By Dr. Jack Wheeler
8/9/12
The Anti-American infestation in the White House is presently
giving speeches and airing campaign ads threatening
that his Republican opponent wants to "drag us back to the 1950s."
That's a threat? More like a promise. Yet again, Zero demonstrates his total cluelessness about America. Far, far more Americans are nostalgic over the 50s, rather than fearful. Chuck Berry's Back In The USA epitomizes why.
The 1950s were not a Golden Age. I know because I grew up in them. We wouldn't want to live there again sicut totum, as a whole, the good, bad, and ugly all together.
We don't really want to go back to the depths of the Cold War with the constant threat of nuclear annihilation, nor to the obscenely immoral Jim Crow laws of the South. And few guys would want to be back in high school or college when dating was inch-by-inch trench warfare and an unhooked bra strap was paradise. Us old guys remember that.
But we also remember the innocence and wholesomeness, especially when compared to the cynicism and degradation of today - cultural depravity of such unimaginable extent that folks in the 50s would consider it absolute proof of clinical insanity.
We remember the unquestioned pride and confidence we had in being an American. Most of all, we remember the optimism. And most of all, what we want today is that same optimism about our future, our children's future, our country's future.
That is what Zero is determined to prevent. Optimistic people are self-reliant, people who do not need him to survive. The people he needs to retain and expand his power are those dependent upon him, who feel they are helpless without him. How many of those kind of helpless and hopeless folks were in the America of the 1950s?
Vast numbers less - as we've seen this week, over 100 million Americans are part of Food Stamp/Welfare Nation now, while 43% of long-term immigrants are still on welfare. All part of Zero's agenda.
So, who do you suppose wrote this?
Zero, he says, is one of those "monarchists-in-spirit... who envision massive government control of virtually every aspect of our lives." Their agenda is "to play on public fears and the resentment of the successful, and to amass to government and thus themselves the power they could not win in a free economy." Their goal is to "replace our culture of opportunity with a culture of dependency. The consequence of that cultural shift... would be catastrophic for our national prosperity and strength."
That was written by Mitt Romney in his 2010 book, No Apology.
Think about that title. The key message of his book is that America should not, must not, apologize for her greatness and superiority in the face of envious cultures and people, foreign or domestic.
Nothing - nothing - drives Libtards more bananas than this. The most fundamental divide between liberals and conservatives is the former's moral relativism which drives their obsession with "multiculturalism," and the latter's confidence in the objective moral superiority of some individuals and cultures over others.
And nothing could be more politically clear than on which side of the divide Zero and Romney stand. As a Hate America Marxist, Zero is multi-culti to the marrow. Where's Romney? From No Apology:
There are those who "are smitten with a devotion to multiculturalism, not merely as an appreciation of the cultures and customs of other peoples, but out of a conviction that no single system of values is superior to another, including our own. This reorientation away from a celebration of American exceptionalism is misguided and bankrupt... The multiculturalism movement must be unmasked for the fraud that it is. There are superior cultures, and ours is one of them."
All of you who are familiar with any of my numerous articles on The Evil Eye of Envy know that this is the crux issue for me. Any other social, political, or economic issue takes a back seat to it and follows from it. For me, there is nothing more important in a President than for him to reject envy - the envy of other nations and cultures, and the envy of domestic moochers and victimologists.
Now, you know the difference between a necessary and a sufficient condition: the former is something you have to have to get what you want, the latter is all you need to get what you want. The refusal to be fearful of the envy of others is the single most necessary condition for a president to have enabling him to stoutly defend America and provide confidence in her future.
This is what Romney has as the antithesis to the Apologizer-in-Chief we have now.
In his visit to Jerusalem late last month (7/30), Romney gave a talk in which he gave high praise to a book by Harvard University Professor Emeritus of History and Economics, David Landes: The Wealth and Poverty of Nations: Why Some Are So Rich and Some So Poor.
"Dr. Landes," he explains, "describes differences that have existed-particularly among the great civilizations that grew and why they grew and why they became great and those that declined and why they declined. And after about 500 pages of this lifelong analysis -- this had been his study for his entire life, and he's in his early 70s at this point - he says: ‘If we learn anything from the economic history of the world it's this: culture makes all the difference.' Culture makes all the difference."
He said this to the Jews of Israel to make clear he understands that their superior culture is responsible for their success, while by contrast the inferior culture of the Palestinians is responsible for their failure.
The P's exploded in rage and called him a racist (too stupid to understand the difference between culture and genetics), as did the entire multi-culti libtard world from the New York Times on down, which accused him of "pandering" to the US Jewish vote. It turns out, though, that Romney has been saying much the same thing (even to quoting Landes) in numerous speeches and articles since early 2005. Here's a compilation.
In his Commencement Address at Liberty University this past May:
"You enter a world with civilizations and economies that are far from equal. Harvard historian David Landes devoted his lifelong study to understanding why some civilizations rise, and why others falter. His conclusion: Culture makes all the difference. Not natural resources, not geography, but what people believe and value. Central to America's rise to global leadership is our Judeo-Christian tradition, with its vision of the goodness and possibilities of every life. The American culture promotes personal responsibility, the dignity of work, the value of education, the merit of service, devotion to a purpose greater than self, and, at the foundation, the pre-eminence of the family."
Or consider what he wrote for National Review last week (7/31), Culture Does Matter:
"What exactly accounts for prosperity if not culture? In the case of the United States, it is a particular kind of culture that has made us the greatest economic power in the history of the earth. Many significant features come to mind: our work ethic, our appreciation for education, our willingness to take risks, our commitment to honor and oath, our family orientation, our devotion to a purpose greater than ourselves, our patriotism. But one feature of our culture that propels the American economy stands out above all others: freedom. The American economy is fueled by freedom. Free people and their free enterprises are what drive our economic vitality."
Folks, this is the ball game, the whole nine yards, the entire enchilada. Pride and confidence in our American culture, our basic founding values, our optimism in being American. It's all under unrelenting assault by academia, Hollywood, the media, and the Zero in the White House. This is what we want back, this is what we are nostalgic for as we had it in the 50s.
Can a President Romney give it back to us? He certainly is a Square straight out of the 50s. He embodies them - in the Ozzie Nelson-Ward Cleaver way. Did Ozzie or Ward ever rock out to Chuck Berry? Probably - and you know their kids sure did.
Chuck Berry, in the opinion of John Lennon, Keith Richards, and many other legendary rockers, is the Inventor of Rock and Roll. My own opinion is that he's the best there ever was. I'm such a huge Chuck Berry fan because he's unmatched as a rock guitarist, because he told such touching stories with his songs (and he wrote them all), and mostly because they bring tears to my eyes with their joy, energy, and optimism that embodies the American spirit.
I want that joy, energy, and optimism of the American spirit back . The Scumbag Left has stolen it - and its leader now has the ludicrous effrontery to threaten us with its return if we don't vote for him.
I don't know if Romney will give it back to us. What I do know is that Zero is fanatically determined to kill it. What I do know is that Romney will give us the opportunity for us to give it back to ourselves.
Culture counts above all. Cultural values and principles in our minds - and how we feel about them in our gut. Those feelings can be deeply solemn and serious, as when we cry in gratitude on Memorial Day for those who sacrificed for our freedom. They can be deeply joyous, providing us with the emotional fuel of optimism to keep us working toward a better future.
This is what I consider to be the Culture of Chuck Berry, as no one more expressed in music the message of the 50s more than him, the message that we miss so badly today - that it's fun to be American, it's awesome, exciting, cool, and totally bitchin' (bitchin', by the way, coined by California surfers in the late 50s, is a contraction of the word "bewitching." I know this as I was one of those surfers at the time).
And that anyone who says we should not feel this way, that we should feel ashamed for our American existence, is just a weirdo not worth paying attention to.
Want America to be young again? Give her her optimism back. I think Romney can do it. I think we are going to do it. The Nightmare, the Long Dark Night, of the Scumbag Left is ending. We are going back to the future, to the optimism of the 50s. Chuck Berry is 86 now. His health is good, so he should live to see his culture revived.
That's a threat? More like a promise. Yet again, Zero demonstrates his total cluelessness about America. Far, far more Americans are nostalgic over the 50s, rather than fearful. Chuck Berry's Back In The USA epitomizes why.
The 1950s were not a Golden Age. I know because I grew up in them. We wouldn't want to live there again sicut totum, as a whole, the good, bad, and ugly all together.
We don't really want to go back to the depths of the Cold War with the constant threat of nuclear annihilation, nor to the obscenely immoral Jim Crow laws of the South. And few guys would want to be back in high school or college when dating was inch-by-inch trench warfare and an unhooked bra strap was paradise. Us old guys remember that.
But we also remember the innocence and wholesomeness, especially when compared to the cynicism and degradation of today - cultural depravity of such unimaginable extent that folks in the 50s would consider it absolute proof of clinical insanity.
We remember the unquestioned pride and confidence we had in being an American. Most of all, we remember the optimism. And most of all, what we want today is that same optimism about our future, our children's future, our country's future.
That is what Zero is determined to prevent. Optimistic people are self-reliant, people who do not need him to survive. The people he needs to retain and expand his power are those dependent upon him, who feel they are helpless without him. How many of those kind of helpless and hopeless folks were in the America of the 1950s?
Vast numbers less - as we've seen this week, over 100 million Americans are part of Food Stamp/Welfare Nation now, while 43% of long-term immigrants are still on welfare. All part of Zero's agenda.
So, who do you suppose wrote this?
Zero, he says, is one of those "monarchists-in-spirit... who envision massive government control of virtually every aspect of our lives." Their agenda is "to play on public fears and the resentment of the successful, and to amass to government and thus themselves the power they could not win in a free economy." Their goal is to "replace our culture of opportunity with a culture of dependency. The consequence of that cultural shift... would be catastrophic for our national prosperity and strength."
That was written by Mitt Romney in his 2010 book, No Apology.
Think about that title. The key message of his book is that America should not, must not, apologize for her greatness and superiority in the face of envious cultures and people, foreign or domestic.
Nothing - nothing - drives Libtards more bananas than this. The most fundamental divide between liberals and conservatives is the former's moral relativism which drives their obsession with "multiculturalism," and the latter's confidence in the objective moral superiority of some individuals and cultures over others.
And nothing could be more politically clear than on which side of the divide Zero and Romney stand. As a Hate America Marxist, Zero is multi-culti to the marrow. Where's Romney? From No Apology:
There are those who "are smitten with a devotion to multiculturalism, not merely as an appreciation of the cultures and customs of other peoples, but out of a conviction that no single system of values is superior to another, including our own. This reorientation away from a celebration of American exceptionalism is misguided and bankrupt... The multiculturalism movement must be unmasked for the fraud that it is. There are superior cultures, and ours is one of them."
All of you who are familiar with any of my numerous articles on The Evil Eye of Envy know that this is the crux issue for me. Any other social, political, or economic issue takes a back seat to it and follows from it. For me, there is nothing more important in a President than for him to reject envy - the envy of other nations and cultures, and the envy of domestic moochers and victimologists.
Now, you know the difference between a necessary and a sufficient condition: the former is something you have to have to get what you want, the latter is all you need to get what you want. The refusal to be fearful of the envy of others is the single most necessary condition for a president to have enabling him to stoutly defend America and provide confidence in her future.
This is what Romney has as the antithesis to the Apologizer-in-Chief we have now.
In his visit to Jerusalem late last month (7/30), Romney gave a talk in which he gave high praise to a book by Harvard University Professor Emeritus of History and Economics, David Landes: The Wealth and Poverty of Nations: Why Some Are So Rich and Some So Poor.
"Dr. Landes," he explains, "describes differences that have existed-particularly among the great civilizations that grew and why they grew and why they became great and those that declined and why they declined. And after about 500 pages of this lifelong analysis -- this had been his study for his entire life, and he's in his early 70s at this point - he says: ‘If we learn anything from the economic history of the world it's this: culture makes all the difference.' Culture makes all the difference."
He said this to the Jews of Israel to make clear he understands that their superior culture is responsible for their success, while by contrast the inferior culture of the Palestinians is responsible for their failure.
The P's exploded in rage and called him a racist (too stupid to understand the difference between culture and genetics), as did the entire multi-culti libtard world from the New York Times on down, which accused him of "pandering" to the US Jewish vote. It turns out, though, that Romney has been saying much the same thing (even to quoting Landes) in numerous speeches and articles since early 2005. Here's a compilation.
In his Commencement Address at Liberty University this past May:
"You enter a world with civilizations and economies that are far from equal. Harvard historian David Landes devoted his lifelong study to understanding why some civilizations rise, and why others falter. His conclusion: Culture makes all the difference. Not natural resources, not geography, but what people believe and value. Central to America's rise to global leadership is our Judeo-Christian tradition, with its vision of the goodness and possibilities of every life. The American culture promotes personal responsibility, the dignity of work, the value of education, the merit of service, devotion to a purpose greater than self, and, at the foundation, the pre-eminence of the family."
Or consider what he wrote for National Review last week (7/31), Culture Does Matter:
"What exactly accounts for prosperity if not culture? In the case of the United States, it is a particular kind of culture that has made us the greatest economic power in the history of the earth. Many significant features come to mind: our work ethic, our appreciation for education, our willingness to take risks, our commitment to honor and oath, our family orientation, our devotion to a purpose greater than ourselves, our patriotism. But one feature of our culture that propels the American economy stands out above all others: freedom. The American economy is fueled by freedom. Free people and their free enterprises are what drive our economic vitality."
Folks, this is the ball game, the whole nine yards, the entire enchilada. Pride and confidence in our American culture, our basic founding values, our optimism in being American. It's all under unrelenting assault by academia, Hollywood, the media, and the Zero in the White House. This is what we want back, this is what we are nostalgic for as we had it in the 50s.
Can a President Romney give it back to us? He certainly is a Square straight out of the 50s. He embodies them - in the Ozzie Nelson-Ward Cleaver way. Did Ozzie or Ward ever rock out to Chuck Berry? Probably - and you know their kids sure did.
Chuck Berry, in the opinion of John Lennon, Keith Richards, and many other legendary rockers, is the Inventor of Rock and Roll. My own opinion is that he's the best there ever was. I'm such a huge Chuck Berry fan because he's unmatched as a rock guitarist, because he told such touching stories with his songs (and he wrote them all), and mostly because they bring tears to my eyes with their joy, energy, and optimism that embodies the American spirit.
I want that joy, energy, and optimism of the American spirit back . The Scumbag Left has stolen it - and its leader now has the ludicrous effrontery to threaten us with its return if we don't vote for him.
I don't know if Romney will give it back to us. What I do know is that Zero is fanatically determined to kill it. What I do know is that Romney will give us the opportunity for us to give it back to ourselves.
Culture counts above all. Cultural values and principles in our minds - and how we feel about them in our gut. Those feelings can be deeply solemn and serious, as when we cry in gratitude on Memorial Day for those who sacrificed for our freedom. They can be deeply joyous, providing us with the emotional fuel of optimism to keep us working toward a better future.
This is what I consider to be the Culture of Chuck Berry, as no one more expressed in music the message of the 50s more than him, the message that we miss so badly today - that it's fun to be American, it's awesome, exciting, cool, and totally bitchin' (bitchin', by the way, coined by California surfers in the late 50s, is a contraction of the word "bewitching." I know this as I was one of those surfers at the time).
And that anyone who says we should not feel this way, that we should feel ashamed for our American existence, is just a weirdo not worth paying attention to.
Want America to be young again? Give her her optimism back. I think Romney can do it. I think we are going to do it. The Nightmare, the Long Dark Night, of the Scumbag Left is ending. We are going back to the future, to the optimism of the 50s. Chuck Berry is 86 now. His health is good, so he should live to see his culture revived.
No comments:
Post a Comment