to be in the America the balance was like this &#8212; private, government or public sector.  Now it&#8217;s like this.</p>
<p>Barack Obama and the far left, when they came in in 2009, they realized they had a short opportunity to accelerate this country to the tipping point.  And they weren&#8217;t about to blow it and they wasted no time.  First thing Obama does, he comes in and they realized that in order to take down the American free market system they have to take down the four key pillars of the US economy.  So they went after the industrial base with the cars.  They went after the financial sector with the banks.  They went after the healthcare sector with Obamacare.  And they went after the energy sector.</p>
<p>If you want to take down American capitalism, you take down those four pillars holding up American capitalism, you have completed the destruction of American capitalism.  And if you succeed in destroying American capitalism or so weakening it that it can&#8217;t function, then you destroy global capitalism because we&#8217;re it.  We&#8217;re it.  And that is the point.</p>
<p>David has been working on this, on these themes for years.  Glenn Beck has done such great work in educating the American public about how this is all interrelated.  Occupy Wall Street didn&#8217;t just spring from the earth organically, out of thin air.  This was all part of the global socialist movement.  You see it happening here, Western Europe, Israel.  It&#8217;s happening everywhere.  It&#8217;s all part of this grand project.</p>
<p>And, again, if you take down American capitalism or so gravely weaken it, you take down global capitalism.  And, again, that&#8217;s the objective.</p>
<p>So Obama goes in.  He attacks the four main pillars of the US economy.  And no opposition, except from the Tea Party, thank God.  The American media is so corrupt nobody raises an eyebrow that all of this is happening.  If you had said to a person on the street five years ago, six years ago, ten years ago, the United States will have socialized medicine, they would have laughed in your face.  And yet here we are.</p>
<p>In my book, every page has some piece of leftist madness, progressive insanity, anti-American &#8212; an anti-American assault on this country.  Because every day that Obama has been President he has inflicted one or many of those on us.  And yet, no resistance except from heroes and heroines like Louie Gohmert and Allen West and Michele Bachmann.  The media just giggles like they did during that press conference this week.  &#8220;Oh, Mr. President, you&#8217;re so…&#8221;  The question is, &#8220;Are you awesome or super awesome?&#8221;  (Laughter) &#8220;Well, Candy, let me answer that as objectively as I can.  I really think I&#8217;m super awesome.&#8221; (Laughter) No resistance.</p>
<p>Take one more step back.  There are two big things happening here.  Far left comes in and, yes, the specific things they do are attack the four main pillars of the US economy.  But remember what the ultimate objective is.  You grow government as fast and as widely as possible.  And the objective of that is to make as many people dependent on government as possible.</p>
<p>And between those two things you have an endless feedback loop, because if you&#8217;re growing government while perpetuating a crappy economy, by the way &#8212; I would just point something out.  Us normal Americans look at this economic situation and see a total disaster, a catastrophe &#8212; high unemployment, anemic economic growth, unprecedented spending, record breaking deficits and debt, socialized medicine that&#8217;s going to break the bank, record numbers of people in poverty, 50 million as of this week, 48  million people on food stamps, another record.  We normal Americans look at this and see a disaster.  Obama and the far left look at this and see a wild success, a wild success.</p>
<p>Think about it this way:  Any normal President would be looking at 8%, 10% when Obama had it at 10.2 in October of &#8217;09.  Any normal President would look at that unemployment rate and be flipping his lid.  Obama never broke a sweat.  He&#8217;s still not breaking a sweat.  The unemployment rate going back up.  And we all know how BLS fudges those numbers.  Now, by the way, they can tell us the truth, which is now why the number&#8217;s over 400,000 new claims each week.</p>
<p>Obama never breaks a sweat.  Why?  Because this is all by design.  He needs to perpetuate the crappy economy.  He needs people out of work.  He needs the chaos to sow the dependency.  You get an endless feedback loop.  The more people dependent on government the more justification you have for growing government and giving government more and more power and control over every American&#8217;s life.  And, remember, the ultimate objective of both of those things is to create a permanent Democrat voting majority.</p>
<p>Have we gotten there yet?  Well, Tuesday night looked like it.  Tuesday night looked like it.  Like I said, I am a firm believer in dealing with reality here. And in reality we have to confront the fact that Obama came close, if not has achieved, getting us to that tipping point.  And once we&#8217;re there, the country is gone, gone.</p>
<p>The dependency part is just part of this equation.  The far left &#8212; and all you have to do now is look at what&#8217;s unfolding in this Benghazi investigation.  The far left is not just interested in redistributing wealth here at home, although that&#8217;s their main mission.  If they were just limited to doing that, it would be horrifying and tough enough to throw into reverse.  But that&#8217;s not what they&#8217;re limited to.  Barack Obama and the far left seek to redistribute everything that has made America great, everything.</p>
<p>So, yes, our wealth here at home, of course.  But our economic power, so weakening us that we are no longer globally competitive.  In fact, in the four years that Barack Obama has been President, the United States of America has gone from being number 1 in global competitiveness to number 7 &#8212; again, all by design.  You wonder why he&#8217;s not flipping out about this?  This is the grand project, our economic power, our military power.</p>
<p>Frank Gaffney can speak to this, about the gutting of the defense budget something like $2 trillion over 10 year &#8212; which was probably a low ball.  I mean, you know that Barack Obama wants to rip apart the Defense budget.  Defense is the only thing, by the way, he&#8217;s willing to cut.</p>
<p>And what the Republicans need to be arguing, which, it&#8217;s such a common sense thing which every American can get, is all of these other issues &#8212; birth control, war on women, abortion &#8212; all of it, none of it matters if we are all dead.  Defense is number one.  And that&#8217;s the only thing he&#8217;s been willing to cut.  (Applause)</p>
<p>Our military power, our economic power, our wealth here at home, our cultural appeal, elevating everybody else in the world so that they&#8217;re equal with the United States.  Oh, hell, no.  No.  I like being number one.  We&#8217;re all proud of being number one and we should all be fighting to stay number one.  (Applause)  There is no virtue, there is no virtue in saying, &#8220;Oh, we&#8217;re Americans and everybody is the same and we&#8217;re all on this great spaceship Earth together and we&#8217;re all equal.&#8221;  No, we are not equal.  Generations before us fought and died for this flag and for the right for me to stand here and speak my mind and the right of all of you to have your own opinions.  And we&#8217;re just going to give that up and say, &#8220;Oh, yes, well Zimbabwe is equal to us&#8221;?  Oh, hell, no.  Hell, no.</p>
<p>Because the ultimate thing that they are trying to redistribute &#8212; when I talk about wealth and &#8212; oh, by the way our borders, they&#8217;re trying to redistribute our borders.  Eleven million new poor voters for them to get us not just across the tipping point but so far past it that you&#8217;ll never get a Republican President again.  You&#8217;ll never get a Ronald Reagan, or you&#8217;ll never even get a George W. Bush.  Forget it, it&#8217;s over.</p>
<p>And the Republicans, the dummies in Congress, present company excluded, of course, &#8220;Oh, we need to &#8212; &#8221;  Let me tell you something.  I heard Ann talking last night about illegal immigration.  When you go back and look at the history of this &#8212; and Rush Limbaugh&#8217;s been talking about this too, thank God.  1986, Ronald Reagan, huge amnesty, amnesty for millions of, particularly, Latinos who had come into the country illegally.  You know what kind of support the Republican Party got out of that?  Zero.  In fact, it went down.</p>
<p>This is not a racial divide.  This is not about appealing or even pandering to Latino voters by doing amnesty or open borders or whatever the heck is being bandied about now to try to get Latinos to pay attention.  This is a dependency problem.  This is a government dependency problem.  It doesn&#8217;t matter what race.  And don&#8217;t think for one second that Barack Obama and the far left don&#8217;t know that.  We have to tackle the roots of government dependency.</p>
<p>The other day, when people jumped all over Mitt Romney in that conference call for &#8212; when he was talking about his loss and, yes, of course he made mistakes.  Every presidential campaign makes mistakes.  Barack Obama made mistakes aplenty.  Remember, &#8220;Vote for me for revenge.&#8221;  Mitt Romney is not the problem here.  The problem is government dependency and getting us to that tipping point, which they have &#8212; looks like they&#8217;ve succeeded in doing.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s some wiggle room for us here &#8212; and I want to get to this in a second &#8212; because it was so very close.  So we still have a little bit of breathing room, but not much.  Not much.</p>
<p>When Mitt Romney said, &#8220;Well, the other side essentially won because of all of the gifts&#8221; &#8212; he used the word &#8220;gifts&#8221; &#8212; all the gifts that Barack Obama and the far left are giving to minorities, to minorities, to black voters and Hispanic voters and women, he was absolutely right.</p>
<p>Now, he got criticized because he said it out loud.  But you know, what, guys?  We have to deal in reality.  I&#8217;m sick and tired of the political correctness and, oh, he shouldn&#8217;t have used the word &#8220;gifts&#8221; and he shouldn&#8217;t have said &#8220;47%.&#8221;  (Applause) Deal in reality.  The other side is Santa Claus.  The other side is giving away all of these gifts.  It&#8217;s called government dependency.  It&#8217;s called social welfare programs.  It&#8217;s all about bringing them in, and once you lock in that dependency you lock them in for life.  And once you lock them in for life on dependency you lock in their vote.  And then you get that majority.  Period.  End of story.</p>
<p>P.S., Mitt Romney was right and Bobby Jindal, who I love and respect so much &#8212; but for him to say, &#8220;No, we can&#8217;t be dividing people.  You know, the Conservative movement, we can&#8217;t be dividing people.&#8221;  It&#8217;s not us doing the dividing.  The other side has been slicing and dicing the American electorate for decades.  Woman &#8212; it&#8217;s all identity politics to them &#8212; women, Latinos, black voters.  And they have succeeded.  They&#8217;ve had a lot of success doing it.  It&#8217;s not us doing the dividing.  But since they have succeeded in slicing and dicing the electorate, now we have to figure out a way to manage that, because now we are navigating a brand new America, with a brand new electorate because the left has had so much success.  And we have to figure out a way to do it.</p>
<p>We have nothing to lose here.  Michele Bachmann was right last night.  We have nothing to lose.  Our backs are against the wall here.  And the founding fathers and every generation that has come before us, they&#8217;re counting on us.  I don&#8217;t know about you; maybe this makes me weird, but I hear the voices of the founders.  Maybe I&#8217;m hearing things.  Maybe I&#8217;m going insane before my time, I don&#8217;t know.  But I hear them.  I hear Thomas Jefferson, I hear George Washington.  I hear them.  I hear the voices of the Greatest Generation, who I&#8217;ve loved and respect so much, who fought for this country in World War II, every military veteran.  I hear them in my head, saying, &#8220;Fight for this.  Fight for it, as tough as it&#8217;s going to be.&#8221;</p>
<p>You&#8217;ve got the grand projects of government dependency and the tipping point on the one hand.  You&#8217;ve got the redistributing everything that has always made America great going on on the other hand.  And so the question is &#8212; what do we do?  And I think we go for broke.  I think we go for broke, because we have nothing to lose.</p>
<p>President Nixon, one time when we were talking about the Vietnam War and his prosecution of it, he told a story one time.  He was deliberating about doing the Christmas Day bombing of Cambodia because the Soviets, and to some extent the Chinese, but mostly the Soviets, they were bringing supply lines into the Communists in North Korea.  And President Nixon &#8212; I&#8217;m sorry &#8212; North Vietnam.  So President Nixon has to make a decision about whether or not to bomb those supply lines, which meant bringing the war into a third country, actually Cambodia and Laos.  And so he has to make a decision.  And you know what he told me?  He said, &#8220;Took about five minutes to make the decision to bomb.&#8221;  And I said, &#8220;Well, why was that, Mr. President?&#8221;  And he said, &#8220;Well,&#8221; he said, &#8220;I realized that I was going to be criticized if I sent one plane or if I sent 1,000 planes.  They were going to crucify me no matter what.  So I went with the 1,000 planes.&#8221;</p>
<p>And that&#8217;s what we need to do.  We need to send the 1,000 planes, because the left, the media, they&#8217;re going to crucify us no matter what.  They already have.  Look at what they have done to the Tea Party &#8212; fringe, nutcases.  Now, I can see why the far left kooks would think that the Constitution and limited government, fiscal responsibility, were radical, because it&#8217;s certainly radical to them.  But these are the very foundational principles of this country.  And we need to figure out new ways of how to do it, how to fight for them.  The old ways don&#8217;t work anymore.</p>
<p>I can&#8217;t say I have any easy, quick ideas to give you, because I don&#8217;t.  And I think what we need to do, first and foremost, is take a deep breath.  I think we are all exhausted from this fight, four long, exhausting years of economic destruction and presidential lies and national collapse.  And now we&#8217;re facing four more years of those exact same things.  I think we&#8217;re all tired, so I would recommend first and foremost, take a deep breath, get a little rest.  Because the battles ahead are going to be very intense and a lot tougher than what we just went through over the last four years.</p>
<p>The second thing I would recommend is spending some time thinking.  Thinking, not just running blindly into what we&#8217;ve always done in the past, and are we going to grasp at some candidate or we&#8217;ve got to grasp at something.  Let&#8217;s spend some time thinking.</p>
<p>When President Nixon first came into office, January, 1969, he summoned his chief of staff on day one, Bob Haldeman, and he said, &#8220;Bob, have a seat.  I&#8217;ve got something really important to tell you.&#8221;  And Haldeman said, &#8220;Okay, Mr. President, what?  What is it?&#8221;  And he said, &#8220;I need you to build in one hour into my schedule every day where I have no meetings, no phone calls, nothing.  One hour every afternoon.&#8221;  So Haldeman said, &#8220;Uh, Mr. President, you do realize you&#8217;re the new President, right?  I mean, you do realize you&#8217;re President of the United States and you have stuff to do?&#8221;  And Nixon said, &#8220;Yeah, I know that, Bob.  I know.  I&#8217;m still asking for the hour every day.&#8221;  And so Haldeman said, &#8220;Well, what are you, Churchill now?  You need a nap every day?&#8221;  And Nixon said, &#8220;No, Bob, I don&#8217;t need the hour to sleep.  I need the hour to think.&#8221;</p>
<p>So many of our politicians don&#8217;t spend any time thinking, because they&#8217;re constantly raising money.  They&#8217;re constantly in front of the cameras.  They&#8217;re constantly racing to constituents and taking care of business.  What we need in this country are strategic thinkers in the Conservative movement.  And this doesn&#8217;t just mean folks on Capitol Hill.  This means us.  We need time to think.</p>
<p>Second thing &#8212; or third thing, I should say, is that rather than look to the Republican establishment which is, for all intents and purposes, worthless, pointless, useless, meaningless. (Applause) Forget for a second about the Republican Party.  Focus on the Tea Party.  Focus on the Conservative movement. And focus on groups, groups like the Freedom Center and David Horowitz.  Support them however you can.  Groups like Americans for Prosperity, FreedomWorks, who are all doing great, on-the-ground grassroots.</p>
<p>People talk about how &#8212; what a failure Romney&#8217;s get-out-the-vote operation was, and it was.  So we have a lot of work to do.  But remember, the battle is not just there.  It&#8217;s on all of these other levels &#8212; philosophical, spiritual, the whole thing.  So we need to be looking more toward groups like the Freedom Center.</p>
<p>For example, I&#8217;ll give you another example.  There&#8217;s a group called Ending Spending.  And you probably haven&#8217;t heard of them.  They don&#8217;t &#8212; they sort of fly below the radar.  These are groups that are centered and focused around a single issue.  Okay?  Whether it&#8217;s freedom or ending spending.  Ending Spending went into Nebraska.  They focused on Deb Fischer, a real Tea Party Conservative.  And they got her elected, around one issue, reining in government spending.  These are the kinds of new things that we can be looking at here as we think about how we&#8217;re going to go forward.</p>
<p>I would just leave you with this one final thought.  The conventional wisdom is that the founding fathers who I always hear in my head, that they gave us three branches of government.  And it is true, they gave us the Executive and the Legislative and the Judiciary.  But the founders also anticipated a moment during which all three branches of government would be in the crapper.  And here we are.</p>
<p>The Executive is held by a radical redistributionist, bent on America&#8217;s destruction.  Congress, present company excluded, of course, Congress cannot stop itself from spending us into oblivion and are raising our taxes in order to do it.  And the Judiciary now is full of leftwing judges who are intent on legislating leftwing madness from the bench.  All three branches are in the crapper.</p>
<p>So the founders anticipated this moment.  They did.  And that&#8217;s why they gave us a stealth fourth branch of government &#8212; us. (Applause) They gave America us, the American people, the ultimate lever of power.</p>
<p>Now has this country become so corrupted after the tipping point that we can&#8217;t get it back?  No, I don&#8217;t believe that.  I&#8217;m back to being a Happy Warrior. I&#8217;ve shed enough tears after Tuesday night and I&#8217;m ready to rock and roll.  I&#8217;m ready to take this country back and I think we can still do it.</p>
<p>We don&#8217;t have much time, though, because remember, Obama won by 50.6%, so enough past the tipping point to get him elected, but still not enough to make it permanent.  We have a window of opportunity here to bring America back, but we have to move fast.  We&#8217;ve got to move fast.  And the thing we need to recognize &#8212; we talk about those three branches of government.  America is such a young country, 200-some-odd years old.  We&#8217;re young.  We&#8217;re babies, still.  And therefore, the American mind in so many ways is still very young and naïve and idealistic.</p>
<p>And it&#8217;s okay to be idealistic, that&#8217;s a great strength. But when it lapses into naïveté, we&#8217;ve got to check ourselves here.  We tend to think that there will always be something to stop some craziness, right?  &#8220;Oh, the President&#8217;s not going to let that happen.&#8221;  Or, &#8220;Congress will be there.  Thank God we&#8217;ve got a Republican Congress.&#8221;  And thank God we do, but &#8212; &#8220;Oh, they&#8217;ll stop some craziness.&#8221;  Or, &#8220;Well, we have the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court would never let anything as unconstitutional as socialized medicine go through.&#8221;  Or, &#8220;The courts will stop Sharia law because that&#8217;s a bridge too far in America.&#8221;</p>
<p>Guess what, guys?  None of that holds true.  We now know we cannot count on the Presidency, we cannot count on the Congress, and we cannot count on the Judiciary to stop any of this.  It&#8217;s up to us to do it.  It&#8217;s up to the founders&#8217; fourth branch to do it. And as we navigate this new America in order to try to bring our country back, it is going to be exhausting and it is going to be a long haul.</p>
<p>But think about the generations that came before us that faced huge challenges &#8212; the founding fathers, that revolutionary first generation of Americans, through the Greatest Generation.  And now it&#8217;s our turn.  It&#8217;s our turn to be, in a different way, America&#8217;s Greatest Generation.  And I have faith we can do it because we&#8217;re Americans.  We&#8217;re Americans, baby.  God bless you.  God bless you so much.  Thank you.  (Applause)</p>
<p>Sure.  Yes.  I&#8217;m happy to take some questions.</p>
<p>Unidentified Audience Member:  Right after the election, I read a quote from Valerie Jarrett.</p>
<p>Monica Crowley:  Yes.</p>
<p>Unidentified Audience Member:  And she made two very alarming points.  One of them was she said, &#8220;Now that we&#8217;ve won this election we don&#8217;t have to worry about Congress.&#8221;</p>
<p>Monica Crowley:  Right.</p>
<p>Unidentified Audience Member:  The other one was, &#8220;Now we&#8217;re going to go get our enemies.&#8221;  I&#8217;ve heard a lot of people express more than alarm that we have to go forward to the next election, but alarm as to what&#8217;s going to happen between now and the next election, and even whether there will be a next election.  What do you make of all this?</p>
<p>Monica Crowley:  Okay.  So the question was about Valerie Jarrett, who has no credentials or no portfolio whatsoever except being a friend of Barack Obama and she&#8217;s running the country.  It&#8217;s beyond belief.  She is &#8212; Valerie Jarrett is Iranian born and there was a rumor that she was actually leading secret talks with Iran.  How scary is that?  Okay?  Don&#8217;t know whether or not that&#8217;s true, but it&#8217;s terrifying.</p>
<p>Two things about what you quoted from Valerie Jarrett.  One is, when she said, &#8220;We don&#8217;t need to worry about Congress,&#8221; this has always been the case.  It was nice when Obama had huge majorities his first year.  That was great, easy for him, a snap.  He doesn&#8217;t need Congress and he has never needed Congress.</p>
<p>Barack Obama set up a network of czars through whom he really exercises power.  And he goes through the czars.  He goes through the bureaucracies and he does it by executive order.  Everything &#8212; there&#8217;s some fiscal issues he needs Congress on, put on a good show.  But he can get around it anytime he wants.  Look at the EPA regulations.  EPA has gone wild, crushing American businesses.</p>
<p>Now you&#8217;ve got Secretary Sebelius about to implement Obamacare, going hog wild through her department.  He doesn&#8217;t need the Congress; he never has.  This man is operating as a dictator.  And still no real resistance, no questioning from the press.  So he&#8217;s never needed Congress; that&#8217;s number one.</p>
<p>Number two, when you use the word &#8220;enemies,&#8221; this is how they view not just the Republicans and the Tea Party and Conservatives.  This is how they view every American who doesn&#8217;t agree with him.  You&#8217;re an enemy.  You&#8217;re an enemy of the state.  You&#8217;re an enemy of him and therefore you must be destroyed.  Because, remember, the ultimate enemy for them is the American system.  The ultimate enemy to be defeated is American capitalism, the free market, and freedom.</p>
<p>So we can expect four more years of this and the amount of destruction that they can inflict on us in four more years is going to be atrocious.  I didn&#8217;t think it could get any worse.  When I wrote my book, I literally &#8212; I wrote the whole book in about four and a half months.  And because I had to write it so fast I was doing sort of day-by-day research, day by day of the Obama presidency, right?  And I would go, &#8220;Oh, my God, I forgot about this.  This is totally crazy.  I have to type out this out for the book.&#8221;  And I&#8217;d write it.</p>
<p>Next day, &#8220;Oh, my God, forgot about this.  This is totally crazy.  I have to write this up.&#8221;  I ended up with a 650 page manuscript because Obama&#8217;s insanity was so prolific.  And I ended up handing it to my editor at Harper Collins whose eyes got huge when I put it on his desk.  And he&#8217;s, like, &#8220;Okay, so I guess I have my weekend reading to do.&#8221;  And we ended up editing it.  But I made sure when I was editing the book that I didn&#8217;t take out any of the substantive madness, but I took out extraneous paragraphs that I had written.  But I wanted all the real policy madness to be in there, so that the American people knew.</p>
<p>And, look, we&#8217;re going to have four more years of this.  Now, when people talk about, people talk about, &#8220;Well, we needed the debacle of 1964 and Barry Goldwater to come back with a Reagan in 1980.&#8221;  Or people will say, &#8220;Well &#8211;&#8221;  Like I heard Ann say last night about the traditional pattern that six years into a presidency you get &#8212; the party out of power gets a huge rebound.</p>
<p>Look, those are historical patterns.  But what we&#8217;ve seen under Barack Obama over the last four years is none of that holds true.  It doesn&#8217;t hold true.  Why?  I think a lot of reasons, namely the changing nature of the country, which he has accelerated.  And also, he is the first black President.  They cannot allow the first black President to fail.  And so they won&#8217;t.  And so whatever he wants to do he will get away with, period.  And that&#8217;s why I am saying it is up to us.  We need to regroup.  We need to rethink our whole approach to this.</p>
<p>Look, the Tea Party had enormous success when we still had the momentum and the energy.  We need to somehow summon that again.  And that&#8217;s why I say I know we&#8217;re all exhausted, so we need a little bit of a rest, maybe just over the holidays, six more weeks of rest.  After that, get ready.</p>
<p>Because the Tea Party had enormous success in bringing pressure to bear on our elected officials on getting candidates to run who really believed in our foundational principles.  That&#8217;s what we&#8217;re going to need again.  We&#8217;re going to need an injection into the American bloodstream by the American people.  Not top down from the Republican establishment, but from the ground up, from us.</p>
<p>Oh, we&#8217;ve got to go.  Okay.  One more?  One more quick one?  Oh, I talked too long.  Thank you guys, so much.  God bless you.  Thank you.  (Applause)</p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank">Click here</a>.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/frontpagemag-com/monica-crowley-at-restoration-weekend/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>21</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Harry Reid Gone Wild</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/arnold-ahlert/harry-reid-gone-wild/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=harry-reid-gone-wild</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/arnold-ahlert/harry-reid-gone-wild/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Aug 2012 04:36:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Arnold Ahlert]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Debbie Wasserman Schultz]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[file]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[proof]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Romney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taxes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=139695</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The senator's unhinged politics at their worst.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/harry_reid_106482368.gif"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-139715" title="harry_reid_106482368" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/harry_reid_106482368.gif" alt="" width="375" height="251" /></a>The Obama administration and Democrats are desperate to turn the national conversation away from the economy. Nothing both reflects and personifies that desperation better than the scurrilous attack on Mitt Romney by Senate Majority leader Harry Reid (D-NV). Without producing a shred of evidence, Reid has made the <a href="http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/08/reid-doubles-down-on-tax-claims-130846.html?hp=l1">claim</a> that the presumptive Republican presidential candidate hasn&#8217;t paid any taxes for 10 years.</p>
<p>Reid&#8217;s ostensible source(s) for the claim have varied. On July 31st, Reid <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/31/harry-reid-romney-taxes_n_1724027.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular">told</a> the <em>Huffington Post</em> that a &#8220;Bain Capital investor&#8221; had called him to reveal the information. Yet even as he made the accusation, he hedged. &#8220;He didn&#8217;t pay taxes for 10 years! Now, do I know that that&#8217;s true? Well, I&#8217;m not certain,&#8221; said Reid. &#8220;But obviously he can&#8217;t release those tax returns. How would it look?&#8221; Reid reiterated his assertion with a bit of class warfare thrown in. &#8220;You guys have said his wealth is $250 million. Not a chance in the world. It&#8217;s a lot more than that. I mean, you do pretty well if you don&#8217;t pay taxes for 10 years when you&#8217;re making millions and millions of dollars,&#8221; he added, further noting that Romney&#8217;s deceased father &#8220;must be so embarrassed about his son.&#8221;</p>
<p>A day later, Reid&#8217;s story changed. &#8220;I am not basing this on some figment of my imagination,&#8221; Reid <a href="http://www.lvrj.com/news/reid-doubles-down-on-romney-tax-charge-164680576.html">said</a> in a telephone call with Nevada reporters. &#8220;I have had a number of people tell me that.&#8221; When Reid was asked to elaborate on his sources he declined. &#8220;No, that&#8217;s the best you&#8217;re going to get from me&#8230;I don&#8217;t think the burden should be on me,&#8221; Reid said. &#8220;The burden should be on him. He&#8217;s the one I&#8217;ve alleged has not paid any taxes. Why didn&#8217;t he release his tax returns?&#8221;</p>
<p>One could ask Harry Reid and most of Congress the same question. As reported by <em>McClatchy</em> newspapers both Democratic leaders of the Senate and the House of Representatives, namely, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) respectively, &#8220;are among hundreds of senators and representatives from both parties who refused to release their tax records.&#8221;</p>
<p>On August 2nd, Reid <a href="http://www.rollcall.com/news/harry_reid_again_accuses_mitt_romney_of_failing_to_pay_taxes-216686-1.html/%253Cbr%20/%253E">upped</a> the ante again, repeating his accusation on the floor of the Senate. “So, the word’s out that he hasn’t paid any taxes for 10 years. Let him prove that he has paid taxes, because he hasn’t,” Reid contended.</p>
<p>Note the despicable tactic to which Harry Reid has resorted. He makes an unsubstantiated allegation&#8211;one that could be made about virtually <em>anything</em>&#8211;and then claims the burden is on <em>Romney</em> to prove that the allegation is untrue. This is the stuff of banana republics and totalitarian regimes, but the Senate Majority Leader does it anyway, knowing that his media allies are more than willing to keep the story alive, and that other Democrats will rally to his side.</p>
<p>Some of the highest ranking Democrats, in fact, have indeed risen to the occasion. On Sunday, both Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Republican National Committee Chairman (RNC) Reince Priebus took to the airwaves and <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/06/nancy-pelosi-harry-reid-romney-taxes_n_1746894.html?utm_hp_ref=elections-2012">called</a> Reid a liar and a &#8220;dirty liar,&#8221; respectively. House Minority Leader Pelosi fired back: &#8220;Harry Reid made a statement that is true. Somebody told him. It is a fact,&#8221; Pelosi told the <em>Huffington Post</em> in an interview. &#8220;Whether he did or not can easily be disposed of: Mitt Romney can release his tax returns and show whether he paid taxes,&#8221; she added. What could be even more easily disposed of is Nancy Pelosi&#8217;s proof that Reid is telling the truth. But asking Pelosi that seemingly obvious question was apparently a bridge too far for the leftist <em>Huffington Post.</em></p>
<p>Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chairwoman Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, (D-FL) who appeared on “This Week”  also believes the burden is on Romney to disprove Reid&#8217;s allegations. “I do know that Mitt Romney could clear this up in ten seconds by releasing the 23 years of tax returns that he gave to John McCain when he was being vetted for vice president. Or even 12 years of tax returns that his own father said were what was appropriate.  Because one year of tax returns, like he’s released, could just be for show,” she said&#8211;even as she added that she does not know who Reid’s source is either.</p>
<p>Former Counselor to the Treasury Secretary under President Obama Steven Rattner played the game as well. “I don’t think [the accusation] was appropriate,&#8221; he said. &#8220;But you still come back to the question, why won’t he release his tax returns?  If he’s paid all the taxes he says he’s paid, he says he’s paid a lot of taxes every year, why not just release them and move on?  And end this discussion.”</p>
<p>This tactic is about anything and everything <em>except</em> ending the discussion. It is about beating up Mitt Romney as a tax cheat if he doesn&#8217;t release his taxes, or more than likely beating him up as an out-of-touch elitist who makes far too much money if he does.</p>
<p>As for Reid, making venomous, unhinged statements is par for the course. He <a href="http://www.humanevents.com/2007/04/27/reids-glass-house/">called</a> Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas &#8220;an embarrassment to the Supreme Court&#8221; in 2004, referred to president George W. Bush as &#8220;a loser&#8221; during a speech at Del Sol High School in 2005, and claimed that former Republican Senate Majority leader Bill Frist had &#8220;no institutional integrity&#8221; in the same year. And on April 12, 2007, Reid revealed where his true concerns lay regarding the war in Iraq. “We’re going to pick up Senate seats as a result of this war. Senator Schumer has shown me numbers that are compelling and astounding,” he gushed at a press conference.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/arnold-ahlert/harry-reid-gone-wild/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>65</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Real &#8216;War on Women&#8217;</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/thomas-sowell/the-real-war-on-women/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-real-war-on-women</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/thomas-sowell/the-real-war-on-women/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Jun 2012 04:06:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Thomas Sowell]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gender]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pay gap]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War on Women]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Women]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=134434</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What the "gender pay gap" canard distracts from. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/wow.gif"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-134435" title="wow" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/wow.gif" alt="" width="375" height="248" /></a>Among the people who are disappointed with President Obama, none has more reason to be disappointed than those who thought he was going to be &#8220;a uniter, rather than a divider&#8221; and that he would &#8220;bring us all together.&#8221;</p>
<p>It was a noble hope, but one with no factual foundation. Barack Obama had been a divider all his adult life, especially as a community organizer, and he had repeatedly sought out and allied himself with other dividers, the most blatant of whom was the man whose church he attend for 20 years, Jeremiah Wright.</p>
<p>Now, with his presidency on the line and the polls looking dicey, President Obama&#8217;s re-election campaign has become more openly divisive than ever.</p>
<p>He has embraced the strident &#8220;Occupy Wall Street&#8221; movement, with its ridiculous claim of representing the 99 percent against the 1 percent. Obama&#8217;s Department of Justice has been spreading the hysteria that states requiring photo identification for voting are trying to keep minorities from voting, and using the prevention of voter fraud as a pretext.</p>
<p>But anyone who doubts the existence of voter fraud should read John Fund&#8217;s book &#8220;Stealing Elections&#8221; or J. Christian Adams&#8217;s book, &#8220;Injustice,&#8221; which deals specifically with the Obama Justice Department&#8217;s overlooking voter fraud when those involved are black Democrats.</p>
<p>Not content with dividing classes and races, the Obama campaign is now seeking to divide the sexes by declaring that women are being paid less than men, as part of a &#8220;war on women&#8221; conducted by villains, from whom Obama and company will protect the women — and, not incidentally, expect to receive their votes this November.</p>
<p>The old — and repeatedly discredited — game of citing women&#8217;s incomes as some percentage of men&#8217;s incomes is being played once again, as part of the &#8220;war on women&#8221; theme.</p>
<p>Since women average fewer hours of work per year, and fewer years of consecutive full-time employment than men, among other differences, comparisons of male and female annual earnings are comparisons of apples and oranges, as various female economists have pointed out.</p>
<p>Read Diana Furchtgott-Roth of the Hudson Institute or Professor Claudia Goldin of Harvard, for example.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/thomas-sowell/the-real-war-on-women/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Final Voyage of the USS Enterprise</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/jamie-glazov/the-final-voyage-of-the-uss-enterprise/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-final-voyage-of-the-uss-enterprise</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/jamie-glazov/the-final-voyage-of-the-uss-enterprise/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Mar 2012 04:21:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jamie Glazov]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Murtha]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[naming ships]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USS Enterprise]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USS Gabrielle Giffords]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=125956</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Mark Krikorian crystallizes the problem of naming ships after living people.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/USS_Enterprise.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-125960" title="USS_Enterprise" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/USS_Enterprise.jpg" alt="" width="300" height="214" /></a></p>
<p>Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Mark Krikorian, the Executive Director of the Center for Immigration Studies. He is the author of <em><a href="http://www.amazon.com/The-New-Case-Against-Immigration/dp/B001KVZ6RA/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1331678553&amp;sr=1-1" target="_blank">The New Case Against Immigration: Both Legal and Illegal</a></em>.</p>
<p><strong>FP: </strong>Mark Krikorian, welcome to Frontpage Interview.</p>
<p>The USS Enterprise is leaving on its final voyage. Tell us a bit about the USS Enterprise, why this is its last voyage, and what significance there is to this development.</p>
<p><strong>Krikorian:</strong> The carrier USS Enterprise (CVN-65) is the eighth Navy ship to bear that name, the first being in the Continental Navy in 1775. It was launched in 1961, the world’s first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and was the successor to Enterprise CV-6, the famed World War II aircraft carrier, the most decorated ship in US Navy history.</p>
<p>Today’s USS Enterprise, nicknamed the “Big E”, is the second-oldest ship in the US Navy, after the wooden sailing ship USS Constitution (“Old Ironsides”). After more than half a century of service, the Big E will be decommissioned at the end of this year. The question is whether the glorious name Enterprise will continue in the Navy. There’s an effort underway to transfer the name to the next planned carrier, CVN-80. This would seem like a no-brainer, but unfortunately, it’s not. The two carriers already under construction, CVN-78 and 79, are already named the USS Gerald R. Ford and the USS John F. Kennedy. There’s a real possibility CVN-80 could be named the USS Bill Clinton, given that he’s next in line, as it were, with all the recent ex-presidents before him already having carriers named after them.</p>
<p><strong>FP: </strong>All of this<strong> </strong>raises the broader question of our practices in naming warships, and even more broadly, the naming of anything by government. Your thoughts on this phenomenon?</p>
<p><strong>Krikorian:</strong> I’m afraid the naming of ships, and a lot of other things owned by the government, has become politicized. The Navy used to name ships after battles, like the USS Yorktown, or states, like the USS Arizona, or characteristics of the nation or the ship, like the USS Intrepid or the USS Hornet. Now, getting a ship named after you is a kind of political payoff.</p>
<p>Most recently, the Navy named a new littoral combat ship the <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2012/02/14/former-military-brass-shocked-angered-over-uss-gabrielle-giffords/?print=1" target="_blank">USS Gabrielle Giffords</a>. I feel for the woman, as do we all, but what possible justification can there be for naming a warship after her? Is that really likely to inspire its crews to patriotic exertions? We also have USS John Murtha – apart from the late congressman’s many flaws, he was chairman of the House defense appropriations subcommittee, so the Navy is basically buying congressional support for new ships by naming them after the lawmakers who vote for them? Unbelievable.</p>
<p>Naming ships after living people is inappropriate even if they might actually warrant such an honor. The Navy’s newest carrier, launched in 2009, is named the USS George H. W. Bush. President Bush was a naval aviator in WWII, so naming a warship after him would have been a good idea – <em>someday</em>. Likewise with other ships – Ronald Reagan certainly warrants such an honor, but it was bestowed on him almost 10 years before his death. Same with Hyman Rickover, father of the nuclear Navy; Bob Hope, who spent so much time and energy lifting the spirits of our soldiers; and even the hapless Jimmy Carter, who was a Navy submariner.</p>
<p>Naming ships – or government buildings or anything else – after living politicians is the kind of thing you’d expect from an empire, not a republic. This is part of a trend that has sprung up elsewhere as government has grown and elected officials have come to think they own their jobs and the taxpayer money they disburse.</p>
<p>Exhibit A: Exalted Cyclops of the Ku Klux Klan Robert Byrd (D-WV), who named practically every federal installation in West Virginia after himself.</p>
<p>How far are we, really, from Saparmurat Niyazov, the late dictator of Turkmenistan, who renamed the days of the week and the months of the year after himself and his family? OK, we’re not likely to see Christmas changed to the 25<sup>th</sup> of MichelleObama, but the impulse is the same – vanity and self-glorification, the very opposite of the humility and self-restraint required of a self-governing people.</p>
<p>Living persons are barred by law from being depicted on US currency – there was an attempt to put Washington’s image on the first US dollar, and he rightly declined it as an unseemly, un-republican act. The Postal Service used to have such a rule, requiring a person to be dead 10 years before they could be honored with a stamp, the only exception being former presidents, and even they are not so honored until one year after their death. Then, the time was reduced to five years, and just last fall, in a desperate attempt to raise money by selling stamps of celebrities, the Post Office announced it would make stamps of living persons. CBS News conducted an internet poll of which living American should be honored with a stamp. The winner?</p>
<p>Lady Gaga.</p>
<p>How far we’ve sunk.</p>
<p>And as we’re naming warships after living politicians – can a USS Nancy Pelosi be far behind? – we no longer have US Navy ships bearing some of the most important names of our history. There is no USS Lexington or USS Saratoga or USS Midway or USS Khe Sanh. Nor is there any US Navy vessel named for Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison,</p>
<p>James Monroe, or Andrew Jackson. Any one of the nearly 1,000 Marines and sailors who have given their lives in Iraq and Afghanistan is a more appropriate source of a ship’s name than any politician.</p>
<p><strong>FP: </strong>Mark Krikorian, thank you for joining Frontpage Interview.</p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank">Click here</a>.  </strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/jamie-glazov/the-final-voyage-of-the-uss-enterprise/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>19</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>John Murtha dies at 77 &#8211; POLITICO.com</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/john-murtha-dies-at-77-politico-com/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=john-murtha-dies-at-77-politico-com</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/john-murtha-dies-at-77-politico-com/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2010 20:26:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jacob Laksin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[afternoon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Appropriations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appropriations committee]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bladder]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Calif.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Center]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chairman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[change of heart]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[delegation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[democratic caucus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gall bladder]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gall bladder infection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hospital]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[house]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[house appropriations subcommittee]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hoyer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[infection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iraq]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iraq War]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John Murtha]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[kady]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Martin Kady II]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Maryland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[member]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[milestone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[military policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Monday]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nancy Pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pennsylvania]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pennsylvania delegation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[perch]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pork barrel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rep. John Murtha]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Saturday]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Speaker Nancy Pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[statement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[steny hoyer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[subcommittee]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[support]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[veteran]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vietnam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vietnam veteran]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[virginia hospital]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[western Pennsylvania]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=49376</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Rep. John Murtha, a Vietnam veteran who became one of the most powerful members of the House serving four decades representing western Pennsylvania, has died at 77.Murtha was the longest serving member of the Pennsylvania delegation — a milestone he passed just this past Saturday. He had been hospitalized in recent weeks with a gall [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0210/32691.html"><img src='http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/100208_murtha_ap_289.jpg' alt='' /></a></p>
<p>Rep. John Murtha, a Vietnam veteran who became one of the most powerful members of the House serving four decades representing western Pennsylvania, has died at 77.Murtha was the longest serving member of the Pennsylvania delegation — a milestone he passed just this past Saturday. He had been hospitalized in recent weeks with a gall bladder infection and died Monday afternoon at Virginia Hospital Center at 1:18 p.m., his office said in a statement.Murtha was chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, and from that perch he controlled billions in Pentagon spending and was one of the most respected voices on military policy. Murtha was well liked on both sides of the aisle, often holding court in the back of the House chamber in what was known as “Murtha’s Corner.”Critics derided Murtha as an unreformed pork barrel spender, and Murtha was unapologetic about steering federal money to his home district, a region of Pennsylvania hard hit by the loss of coal and steel jobs through the 1970s and &amp;apos;80s.He was very close to Speaker Nancy Pelosi D-Calif., both having served on the Appropriations Committee. Pelosi supported Murtha for majority leader in 2006 over Steny Hoyer of Maryland, but Hoyer prevailed.Murtha made a national name for himself in 2005 by becoming one of the more hawkish members of the Democratic caucus to revoke his support of the Iraq war, which he had voted for in 2002. It was Murtha’s change of heart that inspired many Democrats to follow, marking a turning point in public support for the Iraq war.</p>
<p>via <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0210/32691.html">John Murtha dies at 77 &#8211; Martin Kady II &#8211; POLITICO.com</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/john-murtha-dies-at-77-politico-com/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Dave Barry&#8217;s year in review: 2009 &#8211; MiamiHerald.com</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2009/jlaksin/dave-barrys-year-in-review-2009-miamiherald-com/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=dave-barrys-year-in-review-2009-miamiherald-com</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2009/jlaksin/dave-barrys-year-in-review-2009-miamiherald-com/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Dec 2009 19:36:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jacob Laksin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[billions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dave Barry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dave Barry - MiamiHerald]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[group]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hacks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hope]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[instance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[miamiherald]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nancy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nancy Pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[outsiders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[plenty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[problem]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reins]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[result]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxpayer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxpayer dollars]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trillions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Washington]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[year]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Year In Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[year of hope]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[yesteryear]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=44214</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It was a year of Hope &#8212; at first in the sense of &#8220;I feel hopeful!&#8221; and later in the sense of &#8220;I hope this year ends soon!&#8221;It was also a year of Change, especially in Washington, where the tired old hacks of yesteryear finally yielded the reins of power to a group of fresh, [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It was a year of Hope &#8212; at first in the sense of &#8220;I feel hopeful!&#8221; and later in the sense of &#8220;I hope this year ends soon!&#8221;It was also a year of Change, especially in Washington, where the tired old hacks of yesteryear finally yielded the reins of power to a group of fresh, young, idealistic, new-idea outsiders such as Nancy Pelosi. As a result Washington, rejecting &#8220;business as usual,&#8221; finally stopped trying to solve every problem by throwing billions of taxpayer dollars at it and instead started trying to solve every problem by throwing trillions of taxpayer dollars at it.To be sure, it was a year that saw plenty of bad news. But in almost every instance, there was offsetting good news:</p>
<p>via <a href="http://www.miamiherald.com/living/columnists/dave-barry/story/1397654.html">Dave Barry&#8217;s year in review: 2009 &#8211; Dave Barry &#8211; MiamiHerald.com</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2009/jlaksin/dave-barrys-year-in-review-2009-miamiherald-com/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Death Of Moderate Democrats &#8211; by Dick Morris</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2009/dick-morris/the-death-of-moderate-democrats-by-dick-morris/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-death-of-moderate-democrats-by-dick-morris</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2009/dick-morris/the-death-of-moderate-democrats-by-dick-morris/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Dec 2009 05:00:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dick Morris]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Achilles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[achilles heel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[aid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[balanced budget]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Budget]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cabinet positions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[congresspeople]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[decision]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democratic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[democratic regime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[democratic support]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[democrats and republicans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Griffith]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Heel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kool]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[kool aid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[leadership]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[line]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[medicine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[members of congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[moderate democrat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[moderate democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[moderate members]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obamacare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Otto von Bismark]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Parker]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Parker Griffith]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[party leaders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[party unity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[payoffs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[price]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[private commitments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reign]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rep. Parker Griffith]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Senate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shadings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[support]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[use]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vindication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vote]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[voter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Washington]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=43582</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[How Parker Griffith's Party switch illustrates the Achilles' Heel of the Democratic regime.
]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-43584" title="griffith" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/griffith.gif" alt="griffith" width="450" height="350" /></p>
<p>Parker Griffith&#8217;s decision to step out of line and refuse to drink the Democratic Kool-Aid illustrates the Achilles&#8217; Heel of the Democratic regime in Washington: The radical reign of Pelosi and Reid is held up by pillars of moderate and conservative Democrats who come from districts that regularly vote Republican.</p>
<p>To survive in these red precincts, Democrats must act like Republicans, advocating a balanced budget, opposing big spending and fighting against socialized medicine. But, in Washington, Pelosi and Reid use their backing to bring a radical left leadership to Congress.</p>
<p>Once it sufficed for a moderate Democrat merely to vote &#8220;no.&#8221; But American voters are onto their tricks and realize that a Democrat — any Democrat — will vote &#8220;yes&#8221; when his party leaders need it. The unanimous Senate Democratic support for Obamacare shows that there are really only two types of congresspeople: Democrats and Republicans. All other shadings and adjectives are mere decoration.</p>
<p>The Senate dealmaking that produced party unity has gone on in full public view, a vindication of Otto von Bismark&#8217;s wisdom in proclaiming that the public should never witness either a sausage being made or a law being passed. We are watching, real time, as moderate Democrats fold for tiny, dirty little payoffs to their states and their egos.</p>
<p>A moderate Democrat is just someone who will demand a higher price for caving into what Reid and Pelosi and Obama want him to do. By focusing on his so-called moderation and hoping for his support, we just drive up his market price and elevate the bribe he will get.</p>
<p>(We only know now about the publicly funded bribes these moderate members of Congress are getting.</p>
<p>We will learn, as the years unfold, what private commitments were exchanged for their <a style="border-bottom: 0.075em solid darkgreen ! important; font-weight: normal ! important; font-size: 100% ! important; text-decoration: underline ! important; padding-bottom: 1px ! important; color: darkgreen ! important; background-color: transparent ! important; background-image: none; padding-top: 0pt; padding-right: 0pt; padding-left: 0pt;" href="http://www.creators.com/opinion/dick-morris.html#" target="_blank">health care</a> votes. Follow the judgeships, ambassadorships and Cabinet positions to see where these folks land after their voters have thrown them out.)</p>
<p>So Parker Griffith realized — as others will — that merely voting against the legislation he did not like would not be sufficient to inoculate him against voter anger. To get out of the way of the looming tsunami of 2010, he had actually to switch political parties and become a Republican.</p>
<p>In 2010, voters will realize that they can vote only for one of the two parties. Individuals don&#8217;t matter. Candidate personalities, preferences, backgrounds and even ideologies don&#8217;t matter. Once the smart voter said that he votes for the person, not the party. Now, this once virtuous citizen would be a fool. There is no such thing as a moderate Democrat or a centrist or a conservative or a Reagan Democrat. There are only Democrats who, when the chips are down, will vote as his leaders need him to vote.</p>
<p>Rep. Parker Griffith, the newly minted Republican, is typical of his class of freshmen Democrats from heavily John McCain districts. For them to survive, they need to switch parties. Otherwise, they — and the damage they have done — will be two-year footnotes to history.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2009/dick-morris/the-death-of-moderate-democrats-by-dick-morris/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Paul Howard: Obamacare&#8217;s gift to all: More regulation, more debt, more taxes &#8211; Washington Examiner</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2009/jlaksin/paul-howard-obamacares-gift-to-all-more-regulation-more-debt-more-taxes-washington-examiner/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=paul-howard-obamacares-gift-to-all-more-regulation-more-debt-more-taxes-washington-examiner</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2009/jlaksin/paul-howard-obamacares-gift-to-all-more-regulation-more-debt-more-taxes-washington-examiner/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2009 15:18:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jacob Laksin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aunt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[care]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christmas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[christmas present]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Claus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cut]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[debt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Deficit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[everyone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fruitcake]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gift]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gimmicks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Harry Reid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[health care legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[house]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[idea]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[majority]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medicare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nancy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nancy Pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nothing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obamacare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paul Howard]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[percent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Phyllis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[physician]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[physician payments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reindeer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Santa]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[santa claus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Senate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[senate bills]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trillions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Washington]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Washington Examiner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[way]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=43029</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Democrats are spending trillions on a Christmas present that a majority of Americans don&#8217;t want: health care legislation loaded with more debt, more taxes, and more regulations. Like your Aunt Phyllis&#8217; fruitcake, it&#8217;s on the way and there&#8217;s nothing you can do to stop it. &#62;&#62;It&#8217;s easier to believe in Santa Claus and flying reindeer [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Democrats are spending trillions on a Christmas present that a majority of Americans don&#8217;t want: health care legislation loaded with more debt, more taxes, and more regulations. Like your Aunt Phyllis&#8217; fruitcake, it&#8217;s on the way and there&#8217;s nothing you can do to stop it.</p>
<p>&gt;&gt;It&#8217;s easier to believe in Santa Claus and flying reindeer than the idea that the deficit will be reduced under the House and Senate bills. The bills are riddled with fiscal gimmicks &#8212; like assuming that Medicare physician payments will take a 21 percent cut in 2010, even though everyone knows they won&#8217;t. (Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid already have legislation ready to undo the cuts.)</p>
<p>via <a href="http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/Manhattan-Moment/Obamacare_s-gift-to-all_-More-regulation_-more-debt_-more-taxes-8675280-79934532.html">Paul Howard: Obamacare&#8217;s gift to all: More regulation, more debt, more taxes | Washington Examiner</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2009/jlaksin/paul-howard-obamacares-gift-to-all-more-regulation-more-debt-more-taxes-washington-examiner/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Pretense of Knowledge &#8211; by Walter Williams</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2009/walter-williams/the-pretense-of-knowledge-by-walter-williams/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-pretense-of-knowledge-by-walter-williams</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2009/walter-williams/the-pretense-of-knowledge-by-walter-williams/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 05:00:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Walter Williams]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10 years]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[American]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[burden]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[care]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[case]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Committee]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[community]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[constraint]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[czar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[deal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[earnings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[earth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[elite]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[face]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[George Bush]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Harry Reid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health Insurance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[healthy person]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[house]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Insurance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intelligent answer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[knowledge]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[landscaping]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[likeable]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[marital decisions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nancy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nancy Pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[neighbors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[person]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[problem]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[society]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trade offs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tyranny]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S.






Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[use]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Washington]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[washington bureaucrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Williams]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[year]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=40343</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Does Congress know exactly what's best for you? ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-40346" title="pelosi_reid_0705" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/pelosi_reid_0705.jpg" alt="pelosi_reid_0705" width="450" height="294" /></p>
<p>The ultimate constraint that we all face is knowledge — what we know and don&#8217;t know. The knowledge problem is pervasive and by no means trivial as hinted at by just a few examples. You&#8217;ve purchased a house. Was it the best deal you could have gotten? Was there some other house you could have purchased that 10 years later would not have needed extensive repairs or was in a community with more likeable neighbors and a better environment for your children? What about the person you married? Was there another person who would have made for a more pleasing spouse? Though these are important questions, the most intelligent answer you can give to all of them is: &#8220;I don&#8217;t know.&#8221;</p>
<p>Since you don&#8217;t know the answers, who do you think, here on Earth, is likely to know and whom would you like to make these decisions for you — Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, George Bush, a czar appointed by Obama or a committee of Washington bureaucrats? I bet that if these people were to forcibly make housing or marital decisions for us, most would deem it tyranny.</p>
<p>You say, &#8220;Williams, Congress is not making such monumental decisions that affect my life.&#8221; Try this. You are a 22-year-old healthy person. Instead of spending $3,000 or $4,000 a year for health insurance, you&#8217;d prefer investing that money in equipment to start a landscaping business. Which is the best use of that $3,000 or $4,000 a year — purchasing health insurance or starting up a landscaping business — and who should decide that question: Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, George Bush, aczar appointed by Obama or a committee of Washington bureaucrats? How can they possibly know what&#8217;s the best use of your earnings, particularly in light of the fact that they have no idea of who you are?</p>
<p>Neither you nor the U.S.</p>
<p>Congress has the complete knowledge to know exactly what&#8217;s best for you. The difference is that when individuals make their own trade-offs, say between purchasing health insurance or investing in a business, they make wiser decisions because it is they who personally bear the costs and benefits of those decisions. You say, &#8220;Hold it, Williams, we&#8217;ve got you now! What if that person gets really sick and doesn&#8217;t have health insurance. Society suffers the burden of taking care of him.&#8221; To the extent that is a problem, it is not a problem of liberty; it&#8217;s a problem of congressionally mandated socialism. Let&#8217;s look at it.</p>
<p>It is not society that bears the burden; it is some flesh and blood American worker who finds his earnings taken by Congress to finance the health needs of another person. There is absolutely no moral case, much less constitutional case, for Congress forcibly using one American to serve the purposes of another American, a practice that differs only in degree from slavery, which we all should find morally offensive.</p>
<p>Whether it is <a style="border-bottom: 0.075em solid darkgreen ! important; font-weight: normal ! important; font-size: 100% ! important; text-decoration: underline ! important; padding-bottom: 1px ! important; color: darkgreen ! important; background-color: transparent ! important; background-image: none; padding-top: 0pt; padding-right: 0pt; padding-left: 0pt;" href="http://www.creators.com/opinion/walter-williams.html#" target="_blank">health care</a>, education, employment or most other areas of our lives, I ask you: Who has the capacity to master all the complexity to make choices on behalf of others? Each of us possesses only a tiny percentage of the knowledge that would be necessary to make totally informed decisions in our own lives, much less the lives of others. There is only one reason for the forcible transference of decision-making authority over important areas of our private lives to elite decision-makers in Congress and government bureaucracies. Doing so confers control, power, wealth and revenue to society&#8217;s elite. What&#8217;s in the best interests of individual members of society, such as a person who&#8217;d rather launch a landscaping business than purchase a health insurance policy, ranks low on the elite&#8217;s list of priorities.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2009/walter-williams/the-pretense-of-knowledge-by-walter-williams/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>19</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>An Important Statement from Kahlid Sheikh Mohammed &#8211; by Tom Trento</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2009/tom-trento/an-important-statement-from-kahlid-sheikh-mohammed-by-tom-trento/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=an-important-statement-from-kahlid-sheikh-mohammed-by-tom-trento</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2009/tom-trento/an-important-statement-from-kahlid-sheikh-mohammed-by-tom-trento/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 05:03:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom Trento]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[911familiesforamerica]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ACLU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[aclu attorney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[America]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[american principles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[american taxpayer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[attorney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Attorney General Holder]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BLOOMIE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brand]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[column]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[constitutional rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copy of the us constitution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[crap]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[craziness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Daniel Pearl]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[foley square]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[food]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[green card]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ground]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ground zero]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Halal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[halal food]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Holy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[immediate approval]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[infidel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[KSM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lower manhattan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MANHATTAN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mastermind]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New York]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[noon rally]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NY Times]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[org]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[political futures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[President Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Qur]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rally]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[side]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stuff]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxpayer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Times]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[way]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Zero]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=39631</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I’m on my way back to Ground Zero … make sure I get this stuff:]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-39633" title="khalid" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/khalid2.jpg" alt="khalid" width="450" height="336" /></p>
<p>BLOOMIE, OBAMA…</p>
<p>I’m on my way back to Ground Zero … make sure I get this stuff:</p>
<p>1. Only fresh Halal food …no frozen crap.</p>
<p>2. A brand new Holy Qur’an …untouched by infidel pigs</p>
<p>3. No Jews anywhere near me</p>
<p>4. ACLU attorney’s …4 or 5 or 6! (they can be Jews)</p>
<p>5. My own column in the NY Times.</p>
<p>6. No Jews anywhere near me</p>
<p>7. All my trial expenses paid by American taxpayer dogs</p>
<p>8. My personal copy of the US Constitution …signed by Pelosi</p>
<p>9. Immediate approval for my Green Card</p>
<p>10. No Jews anywhere near me.</p>
<p><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-39635" title="trento" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/trento.jpg" alt="trento" width="500" height="317" /></p>
<p>JOIN ME AND MANY OTHERS AS WE SUPPORT THE 911 FAMILIES AT A RALLY IN LOWER MANHATTAN</p>
<p>SATURDAY DECEMBER 5 &#8211; NOON</p>
<p>RALLY IN FOLEY SQUARE: STOP THE TERROR TRIAL IN NYC!</p>
<p>AMERICANS TO ATTORNEY GENERAL HOLDER:<br />
“WE WILL FIGHT YOU ALL THE WAY!”</p>
<p>Listen America – if you cannot find your voice on this absolute craziness (KSM, the mastermind of 911 who brags about beheading Daniel Pearl, having his trial in New York) then you have no voice left in that spineless body.</p>
<p>Yeah, there are two sides to this battle, the one side that says scum terrorists like KSM will NEVER enjoy US Constitutional rights, and the other side, favored by President Obama and Attorney General Holder, which says that their political futures are more important than American principles.</p>
<p>Which side are you on?</p>
<p>See you in New York</p>
<p><strong>For all details visit:<br />
<a href="http://www.911familiesforamerica.org/">www.911familiesforamerica.org</a></strong></p>
<p><strong>Also visit <a href="http://www.floridasecuritycouncil.org/">FloridaSecurityCouncil.org</a></strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2009/tom-trento/an-important-statement-from-kahlid-sheikh-mohammed-by-tom-trento/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>18</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Object Caching 1948/2266 objects using disk
Content Delivery Network via cdn.frontpagemag.com

 Served from: www.frontpagemag.com @ 2014-12-31 11:27:46 by W3 Total Cache -->