another view on good ole Walter

Walter Cronkite: Quintessential Liberal-Progressive
By Thomas Brewton | Jul 17, 2009

Mr. Cronkite, the influential and well-liked anchorman of “CBS Evening News” from 1962 to 1981, died today at age 92.

However nice a person he may have been, Walter Cronkite was, more importantly, a model voice for liberal-progressives’ brand of socialism. His lack of understanding about the nature of the Constitution and about the founding ethos of the United States allowed him to warp the minds of millions of Americans with the historicism that characterizes liberal-progressivism.

In a syndicated opinion column dated August 10, 2003, (Siding with the powerless: Ideas from 60 years in journalism) Mr. Cronkite wrote:

We [journalists] reached our intellectual adulthood with daily close-ups of the inequality in a nation that was founded on the commitment to equality for all. So we are inclined to side with the powerless rather than the powerful. If that is what makes us liberals so be it, just as long as . . . we adhere to the first ideals of good journalism.

This is blatant misrepresentation. Neither Mr. Cronkite, nor anyone, can present a single fact to support the contention that ours was a nation that was founded on the commitment to equality for all. It’s true that the colonists carried on the English tradition that everyone is equal under the law, that ours was to be a government of laws, not men.

But the equality that Mr. Cronkite and his liberal-progressive confreres took for granted is the opposite: an economic equality compelled by government tyranny.

Mr. Cronkite’s assertion can be chalked up either to ignorance of the circumstances leading to the War of Independence, or to intentional manipulation of public opinion. Neither is a worthy thing.

Anyone consulting the most influential documents leading up to the Declaration of Independence, such as the letters of Samuel Adams to members of the committees of correspondence in all the other colonies, will see that the rights of private property were the most important single unifying element among the colonial representatives at the Continental Congress. At the initial meeting of the Continental Congress, Adams was the most famous man present, because he had set the tone for the whole debate.

You will find that Samuel Adams repeatedly cited John Locke’s Second Treatise of Civil Government, in which the justification for ousting James II was the natural law doctrine that citizens had brought into political society inalienable rights to life, liberty, and private property. Of these, noted Locke, by far the most important was the right to protection of property against the arbitrary seizure or taxation by the crown. Locke contended that James II, by infringing property rights via confiscation and imprisonment, had broken the social compact and forfeited his right to rule.

Samuel Adams, in several letters, quotes Locke extensively with regard to property rights and says that those views are precisely the case for the colonists against George III and Parliament.

This is also a key element in the case stated by Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence. Our whole justification for breaking with England was preservation of natural law rights. That is the reason for the Declaration’s reference to the Laws of Nature and Nature’s God.

Mr. Cronkite doubtless believed that his liberal-progressivism really helps the less fortunate. But even Mr. Cronkite must have tumbled to the unmitigated disaster resulting from LBJ’s Great Society and Jimmy Carter’s double-digit inflation that wiped out more than half the value of people’s life savings.

What Mr. Cronkite and his fellow mainstream media liberal-progressive-socialists advocated is no less than the doctrine underlying Lenin’s Soviet Union, Mussolini’s Italy, and Hitler’s National Socialist Germany.

Thomas E. Brewton is a staff writer for the New Media Alliance, Inc. The New Media Alliance is a non-profit (501c3) national coalition of writers, journalists and grass-roots media outlets.

His weblog is THE VIEW FROM 1776
http://www.thomasbrewton.com/

Email comments to viewfrom1776@thomasbrewton.com

imagine if....

from Moe Lauzier's blog. Could not of said/asked it better..

Imagine if this was George Bush's first three nonths in office:


Presidential comparison quiz


If George W. Bush had made a joke at the expense of the Special Olympics, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had given Tony Blair a set of inexpensive and useless (to Tony Blair's UK video formatting) DVDs, when Tony Blair had given him a thoughtful and historically significant gift, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing videos of his speeches, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the non-existent "Austrian language," would you have brushed it off as a minor slip?

If George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with people who cannot seem to keep current on their income taxes, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within 10 years, would you have approved?

So, tell me again, what is it about Obama that makes him so brilliant and impressive?

Can't think of anything? Don't worry. He did all this in three months -- so you have three and a half years to come up with an answer.
Ciao.......Moe

a picture tells a 1000 words....

Savior/President Barack Hussein Obama hugs Debby Smith, 53, from Appalachia, Va., after she asks him about her health care during a town hall meeting at the Northern Virginia Community College in Annandale, Va., Wednesday, July 1, 2009.(AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

The AP reports "The health care changes that Obama called for Wednesday would reshape the nation's medical landscape. He says he wants to cover nearly 50 million uninsured Americans, to persuade doctors to stress quality over quantity of care, to squeeze billions of dollars from spending.

But details on exactly how to do those things were generally lacking in his hour-long town hall forum before a friendly, hand-picked audience in a Washington suburb. The lingering questions underscore the tough negotiations awaiting Congress, the administration and dozens of special interest groups in the coming months. Lawmakers will return to debating the issue when they return from a one-week recess on Monday.

Some of Obama's questioners Wednesday were from friendly sources, including a member of the Service Employees International Union and a member of Health Care for America Now, which organized a Capitol Hill rally last week calling for an overhaul. White House aides selected other questions submitted by people on YouTube, Facebook and Twitter.

Republicans said the event was a political sham designed to help Obama, not to inform the public."

My take on this pic and show....Obama thinking "What the F*** do I do now?"

Meet the newest member of the Obama administration in 2010 and more stuff...

Interesting how quiet the response to violence in the post Iran elections from the United Nations eh? What a sham of an organization.

The following House members of the Republican party are traitors and must be voted out...as they voted in one of the biggest fraud bills in history...The Energy Tax (call it what you want..)
Reps. Mary Bono (Calif.), Michael Castle (Del.), Mark Kirk (Ill.), Leonard Lance (N.J.), Frank LoBiondo (N.J.), John McHugh (N.Y.), David Reichert (Wash.) and Christopher Smith (N.J.) From what I understand, the only thing this bill has done is reduce the gross domestic product (aggregate amount by about $10 trillion, increase the average U.S. home energy bill by $1,500, blow up about 2 million jobs a year, raise the electric rates by 90% if you adjust for inflation, raise gas prices by about 75% and raise natural gas prices by around 55%. That's nothin' according to the Savior Elect. We go green. (as does our cash, what we have of it, down the drain..)

Rasmussen is reporting today..

"The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that 31% of the nation's voters now Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Thirty-three percent (33%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -2. That matches the lowest level yet recorded..." Now the gray hair watch on the Big O begins......

"No individual should face workplace discrimination based on race," Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote for the five-member majority. All that needs to be said after the Supreme Court yesterday restricted how far employers may go in considering race in hiring and promotion decisions. This ruling puts workplaces across the nation on notice that efforts to combat potential discrimination against one group can amount to actual discrimination against another. Bravo!

Laughing at the Obama administration burying their own EPA report that global warming was man made...
This from CNET.. "

The Environmental Protection Agency may have suppressed an internal report that was skeptical of claims about global warming, including whether carbon dioxide must be strictly regulated by the federal government, according to a series of newly disclosed e-mail messages.


Less than two weeks before the agency formally submitted its pro-regulation recommendation to the White House, an EPA center director quashed a 98-page report that warned against making hasty “decisions based on a scientific hypothesis that does not appear to explain most of the available data.”


And from the U.K.'s Telegraph...

"Over the coming days a curiously revealing event will be taking place in Copenhagen. Top of the agenda at a meeting of the Polar Bear Specialist Group (set up under the International Union for the Conservation of Nature/Species Survival Commission) will be the need to produce a suitably scary report on how polar bears are being threatened with extinction by man-made global warming.

...But one of the world's leading experts on polar bears has been told to stay away from this week's meeting, specifically because his views on global warming do not accord with those of the rest of the group.

Dr Taylor had obtained funding to attend this week's meeting of the PBSG, but this was voted down by its members because of his views on global warming. The chairman, Dr Andy Derocher, a former university pupil of Dr Taylor's, frankly explained in an email (which I was not sent by Dr Taylor) that his rejection had nothing to do with his undoubted expertise on polar bears: "it was the position you've taken on global warming that brought opposition".

Dr Taylor was told that his views running "counter to human-induced climate change are extremely unhelpful".


Meet the newest member of the Obama administration in 2010..Based on the latest Rasmussen posting, he is done. And you can have him...

"Twenty-six percent (26%) of Massachusetts voters say their state’s health care reform effort has been a success. A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in the state finds that 37% say the reform effort has been a failure, while another 37% are not sure.

Only 10% of Bay State voters say the quality of health care has gotten better as a result of the reform plan while 29% say it has gotten worse. Most (53%) say the quality of care has not changed.

As for cost, 21% say the reform has made health care more affordable in Massachusetts. Twenty-seven percent (27%) say health care is now less affordable while 44% see no change.

The Massachusetts Health Care Reform was enacted in 2006 by Republican Governor Mitt Romney and a Democratic state legislature. Some consider it a bipartisan model for national health care reform.

By a 37% to 17% margin, Massachusetts liberals consider the program a success. By a 55% to 18% margin, conservatives in the state say it’s been a failure.

From a partisan perspective, Democrats are fairly evenly divided with 49% not sure if the reform effort has been a success or a failure. Sixty-six percent (66%) of Republicans say it’s been a failure. Among those not affiliated with either major party, 27% consider the reform plan a success while 41% say it’s been a failure."

Finally, reports today are that consumer confidence are down. You don't say!
So what if spending from consumers accounts for more than two-thirds of U.S. economic activity. It is CHANGE that we can believe in, right?
Got any loose, spare "change?"

So now the recession looks prolonged. Hey, Michael Jackson died..you here!

a stinker of a Stimulus plan...

While the press is focused on Michael Jackson's passing, the Electric Chair tax and health care, how quick we let go of the sinking Stimulus Ship...(version 1..version 2 is pending..)

The Obonomy has lost more jobs and the unemployment rate is significantly higher than was originally predicted than would be the case if Washington did nothing. In fact, the original projections of Obama's economic pinheads/pencil necked geeks have turned out to be off the mark.

The Obama defense team counters that the economy was worse than it realized at the time it was making its projections, and that the present jobs picture would be worse without the stimulus spending.

The Great One has said that "the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act has saved or created nearly 150,000 jobs." That stat smells of dog crap. The President's Council of Economic Advisers never actually counted those 150,000 jobs. It's a rough projection based on calculations made before the Savior-elect even took office on January 9, 2009.

The Romoer-Bernstein study guessed (among other things) a "rule of thumb" that a one percent increase in economic output (measured by gross domestic product or GDP) roughly equals 1 million jobs. Those are pretty numbers or otherwise known as "fuzzy math." The study authors even said that "Our estimates of economic relationships and rules of thumb are derived from historical experience and so will not apply exactly in any given episode."

Their "fuzzy math" was not even close.

The Obama drool team originally estimated, as an example, that unless a stimulus plan was enacted, the unemployment rate would reach nearly 9 percent sometime in the first three months of next year. But even with the HUGE spending package now in place, the jobless rate blew up to 9.4 percent in May according to the figures from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

There are two charts which show just what I am talkin about.

You can see just how far off the Obama genuis team has been.

In the three months after the stimulus bill was signed on February 18th, , the economy lost more than 1.5 million jobs! So even if the Obama's 150,000-jobs claim is correct, that's about 10 percent of the total jobs lost.

Now back to the Michael Jackson death.....

see any difference in pose?

a shot across his brow.....

P.I.D.E. (President I Didn't Elect) Barack Hussein Obama, Democrat and Teleprompter King, fresh from his smoky treat behind a White House shrub, better be ready to re-light up after I read a recent Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll. In the poll, Obama's political popularity has eroded quite noticeably amongst independents in recent weeks.

While his first real job approval rating among most American's slipped from 61 to 56 percent, (which is about the norm in a President's first term), his first real job approval rating fell to 45% from 60% in April amongst independent voters.

Democrat Peter Hart and Republican Bill McInturff, directors of the Wall Street Journal (owned by Fox News, by the way)/NBC News poll, write in their analysis of the findings that these results are "much more critical evaluation by these voters of President Obama"

This drop just reiterates my prior post about major concerns about government spending on the U.S. American Express Card (don't leave Chicago without it).

The Wall Street Journal adds that "The share of independents who say Mr. Obama is a liberal has risen to a substantial 64% from 46% two months ago. A large portion of them actually classify him as "very liberal." That's a particular problem because independents tend to view themselves as center-right -- 78% call themselves moderate or conservative -- so they see a president moving to the left of where they are."

"This is a clear and important danger for him," says Mr. Hart, the Democratic pollster. Independents, he adds, don't seem to worry so much that Mr. Obama is trying to tackle too many issues, but rather that "this administration is leaning much more left than they expected" as he handles those issues."

As I write this, a fresh coat of Teflon is being applied to the Obama armor.
(Don't worry about the cost, he charged it.)

Our weak, narcissistic and inept President....

President Obama's policy on Iran (or lack thereof) is embarrassing. At a time when our Savior elect can show some stones, he back peddles. Mr. President/Savior, there is a good reason why the protesters have signs in English. Just two weeks ago, Obama had promised in Cairo, (during his Apology 2009 tour) in his address/sermon to the Muslim world, that there will be a "new beginning" in U.S.-Muslim relations. The Great One spoke of his alleged belief in democracy and of his "unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent
and doesn't steal from the people; the freedom to live as you
choose." He added that they were just not American ideas but universal human rights, adding "and that is why we will support them everywhere." I guess this does not apply in Iran. Obama seems to think that the world is watching Iran and suggests that world opinion will turn against the government. He is either suffering from nicotine withdrawal or continuing to suffer from acute naivete. None of this matters to those in the Moslem world. History has proven that they could give a sh** what the non-Moslem world does.

Obama was brilliant in his campaign. But, fluttered in the breeze just as Kerry did on his wind surfboard back in 2004 when issues such as the Georgia conflict occurred with Russia. Many of his believers are even second guessing his spending on America's American Express Card without any definitive plans on how to pay off the balance.

Now Obama's verbal placating of guys like Kim Jong Il and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are taking the wind out his sails. (Sorry Mr. Kerry. Hey where have you been? How is Teresa, the ketchup queen?)

His policies sound great. One thing though, Barack. Do you ever read the policies through? The Big "O" literally subcontracted the stimulus plans to goons named Waxman and Markey. He did the same on his health plan to a fellow goon named Baucus.
He puts out pork barrel projects that have have burst the barrel. Even his carbon emissions bill (sorry Hillary your emissions still violate EPA standards when thinking back of when you found out Biden was the chosen one..) does not limit those fowl emissions from your political pals in those same industries.

So what if you Congressional Budget office came out with a figure of $1,600,000,000,000? Just charge it!

One of the first promises by the Big "O" was his plan to close
Guantanamo Bay. Not so fast. He now has to beg others to take these murderers (ok, alleged murderers and terrorists) to places like Bermuda.

Mr. Obama bent over and accepted the Arabs insistence that all of the problems in the Middle East could be solved with an Israeli/Palestinian settlement. Problem is Mr. President that this puts us in the position of having to pressure our friends in Israel to not expand any settlements and to back off their threats to Iran.

Finally, the stories of Obama wanting to do things "Chicago style politics" are beginning to give him cramps...political cramps. His thinking that there is always a sucker in the private sector that can be looted in behest to his political favs. (I.e. Chrysler and G.M. bailouts to the greedy United Auto Workers.)

His promise of a "transparent" Presidency sure fell off the band wagon. He kept attention anemic Republicans out of any serious policy negotiations. He scorned George W. in his speeches. (This past week GW bashed back, in third person, Texas style..)

While a majority of the mainstream media carry his political depends where ever he goes, he bitches and moans about his negative press on Fox News. (Funny how their ratings have increased since the Big "O" fumbled the oath.)

Now comes news that he fired Inspector Generals who exposed his political pals. Sounds like the same ole same ole Mr. Hussein-Obama.

He arose from Chicago, bumped his head on Air Force One and Marine One at the start of his Presidential rides, and excretes a glow like now one has seen in years. (Perhaps this is off the teleprompter reflection..?)

His poll numbers are down. But not that far down. Yet. Many libs are getting disappointed and frustrated. Their car payments are not being made. Yet. Where is their stimulus? Is it really just a prostate tickle? Can Mr. Obama adjust? Does he admit that he has to adjust his quasi policies?

Can he adapt to some harder realities and those events that are unexpected?

We have 1307 days until his term is up to find out.