Immediate Action Post

Senate GOP Folding Over Health Care Reform

Posted by Erick Erickson
Wednesday, October 7th – RedState.com

I am told quite reliably that in a meeting today on Capitol Hill, Republican Senators began to rapidly move toward concessions on health care because they are afraid they cannot hold their members. Some Republicans are now thinking of supporting a government program.

Go to the action center and start calling.

Already, Senate Democrats are looking to pass healthcare by attaching it to unrelated legislation — the back door Brian Darling has repeatedly warned us about.

Republicans are starting to waver on this.

Call now. Tell the GOP to stand firm in opposition to the Democrats’ health care plans.

Indoctrinated Youth Sing for ‘Health Care Reform Today’ on CNN

Oh, I noticed that they even got a dig in on Joe Wilson:

‘Hope and Change’ is Destroying America’s Military and Security

Ouch:

Hope Doctrine’ risks America’s security
By Armstrong Williams
Washington Times

Over the past month, President Obama has continuously and naively put America’s security at grave risk. At the U.N. General Assembly meeting in September, Mr. Obama unintentionally announced his “Hope Doctrine” to promote world peace. In “our efforts to promote peace … the most powerful weapon in our arsenal is the hope of human beings.”

This statement is the naive keystone of his foreign policy of apology and appeasement. It explains his implicit willingness to impose unilateral nuclear disarmament on the U.S., his ambivalence on deploying additional troops in Afghanistan, his dismantling the Eastern European missile defense shield, and his toothless pursuit of nuclear containment in Iran without credible threats of sanctions or military action.

What is more amazing is that his kitchen cabinet sits idly by and allows him to continue this march toward destroying the military supremacy of the lone super power in the world.

At the U.N. meeting, Mr. Obama continued his mission of apologizing to the world for America’s past foreign policy and replacing it with a policy of appeasement. The president told the assembly how his administration is “responsibly” ending the war in Iraq. (Not winning the war!) He proudly trumped his administration’s pursuit of reductions in nuclear warheads with Russia. (Although the Russians have not indicated whether they will meaningfully participate.)

The next day, Mr. Obama, the first American president to chair a meeting of the U.N. Security Council, presided over the passage of a toothless nuclear nonproliferation resolution. The Iranian pursuit of nuclear weapons was the immediate target of this resolution. However, in order to get the resolution passed, Mr. Obama acknowledged that the U.S. was part of the nuclear proliferation problem and would have to limit its arsenal. While the resolution does not have any teeth in it, the president of the United States announced his willingness to substantially disarm the U.S. without getting any specified concessions.

At the end of his U.N. speeches, Mr. Obama basked in the applause and adulation of those who can’t wait for him to weaken America’s military and foreign policy. Nations without nuclear arms or ambitions praised Mr. Obama’s role in the security council’s nonproliferation resolution and his implicit willingness to impose unilateral nuclear disarmament on the U.S.

Is Capitalism Legalized Greed?

Doc’ informed us that Sean Hannity had his butt served to him on a silver platter last night by Michael Moore.  After reviewing the debate, I agree.

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Sean Hannity is a moron for not brushing up on Michael Moore’s talking points and for not already having a persuasive argument prepared.  Let us hope Mr. Hannity learns from this horrendous mistake before giving anymore airtime to the prognosticators of propaganda.  An effective argument, which would put Michael Moore on the defensive, would have been something along the lines of, “Capitalism is no more legalized greed than Christianity is legitimized extremism.”  If, as Mr. Moore claims, he is a Christian, then he has no choice but to defend his religion and in doing so, only proves that, yes, there are extremists in anything, but they are only aberrant anomalies and do not reflect the whole of the ideology and we shouldn’t throw out the baby with the bathwater.

For the sake of any Sean Hannity’s out there, I thought I would highlight the excellent writings of J.E. Robertson on Capitalism.  The following excerpts are from an article he wrote back in September;  something Sean Hannity should have read:

Does Anyone Know What Capitalism Is?
J.E. Robertson – www.casavaria.com

[…]

Michael Moore has argued that capitalism is “legalized greed”, a view held by both critics and proponents, rooted in the idea that the most pragmatic approach to economics is to let vice have its purpose, and let self-interest power the mill. This idea is partly about social darwinism, partly about a near cynical approach to human freedom, or if you’re Michael Moore, it’s about the reasons why capitalism needs to be curtailed by democratically determined regulations.

Moore argues that what we now call capitalism needs to be cast aside in exchange for a different kind of market system in which democratic processes allow the citizenry to guide the hand of economic influence. But whether one agrees that capitalism is legalized greed or an organic model of resource allocation, it remains true that it is only as virtuous as those who apply it to the circumstances of human experience.

Capitalism, the same as any -ism, is not a hard-and-fast, unchanging object or species; it is a conceptual realm whose qualities vary as applied. It is what we make of it and only as virtuous or democratic as we shape it to be. Because capitalism, as a tendency, as a philosophical urge, operates among and across the lived realities of a society, it is only as democratic as its interrelationship with those realities.

[…]

It is a false choice that would have us choose between capitalism and morality, or between the service of profit and allegiance to the liberties and worth of individual human beings as a socio-economic priority. It is a false choice that asks us to choose between naked laissez-faire capitalism, unfettered by any social conscience and the crushing political bind of a planned economy in which no one is allowed to seek personal gain.

Capitalism is about privileging the flow of capital through society. It works better when those who do not have access to capital are able to come in contact with it, acquire some of it, and capitalize on their own merits, expanding their economic reach. That cycle must, however, be both persistent and pervasive. The freedom to seek personal gain and to innovate must share space with the need to ensure that human dignity is not eroded and free people subject to strategies of indenture.

[…]

Capitalism is not democracy, though the two can be mutually nourishing. And capitalism is not unfettered economic aggression. It is not imperialism, though it can be used to effect a kind of imperial control of resources and social patterns. It is not an ethos, not a way of measuring whether we are good or bad, right or wrong.

Capitalism is an idea, a way of looking at the priorities of a society, and the diffusion of power throughout a political system. It is a conceptual realm, in which pirates and villains compete with saints and public servants, where control competes with creativity, where concentration of wealth competes with discovery and the opening of new terrain.

[…]

No amount of stripping away of individual rights or the terrains of individual liberty will make a capitalist system more vibrant. On the contrary, such measures help to foster the concentration of wealth, but those concentrations have a sclerotic effect on the economy broadly and tend to pressure democratic systems in such a way that they must over-react or give way.

I encourage you all to read this excellent piece in its entirety by CLICKING HERE