Get your Obama care here.

Does anyone think the SEIU goons that are busily assaulting and intimidating voters at town hall meetings understand the details of Obama's health care plans?
Or that the malcontents protesting outside Whole Foods' stores comprehend the catastrophic unintended circumstances of single-payer ANYTHING?
What they do know is that they like Obama. And they know that they don't need to know anything else.

Another clunkers program

We need a program where politicians can turn in their clunker programs to be demolished.

Hypocrisy abounds

Sometimes there is nothing like acquiring power to expose one's true colors. There are some ideals of which leaders of the Democrat party and the political left in general have always claimed to be the guardians. And a few upon which Pres. Obama specifically based his campaign for president. I thought I'd list a few, off the top of my head, and see how they're doing so far since getting a complete stranglehold on the federal government.
1. Dissent is not only acceptable but is a hallmark of democracy and the highest form of patriotism.
2. Freedom of speech is sacrosanct.
3. The will of the people is preeminent. Government is to be responsive to the governed. Hence the name "Democratic".
4. Transparency in government is very important.
5. President Obama campaigned on the need to be "post-partisan", which implies being even more inclusive than bi-partisan.
6. He also campaigned on being a united the people around common causes and "healing" the nation.

I suspect you can see where this is heading. Let's see how they're doing so far, based on their own standards.

1. After relentlessly pushing one liberal policy after another, attempting not to simply 'change' policies of the Bush administration but to remake America in his European socialist vision, Americans have largely said "Whoa" to universal health care. Immediately upon realizing the tide had turned against them Democrat leaders began an effort, coordinated with the media, to declare protesters "un-American". A despicable move designed to intimidate dissenters.
2. The left has used verbal and physical intimidation to prevent people from speaking out against the health care plan. "Political correctness" and its associated intimidation tactics have long been the means of squelching free speech.
3. Democrat leadership is now trying to convince moderate Democrats that the protesters and polls are illegitimate and to be ignored for the 'greater good'.
4. This has been the most secretive administration since Richard Nixon.
5. House and Senate Republicans have been attempting to introduce their own solutions to health care, unemployment, economic recession, etc. They can't even get committee hearings on their bills. They keep this hidden while they brand Republicans as obstructionists. Now Obama has made it clear that if they don't get Republican support (to do it THEIR way) they should pass it through without them.
6. Campaigning as a uniter, Obama has turned out to be the Divider-in-Chief. For every problem there is someone to blame. For most things it has been a continuation of Bush Derangement Syndrome. Of course there are the evil wealthy. More recently it was executives. Now it's the insurance companies. Always there is someone to demonize.

Mayan code cracked!

I confess this could be just wishful thinking on my part, but I've got a new theory about the Mayan calendar.
For years there has been research, discussions and debate about the meaning behind the fact that the Mayan calendar comes to an abrupt end on Dec. 21, 2012. Were the rest of their records lost? Does it mean the end of the world? Did the Mayans know something that we don't? I have a new theory.
Many of the glyphs found in Mayan ruins depict apparent human sacrifice. They seemed to be a blood-thirsty and ruthless people. Which means, of course, they were Democrats.
My theory aligns nicely with present day signs. Scientists are off just a little in their calculations. The Mayan calendar actually ends on November 6, 2012 and predicts the end of the modern Democrat party.
There shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Aesop's lost fable

Does anyone else feel like we're watching the stage production of Aesop's lost fables?
This one takes place in a large and beautiful village. It has more than its fair share of village idiots, most of whom work in the news media.
In the distant past the biggest tribe had treated the one of the smaller tribes very badly. That was a long time ago, and the laws of the land now not only prevented such abuse, as a means of repentance the laws granted favorable status to the smaller tribes.
In fact the villagers even selected a member of the small tribe to be their leader.
This village had a long history of speaking out when they objected to their leaders' decisions. Then the people that didn't like the policy and those that did would have vigorous debates.
It was during one of those debates that the supporters of the leader became very desperate because they were losing the debate, because they were stupid poo-poo heads.
They decided to start saying that any of the good townsfolk that happened to be from the big tribe only disliked the leader's idea because he was from the little tribe. They knew this wasn't true but hoped to make the good townsfolk be quiet so they wouldn't be called tribists. And it always got the attention of the village idiots in the press. This strategy had worked in the past.
It had worked too often in the past, and this time it was obvious to everyone that it was just a strategy. The good townsfolk kept debating and eventually won. All the village was so tired of the strategy that nobody would pay attention to real tribism. So their strategy backfired on them. People of the village decided it would be easier to stop selecting people from the little tribe to be leaders so that the debates could stay on the issues. All the village thought this was a shame. The stupid poo-poo heads and village idiots had ruined it for everyone.
(Some villagers were reminded by this of a shepard boy in their village that liked to yell "wolf".)

Where is the intellectual honesty?

I bet you know some rabid sports fans that are blindly, irrevocably loyal to their favorite team even when that team stinks. You might even be one yourself. And why not? Loyalty is an admirable trait, right? And it's just a game.
Sadly that same attitude seems to prevail in the arena of public policy. People support and defend "their team" jealously. Anxiously exploiting and exaggerating any misstep or miscalculation made by the 'enemy', while willingly overlooking or rationalizing their own teams misdeeds.
But this isn't a game. The stakes are enormous.
This is the flaw, potentially fatal, of the two party system. It too easily becomes a game. Victory trumps values. Partisanship replaces principle.
This is a bad long term plan because the very nature of 'principles' is that when we violate them, regardless of intentions, bad things happen.
Both of the major parties have supporters that fall into this trap.
I can understand why many people were attracted to Pres. Obama during the campaign. His rhetoric was soaring and inspirational. With so many citizens suffering from Bush fatigue, whether real or created, Obama offered a refreshing reprieve.
In the past 7 months it's become clear that his vision for America differs from the one he presented during the campaign. I suspect many that voted for him do not believe that the federal government should take ownership roles in banks and auto manufacturers. Or get further into the insurance providing business. Or guarantee future confiscatory taxes and inflation by devaluing the currency with enourmous debt. After all, economic principles are just that, principles. When we violiate them, regardless of intentions, bad things happen.
This presents those supporters with a dilemma. Do they support their team or their principles? Either way they feel disloyal.
To me it seems obvious. Presidents come and go. Principles persist.
With so wide a variety of issues facing us we can't expect to agree with anyone about everything. It is not contradictory to claim to support a party or individual while opposing this policy or that when intellectual honesty requires we do so.
Our country, our families, and our individual integrity will be better served.

The best defense is a strong offense.

PROJECTION: Projection is a form of defense in which unwanted feelings are displaced onto another person, where they then appear as a threat from the external world. A common form of projection occurs when an individual, threatened by his own angry feelings, accuses another of harbouring hostile thoughts. - Encyclopedia Britannica
All across America citizens, alarmed by the federal government's attempts to nationalize our health care system, have been making their anger known. Despite soft-petal reports by a fawning press they are demanding real answers and accountability from elected officials. And they are in no mood for platitudes and arrogance.
Rather than acknowledge that they have stepped in it, the Democratic leadership is firing back. They pronounce the protests to be illegitimate and the protesters to be pawns of Republicans and the insurance industry. (Although if challenged they can offer no evidence of either.)
Clearly this is their strategy. As the movement grows, in their desperation they need to dissuade others from joining the fight. Ridicule, scorn and intimidation (report your 'fishy' neighbors) are their weapons of choice.
But I think it's more than that. I think many of them really believe what they're saying. From their paradigm angry and boisterous protests are manufactured products. Their community organizers rouse the rabble, bus in rental protesters (union hacks), and call it 'grass roots'. They've never been part of a legitimate, home grown, real-people protest.
Combine that with the arrogant belief that only "special interests" could possibly disagree with them, and only for nefarious motives, and you have a textbook example of projection.