The usual must read Mark Steyn
Bookworm on Apr 18 2009 at 11:34 pm | Filed under: Uncategorized
Hey, the weekend is half way over and you haven’t read Mark Steyn on the tea parties yet? What the heck are you waiting for? With gems like these, you have to read the whole thing:
Asked about the tea parties, President Obama responded that he was not aware of them. As Marie Antoinette said, “Let them drink Lapsang Souchong.” His Imperial Majesty at Barackingham Palace having declined to acknowledge the tea parties, his courtiers at the Globe and elsewhere fell into line. Talk-show host Michael Graham spoke to one attendee at the 2009 Boston Tea Party who remarked of the press embargo: “If Obama had been the King of England, the Globe wouldn’t have covered the American revolution.”
[snip]
Amid his scattershot pronouncements on everything from global nuclear disarmament to high-speed rail, President Obama said something almost interesting the other day. Decrying a “monstrous tax code that is far too complicated for most Americans to understand,” the Tax-Collector-in-Chief pledged: “I want every American to know that we will rewrite the tax code so that it puts your interests over any special interests.”
That shouldn’t be hard. A tax code that put my interests over any special interests would read: “How much did you earn last year? [Insert number here] thousand dollars? Hey, feel free to keep it. You know your interests better than we do!”
Okay, to be less absolutist about it, my interests include finding a road at the end of my drive every morning, and modern equipment for the (volunteer) fire department, and a functioning military to deter the many predators out there, and maybe one or two other things. But 95 percent of the rest is not just “special interests” but social engineering — a $400 tax credit for falling into line with Barack Obama and Susan Roesgen. That’s why these are Tea Parties — because the heart of the matter is the same question posed two-and-a-third centuries ago: Are Americans subjects or citizens? If the latter, then a benign sovereign should not be determining “your interests” and then announcing that he’s giving you a “tax credit” as your pocket money.
Email This Post To A Friend
13 Responses to “The usual must read Mark Steyn”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
He is a gem.
Yes, he IS a gem.
My favorite paragraph out of his entire essay is the last one Bookworm included in her excerpt. That is what I want my government to do. Some assistance to the truly disabled and those in need but nothing more.
I also was tickled to read Steyn’s comments on what that ignorant reporter, Roesgen, said about Illinois receiving $50B. She was astonished that the Tea Partier wasn’t grateful for it!! Where did she think that money is coming from?
Can she really be that dumb?
Deana
Mark Steyn said:
>> A tax code that put my interests over any special interests would read: “How much did you earn last year? [Insert number here] thousand dollars? Hey, feel free to keep it. You know your interests better than we do!”
Mike Devx posts:
“Let me be perfectly clear: Mark Steyn is showing an outdated, obsolete form of thinking. That is not a 21st Century Viewpoint. We need bold new ideas, not the stale failures of the past.”
Me: “Hey you! What are you doing at my computer? Get away from there! My God, you look like Obama.”
Obama, pontificatorally: “I am he. I was in the neighborhood…”
Me: “Dang, I leave the door unlocked while I make coffee in the kitchen, and the next thing you know… couldn’t you have at least knocked? This is my home, you know.”
Obama: “Technically, it isn’t yours, since everything belongs to the State. We are all in this together, and we must all sacrifice, so that none shall suffer. For now, feel free to cherish your illusion.”
Me: “What did you just say?”
Obama: “Hot damn. There I go again. Where’s my teleprompter? There aren’t any cameras around, are there?”
Me: “No…”
Obama: “Whew. Almost another Joe The Plumber moment. As I was saying, we’re all in this together, so you have to make some sacrifices. It’s important to your neighborhood, your sense of community.”
Hillary at the door: “And it takes a community to raise a child!”
Gore, beside her, hiding behind my shrubs: “And even if it were your home, it will be under forty feet of water by the year 2100 anyway.”
Ayers steps out from behind the tree: “All that discussion is pointless. Let me blow em up, Barack, okay? Just one little pipe bomb, please?”
Obama: “Billy, those days are past.”
Ayers: “Aw… shucks! Indoctrinating their children is getting so BORING. I want to watch it all burn. Burn, baby, burn! Burn it all down! I’ve no faith in Constitution. There’s no bloody revolution.”
Hillary and Obama say in unison: “That kind of statement leaves me deeply concerned. Deeply, deeply concerned. In a non-judgmental way, of course.”
Joe Biden pops up: “Good one, Billy! Hey. Why don’t we do it in the road? Sexy Sadie, and all that. He he he.”
Obama, Hillary, Gore, and Ayers just stare at him.
Mike, if some calamity befalls you and you are without a place to eat and sleep, you just come live with me.
Honing our arguments…
This morning, I asked a question about the sexual innuendo behind the word “teabagging” (since other bloggers have noticed a sneering, locker room quality to MSM reports on the Tea Parties). To date, there have been 94 comments on that……
Mike Devx, nice one.
Deanna:
Can she really be that dumb?
Oddly enough, YES.
Can we agree to add the following:
Rude
Aggressive
Belligerent
Unprofessional
Nasty
Degrading
ah…I digress, I believe they are the job requirements for CNN.
Charles:
If you get Mike (heaven forbid a calamity) could I take him on weekends.
I’m aggressive too. Or maybe the right word is “regressive”. Back to a day of feudalism and oaths and honor bound duties. That’s regressive isn’t it.
According to this report, Susan didn’t get her gig at FOX News, which begs the question …Who asks and answers the questions – the reporter or the boss since she was willing and able to go either way.
http://gawker.com/5216313/fox
I saw that mentioned elsewhere, though not as much detail.
Hell hath no fury…!
Sadie, your link is full idiots and people I’d turn into thresh because they’d have no defenses against real propaganda.
They cannot even correctly analyze what Susan’s real views are. They call it “business”. They don’t know the business end of a cannon versus a warhead, let alone what ‘business” in the propaganda world is.
Exactly, my point. Even Susan doesn’t know her own views, she just follows commands from news headquarters.
Maybe a special assignment in China or Iran would help her navigate a moral compass and show her the real end of the propaganda machine business.
Susan’s contempt and derision of the audience was real in my consideration.
Her angst against Fox News is better explained through personal bitterness and vindictiveness, elements of character flaws and weaknesses, then any command on high. She is not that good of an actor to be able to replicate the demands of her bosses for certain on air performances.
If she was that good an actress, she would become one of the top propagandists and news producers, rather than a simple reporter.