A quarterly magazine of urban affairs, published by the Manhattan Institute, edited by Brian C. Anderson.
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
The New Rebellions « Back to Story
Showing 11 Comment(s) Subscribe by RSS
Great article!! by the way I am looking for cheap life insurance any thoughts – my next door neighbor is an agent with Bankers Life and Casualty Company he claims to have the best rates but don’t know if anyone here had any experience with them if so let me know click here for Bankers Life Insurance website.
You misunderstand - not "the party of the stupid" but "the stupid party." The stupidity lies in the inability of the Republican Party to adequately defend itself from coordinated attacks from Democrats and media controlled by Democrats, as well as an overall failure to show the Democratic Party for what it is - a party grounded in and operating on corruption.
As an example of its inability to defend itself, take Reagan and the subject of homelessness. Part of the Democratic plan to undermine Reagan was the assertion that Reagan was against poor people - that Reagan didn't care about the poor. What Democrats did was to use its control of the media to dramatize the issue of homelessness. Democratic media and the Democratic party worked hand in glove to publicize a new found 'crisis' of homelessness. This continued throughout Bush I's term, but ended when Clinton took office. Was the homeless 'problem' solved? Of course not - but there was no need to even discuss it now that a Democrat was President.
The foregoing illustrates how Democrats are able to turn allegation into assumption into fact. It becomes a conditioned response, and Democratic media has mastered the art of manipulation and conditioning. You see the conditioning when you talk to a Democrat and point out that on this or that issue that there is nothing behind an allegation, and what you get is sputtering and anger - it is almost eerie.
Is this coordinated manipulation ever pointed out by Republicans? Of course not.
More recently, we have the anti-war protests. During the Bush II Administration, anti-war protests were front page news, and Cindy Sheehan was the hero of the day. Obama takes office, the issue disappears and Sheehan is tossed aside.
Not the best examples, perhaps, the way the media used the response to Katrina is much better - this was done solely because after the 2004 election some African Americans were looking at the Republican Party and the Democrats were desperate to find an issue to paint the Republicans as racist. Of course nothing but silence on this from the Republican Party.
How to explain why the Republican Party continued to allow Democratic media to host debates even as that media uses the debate forum to make Republican candidates look bad? Or why did Sarah Palin ever agree to allow herself to be interviewed by Katie Couric - she had to know that Couric would be seeking to make Palin look bad. Same thing with Boehner -why on becoming Speaker did he agree to be on "60 Minutes."?
Stupid stupid stupid.
The Republican Party never seems to understand how the deck is stacked against them - how it plays by certain rules, while the Democrats have no rules. So Democrats are able to destroy an entire community - African Americans - with 50 years of shockingly dismal results, and no hope for the future in the inner cities - no surprise of course given the Democratic party's history as the party of slavery, Jim Crow and lynchings. But do Republican say a thing about it? No, what they do is allow themselves to be unfairly tarred with the racism brush, even as taxpayer money is poured into the corrupt pockets of Democratic leaders in the inner cities.
"the Republicans, the party of the stupid"
Which also about sums it up.
"Despite China’s fast economic growth, jobs for young, educated Chinese aren’t plentiful. While a manual worker can easily find work, a university graduate often needs two or three years to find a job commensurate with his education".
Which about sums up the problems.
Dear Mr. Sorman, unfortunately believing in the free market is one thing but being a victim outrageous greed of capitalism is another.
Why no mention of the Democratic Party's role in promoting the OWS movement, and how it, along with media it controls (such as top Obama advisor and General Electric's CEO Jeffrey Immelt's GENBC) has created and manipulated OWS for its own purposes?
What OWS is NOT is a legitimate grass roots movement. Rather it is a small core of die hard anarchists who simply want to topple what's here, with a fuzzy concept of what comes next. Unfortunately, when movements like OWS and the others described in this article manage any degree of success the result never resembles a democracy. What is created are perfect conditions for people of ill will to step in. The best example - besides the French Revolution - is Iran.
How quickly we forget when the Democratic media wants it that way! In the late 1970's the all powerful Western media was gung ho on getting rid of the Shah, but of course too brainless to understand that what would replace the Shah would not be supporters of democracy, but a repressive theocracy - and a highly dangerous theocracy at that. Jimmy Carter, then and now an incompetent, was completely outmaneuvered, no difficult task. The Western media supported those seeking to bring down the regime, and down the regime went. The result was decades of repression, misery and world destabilization.
Of course, no one was taken to task for what happened in Iran. The Democratic media in the United States - among which are the major television networks - CBS, NBC, ABC, PBS, NPR, plus the N.Y. Times, Washington Post et als, never allows a former Democratic President to be thought of in a bad light (think fellow incompetents Harry Truman and even more so - John Kennedy). So as quickly as possible sainthood was conferred on Jimmy Carter and his Arab dictatorship supporting "Carter Center." You have never, and will never hear a peep of criticism from the Democratic media of just how badly Carter handled the Iranian situation.
In fact, it is never mentioned at all.
So now we have the even more openly Democratic media wholeheartedly supporting "Occupy" movement. Naturally, there's an angle in it for the Democrats. Besides taking the spotlight off of Obama's economically and socially ruinous policies, the claim to a "movement" countering the Tea Party is used hand in glove to support Obama's campaign strategy of separating America into rich and poor, us and them. This isn't the place to go into how dangerous and un-American it is to divide the country into classes based on wealth, but it is a certainty that the Democratic media won't take Obama to task for it - heck lots of that media are working for Obama's campaign! In fact, the opposite is true as the Democratic media pushes the assumption - soon to be considered "fact" - that OWS is legitimate movement acting as a voice of the people, and by the way supporting Obama's class warfare strategy.
And, typically, the Republicans, the party of stupid, fall into every trap laid for them by the Democrats - but again that's another story. I have deep admiration for the author of this article, but there should be some mention of the Democratic Party's - and the media that supports it - role in creating and manipulating the OWS movement.
Of maybe something more sinister is going on with the Democrats and OWS. But whatever it is, what OWS is not is a legitimate, spontaneous grass roots movement. Rather, it is a carefully planned, although who knows, perhaps poorly executed stunt aimed at bettering the Democrats chances in the next election.
And here's a prediction - the OWS movement will wither away, Cindy Sheehan style, once the election is over and OWS's usefulness to the Democrats is over.
Because when you come right down to it, the power of the OWS movement is something conferred by the Democratic media. That media is still immensely powerful, and those in it media have done a good job of taking this tiny group of people and making them into something they are not. Recall the hostility of the Democratic media to the far far larger Tea Party and the manipulation that has been used on those already subject to a lifetime of conditioning to convince them that the Tea Party movement is somehow 'racist.' This despite the fact that race and social issues aren't any part of the Tea Party agenda.
And, most troubling is that the issues discussed above don't ever seem to be examined by anyone - again, where are the Republicans and their supporters?
Of course, Republican failures with respect to the Democratic media is another subject entirely.
The free market is dead as is democracy replaced by a repressive triumvirate of government, transnational enterprises and a socialized and lobotomized proletariat--practically everyone not in the ruling elite. Rebellion this time will end with a true, vibrant democracy and free markets not the controlled, bureaucratically directed and monopolistic global enterprises we are smothered by today. We demand freedom from the oppressive hands of government and the ruling dictatorship of effete, intellectually obtuse, power elite whose self-righteous pomposity is destroying what remains of western civilization.
Maybe it's nitpicky, but:
The similarity of the gestures suggests that the rebellions are interconnected—not by any hidden political conspiracy but by the Internet, the movement’s leaderless, uncommitted organizer, crossing borders and connecting cultures.
The gestures are similar because the source is anarchist hand signal training done in both locations as documented in any number of news stories. It is not a hidden political conspiracy, it is the open participation by a political movement offering tools they have developed.
mr. Sorman, why do you nt take ito account the funding and the mehind the scenes mechatations of the "Estabishment Left" In coordinating or funding your so called "revolutions". This is most particularity the case with OWS. As a more proximate cause, Herr Soros has been up to these capers round the world. Moreover, these so called "movements, pace the "Arab Spring" are very much the sort of direct action political fronts and youth fronts we have seen out of the Left for more than a century. They are not new nor are the results of them: we have just passed a hideous century where much of the carnage was due to Oligarchic Collectivism.
As to the Arab Spring, this is by no means a 'democratic movement" and serves not the interest of Free peooles anywhere on this earth.
It is a willful undoing to the GWOT, and "war"--really a containment strategy-- against our enemies. In fact it has not only undone the GWOT. It has wiped out most of the advances of the post war years in the Me. It is a unmitigated disaster, and so it was meant to be by its instigators and enablers: again, the Hard Left.
If you do not think the Left is making common cause with Islam against the West, I suggest you go to the EU and have a look.
Stop drinking the koolaid, please, and start calling things by their real names.
Guy's insights are always astute.