↓ Archives ↓

Posts Tagged → radical

Sen. Bob Casey’s record vs. his YouTube ads

If you are a registered Pennsylvania voter getting on to YouTube, you will probably be presented with several advertisements for and about US senator Bob Casey, Jr., who is running for re-re-re-re-election.

In these ads everyday people are happily, even cheerfully talking to the camera about how bi-partisan Bob Casey is. How helpful he is. He sits down with them and smiles into the camera, and says “We can work together!”

Contrast this sunny image with Casey’s do-nothing, radical left-wing record. Do-nothing in the sense that Harrisburg City officials cannot get Casey to even write a letter of support for basic project funding. Go ahead and call one of his offices yourself; see if you get a human being on the phone. Typically no one answers the phone, and no one answers your letters. This is a man who has completely checked out and simply occupies a space.

Radical in the sense that Casey has sided with the crazed, violent, obstructionist mob in Congress and in the streets of America over and over and over, publicly vowing to oppose every single Trump nominee, every single Republican – passed law.

This is not bipartisan behavior. It is the opposite of positive can-do attitude for American citizens. This is Casey being as starkly partisan and as difficult as he possibly can be.

And most important, what this means is that he is not representing the interests of the citizens he was elected to serve. Rather, Casey is just another Nancy Pelosi radical, serving some weird anti-America agenda that leaves behind every loyal, taxpaying citizen in favor of some law-breaking, border-jumping, illegal foreigner. All for his party’s quest for absolute power through registering illegal aliens as new voters.

Vote Casey out.

Send him a message that we want to be represented in Washington, DC. If he wants to represent the illegal aliens of other nations, then he can go move there, to those countries, and help them right there, where they live. Those of us who keep writing his paychecks are tired of Casey’s lies.

Muslims 4, Infidels 0

British aid worker Alan Henning is the latest innocent beheading victim.

Reports are in that British drones know where the ISIS captives are held, and where serial sadist and chief beheader “Jihad John” is located in Raqqa, Syria.

But Obama is dedicated to half-hearted efforts, symbols, really, of opposition to ISIS. His aerial bombing raids have killed more camels and civilians than Islamic bad guys.  A serious rescue mission could work, but it would require “boots on the ground,” which Obama opposes.

So far, sweet, generous Westerners are losing and the Muslims are winning. Radical Muslims want to cut off your head, and “moderate” Muslims want the radicals to cut off your head. There’s really no other way to confront this than to fight to win.

Curious things afoot in our American republic

Some time ago, actually not too long by the measure of human history, Communists, Capitalists, and Fascists fought each other in the streets of Weimar Germany.

Each fought for what they believed in. What the Fascists and the Communists believed in was equal amounts of totalitarian evil, served up slightly differently. Only the capitalists had a track record, and it was a successful one that had led Germany to a place of such prominence and financial success that human nature and poor judgment had then sought to use those riches for imperial gain and human subjugation.

Weimar Germany was bad for every German. What naturally followed on its heels – Nazi Germany’s National Socialism – was bad for the entire world.

Capitalism creates such great wealth, across such a large number of people, that like bees to honey, the evil inclination of human nature is drawn to it with bad intentions.

Politicians of all stripes cannot keep their hands off of the private money created through capitalism. Whether it’s high taxes to fund government grants to preferred political allies, or outright confiscation/ theft and wealth redistribution, politicians always seek to appropriate capitalist success for their own careers and their own ends.

Yesterday I had the unfortunate experience of watching New York City’s new mayor, Bill deBlasio, get sworn in. De Blasio is a kook, a radical whose communist views are well known. No one can predict for certain what will befall the Big Apple after one term of his management, but it probably won’t be pleasant to watch from Pennsylvania (he is first-off aiming to end the handsome cab business, where tourists get pulled around in horse-drawn carriages in Central Park). And my New York friends will probably suffer significant losses to their home values, businesses, and other investments they have made in the area. Wealth would naturally flee de Blasio’s presence.

One cannot help but be intrigued by the similarity between Weimar Germany’s otherwise unremarkable circumstances, and those America is sliding into today: High unemployment, sliding currency value, inflation, and increasingly hot friction wherever mutually exclusive political interests collide.

Human history repeats itself so often that it’s both kind of silly to even suggest that America will become another Weimar Germany, and it is also silly to blow it off and pretend it isn’t happening.

De Blasio has his sights set on other people’s private wealth, and he is likely to lose a great number of wealthy people from NYC as a result. What is more worrisome is the friction that will arise and ripple out as he presses forward and is met with the natural resistance reasonable people expect to greet thievery.

“Income inequality” is his byword, and it’s just another way of saying he’s going to steal from the makers and give to lazy takers, using the coercive power of government force and threat of loss of liberty for dissenters. Other politicians are watching de Blasio, and they have already signaled their inclinations to follow his lead in their local venues.

It is difficult to imagine a more explosive arrangement or set of circumstances. Once again, one is reminded of either the 19-teens and 1920s, or even the 1850s in America. Such incompatible political philosophies are afoot, banging into one another, and one must win, and one must lose.

I hope de Blasio loses. I hope. To think otherwise is to be against the very American republic that first created the wealth he is now after.