10 thoughts on “On The Horizon”

  1. Optimistic that they’d change course? Heavens, why is that the path of optimism? I’m a Leninist on this matter. The worse the better. Let them continue on this perfect trajectory into the ground at Mach 8. Team Obama and the Democratic leadership in Congress are doing more to discredit the ideas of late 19th-early 20th century socialism, a pernicious mental disease, than anyone in the center or right could possibly accomplish. In a few short years voting Democratic will be seen as the mark of a lunatic or fool, and possibly the Democrats, just to survive, will eject the crazies and get back to their Truman/Jackson roots. One can hope.

    Full speed ahead, Obamacrats! Into the ice field at flank speed!

  2. In a few short years voting Democratic will be seen as the mark of a lunatic or fool

    For some of us, this has been the case for many years and with good reason.

  3. The declassification of some of the trickier aspects of refining uranium under Jimmy Carter is still haunting us, for example. “We need to release this information so people can see how horrible it all is and avoid anything nuclear.” Delightful.

  4. I don’t think you need a crystal ball to know what happens next. The Obama administration will follow the normal trajectory of the failed left. Lie, lie, lie – fix blame on others – re-invent and try again.

  5. Hanson is making up his own reality, and Yglesias is right to call him on the racially paranoid nature of that faux reality. To pick one example:

    we have a traditional statist bent on redistribution (Obama’s words, not mine)

    Of course Obama never described himself as any such thing, Hanson is just making that up.

  6. Yes, but Jim, Obama actually is a traditional statist bent on redistribution, if not a plain garden-variety Stalinist. What he calls himself is of no importance whatsoever. I assure you that when the Devil comes to start Armageddon and destroy humanity, he will call himself the Messiah. Do you doubt it?

  7. Complaining that the Constitution doesn’t have “positive rights” (that requires that someone else pony up to support them) isn’t redistribution because Jim says it’s not.

    Sorry, Jim, but we stubbornly remain not as stupid as you (and the president) want us to be.

  8. What he calls himself is of no importance whatsoever.

    So it’s okay for Hanson to lie about it?

    “Spreading the wealth around” is NOT redistribution because Jim says it’s not.

    Hanson did not write “Obama wants to spread the wealth around (his words, not mine).”

    Complaining that the Constitution doesn’t have “positive rights” (that requires that someone else pony up to support them) isn’t redistribution because Jim says it’s not.

    Observing is not the same thing as complaining, much less being “bent” on the alternative.

    Hanson is playing fast and loose with facts, and as usual Rand is happy to let him get away with it.

Comments are closed.