Curtis Dahlgren
Another rendezvous with Destiny (for better or for worse)!
By Curtis Dahlgren
"Finally, Americans are coming to realize that the Left's goal is now, as it has always been, 'equality,' not prosperity."
- Dennis Prager
"Little else is requisite to carry a state to the highest degree of opulence from the lowest barbarism but peace, easy taxes, and a tolerable administration of justice." — Adam Smith
[THE FOLLOWING EXCERPTS ARE FROM MY APRIL 12, 2010 COLUMN.]
www.renewamerica.com/columns/dahlgren/100412
Last Friday was my first time at a Tea Party party. A good time was had by all. The very moment I arrived at the lakefront in Escanaba, Bart Stupak was on the radio announcing his retirement. He sounded more dogmatic on it than he has sounded for a long time on any issue. Stupak claimed that he could have won if he had chosen to run, but he knew that he couldn't.
The Tea Party participants are about 35 percent "independents" and nearly 10 percent Democrats. The ghost of Ronald Reagan rides again! Although the Upper Peninsula of Michigan (nearly 400 miles by 120 miles) has only three percent of the population of the state of Michigan, we were treated to three stops by the Tea Party Express III.
At the party on Friday, I walked past a couple of guys who were evidently traveling with the tour, and one of them told me I should "smile" at a Tea Party. I didn't know it showed. For a student of history such as myself, it was a bitter-sweet event, because everything about our President indicates that he sees himself as "presidente-for-life." Why would he be amassing such a massive amount of power in the Executive branch if he thought he would be turning it over to the opposition anyway someday? And if he can campaign every day, who's doing his job?
GOOD QUESTIONS, EH?
When his hero, Yugo Chavez became president of Venezeula, the good people down there thought that they could "take back their country." Even a lot of Cubans thought that they could "take back their country" someday when Castro came to power, but Fidel "deemed himself" presidente-for-life and that was that! There are times when we must "sieze the moment" or forever hold our peace. This is one of those moments - a time for choosing!
My grandfather fought the Socialists before the Bolshevik revolution. I've been fighting socialism and communism since before Barak Oboma was born, and this morning I've been thinking about a speech I gave in 1975. That speech was given at a toastmasters meeting on the very spot where my father's cow barn once stood (that spot is now the main office of the headquarters of Sundstrand Aviation, a world-known maker of aircraft parts, in Rockford, Illinois). I transcribed the words of that speech and here is that transcript:
Thank you, fellow Spokesmen. This may sound like heresy, but the next time I hear someone say this is a "dog-eat-dog" society, I think I'm going to scream. If you think it's bad when winners win, wait'll you live in a society in which losers win! That's what society is coming to NOW:
I have in my hand here a sports article by Jim Murray entitled "A Loser's Paradise":
"The headline out of Acapulco made you want to bang yourself against the side of the head to be sure you were seeing right. The headline said, 'Napoles to need medical care 4 months after victory.'
"The story was equally paradoxical. The official decision was that the fight had been suspended bcause of the health of Napolez. Now here, you had to conclude, was a humane way to run a boxing match. Nothing like waking the winner up to tell him he won.
"As Jose Napolez was led stumbling and bleeding into an ambulance, someone must have wondered, 'What does the loser look like?'
"The loser, Amando Munoz, looked like he had just spent a week in the country. All he had lost was a little faith in his fellow man. Of course, he should have known better than to take on Napolez, the idol of Mexico, in Mexico. He had about as much chance of winning that battle as the Indians had of beating John Wayne.
"He was bucking the greatest odds since Battling Siki fought Irish Mike McTeague in Dublin on St. Patrick's Day. Actually, when the physician stopped the fight because Napolez' health was in danger, he might have concluded from a look at the crowd that Munoz' was too.
"But the method and reasons for stopping the fight give a whole new dimension to the art of competition, and we may look forward to stories such as these on the wires in the future: 'Poughkipsie, June 1: The U. of California's 8-oarded shell crossed the finish line first in the storied regatta, but the U. of Mexico crew was declared the winner on the grounds that its boat sank.'
"'New York, July 1: Mohammed Ali was shorn of his heavyweight crown on the grounds that George Foreman was unconscious.'
"' Los Angeles, Oct. 1: The L.A. Lakers, trailing 108-70 with four minutes to play were declared the winner on the grounds that its entire starting five had fouled out.'
"' New Orleans, Jan. 12: The Minnesota Vikings were crowned winners of the Super Bowl because their starting backfield was held to minus yardage by the Pittsburgh Steelers who were leading 81-0.'
"Besides that, we might have girls declared winners of beauty contests because their teeth were bucked.
"Horse races will be stopped and the slowest horse declared the winner. And of course, auto races will be won post-humously.
"Prize fighters will start training for fights by learning how to get cut. Because if they're going to start awarding victories to guys whose health is in danger, the race may not go to the swiftest but surely to the sickest." [end of quotes]
And — I might add — if it has now come to this, we can no longer make any objective comparisons between the socialist countries in the world and the rest.
C'mon now — let's get serious.
My purpose tonight is to make a semantical study of the word 'competition' and show that the people who say we should abolish competition don't mean what they're saying; they hadn't better mean it anyway, because they don't know what they're saying!
There is "good" weather and there is bad weather, but you cannot outlaw "weather"!
There is "good" health and there is bad health, but you can't abolish "health."
There are "good" economic conditions, and "bad" economic conditions, but you cannot "ban" economics — nor the natural laws of economics.
By the same token, there is "good" competition and there may be some bad competition, but no way can "competition" be made a swear word.
Weather, health, economics, and competition can all be classified as "good" or "bad" depending on the specific circumstances, but they are still nevertheless as much of Creation as the sun, moon, and stars — or gravity or electricity or inertia (like the 'competition' between the sun's gravitational pull and the earth's inertia).
People may tell you that we must destroy competition and "profit," etc. God could say, OK — but there goes the earth right into the sun. Here the universe itself is kept running by competition between opposites such as gravity and inertia, evaporation and condensation, etc., yet some people would like to do away with competition — even competition in Academia.
I'm telling you that the biggest problem in society is not too much competition but that some people want to stop competition (and call dissent "divisive").
[Concluding with the final lines of the speech] -
I don't know if you realize the significance of what I'm saying, but for one good example, Americans [in 1975] have stopped competing with the Japanese and Germans in building high quality, sensibly priced cars, and this is a factor in the present high unemployment rates.
If Americans want other Americans to buy American cars, then Americans will have to start really competing. Stop looking around for scapegoats. Some people can tell you "more than they know," and those are the ones who say that the problems of the American people aren't the fault of the American people but a handful of bankers or "Wall Streeters." Oh, horserubbish.
It's just more fun to point one's finger at supposed "straw men" than to say right out that we are getting what we deserved. . [and] Every country gets the kind of rulers it deserves, too. [END OF SPEECH, 1975]
CONCLUSION?
This brings us back to 2012. The radicals now have their ducks in a row. The President is amassing power like a man who never intends to give it up. Why would he "transform" the White House into such a powerful entity if he thought a Republican or other Conservative might someday be running it? Yes, WHY??
Could it be because, like Yugo Chavez, he intends to be Presidente-for-life? All "competition" is to be outlawed? When "partisanship" is outlawed, only outlaws will have Power! Monopoly of thought is the deadliest monopoly on earth, and President Oboma isn't the first man on the planet who wanted to ban dissent and label it "racist" or otherwise verboten!
P.S. To be blunt about it, Monday Night Football brought this topic back to mind. I didn't waste time watching that game, but some people say that the Packers won, but the refs "awarded" the game to the Seahawks. Rush Limbaugh must be laughing, because he had remarked on Monday that the mediocre replacement referees should make the Liberals very happy; after all, we are giving everyone a "fair shot" at the job (affirmative action).
I just wish some of our political candidates had the kind of passion that some of those stupid football fans have! Our ambassador gets assassinated and dragged around the streets of Libya, and people yawned. But in Monday Night Football, those poeple finally found something to get excited about!
© Curtis Dahlgren
September 25, 2012
"Finally, Americans are coming to realize that the Left's goal is now, as it has always been, 'equality,' not prosperity."
- Dennis Prager
"Little else is requisite to carry a state to the highest degree of opulence from the lowest barbarism but peace, easy taxes, and a tolerable administration of justice." — Adam Smith
[THE FOLLOWING EXCERPTS ARE FROM MY APRIL 12, 2010 COLUMN.]
www.renewamerica.com/columns/dahlgren/100412
Last Friday was my first time at a Tea Party party. A good time was had by all. The very moment I arrived at the lakefront in Escanaba, Bart Stupak was on the radio announcing his retirement. He sounded more dogmatic on it than he has sounded for a long time on any issue. Stupak claimed that he could have won if he had chosen to run, but he knew that he couldn't.
The Tea Party participants are about 35 percent "independents" and nearly 10 percent Democrats. The ghost of Ronald Reagan rides again! Although the Upper Peninsula of Michigan (nearly 400 miles by 120 miles) has only three percent of the population of the state of Michigan, we were treated to three stops by the Tea Party Express III.
At the party on Friday, I walked past a couple of guys who were evidently traveling with the tour, and one of them told me I should "smile" at a Tea Party. I didn't know it showed. For a student of history such as myself, it was a bitter-sweet event, because everything about our President indicates that he sees himself as "presidente-for-life." Why would he be amassing such a massive amount of power in the Executive branch if he thought he would be turning it over to the opposition anyway someday? And if he can campaign every day, who's doing his job?
GOOD QUESTIONS, EH?
When his hero, Yugo Chavez became president of Venezeula, the good people down there thought that they could "take back their country." Even a lot of Cubans thought that they could "take back their country" someday when Castro came to power, but Fidel "deemed himself" presidente-for-life and that was that! There are times when we must "sieze the moment" or forever hold our peace. This is one of those moments - a time for choosing!
My grandfather fought the Socialists before the Bolshevik revolution. I've been fighting socialism and communism since before Barak Oboma was born, and this morning I've been thinking about a speech I gave in 1975. That speech was given at a toastmasters meeting on the very spot where my father's cow barn once stood (that spot is now the main office of the headquarters of Sundstrand Aviation, a world-known maker of aircraft parts, in Rockford, Illinois). I transcribed the words of that speech and here is that transcript:
Thank you, fellow Spokesmen. This may sound like heresy, but the next time I hear someone say this is a "dog-eat-dog" society, I think I'm going to scream. If you think it's bad when winners win, wait'll you live in a society in which losers win! That's what society is coming to NOW:
I have in my hand here a sports article by Jim Murray entitled "A Loser's Paradise":
"The headline out of Acapulco made you want to bang yourself against the side of the head to be sure you were seeing right. The headline said, 'Napoles to need medical care 4 months after victory.'
"The story was equally paradoxical. The official decision was that the fight had been suspended bcause of the health of Napolez. Now here, you had to conclude, was a humane way to run a boxing match. Nothing like waking the winner up to tell him he won.
"As Jose Napolez was led stumbling and bleeding into an ambulance, someone must have wondered, 'What does the loser look like?'
"The loser, Amando Munoz, looked like he had just spent a week in the country. All he had lost was a little faith in his fellow man. Of course, he should have known better than to take on Napolez, the idol of Mexico, in Mexico. He had about as much chance of winning that battle as the Indians had of beating John Wayne.
"He was bucking the greatest odds since Battling Siki fought Irish Mike McTeague in Dublin on St. Patrick's Day. Actually, when the physician stopped the fight because Napolez' health was in danger, he might have concluded from a look at the crowd that Munoz' was too.
"But the method and reasons for stopping the fight give a whole new dimension to the art of competition, and we may look forward to stories such as these on the wires in the future: 'Poughkipsie, June 1: The U. of California's 8-oarded shell crossed the finish line first in the storied regatta, but the U. of Mexico crew was declared the winner on the grounds that its boat sank.'
"'New York, July 1: Mohammed Ali was shorn of his heavyweight crown on the grounds that George Foreman was unconscious.'
"' Los Angeles, Oct. 1: The L.A. Lakers, trailing 108-70 with four minutes to play were declared the winner on the grounds that its entire starting five had fouled out.'
"' New Orleans, Jan. 12: The Minnesota Vikings were crowned winners of the Super Bowl because their starting backfield was held to minus yardage by the Pittsburgh Steelers who were leading 81-0.'
"Besides that, we might have girls declared winners of beauty contests because their teeth were bucked.
"Horse races will be stopped and the slowest horse declared the winner. And of course, auto races will be won post-humously.
"Prize fighters will start training for fights by learning how to get cut. Because if they're going to start awarding victories to guys whose health is in danger, the race may not go to the swiftest but surely to the sickest." [end of quotes]
And — I might add — if it has now come to this, we can no longer make any objective comparisons between the socialist countries in the world and the rest.
C'mon now — let's get serious.
My purpose tonight is to make a semantical study of the word 'competition' and show that the people who say we should abolish competition don't mean what they're saying; they hadn't better mean it anyway, because they don't know what they're saying!
There is "good" weather and there is bad weather, but you cannot outlaw "weather"!
There is "good" health and there is bad health, but you can't abolish "health."
There are "good" economic conditions, and "bad" economic conditions, but you cannot "ban" economics — nor the natural laws of economics.
By the same token, there is "good" competition and there may be some bad competition, but no way can "competition" be made a swear word.
Weather, health, economics, and competition can all be classified as "good" or "bad" depending on the specific circumstances, but they are still nevertheless as much of Creation as the sun, moon, and stars — or gravity or electricity or inertia (like the 'competition' between the sun's gravitational pull and the earth's inertia).
People may tell you that we must destroy competition and "profit," etc. God could say, OK — but there goes the earth right into the sun. Here the universe itself is kept running by competition between opposites such as gravity and inertia, evaporation and condensation, etc., yet some people would like to do away with competition — even competition in Academia.
I'm telling you that the biggest problem in society is not too much competition but that some people want to stop competition (and call dissent "divisive").
[Concluding with the final lines of the speech] -
I don't know if you realize the significance of what I'm saying, but for one good example, Americans [in 1975] have stopped competing with the Japanese and Germans in building high quality, sensibly priced cars, and this is a factor in the present high unemployment rates.
If Americans want other Americans to buy American cars, then Americans will have to start really competing. Stop looking around for scapegoats. Some people can tell you "more than they know," and those are the ones who say that the problems of the American people aren't the fault of the American people but a handful of bankers or "Wall Streeters." Oh, horserubbish.
It's just more fun to point one's finger at supposed "straw men" than to say right out that we are getting what we deserved. . [and] Every country gets the kind of rulers it deserves, too. [END OF SPEECH, 1975]
CONCLUSION?
This brings us back to 2012. The radicals now have their ducks in a row. The President is amassing power like a man who never intends to give it up. Why would he "transform" the White House into such a powerful entity if he thought a Republican or other Conservative might someday be running it? Yes, WHY??
Could it be because, like Yugo Chavez, he intends to be Presidente-for-life? All "competition" is to be outlawed? When "partisanship" is outlawed, only outlaws will have Power! Monopoly of thought is the deadliest monopoly on earth, and President Oboma isn't the first man on the planet who wanted to ban dissent and label it "racist" or otherwise verboten!
P.S. To be blunt about it, Monday Night Football brought this topic back to mind. I didn't waste time watching that game, but some people say that the Packers won, but the refs "awarded" the game to the Seahawks. Rush Limbaugh must be laughing, because he had remarked on Monday that the mediocre replacement referees should make the Liberals very happy; after all, we are giving everyone a "fair shot" at the job (affirmative action).
I just wish some of our political candidates had the kind of passion that some of those stupid football fans have! Our ambassador gets assassinated and dragged around the streets of Libya, and people yawned. But in Monday Night Football, those poeple finally found something to get excited about!
© Curtis Dahlgren
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
