Saturday, May 30, 2009

The Downside Of Term Limits

You've got to hand it to the Republicans in the Nevada Assembly. Do any of them have backbones at all, or are they so afraid of Speaker Barbara Buckley and Senate Majority Leader Steven Horsford that they just follow along like sheep?

They eagerly voted along with the Democrats to override Governor Jim Gibbons' veto of nearly 800 million dollars in tax increases. Raising the sales tax is really going to work when sales are plummeting. If I wanted this, I'd have stayed in Maryland.

Now I expect bluster like this out of Governor-wanna-be Buckley: “Most of us agreed we needed new revenue…that we couldn’t cut our way out of the crisis, and we couldn’t tax our way out of the crisis.” Madam Speaker, taxing us out of the crisis is exactly what you've done! And do you really expect businesses to roll over and accept higher taxes without doing anything else? We're trying to draw businesses from California, not keep them there.

But this is about the caving of the Republicans. I don't know exactly how many fall into this category, but I know my senator, Maurice Washington, a Republican, voted for the overrides. Guess what? This is his last term because of term limits, so nobody's going to hold this against him. I hope he's proud of having his constituents foot the bill.

I was a supporter of term limits, but no longer. They undermine accountability on both sides of the aisle. The Democrats who have been term limited won't have to answer for their actions either.

And, Governor Gibbons has gone way up in my esteem. Unlike Bush 41, he said "no new taxes" and meant it. He was just the irresistible force meeting the immovable object . . . a bloated bureaucracy whose prime directive is self-perpetuation at all costs to taxpayers, businesses, anyone except itself. Bravo, Governor Gibbons.

Well, it could be worse. This could be California.

Wednesday, May 27, 2009

Monday, May 18, 2009

Juxtaposition

Got these two stories, one above the other, in my e-mail RSS feed:

Baltimore Plans $60K Study On Boulevard Construction

Baltimore To Cut City Fire Resources

So let me get this straight: The city will spend all this money to consider getting rid of a perfectly functional freeway to replace it with something that Looks Nicer for business? And is cutting fire resources in hopes of becoming Detroit?

I'm so glad I don't live there anymore.

Oh, yeah, the Preakness may be done there as well.

Saturday, May 16, 2009

Defeating the Bullies


One of the most mind-blowing articles I've ever read came from the American Thinker, called "Defeating Political Ridicule" by Kyle-Anne Shiver (hat tip: Jill Stanek).

Read it. I like it for several reasons:

1. It shows, once and for all, that Obama was, and is, a disciple of Saul Alinsky, a spiritual godfather of ultra-leftist radicalism. Actually, anyone who cared to discover that about Obama during the campaign could have found that out easily (yes, Big Media, I'm looking at you, who in your sanctimony made a bigger deal out of Bristol Palin). See the above photo, where Obama teaches Alinsky's Power Analysis.

2. Shiver explains how political discourse has fallen to the level where it resides now . . . the gutter. I'm not saying conservatives don't do it (Ann Coulter has made a career of it), but I'm convinced liberals do it more, and more than ever with the previous and current administration.

3. It drives a stake through the heart of current conventional thinking on bullying.

And I guess that's what I wanted to focus on the most. As a child, I was convinced the more I didn't give bullies what they wanted, the more they goaded me. It turns out I couldn't have been more wrong. In this article, Shiver shows more understanding of how bullying works than a PTA convention. And I have fallen for it, all my life.

Shiver points out that Alinsky knew this, and so does Obama. Why else is Obama busy demonizing car companies, credit card companies, and health care providers? And yet, Obama works extra hard to come off as a populist saint. He'll do no less when he speaks at Notre Dame tomorrow (which is less Obama's fault than the fault of ND, Father John Jenkins, and the typical modern Catholic university quest for prestige over fidelity and Catholic identity. Ex Corde Ecclesiae, anyone?), making it seem he's really not pro-abortion . . . when everything he's done and said indicates otherwise. (And all the Catholic left can say is, "where's the proof?" For those who do not believe -- or put their hands over their ears and scream -- no explanation is possible.)

Anyway, as a kid I simply did not have the moxie that the bullies did, nor could I read people as well as they. So, as Shiver demonstrates, they reveled in my reactions. Later, as adults, they could point the finger at me when I stooped to their level. Hence what Alinsky wrote in 1971:

The fourth rule of tactics: Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.

The fourth rule carries within it the fifth rule: Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage.
I used to be on a message board that I shall not name where I was routinely ridiculed for what I believed. I've now walked away from it for many of these reasons, and Shiver has helped me see I'm walking away a winner. I'm not playing the bullies' game anymore. I'm sticking to my convictions, and I'm not going to argue them to a bunch of people who couldn't care less about rational discourse.

I guess it's like what you hear on the Internet about spammers: "Don't feed them, and they will die." Easier said than done for me, but no less true.