The Fall of Saigon 35 years ago, and the ongoing "Progressive" revisionist history

This month is the anniversary of the end of the hostilities in Viet Nam, well marked on broadcast and in print by the harrowing Hugh Van Es picture of a helicopter rescue of evacuees from the rooftop of the CIA Saigon offices as the city fell to the conquering North Vietnamese.

The Washington Times recalls that shameful time in American history:

"Had the United States fought North Vietnam as it had any other enemy in its history, the conflict would have been settled speedily. However, fear of escalation and Chinese intervention caused Johnson to severely limit the use of force against the North. He chose to fight the war on unfavorable terms in the South, which was a long-term recipe for failure; nevertheless, the United States and South Vietnamese armed forces foiled every North Vietnamese attack. The 1968 Tet Offensive, the last-ditch attempt to achieve a communist victory, was a historic military defeat for the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong, which a demoralized U.S. government and skeptical press turned into an American political defeat....

...America's betrayal of South Vietnam has been an inspiration to foreign insurgents and domestic activists and politicians who have sought to replicate it whenever U.S. forces have been deployed abroad. U.S. military might is only as strong as the politicians who stand behind it. The lesson for the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan is that America will prevail with strong will and determined leadership. A disgrace like April 1975 must never happen again."

Yet even today, there remains an obnoxious insistence in revising the historical truth about the undermining of the war effort, and the resulting hell that produced millions of death and unmeasurable misery and suffering for the people of Southeast Asia.

There exists those who insist on writing the outrageous lies about that era in order to promote their modern day agenda of a sissified, emasculated, and properly punished America among the world community. These people are among worst kind of arrogant and obnoxious jerks we suffer from today. Several of those cretins participate in our local blahgosphere from time to time, and have repeated their disproved canards about the Viet Nam era shamelessly.

I will never let these people go unchallenged when they openly spew their ugly and dogmatic propaganda about Viet Nam.

#

VAT: The answer to Dems' question about "How do we get more money to spend?"

Washington Examiner:

"And current Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke warned that 'to avoid large and ultimately unsustainable budget deficits, the nation will ultimately have to choose among higher taxes, modifications to entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare, less spending on everything else from education to defense, or some combination of the above.' Bernanke knows, of course, that politicians like Obama and Pelosi aren't about to cut spending, which leaves only higher taxes.

That's why the fundamental problem here is not that Americans pay too little in taxes, it's that Washington politicians can't stop spending more and more of our money every year. By 2020, according to the Congressional Budget Office, federal spending will equal 90 percent of the country's gross domestic product. So our politicians clearly have no intention of checking into spending rehab. They're counting on getting that euphoria with the VAT fix. If they do, the rest of us will be left with a dead economy."

The quintessential Looney Lefty: Alan Grayson

First, he waltzes into a meeting of Republicans, and second, he gets into their faces in his already established obnoxious way.

How stupid is this guy?

Excerpt:

"You mean every Congressman doesn't barge into an opposing political party's meeting at a family restaurant while screaming obscenities with spittle-flecked anger?"


From Michelle Malkin (parts of the video shot sideways)

Obama's "new and improved" nuclear policy: More endangerment for America

(HT: Dr. Sanity)

Linda Chavez:

"While anti-nuclear fanatics warned of an apocalypse
if the U.S. continued to expand and improve its nuclear arsenal during the Cold
War, the reality was that our superiority over our enemy and our unwillingness
to foreswear the use of nuclear weapons prevented the conflagration many feared.
Now, President Barack Obama is determined to abandon six decades of proven
nuclear deterrent policy in favor of a fantasy that he can rid the world of
these dangerous weapons by tying America's hands behind our
backs."

What's next?

Providing actual nuclear technology to North Korea, Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, the Palestinians, and Al Qaeda, based on their agreement to abide by a "Don't Be Evil" policy?

#

The so-called "Net Neutrality" heads south

Rasmussen:

"Just 27% of Americans now believe the Federal Communications Commission should regulate the Internet like it does television and radio. That marks a 22-point drop in support for federal regulation of the Internet since June 2008."

That's bad news for those "progressives", particularly those of the Google GaGa brigade, who think that increased government control of the internet is a "good thing".

Since when does increased government control over ANYTHING that "progressives" want controlled in fulfilment of The Agenda (TM) amount to being a "good thing"?

#

Watch out, North Carolina Dem Blue Dogs: SEIU is coming to get YOU!

Talk about shooting themselves in the foot:

"The SEIU says it will do so via a third party – North Carolina First – which, of course, bypasses the whole primary gig. That means those Blue Dogs they’ve targeted (Dem. Reps Heath Shuler, Mike McIntyre,
and Larry Kissell) will face the SEIU candidates in the general elections in traditionally red districts, thereby reliably splitting whatever blue vote there might be and ensuring a GOP victory."

New Duke sexual misconduct policy: You might be a rapist if you're too "powerful"

I kid you not.

Read about it here, from FIRE:

"Duke's vastly overbroad definition of non-consensual sex puts nearly
every student at risk of being found guilty of sexual misconduct. Students are
said to be able to unintentionally coerce others into sexual activity through
'perceived power differentials,' which could include otherwise unremarkable and
consensual liaisons between a varsity athlete and an average student, a senior
and a freshman, or a student government member and a non-member.

Further, students are said to be unable to consent to sexual behavior
when 'intoxicated,' regardless of their level of intoxication. Duke has turned
mutually consensual sexual conduct, which might merely be poorly considered,
into a punishable act. Adding to the confusion, if both parties are intoxicated
at all, both are guilty of sexual misconduct, since neither can officially give
consent. North Carolina law does not support this definition of consent.

'Of course, there is no way that everyone who was
intoxicated during sexual activity, let alone 'perceived' as more powerful, is
going to be charged with sexual misconduct,' said Adam Kissel, Director
of FIRE's Individual Rights Defense Program. 'Add to that
the provision about an unintentional atmosphere of coercion, and anyone can see
that Duke's policy is impossible to rationalize or to fairly and equitably
enforce. As a result, this policy effectively trivializes real sexual
misconduct, which is a gravely serious crime.'"

Hat tip to Dr. Helen, who adds:

"It seems to me that the most powerful group on
Duke's campus is the group of feminists that got this policy passed. If you have
sex with one of them, you have obviously been raped and need to file charges. "

More at Protein Wisdom:

"Women’s Center Director Ada Gregory was quoted in Duke’s student
newspaper The Chronicle justifying the new policy, saying, 'The higher [the] IQ, the more manipulative they are, the more
cunning they are … imagine the sex offenders we have here at Duke—cream of the
crop.' "

What is WRONG with these people?

#

Obamacare's dominoes are already falling

Get ready for steady large increases in premiums, followed by a distinct drop in quality of care.

Noteworthy:

"Add to this statist medical assurance the fact that incrementalist Democrats fully intend, eventually, to provide universal care to over 12 million illegal foreign aliens, and the rising price of medical care defies comprehension. Illegal aliens, like millions of freeloading citizens, will have paid little or nothing for benefits parasitically leeched from the insurance industry, the economy, and the American ideal -- which until the past few decades didn't include an ever-enlarging entitlement appetite of something for nothing."

Gee whiz, what will they think of next?

Oh wait......I know! How about Net Neutrality?

So why does the employment situation remain grim?

Simple......it's just another huge variation in the crisis of confidence we've been suffering through:

"The point, of course, is that corporations are
still in a position, driven by increases in productivity and lack of demand as
well as an unsettled business environment, not to increase hiring any time soon.
The money corporations are sitting on, as noted, is going to go somewhere – most
likely to increased dividends or mergers. And mergers actually mean fewer jobs,
not more. Until companies see increased, well-defined and sustainable growth in
demand to the point they can’t handle it with their present level of employees,
they’re not going to hire no matter how many 'jobs' bills Congress passes and
Obama signs."

Despite what you will hear elsewhere in the local blahgosphere, this entire economic malaise we've been suffering through these last few years is first and foremost a result of a crisis in confidence, on many different levels, in many different segments.

Initially, it was private investors who had little confidence (mainly thanks to mark to market), but now they've been joined by corporate operations. Private investment funding has mainly been sitting on the sidelines for almost 30 months. Corporate funding among those whose free cash flow can afford such are not investing at the levels that promise help for the economy.

Why is the crisis of confidence continuing on many different levels?

You get three guesses at the answer, and the first two don't count.

Part of the solution comes with the voters' actions in November. The other part comes when we are subsequently successful in stopping further disasters coming out of the White House.

#