Liberal Definition

"To them, the essence of life is unfair...and they always assign the suffering to economic or racial reasons."

 - Rush Limbaugh 04.30.10

I'm heading into one of the busiest weeks of my life with vacation on the horizon, so posting might fall by the wayside. I'm hoping I can stay with it. Did you know about this oil spill? Crazy. I didn't until this weekend. I've been out of it. That's what traveling out of town sans husband with my crazy children will do to me.

And if you think the oil spill is going to be political, you better believe it. As suggested by a caller on Rush's program Friday, our leadership is likely to come out saying this is evidence and reason for preventing oil exploration in the future.  The caller quoted Reagan's speech after the Challenger tragedy (I was little, but I remember that firsthand)...Reagan said:

"Sometimes painful things like this happen. It's all part of the process of exploration and discovery. It's all part of taking a chance and expanding man's horizons. The future doesn't belong to the fainthearted; it belongs to the brave."

I believe Reagan is right. But the liberals are going to turn this oil spill into a political attack on oil exploration. This was what Rush had to say about liberals:

"To them, the essence of life is unfair. Just life itself is unfair, because there are days that people hurt. There are days that people suffer. And they always assign the suffering to economic or racial reasons. People are suffering because they don't have as much as the next guy does. Or they are suffering because they're of a minority skin color...Folks, liberalism is hideous. It is the antithesis of being pro-human. It looks at life as a burden in and of itself to be managed, rather than as a blessing to be explored and lived to the fullest."

I'm not belittling suffering. I'm just saying what would life be without suffering? We must face hardships to cherish the moments of joy. Liberals think the opposite...remove the hardships (which is impossible, by the way), and live your life like a robot. No pain. No joy. Not much of a life if you ask me.

Sources:
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_043010/content/01125112.guest.html
http://www.learnoutloud.com/Catalog/History/Speeches/The-Space-Shuttle-Challenger-Tragedy-Address/7316

A History Lesson: Reagan

"Deterrence means simply this: making sure any adversary who thinks about attacking the United States or our allies or our vital interests concludes that the risks to him outweigh any potential gains. Once he understands that, he won't attack. We maintain the peace through our strength. Weakness only invites aggression."

 - President Ronald Reagan

I was a baby when Reagan became President.  It's obvious I don't have a lot of first-hand knowledge about his presidency, so when the current administration and the media compare Obama to Reagan regarding Obama's nuclear arms strategy, my interest was piqued. I had to do some digging to see if that was really true. 

Fact: NOT TRUE.

Another fact: The liberals hated Reagan. They didn't like him one bit. But now they use him to provide validity to Obama's agenda. El Rushbo says, "...the left invokes Reagan any time they want to give credibility to one of their own in virtually anything." 

Obama is doing the complete opposite of Reagan. Obama is so focused on leading the world through moral judgement, but forgets terrorists aren't moral! They could care less about morality. They just want to blow us up.

Obama is coddling our enemies, telling them how nice we are and trying to sit down and make peace with them. He protects their rights (i.e, Miranda rights for the Christmas terrorist?!). And now he's cutting missile defense spending and reducing our stockpiles, which directly weakens our defenses. We may be able to live in a country where our health care goes to the dogs, but what about our liberty and safety? We cannot survive as a nation without strong defenses and leading the world as a national security powerhouse. We must always remain a force to be reckoned with, otherwise we will be trampled. 

Source:
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_041310/content/01125110.guest.html

Noteworthy Palin - Reagan Comparison

Check out these snippets from a WSJ Op-ed by Norman Podhoretz:

"Nothing annoys certain of my fellow conservative intellectuals more than when I remind them, as on occasion I mischievously do, that the derogatory things they say about Sarah Palin are uncannily similar to what many of their forebears once said about Ronald Reagan."

What I am trying to say is not that Sarah Palin would necessarily make a great president but that the criteria by which she is being judged by her conservative critics—never mind the deranged hatred she inspires on the left—tell us next to nothing about the kind of president she would make.

What she does know—and in this respect, she does resemble Reagan—is that the United States has been a force for good in the world, which is more than Barack Obama, whose IQ is no doubt higher than hers, has yet to learn.

I think that this is what, conversely, also accounts for the tremendous enthusiasm she has aroused among ordinary conservatives. They rightly see her as one of them, only better able and better positioned to stand up against the contempt and condescension of the liberal elites that were so perfectly exemplified by Mr. Obama's notorious remark in 2008 about people like them: "And it's not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

I would rather be ruled by the Tea Party than by the Democratic Party, and I would rather have Sarah Palin sitting in the Oval Office than Barack Obama.

The entire article is worth reading.  Check it here.