Some teachers in New Jersey seem to think Barack Hussein Obama is a legitimate substitute for God.
Here's the video. It's two minutes and change, but make sure to watch what follows, which is a discussion in the FOX Strategy Room. This is frightening stuff. Who have we elected? Mao Tse Tung? Kim Jong Il? Fidel Castro? Hugo Chavez? All of the above?
God save us from these fools.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
America Deserves This Bastard in the White House
We deserve our Bastard in Chief because we failed to be vigilant of our freedoms, handed down to us by generations that were. We failed to appreciate our freedoms, our creed, our founding, and all the rich history, in all its imperfection. In short, we failed to appreciate America.
Yes. I call the president a Bastard. But let's look at that in context. He claims to be Christian. But I contend no Christian can, who is genuinely filled with the Holy Spirit, brutalize Israel as he did yesterday. America, thanks to Barack Hussein Obama, has turned its back on Israel, and there will be hell to pay for it.
I am coming very close to hating this man in a manner not acceptable to God. I am commanded to hate and eschew evil; I am commanded to have no fellowship with the ungodly; but in all this I am commanded to love my neighbor. If I am to hate, it is to be with perfect hatred.
Barack Hussein Obama not only delivered Israel's head to the world on a silver charger after his lurid dance at the UN, he also delivered America. This man, so full of arrogance and hatred for America has given us over to our enemies.
America deserves Barack Hussein Obama because America stopped appreciating, many years ago, the sacrifices that made this nation great. We deserve whatever befalls us. Each and every future terrorist attack on America or its citizenry abroad is laid squarely at President Obama's feet. His hands and soul are thick and pregnant with American blood.
We deserve whatever befalls us... May God have mercy on this nation, for we may very well have just witnessed the fall of America. And the blow was dealt by our very own president.
Can this nation ever, truly, recover from the man?
Yes. I call the president a Bastard. But let's look at that in context. He claims to be Christian. But I contend no Christian can, who is genuinely filled with the Holy Spirit, brutalize Israel as he did yesterday. America, thanks to Barack Hussein Obama, has turned its back on Israel, and there will be hell to pay for it.
I am coming very close to hating this man in a manner not acceptable to God. I am commanded to hate and eschew evil; I am commanded to have no fellowship with the ungodly; but in all this I am commanded to love my neighbor. If I am to hate, it is to be with perfect hatred.
Barack Hussein Obama not only delivered Israel's head to the world on a silver charger after his lurid dance at the UN, he also delivered America. This man, so full of arrogance and hatred for America has given us over to our enemies.
America deserves Barack Hussein Obama because America stopped appreciating, many years ago, the sacrifices that made this nation great. We deserve whatever befalls us. Each and every future terrorist attack on America or its citizenry abroad is laid squarely at President Obama's feet. His hands and soul are thick and pregnant with American blood.
We deserve whatever befalls us... May God have mercy on this nation, for we may very well have just witnessed the fall of America. And the blow was dealt by our very own president.
Can this nation ever, truly, recover from the man?
Sunday, September 20, 2009
A New Declaration
"Every citizen should be a soldier. This was the case with the Greeks and Romans, and must be that of every free state." ~ Thomas Jefferson
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these United States; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present President of the United States of America is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He (Obama) has rejected the will of the people.
He is attempting the overthrow of our Constitutional Republic by attempting to form a Socialist Union with himself as Dictator.
He has offered aid and comfort to our enemies.
He has usurped the powers of our Constitutionally formed Congress, by installing policy makers (or "czars") who are unaccountable to the people and the duly elected Congress.
He has combined with others (Principally, certain equally despotic Democrat legislators) to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent.
For altering fundamentally the form of our Governments.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A President, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
We, therefore, the people of the United States of America, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these United States, solemnly publish and declare, That these United States are, and of right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to Barack Hussein Obama, and that all political connection between them and Barack Hussein Obama, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.
We must do whatever we can to protect our freedom and liberty. We must first ask Obama, politely, to resign. If that doesn't work, we must initiate impeachment proceedings against him to have him removed.
If that doesn't work, we must be prepared to shed blood in defense of our Republic and our liberty.
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these United States; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present President of the United States of America is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He (Obama) has rejected the will of the people.
He is attempting the overthrow of our Constitutional Republic by attempting to form a Socialist Union with himself as Dictator.
He has offered aid and comfort to our enemies.
He has usurped the powers of our Constitutionally formed Congress, by installing policy makers (or "czars") who are unaccountable to the people and the duly elected Congress.
He has combined with others (Principally, certain equally despotic Democrat legislators) to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent.
For altering fundamentally the form of our Governments.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A President, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
We, therefore, the people of the United States of America, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these United States, solemnly publish and declare, That these United States are, and of right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to Barack Hussein Obama, and that all political connection between them and Barack Hussein Obama, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.
We must do whatever we can to protect our freedom and liberty. We must first ask Obama, politely, to resign. If that doesn't work, we must initiate impeachment proceedings against him to have him removed.
If that doesn't work, we must be prepared to shed blood in defense of our Republic and our liberty.
Friday, September 11, 2009
Don't Cry, Mommy. I'm Only Bleeding
"America is the greatest, freest and most decent society in existence. It is an oasis of goodness in a desert of cynicism and barbarism. This country, once an experiment unique in the world, is now the last best hope for the world." ~ Dinesh D'Souza
September 11, 2009
I was going to post a very moving and touching tribute to the memories of those Americans whose lives were taken prematurely on September eleventh, two thousand and one, at the Pentagon in Washington, the World Trade Center in New York City, and that nondescript field in Pennsylvania.
I was going to write a blog entry about the significance of the terrorist attacks on America on that fateful day.
I was going to remind both of my readers how that attack 8 years ago today had changed America. How it intensified our resolve to fight tyranny and hatred all over the world. How we responded to the attacks with renewed patriotism, and how we Americans, as one people, with one voice, rose up in unity to protect our rights as free people to defend our country and her people against fanatical Islamic terrorists.
I was going to write an inspirational post reminding my two readers that America is still the greatest country in the world. Self-governing and free.
Yes, I was going to create a blog post about all those things, and it would have been both moving and encouraging.
But, like most Americans (or so it appears), I have forgotten that anything happened on that day.
September 11, 2009
I was going to post a very moving and touching tribute to the memories of those Americans whose lives were taken prematurely on September eleventh, two thousand and one, at the Pentagon in Washington, the World Trade Center in New York City, and that nondescript field in Pennsylvania.
I was going to write a blog entry about the significance of the terrorist attacks on America on that fateful day.
I was going to remind both of my readers how that attack 8 years ago today had changed America. How it intensified our resolve to fight tyranny and hatred all over the world. How we responded to the attacks with renewed patriotism, and how we Americans, as one people, with one voice, rose up in unity to protect our rights as free people to defend our country and her people against fanatical Islamic terrorists.
I was going to write an inspirational post reminding my two readers that America is still the greatest country in the world. Self-governing and free.
Yes, I was going to create a blog post about all those things, and it would have been both moving and encouraging.
But, like most Americans (or so it appears), I have forgotten that anything happened on that day.
Friday, September 4, 2009
Hey! Lay Off Harry! He's Telling The Truth!
"Since a politician never believes what he says, he is quite surprised to be taken at his word." ~ Charles De Gaulle
Conservative radio talk show hosts are outraged over what Nevada Senator Harry Reid said to a Las Vegas Newspaper employee. For my two readers who may have been wandering in some wilderness the last few days, with no access to Conservative media (for we know the alphabet networks would never carry this news), let me elaborate:
According to the American Security Matters web site, at a meet-and-greet photo op with the Las Vegas Chamber of Congress, Senate majority leader Reid told Bob Brown, the Las Vegas Review-Journal’s advertising director,
Harry Reid: Truth Teller
I think the outrage is not so much that he "hopes" the paper goes out of business so much as the fact that, if anyone does, Harry Reid has the political clout to turn his hope into reality. All it would take is some discreet political maneuvering, threats, and bribery.
All the things at which Democrat politicians are most adept.
As usual, I have a slightly different perspective on this incident:
We've all been lamenting the lack of transparency and the prevalence of dishonesty in the current majority party in Washington.
Now, we finally have a Democrat Senator who tells the truth and we blast him for that?
For shame, for shame.
I think Harry Reid deserves praise for finally having the intestinal fortitude and intellectual honesty to voice what is the prevailing attitude among the Democratic party's representatives.
That attitude is: Among the American people there can be: No dissension. No disagreement. No free speech rights. No Freedom of the Press.
I say we should applaud Harry Reid for his honesty.
I say it's time we encourage more transparency and truthfulness from the rest of the Democratic party's leaders. I believe they should all lay their cards on the table and tell it like it is.
Chris Dodd should go ahead and tell us what we already know to be true: That he and Bawney Fwank are the ones really responsible for the housing market crash and the resulting economic recession.
Nancy Pelosi should own up to the fact that she believes she is far superior to the teeming unwashed masses over whom she reigns.
Barack Hussein Obama should admit he is an Islamic terrorist loving Marxist, power crazed dictator-in-the-making, narcissist, who hates America and is in the process of destroying America from the inside.
What difference would it make?
We Conservatives already know the truth, but the media and the uninformed, blind sheeple will continue to defend and follow these miscreants right into their own grave without so much as a whimper of protest.
So, go ahead and tell America the truth, Harry.
No one's listening anyway.
Conservative radio talk show hosts are outraged over what Nevada Senator Harry Reid said to a Las Vegas Newspaper employee. For my two readers who may have been wandering in some wilderness the last few days, with no access to Conservative media (for we know the alphabet networks would never carry this news), let me elaborate:
According to the American Security Matters web site, at a meet-and-greet photo op with the Las Vegas Chamber of Congress, Senate majority leader Reid told Bob Brown, the Las Vegas Review-Journal’s advertising director,
"I hope you go out of business".
Harry Reid: Truth TellerAll the things at which Democrat politicians are most adept.
As usual, I have a slightly different perspective on this incident:
We've all been lamenting the lack of transparency and the prevalence of dishonesty in the current majority party in Washington.
Now, we finally have a Democrat Senator who tells the truth and we blast him for that?
For shame, for shame.
I think Harry Reid deserves praise for finally having the intestinal fortitude and intellectual honesty to voice what is the prevailing attitude among the Democratic party's representatives.
That attitude is: Among the American people there can be: No dissension. No disagreement. No free speech rights. No Freedom of the Press.
I say we should applaud Harry Reid for his honesty.
I say it's time we encourage more transparency and truthfulness from the rest of the Democratic party's leaders. I believe they should all lay their cards on the table and tell it like it is.
Chris Dodd should go ahead and tell us what we already know to be true: That he and Bawney Fwank are the ones really responsible for the housing market crash and the resulting economic recession.
Nancy Pelosi should own up to the fact that she believes she is far superior to the teeming unwashed masses over whom she reigns.
Barack Hussein Obama should admit he is an Islamic terrorist loving Marxist, power crazed dictator-in-the-making, narcissist, who hates America and is in the process of destroying America from the inside.
What difference would it make?
We Conservatives already know the truth, but the media and the uninformed, blind sheeple will continue to defend and follow these miscreants right into their own grave without so much as a whimper of protest.
So, go ahead and tell America the truth, Harry.
No one's listening anyway.
Immorality Is The New Morality
"History is a voice forever sounding across the centuries the laws of right and wrong. Opinions alter, manners change, creeds rise and fall, but the moral law is written on the tablets of eternity." ~ James A. Forude
I found this article by David Corn on my AOL home page this morning entitled, "Does Bob McDonnell want to outlaw non-marital sex?"
Well, the short answer is no.
But the thing that is really stupid about this whole issue is that the Democratic candidate for Governor in the Commonwealth of Virginia is actually trying to use this misleading topic to stir up controversy against his erstwhile opponent.
Read the story, and you'll find Creigh Deed's entire campaign strategy. He is, believe it or not, attempting to base his entire campaign on a 20 year old College thesis.
It seems odd to me that he thinks he would get any mileage with this strategy at all, given that referencing 20 year old books and papers didn't work for Obama's opponents in the last Presidential campaign.
I had been hearing snippets of information about this so-called controversy on the radio and television news over the last few days, but I didn't really know what was contained in the thesis that Deeds found so objectionable.
Now, I know.
According to the article, he once suggested (20 years ago) that non-marital sex should be outlawed.
Oh, horrors! What an incredibly radical and un-American concept! That non-marital sex could in any way be a bad thing!
I couldn't resist adding my comment:
"Mr. Corn, If that's the worst you Libs have found to sully your opponents reputation, you're in for a long campaign.
You and your cohorts had better think this one out a little more thoroughly. A whole lot of problems could be avoided by simply abstaining from sex until marriage. While making extra marital sex against the law may be taking it a little too far(although the Creator of the Universe might disagree), it isn't anywhere near as radical as hanging around with domestic terrorists, communists, and America-hating racist preachers.
In fact, one could say that extra-marital sex isn't a radical concept at all. It was, after all, the type of morality advocated by our founding fathers, and continued to be in line with the moral standards of Americans right up into the middle of the 20th century.
I would say the opposite of Mr. Mc'Donnell's thesis is the radical concept."
Then, if you're so inclined, try reading the comments left by the opponents of morality in support of Corn's article.
One said "Idiots should not be allowed to run for public office" To which I again couldn't resist replying:
If idiots couldn't run for public office, the Democrats would have to look outside their party to come up with a candidate.
That is, if David Corn and Creigh Deeds are examples of the best they have to offer.
I found this article by David Corn on my AOL home page this morning entitled, "Does Bob McDonnell want to outlaw non-marital sex?"
Well, the short answer is no.
But the thing that is really stupid about this whole issue is that the Democratic candidate for Governor in the Commonwealth of Virginia is actually trying to use this misleading topic to stir up controversy against his erstwhile opponent.
Read the story, and you'll find Creigh Deed's entire campaign strategy. He is, believe it or not, attempting to base his entire campaign on a 20 year old College thesis.
It seems odd to me that he thinks he would get any mileage with this strategy at all, given that referencing 20 year old books and papers didn't work for Obama's opponents in the last Presidential campaign.
I had been hearing snippets of information about this so-called controversy on the radio and television news over the last few days, but I didn't really know what was contained in the thesis that Deeds found so objectionable.
Now, I know.
According to the article, he once suggested (20 years ago) that non-marital sex should be outlawed.
Oh, horrors! What an incredibly radical and un-American concept! That non-marital sex could in any way be a bad thing!
I couldn't resist adding my comment:
"Mr. Corn, If that's the worst you Libs have found to sully your opponents reputation, you're in for a long campaign.
You and your cohorts had better think this one out a little more thoroughly. A whole lot of problems could be avoided by simply abstaining from sex until marriage. While making extra marital sex against the law may be taking it a little too far(although the Creator of the Universe might disagree), it isn't anywhere near as radical as hanging around with domestic terrorists, communists, and America-hating racist preachers.
In fact, one could say that extra-marital sex isn't a radical concept at all. It was, after all, the type of morality advocated by our founding fathers, and continued to be in line with the moral standards of Americans right up into the middle of the 20th century.
I would say the opposite of Mr. Mc'Donnell's thesis is the radical concept."
Then, if you're so inclined, try reading the comments left by the opponents of morality in support of Corn's article.
One said "Idiots should not be allowed to run for public office" To which I again couldn't resist replying:
If idiots couldn't run for public office, the Democrats would have to look outside their party to come up with a candidate.
That is, if David Corn and Creigh Deeds are examples of the best they have to offer.
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Death Panels
The left has enjoyed pointing and laughing at the thought of anything like a death panel being proposed in any of the health care reform proposals. This is to be expected from a group for whom "unexpected consequences" is a made-up law. As they are so focused on the superficial wonderfulness of their ideas, they fail to see beyond to possible, and in most cases, likely outcomes. This article shows one manner in which a "death panel" would manifest out of the good intentions of a given policy. It illustrates the fears, and they are righteous and logical fears, of those who balk at the thought of government interference, particularly by THIS government, into areas into which they have no business to tread.
We already know that Barry and others in the Dem Party would prefer to see private insurance companies disappear. There have been documented instances of them saying so. Thus, the likelihood of a government run system dictating who gets to live and when would probably happen down the road, when their dream of a single-payer system has come to pass. Of course, we might be suffering so badly from the financial burden of Barry's version of America that we might look forward to death.
We already know that Barry and others in the Dem Party would prefer to see private insurance companies disappear. There have been documented instances of them saying so. Thus, the likelihood of a government run system dictating who gets to live and when would probably happen down the road, when their dream of a single-payer system has come to pass. Of course, we might be suffering so badly from the financial burden of Barry's version of America that we might look forward to death.
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
"...the tell-tale signs of blood in the water."
For a larger version click here.
This is not the original design. First came the "Creative Hegemony" version which can be viewed here. I was just running through a short tutorial and built a really nice background, but the background was empty. And so I went and performed a "Creative Hegemony" treatment and ended up with a shark cruising through blood in the water. Then I remembered a line from the previous post.
Twenty minutes later, I had "Conservative Hegemony."
Obama has really screwed himself on this, and yes, conservatives everywhere smell blood in the water. It would be foolish to not sit down to lunch, although.... I hear Donkey is tough and stringy.
This is not the original design. First came the "Creative Hegemony" version which can be viewed here. I was just running through a short tutorial and built a really nice background, but the background was empty. And so I went and performed a "Creative Hegemony" treatment and ended up with a shark cruising through blood in the water. Then I remembered a line from the previous post.
Twenty minutes later, I had "Conservative Hegemony."
Obama has really screwed himself on this, and yes, conservatives everywhere smell blood in the water. It would be foolish to not sit down to lunch, although.... I hear Donkey is tough and stringy.
Sunday, August 16, 2009
The Administration Flinches
It would seem the administration has flinched. There are the tell-tale signs of blood on the water. Obama has cried "Uncle!"
It's too soon to claim victory in this. Obama is just the president. He let slip his dogs Reid and Pelosi on healthcare months ago, rather than craft his own health reform legislation. Now it's time to see what these two dogs will do.
Obama's not stupid. Neither are his handlers. They all see his plummeting poll numbers and they are all rightly concerned. And they all can see that the so-called "public option" is at the heart of his fall from grace. He hears what the public is saying...
I haven't been more proud of the American people than I am now. I thought they were all dead, uncaring, and beaten to their core. I have been proven wrong, and I'm not ashamed to say it. The Left has been impotent in their spin, and unable to answer their critics with anything resembling an honest argument. They have resorted to calling us 'angry mobs,' 'brownshirts,' and 'nazis.' They have lied about the protests and the protesters. And they have lost.
Now for the bad news.
It doesn't end here. Diligence is our holding pattern, because this is one plane than can never land... one ship that can never dock. The Left has lost this battle, but they will never give up trying. And remember, we still have to wait to see what Reid and Pelosi will do. The Senate may well try to push their version through by simple majority. It would be a colossal mistake if they did, but there it is.
Nancy Pelosi, grand debutante of the Socialist Ball and constitutional dilettante, will continue to utter inanities and outright falsehoods, and she will still be supported by a Left that has lost all semblance of objectivity-- to say nothing of sensibility. They will believe and repeat her lies and inanities, and we who have won this round will smile knowingly... take a pause... and begin again to make her look every bit as much the fool as she makes herself to be each time she opens her mouth.
Obama. He may not be toast, but he's certainly dark around the edges [no pun intended, you racists!]. But one thing's for certain, he's not going to live this one down ANYTIME soon. He took his party for a merry ride on a train that couldn't ride. Now they're all walking. And the funny this is, many of these pedestrians would have us believe they're walking by design.
This is where Obama's arrogance has brought the Democrat party.
And you know what? I'm fine with that.
It's too soon to claim victory in this. Obama is just the president. He let slip his dogs Reid and Pelosi on healthcare months ago, rather than craft his own health reform legislation. Now it's time to see what these two dogs will do.
Obama's not stupid. Neither are his handlers. They all see his plummeting poll numbers and they are all rightly concerned. And they all can see that the so-called "public option" is at the heart of his fall from grace. He hears what the public is saying...
"Reform healthcare? Fine. Reform away... but don't take over healthcare like you've taken over the auto industry and the banks. Don't ruin our healthcare like you've ruined social security."
I haven't been more proud of the American people than I am now. I thought they were all dead, uncaring, and beaten to their core. I have been proven wrong, and I'm not ashamed to say it. The Left has been impotent in their spin, and unable to answer their critics with anything resembling an honest argument. They have resorted to calling us 'angry mobs,' 'brownshirts,' and 'nazis.' They have lied about the protests and the protesters. And they have lost.
Now for the bad news.
It doesn't end here. Diligence is our holding pattern, because this is one plane than can never land... one ship that can never dock. The Left has lost this battle, but they will never give up trying. And remember, we still have to wait to see what Reid and Pelosi will do. The Senate may well try to push their version through by simple majority. It would be a colossal mistake if they did, but there it is.
Nancy Pelosi, grand debutante of the Socialist Ball and constitutional dilettante, will continue to utter inanities and outright falsehoods, and she will still be supported by a Left that has lost all semblance of objectivity-- to say nothing of sensibility. They will believe and repeat her lies and inanities, and we who have won this round will smile knowingly... take a pause... and begin again to make her look every bit as much the fool as she makes herself to be each time she opens her mouth.
Obama. He may not be toast, but he's certainly dark around the edges [no pun intended, you racists!]. But one thing's for certain, he's not going to live this one down ANYTIME soon. He took his party for a merry ride on a train that couldn't ride. Now they're all walking. And the funny this is, many of these pedestrians would have us believe they're walking by design.
This is where Obama's arrogance has brought the Democrat party.
And you know what? I'm fine with that.
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Sensible Health Care Cost Reducing
As a bit of a follow up to my last post, I offer the linked piece. It touches on some of what my last contained, such as mandated covering of procedures that shouldn't be covered in the first place, interstate purchasing of health insurance, etc. In short, much of what many others have suggested with a few extras. What's more, suggestions such as these would likely not need 1000 pages to explain.
It all comes down to the same basic point: government is the last place we should look to for help in these areas.
Another aspect mentioned in the article is whether health care is truly a right for which government has a duty to provide. It isn't.
One last thing. If you haven't checked out Mark's post below, get to it. It's a good one.
It all comes down to the same basic point: government is the last place we should look to for help in these areas.
Another aspect mentioned in the article is whether health care is truly a right for which government has a duty to provide. It isn't.
One last thing. If you haven't checked out Mark's post below, get to it. It's a good one.
Thursday, August 13, 2009
Got An Hour Or So? Read This
"Preserving health by too severe a rule is a worrisome malady" ~ Francois de La Rochefoucauld
Betsy McCaughey is the founder of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths, a health care patient advocate, and a former Lieutenant Governor of the State of New York.
She has read every version of the proposed health care reform bill now being debated four times, so she could be absolutely sure she understands exactly what they propose. She knows what it says, and consequently, what Barack Hussein Obama is trying to do to Americans.
She also knows why Obama's so-called health care reform is a very bad idea.
She knows Obama is lying.
The video is 40 minutes long, but it is vitally important to watch it in order to understand the Marxist agenda of Obama and his cohorts in the Congress.
Click here.
Click here to hear more.
More information on Obama's lies here:
Obama says: "But keep in mind - I mean this is something that I can't emphasize enough - you don't have to participate. If you are happy with the health care that you've got, then keep it."
THE TRUTH: The health bills now before Congress would force you to switch to a managed-care plan with limits on your access to specialists and tests.
Two main bills are being rushed through Congress with the goal of combining them into a finished product by August. Under either, a new government bureaucracy will select health plans that it considers in your best interest, and you will have to enroll in one of these "qualified plans." If you now get your plan through work, your employer has a five-year "grace period" to switch you into a qualified plan. If you buy your own insurance, you'll have less time.
And as soon as anything changes in your contract - such as a change in copays or deductibles, which many insurers change every year - you'll have to move into a qualified plan instead (House bill, p. 16-17).
When you file your taxes, if you can't prove to the IRS that you are in a qualified plan, you'll be fined thousands of dollars - as much as the average cost of a health plan for your family size - and then automatically enrolled in a randomly selected plan (House bill, p. 167-168).
It's one thing to require that people getting government assistance tolerate managed care, but the legislation limits you to a managed-care plan even if you and your employer are footing the bill (Senate bill, p. 57-58). The goal is to reduce everyone's consumption of health care and to ensure that people have the same health-care experience, regardless of ability to pay.
Obama says: "I want to start by taking a new approach that emphasizes prevention and wellness so that instead of just spending billions of dollars on costly treatments when people get sick, we're spending some of those dollars on the care they need to stay well, things like mammograms and cancer screenings and immunizations, common-sense measures that will save us billions of dollars in future medical costs."
THE TRUTH: The truth is that the second most prevalent disease of aging -- cancer -- is largely linked to genetics and unknown causes. It's occurrence increases with age. Your risk of being diagnosed with cancer doubles from age 50 to 60 according to the National Cancer Institute.
The risk of some forms of heart disease can be reduced through healthy living. But other forms are linked to genetics. Shifting resources from treatment to prevention will leave patients who become sick inadequately cared for. In addition, virtually all studies show that prevention saves lives but not money. Eighty percent of preventive interventions add to medical costs. The reason is simple. Most people who take cholesterol lowering drugs or get mammograms wouldn't get sick anyway. Louise Russell, an economist at Rutgers University, concludes that "hundreds of studies have shown that prevention usually adds to medical costs." (Health Affairs, March-April 2009). The evidence is so conclusive that the only people who claim prevention saves money are politicians.
Obama says: "Nobody is talking about reducing Medicare benefits. Medicare benefits are there because people contributed into a system. It works. We don't want to change it."
THE TRUTH: The Congressional majority wants to pay for its $1 trillion health bills with a $500+ billion cut to Medicare. This cut will come just as Medicare enrollment increases by 30%. Less money and more patients will necessitate rationing.
The assault against seniors began in February with the stimulus package, which slipped in comparative effectiveness research, generally a code for limiting care based on the patient's age. Economists are familiar with the formula, where the cost of a treatment is divided by the number of years that the patient is likely to benefit. In Britain, the formula leads to denying treatments for older patients who have fewer years to benefit from care than younger patients.
In a 7/17 letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, White House budget chief Peter Orszag urged Congress to delegate its authority over Medicare to a newly created body within the executive branch. This measure is designed to circumvent the democratic process and avoid accountability to the public for cuts in benefits.
But all this is a moot point.
The fact is, Government has no right---NONE---to intrude into private enterprise in America.
A government takeover of the health care industry, no matter how altruistic, is unconstitutional.
Betsy McCaughey is the founder of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths, a health care patient advocate, and a former Lieutenant Governor of the State of New York.
She has read every version of the proposed health care reform bill now being debated four times, so she could be absolutely sure she understands exactly what they propose. She knows what it says, and consequently, what Barack Hussein Obama is trying to do to Americans.
She also knows why Obama's so-called health care reform is a very bad idea.
She knows Obama is lying.
The video is 40 minutes long, but it is vitally important to watch it in order to understand the Marxist agenda of Obama and his cohorts in the Congress.
Click here.
Click here to hear more.
More information on Obama's lies here:
Obama says: "But keep in mind - I mean this is something that I can't emphasize enough - you don't have to participate. If you are happy with the health care that you've got, then keep it."
THE TRUTH: The health bills now before Congress would force you to switch to a managed-care plan with limits on your access to specialists and tests.
Two main bills are being rushed through Congress with the goal of combining them into a finished product by August. Under either, a new government bureaucracy will select health plans that it considers in your best interest, and you will have to enroll in one of these "qualified plans." If you now get your plan through work, your employer has a five-year "grace period" to switch you into a qualified plan. If you buy your own insurance, you'll have less time.
And as soon as anything changes in your contract - such as a change in copays or deductibles, which many insurers change every year - you'll have to move into a qualified plan instead (House bill, p. 16-17).
When you file your taxes, if you can't prove to the IRS that you are in a qualified plan, you'll be fined thousands of dollars - as much as the average cost of a health plan for your family size - and then automatically enrolled in a randomly selected plan (House bill, p. 167-168).
It's one thing to require that people getting government assistance tolerate managed care, but the legislation limits you to a managed-care plan even if you and your employer are footing the bill (Senate bill, p. 57-58). The goal is to reduce everyone's consumption of health care and to ensure that people have the same health-care experience, regardless of ability to pay.
Obama says: "I want to start by taking a new approach that emphasizes prevention and wellness so that instead of just spending billions of dollars on costly treatments when people get sick, we're spending some of those dollars on the care they need to stay well, things like mammograms and cancer screenings and immunizations, common-sense measures that will save us billions of dollars in future medical costs."
THE TRUTH: The truth is that the second most prevalent disease of aging -- cancer -- is largely linked to genetics and unknown causes. It's occurrence increases with age. Your risk of being diagnosed with cancer doubles from age 50 to 60 according to the National Cancer Institute.
The risk of some forms of heart disease can be reduced through healthy living. But other forms are linked to genetics. Shifting resources from treatment to prevention will leave patients who become sick inadequately cared for. In addition, virtually all studies show that prevention saves lives but not money. Eighty percent of preventive interventions add to medical costs. The reason is simple. Most people who take cholesterol lowering drugs or get mammograms wouldn't get sick anyway. Louise Russell, an economist at Rutgers University, concludes that "hundreds of studies have shown that prevention usually adds to medical costs." (Health Affairs, March-April 2009). The evidence is so conclusive that the only people who claim prevention saves money are politicians.
Obama says: "Nobody is talking about reducing Medicare benefits. Medicare benefits are there because people contributed into a system. It works. We don't want to change it."
THE TRUTH: The Congressional majority wants to pay for its $1 trillion health bills with a $500+ billion cut to Medicare. This cut will come just as Medicare enrollment increases by 30%. Less money and more patients will necessitate rationing.
The assault against seniors began in February with the stimulus package, which slipped in comparative effectiveness research, generally a code for limiting care based on the patient's age. Economists are familiar with the formula, where the cost of a treatment is divided by the number of years that the patient is likely to benefit. In Britain, the formula leads to denying treatments for older patients who have fewer years to benefit from care than younger patients.
In a 7/17 letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, White House budget chief Peter Orszag urged Congress to delegate its authority over Medicare to a newly created body within the executive branch. This measure is designed to circumvent the democratic process and avoid accountability to the public for cuts in benefits.
But all this is a moot point.
The fact is, Government has no right---NONE---to intrude into private enterprise in America.
A government takeover of the health care industry, no matter how altruistic, is unconstitutional.
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Count the Costs
This article posted at AmericanThinker spells out why our health care system costs what it does. I've seen these reasons put forth in a number of articles, actually, and they don't seem to be addressed by any of those supporting the proposals now being opposed by so many people across the fruited plain.
In an earlier post, someone mentioned that the cost of frivolous lawsuits hasn't risen in some time (if I properly recall the argument). I'll take his word for it. But that doesn't mean that what costs from such exist aren't adding unnecessarily to the overall cost. And it certainly doesn't mean that such costs shouldn't be dealt with first before insisting that draconian alternatives aren't forced down out throats. Once in place, they'll be much harder to remove later.
But these costs, or the threat of them, are, as indicated in the linked piece, what drives so much unnecessary tests and procedures that doctors insist upon in order to prevent any suits should a sad outcome come to pass. In other words, treatments for most illnesses would cost far less if doctors proceded only based on what the patient needs to survive the illness, rather than on any consideration of what the doctor needs to survive a lawsuit.
Another issue is the amount of government interference in insurance coverages. How many here want to pay for invitro fertilization? States often mandate coverage for procedures for which most people have no need or would never utilize if it weren't "free". And from all I've been able to gather, abortion would be included in the coverage the Dems are now pushing. I don't want to pay for that either, either through taxes or insurance premiums. I want a policy that is tailored to my needs and desires and paying only for what I need and want should cost less than paying for what my state insists every policy should cover.
And if I want to buy a policy that matches my needs better, I might have to go to Idaho to find it. Right now, I can't. Allowing the interstate purchase of health insurance would open up the free market competition in a natural way, without the artificial influence of gov't interference screwing it up.
The big argument is that health care costs too much for some in this country and that is why we need reform. The best reform is getting the gov't out of the picture and letting the market shape the best possibility for the most people. The gov't has done more to raise the cost than anything else. I have no faith in their ability to lower costs or improve care. Indeed, with their grubby fingers in the pie, the opposite is certain to occur.
In an earlier post, someone mentioned that the cost of frivolous lawsuits hasn't risen in some time (if I properly recall the argument). I'll take his word for it. But that doesn't mean that what costs from such exist aren't adding unnecessarily to the overall cost. And it certainly doesn't mean that such costs shouldn't be dealt with first before insisting that draconian alternatives aren't forced down out throats. Once in place, they'll be much harder to remove later.
But these costs, or the threat of them, are, as indicated in the linked piece, what drives so much unnecessary tests and procedures that doctors insist upon in order to prevent any suits should a sad outcome come to pass. In other words, treatments for most illnesses would cost far less if doctors proceded only based on what the patient needs to survive the illness, rather than on any consideration of what the doctor needs to survive a lawsuit.
Another issue is the amount of government interference in insurance coverages. How many here want to pay for invitro fertilization? States often mandate coverage for procedures for which most people have no need or would never utilize if it weren't "free". And from all I've been able to gather, abortion would be included in the coverage the Dems are now pushing. I don't want to pay for that either, either through taxes or insurance premiums. I want a policy that is tailored to my needs and desires and paying only for what I need and want should cost less than paying for what my state insists every policy should cover.
And if I want to buy a policy that matches my needs better, I might have to go to Idaho to find it. Right now, I can't. Allowing the interstate purchase of health insurance would open up the free market competition in a natural way, without the artificial influence of gov't interference screwing it up.
The big argument is that health care costs too much for some in this country and that is why we need reform. The best reform is getting the gov't out of the picture and letting the market shape the best possibility for the most people. The gov't has done more to raise the cost than anything else. I have no faith in their ability to lower costs or improve care. Indeed, with their grubby fingers in the pie, the opposite is certain to occur.
Sunday, August 9, 2009
Congress Has Gone Renegade
"Damn the torpedos! Full speed ahead!" ~ Admiral David Glasgow Farragut
This post started in the previous post's comment thread.
Every poll taken, From Rasmussen, Zogby, NPR, AOL, Facebook, Wall Street Journal/NBC News, The Washington Post, Gallup, Pew, and countless others, has shown overwhelming opposition to Obama's plan.
And yet, the Democrat Legislators continue to ignore the will of their own constituents. One Lawmaker, (I forgot which one) said she is even more resolved to pass Obama's health care legislation than before as a result of so much vocal opposition exhibited at the various town hall meetings across the country.
Others are simply refusing to hold or attend any more Town Hall meetings during the August recess. They don't want to be unduly influenced to change their minds, apparently.
These Democrat legislators are blatant in their refusal to listen to the people and do the jobs they were elected to do.
This reminds me of the lynch mobs in the old western movies.
When the victim of the mob expressed displeasure at being hanged without benefit of a fair trial, they were usually told,
"You're going to get a fair trial, followed by a first class hangin'!"
This post started in the previous post's comment thread.
Every poll taken, From Rasmussen, Zogby, NPR, AOL, Facebook, Wall Street Journal/NBC News, The Washington Post, Gallup, Pew, and countless others, has shown overwhelming opposition to Obama's plan.
And yet, the Democrat Legislators continue to ignore the will of their own constituents. One Lawmaker, (I forgot which one) said she is even more resolved to pass Obama's health care legislation than before as a result of so much vocal opposition exhibited at the various town hall meetings across the country.
Others are simply refusing to hold or attend any more Town Hall meetings during the August recess. They don't want to be unduly influenced to change their minds, apparently.
These Democrat legislators are blatant in their refusal to listen to the people and do the jobs they were elected to do.
This reminds me of the lynch mobs in the old western movies.
When the victim of the mob expressed displeasure at being hanged without benefit of a fair trial, they were usually told,"You're going to get a fair trial, followed by a first class hangin'!"
Friday, August 7, 2009
Oops! Forgot My Title!
Busy as I have been with my "studies" as I work to make myself more employable, and using up free time countering goofy comments at my personal blog, I've missed some details of come current events. This "cash for clunkers" thing gives me pause. One billion smackers used up in ten days and they need another two? Barry calls it a great success. How is that exactly? Because a few cars were sold? Let's look at this thing.
First, if cars can't be sold without tax money being offered, how is that "fixing" anything? Assuming the same outcome with the first billion, after twenty days, then what? Will all be well with the auto industry? Or will everything come to a screeching halt?
Secondly, how is this going to stimulate anything? It is said that it is helping the environment by getting rid of polluting vehicles and saving money by the trade up to cars with better mileage. But what has better mileage gotten us thus far? More fatalities, that's what. Also more injuries that require medical attention. I'd prefer to pay a few thousand a year more in gasoline than lose a limb or family member. I'm totally unimpressed.
---------------------------------
Then, as the administration wets itself over the outcry against their health care proposals, the news is that union people will be showing up at townhall meetings to counter angry citizens the Dems are calling plants and/or angry mobs. Will they be wearing brown shirts?
---------------------------------
Barry is chirping about the jobs report for July. It is being billed as one of the best months in a while. No doubt Barry will take full credit. "His plan is working!" the syncophants will say. But there's two points to consider. I have heard that they have changed how they gauge the jobless situation. This is something I heard only today, but unfortunately was unable to get any details as yet. If anyone know what this is about, please comment. It supposedly accounts for the .1 percent drop to 9.4% unemployment (ooh! success!)
The second point is, how many jobs are left to lose? We don't usually hear about jobs created vs jobs lost. I know there are plenty over-the-road trucker jobs, there are health care jobs. But we keep losing other jobs. (I wonder where it will level off; 10%? 15% Higher?) At some point, the amount lost per month will drop simply because we're running out of jobs to lose. I don't think much of this particular statistic as far as judging the success of any policy.
First, if cars can't be sold without tax money being offered, how is that "fixing" anything? Assuming the same outcome with the first billion, after twenty days, then what? Will all be well with the auto industry? Or will everything come to a screeching halt?
Secondly, how is this going to stimulate anything? It is said that it is helping the environment by getting rid of polluting vehicles and saving money by the trade up to cars with better mileage. But what has better mileage gotten us thus far? More fatalities, that's what. Also more injuries that require medical attention. I'd prefer to pay a few thousand a year more in gasoline than lose a limb or family member. I'm totally unimpressed.
---------------------------------
Then, as the administration wets itself over the outcry against their health care proposals, the news is that union people will be showing up at townhall meetings to counter angry citizens the Dems are calling plants and/or angry mobs. Will they be wearing brown shirts?
---------------------------------
Barry is chirping about the jobs report for July. It is being billed as one of the best months in a while. No doubt Barry will take full credit. "His plan is working!" the syncophants will say. But there's two points to consider. I have heard that they have changed how they gauge the jobless situation. This is something I heard only today, but unfortunately was unable to get any details as yet. If anyone know what this is about, please comment. It supposedly accounts for the .1 percent drop to 9.4% unemployment (ooh! success!)
The second point is, how many jobs are left to lose? We don't usually hear about jobs created vs jobs lost. I know there are plenty over-the-road trucker jobs, there are health care jobs. But we keep losing other jobs. (I wonder where it will level off; 10%? 15% Higher?) At some point, the amount lost per month will drop simply because we're running out of jobs to lose. I don't think much of this particular statistic as far as judging the success of any policy.
Alternate Realities Can Be Humorous, Sometimes
There are several different versions of this on YouTube-- Hitler getting the wrong bike, being banned from X-Box Live, even explaining Second Life.
What's interesting about this is the implication of Hitler's rant.... that being, his subordinate position to President Obama. Imagine that! Inarguably the evilest man of the 20th century, bemoaning his declining status within the Obama administration.
The Health Care Reform Bill
"Holy Cow!" ~ Phil Rizzuto
Here it is! The actual bill that will be voted on when Congress reconvenes in September. Read it yourself. I don't have time. It's 1036 pages!
I find it interesting to note, on this, the US Congress' official website, that only 12% of the website's registered users are in favor of this legislation. You can see the results of their own poll on the right sidebar of the site.
I tried to vote, too, but for some reason, my registration was rejected. Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that I tried to vote first, then register.
By the way, for those of you who oppose the health care bill, here is a suggestion:
Since the Whitehouse wants us to report e-mails and things that are "fishy", I decided to comply with their request and send the link to the health care reform bill to them.
I think it's pretty fishy.
Here is the text of the missive I e-mailed to flag@whitehouse.gov:
(only I didn't spell my last name like that. I included my real last name)
It's just a suggestion, mind you, but I think if all those who oppose the bill do the same, it would overwhelm those who would try to follow up on the reports.
Be your own best judge.
Here it is! The actual bill that will be voted on when Congress reconvenes in September. Read it yourself. I don't have time. It's 1036 pages!
I find it interesting to note, on this, the US Congress' official website, that only 12% of the website's registered users are in favor of this legislation. You can see the results of their own poll on the right sidebar of the site.
I tried to vote, too, but for some reason, my registration was rejected. Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that I tried to vote first, then register.
By the way, for those of you who oppose the health care bill, here is a suggestion:
Since the Whitehouse wants us to report e-mails and things that are "fishy", I decided to comply with their request and send the link to the health care reform bill to them.
I think it's pretty fishy.
Here is the text of the missive I e-mailed to flag@whitehouse.gov:
Dear Sir or Madam,
I found this on the internet, and complying with your request to report things that are "fishy", I thought I'd better report it to you:
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3200/text?version=ih&nid=t0:ih:106
While I'm at it, I'd better report myself.
I will stand for Liberty and reject your soft tyranny. Every time!
Sincerely,
Mark XXXXXXX
(only I didn't spell my last name like that. I included my real last name)
It's just a suggestion, mind you, but I think if all those who oppose the bill do the same, it would overwhelm those who would try to follow up on the reports.
Be your own best judge.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
Are The Purges About To Begin?
In a blog post about the history of Communism, I published on October 29th, 2008, which was shortly before the Presidential election, I reminded both of my readers why Socialism is a bad thing.
I wrote, regarding Josef Stalin's oppressive tactics to silence any dissension,
This was before Obama was even elected.
These are the same tactics Obama is now employing in an effort to enslave and oppress the citizens of the United States of America.
The White House is encouraging citizens to report any "scary chain e-mails" if they "see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy".
I hate to say I told you so, but I told you so.
Is there yet any doubt that Obama is a Marxist, now?
On a side note, I also wrote,
Now, do you understand, Liberals?
I wrote, regarding Josef Stalin's oppressive tactics to silence any dissension,
"In an effort to eliminate any possible dissent, citizens were encouraged to report any suspicious talk or activity by their neighbors and friends to the police, and were rewarded if they did, and often punished if there were any suspicions by the Government police that they knew about said offense but failed to report them."
This was before Obama was even elected.
These are the same tactics Obama is now employing in an effort to enslave and oppress the citizens of the United States of America.
The White House is encouraging citizens to report any "scary chain e-mails" if they "see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy".
I hate to say I told you so, but I told you so.
Is there yet any doubt that Obama is a Marxist, now?
On a side note, I also wrote,
"Americans will rise to the occasion. Despite being bruised, battered, and bloody, tyranny shall be defeated, and this nation, under God, will emerge victorious".And we now see the fulfillment of this prophecy beginning to take place in town hall meetings and tea parties across the country.
Now, do you understand, Liberals?
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
It Reeks, & Who Can Dispel The Apparent Hypocrisy? [Updated]
And what does it say about whatever integrity the Left possesses?
Seriously.
With all I have on my plate at work my brain is pretty much fried for a few hours each afternoon after clocking out. Add to this the overwhelming information-overload on radio and television... well, I need time to collect my thoughts, and I'm just not getting it. Still, somethings are quite clear. Like today.
I heard this on the radio... Rush. I know our resident mockers will do just that, and instruct me to 'not be sheep'. Knowing that their bottoms is just as black as mine is the only satisfaction I get...
Hypocrites. And blind leaders of the blind.
Consider then the following, and dispel the apparent double standard-- the hypocrisy --if you can.
There's a poster turning up in Los Angeles, Atlanta, and other places that depicts Obama in Heath Ledger's Joker face. And the Left is naturally outraged.
So riddle me this:
Vanity Fair, July 2008 -- It was apparently acceptable, in 2008, to depict George W. Bush in Joker face. After all he was an evil man and reviled by much of the world's elite... or was he? Who's word are you going to take? Who to believe? The Left routinely called him "Chimp," and that was fine, but one cartoon of a dead chimp and mention of Obama's stimulus boondoggle, and the Left is outraged. Bush can be called Liar in Chief, but any suggestion that Obama has been lying out his backside since he put his hand on the bible on inauguration day, and I become a racist... even though I've made no reference to the color of skin. As if that really matters to the angry left.
Los Angeles, July 2009 -- But just one year later, put a picture of Obama up in Joker face and the hypocrites scurry out from under the fridge like roaches on the attack. Their own brand of "evil" is brought to light in stark relief. And the funny thing is they don't even see their hypocrisy.
From KTLA.com...
So what did Bush do that was so evil? Did he or did he not prevent another attack on U.S. Soil after 9.11? What did the Left do? They clamored all over themselves to vote to give Bush the authority to fight the War on Terror. And they voted to pass the Patriot Act. They also exposed top secret government programs to undermine the war effort, convicted an innocent man for the sole reason he that worked under Cheney, and ridiculed the president of the United States both here and abroad. They maligned our troops, calling them cold-blooded murderers; trying and convicting them in the court of public opinion long before they ever stood before a judge. They compared our troops integrity to that of Pol Pot's, and their tactics to those of Stalinist gulags.
Now their "Messiah" is president, and any cross word against him is viewed askance. Every policy Obama has pressed upon us so far has been designed to strengthen the government rather than the people... Government rather than free enterprise... Government rather than personal responsibility.
Now the messiah is growing paranoid, and becoming every bit the evil dictator he and the rest of his comrades believed of Bush.
From WhiteHouse.gov...
A lot of 'disinformation'? Seems to me the public is more informed about Obama's plans for single-payer government-run healthcare than are the representatives and senators who want to shove this bit of socialist-tripe down our throats. They haven't even read the bill. They didn't read Cap & Tax. They didn't read the stimulus. And what would it matter, for, according to John Conyers, it takes two days and a couple of lawyers to read and understand these bills, and who has that kind of time?
But Obama is worried. He doesn't like that "We the People" are on to his game, and he desires to solicit the help of like-minded comrades all across the fruited plains to keep on the lookout for any dissenters; spy on them, and report their conversations to the administration. For what? What will Obama do to those who disagree with his policy?
The abuse of power he could stoop to is frightening. His Czar count is into the 40's now, many of whose policy positions usurp the authority of cabinet members approved by Congress, so circumventing the Bill of Rights and the Constitution shouldn't faze him at all. Remember, he views the Constitution of the United States of America as a "charter of negative rights..."
Will we soon have a politburo, to go along with our very present state-run media? Will Obama's civilian defense force shortly be seen out in the streets, riding in the back of Toyota pickups-- hopping out when an "offender" is spotted, to beat them with clubs for their temerity (whatever the offense-Du Jour may be)? Is that how Obama intends on keeping the peace?
Of course, all this is merely a rhetorical flourish on my part-- and unflattering toward the King to be sure --since I vehemently oppose the policies he's presenting, which is but one of my Constitutional rights. But despite that admission my concerns are real, and echoed by millions more of Americans. We can't ALL be crazy, or dangerous. At some point a little honesty needs to be injected into the national argument.
But what does it say about a president who asks the public to report on their fellow citizens whose opinions differ from Obama's? When will Team Obama begin raising posters of the Messiah, not unlike those of Saddam's Iraq? Or George Orwell's 1984?
We don't need another savior. Nor do we need another Che-like hero. What we need is persistent honesty not only from our representatives and state-run media, but from Obama as well. He has lied every step of his first six months-- look how much damage his presidency has done to America in just six months! And having re-posted this image, how soon before the IRS audits me? Or the FBI shows up on my doorstep? How long before MY name is filed away for future use (reeducation?) as a 'Dissenter of the Messiah'?
This is not the America I was born to. The America wherein I was born doesn't need a "Fairness Doctrine" or it's backdoor twin under ANY pseudonym. America has the First Amendment, and that's all she needs. The Left used it freely to ridicule and undermine Bush 43, but now they seek to steal it from us. They have declared themselves the arbiters of what speech is, and what speech is not free. Well, no. I object. They are not the deciders of anything when it comes to my my right of free speech. They can't even see past the fog of their own delusions, and I'll be damned before I let the mindless work the same madness in me, or squelch my attempts to bring light back into the world. They are filled with hate, but they'd have you, the reader, believe it is I who is filled with hate. Why?
Because I disagree.
They would have you believe I'm a racist. But if you had never seen a picture or ever heard the name Obama before today, you wouldn't know anything more about his race after reading this post. My disagreement has nothing to do with the color of his skin.
Careful, therefore, what you say... Obama, or one of his mind-numbed robots may be listening, with only one thought on their infected little minds:
Deprive you of your First Amendment right to speak your mind. After all...
Seriously.
With all I have on my plate at work my brain is pretty much fried for a few hours each afternoon after clocking out. Add to this the overwhelming information-overload on radio and television... well, I need time to collect my thoughts, and I'm just not getting it. Still, somethings are quite clear. Like today.
I heard this on the radio... Rush. I know our resident mockers will do just that, and instruct me to 'not be sheep'. Knowing that their bottoms is just as black as mine is the only satisfaction I get...
Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal? Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege?
Hypocrites. And blind leaders of the blind.
Consider then the following, and dispel the apparent double standard-- the hypocrisy --if you can.
There's a poster turning up in Los Angeles, Atlanta, and other places that depicts Obama in Heath Ledger's Joker face. And the Left is naturally outraged.
So riddle me this:
Vanity Fair, July 2008 -- It was apparently acceptable, in 2008, to depict George W. Bush in Joker face. After all he was an evil man and reviled by much of the world's elite... or was he? Who's word are you going to take? Who to believe? The Left routinely called him "Chimp," and that was fine, but one cartoon of a dead chimp and mention of Obama's stimulus boondoggle, and the Left is outraged. Bush can be called Liar in Chief, but any suggestion that Obama has been lying out his backside since he put his hand on the bible on inauguration day, and I become a racist... even though I've made no reference to the color of skin. As if that really matters to the angry left.
Los Angeles, July 2009 -- But just one year later, put a picture of Obama up in Joker face and the hypocrites scurry out from under the fridge like roaches on the attack. Their own brand of "evil" is brought to light in stark relief. And the funny thing is they don't even see their hypocrisy. From KTLA.com...
Los Angeles Urban Policy Roundtable President Earl Ofari Hutchinson is calling the depiction, politically mean spirited and dangerous.
Hutchinson is challenging the group or individual that put up the poster to have the courage and decency to publicly identify themselves.
"Depicting the president as demonic and a socialist goes beyond political spoofery," says Hutchinson, "it is mean-spirited and dangerous."
"We have issued a public challenge to the person or group that put up the poster to come forth and publicly tell why they have used this offensive depiction to ridicule President Obama."
So what did Bush do that was so evil? Did he or did he not prevent another attack on U.S. Soil after 9.11? What did the Left do? They clamored all over themselves to vote to give Bush the authority to fight the War on Terror. And they voted to pass the Patriot Act. They also exposed top secret government programs to undermine the war effort, convicted an innocent man for the sole reason he that worked under Cheney, and ridiculed the president of the United States both here and abroad. They maligned our troops, calling them cold-blooded murderers; trying and convicting them in the court of public opinion long before they ever stood before a judge. They compared our troops integrity to that of Pol Pot's, and their tactics to those of Stalinist gulags.
Now their "Messiah" is president, and any cross word against him is viewed askance. Every policy Obama has pressed upon us so far has been designed to strengthen the government rather than the people... Government rather than free enterprise... Government rather than personal responsibility.
Now the messiah is growing paranoid, and becoming every bit the evil dictator he and the rest of his comrades believed of Bush.
From WhiteHouse.gov...
"There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov."
A lot of 'disinformation'? Seems to me the public is more informed about Obama's plans for single-payer government-run healthcare than are the representatives and senators who want to shove this bit of socialist-tripe down our throats. They haven't even read the bill. They didn't read Cap & Tax. They didn't read the stimulus. And what would it matter, for, according to John Conyers, it takes two days and a couple of lawyers to read and understand these bills, and who has that kind of time?
But Obama is worried. He doesn't like that "We the People" are on to his game, and he desires to solicit the help of like-minded comrades all across the fruited plains to keep on the lookout for any dissenters; spy on them, and report their conversations to the administration. For what? What will Obama do to those who disagree with his policy?
The abuse of power he could stoop to is frightening. His Czar count is into the 40's now, many of whose policy positions usurp the authority of cabinet members approved by Congress, so circumventing the Bill of Rights and the Constitution shouldn't faze him at all. Remember, he views the Constitution of the United States of America as a "charter of negative rights..."
Will we soon have a politburo, to go along with our very present state-run media? Will Obama's civilian defense force shortly be seen out in the streets, riding in the back of Toyota pickups-- hopping out when an "offender" is spotted, to beat them with clubs for their temerity (whatever the offense-Du Jour may be)? Is that how Obama intends on keeping the peace?
Of course, all this is merely a rhetorical flourish on my part-- and unflattering toward the King to be sure --since I vehemently oppose the policies he's presenting, which is but one of my Constitutional rights. But despite that admission my concerns are real, and echoed by millions more of Americans. We can't ALL be crazy, or dangerous. At some point a little honesty needs to be injected into the national argument.
But what does it say about a president who asks the public to report on their fellow citizens whose opinions differ from Obama's? When will Team Obama begin raising posters of the Messiah, not unlike those of Saddam's Iraq? Or George Orwell's 1984?
We don't need another savior. Nor do we need another Che-like hero. What we need is persistent honesty not only from our representatives and state-run media, but from Obama as well. He has lied every step of his first six months-- look how much damage his presidency has done to America in just six months! And having re-posted this image, how soon before the IRS audits me? Or the FBI shows up on my doorstep? How long before MY name is filed away for future use (reeducation?) as a 'Dissenter of the Messiah'?This is not the America I was born to. The America wherein I was born doesn't need a "Fairness Doctrine" or it's backdoor twin under ANY pseudonym. America has the First Amendment, and that's all she needs. The Left used it freely to ridicule and undermine Bush 43, but now they seek to steal it from us. They have declared themselves the arbiters of what speech is, and what speech is not free. Well, no. I object. They are not the deciders of anything when it comes to my my right of free speech. They can't even see past the fog of their own delusions, and I'll be damned before I let the mindless work the same madness in me, or squelch my attempts to bring light back into the world. They are filled with hate, but they'd have you, the reader, believe it is I who is filled with hate. Why?
Because I disagree.
They would have you believe I'm a racist. But if you had never seen a picture or ever heard the name Obama before today, you wouldn't know anything more about his race after reading this post. My disagreement has nothing to do with the color of his skin.
Careful, therefore, what you say... Obama, or one of his mind-numbed robots may be listening, with only one thought on their infected little minds:
Deprive you of your First Amendment right to speak your mind. After all...
There is no room in Obama's America for individualism...
Unless it serves the collective.
Congress: Swimming Against The Tide
"Suppose you were an idiot and suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." ~ Mark Twain
The Congress is now in recess for the month of August, and it couldn't have come at a better time. Now, they can't say, with any credibility, they don't have time to read the health care bill. Now, they have no excuse for being ignorant.
There are two things our lawmakers can do during this time to be better prepared to vote on the national Health care legislation:
1. Hold Town Hall meetings to better understand their constituent's concerns.
2. Read the bill!
The voice of the people is being heard, and evidently, ignored.
Did you hear the black woman with the Muslim headgear say, "Health care is a right, given to us by the United Nations"?
Really? I didn't know the United Nations was God! Did you?
One would think, with between 65% and 75% of Americans vehemently opposing this legislation, that it would be a no-brainer for those lawmakers who intend to vote for the bill.
Apparently, they have no intention of being re-elected.
It would seem to be clear from the poll numbers, if they vote for the bill, they will not be in office after the next Congressional elections.
The Congress is now in recess for the month of August, and it couldn't have come at a better time. Now, they can't say, with any credibility, they don't have time to read the health care bill. Now, they have no excuse for being ignorant.
There are two things our lawmakers can do during this time to be better prepared to vote on the national Health care legislation:
1. Hold Town Hall meetings to better understand their constituent's concerns.
2. Read the bill!
The voice of the people is being heard, and evidently, ignored.
Did you hear the black woman with the Muslim headgear say, "Health care is a right, given to us by the United Nations"?
Really? I didn't know the United Nations was God! Did you?
One would think, with between 65% and 75% of Americans vehemently opposing this legislation, that it would be a no-brainer for those lawmakers who intend to vote for the bill.
Apparently, they have no intention of being re-elected.
It would seem to be clear from the poll numbers, if they vote for the bill, they will not be in office after the next Congressional elections.
Monday, July 27, 2009
Obama Re-acted Stupidly
"Pride goeth before destruction and a haughty spirit before a fall."--Proverbs 16:18
There really isn't much I can add to the latest Obama outrage, that of him calling the Cambridge Police Department stupid. Pretty much anything I can say has already been said by Conservative bloggers and columnists and talk show hosts.
One thing I haven't seen on any blogs is the actual police report submitted by the arresting officer, Sergeant James Crowley and Officer James Figueroa. (not that no blogs have published it)
I found the entire Police report here.
Keep in mind that filing a false police report is one of the most egregious offenses of Police Department policies. It is grounds for immediate dismissal and/or imprisonment. It is highly unlikely that a police officer would lie about what happened, especially in this case, considering the number of eyewitnesses, including both civilian and police personnel.
Plus, a police report has to be filed as soon after the incident as possible, which hardly gives Sergeant Crowley time to come up with some kind of credible fabrication.
No, Sergeant Crowley's version is undoubtedly accurate.
Now. There are a few things about this case that are glaringly obvious:
1. Henry Louis Gates is a racist bigot.
2. This is one more example of a black man shamelessly playing the proverbial race card in an effort to procure special favors or treatment.
3. Obama showed himself to be equally as despicably racist as Henry Gates.
On this last point, I would add, it's really pretty stupid to speak out in this knee-jerk fashion before all the facts are revealed. If Obama had simply said, "I have no comment at this time", he would have saved himself a lot of embarrassment.
Of course, that goes without saying.
But, instead, he stupidly assumed that a white police officer was racist because one of his racist friends said so.
That's right I said it! Obama reacted stupidly!
This is one of those cases when discretion on Obama's part would have been the wiser choice. It would have been more prudent for him to allow himself to be brought up to date on the particulars of the situation before making comment.
But that is not in Obama's nature. Obama is too arrogant.
Arrogance, as I once pointed out, is not necessarily a bad thing. Arrogance is an important trait in salesmen, for instance. It helps a salesman to believe he can close any sale regardless of the difficulty. That requires a certain amount of arrogance.
We've all seen this attitude in friends, co-workers, and enemies many times in our lifetimes, and we will continue to see it until the end of time.
But Obama's arrogance is an entirely different brand of arrogance.
This is evident in his absolute refusal to admit he was wrong to say the Cambridge Police Department acted stupidly in the arrest of Henry Gates. Pathological narcissists such as Obama would never admit fallibility in even the most innocuous matters.
What stubbornly arrogant people like Obama do when proven to be wrong about someone, is, rather than apologize, which normal people would do, simply make some kind of overture, in hopes that the offense will just go away.
And now, what do we see Obama doing?
He has offered to have a friendly little sit-down with Sergeant Crowley, Henry Gates, and himself, over a beer.
This is the typical attempt at apology exemplified by stubbornly arrogant people. It is his way of apologizing.
This offer of a meeting is simply wordplay utilized in an attempt to stem the tide of outrage over Obama's embarrassing remark. He doubtless has no intention of actually following through with his gesture.
But, assuming he would actually follow through with the invitation, which is doubtful, it will be too little, too late for Obama.
He has shown himself to be the small-minded racist bigot most of us believed him to be, and the gloss is beginning to wear off.
There really isn't much I can add to the latest Obama outrage, that of him calling the Cambridge Police Department stupid. Pretty much anything I can say has already been said by Conservative bloggers and columnists and talk show hosts.
One thing I haven't seen on any blogs is the actual police report submitted by the arresting officer, Sergeant James Crowley and Officer James Figueroa. (not that no blogs have published it)
I found the entire Police report here.
Keep in mind that filing a false police report is one of the most egregious offenses of Police Department policies. It is grounds for immediate dismissal and/or imprisonment. It is highly unlikely that a police officer would lie about what happened, especially in this case, considering the number of eyewitnesses, including both civilian and police personnel.
Plus, a police report has to be filed as soon after the incident as possible, which hardly gives Sergeant Crowley time to come up with some kind of credible fabrication.
No, Sergeant Crowley's version is undoubtedly accurate.
Now. There are a few things about this case that are glaringly obvious:
1. Henry Louis Gates is a racist bigot.
2. This is one more example of a black man shamelessly playing the proverbial race card in an effort to procure special favors or treatment.
3. Obama showed himself to be equally as despicably racist as Henry Gates.
On this last point, I would add, it's really pretty stupid to speak out in this knee-jerk fashion before all the facts are revealed. If Obama had simply said, "I have no comment at this time", he would have saved himself a lot of embarrassment.
Of course, that goes without saying.
But, instead, he stupidly assumed that a white police officer was racist because one of his racist friends said so.
That's right I said it! Obama reacted stupidly!
This is one of those cases when discretion on Obama's part would have been the wiser choice. It would have been more prudent for him to allow himself to be brought up to date on the particulars of the situation before making comment.
But that is not in Obama's nature. Obama is too arrogant.
Arrogance, as I once pointed out, is not necessarily a bad thing. Arrogance is an important trait in salesmen, for instance. It helps a salesman to believe he can close any sale regardless of the difficulty. That requires a certain amount of arrogance.
We've all seen this attitude in friends, co-workers, and enemies many times in our lifetimes, and we will continue to see it until the end of time.
But Obama's arrogance is an entirely different brand of arrogance.
This is evident in his absolute refusal to admit he was wrong to say the Cambridge Police Department acted stupidly in the arrest of Henry Gates. Pathological narcissists such as Obama would never admit fallibility in even the most innocuous matters.
What stubbornly arrogant people like Obama do when proven to be wrong about someone, is, rather than apologize, which normal people would do, simply make some kind of overture, in hopes that the offense will just go away.
And now, what do we see Obama doing?
He has offered to have a friendly little sit-down with Sergeant Crowley, Henry Gates, and himself, over a beer.
This is the typical attempt at apology exemplified by stubbornly arrogant people. It is his way of apologizing.
This offer of a meeting is simply wordplay utilized in an attempt to stem the tide of outrage over Obama's embarrassing remark. He doubtless has no intention of actually following through with his gesture.
But, assuming he would actually follow through with the invitation, which is doubtful, it will be too little, too late for Obama.
He has shown himself to be the small-minded racist bigot most of us believed him to be, and the gloss is beginning to wear off.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)