The Israeli response is disproportionate? I hear this a lot from the Jew hating Press, European nations and intollerant leftists. The very idea that this attack on Hamas is purely a result of a few misguided rockets is an understandable ignorance perpetuated by the ignorant left and uninformed sheeple.
The fact is, Hamas and Palestine in general has been launching attacks against Israeli civilians for years. In fact, there have been over 1,100 civilian deaths in Israel from Palestine between 2000 and 2007. Click here for Chart
For those of us in America, we must ask if we would show the same restraint if even a dozen of our civilians were being attacked by terrorists on a regular basis from across the border.
The answer should be a resounding, "No". Why then would we ask Israel to restrain itself? And if you consider all the deaths in Israel, innocent men, women and children over the last decade, the deaths done to civilians far outnumbers the deaths currently in Gaza. As of right now, the number of Palestinian deaths is less than half the number of innocent Israelis killed in terror attacks and MOST of the dead are Hamas militants.
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Why Palestinian Deaths Do Not Bother Me
Well, perhaps the title can be a bit misleading. Of course I absolutely abhor the deaths of innocent civilians, but I have always been one to look at situations with detached perspective. I understand that this can make me appear cold, but I have found that a practical approach resulting in a long standing solution, is more compassionate than accomplishing nothing and patting myself on the back for passing out the most fliers.
Take the San Francisco protesters for example. On Monday they staged a rally that did nothing more than block traffic for hours. I myself walked by a man wearing a modified Israeli flag on his chest with a swastika instead of the star of David. It's not the ironic use of a swastika on an Israeli flag, which makes no sense, it is the irony that the Palestinian people had elected Hamas, an organization recognized by the international community as a terrorist organization which has the destruction of Israel in their charter. The Palestinian people have essentially elected Nazi sympathizers into office.
This brings me to my point of looking at this in perspective. Although not everyone in Palestine voted for Hamas, there are consequences for the actions of a state or nation that determines the fate of its citizens. Germany elected the Nazi party in the 30's despite its overt anti-Semitic views. Over the following years, many German civilians would die in allied carpet bombings. Nazi supporter or not. One could argue that the German citizens were victims by a technicality, but it would be irrelevant when you consider the global intentions of the party and the man they elected to lead their nation.
Take the San Francisco protesters for example. On Monday they staged a rally that did nothing more than block traffic for hours. I myself walked by a man wearing a modified Israeli flag on his chest with a swastika instead of the star of David. It's not the ironic use of a swastika on an Israeli flag, which makes no sense, it is the irony that the Palestinian people had elected Hamas, an organization recognized by the international community as a terrorist organization which has the destruction of Israel in their charter. The Palestinian people have essentially elected Nazi sympathizers into office.
This brings me to my point of looking at this in perspective. Although not everyone in Palestine voted for Hamas, there are consequences for the actions of a state or nation that determines the fate of its citizens. Germany elected the Nazi party in the 30's despite its overt anti-Semitic views. Over the following years, many German civilians would die in allied carpet bombings. Nazi supporter or not. One could argue that the German citizens were victims by a technicality, but it would be irrelevant when you consider the global intentions of the party and the man they elected to lead their nation.
No such thing as media Bias...
The home of the "Most Trusted Name in News" CCN has released the following:
Leadership Rating Best For New Chief Since Reagan
This is of course before he even takes office... Naw, no such thing as bias indeed.
Leadership Rating Best For New Chief Since Reagan
This is of course before he even takes office... Naw, no such thing as bias indeed.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
The GM Union Bail Out: Short Of Sounding Like A Conspiracy Theorist
The first big victim of the Union Bailout Scam has been hit. Dayton Ohio will close it's GM plant, forever changing the landscape of a once thriving city. Many of the city's financial infrastructures are dependent on GM's business needs.
The image I have going in my head is of three men in suits, armed with assault rifles and wearing ski masks standing above about a dozen people kneeling and blindfolded. One of them is on the floor bleeding; he has been shot in the head. As the other hostages quake with fear one of the men in suits yells in a burly voice, "Alright, listen up! We demand 25 Billion dollars in unmarked bills or else the rest of these dopes are gonna take a dirt nap."
As some have mentioned, this entire bailout business is nothing more than the biggest heist in history. The cost to us, the tax payer, will be in the trillions and least for generations to come. What is peculiar about this is that this plant is the only one owned by GM that is not under control of the United Auto Workers. This stinks something rotten. So with this move, the UAW becomes the only union in charge of GM production and sends a message to Washington at the same time.
Meanwhile, the auto manufacturers not controlled by unions are not in such dire straits as the big three. Do you see the connection here? The unions are pulling the strings. These crooks are holding our economy hostage for billions of dollars. These same crooks openly endorsed Barack Obama for the presidency. The crooks of Wall Street also have deep connections to Obama. Franklin Raines and Jim Johnson were both CEOs of Fannie Mae and were key political and economic advisors during his presidential campaign.
The thing that is the funniest about this whole deal is that since most of the country, about ¾ of this country, are unhappy with the Bush administration, blame will forever be passable to his administration, even as they rob us blind. They will use this manufactured crisis to grow government and increase taxes. Yeah, this is "change" alright, from one set of crooks to another. Except these guys are bigger and claim to be champions of the "little guy".
Get ready America, it's going to be a bumpy ride.
The image I have going in my head is of three men in suits, armed with assault rifles and wearing ski masks standing above about a dozen people kneeling and blindfolded. One of them is on the floor bleeding; he has been shot in the head. As the other hostages quake with fear one of the men in suits yells in a burly voice, "Alright, listen up! We demand 25 Billion dollars in unmarked bills or else the rest of these dopes are gonna take a dirt nap."
As some have mentioned, this entire bailout business is nothing more than the biggest heist in history. The cost to us, the tax payer, will be in the trillions and least for generations to come. What is peculiar about this is that this plant is the only one owned by GM that is not under control of the United Auto Workers. This stinks something rotten. So with this move, the UAW becomes the only union in charge of GM production and sends a message to Washington at the same time.
Meanwhile, the auto manufacturers not controlled by unions are not in such dire straits as the big three. Do you see the connection here? The unions are pulling the strings. These crooks are holding our economy hostage for billions of dollars. These same crooks openly endorsed Barack Obama for the presidency. The crooks of Wall Street also have deep connections to Obama. Franklin Raines and Jim Johnson were both CEOs of Fannie Mae and were key political and economic advisors during his presidential campaign.
The thing that is the funniest about this whole deal is that since most of the country, about ¾ of this country, are unhappy with the Bush administration, blame will forever be passable to his administration, even as they rob us blind. They will use this manufactured crisis to grow government and increase taxes. Yeah, this is "change" alright, from one set of crooks to another. Except these guys are bigger and claim to be champions of the "little guy".
Get ready America, it's going to be a bumpy ride.
Friday, November 14, 2008
Anyone Else Getting This? Why Are We Being Coached By Democrats?
The very idea seems absurd to me. It would be as if we went to WWII and asked the Germans how the Allies could hope to win more battles. You think they are going to be honest? Even worse, they have on Democrat columnists and Loser Republicans. Republicans who say that we should move to the so called center. It didn't work out so well for them did it? Leave it to CCCPNN, Faux News and MSBDSM (OK, I'm having too much fun here) to say that the Republican party is not enough like the Democrat party.
They attribute this fact as our downfall when it really couldn't be further from the truth. The nation is sick of Center-Left policies, it's just that those policies have been implemented, to our shame, by the GOP. Bush increased spending and government interference, something you would expect a Democrat to do. So it is no wonder that we elected Barack Obama. He labeled the liberal policies of George Bush as Conservative and told America that it was time for "Change" by moving even further to the left. The people swallowed this tripe in large part because the GOP failed to educate them.
Obama didn't win this election, we lost it and handed this socialist our nation on a silver platter.
They attribute this fact as our downfall when it really couldn't be further from the truth. The nation is sick of Center-Left policies, it's just that those policies have been implemented, to our shame, by the GOP. Bush increased spending and government interference, something you would expect a Democrat to do. So it is no wonder that we elected Barack Obama. He labeled the liberal policies of George Bush as Conservative and told America that it was time for "Change" by moving even further to the left. The people swallowed this tripe in large part because the GOP failed to educate them.
Obama didn't win this election, we lost it and handed this socialist our nation on a silver platter.
Monday, November 10, 2008
Move more to the center? I don't think so.
There is a war of ideals going on today. The fighting is within the Republican party and it is ferocious to say the least. On one side, there are the centrist blue blood country club republicans and on the other side are the social and fiscal conservatives.
I was just listening to Lou Dobbs and he had on a man who is pushing for the GOP to become more centrist. He was a former staff member of Rudy Giuliani, unfortunately I didn't remember his name. It was really funny to listen to really. Rush Limbaugh had mentioned that the media would make it a habit of bring on analysis of people who lost and ask them how their party can win. So in this case, it was the loser (Giuliani) who lost to the loser (McLame) telling us that conservatism doesn't work and that it can't win.
He went on to say that Social conservatives are a dying breed. He pulled some numbers out of his ass that McCain only won voters over 65 and voters in towns no larger than 50,000 in size. That may be true, but it doesn't mean that social conservatives are scarce, it just means that many social conservatives did not vote, or voted for Obama out of spite.
If it is true that Social conservatism is dying, then explain to me how in the biggest liberal state in the country, Proposition 8 (the vote to ban gay marriage) won the ballot. We won 52% against 48% and of those 48%, many may include people who still think homosexuality is wrong, but voted against it on more libertarian reasons of non intrusion. Heck even Obama himself, mister radical left wing has stated his opposition to homosexuality, even if they choose to vote in favor for non intrusion reason.
So don't try to tell me social conservatism is dead. This is a concentrated attack by the country club republicans to team up with the left wing media and destroy the traditionalist conservative movement. Our only response is to clear them out.
I was just listening to Lou Dobbs and he had on a man who is pushing for the GOP to become more centrist. He was a former staff member of Rudy Giuliani, unfortunately I didn't remember his name. It was really funny to listen to really. Rush Limbaugh had mentioned that the media would make it a habit of bring on analysis of people who lost and ask them how their party can win. So in this case, it was the loser (Giuliani) who lost to the loser (McLame) telling us that conservatism doesn't work and that it can't win.
He went on to say that Social conservatives are a dying breed. He pulled some numbers out of his ass that McCain only won voters over 65 and voters in towns no larger than 50,000 in size. That may be true, but it doesn't mean that social conservatives are scarce, it just means that many social conservatives did not vote, or voted for Obama out of spite.
If it is true that Social conservatism is dying, then explain to me how in the biggest liberal state in the country, Proposition 8 (the vote to ban gay marriage) won the ballot. We won 52% against 48% and of those 48%, many may include people who still think homosexuality is wrong, but voted against it on more libertarian reasons of non intrusion. Heck even Obama himself, mister radical left wing has stated his opposition to homosexuality, even if they choose to vote in favor for non intrusion reason.
So don't try to tell me social conservatism is dead. This is a concentrated attack by the country club republicans to team up with the left wing media and destroy the traditionalist conservative movement. Our only response is to clear them out.
Sunday, November 9, 2008
Germany marks pogrom that led to Holocaust
Original Story
"Germans and Israelis on Sunday marked the 70th anniversary of Kristallnacht, the Nazi-incited riots that began their campaign to destroy European Jewry, with ceremonies, concerts and vows to honor the victims with renewed vigilance."
Learning from history is something everyone should do. Certainly this event in history should be looked upon with the utmost scrutiny and caution. The following segment, however did raise a small alarm for me.
"Chancellor Angela Merkel recalled the Nov. 9, 1938 riots in which more than 91 German Jews were killed and more than 1,000 synagogues damaged, telling Germans that the lessons of the nation's past were crucial in confronting a current increase of xenophobia and racism."
She is of course referring t0 the obscene amount of foreign refugees being imported into Europe. Most of them Muslims. As Muslims riot for the inclusion of Sharia Law to be placed into existing European Law, many Europeans cannot help but feel that without assimilation, the growing immigrant population will eventually overtake Europe and force them all under Islamic rule.
Angela Merkel's comments concern me because the two events have little in common. The Jews were not fresh groups of immigrants, many had been in Germany and Europe for decades, if not hundreds of years. Many were proud Germans in fact. In addition to that, the false notion of racial superiority has nothing to do with the factual notion of cultural superiority. Superiority not being a racial or religious based philosophy, but one derived from the ideals of liberty and justice no matter your race, gender or creed. Those who hail themselves as Muslim and believe in religious freedom without reprisal is not thinking that way from a religious perspective, but from a perspective derived from the governing culture of western civilization. A Muslim who thinks otherwise is of a non-assimilated mindset and will seek to overthrow liberty and replace it with theocratic dictatorships.
In that way, the two situations are different. So while I agree that we should not be trying to set a blame on a people or group, as the Nazis did, we should also not overlook the differences in the two situations.
"Germans and Israelis on Sunday marked the 70th anniversary of Kristallnacht, the Nazi-incited riots that began their campaign to destroy European Jewry, with ceremonies, concerts and vows to honor the victims with renewed vigilance."
Learning from history is something everyone should do. Certainly this event in history should be looked upon with the utmost scrutiny and caution. The following segment, however did raise a small alarm for me.
"Chancellor Angela Merkel recalled the Nov. 9, 1938 riots in which more than 91 German Jews were killed and more than 1,000 synagogues damaged, telling Germans that the lessons of the nation's past were crucial in confronting a current increase of xenophobia and racism."
She is of course referring t0 the obscene amount of foreign refugees being imported into Europe. Most of them Muslims. As Muslims riot for the inclusion of Sharia Law to be placed into existing European Law, many Europeans cannot help but feel that without assimilation, the growing immigrant population will eventually overtake Europe and force them all under Islamic rule.
Angela Merkel's comments concern me because the two events have little in common. The Jews were not fresh groups of immigrants, many had been in Germany and Europe for decades, if not hundreds of years. Many were proud Germans in fact. In addition to that, the false notion of racial superiority has nothing to do with the factual notion of cultural superiority. Superiority not being a racial or religious based philosophy, but one derived from the ideals of liberty and justice no matter your race, gender or creed. Those who hail themselves as Muslim and believe in religious freedom without reprisal is not thinking that way from a religious perspective, but from a perspective derived from the governing culture of western civilization. A Muslim who thinks otherwise is of a non-assimilated mindset and will seek to overthrow liberty and replace it with theocratic dictatorships.
In that way, the two situations are different. So while I agree that we should not be trying to set a blame on a people or group, as the Nazis did, we should also not overlook the differences in the two situations.
Friday, October 31, 2008
I told you, I f*ckin' told you!
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/31/obama.blitzer/index.html
Did I not say that Obama would not do anything to get out of Iraq? Well, you say, it's probably still on his list, but with the economy the way it is, he has more important things to worry about.
Wait a tick, one of the main arguments against the war in Iraq is that it is costing us too much money. Well, he could "end" the war and stop all that spending. Funny how you have heard nothing about ending the war in the last few months. In fact, you have heard the opposite from Obama. That the surge is working. His gripe is now focusing on Afghanistan.
Sorry followers of your lord Barack Obama. He will not end the war. He duped you. But of course we here on the right knew it was coming.
Did I not say that Obama would not do anything to get out of Iraq? Well, you say, it's probably still on his list, but with the economy the way it is, he has more important things to worry about.
Wait a tick, one of the main arguments against the war in Iraq is that it is costing us too much money. Well, he could "end" the war and stop all that spending. Funny how you have heard nothing about ending the war in the last few months. In fact, you have heard the opposite from Obama. That the surge is working. His gripe is now focusing on Afghanistan.
Sorry followers of your lord Barack Obama. He will not end the war. He duped you. But of course we here on the right knew it was coming.
Monday, October 27, 2008
How Obama will create a Super Class
Obama is for the little guy right? Well, there are gonna be a whole lot of little guys soon. Thing is, they will be former big guys. Or at least bigger guys. As with all socialist systems, the idea of running an economy on money does not disappear, but the amount of people getting the freedom to get a larger share of the pie decreases.
Small business owners around the country are holding their breath as it seems more and more likely that Barack Obama will win the presidency. Why, you might ask, are they afraid when Obama has repeatedly campaign in defense of the middle class? Simple, the ones who do not own their own business see no harm from taxing those who make more than 250,000 dollars a year. However, a business owner who does make more than 250,000 a year sees nothing but trouble ahead. He is not big enough to survive the economic fallout to come. It's not just the taxes or the demand to increase worker benefits, its things like the Employee Free Choice Act which will unionize small businesses. Bigger corporations can withstand union demands because they make so much money. But how do you think a smaller business will fare against such demands? They will have no choice but to lay people off. No other business, other than corporations will have the capital to hire employees, further filling the coffers of big business.
The thing about socialism is that it does not benefit the little guy. It keeps him little and makes the rich even richer. Look at China. With their introduction into the global market, the traditionally Communist government has turned into a socialist paradise. The party loyalists run everything and squash all possibilities of private growth. They do this by paying their workers less wages and keeping more money out of their pockets. Despite the government being large and having all the money, their schools educate them only to serve their Communist masters and discourage any thoughts of personal gain as greedy.
Couldn't happen here you say? Let's say Obama gets to do what ever he wants. Since the Democrats will soon be filibuster proof, that is more of a possibility. There are a few dirty tricks they will employ. One of the first is to enact a so called "voluntary" health care plan. It will of course tax the "rich" to allow the poor to afford health care. Not to shady, except with cheaper health care more people will drop their insurance to get the cheaper stuff. This will cost eventually spread to everyone as the cost is expected to be astronomical.
The next plan is more sinister. This will effectively limit all opposing views. It is known as the Fairness Doctrine. This doctrine is innocently passed off as a way to have broadcasters offer opposing views in equal time to all "controversial" topics. This doctrine is supported primarily by the left and seeks to target the one news source that liberals have not be able to successfully compete. Radio. Conservative talk radio to be exact. With the failure of Air America, the liberals answer to conservative talk radio, the liberals have instead decided to use its failure to bring down conservative talk radio.
How it will play out. As forced opposing views are required, the ratings of those radio shows will decrease along with the advertisers. Remember, it was the advertisers fear of losing money that got Don Imus cancelled a few years back. Imagine the same for all conservative talk radio.
The liberals have all of Hollywood, News and Newspapers in their pockets. The one last bastion of conservative opposition is on the radio. That bastion will come under attack. Secret government deals like the Dubai Ports deal, the Illegal Amnesty Bill and even the secret bailout that took place before the current 750 billion dollar wall street bailout and future bills like it will go through unopposed as any opposing voice will no longer have an ally.
In summation, Obama will destroy the middle class, thereby leaving the upper class unopposed. He will destroy oppositional thought and ensure that we all share the poverty.
Small business owners around the country are holding their breath as it seems more and more likely that Barack Obama will win the presidency. Why, you might ask, are they afraid when Obama has repeatedly campaign in defense of the middle class? Simple, the ones who do not own their own business see no harm from taxing those who make more than 250,000 dollars a year. However, a business owner who does make more than 250,000 a year sees nothing but trouble ahead. He is not big enough to survive the economic fallout to come. It's not just the taxes or the demand to increase worker benefits, its things like the Employee Free Choice Act which will unionize small businesses. Bigger corporations can withstand union demands because they make so much money. But how do you think a smaller business will fare against such demands? They will have no choice but to lay people off. No other business, other than corporations will have the capital to hire employees, further filling the coffers of big business.
The thing about socialism is that it does not benefit the little guy. It keeps him little and makes the rich even richer. Look at China. With their introduction into the global market, the traditionally Communist government has turned into a socialist paradise. The party loyalists run everything and squash all possibilities of private growth. They do this by paying their workers less wages and keeping more money out of their pockets. Despite the government being large and having all the money, their schools educate them only to serve their Communist masters and discourage any thoughts of personal gain as greedy.
Couldn't happen here you say? Let's say Obama gets to do what ever he wants. Since the Democrats will soon be filibuster proof, that is more of a possibility. There are a few dirty tricks they will employ. One of the first is to enact a so called "voluntary" health care plan. It will of course tax the "rich" to allow the poor to afford health care. Not to shady, except with cheaper health care more people will drop their insurance to get the cheaper stuff. This will cost eventually spread to everyone as the cost is expected to be astronomical.
The next plan is more sinister. This will effectively limit all opposing views. It is known as the Fairness Doctrine. This doctrine is innocently passed off as a way to have broadcasters offer opposing views in equal time to all "controversial" topics. This doctrine is supported primarily by the left and seeks to target the one news source that liberals have not be able to successfully compete. Radio. Conservative talk radio to be exact. With the failure of Air America, the liberals answer to conservative talk radio, the liberals have instead decided to use its failure to bring down conservative talk radio.
How it will play out. As forced opposing views are required, the ratings of those radio shows will decrease along with the advertisers. Remember, it was the advertisers fear of losing money that got Don Imus cancelled a few years back. Imagine the same for all conservative talk radio.
The liberals have all of Hollywood, News and Newspapers in their pockets. The one last bastion of conservative opposition is on the radio. That bastion will come under attack. Secret government deals like the Dubai Ports deal, the Illegal Amnesty Bill and even the secret bailout that took place before the current 750 billion dollar wall street bailout and future bills like it will go through unopposed as any opposing voice will no longer have an ally.
In summation, Obama will destroy the middle class, thereby leaving the upper class unopposed. He will destroy oppositional thought and ensure that we all share the poverty.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Why Obama's "Sharing the Wealth" talk should immediately make you choose McCain
Sharing the wealth. Code word for Marxist policies. Policies that seek to "share the wealth" are failed, industrial aged policies. Some might ask, "What is wrong with sharing the wealth? The rich have too much money anyway." That may be, but consider the consequences...like an adult. America is built on free trade, free thought and the promise of being in charge of your own future. If the government were to start imposing Marxist ideals into a free trade market, you will see a stagnation in production, ideas and profits.
Then there is the pure indignity of the Marxist system. I was raised to do things for myself. Yeah it's hard, but I would sooner work to death than rely on another to take care of me. Not only that, but the satisfaction of success is beyond anything else. When I accomplish something, I do it on my own. When I am involved in the accomplishment of something, then I expect a part of the success. But when I have nothing to do with success and demand a part of it because someone else has so much of it, then that is dishonorable.
For people who know me, I have used this story as an example a lot. For those of you who don't, I think you can understand the simple analogy of a childhood memory.
When I was 10, there was this show called the Mighty Morphing Power Rangers. A show pretty much made for marketing toys. Regardless, I was 10 and didn't care. The toy I wanted was called the "Megazord" and it was very expensive. $80 to be exact. My family did not have a lot of money like the other kids. My allowance was about $10 a month which I had to do chores like mowing the lawn, doing dishes and taking out the trash on occasion.
My financial strife fueled my desire to make more money and get that toy. So I sought out more work to make more money. I got a paper route, did chores for my grandparents (they paid better than my parents) and within a few months, I had enough money to buy the Megazord. Well, we got to the toy store and I went to the counter to buy it. Then came a sudden shock. Tax. I was short because I needed the extra $5 to pay for the sales tax. My brother was with me, and in my desperation accepted his $5 (part of his allowance). It was only later that I would learn that my parents would now be convinced that we BOTH bought the toy and therefore HALF of it belonged to him. So I did all the work, paid about 95% of the cost and now only half of it belonged to me.
All in all, it was a stupid toy, but the point should be clear. There should not be some overseeing power that can forcefully take your profits and give it to someone who has not worked for it. Had I known that was going to happen I would have simply waited to get the extra money myself, or possibly, not try to get it at all. It is the later that I fear coming into play in our economy. People no longer reaching for the stars because the Government will simply take away what THEY decide s/he does not "need". Those who are already rich will seek to spend and make their money elsewhere (in a different, more friendly country) and the people will reap the results of socialism. The spreading of POVERTY. This is what Obama wants. This is why he MUST lose.
Then there is the pure indignity of the Marxist system. I was raised to do things for myself. Yeah it's hard, but I would sooner work to death than rely on another to take care of me. Not only that, but the satisfaction of success is beyond anything else. When I accomplish something, I do it on my own. When I am involved in the accomplishment of something, then I expect a part of the success. But when I have nothing to do with success and demand a part of it because someone else has so much of it, then that is dishonorable.
For people who know me, I have used this story as an example a lot. For those of you who don't, I think you can understand the simple analogy of a childhood memory.
When I was 10, there was this show called the Mighty Morphing Power Rangers. A show pretty much made for marketing toys. Regardless, I was 10 and didn't care. The toy I wanted was called the "Megazord" and it was very expensive. $80 to be exact. My family did not have a lot of money like the other kids. My allowance was about $10 a month which I had to do chores like mowing the lawn, doing dishes and taking out the trash on occasion.
My financial strife fueled my desire to make more money and get that toy. So I sought out more work to make more money. I got a paper route, did chores for my grandparents (they paid better than my parents) and within a few months, I had enough money to buy the Megazord. Well, we got to the toy store and I went to the counter to buy it. Then came a sudden shock. Tax. I was short because I needed the extra $5 to pay for the sales tax. My brother was with me, and in my desperation accepted his $5 (part of his allowance). It was only later that I would learn that my parents would now be convinced that we BOTH bought the toy and therefore HALF of it belonged to him. So I did all the work, paid about 95% of the cost and now only half of it belonged to me.
All in all, it was a stupid toy, but the point should be clear. There should not be some overseeing power that can forcefully take your profits and give it to someone who has not worked for it. Had I known that was going to happen I would have simply waited to get the extra money myself, or possibly, not try to get it at all. It is the later that I fear coming into play in our economy. People no longer reaching for the stars because the Government will simply take away what THEY decide s/he does not "need". Those who are already rich will seek to spend and make their money elsewhere (in a different, more friendly country) and the people will reap the results of socialism. The spreading of POVERTY. This is what Obama wants. This is why he MUST lose.
Monday, October 13, 2008
Wait Wait....We're Mean?
The leftist media has been saying that McCain and republican supports have taken to being mean spirited. Of course the Obama campaign is free of negative supporters right?
If you believe that, I've got some oxygen to sell you at a great price!. Never before in MY LIFE, have I seen such hatred towards someone as much as the left hates Palin. Tshirts calling her the "C" word are made. Unwarranted Incest jokes are hurled and God help you if you happen to wear glasses similar to her. Yes, even people who look like her are teased.
But of course the media is quick to look the other way. For those of us in the real world, the onslaught of liberal hatred is a very real and very constant reality. I wonder how they will react if we (GOP) wins this thing.
One thing is for certain, I don't think politics will ever be the same again.
If you believe that, I've got some oxygen to sell you at a great price!. Never before in MY LIFE, have I seen such hatred towards someone as much as the left hates Palin. Tshirts calling her the "C" word are made. Unwarranted Incest jokes are hurled and God help you if you happen to wear glasses similar to her. Yes, even people who look like her are teased.
But of course the media is quick to look the other way. For those of us in the real world, the onslaught of liberal hatred is a very real and very constant reality. I wonder how they will react if we (GOP) wins this thing.
One thing is for certain, I don't think politics will ever be the same again.
McCain says he is a fighter, I am skeptical
John McCain today told voters they should elect him because America needs a
fighter. "I will fight to take America in a new direction from my first day in
office until my last. I'm not afraid of the fight, I'm ready for it," McCain
said at a rally in Virginia Beach, Virginia. A McCain aide said the rally marks
a return to "basics."How can we expect him to be a fighter when he can't even fight his opponent? The thing about people who try to be friends with everyone is that they are friends of no one.
Don't feel like writing a long blog today. Too exhausted.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
Be Strong, Not Mean Mr. McCain
Our liberalized society has over the years grown intolerant of harsh realities. Prepubescent minded adults complain about how unfair the world is. They complain so much, that they believe anyone who spouts fairy tale Utopian gunk from the podium (IE Obama). My friend, an Obama supporter, God bless his ignorant brain, is convinced that once Obama becomes President, all of our enemies (who of course to a liberal nimrod, believes that the evil out there was caused by us) will want to reconsider their ways. The islamofascists will want to talk instead of saw off heads of innocent prisoners while they are still alive. North Korea will, in all it's communist glory, throw away their oppressive government system, which they only enacted to protect their citizens from being corrupted by ideals of American greed. The world will love us again, the polar ice caps will be reborn so that penguins and polar bears can fornicate to Jerry Garcia and all will be right with the world.
My point is, these people live in fairly land. In my world, in John McCain's world and in the world of your average conservative, thousands of people lost their lives on 9/11, Islamofacists make no mention of capitalism or greed, rather Islamic world domination. Like all dictatorships, North Korea seeks nukes as leverage so they can assure their rule does not come to an end. And the liberal courts grant rights to our enemies who fight to destroy rights.
It is not a pretty thing, but it is as real as it gets. McCain needs to express that. The problem is that he can come off mean, and he probably is. Regardless, the media would portray him as a jerk, even if he weren't. Americans, the undecided moderates anyway, may not like partisanship or anger, but they love leadership and patriotism. McCain has that in spades. If only he would spend more time talking about how great our nation is, in contrast to Obama's gloom and hatred for what this country stands for.
He needs to stop focusing on how many times he betrayed the conservative values to show everyone just how bi-partisan he is (which is what Obama wants). Stand up for America! Take charge. Ignore Obama and his fanatics. They do a good job of making fools of themselves. Focus on the realities not your relationship to GWB.
America is in a financial crisis. The vultures responsible for it have been put in charge of fixing it. GWB as well as the GOP fought to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and the DEMS stood in the way. We want a leader, Mr. McCain. Moderates want a leader, not a panderer. Obama doesn't pander, he has one of the worst bipartisan records in the senate. 96 Percent voting on party lines, yet he is still more popular. Throw your pre-information age common sense out the window and fight like hell in 08'.
My point is, these people live in fairly land. In my world, in John McCain's world and in the world of your average conservative, thousands of people lost their lives on 9/11, Islamofacists make no mention of capitalism or greed, rather Islamic world domination. Like all dictatorships, North Korea seeks nukes as leverage so they can assure their rule does not come to an end. And the liberal courts grant rights to our enemies who fight to destroy rights.
It is not a pretty thing, but it is as real as it gets. McCain needs to express that. The problem is that he can come off mean, and he probably is. Regardless, the media would portray him as a jerk, even if he weren't. Americans, the undecided moderates anyway, may not like partisanship or anger, but they love leadership and patriotism. McCain has that in spades. If only he would spend more time talking about how great our nation is, in contrast to Obama's gloom and hatred for what this country stands for.
He needs to stop focusing on how many times he betrayed the conservative values to show everyone just how bi-partisan he is (which is what Obama wants). Stand up for America! Take charge. Ignore Obama and his fanatics. They do a good job of making fools of themselves. Focus on the realities not your relationship to GWB.
America is in a financial crisis. The vultures responsible for it have been put in charge of fixing it. GWB as well as the GOP fought to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and the DEMS stood in the way. We want a leader, Mr. McCain. Moderates want a leader, not a panderer. Obama doesn't pander, he has one of the worst bipartisan records in the senate. 96 Percent voting on party lines, yet he is still more popular. Throw your pre-information age common sense out the window and fight like hell in 08'.
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
McCain: So we cool, dawg? .... Not exactly
I have made my choice to vote for McCain. It was refreshingly challenging to actually think about the consequences of my vote. I weighed voting, not voting and getting others to vote McCain while I held my vote in protest.
I agree with McCain on a slew of issues. There are other things I disagree with him on. Immigration and campaign financing to name a couple. But on the war, yes. Taxes, Yes. Abortion, Yes. Traditional Marriage, Yes. His choice for VP, Yes.
The issues on Obama however, I cannot think of any issue I agree with. The War, No. Abortion, No. Affirmative Action, No. Reparations, No (He said he does not believe in Reparations, which is true, but only because his extremely leftist mind thinks reparations are TOO LITTLE), Immigration, No. Foreign Policy, No. Health care, No. In fact, give me an issue he stands by and you will hear nothing by, "NO" from me.
But don't think I will let old Johnny off the hook. His pick of Sarah Palin did not please me because she is conservative. It pleased me because it showed his ability to listen to his base. I am not saying to be controlled by his base, but that he has the ability to listen to the people. We conservatives also took stances against the current President, GWB, on issues like port security, immigration (in which he was agreement with John McCain, and Ted Kennedy **shudder**), and Harriet Miers.
If McCain tries to give the Illegals amnesty, we will be there to knock him down (along with the democrats who will try to knock anything he does down because they are petty weak creatures).
I will be voting for Senator McCain, and I have even volunteered my time for his campaign. But don't think I won't call him on anything remotely liberal that he tries.
I agree with McCain on a slew of issues. There are other things I disagree with him on. Immigration and campaign financing to name a couple. But on the war, yes. Taxes, Yes. Abortion, Yes. Traditional Marriage, Yes. His choice for VP, Yes.
The issues on Obama however, I cannot think of any issue I agree with. The War, No. Abortion, No. Affirmative Action, No. Reparations, No (He said he does not believe in Reparations, which is true, but only because his extremely leftist mind thinks reparations are TOO LITTLE), Immigration, No. Foreign Policy, No. Health care, No. In fact, give me an issue he stands by and you will hear nothing by, "NO" from me.
But don't think I will let old Johnny off the hook. His pick of Sarah Palin did not please me because she is conservative. It pleased me because it showed his ability to listen to his base. I am not saying to be controlled by his base, but that he has the ability to listen to the people. We conservatives also took stances against the current President, GWB, on issues like port security, immigration (in which he was agreement with John McCain, and Ted Kennedy **shudder**), and Harriet Miers.
If McCain tries to give the Illegals amnesty, we will be there to knock him down (along with the democrats who will try to knock anything he does down because they are petty weak creatures).
I will be voting for Senator McCain, and I have even volunteered my time for his campaign. But don't think I won't call him on anything remotely liberal that he tries.
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
The Dems Are Confused, the Right Is Fired Up
Sarah Palin's selection in the GOP Veepstakes has surprised a lot of people. Especially the left. So certain that she will doom McCain's campaign, they talk about her as a choice endlessly. In fact, I am at work typing this and I am currently listening to my ultra leftist co workers try to figure out McCain's pick. Conspiracy theories are running wild, discussions of her so called inexperience are being thrown about and heads are spinning. They talk more about her than Obama's acceptance speech.
I for one am trying to figure out this pick as well. I know there is a strategy out there somewhere. And it ain't trying to get the women vote. Behind every simple intention lies a more complicated strategy.
What I can say about the pick is that it succeeded to do at least two things. Energize the conservative base and still distance the campaign from the Washington insider image.
I look forward to seeing more of this as it unfolds.
I for one am trying to figure out this pick as well. I know there is a strategy out there somewhere. And it ain't trying to get the women vote. Behind every simple intention lies a more complicated strategy.
What I can say about the pick is that it succeeded to do at least two things. Energize the conservative base and still distance the campaign from the Washington insider image.
I look forward to seeing more of this as it unfolds.
Friday, August 29, 2008
My Theory As To Why McCain Chose Palin
I think I got it. I think I got why McCain chose Sarah Palin. This is just a theory mind you. Sarah Palin is a relative newbie, and since no one knows her, it is the first thing people bring up. The fear, according to Democratic Strategist Paul Begala in his article on CNN.COM, is that she, being a Governor of Alaska for only two years, that she is inexperienced and unfit to fill the role of President should the unthinkable happen to McCain in office. That was my question as well. I am sure that this will be the dominant question on every ones mind.
Now, let's take a step back. Who do we know that has little more experience than Sarah Palin and is not running for Vice President, but for President of the United States? Who else but Barack Obama? Her selection has brought qualification into the mix. Perhaps, according to my theory, that is what her selection was supposed to do. As demonstrated by Paul Begala's article, the dems may have taken the bait.
They themselves have raised the issue of qualification. If you think about it, should Barack or Joe Biden question her qualifications, she can simply snap back, "Well, I have almost as much experience than Barack Obama".
Now, let's take a step back. Who do we know that has little more experience than Sarah Palin and is not running for Vice President, but for President of the United States? Who else but Barack Obama? Her selection has brought qualification into the mix. Perhaps, according to my theory, that is what her selection was supposed to do. As demonstrated by Paul Begala's article, the dems may have taken the bait.
They themselves have raised the issue of qualification. If you think about it, should Barack or Joe Biden question her qualifications, she can simply snap back, "Well, I have almost as much experience than Barack Obama".
Wha--? I don't get it
You know, you just can't go to bed anymore knowing how you will react tomorrow. I remember on 8-7-08 wondering how they were going to cover the 08' Olympics. I turned on the news Friday morning and instead of seeing an opening ceremony, I saw Russian tanks rolling into Georgia.
Now today, I can recall thinking about who McCain will pick to be his VP. I personally was pulling for Mitt. I value his economic experience, and thought his expertise in dealing with economies and working with the dems in the liberal state of Massachusetts was invaluable. I even understood the possibility of a woman VP through Kay Bailey Hutchinson. I had no problem with that. I don't have a problem with gender. Heck, I would vote for a black woman if she were conservative.
So it was an immense surprise to me when McCain picked this relative newbie to be his VP. She has some time as a mayor of a small city and was Governor of Alaska for two years, but is that enough experience should McCain fall ill or God forbid, die while in office? Would she be ready to lead the free world?
Inexperience is Obama's main flaw and we were good at exploiting it. Now McCain goes out and chooses someone who, while more experienced that Obama, is certainly not a heavyweight politician. A strong VP choice would have solidified his resume to the American People, now it seems he may have weakened himself. Perhaps he thinks a female voter boost will compensate for that. But only time will tell.
As for me, I do not know enough about her to make any criticisms, so I guess I will have to see how this plays out.
Now today, I can recall thinking about who McCain will pick to be his VP. I personally was pulling for Mitt. I value his economic experience, and thought his expertise in dealing with economies and working with the dems in the liberal state of Massachusetts was invaluable. I even understood the possibility of a woman VP through Kay Bailey Hutchinson. I had no problem with that. I don't have a problem with gender. Heck, I would vote for a black woman if she were conservative.
So it was an immense surprise to me when McCain picked this relative newbie to be his VP. She has some time as a mayor of a small city and was Governor of Alaska for two years, but is that enough experience should McCain fall ill or God forbid, die while in office? Would she be ready to lead the free world?
Inexperience is Obama's main flaw and we were good at exploiting it. Now McCain goes out and chooses someone who, while more experienced that Obama, is certainly not a heavyweight politician. A strong VP choice would have solidified his resume to the American People, now it seems he may have weakened himself. Perhaps he thinks a female voter boost will compensate for that. But only time will tell.
As for me, I do not know enough about her to make any criticisms, so I guess I will have to see how this plays out.
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Would They Have Taken It Down If It Were Muhammad?
Art Mocks Crucifixion
There really is a double standard here people. I personally believe in freedom of speech and as long as the taxpayers are OK with their tax money going to support such blasphemy, I can see no real reason to take it down, offended as I am.
But my gripe is that this mockery is only done in excess to Christianity. The Muslims are violently outspoken, and it is that fear that ensures that such works of art are not permitted. If they are to mock Christianity, then let them mock Islam, Judaism and Buddhism as well with the same disrespect.
But no, you will not see that. Perhaps if a few Christians decided to bomb the building, it would be taken down. Thank goodness they don't. We don't want to stoop to that level.
There really is a double standard here people. I personally believe in freedom of speech and as long as the taxpayers are OK with their tax money going to support such blasphemy, I can see no real reason to take it down, offended as I am.
But my gripe is that this mockery is only done in excess to Christianity. The Muslims are violently outspoken, and it is that fear that ensures that such works of art are not permitted. If they are to mock Christianity, then let them mock Islam, Judaism and Buddhism as well with the same disrespect.
But no, you will not see that. Perhaps if a few Christians decided to bomb the building, it would be taken down. Thank goodness they don't. We don't want to stoop to that level.
Liberal Insensitivity-Beyond Belief
One thing living in San Francisco has taught me, is that liberals are not as much compassionate as they are apathetic to things they cannot see. This liberal city touts its left wing "achievements" yet has the shameful designation as the country's leader in sex slave populations with as much as 50,000 estimated to reside within San Francisco County.
In addition to this human rights tragedy, San Francisco loves to boast its treatment of the homeless, while thousands of poverty stricken individuals beg for money on the streets or line up for their meager food from a local church. For about 30 years, San Francisco has been uninhibited by any so called "republican interference", yet poverty, slavery and loss freedoms are abundant. What have they been doing these last few decades? Well, I'll tell you. They have been banning the use of plastic bags, Styrofoam and trans fats. The raids on so called, "massage parlors" which often keep the women virtual prisoners, forced into sexual relations with paying patrons, are nothing but symbolic, as it is rare for a raid to even occur, let alone, be enough to close them down.
In San Francisco, you can make millions of dollars a year, drink your lattes and enjoy your wine and cheese parties. You talk badly about George W. Bush, lavish over your vote to make the world a better place since you voted to keep the San Francisco government the way it is. Soon as you come down from your lofty flats onto the streets of San Francisco, you can give a dollar to a homeless man and feel good about yourself as he uses that money for drugs, liquor and unnourishing fast food as he slowly starves to death, day in and day out. But perhaps not as quickly since you had the good mercy to ban trans fats.
It really is odd how this city is truly two sided. I can go on forever about how beautiful the buildings are, or how diverse the cultures are or even how amazing the food is (and it is). But I could also go on longer with my disgust of liberalism in its true form. Unapologetically arrogant, infinitely naive and apathetically cruel to all who are not like them.
In addition to this human rights tragedy, San Francisco loves to boast its treatment of the homeless, while thousands of poverty stricken individuals beg for money on the streets or line up for their meager food from a local church. For about 30 years, San Francisco has been uninhibited by any so called "republican interference", yet poverty, slavery and loss freedoms are abundant. What have they been doing these last few decades? Well, I'll tell you. They have been banning the use of plastic bags, Styrofoam and trans fats. The raids on so called, "massage parlors" which often keep the women virtual prisoners, forced into sexual relations with paying patrons, are nothing but symbolic, as it is rare for a raid to even occur, let alone, be enough to close them down.
In San Francisco, you can make millions of dollars a year, drink your lattes and enjoy your wine and cheese parties. You talk badly about George W. Bush, lavish over your vote to make the world a better place since you voted to keep the San Francisco government the way it is. Soon as you come down from your lofty flats onto the streets of San Francisco, you can give a dollar to a homeless man and feel good about yourself as he uses that money for drugs, liquor and unnourishing fast food as he slowly starves to death, day in and day out. But perhaps not as quickly since you had the good mercy to ban trans fats.
It really is odd how this city is truly two sided. I can go on forever about how beautiful the buildings are, or how diverse the cultures are or even how amazing the food is (and it is). But I could also go on longer with my disgust of liberalism in its true form. Unapologetically arrogant, infinitely naive and apathetically cruel to all who are not like them.
Friday, August 22, 2008
Don't Socialize Medicine
You get what you pay for. Right now, I have a very dear family member in the hospital. He is being treated with great care and technology and is doing well. Such is the power of competative enterprise. Without it, the healthcare system would become stagnant. Of course his treatment will be pretty expensive, but money is no concern when it involves the ones you love.
I find it interesting that the politicians who want to socialize medicine, are themselves possessors of great wealth. They do not have to deal with the nightmare that is a government clinic. I have peace of mind because I know that he stands a better chance in a privately funded facility, than in a bureaucratic pit of darkness that public clinics often are.
This is not a diss against those who work in clinics, their zeal and dedication is truly admirable. But the point of living in a progressing nation is that we go forward in our advances, not backwards.
The next time you start to think that socialized medicine is a good idea, ask yourself if you think the government has ever done a good job providing education or jobs and think just how badly they could screw up the chances that YOUR loved ones may have of surviving the unthinkable.
I find it interesting that the politicians who want to socialize medicine, are themselves possessors of great wealth. They do not have to deal with the nightmare that is a government clinic. I have peace of mind because I know that he stands a better chance in a privately funded facility, than in a bureaucratic pit of darkness that public clinics often are.
This is not a diss against those who work in clinics, their zeal and dedication is truly admirable. But the point of living in a progressing nation is that we go forward in our advances, not backwards.
The next time you start to think that socialized medicine is a good idea, ask yourself if you think the government has ever done a good job providing education or jobs and think just how badly they could screw up the chances that YOUR loved ones may have of surviving the unthinkable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)