House of Eratosthenes

The title of this post could have been a handy, six-word summary applied to any one of a number of metropolitan areas throughout the country last year: San Francisco, the Chicago From Whence Our White House Messiah Cometh, Detroit, DC, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. Now, it applies to the nation as a whole. The left-wing talking point, even, has nothing whatsoever to do with the time-honored “aw, things aren’t nearly that bad”…rather, it’s the equally time-honored “Failed policies of that other guy who came before us.”

Say it loud, say it proud: Liberal policies don’t work. They don’t, they don’t, they don’t. Stop being inquisitive about it. Stop being open-minded. Yes, sometimes that is good advice, and right now’s the time. All things in life are not necessarily open-ended questions.

Cassy Fiano notes what housing prices are doing in Detroit. Can’t blame Republicans, there aren’t any.

This is really sad:

It may be tough to get financing for a new car these days, but in Detroit you can buy a house with a credit card.

The median price of a home sold in Detroit in December was $7,500, according to Realcomp, a listing service.

Not $75,000. Remove a zero—it’s seven thousand five hundred dollars, substantially less than the lowest-price car on the new-car market.

Among the many dispiriting numbers that bleakly depict the decrepitude of this onetime industrial behemoth, the steep slide of housing values helps define the daunting challenge to anyone who wants to lead this shrinking, poverty-pocked city of about 800,000 people.

:
It’s not too late for Detroit to be saved. However, the rest of us should take notice. This is what happens when liberals are allowed to make all of their dreams a reality (well, maybe combine Detroit and San Francisco). Once great cities are reduced to a shell of their former brilliance.

Do we want this to happen on a larger scale?

Precisely.

Awhile ago I had put out a story about the sailor with the pet duck who was given his choice of which sister to marry, out of three: the oldest one, History; the middle one, Logic; and the baby of the family who had to have everyone’s attention all the time, Rhetoric. The sailor had a pet duck named hope — and, noticing Rhetoric got along best with Hope (she never once stopped talking about that damn duck), he turned his back on the two older sisters and married Rhetoric.

Hope ended up dead. Logic came by afterward and pointed out to him what an unusual and exceptional thing it was that History and Logic went in one direction and Rhetoric went in the other…it should have told him something about what’s the right thing to do.

I was asked what I would change about that story if I had to write it again. Two things. One, the duck named Hope should’ve been a pelican. Ducks are freshwater fowl. I don’t understand what a sailor would be doing with a pet duck. Even if he lost his memory and washed up on an island somewhere. What’s a duck doing there? Anyway, while ducks are funny, pelicans are funny too. Should’ve gone with the pelican.

The other thing: I should’ve had some kind of rant by History about all the things Rhetoric said she said, that she never really said.

That would have been another smashing uppercut, one that, again, runs parallel to real life. There’s lots of rhetoric out there about what history says, that history doesn’t really say. Reaganomics didn’t work, Roosevelt saved us from the Depression, Nixon started the Vietnam War, Saddam Hussein was a lovable harmless old teddy bear.

Rhetoric speaks for history. History said nothing close to what rhetoric says she said. And always, liberal ideas are made to look good.

They aren’t.

I’ll go even further. They aren’t even designed to do good. Listen to the talking points sometime; listen close. What are our liberals going to do for us here…something to do with making the economy work for everyone, right? What’s that mean? How come the goal is never expressed as anything with meaning. Like, get the Dow back up above 10,000 again. Isn’t it odd, that this is what normal people have in mind when they hear about “fixing the economy” — but you’ll never hear a liberal come out and say it in those words?

That’s because this isn’t what their plans are supposed to do. Make the economy work for “everybody,” means making it work for those who have bet against it. It means hurting the economy.

Wow, I’m sure that sounds extremist and harsh. But let’s just keep our eyes & ears opened for a famous, luminous and respected liberal spokesman to come out and directly contradict it. Wait for it. You’ll be waiting awhile.

Meanwhile — what’re we doing? We just turned our backs on history and logic, and went with rhetoric, for the sake of our pet waterfowl named Hope. That’s why we did this. It was part of the campaign sloganeering…part of the rhetoric.

And how’s hope doing right about now? Feelin’ rather chipper? Healthy? Vibrant? Compared to November 5th? Compared to January 20?

Update 3/3/09: On that note…answering my own question, I see via Neal Boortz’s reading assignments, a new report that capitalism is on strike. Three trillion dollars missing since The Holy One was ensconced. “We’ve seen the change as the economy’s deterioration accelerated. Now where’s the hope?” Yup, that’s pretty much it.

Good analogy!

I would change the pet to to a Teddy Bear or Hello Kitty and the sailor into child.

Pets, even birds can be protective of their owners and return love and affection. Teddy Bears fool little kids into believing that they are safe in the dark. Many liberals exist in a kind of learned infantilism that makes them believe in all sorts of funny things that they need protecting from and yet makes them brave enough to do all sorts of things that are really dangerous. This is not a uniquely American/Canadian/European thing. For an example see my correspondence with the Hong Kong Environmental Protection Department

http://faimao.blogspot.com/2009/02/another-reply-from-epd.html
- Fai Mao | 03/03/2009 @ 02:20
“Ducks are freshwater fowl.”

Incorrect Morgan, there are sea ducks.

“Many liberals exist in a kind of learned infantilism that makes them believe in all sorts of funny things that they need protecting from and yet makes them brave enough to do all sorts of things that are really dangerous.”

Well said Fai Mao.
- tim | 03/03/2009 @ 13:45
Forgot to add-

If interested –

http://www.ducks.org/Conservation/WaterfowlBiology/2114/TheCuriousLivesofSeaDucks.html
- tim | 03/03/2009 @ 13:46
Ah, you’re right again small-tee. Should’ve consulted my reference materials.

The pattern continues: Every time I think I’ve made a mistake, I turn out to be wrong about it.
- mkfreeberg | 03/03/2009 @ 14:14

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

Can’t Blame Republicans; There Aren’t AnyMonday, March 2nd, 2009

Can’t Blame Republicans; There Aren’t Any
Monday, March 2nd, 2009