11.03.08

The Chicago Marxist doesn’t care about you, the middle class, the United States of America – or even the stinkin’ environment, for that matter

Posted in Environment policy, Ideology, Law dhimmitude, Politics, iraq at 4:21 pm by Administrator

Sure on the surface, it looks like his forthright assertion that his cap-and-trade scheme’s effects of “skyrocketing prices” for coal-engendered energy and the bankrupting of the coal industry is all about his principled fealty to pristine air.  Don’t kid yourself.  It’s all about a Stalinist thug’s lust for absolute power.

  • Share/Bookmark

5 Comments »

  1. Mr. Dings said,

    November 3, 2008 at 6:25 pm

    Absolutely unprecedented move by the newspaper I grew up reading and enjoying much more than the Indy Star which I delivered. Absolutely unprecedented!! Perhaps they want a Chicagoan in the WH? But, dearest of bloggies, W in the WH (with all the baggage of his henchmen) was an unmitigated disaster. Unmitigated! And you trash Carter here repeatedly. Good friggin’ riddance. Thank God, though, we never had to endure a President Cheney. Was’ up with that anyhow? Usually Veeps run….

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-chicago-tribune-endorsement,0,1371034.story?track=email-alert-breakingnews

    This endorsement makes some history for the Chicago Tribune. This is the first time the newspaper has endorsed the Democratic Party’s nominee for president.

    The Tribune in its earliest days took up the abolition of slavery and linked itself to a powerful force for that cause–the Republican Party. The Tribune’s first great leader, Joseph Medill, was a founder of the GOP. The editorial page has been a proponent of conservative principles. It believes that government has to serve people honestly and efficiently.

    With that in mind, in 1872 we endorsed Horace Greeley, who ran as an independent against the corrupt administration of Republican President Ulysses S. Grant. (Greeley was later endorsed by the Democrats.) In 1912 we endorsed Theodore Roosevelt, who ran as the Progressive Party candidate against Republican President William Howard Taft.

    The Tribune’s decisions then were driven by outrage at inept and corrupt business and political leaders.

    We see parallels today.

    The Republican Party, the party of limited government, has lost its way. The government ran a $237 billion surplus in 2000, the year before Bush took office — and recorded a $455 billion deficit in 2008. The Republicans lost control of the U.S. House and Senate in 2006 because, as we said at the time, they gave the nation rampant spending and Capitol Hill corruption. They abandoned their principles. They paid the price.

  2. Bentnotesmanhisself said,

    November 3, 2008 at 8:06 pm

    You read it here first – BN harbors huge biterness toward the Republican Party, many if not most of its Congressional members, and the disgustingly clueless John McCain for the danger we find ourselves in this evening.
    I am unsparing in my scorn for those who profess to be exemplars of the party that should be the repository of conservatism and then act like either greed-and-pork dealers of mush-headed Reasonable Gentlemen.
    By their malfeasance and ineptitude, they handed the field of battle to the Freedom-Haters, who now have the perfect embodiment of their aims.
    May God show us mercy.

  3. Mr. Dings said,

    November 4, 2008 at 1:55 pm

    So, are the alleged Freedom-Haters to blame for their perceived aims, their agenda? I cannot abide the hate that has spewed forth from the right this time. Squriming like little bugs on pins of their own positioning. The whole world is watching.

  4. Administrator said,

    November 4, 2008 at 5:24 pm

    Here’s what we hate: socialism, perversity, disdain for the Constitution, junk science and the poisonous idea that postive historical developments happen because “this world stands as one.”

    Conversely, we love the United States of America, its Constitution, almighty God, the family unit, human initiative and ingenuity and the prosperity that results from it, common sense and a true cultural vitality borne of a collective societal maturity.

  5. Mr. Dings said,

    November 5, 2008 at 6:05 pm

    I vote for the latter as well. But where is the prosperity now? We all need a change of heart, mind, and especially soul. This has become a soulless nation. Name calling will not change a thing. This is a democracy and the people spoke. We all deserve change. All of us!

Leave a Comment