Quote of the day – Václav Klaus

September 24th, 2009

It would be a tragic mistake to fundamentally impair economic freedom in favor of state or supra-state regulation just now. The long-term experience tells us that it is thanks to the free markets and free entrepreneurship that we can enjoy the current material welfare and economic progress. Business cycles, accompanied by economic downturns, recessions and crises, did exist, do exist and will exist in the future. In spite of them, the world has been – at least in the last two centuries – characterized primarily by economic growth and growing prosperity.

When looking for an appropriate reaction to the problems connected with the current crisis, we should build on the idea that the crisis was basically a failure of governments, not markets. The manipulation of monetary policy in an attempt to artificially prolong the period of growth, the irrational subsidization of demand in the housing sector and the failures of financial market regulation contributed substantially to the crisis. Let us not delude ourselves that the economic cycle and its consequences can be prevented by the more extensive government regulation or by aiming at global governance of the world economy.

Václav Klaus, President of the Czech Republic, September 23, 2009

Feel free to share this with others:
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis
  • del.icio.us
  • Google
  • Slashdot
  • Technorati
  • Digg

Quote of the day – Stephen Harper

September 23rd, 2009

President Ahmadinejad has said things, particularly about the state of Israel, the Jewish people, and the holocaust, that are absolutely repugnant. It is unfitting that somebody like that would be giving those kind of remarks before the United Nations General Assembly. Canada does not want to be equivocal at all in terms of our view on that; we find it disgraceful, unacceptable, and we’re going to be absolutely clear on that.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper, September 23, 2009

Feel free to share this with others:
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis
  • del.icio.us
  • Google
  • Slashdot
  • Technorati
  • Digg

Quote of the day – Michael Steele

September 19th, 2009

It is becoming increasingly clear that some in the Democratic Party need a serious history lesson. Slavery was racist, Jim Crow laws were racist, segregation was racist – opposing a radical political agenda is not. Americans of all races and political mindsets applauded the election of America’s first African American president; it was a proud moment for every American. But our pride in electing an African-American president does not override our right to disagree with President Obama’s policies. It is obvious certain politicians are attempting to exploit racial anger to make up for their own policy failings.

Americans have an obligation to stand up for what they believe in and that is exactly what they are doing. As a whole, Americans are exercising their First Amendment rights and are rejecting President Obama’s massive government-run experiments. They want common sense reforms and economic security. These principles are not found in the Democrats’ health care plans. The Democrats’ health care plan is the antithesis of these ideals.

President Obama’s campaign promised to move America beyond the bitter divides of yesterday. But for leaders of the Democrat Party to characterize Americans’ disapproval of the president’s policies as being based on race is an outrage and troubling sign about the lengths Democrats will go to disparage all who disagree with them. Playing the race card shows that Democrats are willing to deal from the bottom of the deck. Our political system has no place for this. President Obama should join me in calling for an end to these attacks by members of his party and a renewal of honest debate.

Michael Steele, September 17, 2009

Feel free to share this with others:
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis
  • del.icio.us
  • Google
  • Slashdot
  • Technorati
  • Digg

Quote of the day – Ed Morrissey

September 17th, 2009

Ed Morrissy responds to former US President Jimmy Carter’s claim that Obama opposition is largely racially motivated:

If Jimmy Carter believes that the “overwhelming” portion of criticism towards Barack Obama is due to racism, does he also believe that the overwhelming portion of criticism towards Israel is anti-Semitic? Wouldn’t that apply to a man who hangs out with people who target Israeli citizens for terrorist attacks? After all, Hamas regularly issues anti-Semitic harangues and smears, and yet Carter has no problem cozying up to them and claiming that their criticism of Israel is legitimate.

From now on, using Carter’s own logic, we should note each of his remarks on the Middle East by saying they come from “Jimmy Carter, known anti-Semite.” Two can play this game.

Ed Morrissey, September 16, 2009

You can see Carter making his comments in this video:

Feel free to share this with others:
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis
  • del.icio.us
  • Google
  • Slashdot
  • Technorati
  • Digg

The Hypocrisy File – It’s not bad if liberals do it.

September 16th, 2009

Michelle Malkin writes today about the liberal mainstream media’s attempt to discredit recent revelations regarding ACORN’s illegal activities. Rather than focus on the very real concerns that have been raised about ACORN’s operations and the close ties it has with the Obama administration, NBC is instead criticizing the investigator’s use of hidden cameras:

Conservative documentarian James O’Keefe and writer Hannah Giles, working for the BigGovernment.com website, posed as a pimp and prostitute during visits to ACORN offices in Baltimore, Washington, D.C., and Brooklyn. ACORN housing officials and tax advisers offered them brazen suggestions on how to lie on their applications, disguise their income, obscure their child sex-ring business and hide cash from abusive johns. (“When you buy the house with the backyard, you get a tin,” an ACORN counselor in New York told Giles, “and you bury it down in there, cover it and put the grass over it.”)

Summing up the ACORN Housing Corporation philosophy, another Brooklyn ACORN official told the undercover pair bluntly: “Honesty is not going to get you the house.”

ACORN spokesman Scott Levenson blasted the investigation as “gotcha journalism.” Echoing ACORN’s defenders, MSNBC anchor Norah O’Donnell fretted on Tuesday that Giles and O’Keefe’s methods “might be viewed as entrapment. That some conservative activists used hidden cameras to get this stuff on camera.”

O’Donnell has apparently forgotten the inglorious history of news “entrapment” by her betters at NBC News.

This is the network that surreptitiously rigged GM pickup trucks in staged crash tests in 1993 to show that the vehicles were unsafe — and failed to inform viewers that the simulations used incendiary devices to ignite the explosions. Jane Pauley admitted in a nationally televised apology that “NBC’s contractor did put incendiary devices under the trucks to ensure there would be a fire if gasoline were released from the gas tank. NBC personnel knew this before we aired the program, but the public was not informed because consultants at the scene told us the devices did not start the fire. We agree with GM that we should have told the viewer about these devices.”

Source.

If you’re not yet familiar with this developing story you should visit:
www.biggovernment.org

—–

Related: “Jon Stewart Mocks Media on ACORN Story: ‘Where the Hell Were You?

Feel free to share this with others:
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis
  • del.icio.us
  • Google
  • Slashdot
  • Technorati
  • Digg

Camille Paglia – Feminist neo-con?

September 10th, 2009

This is encouraging:

How has “liberty” become the inspirational code word of conservatives rather than liberals? (A prominent example is radio host Mark Levin’s book “Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto,” which was No. 1 on the New York Times bestseller list for nearly three months without receiving major reviews, including in the Times.) I always thought that the Democratic Party is the freedom party — but I must be living in the nostalgic past. Remember Bob Dylan’s 1964 song “Chimes of Freedom,” made famous by the Byrds? And here’s Richie Havens electrifying the audience at Woodstock with “Freedom! Freedom!” Even Linda Ronstadt, in the 1967 song “A Different Drum,” with the Stone Ponys, provided a soaring motto for that decade: “All I’m saying is I’m not ready/ For any person, place or thing/ To try and pull the reins in on me.”

But affluent middle-class Democrats now seem to be complacently servile toward authority and automatically believe everything party leaders tell them. Why? Is it because the new professional class is a glossy product of generically institutionalized learning? Independent thought and logical analysis of argument are no longer taught. Elite education in the U.S. has become a frenetic assembly line of competitive college application to schools where ideological brainwashing is so pandemic that it’s invisible. The top schools, from the Ivy League on down, promote “critical thinking,” which sounds good but is in fact just a style of rote regurgitation of hackneyed approved terms (“racism, sexism, homophobia”) when confronted with any social issue. The Democratic brain has been marinating so long in those clichés that it’s positively pickled.

Source.

Feel free to share this with others:
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis
  • del.icio.us
  • Google
  • Slashdot
  • Technorati
  • Digg

Quote of the day – David Horowitz

September 9th, 2009

And if you don’t believe how far left the Democrats have lurched when I say it, here’s authentication from Alan Colmes who, after ignoring all the evidence about who Van Jones actually is and what he believes, and pretending that it’s all a Glenn Beck-World Net Daily-Horowitz plot, concludes “Van Jones is a mainstream liberal.” That’s exactly right Alan. And that’s exactly the problem.

How did things get to this pass? Let me just single out one problem, because it’s the one conservatives can actually affect. And that is to start calling things by their right names. The timidity and cowardice of Republicans towards Democratic Party outrages of this nature is a principal culprit. When you call Communists “liberals,” it legitimizes them. The time has come to stop it. To stop the charade, stick your head out the window and say “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore.”

David Horowitz, September 6, 2009

Feel free to share this with others:
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis
  • del.icio.us
  • Google
  • Slashdot
  • Technorati
  • Digg

Remembering the FLQ

September 9th, 2009

There has been much debate recently about the events being planned to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the Battle of the Plains of Abraham. Perhaps most controversial is the decision by organisers to include a reading of the 1970 FLQ Manifesto. This decision has the support of the National Post editorial board, which writes:

The FLQ Manifesto is undeniably part of Quebec’s history. It is a text that evokes a particular time — one that, in fact, does so splendidly, evoking the feverish, fetid atmosphere of the late Sixties with a suddenness and a brutality that makes one glad those days were so long ago. It is perfectly proper that the manifesto should be recited as part of a general airing of important historical texts, as it was once recited to help save the life of James Cross, the still-living British diplomat kidnapped by the Front de liberation du Quebec on Oct. 5, 1970.

Source.

I too, support the argument that we must not forget our past.

To understand the FLQ and it’s violent actions, it’s important to first understand the ideology they were loyal to. The FLQ were first and foremost a radical Marxist movement. For the FLQ and most Marxist groups, the primary objective is to defeat capitalism – using any means possible. For the FLQ, the goal of Quebec sovereignty provided the “noble” cover to their part in the much wider global struggle against capitalism.

Much of the FLQ Manifesto reads as though it were lifted directly out of Marx’s A Communist Manifesto:

We are the workers of Québec and we will continue to the bitter end. We want to replace the slave society with a free society, functioning by itself and for itself; a society open to the world.

Our struggle can only lead to victory. You cannot hold an awakening people in misery and contempt indefinitely. Long live Free Québec!

Long live our imprisoned political comrades. Long live the Québec revolution!

Long live the Front de liberation du Québec.

In addition to capitalism, the other enemy of Marxism is organised religion. In this passage the FLQ takes a swipe at both enemies in one sentence:

We are terrorized by the capitalist Roman church, even though this seems less and less obvious (who owns the property on which the stock exchange stands?)

In fact, there is very little reference to Quebec as a “distinct society” in the FLQ Manifesto. Instead it is quite clearly a call for “workers” to rise up against their “bosses”. Quebec nationalism is merely a smokescreen.

This pattern of seeking out what appear to be noble causes can been seen throughout history in the Marxist battle against capitalism. The most recent example of this wolf in sheep’s clothing is the battle over how to deal with climate change, which is rather ironic considering the environment records of the communist world.

While the FLQ now appears to be a historical footnote, it’s important to understand that it’s underpinnings are still very much alive and kicking today.

Feel free to share this with others:
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis
  • del.icio.us
  • Google
  • Slashdot
  • Technorati
  • Digg

Some things never change – well, except maybe history

September 4th, 2009

I came across two stories today that should serve to remind us how, as time passes, historical accounts of world events become increasingly fluid. The first story comes from Russia:

Half a century of lies have been poured over Stalin’s reputation and he cannot defend himself from the grave so this case is essential to put the record straight…We want to rehabilitate Stalin. He turned populations into peoples, he presided over a golden era in literature and the arts, he was a real leader…” And Zhura was particularly enraged by the claim that “the secret police committed grave crimes against their own people.”

Source.

The second story is a bit closer to home, and not as far back in time:

Liberal MP Bob Rae joined our very own Dave Rutherford this morning to talk about the possibility of a November election, which the Liberals strangely seem intent on forcing. You can listen to an excerpt via the audio player at right.

The conversation drifted to last year’s failed Liberal NDP-Bloc coalition during which Bob Rae had some very curious – and inaccurate – things to say about those heady days. One example:

Dave: “Coalition if necessary, but not necessarily a coalition” – didn’t Michael Ignatieff say this?”

Bob: No.

Source.

I expect we’ll be hearing a bit more about that last one if the Liberals actually follow through on their recent threat to take us to the polls in the next few weeks.

Feel free to share this with others:
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis
  • del.icio.us
  • Google
  • Slashdot
  • Technorati
  • Digg

America, I thought we were friends?

August 29th, 2009

While the domestic policies of the Obama administration have been dominating most of the headlines since his inauguration, raising very real concern and even dissent at home, foreign policy has quietly been taking shape behind the scenes. While Americans focus on the spectacle of a ballooning deficit as it’s government has taken unprecedented steps to control of the banking, automotive, and healthcare sectors, other countries have been asking the question “What does this administration mean to us?”

A month ago, the heroic leaders of Eastern Europe got down on their knees and begged Obama not to renege on George W. Bush’s promise to give them a missile defense system and not to give in to Russian threats and remonstrations, which were obviously designed to keep the former Soviet slave states within Russia’s imperial reach. Having seen Russian tanks rolling into Georgia, who can doubt that the Putin regime has long-term goals of reacquiring the “sphere of influence” that brought so much terror and loss of life to Eastern Europe just a few decades ago?

Source.

With the financial means to exert meaningful influence on the international stage now significantly compromised by out-of-control domestic spending programs, combined with this administration’s apparent desire to apologize for past “American imperialist sins”, historical Western allies do have reason for concern.

—-

Update: Eastern European concerns go unheard:

WARSAW, Poland – Poles and Czechs voiced deep concern Friday at President Barack Obama’s decision to scrap a Bush-era missile defense shield planned for their countries.

“Betrayal! The U.S. sold us to Russia and stabbed us in the back,” the Polish tabloid Fakt declared on its front page.

Polish President Lech Kaczynski said he was concerned that Obama’s new strategy leaves Poland in a dangerous “gray zone” between Western Europe and the old Soviet sphere.

Source.

Feel free to share this with others:
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis
  • del.icio.us
  • Google
  • Slashdot
  • Technorati
  • Digg