Message to the looter class

How can you tell when your society is destined for ruin?  Easy.

"Do you wish to know whether that day is coming? Watch money. Money is the barometer of a society's virtue. When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion -- when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing -- when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors -- when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don't protect you against them, but protect them against you -- when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice -- you may know that your society is doomed. Money is so noble a medium that it does not compete with guns and it does not make terms with brutality. It will not permit a country to survive as half-property, half-loot.

"Whenever destroyers appear among men, they start by destroying money, for money is men's protection and the base of a moral existence. Destroyers seize gold and leave to its owners a counterfeit pile of paper. This kills all objective standards and delivers men into the arbitrary power of an arbitrary setter of values. Gold was an objective value, an equivalent of wealth produced. Paper is a mortgage on wealth that does not exist, backed by a gun aimed at those who are expected to produce it. Paper is a check drawn by legal looters upon an account which is not theirs: upon the virtue of the victims. Watch for the day when it becomes, marked: 'Account overdrawn.'

"When you have made evil the means of survival, do not expect men to remain good. Do not expect them to stay moral and lose their lives for the purpose of becoming the fodder of the immoral. Do not expect them to produce, when production is punished and looting rewarded. Do not ask, 'Who is destroying the world?' You are.

An excerpt from Atlas Shrugged by Ain Rand.

How valid is Rand's assessment.  Pretty spot on, if you ask me.  Pretty spot on.

A hearty welcome to the 112th Congress of the United States.  Loot on!

Vulture Droppings: Electoral Defeat

Vulture Droppings is a semi-regular feature of this blog. It's a kind of "Random Thoughts" post in which I try to quickly summarize a particularly large event or series of events. Think of it being sort of like what a vulture leaves behind after devouring a horse. You don't get the whole horse, just highly processed leftovers.

---

Some of you are going to read the title of this point and come to the conclusion that I've finally gone around the bend.  You're going to assume that I've completely LOST IT.  While you may, in fact, be right about my failing sanity (until you've lived a workload like I've had for the past 4 months, you have NO IDEA what insanity really feels like), I am speaking from the heart here.

This edition of Vulture Droppings deals with my analysis of the 2010 elections, which are, thankfully, finally over.  If I had to watch one more ad for Candidate A in which Candidate B was painted as Hitler's more evil twin, followed apace by an ad for Candidate B in which Candidate A was painted as worse than Stalin, I think I would have stuck a pencil in my eye.

---

It is said that a pessimist views the glass as half full, while the optimist sees it as half empty.  So what does that make me?  I see the glass as nearly empty, leaking, and what little water remains in it is polluted.

What most so-called conservatives are touting as a major electoral victory is nothing of the sort.  Team Elephant won the House - hey, how 'bout that?  "Oh come on, Vulture!  Even you have to concede that the historic taking of the House is a major victory!"

No.  No I don't.

The House will make for a nice, boisterous legislative soap opera for the next two years.  But the Senate is still under the control of Harry Reid (more on that later), and the White House is still in the clutches of Il Duce.  Good luck getting anything constructive done in the next two years.

---

What constitutes victory? What defines defeat?  Let me take a stab at it.

• Victory would have included a major purge of Team Donkey leadership.  

See Harry Reid?  Still standing.  See Nancy Pelosi?  Sure, she's no longer the Screecher of the House...but she's still standing.  See Barney (Elmer Fudd's evil twin) Frank?  Still standing. Team Elephant might not have had a legitimate chance at taking down "Air Force 3".  But that senile old fool Harry Reid was ripe for the taking.  And Barney Frank was extremely vulnerable, given his cozy relationship with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  But the elitist snobs that run Team Elephant (into the ground, I might say) weren't about to lend any material support to a commoner like Sharon Angle.  She wouldn't fit in at a Washington cocktail party at all!  Neither was there any real effort on the part of the Elephants to take down Frank.  You leave Harry Reid and Barney Frank standing -- that's not victory.

• Victory would have included a change in the kind of candidates elected by the Elephants.  

Set aside for a moment Rand Paul's win in Tennessee.  See anyone else "different" winning anywhere?   I don't.  And, no, Marco Rubio doesn't count.  I think he's every bit the faux conservative that John Boehner is.

Sharon Angle?  Joe Miller?  Christine O'Donnell?  They were undermined at every turn by the Elephant elites.  Face facts, conservatives: your side threw the game.  They were happier with losing those races than with dealing with commoners in their midst.

But don't worry.  John McCommie won reelection.  Yeah....

• Victory would have set the stage for the dismantling of Obamacare.

You can't roll back Obamacare with just the House.  Face facts -- we're stuck with it.  In 2 years, even if the Elephants win the House, the Senate, and the Presidency, they'll throw up their hands and say that Obamacare can't be rolled back because too many people are dependent on it.  That's Washington DC Realpolitik.

---

You're going to think I've lost my mind, but I'm actually sorry that Russ Feingold lost his Senate seat in Wisconsin.  Yeah, he's a big Lefty.  But he's an HONEST big Lefty.  And he was one of the few in Washington willing to stand up to the abuses of the DHSS (you can't spell Schutzstaffel without the double S).

---

One final observation on the election.  No matter the political climate.  No matter the economic parameters.  Even if the very survival of the human race were at stake, it just wouldn't matter.  The People's Republic of Maryland will vote Democrat.

The Elephants didn't even bother to field a candidate against Senator-since-Reconstruction Barbara Mikulski.  Yeah, there was some guy's name with an 'R' next to it on the ballot.  But I wouldn't recognize him if he was standing in my kitchen carving the turkey at Thanksgiving wearing a sweater with his name embroidered on it.

6 of 8 Congressional districts went Donkey.  The 2 that didn't?  Frederick County and points west, and the Eastern Shore, both heavily agricultural.

Martin O'Malley, quite possibly the worst governor in the State's history, won in a crushing landslide against former governor (and RINO) Bob Erlich.

Yeah, I'm ready to move.  You can't live in Libtardia for 20-plus years and not have it affect you.

---

Vulture Droppings: Most Importantist Election Ever Edition

Vulture Droppings is a semi-regular feature of this blog. It's a kind of "Random Thoughts" post in which I try to quickly summarize a particularly large event or series of events. Think of it being sort of like what a vulture leaves behind after devouring a horse. You don't get the whole horse, just highly processed leftovers.

---

There's an election tomorrow.  Hey, how 'bout that? [/sarcasm]

"Shame on you, Vulture!  It's the most importantist election ever!"  Uh huh.

"Vulture!  It's all different this year!  The Tea Party is gonna change everything!"  Really?  How so?  The Tea Parties have been completely co-opted by Team Elephant.  Why would I say that?  What evidence do I have of such a thing?  A sampling:

Some traditional Republican consultants are advising — with a straight face — that newly elected Republican members of Congress "reach across the aisle…and "work with the Democrats."

John Boehner "rallies the troops" with empty (and limp) words "backing" Tea Party principles.  He swears spending will be rolled back to "pre-bailouts levels".  Seriously?  Going from $1.5 trillion deficits to $1 trillion deficits?  Oooooh!  I'm SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO impressed!

And worst of all, the Queen of Inside the Beltway faux conservatism "celebrates" the Tea Party as having "saved" Team Elephant from King George the Dim.  Ms. Noonan, for those of you who weren't paying attention, was one of King George's biggest apologists during his 8 year reign of error.

---

"Vulture! Even YOU have to admit that we're better off with Republican-co-opted Tea Party candidates than with the Dhimmi-crats who have rammed a 50-year wish-list of Progressivism down our throats the past 4 years!"

Better?  Better HOW?  BETTER would have been for the Tea Parties to have come together as a third party or under the umbrella of one of the existing third parties (Libertarian or Constitution, for example).  BETTER would be for those candidates to be able to enter Mordor on the Potomac (hat tip: Mike Church) with a clean slate and a fresh canvas than to walk into the clutches of Mitch McCommie and John BaneTurd.

---

Here's the big reason I'm so unenthusiastic.  I'll lay it out in a single sentence.  The co-opting of the Tea Parties by Team Elephant guarantees the failure of the principles that brought those people together.  Guaran.  Effing.  Tees it.

There is no principle that Republicans will not run from, no compromise they will not accept, no stand crucial enough for them to make.

What happens to the Tea Parties after their "champions" are relegated to the Congressional equivalent of the Back Bench, and the John Boehner Business-as-Usual express continues propping up Crony Capitalism?  What happens after Mitch McConnell compromises for the umpteenth time on a point of principle that just SCREAMS for men of courage and conviction to just say "NO!"?

You kill this once-in-a-political lifetime awakening of the sheeple, and you kill any chance we ever have of wresting power away from the looters.

But that's the idea really, isn't it?  That's why the GOP has co-opted the Tea Parties.  They like the gravy train that is "public service" in Washington every bit as much as Team Donkey does.

---

Vulture Droppings: Interesting Times

Vulture Droppings is a semi-regular feature of this blog. It's a kind of "Random Thoughts" post in which I try to quickly summarize a particularly large event or series of events. Think of it being sort of like what a vulture leaves behind after devouring a horse. You don't get the whole horse, just highly processed leftovers.

---

The old curse is, "May you live in interesting times."  We do.

This edition of Vulture Droppings looks at the "interesting" goings on of the past week, which, of course, had to occur during a week when I was absolutely slammed at work.

---

Election rhetoric is in full stride as "the most importantest election ever" nears.  Team Donkey, always disdainful of the little people in flyover country, is in full throat blaming the voters for the coming slaughter they face.

Democrats seeking to boost voter turnout this fall are beginning to sound like the late comedian Chris Farley's portrayal of a "motivational speaker" on Saturday Night Live. Farley's character sought to inspire young people by announcing that they wouldn't amount to "jack squat" and would someday be "living in a van down by the river."

Massachusetts Senator John Kerry, who prefers sailing vessels to vans by the river, recently tried out the Farley method. Said Mr. Kerry, "We have an electorate that doesn't always pay that much attention to what's going on so people are influenced by a simple slogan rather than the facts or the truth or what's happening." Bay State voters are surely thrilled to be represented by a man so respectful of their concerns.

This week President Obama chimed in with another uplifting message about the American electorate. Mr. Obama told Rolling Stone that the tea party movement is financed and directed by "powerful, special-interest lobbies." But this doesn't mean that tea party groups are composed entirely of corporate puppets. Mr. Obama graciously implied that a small subset of the movement is simply motivated by bigotry.

The President said "there are probably some aspects of the Tea Party that are a little darker, that have to do with anti-immigrant sentiment or are troubled by what I represent as the President." The tea party is now supported by a third of the country in some polls.

Perhaps advocates for smaller government shouldn't take Mr. Obama's comments personally. In the new Democratic attacks on the voting public, not even Democrats are spared. Vice President Joe Biden recently urged the party's base to "stop whining" and "buck up," a message echoed by Mr. Obama in his Rolling Stone interview. The President demanded that his supporters "shake off this lethargy," warning that it would be "inexcusable" for liberals to stay home on Election Day.

Mr. Obama added that "if people now want to take their ball and go home, that tells me folks weren't serious in the first place." Making the case for left-wing voters to show up in November, Mr. Obama told Rolling Stone that he is presiding over "the most successful administration in a generation in moving progressive agendas forward."

We'd agree, but his problem is that most Americans don't like that agenda and millions of voters in both parties wanted him to oversee an economic expansion instead. Blaming the voters is not unheard of among politicians, but usually they wait until after an election.

Great stuff. The Donkeys are selling a stupid electorate so they don't have to face the reality - that their policies are poison.

---

And why wouldn't they blame the voters?  After all, it's not like they have anything else to fall back on, particularly when the Screacher of the House has approval ratings that mirror those of BP.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's negative ratings have hit an all-time high in the new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll. A full 50 percent of those surveyed have a somewhat or very negative impression of Pelosi, while just 22 percent have a somewhat or very positive impression of her.

Pelosi's negative rating is precisely the same as oil giant BP, which has taken a public relations beating in the aftermath of the Gulf oil spill.

Negatives on par with BP. Priceless.

---

Stimulus was going to revive the US economy, remember? So why is it that it is China receiving the jobs stimulus was going to save?

Caterpillar, the world's largest manufacturer of construction equipment, will build a factory in China to produce mini hydraulic excavators, the company said in a statement.

Caterpillar, you may recall, was one of the companies claiming that stimulus was going to allow them to rehire laid-off workers.

Jim Owens, the CEO of Caterpillar, Inc., "said that if Congress passes our plan, this company will be able to rehire some of the folks who were just laid off."

Hey, Owens! Thanks for "rehiring" all of those workers.

Asshole.

---

We're constantly told that government spending cuts are impossible.  Tell that to France.

President Nicolas Sarkozy's government launched a "historic" attack on France's soaring overspending on Wednesday, unveiling a budget which closes tax loopholes and imposes unprecedented spending cuts.

Such a reduction so quickly is widely regarded as a huge undertaking, and a correction on this scale has never been achieved in modern French history.

Hey, how 'bout that?

But our spineless government can't find the will to do anything remotely similar. Sad.

---

Pledge to America is lame

Nearly assured of a massive victory at the polls in November, Team Elephant did what it does best: it undermined its own chances for success.  Their chosen mode of self-immolation this election: Son of Contract With America.

This propaganda masterpiece, called  A Pledge to America, is a real head-scratcher.  There is no reference to nor acknowledgment of the Tea Party.  Why would the Elephant elites give any credit to people they both loath and seek to discredit?

A lot of slick pictures accompany the propaganda piece.  These are images meant to elicit an emotional, patriotic response from the reader.  It made me sick.

The document is divided into sections tailored at issues the elitists think are important to ordinary Americans. The promise in the preface to "honor the Constitution" and "those precepts that have been consistently ignored – particularly the Tenth Amendment", is broken right away in the Foreword, where they state that, when it comes to spending cuts, "common-sense exceptions for seniors, veterans, and our troops" will be made.  Business as usual, anyone?

Here's the worst from each section.

Section 1, Job Creation.  Job creation.  Job creation.  They still think the GOVERNMENT creates jobs.  Nevertheless, the steps they propose to take, while hardly representing job creation, do at least improve the business environment to where employers MIGHT consider hiring.

Grade: B

Section 2, Reduce the Size of Government.  The people who gave us King George the Dim's War Without End are trying to sell us reduced government spending and the size of government?  That's rich. 

They promise to "act immediately to reduce spending" (yawn).  They promise to cut government spending to "pre-stimulus, pre-bailout levels".   Hey, how 'bout that? [/sarcasm]   Pre-bailout levels?  That's it?  WTF!  I think the American people -- and particularly the people who make up the Tea Parties -- want more than that.  Much more.  This "promise" is a joke.

They want to put "limits" on the growth of Government.  Limits?!?!? On growth?!?!?  Are you effin' kidding me!  A real plan would seek to reduce the size of government by at least 15% JUST FOR STARTERS.

They plan to hold weekly votes on spending. Hey, how 'bout that? [/sarcasm] And this dog and pony show will achieve what exactly? 

But it's the last "promise" that really set my teeth on edge.  "We will make the decisions that are necessary to protect our entitlement programs for today’s seniors and future generations".  You can't make this stuff up. 

Grade: F

Section 3, Health Care.  They promise "repeal and replace".  70% of Americans support repeal.  But replace? 

Part of what constitutes "replace" is to "ensure access for patients with pre-existing conditions."  I kid you not.

Grade: D-

Section 4, Reform Congress and Restore Trust.  I laughed my ass off when I read that.  Seriously?  Among the promises in this section is a promise to "adhere to the Constitution".  How, precisely, do you plan to do that AND "ensure access for patients with pre-existing conditions" AND "maintain entitlements", neither of which is Constitutionally permitted?

Grade: F

Section 5, National Security.  I can summarize this in two sentences.  Spend more money on defense systems like missile defense.  And continue the War Without End.  There is also a hollow promise to "enforce our immigration laws".  Nobody believes that.  Nobody. 

Grade: F

Section 6, Checks and Balances.  The shortest section, this is yet another attempt by the Elephant elites to sucker us.  I can sum this section up in two words: "Trust me".  The right answer -- No way!

Grade: F

There you have it.  Aren't you impressed?  Doesn't this steaming POS make you just long to rush to the polls to vote for the guy with the 'R' by his name?

Now, if you'll excuse me, I think I'll get a shower.  I feel dirty.

Topic revisited -- Team Elephant's "reformation"

I last spoke on this subject some days before the primary elections.  Now the primaries for Delaware, Maryland, New York, and various other states are complete.  Let's see what Team Elephant has been up to in the time since my last taunt post.

Wanna see true colors?  See this.

In an extraordinary move, the state Republican Party began automated phone calls attacking O'Donnell in the campaign's final hours. The calls feature the voice of a woman who identifies herself as Kristin Murray, O'Donnell's campaign manager in her 2008 unsuccessful Senate campaign, accusing the candidate of "living on campaign donations — using them for rent and personal expenses, while leaving her workers unpaid and piling up thousands in debt."

O'Donnell's campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Republican officials have said privately they intend to write off the seat if O'Donnell is victorious against Castle.

The establishment would rather lose than support a candidate whose views aren't those of John McCommie, Lincoln Chafee, and other stalwart "conservatives".  What is it you're not seeing here, conservatives?  These people hate you and hate everything you believe in.

Most telling was the establishment response to O'Donnell's win.

However, a top Republican official told CNN on Tuesday night that O'Donnell will have to show she can generate viable support before the national party will give her money.

"It is now incumbent on Sarah Palin, (U.S. Sen.) Jim DeMint and the Tea Party Express to help support her," the official said on condition of not being identified by name. "They got her here. Now make it happen."

After the establishment said they wouldn't support O'Donnell financially, she made her own pitch -- and picked up $1.5 million dollars just since Tuesday!  You're looking bad, Rockefellerites!

New York posted a stunning upset as well.  Carl Paladino upset RINO Rick Lazio.

The Team Elephant establishment is grossly out of touch with its base.  I would say DELIBERATELY out of touch; they really would rather see grassroots candidates lose.  They will only support "their kind".  WHY you people still affiliate yourselves with that party, I cannot understand.

A brilliant campaign strategy

If you're going down - I mean going down hard - and you know it, what do you do?  You could just give up, I suppose.  But if you're Team Donkey, you never say die!  In what may be perhaps the single most brilliant campaign strategy ever, the Donkeys are unveiling a brilliant strategy of threats of what they will do if they lose Congress in the 2010 elections.

That's why there have been signs in recent weeks that party leaders are planning an ambitious, lame-duck session to muscle through bills in December they don't want to defend before November. Retiring or defeated members of Congress would then be able to vote for sweeping legislation without any fear of voter retaliation.

"I've got lots of things I want to do" in a lame duck, Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D., W. Va.) told reporters in mid June. North Dakota's Kent Conrad, chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, wants a lame-duck session to act on the recommendations of President Obama's deficit commission, which is due to report on Dec. 1. "It could be a huge deal," he told Roll Call last month.
[...]
Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin, chair of the Senate committee overseeing labor issues, told the Bill Press radio show in June that "to those who think [card check] is dead, I say think again." He told Mr. Press "we're still trying to maneuver" a way to pass some parts of the bill before the next Congress is sworn in.

Other lame-duck possibilities? Senate ratification of the New Start nuclear treaty, a federally mandated universal voter registration system to override state laws, and a budget resolution to lock in increased agency spending.

Then there is pork. A Senate aide told me that "some of the biggest porkers on both sides of the aisle are leaving office this year, and a lame-duck session would be their last hurrah for spending." Likely suspects include key members of the Senate Appropriations Committee, Congress's "favor factory," such as Pennsylvania Democrat Arlen Specter and Utah Republican Bob Bennett.

"SOOOOOOOOOOOO! You think you can just discard us like yesterday's trash!  Try it an we'll unleash hell!"

How brilliant is this strategy?  My first thought after I read the article was, "OMG!  We'd better pray that the Donkeys win in November!"  Then the portion of my brain dedicated to cynicism (that would be 99.9%) kicked in and I realized that the reaction I had is the reaction their strategy is intended to trigger!

Give credit where credit is due.  They're evil geniuses, those Donkeys.  Evil effing geniuses.

As the Team Elephant Establishment Spins

The latest soap opera offered for your entertainment and bemusement is called "As the Team Elephant Establishment Spins".  You see, the anointed candidate in Kentucky, Trey Grayson, lost to libertarian Rand Paul.  Wait, let me rephrase that.  Trey Grayson got his clock cleaned by Rand Paul.

This has to be a huge disappointment to folks like Elephants in the Blue Grass, about whom I wrote last month, who were gung-ho for the Establishment guy.  I will say of Mr. "Grass" that he was extraordinarily gracious in defeat.

But others weren't, particularly Elephant establishment leader Mitch McConnell (via his spokesmouth).

“The electorate is pissed,” said Mike Shea, a long-time political adviser to McConnell. “Rand did a really good job of tapping into those themes and tapping into that anger. Trey is a nice guy, but in his commercials and everything else, he seemed completely unable to generate any kind of dialogue to indicate he was tapping into that. If you meet him, he didn’t seem like he was angry.”

Oh. That's what it was. It wasn't that the electorate liked Paul.  They just wanted to vote for an angry guy.

Those of us of a certain age recall that in 1994, when Team Elephant took the House of Representatives for the first time in 40 years, Big Media (the BM for short) spun it as "revenge of the angry white man".  Is that really where you want to go, Mr. McConnell?  Because you're every bit as expendable as anyone in Washington.

Tired establishment candidates and RINOs went down to defeat.  This has to have the Elephant elites banging their heads on the wall.  The last thing they want is for their party to be coopted by mundanes.