In other words, exactly what carry advocates predicted, and exactly the opposite of what anti-gun folks predicted. Again.
I don’t post these so much so I can write “I told you so!” (although I do enjoy that aspect) but far more to illustrate how there are so many things the MAL consider beyond debate that are, in fact, quite debatable, even if the standard response is “you crazy extremist racist theocrat!”.
Apparently the FBI thinks anyone preparing for civil disasters needs to be watched because obviously a good
subject citizen will sit passively waiting to be rescued by The State. It would be unseemly at best to take care of one’s self, and at worst damaging to society (just look at the hoodlums who dared to try to stop the misunderstood and underserved youth of London — don’t they know that the government has everything under control?).
Of course, it wouldn’t be the government if it didn’t provide a guaranteed failure, with the Department of Homeland Security encouraging people to be prepared. But maybe that’s just so it’s easier to justify watching everyone.
If the government were actually concerned about helping people with disasters rather than fostering dependency, civil defense and preparedness would pay enormous dividends without being particularly expensive. Unfortunately, like feudal lords, our ruling class and their minions can’t stand the thought of the serfs living lives that aren’t controlled by the ruling class. Those bitter clingers would be simply unable to cope if they did not have their betters in charge.
It certainly makes the idea that public transport is much more about control than economy or ecology quite plausible.
Apparently in response to the illegal gun running to Mexican gangs by the ATF (and possibly a number of other federal agencies) the Department of Justice intends to impose additional regulations on gun shops. And there are those who wonder why I just laugh when it’s claimed that government regulation is intended to prevent the recurrence of a problem.
While speaking to a crowd in Pennsylvania, [President] Obama scoffed at the notion of high gas prices and told the
peasantsvoters that if gas prices were too high, then maybe they should eat cake insteadbuy new cars instead
— Hot Air
I am sure Old Media savaged him for this insensitive and out of touch comment…
From Instapundit, a point I have tried to make several times.
Reader Dave Ivers emails: “Having just had a discussion with a close friend on the Left, I truly believe that Obama and probably all of the Left think that 3.5% GDP growth year on year is some sort of natural phenomenon and that no matter what they do it will happen. They then proceeded to trash the things that make that 3.5% growth happen.”
I suspect it’s tied to the general lack of introspection
Once again, the Robert Heinlein quote:Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty. This is known as “bad luck.”
What I find fascinating is that so many of the MAL find physical laws rather flexible and human nature malleable, but the fragile conditions that sustain our technological civilization utterly unalterable.
Obviously, this means taxes and spending aren’t high enough. After all, it worked for FDR.
While we watch the riots in London, there’s something similar brewing locally with increasing incidents of flash mob violence. Some good links to start with are
I think we have to ask ourselves how much the class warfare rhetoric of the MAL has done to enable this problem. One might wonder about MAList policies which excuse and minimize the consequences of such actions for certain segments of the population (which makes it, to me, unsurprising that we’re seeing this mainly from those segments).
In that vein, I await with trepidation the first time one of these mobs encounters armed resistance. I have no doubt that when one of these thugs is killed, all of the usual MAList commentators will put the entire blame on the person who resisted civil violence, not the instigators. Which is precisely the attitude that has done so much to enable this behavior, which we can see in the police concerns during the London riots, the kind of thing the MAL has worked for decades to bring to America.
P.S. One notes that these mobs are primarily (entirely?) in cities that are very strongly controlled by the MALists. Should it not be the opposite, where conservative regions that flood the streets with guns have the violence? Should not cities with more progressive policies be more peaceful? I remain confident that no matter what happens, or what policies these MAList cities pursue, it will be the fault of Reagan / Bush / Tea Party / tax cuts / right wing rants.
I think we might add all the calls for increased social spending in the wake of the London riots. “Pay off the rioters or they’ll do it again”.
P.S. I think the results of the Gladney case were a travesty.
The stories just stack up so fast …
Let’s start with this from the New York Times regarding their reporting about hydraulic fracturing. Even if we skip over the disreputability of that kind of reliance on anonymous sources, check the list of made up titles used by the NYT in the article. I don’t see how that can be described as other than outright lies. We might further note that the purpose of this dishonesty was to influence government policy. I eagerly await the outrage from those journalists who still value their reputation.
Now let us skip across the globe to Australia and a hit piece on Tim Blair which is notable for the blatant and completely fabrications on which it is based. I also note the reflexive “Fox! Murdoch!” accusation which seems to be a replacement for the fading power of “racist!”.
Finally we can look at something with real meat, the entire Global Warmening hoax and its supporters in Old Media. I note that new satellite data puts a big damper on the idea. There’s the CERN data on csmic rays and cloud formation which is being inhibited. We can recall the “anti-science” diatribes against President Bush — perhaps we can hear something similar about this?
But the essential point is all of the “the science is settled!” reporting, when it wasn’t. The mocking abuse of any critic or skeptic (such as the “climate denialist” label). All of it intended to influence, if not control, public policy and the economics of the entire planet. Is this still not big enough to demand the termination of those news organizations that participated?
P.S. There’s the aiding and abetting of the gunwalker coverup as well. Let’s not leave that behind.
Ann Althouse asks “Why do Democrats want high taxation as their brand?”. Basically for the same reason a feudal lord told his serfs to work harder. You don’t have to read much from the MAL to see that the mentality is effectively identical.
Let’s go ahead and drop this in, an article that notes that rising taxes have been percentage wise the leader in the economic burdens on the middle class. One is left wondering whether the Democratic Party is stupid or cruel. I say, why not both?