Comments Posted By mannning
Displaying 251 To 260 Of 475 Comments
IS OUR NATIONAL WILL 'WILTING AWAY?'
1. We are seeing the payoff from several generations of liberal-directed education on our nation. Naturally, Obama wants more of the same, and well-funded at that.
2. We really seem not to know who the inside enemies are---the so-called elites, and the leftists--listed by their proper names, and their influences on government, legislation, the economy, foreign relations, and the administration spelled out for all to see.
3. We do know that many of these enemies of the nation use the shameful rules of the radical Saul Alinsky to foster dissention and create confusion.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/09/barack_obama_and_alinskys_rule.htmlWHO ARE THEY?
Comment Posted By mannning On 25.03.2009 @ 12:44
oops! buy, not nuy.
Comment Posted By mannning On 23.03.2009 @ 15:12
I nuy into the idea that elites are the culprits using their money and influence to steer America into positions favorable to their future, and ignoring the population in general.
But, I have a huge problem with this targeting of "elites". No one, to my knowledge, has created a reasonably complete listing of these Elites, and their profiles, so that we could actually put them under a spotlight of unfavorable comments and actions on a continuous basis. By using the collective term, we are hiding the problem of identification of these elites until it may become too da*m late to change course.
Does this remind anyone of the French revolution, and the abiding hatred of the aristocrats, as shown by the tumbrils rolling...
Someone step up and create the list! Then we can start to figure out what to do.
Comment Posted By mannning On 23.03.2009 @ 15:11
A LETTER TO THE TIMES ON BOB HERBERT'S COLUMN PUSHING A THIRD AIRPORT FOR CHICAGOLAND
Of course, one could lay down far wider runways and taxiways so that the gigantic A380 and those that follow would have a place to takeoff and land. In the future, an expansion program to put in parallel runways could be initiated to allow two simultaneous landings or takeoffs just like O'Hare. Then too, a monorail system from the terminals to Downtown Chicago would greatly improve access for the public, and would provide for other construction firms to partake in the contracts and such, including stops at the brothel district, of course.
There would have to be an annual budget with a built in growth of 12% each year to account for some overruns and new "arrangements", with a 5-year boost of 50% to catch up the arrears. All told, a magnificent project for the Machine--oh! and Chicago, eventually...
Comment Posted By mannning On 14.03.2009 @ 14:48
Just for fun, why not take a page out of Hong Kong's book and create an island in the lake off the coast of Chicago for a new airport? It would be far more expensive to construct that way, thus much greater graft and corruption opportunity, and it would create a wonderful backlash from the current waterfront owners. Noise abatement would not be a problem, which is a plus, but the prevailing winds, which are West to East, I suppose, would mean a larger island in that direction to accomodate landings and takeoffs without significant crosswinds, and hence even more opportunities for contracts...
Comment Posted By mannning On 14.03.2009 @ 12:54
The stage is set, the characters are mostly on stage(except for the tax dodgers and soiled ones), and the audience is sitting back and listening. The orchestra is fiddling a tune, or is it a dirge?. The missing person is the play's author (or authors).
What they are hearing is no play, but a rambling of flawed personalities and pompous idiots that think they rule the world now, and can rewrite the Constitution, chapter at a time.
The audience grows more and more restless as nothing happens but the same dirge played over and over again: spend! it says. Spend! Spend some more! Dream up something to spend on, any old piece of pork!
The boos and hisses are getting louder now. The characters are doe-eyed in the glare of lights and in the palpable anger rising in the theater.
All it will take for shoes and tomatoes to rain on the stage is one more period of stuttering silence, one more dumb gaffe, or one more exhortation to yet another stimulus to spend, spend, spend.Then comes the cry: "Get off the stage, and let some real actors perform in a real play!" Amateur night is over!
Comment Posted By mannning On 11.03.2009 @ 12:20
ON FAILURE - OBAMA'S AND AMERICA'S
We have placed upon his shoulders the responsibility to lead us out of this financial morass in which we find ourselves.
That rhetorical WE is part of the problem. The opposition tried valiantly to head this chaos off, did not vote for this man, and failed to win the election... So WE didn't do it at all: the majority of voters--THEY--did it by our winner-take-all system.
Those of us that understood the radical ideas and policies this man championed before the election, are now even more convinced of the absolute necessity for immediate and effective opposition wherever possible.
The marketplace, the financial sector, and the consumer are in massive defacto opposition, and are refusing to even try to take up business as usual, which just about guarantees that our nation will suffer extremely. So the economy is now his problem; he owns it; and it is a good bet that he can't fix it; and keep America free.
The people will score a deep hatred for those who have taken advantage of our problems to spread pork and payoffs around in the multiple billions from taxpayer revenue, and all this man could do is say "that is old business." So he signed it. Change and hope? I doubt it.
It is the Triumverate of Obama, Reid and Pelosi, and their minions, that must be held to a detailed and explicit account of their wrong moves--starting right now. Hopefully, WE can turn things around in 2010!
Comment Posted By mannning On 9.03.2009 @ 08:39
Quite right, if it is well-founded data, and hasn't been "adjusted" into knots, fm.
Comment Posted By mannning On 3.03.2009 @ 15:08
I must admit, funny man, that such a comparison would seem to demand success criteria that are not easy to quantify, not easy to validate, and not easy to accept by the layman.
I have always been suspicious of the reports on which nations have the most freedom and liberty, for instance, because there are many shades of freedom and liberty, and it is hard to score. Add in a wide range of government forms and laws, or at least several forms and laws for each side, and the permutations and combinations get out of hand.
It would be nice, however, to be able to prove the conservative case in a comprehensive manner that leaves liberals little or no room to maneuver. Just dreaming!
Comment Posted By mannning On 2.03.2009 @ 19:50
Idea Time
Somewhere, sometime, a very smart and knowledgeable team will construct a thoroughgoing comparison between the most likely OUTCOMES OF LIBERALISM and the most likely OUTCOMES OF CONSERVATISM when APPLIED TO THE SAME POLITICAL SITUATION and its issues as the test environment. Maybe in 2050 or later.
While it could never be perfect or complete, and it would find little acceptance by liberals, I assert that it would be an eye-opener for independents and a wide range of conservatives.
The main measures would revolve around freedom of choice, liberty, economic potentials, and equality of opportunity, and, as the backdrop, the provisions of the Constitution--as they stand, and as anyone seriously suggests that it be changed.
We just might then understand more clearly the full impacts of some current decisions of the Congress and President on our nation in a more careful, and unemotional light. It would require an Input/Output Matrix approach that has at least a hundred terms, if not more (an effective econometric matrix for the USSR had 88).
Such a holistic comparison is far beyond my reach to execute--and probably beyond any real possibility of success by any team, either.
The attempt, however, would be an enormous learning experience, and one would hope that some of the fallout would be very useful to conservatism. It would certainly provide a framework for discussion where it would be less possible to subvert the process or to bring in emotional factors of little relevance.
Comment Posted By mannning On 2.03.2009 @ 15:41
FFT
