Gay Patriot Header Image

“Civility” Is Just Another Word For Nothing Left To Lose

(With apologies to Bobbie McGee for the headline….)  (And h/t to Instapundit for the articles that inspired this post)

You may recall that in the early days following Jaren Loughner’s (the pot-smoking anarchist) shoot-up in Tucson, I joined with Glenn Beck in his challenge.  I ask you to read it again carefully.  What I am about to write, in my opinion, does not violate that challenge.  But I’m open to interpretation.

Ladies and gents, this call from the Progressives and the liberal media for “civility” is total bullshit.  Please note I rarely use profanity in my posts or comments here.  But yes, I call total and utter bullshit.  This is a ploy by the Left to silence the 40% of Americans who told Gallup last year that they hold conservative principles.

It is easy for Progressives and Democrats to ask for “civility” when they are the ones who call for violent revolution and have been since their halcyon flower-sniffing, pot-smoking, anti-American days of yore.  Us GenXer’s refer to those days as The Sixties.  When we say “The Sixties” — it is with the derisive tone of voice usually reserved for the phrase: “um… this is escargot?”

Oh yeah, and “civility” is easy to call for when your Marxist-taught President’s best buddies are an admitted terrorist (William Ayers) and a black liberation preacher who repeatedly damns this nation (Rev. Whose-Name-Must-Never-Be-Uttered-By-Media).

One calls for “civility” when one’s ideas are soundly rejected in an historic legislative landslide the likes of which few living Americans are cogent enough to remember.

Now those same people are asking that the free peoples of the United States of America disarm themselves in favor of the tyranny of “civility”.  Well, I say HELL NO!  I don’t want violence, but I certainly don’t want these people dictating the terms of my Constitutional surrender.

So I invoke THIS passage of Glenn’s challenge:

  • I denounce those from the Left, the Right or middle that sees violence as a viable alternative to our long established system of change made within the constraints of our constitutional Republic.
  • There can be, in my view, nothing more violent in the long-term than straying from the limited government principles of the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution.  What the Left has systematically proposed to do since the Progressive movement was born is to violently shred our American Republic and tell you to shut up while they do it.

    Not on my watch.

    -Bruce (GayPatriot)

    A spending freeze is not enough

    Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 1:54 am - January 26, 2011.
    Filed under: 112th Congress,Big Government Follies

    “Hours before” the president proposed a spending freeze in in the State of the Union address, the Republican House took a small, but significant step in the direction of real spending control, voting “256-165 to slash spending this year to 2008 levels ‘or less’“:

    Seventeen Democrats, mostly from the conservative Blue Dog Coalition, joined 239 Republicans in approving the measure. No Republicans voted against it.

    Recall that a Democratic Congress (albeit one subject to a veto from a Republican president) set the spending levels for 2008.  Too bad they didn’t go back to 2006 levels before Nancy Pelosi’s Democrats increased spending at a greater rate than did the prior spendthrift Republican Congresses.

    This “proposed partial budget freeze” would be “on non-security related discretionary spending“:

    The FY 2011 budget was $3.8 trillion; $1.415 trillion of which was discretionary spending. The president’s proposal would save, according to estmates, roughly $400 billion.

    Last year President Obama proposed a three-year hard freeze on non-security discretionary spending, which White House officials said would save $250 billion over the next decade. (Non-discretionary spending includes items such as Social Security and Medicare

    Ed Morrissey calls this freeze “a fallback position by a President afraid of losing his buying power with the public.”  (Read the whole thing.)

    This spending freeze will only lock the increased spending in place — and not just the increases of the past two years, but also of the two before that — not to mention the previous six years when George W. Bush governed with Republican Congresses (well, for the better part of the 107th Congress, Democrats ran the Senate). (more…)