Wednesday, August 10, 2011

More Proof That Liberals Are Insane

Liberalism truly is a mental condition. Time and again, liberal policies lead to disaster and yet liberals absolutely refuse to see that. If at first you don’t succeed, just keep doing the same thing over and over until you get a different result. . . and don’t you dare try to fix any problems that may arise. Consider these examples.

1. Food Stamps For Rich College Kids Liberals believe in food stamps as a way to help poor people who “don’t earn enough to survive.” So you would assume liberals would want to stop rich and middle class moochers from exploiting the food stamp program? Apparently not.

Unlike other states, Michigan allows college kids to get food stamps. Federal law forbids this, but Michigan liberals got around that by classifying college as an “employment training program.” They also check eligibility for food stamps on the basis of income only without regard to assets. Hence, someone with a ton of money but no actual income can qualify for food stamps. . . someone like Leroy Fick, who won the state lottery but remained on food stamps.

Michigan is now changing its rules. College kids can now only get food stamps if they are single mothers or if they work more than 20 hours per week and still fall within income restrictions (assets will be considered as well). This change will kick 30,000 college kids off the program and save the state $75 million per year in food stamps.

Liberals should be thrilled. These middle class to rich moochers living comfortably on parental support and federal student loans, most of whom have better job prospects upon graduation than 90% of taxpayers, were robbing taxpayers (including “the working poor”) and draining the system, which prevented the money from reaching people who really needed it. But liberals aren’t outraged at the moochers, they’re outraged at the conservative governor who has made the change. Their reasoning? A change in the law to prevent the rich from taking money meant for the poor “will be unfair to the poor.”

Stupidity or insanity?

2. Stimulus Failure (redux): The evidence is indisputable that government spending to boost an economy in the short term is a disaster. I do believe careful spending in certain types of infrastructure can lead to long term growth. For example, the creation of a highway or getting electricity to people can create a wealth of opportunities as consumers and businesses make use of those services to reach each other. But you can’t boost an economy just by hiring people to build something.

History has shown this over and over. In fact, the biggest ignored lesson of the Great Depression came from FDR’s own Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau, who wrote this in his diary about their efforts to stem the recession:

“We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. . . [A]fter eight years of this administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started. . . and an enormous debt to boot!”
Sound familiar? Now the Democrats want to go for another stimulus bill. . . a fifth under Obama. The others all failed, yet they think this one will work. That’s Albert Einstein’s definition of insanity: repeating the same action over and over, but expecting a different result. Hence, liberals are insane.

3. CAFE Standards Obama just introduced new fuel efficiency standards (CAFE) for trucks. Raising CAFE standards makes cars more expensive, driving down demand and keeping poor people in older, less-safe vehicles longer. What’s more, the one type of vehicle in which American car companies still dominate is the truck. This will hurt Detroit. I guess Obama’s slogan for 2012 will be, “The GM bailout was so successful, I want to repeat it in 2014!”

4. Obama Strong Warlord The last Democrat with any sense of how to win a war was Harry Truman, and he seemed to lose that by the time Korea came along. Since that time, the Democrats have become a party of pacifists, cowards and military incompetents. Obama looks to continue this ignoble tradition by tucking his tail in Afghanistan and Libya. But the Democrats want to portray him as a big tough killer. What to do? What to do?

Oh, I know. Let’s have Hollywood make a movie about Obama’s dithering over the killing of Osama bin Laden to prove his resolve of steal (hmm, is that spelled right?).

Here’s the catch. When Obama was thumping his chest after the military killed bin Laden, he got all of a three point bounce, which vanished again before the first shark took a bite out of bin Laden’s body. Obama got no bounce form running away in Iraq or cowering before Iran or Honduras. He got no bounce from the surge in Afghanistan. He got a negative bounce from bombing Libya. And Americans have stayed away in droves from every war film Hollywood has produced about the war on terror. Hmmm. So what makes liberals think this will help the man of steal? Insanity.

5. London Violence London police killed some gangbanger. According to liberals, it is outrageous that anyone should ever be killed and violence is unacceptable. So what do liberals do to protest? They start rioting in London, burning buses with people in them, beating people with baseball bats, etc. In other words, they have turned to massive, random violence to protest a single instance of probably justified violence. Nice.

As an "interesting" aside -- at least it will be interesting for most liberals (possibly even mind-boggling) -- the rioting stopped in London once the police threatened to use rubber bullets. The rioters moved on to other cities at that point. As a further aside, they don't riot in my neighborhood because we don't waste our time with rubber bullets.


T-Rav said...

Andrew, I disagree. I don't think it's insanity--I think it's pure cravenness inevitably resulting from the welfare-state mentality. This is no longer about providing for those who can't support themselves, it's all "I want mine." Take the London rioters. Whatever role the racism thing might have played originally, it now seems to be more a case of spoiled youth acting out because the government is trying to stop pouring money on them. Perfect example of what a sense of entitlement does to you.

Also, if I were the London police chief, I would have gone Bull Connor on their rears a long time ago.

Tennessee Jed said...

Ann Coulter seems to think it is "mob" mentality.

One interesting thing about the Morgenthau, Jr. quote. It was in a May 9, 1939 speech to influential Democrats in control of the Ways and Means committee. It was a frank admission of the truth to the true believers. Morgenthau was one of the very few unafraid to tell FDR the truth. Frighteningly, there are eery similarities as to what went on then and what is going on now in terms of the market. Scary!!!

If I may, I'll plug a couple of good reads in so far as our learning from that time (something, as you point out, liberals seem incapable of doing.)

1) New Deal or Raw Deal?: Burton Folsom, Jr

2) The Forgotten Man - A New History of the Great Depression: Amity Shlaes

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, I agree. I think history is quickly showing us that the welfare state breeds a mindset that is both devoid of reason or decency, and the only things it cares about are perpetuating itself, getting the benefits to which it thinks it is entitled, and throwing tantrums no matter who gets hurt.

It's amazing how similar union thuggery, leftist/"anarchist" protestors, and riots all look -- and excuse to use violence without purpose except to punish those they don't like and to steal things they haven't earned.

Tam said...

Often it is easier to mourn with those who mourn than to rejoice with those who rejoice. I think that sometimes we feel threatened or minimized by others' success. Reasonable people can get past whatever envy or insecurity causes this and eventually come around to celebrating others' success. Liberals can't do that. In my experience and observations, liberals oversympathize with "the poor" or "the unfortunate" but have no such connection with people who work, have success and therefore create opportunities for more success. I think they epitomize insecurity and guilt, projecting both onto their opposition, seeing (a.k.a. fabricating) in others their own nasty and violent tendencies while denying or excusing their behavior.

And, we have a plaque with an engraving of a gun and the saying "We don't call 911."

AndrewPrice said...

Jed, You can always plug a good book! :-)

It is eerie how similar things are today to then. The Democrats reacted stupidly back then and it didn't work. Today, with all the lessons of history available, they have decided to repeat the exact same pattern of mistakes. It's amazing.

It's like someone who shoots themselves in the foot because they refuse to unload their gun before cleaning it.... and then they repeat their motions exactly the next time.... and the next time.... and the next time.

It really is Einstein's definition of insanity.

AndrewPrice said...

BTW, I have just heard that the Dems did indeed lose the Wisconsin recall lost night. They needed three wins and only got two. Ha ha!

So let's do what the dems/MSM would do and read in that this is a total confirmation of all prior Republican policies (state and national) and a total repudiation of unions and Democrats everywhere! :-)

AndrewPrice said...

Tam, First, let me say that is a great plaque! :-)

Secondly, great diagnosis of liberalism. I think that's absolutely true. They make this huge fuss about "the poor" and siding with "those who can't help themselves" and they don't care at all that their policies are crushing everyone else to placate their desire to feel gracious.

What's more, I think there's an incredible condescension in their views on the poor. They aren't interested in truly helping the poor improve so much as they are interested in turning the poor into children who must look to them for support and advice on how to live their lives. I think it's a way to make themselves feel superior --- "they need me."

And the fact this whole thing is so twisted causes them strange moments of guilt, which they react to by projecting those onto conservatives and others, in attempt to delude themselves that their own sins are someone elses.

CrispyRice said...

"Stupidity or insanity?"

Is this a trick question? Can I pick both??

Actually, I keep coming back to thinking that it has to be intentional. They cannot be this stupid. Can they?? Could the conspiracy-theorists who think this is a plot to destroy America be right?? Why do I feel like *I* am the one living in crazy world?

AndrewPrice said...

Crispy, Of course it's a trick question! LOL! It's both! :-)

In terms of this being intentional... I think it's probably intentional with many of the Democratic leaders. I'm sure people like Pelosi are cynically working to trap people as permanent Democratic voters and she knows the consequences of what she's doing and she doesn't care.

But the rank and file are just stupid and blind. They believe what they are told without a second thought and so they are genuinely surprised when things don't work out.

CrispyRice said...

How often can you be "genuinely surprised" and pass it off as "hmm, must be Bush's fault!"???

I think Tam, Jed and T-Rav are all right. There is very little sense of personal responsibility left. We have nurtured a society of "gimme gimme gimme it's my right to have" and when you don't get it for free, then it's ok to use force, whether that be lawmakers, unions or taking to the streets. We're going to pay dearly for it. I don't know how to change the mob thinking and inject some shred of responsibility and human decency back into the equation.

BevfromNYC said...

Andrew - re: Wisconsin recall. What the MSM and HuffPo AREN'T reporting much is that there are 2 Dem recall elections coming up...if they lose one, the Dems will be back to square one. But in true Dem fashion, they are spinning it that they won a victory because they got their point. Yes, they showed up - losing is the same as winning

AndrewPrice said...

Crispy, I think there is a lot too that... BUT not in all parts of America. This is true with the liberal class (poor, drug addicts, pimps, environmental terrorists, college professors, union thugs, government employees) but the rest of America no longer has a tolerance to allow this.

If a riot happened in my neighborhood, they would need trucks to haul away the bodies. And liberals know that, so they only riot in their own neighborhoods. And even there, they are leery of doing it in the US because the American public will not allow it -- unlike the weak-kneed Europeans.

Unfortunately, we haven't been able to cut them off from government support, but things like the Michigan reform and the Wisconsin reform in the 1990s are the first steps there.

The country is slowly becoming more conservative even if Washington isn't. And hopefully, the Tea Party will force Washington to accept that the days of letting people live off the government are over.

AndrewPrice said...

Bev, I couldn't help but notice that the AP was giving the races major coverage last night when it looked like the Dems might win and has suddenly gone radio silent now that they've lost.

It doesn't surprise me that the idiots at Huffpo would declare losing the same as victory, but if you think about it, this is a HUGE loss for the Dems, even if we don't win any more seats. Wisconsin in a liberal, pro-union state. They poured millions of dollars into these campaigns ($37 million apparently). The sent in thousand of union thugs to organize. They turned out every union member, every drug addict and every leftist college student they could find.

And yet they lost.

That is an amazing affirmation of what the Republicans did and a serious slap the Democrats. This was supposed to be the place the Republicans "went too far," and the public just said "no, not really... keep going."

T-Rav said...

Andrew, I was following the WI races some last night, and a little bit this morning, and from what I've seen, the Kos/HuffPo crowd are having a meltdown in private, whatever they might say publicly. All the usual stuff about "dumb rural hicks" is going around, except this time it's directed towards a state they always assumed was on their side. Awesome.

A couple of Dem officials are saying this is just the warm-up for their planned recall against Scott Walker. I say: Do it. Just keep this up and show where your head's at, while the rest of the state moves on without you.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, That's interesting that they seem to understand what happened even if they don't admit it publicly.

This was a disaster for them and there's no other way to put it. Of all the place in the country that should have gone to the Democrats, this was is. And they certainly pumped in enough money to push it well over the top. Shocking! Hilarious, but shocking!

I agree about the Walker recall. This is like spoiled children who will keep making demands until they get there way. This will turn the public off something fierce. So I say, have at it. Show us the public what kind of bad losers the left are!

AndrewPrice said...

P.S. T-Rav, I don't think we would have lost that one race either, if the guy hadn't had an affair with a staffer. So this could actually have been much worse for them.

And idea if we have a chance to win any Democratic seats? I'm assuming we don't because turn out will probably be light now, but it would be hilarious to win some of those.

Unknown said...

Andrew: I'm with Crispy. I choose stupid and insane.

On Wisconsin (that's a song, isn't it?): The proof of the insanity is the ability to spend $30 million dollars of union dues to lose, then declare a victory. The proof of the stupidity is their ability to believe that now that Walker and the Republicans can get Wisconsin's fiscal house in order and get the state out of debt, they can defeat Walker because he's a big meanie. There will be a large number of non-public employee union members who will vote Republican.

AndrewPrice said...

Lawhawk, What would be true evidence of insanity would be if anyone believed their declaration that this was a victory. There's just no reasonable way to spin that to a victory.

So I guess we'll see how smart/sane their followers are.

On the stupid or insane question, I tend to agree that it's both. Why limit ourselves?

Joel Farnham said...


A lot of this is just Liberalism taken to it's logical conclusion.

Feed the poor. What do you get? More poor. More people qualified as poor to get food stamps.

Logical and inevitable. I could go on, but you get the idea. Fortunately, if there is any fortune, this demonstrates the insanity and stupidity of liberalism and by extension liberals. I hope the electorate gets the lessons.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, I think the electorate is listening and more importantly, they are getting engaged.

I think you can see this in the fact the Democrats need to lie more and more brazenly than they used to. At this point, no one (not even leftists) openly advocates leftism -- they need to disguise it as conservatism. If the public hadn't turned on them, that wouldn't be the case.

And now a whole new generation has learned what happens when the Democrats get their hands on power -- labor unrest, riots, crashing dollar, huge debts, bad economy.

Clinton was an aberration because he did what the Republicans told him.

Joel Farnham said...


I noticed that. Didn't Hillary get upset at Bill for signing the welfare reform law?

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, She was furious. There was even talk about her running against Bill when he ran for re-election because he had "betrayed his base." And that turned out to be THE bill the Clinton's now brag about as their biggest achievement (apart from the "balanced" budget**).

** this statement does not account for debts and spending excluded from the budget to make it balance.

T-Rav said...

Andrew, that's very true about the one seat that was lost, and the other one was a generally Democratic district anyway. So claims by the Dems that they somehow took on the Republicans on their own turf should be inducing laughter, not chest-thumping. Of course, you can't blame them for trying to put the best spin they can on this, but they all know what happened last night.

As for the two Dem seats up next week, I hear they're both potential toss-ups: one more so than the other, but even the "safer" one only voted for Kerry about 51-49 in '04. So there's a very real chance that we could make these losses good, in which case the unions would be totally broken for next year. Yum...

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, If we win either, it will be huge. Wisconsin just isn't a state you think about when the word "Republican" comes up. And to see the Republicans not only get the legislature and the governorship, but also use it for genuine conservatism, and then withstand an all out union/Democratic counter attack is just wonderful. If we could now get a Democratic seat or two, that would be the cherry on top of a major Sunday! :-)

I'm not holding my breath--- heck, I thought we would have lost almost all of the seats last night--- but I am hopeful. That would be a real blow to the Democrats and their union buddies.

As it is, this may spark a lot more conservative activity in other states now that the unions have proven to be a paper tiger on their home turf.

Joel Farnham said...


I wonder if anyone has noted down the places in the United States where flash mobs and riots have broken out? My guess is that they only occur in places where people have deliberately disarmed themselves. Large cities and certain placid suburbs where the liberal mantras hold sway. Like gun and drug free zones.

Joel Farnham said...

I found one! This obviously doesn't include small incidents.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, I haven't kept specific track, but the names always seem to be Chicago, Philly... places like that... places with generations of liberal government and strong gun control.

So yeah, I think you're right. You're not going to see a lot of this in places like Texas or Oklahoma. For one thing, the liberal culture of violence and selfishness don't exist in those places and for another the population is armed and won't stand there and play victim.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, Hmm. Well, look at that... the same places that have gang problems. Who could have guessed!

** rolls eyes **

Joel Farnham said...


What was that old saying? Mug a liberal, create a conservative?

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, That is one method of creating a conservative. Another is to tax their income. Another is to show them liberalism in all its "glory."

StanH said...

Poverty is a choice in America, and we all know how important choice is to a liberal - - as long as you choose what they want you to choose.

Wisconsin is wonderful stuff. Sgt. Shultz looked like somebody stole his box of donuts, I love it. That’s $35million that won’t used in later elections, unless Barry gets into his stash.

If a flash mob happened in my neck of the woods, foothills of North Georgia, be certain to bring body bags for your protest. It’ll truly be a flash mob, over in a flash.

Joel Farnham said...


It is doubtful a flash mob will happen in your neck of the woods. It requires a citizenry that has been effectively disarmed and promised to be protected by the police. You aren't disarmed.

AndrewPrice said...

Stan, LOL! "I would be over in a flash." That's why they stick to nice, safe, liberal cities... cities where the government has disarmed it's citizenry. It's too dangerous to riot where people can defend themselves.

You're right about poverty being a choice in America. Even with a kleptocratic-Democrat like Obama in the White House, America is still the land of opportunity.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, Speaking of police protection for mobs. When I was still in DC, they had one of these anti-IMF protests by the "anarchists" who want world-wide socialism.

The cops were literally there to stop people from hurting the rioters. They weren't there to stop the riots. They even worked out with the rioters where they could riot and where they couldn't. Unbelievable.

Joel Farnham said...


That is unreal. Unfortunately, it never made the news. This is the first time I had heard that police cooperated with rioters. Here in this Tennessee town, if there happened to be a riot and the police attempted to restrain citizens to stop them from sniping at them, there would be several police funerals included with the deaths of the rioters. And no one would know anything.

I think the local paper would include the names of the dead police in the list of dead rioters.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, It was pretty outrageous. The cops decided that it was safer if they established zones where the rioters could riot and then let people claim the damage on their insurance. It was despicable.

Across the river, by the way, in Virginia, the cops would have ended the riot at the first since of violence and they would have been ruthless about it. Hence, Northern Virginia has a murder rate that is about 1/100th of the rate in DC.

rlaWTX said...

on that map: interesting that despite racial statements being yelled, none of these incidents are "racially motivated"... 1+1=5?

I have a relative in England with whom I was discussing the riots on facebook. She is furious - and since I realize that she's a bit biased: despite being a Brit, she's married to a US military guy - I was glad to see her fb friends were furious too. We got into the "unarmed" police issue - bizarre!
and the Reuters article that said that there had been "unacceptable levels" of looting etc - what ARE acceptable levels?????

T-Rav said...

Andrew, I've been keeping up with the rioting some on the BBC and Telegraph live blogs--check those out, there's lots of horrific and infuriating details--and apparently there were one or two London suburbs where the citizens banded together with baseball bats and so on to protect their neighborhoods from the rioters. And the police came close to arresting some of THEM. Un-freaking-believable.

AndrewPrice said...

rlaWTX, It's always interesting when a liberal slips up like that and gives you some insight into their state of mind. Clearly, they are not opposed to rioting. . . they just don't like this particular instance of rioting. It really does make you wonder what they consider to be the acceptable level of rioting?

Glad to hear that your friend and her friends don't think this rioting is an acceptable thing. But that won't help them. I know a ton of Germans who disagree with everything their government does (probably even a majority), but the government just doesn't care. I've come to realize that European governments just don't care what their people want.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, Sadly, it doesn't surprise me. The authorities always go hardest against the people who are protecting themselves from the criminals rather than going after the criminals.

You see that here too in liberal cities where they are more upset at the homeowner who shoots the thief/rapist than the thief/rapist who started the whole thing. It's crazy and despicable thinking.

Game Master Rob Adams said...

"T-Rav, Sadly, it doesn't surprise me. The authorities always go hardest against the people who are protecting themselves from the criminals rather than going after the criminals."

Case in point- > gun owners.

AndrewPrice said...

ACG, It's amazing how angry the authorities can get at legal gun owners, isn't it? Especially since they don't seem to worry too much about thugs with illegal guns.

Notawonk said...

andrew: as texans watch the london chaos, i am overhearing a constant theme: we ain't gonna tolerate punkass thieving, rioting and general outlaw behavior here, bubba. and if comes here, we're preparing for the pushback.

i'm sure other folks in other states are hearing the same sentiments.

it's time for all who can, to think about lawfully carrying a concealed weapon for protection. nope, i ain't kidding.

it stuns me to see where we are. stuns me.

AndrewPrice said...

Patti, It is stunning that a government would let people get away with terrorizing its citizens like this -- both in London and in the flash mobs in our big liberal cities.

It's just as amazing to me that people would let themselves be terrorized. If they tried that here or in any good conservative state, the riot would end in minutes in a hail of bullets and rioters whining about needing universal health care.

BevfromNYC said...

Speaking of flash mobs, did anyone see the Philly Mayor's speech? He blasted black youth. He is about the only one who has been brave enought to say out loud including the MSM that the kids who are perpetrating these flash mobs are mostly, if not all black. He's mandated a 9pm curfew for anyone under 18. If any kid is out after the curfew, the parents will be fined. Maybe HE can be President...btw his name is Michael Nutter.

“Take those God-darn hoodies down, especially in the summer,” Mr. Nutter, the city’s third black mayor, said in an angry lecture aimed at black teens. “Pull your pants up and buy a belt ‘cause no one wants to see your underwear or the crack of your butt.”

“If you walk into somebody’s office with your hair uncombed and a pick in the back, and your shoes untied, and your pants half down, tattoos up and down your arms and on your neck, and you wonder why somebody won’t hire you? They don’t hire you ‘cause you look like you’re crazy,” the mayor said. “You have damaged your own race.”

AndrewPrice said...

Bev, I haven't seen it, but I've been hearing about it everywhere! Could you imagine the outrage if he had been white and said this?

He also said:

"This nonsense must stop. If you want to act like an idiot, move. Move out of this city. We don't want you here anymore."

He said flash mobs have hurt other people, hurt themselves and that “you’ve damaged your own race.”

He said parents who don't spend time with their kids are just a “human ATM.”

"A particular problem in the black community is we have too many men making too many babies that they don't want to take care of," he preached to applause. "We end up dealing with your children.

"The immaculate conception of our Lord Jesus Christ took place a long time ago, and it didn't happen here in Philadelphia. So every one of these kids has two parents who were around and participating at the time. You need to be around now.

"Ain't no immaculate conception happening up in here."

darski said...

it's been a while since I watched this Evan Sayet vid but I found ti most helpful.

Youse guys do that link magic right?

I just want to say that I am finding this all very scary. I lived through the 60's but even that did not have the feeling of evil that I have now.

AndrewPrice said...

darski, We do indeed use link magic here: LINK!

I know what you mean. I've seen a lot of stupidity from Democrats in the past, but we really have hit a point where the stupidity is combining with hate and spite. At this point, I no longer see anything they do as being in good faith.

Joel Farnham said...

Darski and Andrew,

Did you read the comments under that video? I get a bit of a kick, especially when the liberals don't understand that deficits are created when spending out paces income. Have a set amount of money coming in and then overspending creates a deficit which is eventually transmogrified into debt.

Increasing the income is far more difficult than increasing the spending. The only way liberals increase income is by increasing taxes which cuts down the economic behavior which then lowers the income. What to do about that? Increase more taxes!!!

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, I haven't gotten there yet to read the comments, but I'm not surprised. Liberals truly don't understand where money comes from or how the economy works. They think "oh, you just print it." It's like dealing with children who still believe in Santa and fairies.

Post a Comment