The Tucson shooting of a member of Congress has provoked responses and statements from politicians that are quite disturbing, yet fascinating.  The knee jerk response from the left promoting the idea that the shooter in Tucson was motivated,  inspired and provoked to action by the likes of Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh and other conservative commentators is a theory that is condemned by the right and supported by the left.  The most ardent supporters of this theory appear to be liberal members of Congress and their lock-step liberal counterparts in the media.  The question is this:  What has produced the thought processes of these people that led them to concoct this theory?

The first thing to recognize in evaluating this phenomenon is that the people who are proclaiming this theory actually believe it.  This is not purely an instance of political hacks trying to turn people against conservatives.  They really believe that conservatives and the public expression of conservative principles have the power and potential to send people into the streets to assassinate elected officials.   They sincerely believe that conservatives are “evil”.  It is here we find the issue that has lit the fire of fear in these people to the extent that they are demanding the elimination of free speech for anyone who has an effective conservative voice.

One thing members of Congress have traditionally done is to insulate themselves from real life that the rest of us have to live and deal with as a result of their legislative behavior.  You see this in the fact that Congress routinely exempts its members from the laws they pass regulating the lives of other Americans.  In their self-created cocoon of denial they live with their perks and only go home to be vulnerable to their constituents during elections and holidays.  The remainder of the time they shut themselves up in an environment designed to insulate them from the realities of the bizarre world they are creating.  By that, I mean that they ignore, discount and belittle the opinions of other Americans about what is important, such as securing our borders, opposing government healthcare, objecting to Cap and Trade legislation, and condemning off-the-chart spending. They are able to comfortably stay in an insulated world of diminished reality until something like the event in Tucson happens.  They have interpreted the horror personally and are thinking:  “That could have been ME!

The minds of the people on the left who have raised this theory of conservative influence on potential assassins have suddenly focused their minds on just how mad their constituents might be about the way they have been behaving.   The tragedy in Arizona has come on the heels of the earth-shaking November election when the American people sent a very powerful message of disapproval of all things Congress!  In the minds of those on the left it is a logical progression to believe this electoral rejection (which was caused by conservatives) has now escalated to the level of political assassination!  In other words, the shooting in Arizona has (in their minds) become visible proof of just how upset the American people are with them and they are terrified for their own safety (political and otherwise).  In other words they are beginning to really fear the people they represent.  This Tucson tragedy will no doubt produce a sharp reduction in the “town meeting” format all across America.

The left views conservatism as an evil force because it has the potential to disrupt the political cocoon they have created for themselves and force them to become accountable for their political elitism.  In their minds, the recent election and the shooting in Arizona are of the same cloth.  Both events are seen by the left as extreme forms of rejection for their legislative behavior and they see conservatism as the foundational cause of that rejection.  Therefore, the solution to this threat is to throttle the voices of those who influence and promote conservative thought.  Who are the two most high-profile conservative voices?  You guessed it – Palin and Limbaugh!  Therefore, the cause of their fear and the cause of the shooting in Arizona must be Palin and Limbaugh and their clones.  The solution of the left is to smear them both and influence people to accept the premise that conservatism is evil.

They are obviously willing to trample the Constitution in the process.

Mr. Zack Burgess of the Philadelphia Tribune is horrified that the world media did not go on a celebration frenzy when a Nigerian named Adebayo Ogunlesi recently purchased London’s Gatwick Airport for 1.455 billion pounds.  Mr. Burgess is in the process of doing a story on this purchase and recently put out a query on the Internet for people to interview.  He wants to interview historians and psychiatrists and educators.  It is Mr. Burgess’ twisted focus that is so typical of the American Liberal Media.  Mr. Burgess’ Internet solicitation made the following observation:

“We often are quick to hear and see images on television of African Americans in disparaging situations like jail, poverty, prostitution, etc.  But we hardly hear about the good of our African American tycoons, lawyers, doctors, etc. Now, the question is, why did the mainstream media keep this so very, very quiet? I was even more surprised that not even the BBC covered this story, or any of the other major news networks including CNN!”

Where is Mr. Burgess going with this little inquiry?  Well, he gets to the point by saying:

“I know this is rather controversial, but it’s a story that needs to be tackled.  Furthermore, is this the reason the president is under such fire…because we’re not used to seeing an African American with such power outside of entertainment. How do we change such a problem that has been talked about in the African American community for years, but hasn’t been talked about enough publicly?”

Now we get it!  Barack Obama is under fire because he is black – not because he is a Marxist/Socialist/ left wing radical who is systematically taking America apart.  For Mr. Burgess and the political left they can’t accept that Americans might be down on Mr. Obama for what he has done and is doing.  It has to be about race for them.

Mr. Burgess, you and your media friends are living under the greatest denial cloud that has ever been floated.

Let’s say you have $500 that you want to loan to someone at a reasonable rate of interest.  Let’s say you have narrowed your loan candidates down to two possibilities.  The first possibility is to loan the money to a member of your own family.  You realize the interest rate might be a little lower but you trust your family member to honor the loan and repay it.

Your second possibility is to loan the money to a rich person across town who seems to have more money than they need and they just choose to borrow money to maintain a certain standard of living.  Your realize the rich person on the other side of town is a spendthrift, but they have great references and you have a lot of faith in their ability to survive difficulty and keep on trucking.

Then, on the brink of pulling the trigger of making the loan to the rich guy you learn some facts about the behavior of the the person:

1.  The rich person has recently embarked on an incredible spending spree and has done it on borrowed money.  As a matter of fact you learn that almost 50% of every dollar they spend is borrowed from other people, like you!

2.  The rich person has been totally ignoring warnings from its lenders that the borrowed money they are spending is toxic and deadly to their long term survival.  Yet, the person continues to spend in an irresponsible rush to disaster.

Armed with these new facts you decide that you don’t want to loan your $500 to the irresponsible rich person and elect to loan your money instead to your family member, who is close to home and behaves more responsibly than the rich lunatic across town.

About a year later you learn that the rich person has exhausted its resources to obtain loans and is going bankrupt.  All the people who had loaned money to the rich person in previous years have evaporated.

What’s the meaning of this?

1.  The United States of America is the rich person across town behaving like a lunatic.

2. You represent the foreign investors who are financing the spending spree of the lunatic and have little or no hope of being repaid the $12,000,000,000,000 of debt accumulated by the lunatic.

Here’s the question:  What happens when the lunatic can no longer borrow money to to pay its bills?

Nobody seems to want to know the answer to that question and that is our national crisis.

MORE:

I posted the video link below of New Jersey Governor Christi absolutely demolishing a liberal reporter at a news conference.  The reporter worked for a NJ paper called the Star Ledger.  Evidently, that paper has alleged a copyright claim on the video and YouTube has pulled it!  The collusion between YouTube and the paper on this issue is probably another discussion to have, but the fact that the video was pulled proves how effective conservatives can be when they just throw political correctness out the window and tell the truth.  Fortunately, someone got the video up at another site and the link below still has it.

Link to Gov Christie Video at FoxNation

Jim Bob
May 15, 2009

PS:  I”ve left the YouTube link here so you can see the “copyright claim”.

America needs about 500 of these guys in Congress and in every state house in all 50 states.

What a great American this guy is:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsdqfVA3fqk

I’m writing this to go on record concerning this subject.  In a few years when what I am going to predict is beginning to happen,  I can point to this post and say:  “I told you so!”  That is, if I’m still alive.   If Obamacare becomes law it will be the method by which the bankrupt social security system will be fixed.  How is this you ask?

The impending doom for Social Security is found in the huge numbers of baby boomers who will go on Social Security/Medicare over the next 5 to 25 years.   Because the abortion-on-demand movement has murdered over 50,000,000 babies since 1973, we are missing 1.5 generations of Americans who should be working and paying taxes, particularly FICA employment taxes.  When the boomers retire there will not be enough people paying FICA taxes to support their Social Security payments.  Big problem. 

There are only two solutions to fix this potential disaster.  The first is to drastically raise FICA taxes on the working population.  The second is to reduce the number of people drawing Social Security checks.  I predict that the people paying the FICA taxes will prefer the second method.  I also believe Obamacare will provide the means to accomplish the reduction in the number of people receiving social security.  How?  It’s very simple:  Administrative Volutary Euthenasia!

When Obamacare is in effect, the Government is going to gradually decide who deserves certain kinds of care.  A 70 year old person suffering cancer will be provided hospice care, rather than expensive Chemotherapy.  As the aged get sick, they will be thinned out by being denied the expensive care and treatment that might help them live a few more years.  Instead they will be offered Administrative Voluntary Euthenasia.  This will be Dr. Kervorkian on steroids, from coast to coast! 

I am 67 as of this post.  I fully expect the day to come when I am going to get sick with something and the government is going to disapprove the treatment I need based on my age and the expense of the treatment.  Obamacare will prohibit me from buying it out of my own pocket and the government will help me exit this world as painlessly as possible.  When you multiply this scenario millions of times it won’t be long until the Social Security recipients are drastically reduced.  The result will be a ‘fix’ for Social Security.

Call me a conspiracy nut if you like, but I believe this is inevitable if Obama and the Democrats have their way.

A friend of mine sent me the link to this video and I am passing it on here at the Mail Bag.  If you have not seen it you need to take a moment to listen to what Mr. Reagan had to say about this issue.  We are truly living in his prophetic words!

www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnLa1BvtaxM

Dear Jim Bob,

When I ask people about the difference between liberals and conservatives I get a lot of different answers.  What’s the best way to understand this Jim Bob?

Interested in Iowa

Dear Interested,

I think the best way to understand the difference between liberals and conservatives is to take a look at their behavior.  After all, behavior is the result of what we think and what we think is driven by what we believe.  So, if you can simply describe what liberals do and what conservatives do it might help you understand what separates them.  Here is what I’ve observed over the years.

WHAT LIBERALS DO: Liberals usually create problems where they don’t really exist.  They are always trying to fix stuff that isn’t really broken.  Even if something is slightly broken, their approach is to throw the whole thing out and start over with something that always involves the government doing it.  It gets even more complicated when you understand that liberals will decide something SHOULD be broken even if it isn’t and try to fix that too.  The Global Warming Hoax is like that.  Finally, liberals rarely, if ever, trust fixing things to individuals, because they want the government to do it through taxes and more regulation. Why liberals do this is another subject.

Now, it’s important to understand that for something to be broken in the mind of a liberal, all that needs to exist is an opinion that its broken.  Liberals are rarely restrained by actual facts.  What they do is assemble a lot of anecdotal information and portray it as a dominant trend.  They also twist facts to fit the agenda they have created to fix whatever they believe is broken.  Our current health care controversy is a perfect example of how liberals operate.  American health care has some problems and they are very specific problems.  The liberal approach is to completely replace the entire system with a government controlled environment.

WHAT CONSERVATIVES DO: Conservatives do not try to fix things that are not broken.  When something is actually broken or looks like it might become broken, a true conservative first examines the extent of the problem based on the actual reality and facts of the situation.  Then, a conservative will create solutions that deal with the actual problem.  Conservatives will always try to preserve the best parts of whatever they are trying to fix.  Conservatives strive for improvement, not destruction.  A conservative will never throw the baby out with the bath water.

So, that is basic difference between liberals and conservatives, as I see it.  Hope that helps.