Political Thoughts and Discourse by a Gay Conservative

My thoughts on Kim Jong Il's Funeral and the UN lowering the flag for his death

2011-12-31T07:16:00.000-08:00

On one hand, judge not lest ye be judged; the West likes to claim they are in touch with Judeo Christian values, and yet I find myself judging the rest of the world all the time, even subconsciously, something I am never proud of doing and work hard to stop myself from doing, yet something I also notice is very pervasive. I agree it's a nice gesture to bridge-build with the North Korean people and maybe one day history will recall the UN's lowering of the flag as the first brick paved in a road to better relations between N Korea and the rest of the world. But, at the same time, I'm also kind of aggravated because the UN does exist on US soil and the US is its largest financial contributor. The US also believes in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and I feel that in a way, even though te US and the UN are NOT the same, I don't see the harm in upholding those ideals, I don't really see how any rational person could possibly have a problem with endeavouring to pursue these ideals, I don't see "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" as controversial goals, and by the UN lowering its flag on US soil for N Korea, it's kind of telling man's most noble qualities, or at least telling those who believe it's worthwhile to try and achieve or embrace those qualities, that they aren't any better than the diametrically opposed ideals of repression and tyranny championed by Kim Jong Il. I don't think it's controversial for the UN to champion, foster, and embrace the best parts of humanity, the most noble qualities we as humans (not just as members of any particular country) can achieve, or to make a statement that it holds these values in higher regard than oppression. Life and liberty are always going to be better than death and oppression. there are some times morals aren't relative; there are some beliefs that are better than others, that represent a more evolved frame of mind; ideals whose ends result in better outcomes than others. However, this stance confuses me too, because it's kind of like we'd be treating N Korea like some wayward child that needs our guidance, and to disrespect their sovereignty like that is counter to our founding principles (save the GW Bush references, I know we haven't always adhered to them), and run counter to my personal beliefs as somebody who does try to be the best person I can be and embrace the best parts of my nature. So, I find myself in a conundrum, a very slippery slope. I think we have an obligation to let the world know many of us believe in principles of equality, freedom, and democracy, and that we don't tolerate brutal regimes who murder their own people and create misery solely by existing. At the same time, it's hard to adopt this stance without the accompanying condescension implicit in "we know better than you; here's how to do things if you want to be our friend. You are a misbehaving child who needs our discipline." I disagree with that, too. How do we show the world we hold idealism in regard without heavy-handing our way into their way of life? How do we encourage them to embrace freedom, equality, and opportunity without judging them implicitly? It's just a really slippery slope. I'm just going to hope smarter people than I, smarter, well-intentioned people, can answer these questions.

Try Occupying a Job

2011-11-05T14:41:00.000-07:00

The "Occupy Wall Street" movement, organized and funded by Adbusters, a Canadian leftist organization (huh?), is a fetid swamp of human trash, eager to steal rather than earn their keep. Possessing an irrational hatred of the wealthiest 1% of the population, most of whom earned their money through hard work, ingenuity, or a combination of both, they believe these people are to be exterminated and vilified rather than emulated or imitated. Why is that? Because hard work is involved. Today's generation of people, especially college aged and early 20somethings, have an entitlement mentality never before seen in any recent generation. The idea of industriousness has earned the ire of these losers, who went to college to pursue idiotic degrees such as Women's Studies or Gender Relations, then expressed surprise at their inability to acquire a high-paying job right at the outset. Forget the idea of entry-level work, forget the idea that during a recession/weak economy it might be necessary to lower your expectations and buckle down for a few years, forget the idea that it's possible to make your own opportunities when you're fortunate enough to live in America, just complain that your student loan debt isn't being paid off by somebody else's dollars and if you complain loudly enough, with enough other losers, and without taking a shower for enough days, maybe the mainstream media will embrace your movement in an attempt to distract people from the president's ever increasing embarrassments during a tenure highlighted by gross incompetency, greed, selfishness, arrogance, and loathing. In this regard, it's very easy to see similarities between those in the movement, and their party leaders.

Target to San Diego Gay Group: Get off Our Property or We'll Sue You

2011-03-25T13:47:00.000-07:00

The latest news coming out of San Diego's gay community is the lawsuit being filed against them by Target (the retailer). The pro gay-marriage group, Canvass for a Cause, has been picketing outside Target stores in response to the retailer's donation to a political candidate who is anti gay-marriage. Since the protestors were on private property, Target had them removed. A judge has ruled in Target's favor.

Typically, a furor has erupted in the wake of these events. The attorney for Canvass for a Cause is arguing that courts have traditionally held that the land outside department stores, retailers, etc., to be public domain, and that people have the right to assemble/free speech in public domain lands.

What do you think? Here is a link to the whole story.

Top Headlines for Friday, March 25 2011

2011-03-25T11:46:00.000-07:00

California GOP Elects First Openly Gay Board Member

Lost amidst all insider bickering, Haley Barbour question-dodging, press-banning and John Bolton sabre-rattling at the weekend California Republican convention was a bit of history:
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/nov05election/detail?entry_id=85460#ixzz1HdcrRNcG

Senator Barbara Boxer gets up in GOP's face about Effort to Defund Planned Parenthood

GOProud Joins other Conservative Outfits in Effort to de-fund Planned Parenthood

New York Rep. Anthony Weiner both Toasts Obamacare...and Pushes for Statewide Exemption to "save money."

Obama Administration Storied history with Inspectors General - Why Amtrak failed par the course

As Usual, Eric Holder Offers Policy on Racial Lines Only

2011-03-20T10:09:00.000-07:00

Much has been made in the media about bullying as of late. While Columbine really opened up the national discourse on the social ramifications of bullying, a resurgence of high-profile, violent scenarios have resulted in deaths, suicides, and jail time. While the faces have changed - these days, social media provides bullies a venue - the message is still the same: bullying affects kids. Whether you're a gay kid at Rutgers hooking up with somebody in his dorm room, whose roommate all the while has been feeding the video stream to the Internet, or you're a mother-daughter team masquerading as a facebook/myspace guy to bait a girl down the block, only to later tell her she should kill herself, the progression of bullying is something that needs to be analyzed to find a root, then addressed by the government. Unfortunately, that means Eric Holder.

The current administration's idea of dealing with bullying is essentially to apply the anti-discrimination laws of the 60s and 70s to school settings. This means reverse racism, of course. The anti discrimination/hate-crime laws focus on protecting things like sex, race, religion, and sexual orientation, or people with handicaps or disabilities, etc. If you're one of these golden ticket winners in the eyes of the Obama Administration, consider yourself protected....or, at least, able to pursue legal recourse. However - if you're, for example, a tubby straight white kid being bullied for being fat, or, a white kid being bullied by a black kid, or a black kid being bullied by another black kid, you're SOL (shit outta luck). Yet another hasty, ill-conceived bandaid from the Obama administration, these becoming the hallmark of his tenure as Worst President Ever. Sagging auto sales? Cash for Clunkers! Rising unemployment? Put 'em to work in the Census! Historic uprisings in the Arab world? Doddle and jetset for 30 days, then whimper out a tenuous co-sponsorship of a U.N. no-fly resolution.

I'll leave you with one thing to think about. The next time you're voting for something and you feel those awful stirrings of White Guilt™ in your belly, remember what it got you all the last time, as you're sitting with your child and his black eye and scarred psyche from being picked on by a student who gets bussed in from 3 counties away, in the waiting room of a government-owned doctor's office behind 450 illegal immigrants waiting to give birth for free, only to find out you can't afford the gas to drive home afterwards.

Japan's Stock Market is Going Nuclear

2011-03-15T04:33:00.000-07:00

In the wake of that country's worst earthquake ever - recently upgraded to a moment magnitude of 9.0 from original estimates as low as the low 8's, then 8.8, then hovering around at 8.9, making it the 5th worst quaker in recorded history - the fallout included the usual victims: architectural damage, fires, power outages, tsunami; what nobody was banking on were implications in Japan's notoriously efficient and technologically advanced nuclear power infrastructure.

Unfortunately, catastrophic damage at the Futsushibidabubabidadudshubi (sic) Nuclear Power reactor near Sendai - a port city around 35N in the Northeastern part of Japan - has led to superheated fuel rods, increased radiation levels (as high as 25-30x normal levels in areas north of Tokyo), and a real shit-show for Tokyo Power Co. Plant workers even had to divert sea-water into the reactors as a last-ditch effort to prevent a worse melt-down, something that I have gathered from several articles over the last couple of days, is considered a very last-ditch effort to cool overheated fuel rods in the event that coolant is either depleted or cannot be accessed. For those of you novices in nuclear physics (morons!), the fuel rods are literally several meter long rods of nuclear material which become superheated due to radiation, then inserted into water to produce steam. The steam is what actually produces energy, not nuclear energy itself. Dumping sea-water into the core to cool them down, I would imagine, "fucks stuff up."

Fears of a Chernobyl-style meltdown (which experts, and yours truly, both feel is not a possible scenario, so don't worry) have translated to a real Chernobyl-style stock market meltdown. The Nissei - Japan's benchmark index, like our DOW or S&P, has shed 11%, up from a 14% sell-off earlier yesterday - making it the 2nd worst sell-off in that index's auspicious history. The 1st worst? Oct 2008, in the immediate aftermath of the global financial crisis. Of course, major sell-offs in one of the world's biggest economies spreads. The Hang Seng (china), as well as India's indices suffered, and the DOW went down about 187 points. This is not catastrophic by any standards, but, it shows how the world's economy has really integrated and globalized.

In any case, that's just the news I have time to share at 6:30 am before I have to leave for school. I would like anyone reading to offer a moment of silence, of prayer, of thought, whatever your preference, for the potentially tens of thousands of dead in Japan. GOd bless!

5 members of Israeli West Bank Family have their throats slit - World shrugs

2011-03-13T20:34:00.000-07:00

By now, I know enough to say, with conviction, that I will never know enough to understand the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. There are perhaps, only a handful of other deep-reaching, long-lasting, controversial agreements which permeate every aspect of life, from diplomatic disagreement through full-blown cultural antagonism. Reports grounded in objective fact are nonexistent - too much passion exists on both sides. We hear that Palestinians murder Israelis in cold blood. We hear that Israelis fire missiles indiscriminately into Palestinian territory. We hear that neither side's claim to sovereignty is legal or should be recognized internationally. We hear Israelis are evil colonial imperialists, strong-arming their neighbors into submission with their nuclear arsenal and superior military. We hear that Palestinians unanimously support, harbor, and sympathize with Hamas. What we never hear, however, are serious and realistic intentions to forge a peace.

On the heels of Saturday's news piece, that 5 members of an Israeli family living in the West Bank had their throats slit as they slept, by suspected Palestinian militants, the international community is in a furor. A link to the original story is below, and it also follows up with Israel's planned response to add several hundred settlements in the West Bank - an obvious backtrack from their pledge to halt any further settlement until a mutually agreed upon plan had been reached - in order to secure the area.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/13/israel-expand-settlements-family-killing

All I can really say is - murdering a family in cold blood, in the middle of the night, to make any type of statement about politics, religion, government, or anything at all - is not the right way to do things. I get that both sides of this schism feel equally passionate about the core issues....but how can society purport to label itself "civilized" if this is how we handle things? So many people on comment boards, on other blogs, etc., seem to target one side or the other. Some say that Israelis deserve this due to their past treatment of Palestinians. Others say that Palestinians deserve retaliation for this. I say: stop disrespecting your neighbor. What is so important? What is the end goal? What does this accomplish? Maybe nobody should be allowed to reside in the West Bank - nary an iota of good news has ever come out of that region.

NPR serves up its own head on the Chopping Block!

2011-03-09T20:38:00.000-08:00

Well, well, well, it's not everyday that I have to augment a post I put up about 12 hours earlier....but what a 12 hours it was. In the wake of NPR's VP of Bullshit Ron Schiller's embarassing exposition by Project Veritas' James O'Keefe, a conservative filmmaker, in the very recent past (just read the immediately preceding post), NPR CEO Vivian Schiller, which every media outlet EVER will make it a point to mention is of no relation to the former Schiller, has resigned.

Viv has been battling a proverbial shitstorm ever since the ouster of NPR Commentator Juan Williams over his "incendiary" comments, in which he claimed that Muslims in turbans on airplanes make him nervous (surprise!). But the comedy of errors that has ensued that fateful day has hammered nail after nail into NPR's coffin and essentially derailed any credibility the organization may have had to make a strong case for continued public funding. The push to de-fund NPR is no stranger, nor is it a novel concoction of the Tea Party. As some of you may recall, once in the early-mid 1990s, and once again in 2005, have members of Congress called for NPR's de-funding. For those not familiar with the controversy, a brief synopsis is as follows: many people, both in the American public, and in public service, believe that NPR has a left-wing, liberal slant. Whether or not that is true, of course, is open to interpretation; whether or not it matters is also contested. The belief is that due to the fact NPR and sister subsidiary PBS are partially subsidized by the American taxpayer, approximately 10% of the operating budget or so, that they automatically forfeit the right to "endorse" a political alignment or slant. I think that most people agree on that notion.

In any case, the current "hotly" conservative House of Representatives, pushed to electoral victory in part by the Tea Party, has renewed calls to defund NPR, and I'd say that at no other point in history has it looked like they have had this good a chance of making it happen. It was just this past Monday when Vivian Schiller had appeared to make her case for the continued congressional earmarking of NPR; now, Monday seems like a day from some alternate dimension. Vivian has resigned; Ron's out. The dominoes keep falling against them. Keep in mind, in the recent past alone, NPR has been pretty gaffe-tastic - from its erroneous reporting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords' death (she survived) during the Tucson massacre, to the furor over Juan Williams' termination, which she even admitted happened "badly," though she did stand by her conviction, to the increasing cries of liberal bias NPR has endured during her two year tenure.

The Figures:
The CPB - Corporation for Public Broadcasting - is the parent of both NPR and PBS. This year alone, the CPB distributed approximately $470 million of federal dollars to the organizations. I have the same problem with NPR as I do with things like Amtrak - if these supposedly necessary, wonderful organizations can't survive in the free market without subsidies, why not let them go up against natural selection and let the chips fall where they may? The wonderful thing about a truly economically free market is that, (ideally), the best product with the most reasonable price ends up "winning." Why prop up a failing idea? I know the argument - that federal subsidies to NPR acts merely as "seed funding" which attracts private investment - but all we do have is theory. I know that $470 million dollars is literally less than a drop in the bucket when it comes to the freakishly brobdinagian deficits we hear about on a monthly basis these days, but every little bit counts, and we'll never know what will evolve unless we allow it to happen. I feel that the fear of "what might happen" isn't a valid reason to maintain a failing product, regardless if some people utilize it. Have hope in free enterprise - have hope in something! I will continue to update with any developments on this story. God Bless and good night all.

James O'Keefe Finally Makes NPR Wake Up to Half the US Population - Bye Ron Schiller!

2011-03-09T05:28:00.000-08:00

Let's face it - despite the fact that NPR is funded, in significant part by "white, middle America," they haven't exactly had the most warm, friendly relationship with "white, middle America." NPR seems to pride itself for its hard-earned status as newsbastion to the erudite elite Left. See "Juan Williams firing" if you have any doubt about that - thoughtcrimes are punishable by termination.

James O'Keefe - the conservative founder of Project Veritas - is probably best remembered as the brainchild behind the 2009 ACORN and Planned Parenthood exposes, or perhaps the 2010 controversy behind Sen. Mary Landrieu's failed phone-tapping attempt (oops!) In any case, he videotaped NPR's Rob Schiller speaking with two prospective (fake) Muslim donors, and verbally tongue-lashed America's Tea Party movement, Christians, and right-wing constituency, which, if you remember, makes up about 50% of our country. While interpretations of the video differ - some believe that he didn't really say anything incriminating and stuck to pretty standard fundraising tactics, whereas others are appalled - what is certain is you're going to have a reaction one way or the other. Here is a link to the video:

NPR summarily dismissed Schiller - a far cry from the days of the ouster of Juan Williams. Could it be the pendulum is finally swinging in the other direction? I give NPR credit for respecting the beliefs of a major part of the American population and doing what it thought it had to do, instead of sweeping this under a rug, pretending it didn't happen, or skirting the issue until it went away.

Graydon Carter's Pet Can't Stay On Topic - How Vanity Fair's James Wolcott went from Piers Morgan to Sarah Palin in 2 minutes or less

2011-03-04T16:04:00.000-08:00

Link to Full Article: I know it takes about 10 minutes to read, but this is, I promise you, the worst piece of "journalism" that has ever been published:

http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2011/04/wolcott-201104?currentPage=1

How does this happen? I know Graydon Carter has become the laughingstock of the publishing world, as Vanity Fair begs and pleads to hang on to dear life. It's becoming pretty obvious why. James Wolcott is, perhaps, the least objective journalist since Helen Thomas, who, thankfully, is only moments away from death. A piece he begins by talking about Piers Morgan fails to mention his name in the entire back 50% of the 3 page article.
Instead, not even functional as a paean to the Democratic party or liberals in general, it devolves into a hit-piece on Sarah Palin. It appears PDS (Palin Derangement Syndrome) has reared its head - at fucking Vanity Fair. I'm sorry - are you Newsweek?

Sarah Palin really needs to be researched as an alternative fuel, because Jesus f*ing Christ, people have been fueling their rage with her for over 2 yeaaaars. I *hate* Obama, like, I really, honestly hate him, and at least there are a million reasons to hate him....but even me, 2 years later, has mellowed out a bit. I barely mention his incompetency or laughable idiocy at all anymore. How does talking about Piers Morgan's desire to brand himself turn into a review of Sarah Palin's Alaska within two paragraphs? NO WONDER YOUR PUBLICATION IS BANKRUPT, GRAYDON. YOUR WRITERS HAVE ALREADY ALL SOLD OUT.

Rats of a Feather: Ellsburg cries 'foul' on administration's handling of poor little Brandon Manning

2011-03-03T17:26:00.000-08:00

"Queer Traitor"

Sorry Brandon, you'll get no sympathy from this gay guy. Being a yellow-bellied traitor is the worst thing a person can be, in my opinion, and because you're a mealy mouthed, failure of an Army queer, it doesn't single you out for any special treatment or any sympathy. I was so glad to hear that the Army, on Wednesday (yesterday), decided to levy an additional 22 offenses on you. I hope you're enjoying the brig. What do you think your parents think of you?

In any case - Ronald Ellsburg - the guy who released The Pentagon Papers to the NY Times in the 1970s, detailing secret information on America's involvement in Vietnam from 1945-1969, believes that Manning is being unfairly treated, and being singled out. I hope he gets a capitol offense slammed against him personally - conspiring with the enemy. In any event, I get a kick out of reading the liberal blogs where unkempt, overweight Left Coast basement dwellers decry Manning as a hero of unparalleled courage. What is brave about squealing? Your country comes first.

Union Rallies and Polite Discourse: Some Myths the Left Relies On

2011-03-02T20:41:00.000-08:00

All across the country, pro-Union groups and Union supporters have rallied for "solidarity" with what's been going on in Wisconsin. Far be it from a Leftist to let any opportunity to incite class warfare go to waste, these gatherings have left civility behind faster than the Left abandoned the "Blame Bush" mantra...just kidding. In Lansing, MI, Union fomenters have resorted to violence. See my post about violence in Massachussetts from several days ago. This follows in pretty much the same vein.

A Tea Party member brought a camera along to capture the "civil" and "nonviolent" protest in Michigan.

See these videos regarding the protests in Madison, WI:

Calderon to U.S.: It's Your Fault Our Drug War is a Miserable Failure

2011-03-02T19:36:00.000-08:00

Mexico's "Center-right" President, Felipe Calderon, was elected in 2006 and quickly made the priority of his administration the tackling of Mexico's gang-drug problem. Let the Leftist Chorus sing: "It's the West's fault Mexico has a gang and drug problem." Remember, the Europeans who settled America "stole" Mexico from the Europeans who settled Mexico. Sorry, Aztlan theorists. Plus, our standard of living and our success meant there is apparently less for Mexico to have. Moving back from my tangent. Calderon's struggle to reclaim vast tracts of Mexican territory lost to drug-peddling gangs resulted in approximately 36,000 lost souls in the last 4 years, including drug dealers, gang members, police, army, and civilians.

Calderon, slipping in the polls and facing the ire of his entire country for his abysmal handling of the situation and the rampant escalation of drug violence, is surely looking for a scapegoat, so he hopped on the most popular bandwagon of the last 100 years: Blame America. Let's go down a simple list of his cries:

1. "Americans have money and a huge appetite for drugs!"
2. "Americans don't have a ban on guns and are selling assault weapons to the gangs!"
3. "America isn't doing enough to help us!"
4. "America enforcing its borders and national sovereignty is causing Mexicans to turn to gangs and drug dealing!"

Sweetie, honey, save it. We already feed, clothe and house the bottom 25th percentile of your population - your derelict, undesirable border-hoppers. Try adding something to your GDP other than remittances. Felipe needs to be re-acquainted with the term "stop biting the hand that feeds you." He can't take care of his own constituents, so it somehow fell on our shoulders, because through some chutes-and-ladders convolution of logic, it's America's fault for Mexicans killing each other, in Mexico. Well, this violence has gotten so out of hand, it is spilling over onto American soil, and Americans are getting killed.

You know - no matter what America does, we never get a thank-you. We give the entire world handouts they don't deserve, we get nothing back except criticism and hatred. For one year, I want all the money that usually leaves our borders in terms of charity of any kind to stay in the country. Force all remittances to be spent on our GDP. I just want to see what would happen. I want to see what would happen if we stopped propping up the UN. Would Mistakeretary Ban-ki Moonbat flip out? Would we experience phenomenal growth? Of these things I'm not sure, but I am sure of this: if we keep giving people handouts and we get nothing back but disrespect, what do you think more money is going to do? I don't think we can afford to help Mexico, and I don't think we should, unless they let us do it on our terms. Mexico doesn't respect our sovereignty, but I'm sure our foreign aid, troops, and special ops would have to respect theirs.

The High Road is something America has always followed - that is more than I can say for the rest of the world. Mexico's war on drugs is a manifestation of a systemic, deeply rooted problem in their society. Until Calderon can figure out a way to generate economic prosperity with a plan that doesn't include shipping dirt-poor Mexicans to America to work illegally, drugs and gangs will proliferate. They are a product of poverty. The question is - just how morally impoverished is Calderon and his administration?

Invulnerable TSA employees find that they aren't above the law, after all

2011-03-01T15:43:00.000-08:00

Link to the original story from reporter Dan Herbeck at The Buffalo News:

http://www.buffalonews.com/city/police-courts/police-blotter/article355093.ece

Here is the article posted in its entirety below:
BEGIN STORY ---------------

Updated: March 1, 2011, 4:16 PM

A federal Homeland Security employee who assisted in screening passengers at the Buffalo Niagara International Airport was arrested today on charges that she provided help to drug dealers at the airport.

Minnetta Walker, 43, of Glenwood Avenue, was arrested this morning by agents from the FBI and the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration. She pleaded not guilty late this afternoon before Magistrate Judge H. Kenneth Schroeder Jr.

Police said she is alleged to have assisted "known drug traffickers" with information and with getting through airport security checkpoint.

"There have been some developments in an investigation at the airport. There has been an arrest," said Earl Gould, spokesman for the Buffalo FBI office.

Walker works for the Transportation Security Administration, a Homeland Security agency whose workers conduct the security screening of passengers and baggage passing through the Buffalo airport, law enforcement officials said.

TSA officials had no immediate comment on the arrest when contacted by The Buffalo News.

Walker has been watched and followed for months, after federal agents became aware of her alleged ties to Buffalo drug dealers, authorities told The News.

Top officials of the TSA in Buffalo assisted in the probe, as did U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement investigators and officers of the Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority, who work at the airport.

NFTA Police Chief George Gast said he was aware of the arrest and the investigation.

"I can say that we have no evidence or indication that any other employees were involved," Gast said.

Walker, who told the judge she makes $40,000 a year at her airport job, said "no comment" when approached by a reporter after her court appearance.

END ARTICLE--------

What does this say to you? To me, this indicates that again, the TSA is coming under fire. Yes, of course, no job is full of 100% law-abiding people. However, it seems that the TSA is rapidly taking its place at the peak of the pantheon of bloated, corrupt government agencies - more evidence to avoid turning healthcare into a government job. When the TSA was founded - and it's hard to believe it was just 10 years ago - it had only a few hundred employees and a miniscule budget. It has since blown up over the years into an agency employing thousands and thousands of people, and its budget has likewise exploded. With all the complaints regarding the TSA lately, can they afford this latest flub? The idea that these people take such gleeful opportunities to molest you legally, and are assisting drug dealers on the side, is enraging. I motion to privatize American airport security. Taxpayers don't need to be subsidizing this nonsense.
Down with the TSA, down with legally sanctioned molestation, down with government-subsidized drug trafficking.

Wisconsin Gov. Walker - Reagan in our Midst?

2011-02-28T23:14:00.000-08:00

It's now week two of the Wisconsin Union-busting standoff, and the more I think about it, the more I believe that vestiges of Ronald Reagan can be seen in Gov Walker's actions...although with the whole uprising in the Middle East lately, I have to admit, I've been missing Reagan quite a bit in general. While any strong conservative with steadfast beliefs will echo Reagan, so few in power ever actually do.

The battle in Wisconsin is due to the fact that unions and their supporters don't want to give up collective bargaining as a concession. The Fleebagger Democrats from Wisconsin have escaped - mostly to my home state of Illinois - to avoid having to vote on the bill (Wiconsin only has 19 votes; they need 20) to postpone it from becoming law. You see - unions, and their supporters, like to believe that although they didn't invent the means of production, or start the company, but merely work for it, that their 6-12 months of trade learning should entitle them to enough compensation to run a company. They like to believe that they are invaluable, and invulnerable, and over the years, we as a society have allowed them to get this way. Let's think back to 1981 - a similar group of people, the air traffic controllers, thought they were invulnerable and invaluable. Mr. Reagan showed them otherwise. No man is invaluable - a man is only as valuable as how hard he is willing to work. When a man gets into his head that he is more important than he is, consequences and repercussions ensue. Governor Walker is simply enforcing these consequences, as Reagan did nearly 30 years ago. We need more strong conservatives in Washington and in our states. It's our job as members of society to positively reinforce the messages these strong leaders send.

Obama's Reading Reagan - Time to Walk the Walk

2011-02-26T00:17:00.001-08:00

Much has been said about Obama's reading of Ronald Reagan's autobiography in the past couple of months. Quite a switch from Alinky, isn't he? While paying lip service to Ronald Reagan is one thing, do any of us actually believe the egotistical Obama has anything in common with Ronald Reagan? Does Will Smith have anything in common with Clark Gable?

In any case, it's hard to not think of Ronald Reagan with what has been going on the last few months in the Middle East, North Africa, and indeed, all over the Arab world. Reagan didn't shrink from Gaddafi in the 80s - he stood up to him and put him in his place. Compare Jimmy Carter - Obama's 70s doppelganger - and his approach to the Middle East after the 1979 Iranian Revolution, with Ronald Reagan in the 1980s. Carter dilly dallied and didn't send US foreign diplomats over there to teach the foundling society in the wake of the Revolution how to install the foundations of democracy. Instead, radical imams quickly moved in to fill the power vacuum. Despite being a fringe group at the time, they were the best organized, and within a short period of time, they set up basically a Caliphate. We need to send in people to set up the infrastructure of a modern society - something I doubt Obama is going to be willing to do.

Gas Prices, Oil Prices, Libya, and Uprisings in the Arab World

2011-02-26T00:08:00.000-08:00

As I'm sure many of you have noticed, drivers are being molested at the pump - again. Why can't oil prices do the same thing as Obama's approval ratings? Whenever somebody so much as sneezes between Morocco and India, the price per barrel of oil gets higher than Charlie Sheen. Not to downplay the uprisings and turbulence of the revolutions that have been going on these past few weeks, but we should really examine if there is any logic for the incredible surge in oil prices and the reduction in output.

The recent Libyan uprisings - and thank god, because who likes Muammar Gaddafi? - have caused a bit of sticker shock at the gas station this week. I did some checking. The International Energy Agency said that it estimates the Libyan crisis has caused a reduction of less than 1% in global production, or between 500,000 and 750,000 barrels per day. Okay, gotcha. So, since when does < 1% reduction in supply ~ 20% rise in price? If a store has 100 beanie babies left (alright, a bit dated of an analogy, I know) at $100 apiece, and one gets destroyed, do they charge $120 for the other 99? I'm sure the oil industry would like me to believe there is more that goes into it than that - but we've all passed 8th grade math...at least I assume Obama has, but he won't release his academic records, so we'll just give him a pass.

In light of this insanity, it seems to me that it's safe to assume some asswipe investor simply rode the scaremongering express to GetRichQuick Land. That is one of the fundamental problems with no Wall Street reform. I don't care about risk management - nothing great comes with no risk. What I care about is the fact that such a HUGE fluctation is allowed to occur, relatively frequently, in the oil market when something happens. Even the most inane, inocuous things that logically make no sense bear huge implications on oil prices from time to time. Remember when fewer than 10% of the Gulf of Mexico's refining capacity went offline for about a whole 3 weeks during the 2005 hurricane season, but prices increased dramatically? To be honest, I'm still getting over how oil can be 400% more expensive than it was 10 years ago, but people have lots of excuses for how that's possible, but people also have theories about how Elvis is still alive too. It seems drought, rain, sun, clouds, heat, cold, political stability and instability alike all cause volatility in the oil market. I think something else is affecting oil prices - graft.

I'm not going to begrudge the Libyans getting the form of goverment they want. I don't think Gaddafi is good for their country, or the world. However, I would like to point out that whenever America does something for the world, we get scapegoated and maligned. Take, for example, our 2003 Invasion of Iraq to introduce a little-known concept called Democracy, to help augment it more than just the foothold that the often maligned Israel provides for it. [Insert gratuitous bashing of Halliburton and 3rd party security contractors here]. The next thing you know, America is the most horrible thing to ever happen to mother Gaia since mankind started raping and pillaging her for her resources (as liberals would have you believe). Yet, it's too much to ask for the Middle East to maintain oil output to stabilize the global economic recovery. We can't ask them for anything - but if they have an earthquake tomorrow, be ready and happy to fork over tens or hundreds of billions of dollars. Have you noticed how Secretary General Ban-ki Moonbat of the UN condescends at us about our cowboy diplomacy, our fossil fuel consumption, and eveything else about us, except when he needs money? Please take a moment to look up Mexican President Calderon's latest pass-the-buck tirade, blaming us for not doing enough to help him solve his drug-cartel problem.

If the world isn't going to let us drill for our own oil, they should make sure they produce enough of it for us. Period.

Angry Unions, Gravy Trains, Violence, Hate, and Abuse

2011-02-25T22:08:00.000-08:00

I have to admit, even as a child, the term "union" conjured up images of surly burly men, blue-collar thugs throwing their weight around because of some investment into the idea that "might makes right." I see that currently, they aren't doing much to dispel this archetype. Let's visit the steps of Madison, Wisconsin's Capitol building, along with other capitols in an ever-growing number of states this past week.

This past week, union workers and their advocates have been in a furor over Gov. Walker of Wisconsin and his legislature's attempt to severly curtail the union gravy-train of benefits, as well as rescind the ability for unions to collectively bargain - that is, modify their contracts whenever they are up for renewal by demanding ever-more generous concessions. The typical arguments - or usual suspects as I call them - have reared their heads. I'd like to underscore a list of the most commonly offered arguments advanced by unions and their supporters:

1. Without unions, there would be no 40 hour work week, no lunch breaks, and no livable wages.

2. The Republicans are trying to take our rights away.

3. The Republicans are at the mythical behest of the evil Koch brothers and other wealthy, limited-government advocates.

4. Without unions, there would be a greater income disparity between women and men, minorities and non-minorities.

Well, here is what I have to say about these points.

1. You're right, unions are responsible for the creation of the 40 hour work week and a livable wage. However, now government ensures workers' rights. We don't need you anymore.

2. What rights? The Constitution doesn't enumerate any rights you specifically have that nobody else does. You're right to a pension you didn't contribute to, funded by my tax dollars? Is that what you mean?

3. Just because Republicans receive donations from corporations doesn't make them behest to anybody. Answer me why union donations, and dues collected from members, always only go to democratic candidates? Could it be Big Labor is at the behest of the Democratic Party?

4. Women make less than men because statistically, women take off more time from work. They do things like have children/maternity leave, they're far more likely to call off work to take care of domestic issues, such as a sick child, and overall, their work output and hours-worked end up being fewer than men. Statistically speaking. As for the minority argument - stop race-baiting. People get paid for how qualified they are. A minority member in a skilled labor job is compensated the same.

Answer me this. If Person A goes to college, then graduate school, gets an advanced degree, and makes $XXX,000 dollars, and has to pay back $200k of student loans, in addition to their own pension and healthcare, why should Person B, who spent 6 months apprenticing a trade with a maximul educational attainment of high school make close to Person A, and make Person A subsidize their retirement and healthcare costs while having to pay for their own? Are those the "rights" you feel are threatened? I think, the bottom line is, maybe some union members aren't very educated, and have only one skill, but feel that their 6 months-1 year of trade-apprenticeship should entitle them to enough compensate to support a family and retire comfortably. Life is about working hard. If you don't want to work hard - and I have lived long enough to realize that some people have a VERY different idea of what "hard work" is than others - you don't get much back. It's that simple. You don't get to put in less work and reap the same benefit. I'd never expect to make as much as somebody with 8 years of post-HS education if I myself had zero or 2. Again - statistically speaking.

Since Republicans are so evil, why don't you ask Bill Clinton and the Democrats who signed NAFTA into law why they did that? Ask your democrat friends about globalization, and the shipping of your vastly overpaid job overseas so it can be done by foreigners for pennies on the dollar. But make sure you keep funnelling your dues into their coffers.

Lastly, but most importantly - I'd like to bring up the horrific examples of media-ignored double standards. When Jared Laughner went on his terrible rampage, before the bodies even hit the floor (no disrespect to the victims), Democrats were pointing fingers at Republicans in the civil discourse that erupted immediately after. "It makes perfect sense," I read on one liberal blog. "I'm praying to god this wasn't a rethuglican, but I'm not holding my breath" read another comment. When the dust cleared, and it turned out that it was not the work of a Republican, did anybody bat an eyelash or apologize? No, it was back-to-usual. Katie Couric must have been pissed she didn't have a story. Another example: the tea party. Years later, not a single instance of racism, homophobia, violence, or general misanthropy from any one of the hundreds of thousands of people who have attended the thousands of rallies, but god forbid we go a week without hearing something about how violent we are. Sarah Palin, the left's favorite sinner, came under nonstop reproach for her at-the-time already forgotten poster showing targets over states with (D) congresscritters to vote out of office at the November 2010 Midterms. Ignore the fact Democratic candidates released dozens of similar posters of the sort. HOWEVER: let's flash forward to the present, where democratic congressmen advocate "getting a little bloody" at union solidatory rallies - and his constituents took him up on it. Look at what's happening at the Massachussetts State house - pro-union thugs hurting people, then MsNBC fill-in commentators for Ed Schultz validate their behavior, discussing how these "old, elderly" 45-65 year olds have had their time, eliciting responses from his co-hosts like "we're just a few funerals away from good government." Imagine some burly, piece of filth 20something Southie rube tossing some 50+ year old man into a wall, hitting him, unleashing a torrent of curse words at him, destroying his American flag and screaming at him to leave.

When it comes to Obama's Era of Civility, apparently everybody but Obama and his supporters were supposed to get on board.

Andy Thayer, the GLN and Fiesta Azteca

2010-06-09T17:28:00.001-07:00

About a week ago, in Alsip, IL, a suburb located approximately 20 miles southwest of Chicago, two gay men went to dine at a restaurant called La Fiesta Azteca. They claimed they were discriminated against by the owner and asked to leave. Accounts of what really happened that night differ, as they often do after such events. The gay couple claim that they were merely interacting with each other as any couple in love would - i.e. what most people would probably define as mild PDA, things like gentle kissing, hand holding, cutsey-couple things. The owner, in his interview on Fox news, claimed they were going at it pretty hot and heavy. He insinuated the couple was acting inappropriately by any standards regardless of gender. The gay couple played the homophobia card and a "kiss-in" was staged at the institution.

My motive for writing about this is not to discuss how these events have probably hurt business (and they have), and it is not to talk about the reactions of the sample population polled by Fox News (the people shown on the original segment which aired were not in favor of same-sex PDA, or any PDA for that matter. They also expressed concern that same-sex kissing as well as a gay kiss-in protest would hurt business and create an uncomfortable atmosphere for diners in a family oriented restaurant). I also am not interested in the Illinois State Law, which states that if you want to ban kissing in your establishment, you must post a sign that says so explicitly. If a sign is not posted, you must tolerate all kissing, regardless of the sexes involved. What I am most interested in is the hypocrisy and violent reaction of the GLBT community whenever they "feel" their "civil rights" are being infringed upon.

I would like to address the visceral and violent reaction of the GLBT community to perceived snubs. I received this e-mail through Facebook yesterday, in response to the "kiss-in" that was held at La Fiesta Azteca. I shall reproduce it here:

------------------------ E-mail pasted below ---------------------
Hi everyone,

We have received at least one report of an attendee at Friday’s Kiss-In receiving a phone call from someone purporting to be from the Gay Liberation Network (GLN) making threatening remarks about Kiss-Iners being on the receiving end of a potential lawsuit from La Fiesta Azteca due to “loss of business.”

Please understand that if you receive such a phone call, it is NOT coming from anyone at GLN. During the latter part of our Kiss-In or immediately after it, someone from Fiesta Azteca apparently picked up the GLN sign-up clipboards from a table in the restaurant and has used them to make these false phone calls while impersonating being a GLN member.

Unfortunately, thanks to this apparent theft of the clipboards, GLN does NOT have your email addresses or phone numbers, and so if you would like information about the Pride Parade contingent (and other activities), please send an email to LGBTliberation@aol.com – say that you were at the Kiss-In and wish to be on the GLN list, and give your name, email address and/or phone number.

Please understand that for someone from Fiesta Azteca to be making these fraudulent phone calls means that instead of any participants in our Kiss-In potentially facing a lawsuit, it is the makers of these calls who are themselves breaking the law and potentially subjecting themselves to criminal and civil proceedings. If you receive one of these calls, please do the following:

1) Look at your caller I.D. (if you have it) and copy down the phone number and any additional information it provides about the caller.
2) Take careful notes as to what the caller says, getting exact quotes where you can.
3) Ask the caller to give his/her name, and copy that down.
4) Do not make threatening remarks against Fiesta Azteca or offer up any information about yourself or others.

Sorry for this hassle, but apparently La Fiesta Azteca were even greater homophobes than we thought they were originally.

Finally, thank you again for participating in the Kiss-In!!

Yours,

Andy Thayer, Gay Liberation Network
Frank Nielsen
Danny Hankes

--------------------------------- End of E-mail --------------------

Mr. Andy Thayer is making quite a few brazen accusations in this letter. Nowhere does GLN claim to have incontravertible evidence that makes it clear beyond a reasonable doubt that the theft of the clipboards was perpetrated by an employee of Fiesta Azteca. It seems only that it was implied. Many possibilities regarding the theft of the clipboards exist. Maybe it was a concerned citizen with no ties to the restaurant. Maybe it was someone who had religious or moral objections to a same-sex Kiss-In. To give Mr. Thayer the benefit of the doubt, maybe it even was an employee of the Fiesta Azteca, trying to save their family business from financial ruin. Saving a venture which requires the investment of the amount of money that a restaurant requires does not translate to "homophobia." It is not "homophobic" to want customers to eat at your restaurant, and it is not homophobic to want 99% of the customers at your ***family-oriented establishment*** to feel comfortable at the expense of 1%. But like I said, I'm not getting into whether or not I agree with the owner's actions or the couple's kissing. I am getting into the fact I disagree with the loathesome methods the GLBT community has recently employed to circumvent freedom of thought.

I am reminded of the recent debacle over Prop 8 in California. The GLBT community responded to people who supported Prop 8 by violating their privacy while embarking on a witch hunt that would have made McCarthy blush. People who donated money - specifically the Mormons - in favor of preserving traditional marriage had to face a veritable shitstorm. Many had their identities published on a "blacklist" and as a result, faced a barrage of harassment. Their employers received angry phone calls, their businesses were boycotted, many of them were fired or forced to resign, they dealt with crude phone calls and e-mails, etc. Now, a similar thing is happening to the owners of a small, Mexican family restaurant in suburban Chicagoland, all because they wanted to make sure the majority of their customers felt comfortable dining there. It seems to me the GLBT community is responding to intolerance in kind. I urge La Fiesta Azteca's owners to confront Mr. Andy Thayer about his slanderous claims of "even greater homophobia" and his insinuations that it was a restaurant employee who stole the clipboard signup sheets.

From my own experience, gay men and women seem to want equal treatment. They don't want to feel left out and they want their love to be acknowledged to be as valid as their heterosexual counterparts. However, I think the GLBT community needs to become acquainted with the term "you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar." Gay men and women long for marriage. Not content to be granted "separate but equal" privilegels of a domestic partnership or civil unions, they want marriage, a religious sacrament that is defined as a union between a man and a woman. It's ironic, considering how many gay men and women I know who have as high an opinion about religion as they do of George W. Bush. How does the gay community go about trying to achieve this equality? Perpetrating stereotypes. Whether we like it or not, society perceives our community as one which claims the wholesale rejection of heteronormative behavior, a community with escalating rates of sexually transmitted diseases (implying a disregard for safety or honesty), and a penchant for having anonymous sex, either through bars or the rabid use of the Internet to engage in risky sexual behavior devoid of emotion. I am, of course, not claiming the entire community is guilty of these actions. I know many people will complain about my use of the word "guilty" because many people adhere to some ridiculous notion of relativism in which one group's standards or morals are equal to another's. Regardless of it is the entire community or just a vocal and highly exposed minority, the fact remains: if we want middle America to accept us, we have to start living by the set of morals they do, or at the very least, not spit on them. If our community wants equal rights and equal respect, be prepared to meet the 90% halfway. Who are the 90%? The percentage of the population whose acceptance we have made clear we desperately want. We can't react to intolerance with worse intolerance and violence. This isn't a shouting match. If we truly want society to accept and embrace us, we have to accept, no, I daresay respect, their values and shortcomings. At the end of the day, do you want somebody to treat you equally because they respect you? Or are you content in somebody treating you as an equal only because you destroyed their life, their business, forced them to feel uncomfortable and threatened legal action against them? We all speak for each other, whether we like ir or not. Your actions speak for me and vice versa, because we all belong to the same community... and right now, I don't like what you're saying.

Regarding Illegal Immigration

2010-04-08T07:58:00.001-07:00

Several months ago, Secretary of "Homeland Security" Janet Crap...Napolitano made healines for what I think is an inexcusable gaffe. She bellowed that "entering the country illegally is not a crime, per se." That sentiment echoes the open-borders acivists, who I am going to start calling the "pro-illegal activities activists" in light of MSNBC and the AP's recent decision to begin referring to pro-lifers as "anti-abortion rights activists." In fact, I may play with words all throughout this post.

In any case, the mentality of many on the Anti-Right (the Left, which fittingly comes from the Latin, for sinister), especially lobby groups like La Raza (pro-illegal activities activists slang for 'The Race'). They often decry that "nobody is illegal," or carry signs at protests with slogans like "All immigrants are legal immigrants." So-called "elites" on the Anti-Right make the argument that today's illegal immigrants are like modern day Italians, Irish, Germans and other Europeans arriving on the shores of Ellis Island a century ago. They say that much like those immigrants assimilated and became part of society, so will the ones entering the country illegally from south of our borders.

When did "borders" become such a dirty word? One wonders when liberals will decide to want to rename the evil, capitalist chain of book sellers to something less oppressive or offensive, maybe something like "Wade on Across!" This brings me to my point: America's cultural history, its zeitgeist, is full of stories of the poor Italian, who scrubbed shoes at the train station for two years to save the money to come to America. Or, the boy from the slums of Dublin who overcame disability, malnutrition and abject poverty, saved money over the course of years from odd jobs, and boarded a ship bound for America. None of these people had the luxury of wading across the Rio Grande in the thick of the night and dropping off an anchor baby in order to capitalize on America's generous social (in)justice programs. Becoming an American citizen was a source of pride for my ancestors - I know because I have heard it firsthand. These immigrants may have stuck together at first in the ethnic ghettoes of New York, Boston, Chicago and a host of other cities, but they wanted to be here. They wanted to assimilate and become members of their communities. They wanted to succeed and usher in a new era in their family history. I imagine these early pioneers, eyes full of hope as they took any job they could amidst Sinclair's Jungle-like working conditions. They evoke images of the romantic Frontier, the pioneers of the West. Young families setting out in search of opportunity, grabbing their future by the horns and making their own destinies. Our entire society is the apotheosis of their gritty determination, borne from the American spirit itself. One thing I don't recall these immigrants doing is demanding their new host country accommodate them by posting signs in their native languages and offering bilingual services. When you moved to America, you did so to become an American.

These Left-anointed modern day "pioneers" from the south come here for a myriad of reasons. Many come and are as industrious and hard working as anyone. Many become integrated parts of the communities in which they settle. However, I know that 12 million Italians, Irishmen and Germans didn't stowaway on ships during the 19th and 20th centuries illegally. That is, however, approximately the number of people who did come here illegally from the south. I'm not only targetting Mexico. People come here from everywhere illegally, through various entry points. I don't doubt they want to be here...but once they are here, they are more interested in living in enclaves with little to no interaction with the outside world. These enclaves become hotbeds of criminal activity and strife. These people don't want to - and many will never - assimilate to our way of life. They're only here for the handouts.

These reasons are exactly why blanket amnesty must never be considered. 12 million people receiving amnesty is 12 million slaps in the face to the courage and dedication demonstrated by the immigrants of generations past. It is spitting on our entire way of life, and it is setting a dangerous precedent. It is saying the American way of life no longer belongs to Americans. 3 centuries ago, we were a nation of foreigners living in the same land. Today, we are a culture. I just hope enough people are interested in preserving it.

Liberal theft

2010-04-07T12:47:00.001-07:00

With all the recent talk of nuclear missiles, mutual disarmament, and the removal of Islamic, psycho-Jihadis as a terror classification (all thanks to Chairman Zero [thanks Moonbattery]), I began thinking about what the immediate consequences of these actions are. I know that personally, the first thing I insinuate from this is that Obama is deliberately trying to induce America's decline.

Then I realize something else, something I wish other Americans realized. I wish that Americans realized they possess(ed) a weapon of unlimited power - the American spirit. This ethereal notion, championed by leaders from Washington to Reagan, is an idealogical manifestation of our Constitution, which itself was founded on Judeo Christian values. If you ask me, America is already a utopia; liberals needn't tax, regulate, confiscate and self deprecate us into an artificial one. You can come to America as the biggest nobody there ever was, and through hard work and by the grace of Providence become a real somebody. There is enough pie out there for all Her citizens, because we are a generous and industrious lot who, as Americans, possess a shared divine spark - the desire to improve ourselves. This gives us the ability to laugh in the face of adversity, to repel the deluge, to survive the flood.

I think we are exceptional. I understand why the world hates us: they don't understand that good things don't come easily. They mistake their laziness for exclusion. This America-directed hatred is no longer relegated to countries outside our domain, it now divides our country into those who have faith in the American way, and those who are unwilling to take that leap of faith. We call them the "haves" vs the "have nots." In my context, it goes much deeper than money. The "have nots" lack something so much more than just money, they lack the desire or will to live as Americans. When we don't get something, we don't get jealous and demand our Congressional representative to either steal or subsidize it for ourselves. We don't get jealous because we don't feel entitled to it in the first place - conservatives don't view the world through that framework. The reason you can't keep up with the Joneses is not due to chance, or some genetic lottery, or some perceived injustice. America was founded as an equilizer - it starts us all out at the same place. The reason you can't keep up with the Joneses has to do with YOU, not the Jones family. Liberal vitriol - the constant, seething hatred they all spew - makes sense when understood in this context, in the sense that I'm sure it's very painful to reflect upon a life of missed opportunitie and could-have-beens. Some people take solace in the fact that America is still the Land of Opportunity, that there are such things as second chances. In fact, here, there are such things as 10th and 20th chances. Some of us give up and are content to retire from the idea of betterment, to resign ourselves to the Nanny government and its handouts. My problem is not so much with the fact that certain people receive handouts. I would never begrudge somebody who stumbled into hard times, I have been there (am there currently) myself, as have people who came before me and as will those who come after. What I begrudge is that some people think their handouts should be paid for by everybody else. THEY begrudge everybody else. To get your piece of the pie, put in the time and more pie than you could ever dream will come to you. Stop trying to steal the piece I have, the piece that started as a dream, then a vision, then crust, the piece I sacrificed and worked for. It won't be as filling when you eat it.

Finally, this attack on the Christian religion must stop. I am not excusing bad behavior. However, Christians are not educating their faithful in taxpayer subsidized institutions on how to bomb and destroy buildings. Christians do not espouse a worldview which directs us to kill infidels, to "behead those who criticize" it, to punish by death those who speak ill, or those who choose not to believe in, our God. In times of crisis, it's Christian charities that you hear about donating money after every natural disaster. We hear of priests and nuns giving the homeless sanctuary, feeding the poor, caring for the sick and orphaned. In prison, does an Imam come to you to give you solace and comfort? Yes, some priests are bad seeds. Yes, shit happens. Yes, it is disappointing. How does turning away from God make any sense in times of confusion and despair? From a logical standpoint, Christianity is more valuable now than ever - as a bulwark against radical extremists. Good and Evil are qualities that exist in everyone of every creed. Modern, (Western) Christianity teaches us to embrace the former, to seek it in every aspect of our lives....and radical Islam does not.

Michelle Obama, First Socialist

2010-03-25T19:32:00.001-07:00

I know people love her because she's a black woman who doesn't look like Queen on the Scene from tmz, but words don't lie:

“The truth is, in order to get things like universal health care and a revamped education system, then someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more.” — Michelle Obama, April 8, 2008

Instead of STEALING my pie, the pie I gave up my twenties and going into a quarter million dollars of debt to educate myself in order to achieve, why don't you work as hard as I did? Is it racist to assume people have the same drive as I do because I'm white? Am I being insensitive to people who'd rather have fun, have kids and postpone adulthood? Honestly, being on your parents insurance until 26 is shameful unless
your name is Helen Keller.

She is a socialist. Her husband is a socialist. Don't call your congressmen. RECALL THEM!

Enjoy the little time you have left, dems, under the auspices of your socialist master and his baboon wife. You'll be going home after November.

You can't order Bipartisanship A la Carte

2010-03-24T19:38:00.000-07:00

Well, well, well. The chickens have come home to roost. Demorats, led by Steny Hoyer (D-Shitsville), have begun receiving death threats. Oh, it's so hard to imagine why this would possibly be happening... I mean, if you kick a sleeping tiger over, and over, and over, and over, and over again, then ignore it when it gives you warnings, then kick it a few more times for good measure, it KILLS YOU. I'm not saying people are literally going to kill the Democrats. I didn't just receive 3 wishes from a Genie, after all. What am I saying, is Democrats, who gave Republicans and Americans the middle finger during their 3 attempts at Healthcare, lying, bribing and cheating their way until their master Obama was satisfied, are now "surprised" that people hate them.

Let's review the facts. First you tried to jam a healthcare proposal through Christmas. It didn't work. You tried again, but pesky Scott Brown was voted in what was an obvious national referendum on the fact nobody wanted your crappy healthcare plan. Only Obama would be arrogant enough to perceive both these snubs as an indication to try again. And try again he did, except he pulled out all the lying, cheating stops. He made backroom deals in a maneuver my friends who work as Hill staffers even decried as Machiavellian. When Brown was voted in, Republicans said "let's start over, from the beginning. Don't do reconciliation." Harry Reid sniveled back "nobody's talking about reconciliation!" He also promised that both parties would work together from the beginning. Oh, but our minority-quota Harvard-accepted Adolescent in Chief's ego was bruised, the poor man(boy). Weeks later, Reid reneged on his promises of starting over with a spirit of bipartisanship. Democrats said "FUCK YOU" to bipartisanship.

And so they passed their illegitimate plan, and people got sick of being kicked in the nuts. So they started making it known how seriously they disapprove. And now the Democrats are crying to Republicans! "Please unite with us in bipartisanship and tell them that threats are bad! Protect us!" the 209 assholes who might as well be marked for dead cry and pout! I for one would be happier to pull the metaphorical trigger on each and every one of them. Come what may in November, my friends. Your lives are safe, but trust me, your careers are not.

Stu Ostro, you're a Chill Shill

2010-03-19T07:49:00.000-07:00

I apologize for my lame subject title, I wanted to borrow Stu's absolutely ridiculous habit of rhyming, or alliterating, combined with his charming ability to repeat Leftist government talking points while miring in his own idiocy. This is not surprising onsidering weather.com is tied to the government-funded NOAA. Stu wrote a large article on today's weather.com about how this past winter can best be characterized as "relentless." He then spirals off onto a 3 paragraph tangent, huffing and puffing about how despite record snow events and a persistent blocking ridge over Greenland than funneled Arctic air right into the Caribbean, it's actually the 2nd warmest January ever, and that anthropogenic warming is the culprit. Apparently Stu Ostro, the snake oil salesman of meteorology, doesn't want to lose credibility or the one other reader of weather.com besides me. Well, it's kind of funny, because Stu first mentions that the El Nino of 2009-2010 (which I predicted last April) was the 4th strongest on record. Then he squawked about how this winter was the 2nd warmest in some places. Then, he attributed it to man-made factors. Let's review definitions, Mr. Ostroass:

1. El Nino warms the ocean.
2. Air passing over the ocean takes on the temperature of the water beneath it (think 6 months of straight 90 degree weather in Miami), making the air warm.
3. That air blows over America.

So, if it's El Nino's fault for warm air, that would be responsible for the overall warmmess of this past winter. NOT HUMANS. Unless billions of boatloads of humans started dumping boiling water into the Pacific Ocean at some point.

Open their wallets, not our borders

2010-03-17T11:37:00.001-07:00

In case you didn't know, I am fiercely anti open borders. Even though the day has already come when the greatest threat to our nation emerged from the inside ( see Obama), our national sovereignty - and preserving what's left of it - is more pressing than ever.

Obama the Cat Burglar

2010-03-16T12:41:00.000-07:00

This post is written by Benjamin Jenkins.

Our president resembles a cat burglar. He's tried the front door, locked. He made his way around the house to the back door, also locked, along with all the windows. Despite years left to accomplish the task, he has no patience. So, he digs a hole in the rose garden and attempts to tunnel directly into the house itself. Imagine his surprise when he wakes the sleeping doberman directly above him.

The rest is written by me, the usual blogger:

Imagine his surprise as well when he realizes he has totally compromised the house's foundation.

I think this metaphor is very apt. Our president is ridiculous. He's had the door slammed in his face twice regarding healthcare. How arrogant do you have to be, how clinically narcisstic must you be, to say "okay, we'll wait a week and try again!"?
With each pass, fewer people support this whole mess.

Obama: GO TO HELL.

Adam Kokesh: Wolf in Sheeps Clothing

2010-03-10T18:30:00.001-08:00

I will confess up front this post is mostly reciting Michelle Malkins post but I think it's worth repeating. Don't be fooled by Adam Kokesh, a smear merchant running for Senate in New Mexico. like the plot of the Illuminati infiltrating the Vatican in Angels and Demons. Remember just a few years back, mr Kokesh marched around in a mock army uniform and holding a flag upside down, protesting the war effort. You can choose not to support our war, but don't protest our country and it's servicemen and women. Jerk.

Chicago Way or the Highway

2010-03-08T11:51:00.001-08:00

Rahm "The Ballerina" Emanuel, the hot headed douchebag Chief of Ass of the Imperial Palace of America, formerly known as the White House during our days of a democratic Republic, has been in rare form the last few weeks. Now come accusations of naked shower bullying to force Eric Massa to resign over his no vote on healthcare

While I'm not sure, or even care, if Massa is guilty of sexual impropriety, I believe there is credence to his claim that the demonrats are forcing him to resign over his refusal to go along with obamacare. And I'd like to use this as an opportunity to challenge Rahm Emanuel to a fight. Don't mess with a bull, you get the horns. I'm tired of the pusses in DC too afraid to stand up to this Nazi. While I'm sure Rahmbo is not one of my 4 readers, if you read this, please, allow me to speak for the American people via a gentlemanly thrashing.

You may reach me at soliboy82@hotmail.com.

Liberanalogy

2010-02-28T14:52:00.001-08:00

Today, while driving around the overly congested streets of Chicago, it occured to me: liberals are like those people who talk or text on their cell phones when they come up to an intersection. They don't look up to see if they have the right of way, they just begin walking into the street under the mistaken pretense of "the pedestrian always has right of way" -they don't. Inidentally those are the same people who react violently if you honk at them and they're also the first person to point out people who talk on their phones while driving. In essence, they are vitrioloc hypocrites who react irrationally when you wake them from their self important delusions.

Joe Klein

2010-02-27T19:49:00.001-08:00

well now I know definitively that if you click a link to an article in Time, it will be insanely lefty biased. Let them not even entertain the illusion that they have no bias.

When the cat's away, the rats get away...with everything

2009-12-30T07:30:00.000-08:00

It's been 4 days since the attempted terrorist attack by Nigerian national Omar Abdulmutallab on Northwest Airlines flight from Amsterdam to Detroit...an attack we are all scratching our heads in wonder at how it even almost happened, considering the terrorist's own father alerted US authorities about his son's Islamic extremism. It's been 4 days, and the response from our administration? An awkward, credibility-killing about-face ("the system worked"...."the system failed") by mistakecretary of Homeland Security Janet Manpolitano. 4 days, and Obama's still on vacay. His excuse? "I'm tired."
I'm tired too. Some of us (white, upper middle class males) have to actually work twice as hard to get half as far in these politically correct times. In between working, my rotations, and a grueling coursework schedule, I'm atoning for all of the crimes my white privilege background has inflicted on people, Quantum-Leap style. Dr. Sam Beckett never did return home.
I love how the DNC spokesman, McCrazyName, releases some bogus statement moaning about how out of touch Republicans are for criticizing Dear Leader's lack of, for better words, balls, and how hypocritical it was that Bush didn't receive any heat for his delay in response to the Dec 22nd, 2001 shoe-bomber attack. Well, for starters, Bush hadn't slept since September 11th. I know some people think this is because he was orchestrating the attack on the WTC himself, which is just about as retarded as liberals' 21st chromosome trisomy. However, Bush was a real leader, who had the trust and support of the American people at the time, and wasn't seen as a milquetoast apologist.
Obama's policy of bending over may suit him well in the bedroom and his marriage, but it isn't working on the national stage. America is great. Period. I'm sorry for you cultural relativists, who argue that the ass-backward Mullahs of Iran and the dhimmis of Saudi Arabia are just as great as our freedom-loving, dreams-are-possible, lack-of-human-rights-violations society. You know, Americans are always trying to bomb hundreds of innocent Muslims on their holy days. That brings me to my next rant : racial profiling. I'm not for it, per se. I'm not saying all Muslims are terrorists. However - all terrorists are Muslims. Stop appeasing these madmen. It's time to show the world again what we proved to them in 1911 and again in 1939-1945. Greatness is the product of American society, and nothing less.

Pelosi wants it both ways

2009-11-19T14:51:00.001-08:00

One wonders what is wrong with Nancy Pelosi.

In the latest mind-boggling decision, Pelosi proposes slapping a tax on Wall Street. This part makes sense, at least to liberals. After all, they believe that Wall Street and their deregulated appetite for greed caused the financial collapse - not the social engineering programs instilled by Democrats. The part that doesn't make sense is she now wants the tax (punishment) to be enforced overseas. The reason? TO STOP WALL STREET TALENT FROM GOING OVERSEAS. Check the full article out here:

http://www.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idUSTRE5AI3ZV20091119?feedType=RSS&feedName=businessNews&rpc=23&sp=true

Wall Street does not work for the American Government, Nancy Pelosi. The American Government, or what's left of it, doesn't get to turn an entire sector of the economy into a scapegoat using flawed logic, levy a tax against them as punishment (as if they don't already get taxed enough), then tell them they can't take their talent elsewhere, that they are forced INDENTURED SERVANTS of the American economy now, forced to perform their jobs at reduced wages and told they can't leave.

I'll keep Wall Street - I'd prefer Congress to leave. At least one of them does something for me.

Tears From My Father

2009-11-05T16:05:00.000-08:00

So, a lot of people have been ranting and raving about how "presidential" Obama is. Completely circumventing the fact he has no experience, they were even willing to lambaste an innocent woman - somebody who wasn't even running against him - as stupid, as a "beauty queen" or "Caribou Barbie" because the fact she had more experience than he did earned their ire and irked them so much that they flew into a tizzy. Well, how is it presidential to use the White House as a bully pulpit to attack news networks?

It is clear that the media carried Obama's water for him. They are certainly to be thanked for putting a green, unexperienced special-interests-pawn community organizer with no real executive experience in the White House. However, one of these media networks - Fox news - didn't go along with the trend and reported things as they actually were. Now Obama and his fat slob of a spokesperson Robert I-need-a-bib Gibbs as well as various other cronies, not to mention The Angry Ballerina Emanuel, have it out for Fox, accusing it of opinion journalism masquerading as legitimate.

How "presidential" do you think this behavior seems to his family? How do you think his wife, his children, and his parents handle this? Granted, his wife is a monster and I don't know anything about his kids or his parents, but the example you set in life is the most important way to raise a child. His kids get daily doses of their father's arrogance, bullying and petulance. They see their father criticize and lash out at those who don't agree with him. What kind of message is that? Your job as a father is far more important than the position you get paid for, and if Rasmussen had a poll for that, his numbers would be even lower than his approval ratings.

If a commie can't take the heat...then get out of the White House

2009-09-06T12:59:00.001-07:00

Self-proclaimed communist Van Jones, Obama's "green czar" (ps why are we using terms that go back to a country which embraced socialism for nearly a century?) has finally come to his senses after pundits have mounted a weeks-long campaign exposing his links to 9/11 Truthers as well as his vicious, juvenile attacks against Republicans. As some of you may remember, Van Jones signed a petition accusing the Bush administration of orchestrating the 2001 terror attacks which has recently come to light, days after referring to Republicans as "assholes."

I must admit it is refreshing that somebody on the Obama administration decided to step down rather than embrace a decades-dead race card. In typical liberal victim fashion, Jones proclaimed making his decision amidst a "smear campaign" leveled against him. I love how when the truth hurts, it becomes a smear campaign with insinuations of slander. Sorry Jones - in an era where information is available at the click of a mouse, don't get upset when people call you out on your own unpatriotic past. It sucks having to pay the piper, doesn't it? To conclude, I'm kind of enjoying the fact this administration is finally having to face the music, and with so many members being called out recently, this is one cacophony that is music to my ears.

the great welfare scam

2009-06-29T21:10:00.000-07:00

so, my attention has just been brought to a rather interesting fact. A friend of mine works in a hair salon near Roosevelt and state st in Chicago. Her employees, all black, openly boast about how while many of them don't require link cards, the equivalent of food stamps, all of them apply for them anyways. Some of these women are eligible for $500 a month. They then offer to buy groceries for their friends or other women for half price, I.e. They'll buy $100 of groceries on their link card u
in exchange for $50 in cash. Incidentally these are the people who clamor the loudest for Obama and other
democrats.

Maybe instead of raising taxes ad infinitum and ad nauseum, the city should crack down on the billions of dollars being STOLEN and lost to FRAUD. Try to imagine the billions saved not to mention maybe encouraging ghetto welfare queens to drop their sense of entitlement and maybe look for jobs or other ways to invest into the community instead of just taking.

My personal views on wealth redistribution and universal healthcare

2009-05-08T11:57:00.000-07:00

It seems to me that the debate on healthcare is ultimately predicated on the question of whether healthcare is a privilege or a right. I am not a heartless bastard; I would not begrudge medical care to anybody who needs it because of an inability to pay. I'm not sure if this is just because I live in Chicago, home of the "we cater to the lowest common denominator, seek only to please underemployed minorities and encourage as many people as possible to adopt an entitlement mentality in an attempt to boost Mayor Daley's approval ratings" or if it's how liberals all over America think of healthcare, but in any case, a lot of at least anecdotal ramblings I hear from people regarding their complaints of healthcare is that it is somehow the doctors' and specialists' collective fault for demanding compensation. Somehow, it is the burden of the physician to bear all fault for the entire uninsured or underinsured population's woes in healthcare.

As it should be well known by now, a single-payor, or in other words, entirely government-run insurance program, has as many inherent faults and problems with it as does the current privitized-only healthcare system we use in America. In countries with such a plan, such as Canada, this system has led to the rationing of resources, insane wait times for what we consider routine or preventative measures in America, 9 month to one year waiting lists for things like transplants or complicated procedures, and in some cases, a complete inability to meet patient demands in certain fields, such as neurosurgery and oncology. For this reason, Canada routinely sends hundreds of patients over the American border every year, from things such as baby delivery to cerebrospinal and brain injury treatments. In addition, certain procedures or treatments for unusual or rare conditions are just refused flat out, leaving the patient with no choice but to live with the discomfort until they ultimately die. The government denies this is ever due to the expense; however, it is widely known and accepted that certain services are cut due to their cost. This rationing of resources obviously results in death many times - the case of Natasha Richardson certainly makes one wonder, as hospital administrators struggled to determine whether a CT Scan or MRI was a necessary cost to evaluate the late actress' brain. Had she been in America, where MRIs are standard, Ms. Richardson's doctors would have noticed hemorrhaging immediately and she might have survived.

In any case, the disgruntled malaise which was limited formerly to the lower class, but with the recession and increasing cost of healthcare, has found its way into the middle class zeitgeist as well, has sought a scapegoat for its anger and collective frustration. In the spirit of the current "blame/hate/soak-the-rich" mentality fostered by the Obama administration, people have turned to blaming the fact that "doctors make so much money." I have the feeling that most Liberals hold physician compensation as the reason why their healthcare costs are so high - and the government, with its new policy of determining executive compensation and blaming anyone earning a decent income as the problem and not the solution - only serves to fuel the fire. I am speaking in defense of medical professionals. Of all professions, very few require as extensive, thorough, difficult and demanding education and training as those in medicine. Doctors save lives - on top of that, they take oaths to do no harm and to basically exist for the sole purpose of bettering mankind and alleviating pain. The cost of obtaining a medical education is, all things considered, routinely over a quarter of a million dollars. Additionally, it requires sacrificing a decade of life to maintain grueling work and study schedules. Contrary to (liberal/communist) popular opinion, all jobs are not inherently equal. Obama's ideal, idiotic fantasy world where everybody doing work should receive equitable payment is absurd. Not all professions, or people for that matter, are equal. The doctor SHOULD and MUST make more than the hairdresser. The surgeon SHOULD and MUST make more than the plumber. The difference in skill required to do the job is so vastly different it would be criminal to even suggest that "the output of a hairdresser should yield similar pay to the output of a doctor." The fact that uninformed, ignorant miscreants with no outlets to vent their frustration have the audacity to lay the blame with some of society's greatest producers is simply ludicrous and shows a serious lack of maturity. "Can you believe that doc made $3000 just to fix my broken nose? Maybe if he wasn't allowed to participate in this highway robbery our insurance premiums wouldn't be through the roof." First of all - the reason that doctor had to charge $3000 instead of $2000 is thanks to low lives like these complainers, who over the last two decades have sought making a quick buck by engaging in frivolous lawsuits, sending these doctors' malpractice insurance rates skyrocketing. The reason he had to charge $2000 instead of $1000 is due to the fact his patient' insurance doesn't even reimburse him for the entire cost, thanks to the fact millions of Americans, with their smoking, drinking, overeating and unwillingness to exercise - in general, laziness - have made the business of insurance an increasingly unprofitable one. In sum - start by blaming yourself, not your doctor.

To conclude, this alarming trend in American culture in which people have no qualms about hating those who produce the most, is only going to result in cataclysm. An ever dwindling number of producers is being held more and more responsible for supporting an ever growing number of people dependent on the government dole for their livelihood. Eventually, a critical mass tipping point will be encountered - and you might find the people who used to delight in providing premium healthcare at competitive costs have abandoned their specialties for more lucrative and less stressful ones, or have fled to countries where their talents are appreciated and compensated properly.

Crappy Nappy's Perpetual Idiocy

2009-05-08T00:22:00.000-07:00

Mistakeretary of Homeland Security, Janet "Crappy Nappy" Napolitano, or as I like to call her, "La Walrusse," for her uncanny, doppleganger-like resemblance to the tusked, blubbery finned mammal, has found herself and her retardepartment of Homeland Security in the news for gross incompetency, racism and demonstrating an overall and inexcusable lack of respect for um, MOST people. By now, everybody is aware of the infamous DHS memo claiming that religious people, returning veterans and a slough of other blanket criteria that include basically 90% of Americans, all have the potential to be domestic terrorists. She has also demonstrated an alarming lack of historical knowledge when it comes to the history of terrorism in North America, suggesting that terrorists have come through Canada in the past. She also claims that crossing the border illegally is "not a crime per se."

Chalk another brilliant appointment up to the Chocolate Genius. Ugh man, my apartment is so cramped, I could sure use more lebensraum. Oops! Label me a domestic terrorist. I used a German word. God Bless you Janet. Oops - strike two, I invoked the Christian God.

B.U.L.L.D.Y.K.E.
I swear that doesn't say "bulldyke," it's an acronym. I can't remember for what though.

In honor of my dad

2009-05-06T21:38:00.001-07:00

My dad has a special place in his heart for Helen of Arabia, so I thought I would post another image of her. Look who I found hiding in Michael Jackson's famous 1983 Thriller video!

I always knew the zombie on the right looked vaguely familiar but I didn't want to make any conclusions. Thanks to modern technology (Microsoft Paint) allowing us to freeze the frame and enlarge, any doubts were assuaged for sure - it really is Helen Thomas. They must have saved so much on makeup and wardrobe.

Sara Robinson: Pathologically Retarded?

2009-05-06T21:18:00.001-07:00

Sara Robinson:
The asinine ramblings of Sara "Vagina Dentata" Robinson are as idiotic as they are insipid. The (false) prophets of the Left are at it again - blanketing all conservative opposition under the undeserved yet overused "racism" knell. If this were a video game, or Dungeons and Dragons, the "racism" card would be the cheap Endgame magic that ultimately resulted in you not passing go and not collecting your $200.

Spit out anything you're eating in advance as I invite you to take a second to read this drivel. As evidenced by her lackluster writing style, I'm game to guess that Robinson spent more time slobbing the English Professor's pole at her fancy liberal education instead of paying attention.

http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/139825

Gay. Honestly, you give the GOP far too much credit. We are too busy trying to find ways to reverse the statist damage you are doing to our Republic to have the time to engage in some racial conspiracy. Blacks are 12% of our population; you want to take 100% of our money. Guess what we care more about? BOO YAH, whore.

Helen Thomas really is the Wicked Witch

2009-02-12T17:24:00.000-08:00

The gloves are off. I have no qualms about calling an 86 year old a piece of trash. This classless, anti-American media whoreling is as partial as no journalist should ever be allowed. Let's review some of Windbag's laughable responses to those with the gall of calling Ms. Thomas out on the fact she exudes unmitigated bias:

"I'm a liberal, I was born a liberal, I'll be one 'til I die, what else should a reporter be when you see so much and when we have such great privilege and access to the truth?"

Um, truth becomes a subjective concept in the realm of the left. For example, the truth is that JFK was a ridiculous president, yet Thomas consistently ranks him her favorite and "the best." Her opinions on presidents are as varied as they probably are on Medicare-funded prescriptions.

When a CBC correspondent prodded Thomas with the proposition to seek impartiality by asking her "Oh, I don't know, How about objective?" the cunty Thomas responds:

"You're not asking people not to think not to care are you?"

No, we wouldn't want to have to do your job.

Anyways, Bill O'Reilly referred to her as the Wicked Witch of the East (he meant West) and made a jab that Thomas has covered the White House since Lincoln. Now the Loose-screw Liberals are up in arms, claiming such a "dignified" woman as Thomas deserves respect and not to be criticized. Well, let's see. It's the media's job to criticize the government. The media failed miserably in this respect. They coddled a candidate, greased the wheels so he slipped right past the criticism of the public and gave him a free pass on everything from his dismal failures and sketchy past to his inability to speak without a teleprompter. As a result, O'Reilly decided to criticize the media for not doing its job....and now O'Reilly is being criticized by the same people who had the wool pulled over their eyes.

She doesn't deserve special treatment for being an old crusty bitch. She's being evaluated on her failure to do her job. She bitched and moaned constantly during Bush's presidency and now she's singing a noticeably more pleasant song for the current administration. This proves you can be a two-faced bitch at any age.

Margaret Thatcher is a genius

2009-02-12T16:00:00.000-08:00

I'll leave this post simple. In light of trillion dollar bailouts, manufactured crises, financial panic and borrowing against our grandchildren, a mortgage industry on the verge of subsidy, it should make sense.

"The problem with Socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money."

Brilliant.
The Iron Lady needs to have a few words with Chairman Zero.

Helen Thomas is a dingy bitch.

2009-02-11T20:12:00.000-08:00

I can't wait until she dies.

If a celebrity says something liberal and nobody thinks they have any credibility, why does it still make a sound?

2009-02-05T17:26:00.001-08:00

Ashley "I've never been in a high-grossing or critically acclaimed movie" Judd has had time, inbetween hiding food from her grossly overweight alcoholic, depressed half-sister Wynonna, to come down with Palin Derangement Syndrome. In the latest liberal attack on a woman who has done absolutely nothing wrong, from a woman who has absolutely no idea what she is attacking, Judd has taken pot-shots at Palin for condoning shooting wild wolves from helicopters. To the naked, uninformed eye, this practice seems barbaric. However, being uninformed about any issue, let alone a hotbed environmental issue, should not be characteristic of a 40something Hollywood actress whose opinions are taken to heart by her vapid fans. Er, fan.

Let's review the facts. Alaskans depend on moose and caribou for food and a multitude of other resources. Until recently, the environment was in equilibrium, until "conservation efforts" put into place by liberals forced native Alaskan wolves out of their indigenous range and out into adjacent quadrants, where they metastasized, multiplied exponentially and have nearly eradicated the native caribou population. So, Governor Palin, depending on one of her most valuable assets - native wisdom - (a wisdom Ms. Judd does not have, far removed from the reality of those living in Alaska in her Los Angeles-area ivory tower) allowed hunters to take measures to control the wolf population by sniping them from helicopters, so that the livelihood and well-being of literally thousands of isolated Alaskans remained intact. A liberal always places animals' rights before human beings'. However, let us remember, these wolves would most likely have stayed quarantined to their native ranges had liberals not interfered with natural order.

I would like to apologize on behalf of the insightful and actionary Governor Palin for looking out for the best interests of her state's population. I apologize she valued the lives of thousands of human beings more than the lives of lupine predators who would start going after humans when the caribou population went extinct. Lastly, I would like to apologize to the irascible Ashley Judd for being too much of an invalid to do some background readings and base her viewpoints on logic rather than emotion. Maybe she realized she hasn't had any blockbusters....for quite some time, or really, ever. Maybe she desperately wants to jump on the feel good Obama kool-aid bandwagon and attack the reputations of people she has never met or knows nothing about, before people wise up to the fact they were duped by the left's lies and no longer support any liberal causes. Maybe she was under pressure by an agent to do something - anything - to get back in the limelight. Next time Miss Judd, I recommend a Vanity Fair shoot instead of backing a cause that is going to bite you in the Golden Globe...oh wait, you don't have one.

The Entitlement Class is incapable of analyzing consequences.Thi

2009-02-02T21:14:00.001-08:00

I am half asleep and exhausted, so this would be a short meeting. I am tired of the "taker" class always assuming to be taken care of by the "provider class." I have realized that these societal patterns reflect basic individual behavior. I notice in my life that some people do not know how to take care of their own needs. For example, if one person runs out of cigarettes, he or she instinctively borrows/steals them from the next nearest person, either a roommate or boyfriend and girlfriend. That person then has to ask a coworker or friend to borrow a cigarette because they have now run out much earlier than they should have.

We'll call the first person, the irresponsible one, Patient Zero. Patient Zero probably ran out of cigarettes because he or she went to the club one too many times that week, way beyond the margin of responsibility. He or she spent all of their money and smoked all of their cigarettes, and after making the decision "cigs or rent" one too many times, realizes they now have to bum them from others until the next paycheck. Unfortunately, at every juncture, Patient Zero's irresponsible behavior has spiraled off, negatively impacting somebody at every turn. At the club, they probably needed somebody to buy them a drink. Everyone in that person's life is now affected by a chain reaction. Patient Zero probably had to borrow rent money from a relative since they spent too much of it out. The family member is now strapped for cash, setting off a chain reaction. Patient Zero was involved in a drunk driving incident so asked another friend to borrow their car to get to work and in the process got a fender bender, something the owner of the vehicle has managed to constantly avoid. Now the vehicle owner's life is in turmoil as they sacrifice time and money to get the car repaired.

If fucking irresponsible people, whether they be alcoholic lesbians, or Obama-voting liberals, keep asking us for handouts and entitlements due to their own irresponsibility, they set off a cultural ripple that hurts and imposes on thousands of people down the line.

Bipartisanship is not what politics is about...

2009-01-28T22:25:00.000-08:00

Um, so there are two political parties because the majority of Americans believe in different idealogies. Unfortunately, the idealogy Barack Hussein Obama believes in is that of socialism.

For those of you living under a rock, Robama Hood is eagerly trying to pass a nearly $1 trillion bailout on top of the $750b bailout Bush already passed. He screeched at Republican lawmakers opposing the magnum opus of his 8 day legacy, the one that will get him forever known for as the man who destroyed capitalism, claiming that they "can't listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done" and he's angry there is not a bipartisan spirit. NO SHIT THERE ISN'T A BIPARTISAN SPIRIT - Republicans DON'T WANT YOUR INDENTURED SERVITUDE ACT being passed! And who are we kidding? The only reason he wants a "bipartisan" spirit is when this "stimulus" fails to stimulate anything other than welfare class self-entitlement, he'll get to shove the blame onto Republicans, which is all Democrats are really good at.

Don't get me started on Rahm Emanuel, the pinnacle example of Short Man's complex. The midgetous Emanuel states today that one should "never let a crisis go to waste," expounding on this by explaining that severe crises are ways to dupe people into accepting changes they would never have gone for. What a piece of shit. "Rahm-Bo" the Clown.

The truth is plain and simple. Liberals, in an effort to garnish ill-gotten votes, cater to the lowest common denominator - the poor, disenfranchised and minorities. They do this because anybody with common sense and self pride is already a Republican. To make their constituency feel better about being part of the trashy party, they pretend they are the party of altruism and equality. They throw libelous words and phrases around they don't really understand, like "Cheney and the other neocons are war criminals." They release ridiculous "studies" and "facts" claiming that "Democrats tend to be better educated and wealthier" which are the same conclusions you would draw from any comparison of urban to rural communities, urban areas being bastions of Trashocrats. It is no surprise liberals congregate in large cities - the herd mentality these Sheeple exhibit is much more conducive in areas of high population density, so that way when the blind lead the blind, they have a better chance of success just in terms of statistics.

Obama is a shyster fraud. He is robbing us of our dignity and collective spirit. What an arrogant douchebag! Who the hell does he think he is? He was probably too busy dealing heroin (allegedly) and smoking weed during his college days to pay attention in either history or economics, when the rest of us who had to go 2nd tier schools (because we couldn't take advantage of minority quota acceptance like he and his wife) were learning that a.) socialism is bad, anti-American and always fails and b.) government spending exacerbates recessions, not alleviates them.

I hate Barack Obama. I hate Nancy Pelosi. I hate Rahm Emanuel. I hate socialists. I hate Democratic Socialists. I hate Democrats.

Nancy Pelosi, Hypocunt of the House

2009-01-18T21:46:00.000-08:00

What a f*ing bitch. I have always had a special place in the area of my brain dedicated to hate and resentment for Nancy Pelosi, the Demosnatch from California who somehow became Speaker of the House, likes to pretend she cares about constitutionality. Let's review, whore!

I am all about "interpretation" but not when it requires rationalization or contradicts what you have said earlier, or contradicts your party platform. This is so typical of liberals.

The evidence (we have TWO examples!):

1. Example 1 "Impeachment Blues"

Summer of 2008: Nancy Pelosi yells at leftist zealots for wanting to impeach Bush, telling them it would be divisive and a distraction from the Democratic agenda. Her motto is "let it slide" and "get over it."

Today: “I think you look at each item and see what is a violation of the law and do we even have a right to ignore it,” Nancy Pelosi says “And other things that are maybe time that is spent better looking to the future rather than to the past.”

A violation of the law?! Obama isn't even a CITIZEN! I'm pretty sure being a citizen is spelled out in the Constitution...you know, the document we derive all our laws from.

2. Example 2 "Flags of our Fathers"

The Law (The Official Flag Code): “The flag should never have placed upon it, nor on any part of it, nor attached to it any mark, insignia, letter, word, figure, design, picture, or drawing of any nature.”

Today:

Why isn't this hypocrisy noted? I thought we had a media for this exact reason. Why aren't people talking about this? Please stop claiming Bush's War on Terror is unconstitutional, or waterboarding known terrorists who kill Americans is "illegal" and "unconstitutional," but then claim that putting a Muslim non-citizen into office isn't unconstitutional and neither is defiling and debasing our country's flag. F* you Nazi Smellosi. You'll get yours. Karma is a bitch.

A Long Time Ago, in a Beltway Far Far Away

2009-01-08T21:09:00.001-08:00

So apparently, the Constitutionally protected media, which received this protection so that it remains an impartial protector and possibly, potential exposer of corruption or Government wrongdoing has decided to abandon any and all pretense of impartiality. Technically, the freedom of the press should be revoked, since it now belongs to the liberals and only feeds us what the government deems us worthy to hear. It kind of reminds me of...Hitler's Germany, or Stalin's Russia, or Kim Jong-Il's North Korea. Keep in mind these are all people Sean Penn has either fantasized about being or currently is B.F.F.'s with. Actually, to use an example that might resonate a bit better with my readers, think of it as Emperor Palpatine's Galactic Empire from Star Wars. Think of the 2008 economic downturn, subprime mortgage crisis and financial market collapse as the equivalent of the Clone Wars. The liberals engineered these events to create a crisis and atmosphere of fear so that people will back their party unequivocally. I suspect we might see Obama having the entirely Democratic Congress granting him the equivalent of "emergency powers" to handle this manufactured crisis, and a possible dissolution of the two-term Presidential limit, ostensibly of course for a "temporary" time frame. Hell, we don't even have to look as far as Lucas. Um, Caesar did it...oh that's right, so did FDR, Obama's most direct presidential parallel, also known as "the man who tripled the Great Depression" with his ridiculous government spending programs.

In any case, that's just my prediction, and it's tangential. The point of this entry is to showcase that the media can spin just about anything how they want. Let's compare their treatment of two consecutive presidents' exercise regimes.

Obama's flabby, Butter-tits body, with "pecs" that more closely resemble runny eggs, has received more-than-fawning treatment by the media. The wonderful Ann Coulter said it best in her new book "Guilty," by claiming the media basically wants to have sex with Obama. When Obama was recently on a Hawaiian vacation, he of course went to the beach in swimming trunks. The headlines ran rampant:

"Fit for Office!"
"Gym Workouts help Obama carry the Weight of his Position"

Before I go further, I have to give credit where it's due - I was inspired to write this blog based on one Michelle Malkin herself wrote recently, so if you happen to come across this Mrs. Malkin, you were the muse behind my blog. But, in any case, let's examine the media's treatment of The Moonbat Messiah's exercise regime with "War-Crimes" Bush's.

Here's some of the musings of our impartial media regarding Obama, from The Washington Post (Eli Zaslow):

“The sun glinted off chiseled pectorals sculpted during four weightlifting sessions each week, and a body toned by regular treadmill runs and basketball games.”

Aaaand, here is one of the pictures he is referencing:

Um honestly? I seriously threw up in my mouth. A more correct interpretation of this picture would be:

"Under the intensity of the Hawaiian sun, Obama's moobs began to melt into a buttery blend of tit-fat and flab, oozing off his upper torso with a consistency similar to undercooked eggs." I have a fabulous chest. I can write these things with conviction.

Moving on. Obama's Chicago friend Marty Nesbitt says of the president-elect's exercise regime: "He doesn’t think of it as something he has to do — it’s his time for himself, a chance for him to reflect. It’s his break. He feels better and more revved up after he gets in his workout.”

The current President - you know, the one whose office actually has a legitimate Seal, also likes to exercise. The media, however, had something a little different to say about him.

A former Washington Post writer, Jonathan Chait wrote a piece entitled "The (over)exercise of power" regarding GW's exercise regimen. He goes on to say “Am I the only person who finds this disturbing?…What I mean is the fact that Bush has an obsession with exercise that borders on the creepy" and "Does the leader of the free world need to attain that level of physical achievement? “It’s nice for Bush that he can take an hour or two out of every day to run, bike or pump iron. Unfortunately, most of us have more demanding jobs than he does.”

Caron Bohen of Reuters echoes Chait's sentiments: “Bush says exercise helps sharpen his thinking. But some of his critics view his exercise obsession as an indulgence that takes time away from other priorities."

Fatty Jonathan Chait throws stones from his fat/ glass house:

So, when Obama exercises, he gets lionized. Exercise sharpens his psyche, makes him more prepared to handle the rigors of office, gives him focus and clarity...even though he exercises less, and despite being nearly two decades his junior, doesn't look half as good as GW. When GW exercises, he's a "creep," or "fanatical" and "disturbing," and it detracts from his ability to lead the nation. Maybe he exercised so much to get over the fact the media was constantly undermining him at every turn, or making his job 20x more difficult, or because he was shockingly and depressingly alone in his convictions with little to no support, while liberal America orchestrated a plot to destroy his credibility in their attempts to vilify him.

Racism!

2009-01-08T20:54:00.000-08:00

Since America is hellbent on becoming a nation that hates its founders, I would like to take the opportunity to expose one of the liberal media's most hateful harbingers.
The name of this blacktress is Gwen Ifill. You may remember her as the hateful and myopic "moderator" which clearly means "ringer" for one of the 2008 Presidential debates. In her "book," entitled "The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the 'Age of Obama'" this sham fraud relays the conversation that Diane Patrick, wife of Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, had with the Boston Globe, chastising the outlet for the use of the "racist" term 'tricked out' to describe the Gov.'s new Cadillac.

"'It didn’t have boom boxes, speakers on the outside, but they called it tricked-out,'”Ifill quoted Patrick as saying."

Hey Gwen Ifill, how about this: you are a hate-mongering fat bitch who hates White people, has a face like a bonobo and very well may be the missing link. Do NOT claim to be bipartisan. You're biparti-sham.

Global warming!

2008-12-18T21:21:00.000-08:00

Sorry Al Gore and Enviroleftists...you lose!I won't say much in this blog. For those of you who know me, you know I am one of the most ardent Global Warming skeptics alive. I ferociously believe Gore needed a bandwagon after Bush took foreign policy and Clinton took tax and immigration. Anyways, pictures are worth a thousand words, so let's just enjoy my album.

Death Valley, a.k.a "The Hottest Place in the Northern Hemisphere" 12/18/2008:

Las Vegas 12/18/2008. Average hi: 64. Low: 45.

Here's Malibu, CA on 12/18/2008. Regular daily temperature for this date? Hi 69, Low 48. Remember snow needs 32 degrees or lower to accumulate.

Malibu again:

And the Mojave DESERT. Yes, that's the correct word. Desert. The irony is that deserts are not always by default hot places, they are just places that have an evaporation rate of twice the amount of rain that falls. Oops, looks like they just got about 80% of their yearly precipitation....as SNOW.

Hello America! Get used to Illinois politics - you voted for 4 years of it!

2008-12-09T21:17:00.000-08:00

By now, Rod Blobejevich (D-IL), the Governor of Illinois, is a household name. I boldfaced his party affiliation, since the MSM has been slightly less than coy with addressing that little tidbit, and I only bring this up since among blogs all over the blogosphere today, self-righteous libs incorrectly assumed he "must be a Republican't." Irony. As a Democrat, we would be too quick to assume he has become a household name through hard work, ingenious policymaking, diplomacy and politicking. No, in the typical milieu of the Democratic party, he has become infamous through scandal and failure. Around 6:30 a.m. today, he was arrested and indicted on charges of conspiracy, fraud and corruption.

From Yahoo news:

CHICAGO – Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich was arrested Tuesday on charges he brazenly conspired to sell or trade President-elect Barack Obama's vacant Senate seat to the highest bidder as part of what federal prosecutors called a "political corruption crime spree." A federal judge later ordered Blagojevich released on his own recognizance.

Prosecutors did not accuse Obama himself of any wrongdoing.

Blagojevich also was charged with illegally threatening to withhold state assistance to Tribune Co., the owner of the Chicago Tribune, in an attempt to strong-arm the newspaper into firing editorial writers who had criticized him.

The 51-year-old Democrat was also accused of engaging in pay-to-play politics — that is, doling out jobs, contracts and appointments in return for campaign contributions.

"We were in the middle of a corruption crime spree, and we wanted to stop it," U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald said, calling the charges against Blagojevich "a truly new low." He added: "The conduct would make Lincoln roll over in his grave."

God damn! Have you ever seen this man's dopey eyes? How he could even conceive of this idea is amazing in the first place.

Additionally, Blagojevich himself sought to hopefully achieve a Cabinet position in Obama's administration, another fact that is being conveniently left out the majority of MSM reporting, for the fear of the negative associations with Obama's name and this political travesty, despite the fact Obama did not have anything to do with it.

More eloquence from Blagojevich:

"I've got this thing and it's (expletive) golden," he said of his authority to appoint Obama's replacement, "and I'm just not giving it up for (expletive) nothing. I'm not gonna do it."

Blagojevich also considered appointing himself to the Senate seat, telling his deputy governor that if "they're not going to offer me anything of value, I might as well take it," prosecutors said.

And in his typical graceful, sophisticated manner, he was overheard complaining at one that Obama's people are "not going to give me anything except appreciation." He added: "(Expletive) them."

Wow, the pride this man has for his state is overwhelming. The true irony is that Blagojevich ran on a reforming platform after the previous Governor, Republican George Ryan, was arrested and given six years in the slam for racketeering and bribes related to drivers licenses.

Know how Libs always accuse of Republicans as being out-of-touch, wealthy elitists who don't care about middle-class America because they are too blindsighted by their quest for wealth?

Blagojevich also talked about getting his wife placed on corporate boards where she might get $150,000 a year in director's fees.

In court papers, the FBI said Blagojevich expressed frustration at being "stuck" as governor. "I want to make money," the governor, whose salary is $177,412, was quoted as saying in one conversation.

Stick it up your ass, libs.
I'm interested in seeing how this is spun by liberal ass-tard bloggers and the media. My money is that they will instead focus entirely on the pressures of Blagojevich and the overwhelming expectations put on him to clean up the awful, big bad former Republican Governor's mess, and how given the circumstances, he isn't soooo bad. Then again, expecting a liberal to admit guilt or wrongdoing would require them to accept responsibility.

It's not beating a dead horse if the horse refuses to die

2008-12-08T21:53:00.000-08:00

So, I get a lot of "okay, you love pointing out liberal double standards...when will you stop?" I'll stop when their hypocrisy stops. If Washington, D.C. is the "Hollywood" of the East Coast, referring to the fame, controversies and high-profile lives of politicians reflecting those of Tinseltown, then Minnesota is the perfect halfway point for the marriage of the two. Not content to be a waste of space, Minnesota has made a career of courting ex-celebrities to become politicians, i.e. Jesse Ventura, and now Al Franken. On all the message boards regarding Al "ScumTrash" Franken's recount to the Pointless State's (Minnesota) recount, liberal bloggers love bitching about, I mean, referencing W's "corrupt" and "anti-Constitutional" induction as POTUS by the Supreme Court in the highly contested 2000 election. Since when the F do libs care about "unconstitutionality" of the Supreme Court? Oh that's right, only when it suits them. Never mind that the Supreme Court just threw out the investigation into Obama's constitutionality criteria fulfillment to be eligible to actually be President. Never mind that he may not be constitutionally acceptable to become President, but thanks to them, we may never know. They only care when the Supreme Court actually does its job, and when it does, they are the first to yell "fire." When it reneges, or "throws the case out" libs are all too happy to not address the issue themselves. Another sterling example of liberals picking and choosing the parts of the Constitution that works in their favor, when it works in their favor. They are also the first to call conservatives "whiners." Caveat: onomatopoeia wise, "Franken" is the same noise as "whining."

The Hamburgers of Navarone

2008-12-07T01:07:00.000-08:00

What a crackpot numbnuts....although she is a woman (allegedly, appearance insinuates otherwise) so she doesn't have nuts.

Taken from the London Telegraph:

In teaser adverts promoting its "Whopper Virgins" challenge, the fast food chain describes how it sought out farmers in rural Romania, Thai villagers and residents of Greenland's icy tundra to compare its signature burger with arch rival McDonalds'.

Miss Sharon Akabas of Columbia's response?

"It's outrageous," Sharon Akabas of the Institute of Human Nutrition at Columbia University, told the New York Daily News. "What's next? Are we going to start taking guns out to some of these remote places and ask them which one they like better?"

Yes Sharon, because that makes ANY sense? What's it like to be the only Ph.D in a department full of actual doctors? Maybe when you aren't playing softball, eating tofu or idolizing Martina Navriltiloba you can stop to take a second to realize you sound like you're from the moon. I understand when you hear the word "American," in a sentence such as, for example "giving starving people American fast food," your brain flags it as dangerous, because you hate America like the rest of the liberals, but I don't see giving allegedly starving people a free hamburger as something bad. It's not like we're giving Mama Cass a ham sandwich. What do you think the danger is? And what's wrong with guns? I see you're anti "The Constitution" now too.

History repeats

2008-12-05T22:03:00.000-08:00

Remember that Sesame Street song "one of these things is not like the other..."
I wish it were true in this case. Doesn't anybody notice similarities?

Click this to find out what they all have in common

Che Guevera = piece of trash. Just like those who respect him.

2008-12-05T21:41:00.000-08:00

Like a moth to the flame, one and the same...

For those (i.e. college liberals, underprivileged immigrants, 'tards) who enjoy the mass butcher, hypocritical, opportunistic douchebag Castro cuckold named Che Guevera, which I believe translated means "Scumfucker," I have just one question: why? You know he was as incompetent in battle as he was at life, right? In a capitalist society, how can anybody respect people who supported mobilizing the proletariats and forcing wealth redistribution? You should be executed for high treason for the very thought. If you aren't happy, or succeeding, in a capitalist society, the problem isn't the society. It's you. Bring your "ideals," and I use the term loosely as there is nothing idealistic about them, elsewhere. Every "revolutionary," which is another name for "self-promoter who seeks to compensate for personal inadequacies and misdirected rage stemming from a lifetime of perceived and often real failures, having a less-than-desirable background, and typically suffering from classic Narcissistic Personality Disorder" who ever tried imposing a communist regime left nothing but legacies that are historically closely correlated with media subjugation, oppression, mass murders, unrest and economic hardship and depravity on a national level. Don't worry; on Jan. 20th 2009 I can just substitute everything I just said with "welcome to America!"

And let's throw good money after bad...

2008-12-02T20:06:00.001-08:00

"Give me give me give me."
Who am I? I'm either a 3 year old or a self-entitled liberal. There's really not much to differentiate.

Another frivolous lawsuit: This was lifted from www.amren.com and in turn from an article of the Los Angeles Times.

In what is apparently the first legal action of its kind, an association of community-based organizations has filed a federal civil rights complaint against two of the three largest Wall Street rating firms, charging that their inflated ratings on subprime mortgage bonds disproportionately caused financial harm to African American and Latino home buyers across the country.

The complaint, filed by the National Community Reinvestment Coalition, alleges that Moody’s Investors Service and Fitch Ratings enriched themselves by assigning high ratings to bonds backed by mortgages “that were designed to fail” because of “unfair payment terms and insufficient borrower income levels.”

The firms “knew or should have known” that subprime loans disproportionately were marketed to minority consumers—a process known as “reverse redlining”—and that those borrowers would ultimately default and go into foreclosure at high rates, according to the coalition’s complaint.

Fitch Managing Director David Weinfurter said the NCRC’s filing “is fully without merit, and Fitch intends to defend itself vigorously.” Moody’s had no immediate comment.

The filing cites multiple studies that found that African Americans and Latinos received a disproportionate share of subprime loans during the housing boom years. A Federal Reserve study in 2006 estimated that 45% of mortgages extended to Latinos and 55% of loans to African Americans were subprime—a utilization rate “three to four times that of non-Hispanic whites.”

Because the loans themselves often came with terms that increased borrowers’ probability of default—upfront teaser rates followed by unaffordable reset payment adjustments, no required documentation of applicants’ incomes or assets, plus hefty prepayment penalties—African Americans with subprime mortgages are projected to lose $71 billion to $92 billion through foreclosures, while Latinos are projected to lose $75 billion to $98 billion, according to one study cited in the complaint.

“Had subprime loans been distributed equitably,” the complaint estimates, “losses for whites would be 44.5% higher and losses for people of color would be about 24% lower.”

{snip}

The civil rights complaint is the latest in a series of lawsuits, regulatory investigations and congressional criticism of the rating firms’ roles and conduct during the mortgage bond heyday years of 2003-05. In dollar terms, subprime and so-called Alt-A no-documentation loans accounted for 32% of all mortgage originations in 2005. Their share had been 10% two years before. Virtually all of those high-risk loans were sold to Wall Street firms for inclusion in complex bond structures that were resold, often in bits and pieces, to pension funds and financial institutions.

Let's recap:
So, first they complain that the housing industry discriminates by making people meet "unfair" prerequisites, such as a "credit history" and "having a job." So...housing laws were changed to enable low and moderate-income, normally unqualified borrowers obtain $0 down, 100% financing mortgage, in some cases where they didn't even have to pay CLOSING COSTS. Talk about skewed reasoning. How are these people EVER supposed to be happy? You are damned if you do and damned if you don't, and if you're don't, you're a damned racist. Why do I feel that liberals love Catch-22s? If you say no, you're racist. If you oblige, you set yourself up for the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression....and you STILL get called a racist! Gee, I wonder why FEMA isn't tripping over themselves to give you more handouts. You know, the reason that so many of you received NINJA and ARM mortgages is because you were already overextended and didn't meet any minimum requirements. Home ownership isn't exactly a right, it's a privilege. Kind of like health care, but I won't get into that. In any case, maybe some of these people should have stayed in an apartment until they saved a "down payment" or paid off their credit cards...but then again, asking them to live up to the same standards as everybody else is racist.

The thing that infuriates me the most about this flagrantly frivolous lawsuit is...aren't we already cash-strapped enough? Why flood the courts with a costly, asinine lawsuit that is just going to cost already strapped taxpayers, who are already paying so much in terms of higher taxes imposed by states to cover budget shortfalls due to decreased home values, and because of the bailout which was ultimately a result of these same peoples' poor judgment? Why is it always somebody else's fault when you get yourself into trouble and somebody else's responsibility to make it better for you? How can you still feel entitled? I'm just too racist to understand, living within my means and all, and not suing somebody for extra cash. The silver lining? At least these people are filing lawsuits instead of waiting outside Long Island Wal Marts ready to trample innocent employees to death because of their avarice and thrift.

FEMA deserves your respect, not your contempt

2008-12-02T18:10:00.000-08:00

Well, I'm not sure who owns weather.com, but why am I guessing it's owned by MSNBC? It's liberal drippings reek of anything you've ever read on msn.com or seen on the network.

"FEMA, whose name became a bad punchline after its botched job after 2005's Hurricane Katrina" is just one quote from a story entitled "Debris pile becomes symbol of FEMA delays."

Let's see. Poor minorities largely inhabit the Gulf Coast. Most of the Gulf Coast counties are rural on top of it. Hurricanes hit the Gulf Coast. Poor minorities don't buy insurance. Poor minorities got involved in subprime mortgages. The housing bubble burst, causing trillions of dollars of equity loss and derivative devaluation. THERE'S NO F*ING MONEY LEFT FOR FEMA TO DO ITS JOB, AGAIN. None of you people learned after the entire Hurricane seasons of 2004 and 2005. There's no money left, and guess what? It isn't FEMA's fault. They are doing the best job they can with the resources they don't have and can't afford to buy after a.) you pulled this shit in 2005 and b.) um, the government spent 6 trillion dollars bailing out an economy YOU squandered because YOU borrowed the American dream on credit, credit you should never have even qualified for. Guess what again? Iowa, Missouri and Illinois didn't need FEMA during the 2008 floods. We didn't hear a thing about FEMA. Sure, counties applied for disaster relief, BFD. Those people did the work themselves. If you value your property so badly, stop trying to squat in houses you didn't pay for and get to work. I love the excuse of "well, the illegals are afraid if they apply for jobs people will find out they're here illegally." There's your first problem. Try...going home? Try going "through the proper channels"?

I don't understand why whenever something bad happens, "some" people automatically run under the assumption it is the government's job to help them. People are whining the government isn't doing anything to help Americans losing their homes. Maybe these Americans bought outside their means and need to learn a lesson they NEVER LEARNED AS CHILDREN. The passing the blame buck is so atrociously disgusting... we hear "well, the predatory lenders really pushed it on me." Grow a f*ing sack and say "no, I don't have the money, period." There's nothing difficult about that. You wanted to keep up with the Joneses except you made $30k a year, not $150. Do you know what the colloquial term is for a government that takes care of you from cradle to grave? A Nanny State. We're capitalists, not socialists. Fundamentally, when you get down to it, you are responsible for your own destiny. That's why we live in America. You reap what you sow. You can't reap somebody else's harvest because you didn't spend enough time planting. And you can't run to the government to ask for more when it turns out you didn't plant enough. It's not their job to baby you until you retire....whoa, I should stop myself, considering another headline on msn.com today was "Pension bailout next?" Get over it. You have to let things correct themselves naturally or things will never get to where they should be. Not everybody is going to come out winning. That's just reality.

We're in a Recession; Obama still needs to prove he's naturally-born.

2008-12-01T16:01:00.001-08:00

The more and more comments I read from bloggers or articles regarding issues concerning anti-doctrine (meaning Anti-Obama), I realize liberals hold themselves to the highest standard - the Double Standard. Ranging from their kind offers to abort Bristol Palin's unborn child, to calling the holder of the highest executive office in one of our 50 states anti-feminist for balancing her career with her husband and her family, to calling her a hypocrite and out of touch for her $150,000 wardrobe (Obama's inauguration is estimated to be a cool $80-$100 million ) that was later donated to charity and paid for by a private donor, liberals really espouse their beliefs of inclusion, tolerance and equality, and they do it in such an American manner. Now, Obama's hearing to determine whether the Supreme court will hold oral arguments to enforce the Constitutional mandate that any contender for office of the President must be a natural born citizen will commence on Friday, Dec 5th, and liberals, in typical fashion, are already falling back on what they do best; their party's mainstays: double standards and excuse-making. How ironic, how anti-American, if this rumored Muslim who refuses to put his hand over his heart during the National Anthem, content to let his hands flaccidly wrung against each other on his lap, this Muslim who refuses to wear American paraphernalia or recite the Pledge of Allegiance that vapid "college liberals" and "Blacks" put into office, is now proven to not even be a viable candidate for the American presidency that he coerced his way into! Here's how liberals are reacting:

-"Is the Right so pathetic that they are reduced to fabrications and lies?"
Um, I understand that you as a liberal have no regard whatsoever for the premises our country was founded on by people far greater than you OR Mr. Obama, but it's called the Constitution. He's spent $500,000 trying to make the issue go away but he hasn't adequately addressed it. His busted, obvious forgery COLB is not good enough to sate our desire for the truth.

-"Get over it! Can't you just let this man do his job? Aren't we all dealing with enough? We have to come together and work through this recession as one."
Yes, in typical Liberal Wonderland, your lovely idealism sounds fabulous. Too bad we live on "Earth," in "2008" in "America." Are you honestly insinuating that if, IF it turns out Obama is not qualified to have run for president, we should just "look the other way?" Are you crazy?! You actually want somebody who isn't an American leading America? How do you think America got to be where it is? Not through fraud and lies! Liberals don't understand the American Way.

Liberals - you need to get a clue. GET A CLUE. Use your own rhetoric and put yourselves in the other person's position. If Obama had lost you would be poring over every amendment to every law that ever was to find some technicality to diaqualify McCain. The Right (and we're called that for a reason) isn't trying to be petty or bitter. We're trying to make sure that this shady and ominous President-elect, which, by the way wasn't even an office until Obama decided to make it one in his typical narcissistic fashion, operates according to the Constitution and doesn't go down a road I think we all, deep down, kind of think he might.

TheRoot.com - the most racist Web site and Internet magazine in existence today.

2008-11-28T00:51:00.001-08:00

I've never come across a more myopic, one-sided publication that spews as much anti-White rhetoric in my life. This Web site not only shunts all of the Black culture's failings onto White people, but it justifies media portrayals of the failure of minorities not due to their shortcomings, laziness or genetic predisposition toward disingenuity but rather due to White's failure to give them more handouts or make more excuses for them or the government failing to make life easier for them. By encouraging multiculturalism, which is just a way to hold the collective European-derived culture's head in the guillotine with the blade named "racism" perpetually hovering overhead, liberals and their cohorts - members of less productive cultures - manipulate White guilt into a way to neuter us into inactivity or speaking back against it, so that these minorities can further their own agenda, use more of America's resources and money and change policy to reward themselves and penalize the founders of the country.

In any case, The Root's "journalists" tried, a couple of months ago, to claim that the economic collapse due to the subprime mortgage industry's bust had nothing to do with Blacks or Latinos, and that insinuating otherwise is an example of cold-blooded racism. Let's see: pretty much every economist, literate person, and me all agree that yes, it was minorities' fault. I mean, why would the media want people to knwo the truth when reporters forge their careers feeding people certain facts to better gain control of the masses for the politicians who have them in their pockets (cough, Obama, cough)?

It's 3 a.m. and I'm high on tryptophan. I'm crashing, so maybe tomorrow or the next day I will find the actual statistics for the number of minorities who received subprime mortgages compared to the amount of defaults. In the meantime, google "race statistics for subprime mortgages." The results are telling and chilling. The overwhelming majority of subprime mortgages are a result of Clinton's minority-homeownership, no-criteria-needed home loans, further aggravated by Bush in his attempt to court minority votes for Republicans.

Now, the media, the NAACP and every other liberal organization (again, the media) is covertly accepting the blame through distraction and misdirection through turn-around. "Yes, maybe it is minorities fault by taking out mortgages with adjustable rates they wouldn't be able to afford, but it was the evil lenders' fault for pushing it on them. They didn't understand the terms." Well, learn to fucking read english and maybe you would.

Eric McKinley and the Frivolous Lawsuit

2008-11-26T20:29:00.000-08:00

Do you want to know why people call us "nellies"? It's because some of us choose to act like whiny bitches. Especially if you're a middle aged douchebag homo named Eric McKinley.

I don't know why Mr. McKinley looks like, nor should it matter...yet whenever I read about the EHarmony lawsuit, reading about this Eric McKinley, I can't help but imagine in my mind's eye some beady-eyed, frumpy, overweight balding homo who never got picked at the Bathhouse and had to waddle home alone with nothing but his crystal meth-induced illusions of self-worth and validation, causing him to begrudge heterosexual society, free of its image-conscious male oriented pressures. Never exceeding at the superficial, but never really having accomplished much in the way of anything else, and reduced to finding love on the Internet, Mr. McKinley (in my fantasy) sadly scours, and fails at finding love, at gay.com, then manhunt.net, then finally adam4adam.com, until he hears an EHarmony commercial softly playing from the television in the background as he sits in his computer chair in his white briefs with nothing but the computer screen illuminating the darkened room. On a whim, he tries it, but to his dismay realizes there are no gays on it. Knowing the ones on the other sites are out of his league, and this insult being the straw that broke the camel's back, McKinley acts out of rage, which is so typical of the gay community as of late (thanks Prop 8). From the West Coast to the East Coast, their self proclaimed liberal values have given way to bouts of infantile rage.

Anyways: Neil Warren founded EHarmony based on his experience as a doctorate-level educated professional with a career-spanning dedicated to studying heterosexual interaction. He founded EHarmony to foster the values and ideals of Christian marriage. Admittedly, he has said in the past, the main reason he doesn't have a section for homosexual compatibility is that he doesn't know enough about gay relationships. Is that a crime? I wouldn't be surprised if most gay people didn't know what a football was, but the NFL isn't penalizing them. This is a case of a frivolous, rage-mandated lawsuit at its best, or should I say, worst. Even if Warren had a burning hatred of homosexuals and wanted to found a solely, exclusive group for heterosexuals, we are in America - that should be his right and his prerogative. Now EHarmony has been forced to start a gay-inclusive matchmaking service. I doubt this will increase the odds of Mr. McKinley finding a partner.

I do want to discuss some of the disgusting ramifications of this lawsuit. This is imposing on freedom, fundamentally. There is such a terrifying move to socializing everything in America. What's next? An abortion clinic being sued for not performing vasectomies? Suing Chick Fil A for not serving veal? Suing the NBA for not allowing golfers to participate? The great thing about America is we have the freedom to express ourselves by the differences that bring us together. Yes: some people choose to embrace the things that set them apart, make them unique, and seek others like them. This is as annoying as women who demand inclusion to men's clubs. God forbid a White person demand to join the NAACP. Once we stamp out organizations that promote our individuality, we will all become the same, despite the fact we are not. Hegemony for all. Thanks McKinley. If it's so hard for you to meet somebody, maybe it's you, not EHarmony.

Prop 8 and the Hypocrisy of Homos

2008-11-26T19:54:00.001-08:00

It has dawned on me that as I run a blog for gay Republicans, I should probably address some topics that pertain to homosexuality. The first is slightly more serious, and by serious I mean not a ridiculous frivolous lawsuit by a fat, bitter middle aged homo.

A letter to the embittered grotesquerie that is California's homosexual population:

Homos: you lost. Deal with it. The way you are all handling your loss is completely irrational. Typical of a liberal. Let me talk to you about some of the signs I saw when I went by the Daley Center's November 15th Prop 8 Protest.

"Equal rights for equal people!"
"You can't deny our rights!"
"We don't tell you who can get married!"

Sorry girls. You already have equal rights. Just go read a little thing about civil rights. Even the most right-winged Republican understand, respects and is willing to cede you your civil right to be joined in a union with all the same rights and privileges of a heterosexual marriage with the partner of your choice. You are receiving equal rights. Marriage is a term steeped with religious connotation. In nearly almost every culture that ever was or is, marriage has been and is understood (and thanks to Prop 8, forever will be understood) as a union between a man and a woman before the eyes of God. I am against archaic interpretations of the Bible, but I think the writing's on the wall with this - it was pretty clearly spelled out that marriage is a union between a man and a woman, largely with the intent to reproduce. I won't go into the varied sociopolitical benefits underlying the historic value of marriage, such as family alliances and ensuring paternity, because I think that's tangential.

Secondly, nobody is taking away any of your rights. A rogue Supreme court overturned a constitutional amendment 7 months ago, if that. Those justices didn't reflect the will of the people. I know there is this big clamor that the margin was so small, with a difference in pro/con votes something like 3 or 4%, but you can't blame the Mormons, or the Catholics, or the Blacks or the Hispanics or people who donated money to the campaign to pass Prop 8. If you really think advertisements have the power to challenge and change people's core beliefs, you are naive as...well as a liberal. This wasn't "do you want the courthouse's wallpaper to be pink or red." This was a matter of protecting conservative values...and I know it must have been earth-shattering for your conceptions of an ultra-liberal California and the inherent "enlightenment" of its denizens to be completely refuted, but this is something a lot of people take seriously. Don't punish them for having their beliefs. It's totally, completely and 100% against what you preach in your politics, to be inclusive and respective of everyone's opinion. Hell, your party has gone so far as to enforce things like affirmative action and special interest group legislation because you are "so tolerant" and think "everybody has a chance." I guess you're only for equality when it results in you being more equal than everybody else.

The saddest part of this, is their demand for unequal equality has caused the Director of an L.A. Film Festival, Richard Raddon, some of HIS rights. The irritated and upset homos accessed public donation records, and now, not only are they boycotting and threatening businesses (a genius move in a collapsing economy), but they demanded the resignation of Richard Raddon. Michelle Malkin has a great piece on the story right here. The barrage of protests and threats his parent organization, Film Independent (FIND), has received in the wake of the Prop 8 decision, Raddon has been coerced into tending a resignation. Does denying a man his livelihood, and forcing him to stop contributing to a field he is talented and passionate about, a devotion that has undoubtedly brought about enriching, untold creative productivity, make any sense, because you're bitter? Your rights AREN'T BEING infringed upon. You can have unions. The unions = the same rights as marriage. Everybody will treat you as if you are married. They already do. Nobody took anything away from you, but you respond by taking away from a talented visionary. This is so typical to me of the liberal agenda - stifling the productive members of society if they exercise THEIR rights - RIGHT to an opinion, RIGHT to believe in whatever they want. Liberals will clamor to give international terrorists more rights by calling for their release from Gitmo, especially that fat vag Rosie, but they don't condone an American's exercising of his freedom of thought. Bravo, two-faces. P.S. you're really starting to prove you aren't even responsible enough to handle adult affairs like marriage anyways...the Prop 8 outcome was obviously for the best.

I love all the clips of gays bashing Blacks and Hispanics in the aftermath of having JUST VOTED FOR A CANDIDATE WHOSE CENTRAL MESSAGE WAS UNIFICATION. The Republicans are learning that we as a party have to put aside arbitrary differences to unify on grounds of our common values, which are more powerful than the things that divide us. I suggest you do the same. You can't make everybody happy all of the time. You still have your civil unions; nobody would dare ever try to take that away from you. That isn't the logical "next step" after they "took gay marriage away" from you. You never really legally had it in the first place. The people have spoken, and they said the rights you have are enough. After all, it's the same rights they have. Everybody will treat you the same as if you were "married." The law recognizes you the same as if you were "married." And, MOST importantly, you love each other as you would if you were "married." Unfortunately, the word itself means "a union between a man and a woman." That is solidified by the Bible. For all intensive purposes, the Bible is God's word. We are one nation under God. Sorry, but God wins. If you're so steamed about not having your own word for it, call it Garriage. I doubt anybody will stop you.

Round and round they go; where the issues stop, only the centrists know

2008-11-24T21:38:00.000-08:00

Amaaaaazing how Obama and the media is already covering his tracks before he even starts making mistakes. Note that I no longer differentiate the media from the liberal media, as it's pretty obvious the two bear no differences.

Obama infused millions with his "hope," "change," and "new day" rhetoric. Then, he gets into office and what do you know? He's magically a centrist. If all "change I could believe in" encompassed was simply changing the scene back to 1992-2000, I may have believed in it! Obama's cabinet, transitional office and staff appointments are not the new, unseen faces he promised his constituency, but rather a rehash of the Clinton White House. How LBJ in the wake of Kennedy is he? Populating his offices with very well known Washington insiders, many of whom are doing the same job they had last decade.

Before I get too into this, I want to bring to light the fact that Obama is smart in a way - too often in the past, we always heard a politician promise something and renege. "Mark my words, no new taxes!" or "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" or "I will repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell." Bam bam bam, none came to pass. This time, he with his cronies, the media, are burning the midnight oil to make sure we know in advance he's probably going to be forced to renege on his promises and accept what he is classifying as irredeemable failures...however, he is luckily on the coattails of an outgoing administration with a 20% approval rating to use more than conveniently as a scapegoat.

Today we hear that the economy is going to get worse before it gets better. That doesn't bode well for the Welfare Whore who chillingly predicted she would no longer have to worry about paying her mortgage or for gasoline. P.S., to the liberals who defend this awful crackslut, no, I doubt that what she is trying to imply is that with Obama as president, she won't have to worry about not having the opportunities to be able to earn the money for these expenses, or she wouldn't have the little "if I help him out he'll help me" (so typical of their mentality) addendum. We also hear tales of the media saying "the problems facing Obama are so insurmountable, we can't hold him accountable if he fails." Well, he IS the Messiah. He's a miracle worker. He's of a higher plane, says Oprah and Chris Matthews. His path to the White House is of a "divine origin," therefore: we should be able to expect miracles. He promised change. Let's see some!

Now I will segue back into my second paragraph, about Obama's side-stepping politics. His shameless abandonment of the far left, the people that put him in office (well, along with the help of the idiots seen in the video here ) is not even being greeted with the fury it should be met with, at least not by as many people as it should be. Many far-leftists are furious. Even a few people at the Obama-can-do-no-wrong Daily KOS and that batshit crazy Huffington are crying foul. They feel alienated and used as mere props and puppets to get the extra millions of votes Obama needed, and rightly so. The second he got in, he laid down like a dog for Hillary and the established Democratic royalty. However, leave it up to the retarded, idealistic youth to help Obama gloss over his blatant and flagrant treason to his core constituency(I never once thought I would ever use the NYTimes to SUPPORT one of my points):

“We’re frustrated by it, but we understand,” said Mollie Ruskin, 22, who grew up in Baltimore and is spending the summer here as a fellow with Politicorps, a program run by the Bus Project, a local nonprofit that trains young people to campaign for progressive candidates. “He’s doing it so he can get into office and do the things he believes in.”

Nate Gulley, 23, who grew up in Cleveland and is also here as a Politicorps fellow, said too much was being made of Mr. Obama’s every move.

“It’s important not to get swept up in ‘Is Obama posturing?’ ” Mr. Gulley said. “It’s self-evident that he’s a different kind of candidate.”

Um yes Nate, it IS important to get swept up in it. He isn't a different kind of candidate. Your yellow-bellied candidate has proven himself to be just like every cuckold run of the mill politician. You voted for "change you could believe in." Your savior reneged on his promise to you. You are one of the reasons this potentially VERY DANGEROUS man holds the highest position in the land. Now you're sitting by, not with outrage but with neutered apathy and blind indifference. You're being naive, and hypocritical. He lied to you. Instead of realizing this, you're just saying "oh he had to do it, it's okay." What else? Once a liar, always a liar. When do you think it's going to stop? He abandoned you like a 16 year old Kansas boy would leave his pregnant inamorata at a Route 66 Wal-Mart parking lot. You're already making excuses for him.

To conclude, you can't make excuses for Obama so that he can never make a mistake. This isn't the CTA or Mayor Daley legislation. We've already seen plenty of mistakes. The media and Obama himself can't keep up this "oh well, even if I fail it's okay. If I lie, it's okay." It wasn't okay when Bush changed his mind. You can't enforce a double standard. Obama must be, and is going to be held accountable for all of his shortcomings, lies, hyperbole and bait-and-switching. There is one thing we should all be able to agree on. Whether you believe Obama's spectrum shifting is a result of being pragmatic and view it as necessary, or if you feel embittered and alienated by this two-face, one thing is for sure: Obama isn't the miracle-working Messiah you all thought he was. Period.

More misconceptions from the Left

2008-11-21T07:27:00.001-08:00

As I have discussed in many posts, the Left likes to claim that Bush favored the wealthy; that rich people get all the tax breaks, that Obama is great because he's finally going to give the trash with self-entitlement issues, I mean, the lower classes their own tax breaks. Let's look at some statistics compiled in 2004-2005, arguable the apex of Bush's presidential tenure, a time when allegedly rich people weren't paying any taxes.

"Number of Americans Outside the Income Tax System Continues to Grow

by Scott A. Hodge

Fiscal Fact No. 27

One of the biggest obstacles facing President Bush’s Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform is the fact that America has become divided between a growing class of people who pay no income taxes and a shrinking class of people who are bearing the lion’s share of the burden.

Despite the charges of critics that the tax cuts enacted in 2001, 2003 and 2004 favored the “rich,” these cuts actually reduced the tax burden of low- and middle-income taxpayers and shifted the tax burden onto wealthier taxpayers. Tax Foundation economists estimate that for tax year 2004, a record 42.5 million Americans who filed a tax return (one-third of the 131 million returns filed last year) had no tax liability after they took advantage of their credits and deductions. Millions more paid next to nothing. "

"Conclusion
In 2004, a record 42.5 million tax returns – one-third of all returns filed – had no income tax liability because of the available credits and deductions in the tax code. This is a 42 percent increase in the number of zero-tax filers in just four years. In addition to these zero-tax filers are the 15 million individuals or households who do not earn enough to file a tax return. Overall, nearly 58 million taxable households are outside of the income tax system.

These findings raise serious questions about the future of the U.S. income tax system. Are any future tax cuts, or even tax reforms, possible when the lion’s share of the tax burden is increasingly borne by a shrinking pool of taxpayers who – at least on paper – appear to be "upper-income"? And will the expanding pool of non-payers demand even higher income taxes? These are questions lawmakers must begin to debate."

Wow. They were scared of this in 2004-2005. Now we have some idealogical socialist catering to the basest and most banal desires of the lowest common denominator who wants to shunt even MORE of the already ridiculous burden on to a fraction of the population who not only shouldn't be, but soon aren't going to be physically able to carry the burden. Why should the most successful people be ordained to carry the dead weight of everybody else? Society should reward them for their contributions, not ask for more out of them.

Oh - and um, I know that nobody is allowed to quote racial statistics anymore because on Nov 4th, racism "died," but choke on this:

"Race and Ethnicity

When we combine the populations of non-payers and non-filers and look to see what overall percentage of each group is not paying taxes, we find that: 50.7 percent of African American households pay no income taxes, 35.5 percent of Asian American households do not, 37.6 percent of White American households do not, and roughly 52 percent of Hispanics pay no income taxes."

Let's overlap with Obama's voters:

41% Whites voted for Obama
96% Blacks voted for Obama
66% Latinos voted for Obama

Wow...amazing to see that Obama's largest constituency were people who don't pay income tax. Shocking anyone? Shocking that people who leech off the teat of taxpayers for everything from their cigarettes to their baby formula voted overwhelmingly for a man who promised more free money?

Bye American work ethic. Maybe by 2012 the percentage of people who don't pay income taxes will increase from 31% (a historic high)today to 50% as people realize they are working when they don't have to.

Did you hear the one about the gay guy who beat, raped and killed his straight 23 year old intern? Me neither! Nobody has.

2008-11-20T20:45:00.001-08:00

A crime of the same atrocity and magnitude of the Matthew Shepherd tragedy...but nobody will ever hear about it. This is just another example of the liberal media bias. When Republican conservative Iowans were rebuilding their flood-ravaged cities this summer, the liberal media didn't deign to show their plight. They were too busy getting ready to focus on the next batch of Gulf trash whine, moan and bitch their gospel of self-entitlement the next time a hurricane came visiting. Why would they want to show that some people are totally capable of rebuilding their cities without help from FEMA and hundreds of millions of dollars of support? That would totally undermine the claims that FEMA's response was too slowly, and force people to consider that maybe, just maybe, the trash of New Orleans was - *drumroll please* maybe just lazy.

That's neither here nor there. The focus of this story is 23 year old, ironically named Jason Shephard, who, in 2006, was drugged, raped and murdered by 43 year old gay coworker William Smithson. Shephard, a straight, "nice Republican boy" from South Dakota who "liked to talk about his faith" had come to Delaware county, Maryland to intern at the East coast branch of his company. After turning down the advances of Smithson, who was known to have GHB (a date rape drug) and meth-fueled parties with the other homosexuals of the town at his residence, he was found 3 days after one such party wrapped in a series of sheets in Smithson's basement. The case just went to trial in Delaware county, where it has been pending this week.

I'm not going to get into the sordid details of this case. I'll post a link for you to find the story itself, since um, it's basically being completely glossed over by all media outlets except the paper in the small town the crime occurred, and a few other small regional papers. My question is: why? When this happened in reverse, i.e. a republican male beating and killing a gay democrat, America was forced to confront the horrible evils that result from small-town, close-minded conservative values. However, when a gay man brutally beats and murders a small-town religious conservative, the media just says "um, we're passing on this one." You know, maybe this will cause you to think twice and re-evaluate how badly you want your Fairness Doctrine reinstated. You might just have to start reporting both sides of the story.

The story:
http://www.delcotimes.com/articles/2008/11/18/news/doc49223c58bcebe327506584.txt

Difference between Republicans and Democrats?

2008-11-20T18:07:00.000-08:00

Rational thinking.
Using the scientific method.
Class.

This is lifted from a regional newspaper called The Naperville Sun. It serves as a perfect example of how the liberal media pigeonholes any, and I mean ANY right-wing dissent with Obama as racism, as if there can be no rational, logical or political reasons a person might disagree with his policies.

Covert racism? Please translate...
By
Patrick Ferrell
on November 19, 2008 2:29 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

You know how forwarded e-mails work. There are hundreds of names piled on tops of hundreds more, with dozens of e-mail signatures, and occasionally a message from one friend to another.

Of course, you never know any of these people, except for the one who sent it to you. But, still, if you're like me, you find it interesting to read their very often ignorant and off-base comments.

This one, again from somebody I don't know, was at the bottom of the e-mail in which the Barack Obama-referenced photo of the week was attached:

If I remember correctly this man got 51% of the vote and for the life of me I canʼt find anyone who will admit to voting for him. I wonder if he would have gotten elected if you had to vote verbally while on national television?

So what, exactly, does this dude mean? Is this some thinly veiled racism? Or is the comment just too shallow (or could my mind just be too feeble) to pick up on the greater point?

-------------------------------------------------------------

No Patrick Ferrell. No, for as much as Obama's campaign paid the Naperville Sun (owned by the Chicago Sun-Times, a publication whose liberalism is rivaled only by the NYT) to espouse that any anti-Obama sentiment is caused by racism, there is a multitude of other reasons that this individual might not like Obama. I'll go over a theory I have why this man said what he did.

I think that most people can't admit to voting for Obama because maybe, upon retrospection, they realized they were driven solely by emotional reasons to vote for a person that ultimately, they knew nothing about whatsoever. Maybe they were having the conversation with a learned or politically knowledgeable person who explained that Obama wants to raise taxes for only the upper middle class, maybe they explained he favors granting amnesty to hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants, maybe they explained Obama wants to create a civilian standing army, maybe they explained Obama really doesn't have much proven executive experience, and that this is the first true election he ever even actually won, maybe they explained how Obama dishonorably had all of his opposition, including his mentor, disqualified from the 1996 senate ballot, maybe they explained how Obama is the only president-elect arrogant and conceited enough to create his own Seal of the Office of President-Elect, maybe they explained that Obama has no American pride, maybe they explained that Obama was a proven member of the New Party, the socialist branch of the Democrats in the 90s, maybe they explained how for any time in our economic history, raising taxes have ALWAYS either caused a recession or drastically exacerbated existing ones whereas tax breaks have always stimulated the economy, maybe they explained that Obama's policy to grant more economic stimulus packages and increase infrastructure spending were the exact approaches adopted by FDR during the Great Depression which dramatically prolonged the impact and duration of the Great Depression rather than ameliorate it.
Maybe, since any liberal you pose the question "why did you vote for Obama," 9 times out of 10 you hear back "Why wouldn't you!?" or "Bush is an asshole!" or "You want more of McSame?? you're stupid!" or "He's a wonderful man" or "he gives great speeches." Yeah...um...that basically makes him a motivational speaker, not THE PRESIDENT. Way to go. You don't vote for the leader of the free world because he's charismatic. You vote the 8th grade student council president in for being charismatic. P.S. - Know who else got a big majority of the vote through charisma? JFK. Oh, yeah, and Hitler. Thanks Bay of Pigs, thanks World War II. I'm not saying Obama is the next Hitler - so don't use the opportunity to fucking call me a racist or say I am equating the two. What I am saying is history doesn't lie, and perhaps, just maybe, a few people now realize they were a little brainwashed or taken in by his personality and failed to evaluate him on his skills and qualifications, or lack thereof. Don't counter me with some Sarah Palin-is-stupid argument either - they weren't running for the same office, and no, she isn't. It's not being racist to argue that the majority of Obama's supporters know too little, or in some cases, nothing at all, about what he actually stands for. It isn't racist to argue that a substantial percentage of Obama's supporters lack a thorough understanding of American economic and political history, and it isn't racist to imply maybe they voted for him based on a trifecta of factors that have nothing to do with Obama's stance on the issues: the fact they hated Bush, couldn't or wouldn't consider the fact that our current economic woes are not automatically and by default caused by the incumbent party, and lastly, communally adopted a mob mentality and went with the guy with the reassuring smile. Sorry Patrick Ferrell. Enjoy Will county by the way.

This brings me to the question posed in my topic line. Conservatives are often labeled by liberals as hate-mongering idiots. Liberals love accusing conservatives of being old-fashioned, illogical, dumb, racist or any other a wide gamut of insults. This skews ironic as their party mentality is self-styled on premises of tolerance, acceptance and rationality. So far in this election, based on anecdotal evidence, blog comments, liberal media articles or video footage of the rallies, liberals are the angry ones, liberals are the ones screaming for Bush to be tried on war crimes, liberals are the ones calling conservatives hate-mongering anti-Americans. Liberals are the ones taking cheap shots at Sarah Palin for being from Alaska and speaking with a drawl, or John McCain being "old" or Bush being some Southern idiot. You know, um, that's more racist than any of the insults ever leveraged against Obama. Conservatives have NEVER made a character assault on Obama, insulted him or made an issue of his race. In spite of this, liberals started and never let up on the offensive, without any provocation whatsoever. Conservatives often have logical, historically-backed and factual arguments about why Obama is not the best answer for president, none of which ever insult his intelligence, heritage or race. Liberals respond not with a retort or counter argument, but by attacking the questioner, attacking Republicans, lambasting with character assaults, questioning intelligence, patriotism and intelligence, and fall back solely on high-powered emotional rants that lead to the invariable and inevitable conclusion that you are a racist for even asking, every time, without fail. I have yet to hear a liberal defend Obama's policies with a response framed by a logical argument, or by even answering the question. The most logical thing I have heard to date is "it can't be any worse than what we have now." That's the BEST they've come up with. What I have heard, ad nauseum, is a lot of Obama-worship, overzealous praise, swooning and fainting from exuberance, and a look of irrational rage and readiness to crucify anyone who dares question their dogmatic beliefs. They are the hate mongers, they are traitors to their party, they are intolerant, they are the ones who defend Obama not with reason but with daft propaganda-ridden vagueries like "yes we can," and "change we can believe in," writing off anyone who disagrees with his politics, not even him as a person, as racist. Conservatives were quick to congratulate Obama on his victory and be gracious in defeat, yet liberals are still quick to gloat, even when they don't know a thing about the person they put into office. 82% of Obama voters answered incorrectly when polled on Obama's political leanings, and instead of being concerned and maybe scared, they instead resorted to accusing the pollster of being, imagine this, a racist for even having the audacity to ask in the first place. Liberal teachers are looking the other way and allowing their students to eviscerate conservative students; liberal colleges are forbidding conservative guest speakers or professors to question Obama's competency and qualifications....and here of all places, the "land of the free," where you are guaranteed freedom of speech and expression. You're free all right...free to agree with the mob. If not, you're free to be ostracized.

Those who do not learn from the mistakes of history are doomed to repeat them.

2008-11-19T11:20:00.000-08:00

From Wikipedia, under "Nazi Party":

"Depressed working-class areas such as Thuringia also gave a strong Nazi vote, while the workers of the Ruhr and Hamburg largely remained loyal to the SPD, the KPD or the Catholic Centre Party. Nuremberg remained a party stronghold, and the first Nuremberg rally was held there in 1927. These rallies soon became massive displays of Nazi paramilitary power, and attracted many recruits. The Nazis' strongest appeal was to the lower middle-class – farmers, public servants, teachers, small businessmen – who had suffered most from the inflation of the 1920s and who feared Bolsheviks more than anything else. The small business class were receptive to Hitler's anti-Semitism, since they blamed Jewish big business for their economic problems. University students, disappointed at being too young to have served in World War I and attracted by the Nazis' radical rhetoric, also became a strong Nazi constituency.

Despite these strengths, the Nazi Party might never have come to power had it not been for the Great Depression and its effects on Germany. By 1930 the German economy was beset with mass unemployment and widespread business failures. The SPD and the KPD parties were bitterly divided and unable to formulate an effective solution; this gave the Nazis their opportunity, and Hitler's message, blaming the crisis on the Jewish financiers and the Bolsheviks resonated with wide sections of the electorate."

And let's play MadLibs...what I'm gonna do is swap no more than 10 words, adjust the syntax so the sentences make sense, and see what happens.

"Depressed working-class area also gave a strong Obama vote, while the workers of corporations and self-employed professionals largely remained loyal to Bush. Chicago remained a party stronghold, and the first Grant Park rally was held there in 2008. These rallies soon became massive displays of Obama's paramilitary power, and attracted many recruits . Obama's strongest appeal was to the lower middle-class – farmers, public servants, teachers, small businessmen – who had suffered most from the inflation of the 2000s and who feared Republicans more than anything else. The small business class were receptive to Obama's anti-Bush rhetoric, since they blamed Republican big business for their economic problems. University students, disappointed at being too young to have served in Iraq or Afghanistan and attracted by Obama's radical rhetoric, also became a strong Obama constituency.

Despite these strengths, Obama might never have come to power had it not been for the 2008 Economic recession and its effects on America. By 2008 the American economy was beset with mass unemployment and widespread business failures. The Republican and Democratic parties were bitterly divided and unable to formulate an effective solution; this gave Obama his opportunity, and Obama'ss message, blaming the crisis on the Republican financiers and the upper class resonated with wide sections of the electorate."

P.S. Contrary to every liberal mind (oxymoron) on the planet, this does not make me a racist. It makes me studied in history and concerned about my country. Mass hysteria-induced crowds, drunk on "hope" never did any good for anybody. Last time a little place called "Europe" was decimated.

Mother knows best

2008-11-18T21:13:00.000-08:00

When I was a child, I was very naive; naive with how the world works and naive in my idealism, as most children are. When I was about 10, I asked my mom why the U.S.S.R. was so bad, and why America didn't get along with them (they were still around then). I said socialism doesn't sound bad, it seemed quasi-utopian to me back then that everybody was treated equally and everybody earned the same. My mom explained it as this: "it sounds great in theory, but there is a big difference between what things look like on paper and how they play out in reality."

Two main problems exist with the government creating an artificially leveled playing field.

1. Not everybody is created equally. Anybody with respect for Darwin, evolution and intelligence realizes that not everybody has the same gifts or same intelligence. Some people are by default harder workers, some people are more apt to learn sciences such as medicine, others engineering, others math, others computers. Some people are good listeners; others are good at farming. Some jobs require more skill than other jobs: those jobs deserve to be compensated more. Work, in and of itself, can not be quantified as having equal value. How would you quantify that to begin with?

2. Human green, avarice and manipulation. People have a really hard time not forming castes based on any one of a million dividing factors. That's one of the reasons people chose to divide by income in a capitalist society. Secondly, as history as shown, there is always an urge to take advantage of the masses.

Mother knows best.

Um...WOW...the Obamas are drunk on..themselves

2008-11-17T21:37:00.000-08:00

Okay, never once in my white male life did I ever sit back and say "wow, I can't wait for a Black extremist woman married to a Kenyan authoritarian non-citizen to make assumptions about me and have a better idea of what I need than I do."

Michelle Obama is a batshit crazy extremist..it's no wonder they love each other.

"Barack Obama will require you to work. He is going to demand that you shed your cynicism. That you put down your divisions. That you come out of your isolation, that you move out of your comfort zone. That you push yourselves to be better. And that you engage. Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual, uninvolved, uninformed."
-Michelle Obama, 2008

-Um, I'm not cynical, I'm American.
- Unlike the minorities who voted for him, I DO work, 50+ hour weeks. Then I do this blog for free, another 15 hours, and I design Web pages, mostly for free, for another about 20 hours a week, I spend about 10 hours a week volunteering. And guess what? I never needed an Obama-mandated high school volunteer (S.S. in training)program to make me do it. I have a work ethic. Most conservatives do.
- I'm not isolated; I am incredibly involved in my community.
- I'm a gay Republican, I have no comfort zone.
- A separatist minority-quota accepted (by her own admission)Princeton graduate whose thesis was nothing short of hoping for a White-free Black culture formed by the "ideals" of segregation and embraced by the Black community doesn't need to tell me I'm isolated and I need to be better.
-Uninvolved? Uninformed? What the FUCK do you call the liberal media? I actively pursue both sides of a story and question each side because I strive to be informed...I'm not simply content reading MS-NBC's Messiah-praising, one-sided stories, mass cover-ups and thinking that gave me a good gauge on understanding the world.

Liberal media bias? No way!

2008-11-14T10:35:00.000-08:00

From MsNBC:
The Emanuel brothers
"Talk about a trifecta: The brothers are hot-tempered, sexy and smart. Find out which one fought with Mel Gibson and which one put a dead fish in the mail."

Um, I'm sorry. They're not celebrities. They're politicians. Awful ones at that. This must be an example of the mind-blowing professional of MsNBC.

Ayanna Watson: Bringing double standards to the classroom.

2008-11-13T18:51:00.001-08:00

How f*ing dare this woman. This totally goes along with my last post, about academic institutions shunning a healthy exploration of all sides of a story. Ayanna Watson, how f*ing dare you, you racist sorry excuse of a teacher. Ayanna Watson, a "professor" at Prince George Community College, idly sat by and allowed her class to metaphorically crucify and eviscerate White student Gloria Alfonzo, because she didn't agree with Obama's policies. She didn't lambaste him, or say things that were untrue; in a class assignment designed to write about the merits of Obama, she merely disagreed with his political stances in favor of John McCain. The predominantly black classmates intelligently and rationally responded to dissenting opinion by calling her a white whore, subjecting her to an onslaught of racial expletives and threatening physical action against her. Was Gloria praised for bringing up opposing viewpoints in an academic environment, the sole purpose of which is to foster debate and discussion? No, the teacher threateningly and through intimidation, demanded to know if Gloria was a Republican (not the job of a college-level teacher), then indifferently ignored her student's attack by looking the other way. When Gloria went to speak to her college adviser about this, the adviser recommended she withdraw. No, there were no apologies on behalf of the college, like there were when a professor at Loyola Baltimore lectured negatively about Obama. All we got was a promise of an investigation, and the specter of disciplinary action to be taken if they reach any conclusions that the teacher was out of bounds. There was no immediate disciplinary action taken, necessitated by student outrage against this hate-mongering liberal "teacher" as there was against the white professor for speaking out against Obama.

How can liberals call conservatives hate-mongers? You know, maybe conservatives are labeling Obama as Hitler because any dissent we have is already being regulated, suppressed and punished. The true irony is that this election has been self-styled as the triumph of tolerance and equality and advent of a new age of a world without racism, brought to realization through a community that values liberalism and acceptance... yet a Black teacher can get away with throwing her student to the lions. When reporters tried confronting the teacher, she wouldn't answer the door, yet she had Obama signs all over her house.

I am all about equality, and even though I don't agree that Obama is Black, I would be willing to see Obama's victory as a symbol of equality, if maybe Blacks weren't now openly indulging their anti-White racist urges and getting away with it. How can people be immune to liberals' hypocrisy? Why is this going unexcused? The real tragedy here is for poor Gloria. She has put her college dreams on hold as a result of this fiasco, as Prince George Community College was the only place she could afford. Ah, a glimpse of things to come under a Leftist monarchy. The irony here is that if I were to say, call, Ayanna Watson a fucking black whore teacher, I'd be called a racist on the spot without a second thought and blasted to hell and back. Yet, she is allowed to tolerate her students calling a White student a fucking stupid white whore without any subsequent outrage or resistance from the community. So you listen Watson - you better be careful, because now people who are actually against racism are going to be watching you, you intolerant, ignorant woman. America's riding higher than a kite on the opiate named "YesWeCanoine" so maybe they're distracted from the blatant and flagrant injustice and double standard here. Then again, liberals love double standards, so I'm not surprised, and the media is already policing the entire information highway so truth is never seen or heard. What was your motivation? Do you feel justified and vindicated through your class' collective thought-policing, idiotic Jim Crow-era response as a valid manifestation to years of rage caused by Black oppression, and thinking because Obama fooled America into voting for him that you can get away with murder? Until now, conservatives have sat placidly by and tried to reason with liberals, but if this continues, maybe we'll organize a little march, sit-in or even better, protest until you have your ill-gotten job taken away from you...since God knows if the situation were reversed there would be hell to pay. Then again, a Republican professor would never impose his or her own beliefs on their students.

Conservatives are not the truth silencers.

2008-11-12T22:22:00.000-08:00

In the wake of the "Obama has comparisons to Hitler," liberals have been the first to vomit back their pre-programmed doublespeak initiatives, mostly by countering that it is actually Bush who is Hitler-esque. They tend to first point out the Patriot Act and the unconstitutionality of the wars.

The Patriot Act was a directive imperative to realizing the goals forced by Bush to realize by the American people. I doubt it had adverse effects on anybody who was a law-abiding American. If you want to talk about censorship, let's visit a little Orwellian concept known as The Fairness Doctrine.

The Fairness Doctrine, popular in Jimmy Carter-era America, but declared unconstitutional shortly after its inception, dictates that media outlets must present opposing sides of a story with equal time and consideration. Basically it is in favor of liberals now because they fear (hate) conservative talk radio hosts. The irony of this is conservative outlets, with the exception of Ann Coulter, seldom do any hate-mongering or speak of things that aren't true or have the possibility of truth. I think the real victims of the Fairness Doctrine will be the liberal media, since they are prone to left-skewing bias and lambasting basically any conservative viewpoint. If you want to talk about a nanny state, look no further than the Fairness Doctrine. If the government doesn't have enough faith in the American people to draw their own conclusions and make their own decisions, why are we suddenly a great people again for voting for a "Black" (read: more White than Black) president? The great irony in that is he was voted in because people didn't read all the facts, ignored both sides of the story. They heard what they wanted and went with it. When they're being policed by the thought police in a few months, I wonder how they're going to make Bush responsible for that, too. I'm so excited for watching all the failures of the Obama presidency laid upon Bush. Liberals have already anticipated the fact people might realize their bullshit and are already propagating and seeding the media with ideas like "well Bush left the state of the country in such shambles, nobody is capable of fixing them." Make sure to cover all your bases and deflect blame onto anybody but yourself - it's what liberals do best.

Racism, it's not just for Whites!

2008-11-12T22:05:00.000-08:00

From Michelle Obama to institutions of learning, Whites are on the receiving end of racist idealogies, yet conservatives are the hate-mongers. Whether we "can never understand the plight of Blacks," to "we don't do enough to elevate the conditions of Blacks," or "even our best interests show a decidedly lack of sympathy or understanding about what it means to be Black" we can't win. We're not allowed to have White History month, White College Student organizations or White-only scholarships. We are already shortchanged by affirmative action - liberal mandates that deny evaluation based on merit in lieu of reparations.

Did anybody answer why Michelle Obama's Princeton senior thesis - about why Blacks shouldn't even want integration with Whites, and poignant and blatant statements about how she is obligated to use any of her resources, present or future, to elevating solely the Black community - was frozen to release until November 5th? A little suspicious. I wonder how much Princeton received from Obama's campaign funds to instate that policy.

When a well-respected, highly educated visiting professor to Loyola in Baltimore urged people to consider - not even to accept as fact, merely consider - that the income disparity between certain professions of Whites as opposed to Blacks might be a result of a disparity in intelligence and work output, he was silenced by the university amid a flurry of apologies from officials and the university. He had studies, facts and statistics to back his theory up too. Ironic, as academia is about the pursuit of knowledge, not controversy. God forbid a professor in academia asks a question and postulates theories. Kind of like how Copernicus and Galileo were silenced for thinking outside the box. Liberals have always tried to silence the pursuit of truth in favor of unfettered acceptance of dogma and mantra.

And another philosopher disagrees with Obama. He's batting 0....

2008-11-11T17:25:00.000-08:00

"You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
You cannot help small men by tearing down big men.
You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
You cannot lift the wage-earner by pulling down the wage-payer.
You cannot help the poor man by destroying the rich.
You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than your income.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
You cannot establish security on borrowed money.
You cannot build character and courage by taking away men's initiative
and independence.
You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could
and should do for themselves."

William Boetcker, 1873 - 1962

Sorry Obama - I know you needed the disenfranchised to win an election, but um for the Americans living in America, we don't intend to lose things we earned that only God has the power to take away to the likes of you.

A message to liberals

2008-11-11T17:24:00.000-08:00

Liberals are as stupid as they are hypocritical. Name one thing Bush did that is Hitler-like? Did he mobilize uneducated and underprivileged youth, youth with a sense of entitlement to the upper class' money and possessions, by indoctrinating them ad nauseum with vagueries spoken with unfettered charisma? Did Bush want to create a civilian army that is "equally powerful" to the standing army? Um...no. Bush started a war that you all begged him to, and then reneged on when you saw the price tag. This price tag, keep in mind, is infinitsimal compared to the price tag of the almost-trillion dollar bailout that democrats are now shoving down taxpayer's throats. Oh , by the way, that bailout wouldn't be necessary had Clintonian liberals (following Jimmy "The Antichrist" Carter's policies from decades before)not forced banks to ease restrictions on making loans to low-income applicants who could never pay them back, under the altruistic guise of putting everybody in a home. Home ownership, much like health care, is not a right, it's a privilege. See what happened when liberals mandate things? We have the worst downtown in half a century to deal with now. Imagine what will happen when liberals mandate universal healthcare to people. You need to understand - some people don't put in the work. Some people do. When people who don't put in the work start demanding the same things as people who do put in the work, they get restless. Now you have a predator preying off your frustration and restlessness, validating the income disparity as "unfair" rather than acknowledging it as proper free-trade capitalism. Now he's going to penalize and take wealth from the upper class in order to placate the majority, because the majority needs to be coddled and is incapable of realizing they got themselves into the mess they are in, and in the process create a socialist country. That, my friends, IS Hitler-like behavior.

Obama the Dictator

2008-11-11T11:19:00.000-08:00

"Obama will be ready to rule from day one."

That makes me want to form a Segue blog. On the first day of Obama's presidency, the name of this blog will change to "Day One," to categorize the promises and reneges of Obama. That was a quote from the AP earlier today. This brings me to how liberals are shifty liars.

Liberals - the ultimate truthbenders and hypocrites.

When you confront Obama supporters with some of your fears about an Obama presidency, a wide array of responses come back - none of which do anything to allay the concerns that prompted you to talk about them in the first place. Here are the most common concerns I voice, and the answers I receive.

"How do you think it's morally justifiable to impose tax increases on society's top earners and using that money to reward its moochers? You do know many of the people benefitting do not even pay taxes, right?"

- There are more middle class people than upper class people, so it's our time for a break.
- Oh well, they can afford it.
- Well it's time to make the upper class pay for keeping everybody else down for so long.
- Oh well, the upper class barely pays any taxes. (see my last blog for how that's the opposite of being true).
- The government's job is about redistribution, the money has to come from somewhere.
- Poor people deserve stuff too, is it that bad to take a little off the top to make sure everybody gets equal treatment?

All of those answers have one thing in common - they show total disregard for the upper class; instead they show contempt and even disdain and disapproval. Nevermind the thank-yous for all of the art, science, music (those artists were patronized by the wealthy). Nevermind the thank-yous for living in a world with the largest economy. Brings me to my next point, the one I started this post with.

"Are you concerned that Obama's rise closely mirrors that of other 20th century autocrats and dictators?"

Some of the liberal-minded responses:

-Oh, you mean as opposed to the white dictator we have now?
(not an answer to my question, liberal hate-mongering)

-Regardless, we need some kind of change.
(so a tyrranical dictator is better than free-market democracy, just because we are in the middle of a recession which when viewed in the larger scope of American history will appear as nothing more than a blip on our radar if you stop blowing it out of proportion because the credit-generation has taught you to expect instant gratification and nothing less)

-You are a racist!
(no, I'm really not. I'm concerned personal freedoms are going to be slowly and imperceptibly modified and phased out, covered up by huge speeces and public spectacles, liberal propaganda drilled into us ad nauseum, until we notice in 8 years that Congress has done away with maximum term limits on presidents and Obama is wearing a crown.)

To the middle class:

2008-11-07T21:03:00.001-08:00

How many people have heard a liberal or a downtrodden middle class person say "we have it the roughest" and "we pay all the taxes" and "rich people don't pay anything"?

Percentiles Ranked by AGI

AGI Threshold on Percentiles

Percentage of Federal Personal Income Tax Paid

Top 1% $295,495 34.27%

Top 5% $130,080 54.36%

Top 10% $94,891 65.84%

Top 25% $57,343 83.88%

Top 50% $29,019 96.54%

Bottom 50% < $29,019 3.46%

Sorry - the top 5% alone pays more than half of all taxes. You lose.

One small step for man, one giant leap for semantics.

2008-11-07T20:28:00.000-08:00

For those of who were waiting for "history," you'll have to keep waiting.

Listen, I am not a racist. Far from it. I hate just as many white people as I hate blacks and latinos. Just kidding. I evaluate everybody on a meritocracy basis. Those people who exhibit values and motivations that I think are noble, I applaud and respect. When people are hard working, self-accountable and responsible, the color of their skin is as insignificant as their eye color. However, there are some who are too quick to quip "so, you look at them like they were a white person?" No, my evaluations of people do not lie on a White version of a Kinsey scale, with the most noble people being "Very White," somewhat flawed yet well-meaning people being "Somewhat White" and people with no motivations and a sense of entitlement being "Least White." Every type of person can have any types of values. I find it ironic that some Whites are accused of racism when they aren't categorizing on basis of color, yet minorities are the first to draw color line differentiation.

Obama is not a Black man. Obama is part Kenyan and part White. There are a couple of issues that are bothering me.

The First:
When Obama was running against Hillary in the primaries, his camp was on the preemptive to portray him in a White light. "Look at his White mom, look at his White aunt and White grandma, he identifies with his White family," etc. Obama himself realized the "fear" middle-of-the-road middle America might have with him ,when he used the word "scary" in his tirade of how "they," who I can only interpret as being conservatives, will try to make him look "scary." Don't be scared of The One - he's as White as white bread, as White as you and me. His color is a technicality.

Now that he is president-elect, he is suddenly blackitty black black, the first Black man to accomplish this, the first Black man to accomplish that. You know what - Halle Barry wasn't the first Black woman to win an Academy Award; Tiger Woods wasn't the first Black golfer to win the millions of tournaments he has won. All are the first biracial or multiracial people to have earned their respective accomplishments, a sentiment echoed by my biracial boyfriend, who was the first to say "I'm not black, I'm not white, I'm biracial. I don't categorize myself as either black or white." To stay in the spirit of my argument - what about Obama's White half? To claim him as Black, commodify him as part of the Black race and culture, to say "we have someone in the White House" is to deny the millions of Whites who not only voted for him and love him, but who relate to him on as many levels as Blacks do. To say he is the first Black man in office is not only to enforce the Civil War notions of quantifying a person's worth (vis a vis slave vs. freeman status) by their Black heritage percentage, but it is also as incorrect as if somebody wanted to try defining Obama as "the first White 47 year old man to become President." This brings me to my second point:

Number Two:
To make any differentiation on color lines is to enforce racism. To arbitrarily separate people or classify them based on their color is to enforce color lines and works against the idea of integration via blurring of color lines. For there to truly not be any racism, for this election to signal the death knell of racism, there would have had to have been no acknowledgement of Obama's race whatsoever. I think by constantly boxing and framing Obama as "the first Black president" goes way beyond a simple celebration of a cultural achievement, (such as Italians being proud of Leonardo di Vinci for example) since Obama does not identify with nor is part of the conventional Black culture, but rather by default negates White supporters from having anything to be proud of themselves. I guess the only solution to this conundrum would be to reclassify the Black race as a culture, since we do not say Italians are a race, or the French are a race, and it is obvious that there are as many or more differences between different mother nationalities of Black people than differences between French and Italians. In that case, we all have to sit down and say, for depriving their race from ever developing nationalism because they coerced them forcibly into crossing the Atlantic and becoming slaves, their compensation is that the can without hesitation identify with each other on a race level rather than a national one. From anecdotal evidence alone, I know of so many biracial or multiracial individuals say "I'm Irish and Asian" or "I'm British and Black." Well...there are as many "Asian" options are there are European ones, are you Laotian, Filipino, Thai, Korean, etc? Are you Nigerian, Libyan, Moroccan, South African, Sudanese? As mentioned above, it is unfortunate that due to horrible things that happened in the past, people were deprived from ever knowing in a sense, but if that is the case, it needs to be addressed instead of deferring to race as a panacea in order to identify with anyone you please.

To conclude, to say "Obama is the first Black president" is neither accurate, nor is it fair. By the fact that Black people keep claiming "in our lifetimes" and "we never thought we'd see it" implies they as a culture and a race have been defining themselves as different regardless of White attitudes, and are not interested in genuine integration and the cessation of racism.

My thoughts exactly

2008-11-07T10:57:00.000-08:00

This video is brilliant.
They really were drones, weren't they?

Through the Looking Glass...

2008-11-06T20:24:00.000-08:00

Hail to the Grand Inquisitor.

"Keith Olbermann" is a liberal language term for "elitist, pompous, self promoting, acrimonious, anti-establishment, communist poosack douchebag." If Keith Olbermann were a pussy, he would be a bloated, gonorrhea-ridden, yeast infected one. Haha - oh wait, he is a pussy. How did somebody who made a career commenting on sports - by default, a profession that requires a certain vapidness or vacuous intellect and a lack of real journalistic ability, get into a position where his opinions were solicited by anybody? I'm sure he would find a way to put Mother Theresa in his "Worst Human Being Ever" for focusing on helping people instead of spending her time scapegoating the plight of Calcutta's poor on the century-before imperialism of the British empire. He probably wouldn't have even given her a thank-you. What a f*stain. Who is he to attempt to eviscerate any person, let alone conservatives? Mr. Olbermann claims that conservatives need to be dragged into the civil rights movement "kicking and screaming." Nobody is against civil rights. Obama's election is not a victory for civil rights. It's a victory for people with nothing original to say to say it charismatically. Maybe once Olbermann gets his new tax bill he'll be singing a different tune, although any organization that is willing to pay him more than $250,000 is one I hope was not assisted by the bailout.

Food (or beer) for thought.

2008-11-06T11:37:00.000-08:00

A little look at Obama tax reform. Considering these men don't appear to work and prefer to go out drinking instead of job hunting, I'm guessing they are liberals.

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. “Since you are all such good customers, he said, I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20.”

Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?' They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same percentage amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay! And so:

The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% savings).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings. “I only got a dollar out of the $20”, declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, “but he got $10!” “Yeah, that's right,” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!”

“That's true!!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!” “Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison. “We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!” The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, friends, journalists and all you tax-crazy, spread-the-wealth liberals, is how our tax system really works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere might be friendlier and the other beer drinkers more appreciative.

For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

Change we can either believe in or have imposed on us forcefully.

2008-11-05T20:31:00.000-08:00

I got this gem from the Atlas Shrugs blog. It's funny, my dad and I were talking about an Obama presidency and he brought up the apocalyptic question "Have you ever read 'Atlas Shrugged'?" Such a poignant question, one I hadn't considered, but as soon as he asked it, the correlations became blindingly obvious. I'm not going to write a synopsis of Atlas Shrugged - but considering the substandard education (evidenced by the drone behavior and section 8 habitation) that is characteristic of so many of Obama supporters, it wouldn't come as much of a surprise if they had never read it. Needless too say, any society that penalizes the best, brightest, wealthiest and the ones who contribute the most "mental work," simply out of spite that they end up having more money as a direct result of compensation for their abilities and contributions, is doomed to fail. Try considering the option capitalism didn't work for you because you didn't try hard enough. You want to talk about outsourcing jobs to India and China? What happens when doctors, lawyers, MBAs, pharmacists decide that they are tired of having their incomes docked by hangers-on and the welfare class and pick up and move to countries that will reward them for excellence? I didn't think I'd live to see the day I'd find out. Thanks middle class!

Let me leave you with a little nugget from a man who actually did love his country and its ideals. Let me rephrase that - he loved these ideals so much, found them so noble, that he fought to be a founding father of a nation built on them. That's a real President, ladies and gentlemen, not this flaccid wolf in sheep's clothes. I'm sure he is absolutely thrilled watching the destruction of everything he fought for and believed in by somebody with no patriotism and even less experience.

"To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his indstry and the fruits acquired by it."

-Thomas Jefferson, 1816.

Capitalism: 1776- Nov. 4th, 2008

2008-11-04T21:11:00.001-08:00

Say good-bye to American values. Don't worry if you never got that dream job or the corner office - your new president will just steal from the people who did and give it to you. Don't pay taxes? Don't worry about having to start - oh, and here's a little bit extra we stole from that doctor over here and that and lawyer over there so you can feed your illegitimate children. Darwin must be turning in his grave. 57 more days that America's still a free country. The obvious conundrum to me is, why have marginalized people who make no financial or intellectual contributions to society suddenly now feel so entitled? What contributions have you made to society other than chronically asking for handouts and social welfare programs? Don't blame predatory lenders on your inability to pay your mortgage. Accept personal responsibility - a concept foreign to liberals - and blame yourselves for smoking weed throughout high school, not trying to better yourself and ultimately becoming part of the faceless masses of proletariats who don't contribute to society but think they deserve as big a piece of the pie as the guy who worked 3 jobs to put himself through school, sacrificed his twenties for education and now makes six figures. Yes, instead, congratulations for leeching off Clinton-era welfare reforms until somebody else came into office who promised to take care of you since you weren't interesting in helping yourselves. I understand why you think you deserve the same. Especially in the cases of put-upon immigrants who brought their socialist tendencies with them when they got off their raft or hollowed-out 1954 Cadillac. Just because the odds are against you ever making a difference doesn't mean you should penalize people who are willing to put in the work. Nothing comes easily to anybody. Everybody has it rough. Some people rise above it. Don't try to pull them back down by adding the dead weight of mandatory altruism. Think about this little caveat: the middle class moans and harps about how they aren't taken care of and how they feel ignored and how nobody cares about them. You think the current economic downturn is bad? (p.s. that was caused by liberal-mandated lending practices.) Wait until you alienate the movers and shakers of the upper class and make them take their business to Asian and European markets with them. Then watch what happens to unemployment. If you alienate the employers, who is going to pay you?

Obama is a Janus of Politics

2008-11-03T11:31:00.001-08:00

To those who say Obama basically caters to everybody...you're right. He does. Please read
http://web.archive.org/web/20010715175647/http:/www.suba.com/~outlines/current/election/mckeon.html

and please note Obama's stances when he was running for positions slightly less hi-visibility as the American Presidency. Leave it up to The One to change his mind to appeal to the lowest common denominator.

It reminds me of 8th grade student council president election, when the candidate promises to make every Friday a holiday, ban all homework and add free vending machines to every classroom. Just tell everybody what they want to hear, regardless if you believe it or are even capable of delivering.

McCain is pro-GLBT rights.

2008-11-03T11:09:00.000-08:00

This article was found at logcabinrepublican.org and in turn had previously been lifted out of the Washington Blade, a gay publication. This is for people who have some notion that McCain - as Madonna would have you believe - deserves to be equated to dictatorial tyrants.

McCain’s gay Q&A‘I hope gay and lesbian Americans will give full consideration to supporting me’By WILLIAM R. KAPFER Oct 1, 1:06 PM
Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) told the Blade in an exclusive written interview this week that he appreciates the Log Cabin Republicans’ decision to endorse him, and he hopes “gay and lesbian Americans will give full consideration to supporting me.”
McCain’s decision to answer questions submitted to him in writing marks the first known time a Republican presidential nominee has agreed to an interview with a gay publication.
McCain reiterated his long-held position that he would leave it up to military leaders to decide whether the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law should be retained or repealed. But he suggested that he would support a “review” of the policy.
Washington Blade: What personal experiences or friendships in your life have shaped how you view gay issues?

Republican presidential nominee John McCain reiterated his support for California’s Proposition 8, which would ban same-sex marriage there, but indicated he is open to a review of the military’s ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy. (Photo by Carolyn Kaster/AP)
John McCain: I have known former Congressman Jim Kolbe for 25 years. We first ran for Congress in Arizona the same year — in 1982. We served together starting in 1985. He’s a great American who spent two decades serving his country in Congress. Like me, he also served in Vietnam so we have a special kinship. When he came out in 1996, there was no question that I would stand by him. He’s a friend and a patriot and has been an admirable public servant, and a good example of why someone’s sexuality should not be relevant in public life.
I have also known former Tempe Mayor [Neil] Giuliano for many years. He headed Mayors for McCain in our 2000 campaign. I stood by him when there was an effort to recall him in 2001, led by people who objected to him being an openly gay public official. He was a hard-working public servant and someone I have great respect for.
Blade: Do you have any role models who are openly gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender?
McCain: I had the humbling experience of speaking at Mark Bingham’s funeral after the attacks on Sept. 11. Mark had supported me during the 2000 campaign. Unfortunately, I barely knew him, but our country learned about him after 9-11. He was one of the heroes on 9-11 who tried to retake control of United Flight 93. His efforts along with the other brave patriots could have saved hundreds of lives. I honor and respect Mark. Memories of his sacrifice and the other victims from 9-11 motivate me everyday to make sure we keep our nation safe from the terrorists who want to attack our way of life because freedom is a threat to their message of hate.
Here’s what I said during his eulogy:
I love my country, and I take pride in serving her. But I cannot say that I love her more or as well as Mark Bingham did, or the other heroes on United Flight 93 who gave their lives to prevent our enemies from inflicting an even greater injury on our country. It has been my fate to witness great courage and sacrifice for America's sake, but none greater than the selfless sacrifice of Mark Bingham and those good men who grasped the gravity of the moment, understood the threat, and decided to fight back at the cost of their lives. (The full eulogy is available at tampabaycoalition.com/files/0921McCainPR.htm)
Blade: Would you decline to nominate a qualified Supreme Court justice, cabinet member or other appointed position just because the person is openly gay?
McCain: I have always hired the most qualified and competent people — regardless of their political party, race, gender, religion or sexual orientation.
Blade: Would you decline to nominate a qualified Supreme Court justice or cabinet member who had a history of anti-gay rulings?
McCain: I will nominate judges who interpret the Constitution, not judges who legislate from the bench. Legislators pass laws; judges interpret them. Unfortunately, too many judges have become confused [about] their role.
Blade: President Bush has been praised for his AIDS relief efforts in Africa, but many domestic AIDS service providers say the U.S. focus on the epidemic abroad ignores growing infection rates here at home. How would your AIDS policies differ from President Bush? And would you put a greater focus on the domestic problem?
McCain: I’m proud to have supported President Bush’s efforts to address the international AIDS crisis. History will remember him for the PEPFAR program, which has saved millions of lives. We’ve made progress on the domestic front too, but not enough. I am committed to supporting the development of a National AIDS Strategy. Countries receiving PEPFAR aid are required to develop a national plan; but we don’t have one in our country.
It’s important to settle on a national strategy — with input from state, local and federal government officials; along with the private sector, doctors, drug companies and AIDS advocates. Let’s roll up our sleeves and put together a National AIDS Strategy for more effectively addressing the domestic challenges.
Recent CDC statistics show that gay men continue to be strongly impacted by the disease, and the disease is disproportionately affecting people of color. Our prevention and treatment efforts must be improved to address these challenges.
Blade: Would you resume the practice started by President Clinton but discontinued by President Bush of creating a high-level White House staff position serving as liaison to the GLBT community?
McCain: I have already publicly stated that there will be no White House Office of Political Affairs in my administration — professional politics should be at the party committees, where it has a rightful place, not in the White House. I intend to be a President for all Americans. This discussion is somewhat premature given that I have not been elected (yet).
Blade: Important gay rights legislation unrelated to marriage has been stalled in Congress for some time. You have a reputation for having challenged your party in the past. Would you work with Congress to pass or deal with any of the following: ENDA, the hate crimes bill, repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell?”
McCain: I promise to give full consideration to any legislation that reaches my desk. On “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” I’m going to defer to our military commanders. So far they have told me it’s working. I’m willing to have the policy reviewed to make sure that’s the case, but at the end of the day, I’m going to rely on the commanders who will be impacted by a change in the law.
Blade: What is your advice to gay rights activists as to what they should pursue and realistically expect to pass in 2009 with regard to the issues listed above?
McCain: My advice to all Americans is that it is time we came together to work in a bipartisan fashion to find real solutions to the challenges facing our country. I will be the President for all Americans — and will challenge every American to work with me to put our country first.
Blade: Would a McCain administration be willing to meet with and work with gay leaders to discuss matters of interest to the gay community?
McCain: I have met with leaders of Log Cabin Republicans in my campaigns. I am always willing to listen to all viewpoints and that will continue if I become President.
Blade: What is your reaction to the news that Log Cabin Republicans endorsed your campaign and will the Log Cabin Republicans be welcome in the White House if you're elected?
McCain: I appreciate Log Cabin’s support. I’ve had a friendly relationship with the organization for almost 15 years. We don’t agree on every issue, but I respect their commitment to the GOP and I thank them for their support. Our party needs to focus on what unites us and I appreciate Log Cabin’s effort to make the GOP more inclusive. I have always been willing to discuss the important issues of the day with Log Cabin members and that will continue if I am elected. This is going to be a close election and we need support from every American.
I hope gay and lesbian Americans will give full consideration to supporting me. The stakes are high in this election. I will have an inclusive administration and I will be a president for all Americans.
Blade: What are your views regarding the Defense of Marriage Act? Do you think DOMA devalues the relationships of gay citizens?
McCain: As a Republican, I am a strong advocate for federalism. States should be able to decide as many issues as possible. That’s certainly the case on the definition of marriage. My home state of Arizona shouldn’t be compelled to recognize a marriage from California or Massachusetts. Those states can decide that issue by themselves.
However, at the same time, my own view is that marriage should be reserved for a man and a woman. That’s what I supported in Arizona. I realize this is a controversial issue and we must conduct this debate in a way that respects the dignity of every person.
Blade: What is your view of attempts to pass a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage? Do you think repeal of all of DOMA would prompt Congress to strongly consider and possibly pass a constitutional ban on gay marriage?
McCain: I voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment in 2004 and 2006. I continue to oppose such an amendment today, because as I’ve explained this should be a state matter, and not one for the federal government — as long as no state is forced to adopt some other state’s standard.
Blade: Regarding adoption by same-sex couples, you have been quoted as saying you don’t believe it’s appropriate. Can you elaborate?
McCain: I hope my comments are not misinterpreted. I respect the hundreds of thousands of gay and lesbian people who are doing their best to raise the children they have adopted. As someone who adopted a child, Cindy and I know better than most couples the amazing satisfaction that comes from providing love to an unwanted child. I believe a child is best raised by a mother and father because of the unique contributions that they make together to the development of a child.
At the end of the day, this isn’t an issue the president deals with. I’m a federalist, and this is an issue reserved to the states in our system of government.
Blade: What is your position on California's Proposition 8, which would ban same-sex marriage there?
McCain: As I did in my home state of Arizona, I support the effort in California to define marriage as the union of a man and a woman. However, the people of California will ultimately decide this issue, and I’ll of course respect the decision of the voters.
Blade: Do you foresee a day when the federal government will recognize civil unions or domestic partnerships performed by states?
McCain: I honestly don’t know.
Blade: How would a McCain administration approach abstinence-until-marriage sex education initiatives? What is your view regarding programs that provide safe-sex messages specific to gay youth?
McCain: I have supported including abstinence as a component of sex-education programs. Decisions regarding programs targeted specifically at gay youth should be made based on a review of the scientific data to determine what works and what doesn’t, but they must encourage responsible individual behavior.
Blade: When asked last year whether condoms help stop the spread of HIV, you were uncertain. Are you confident that condoms do help stop the spread of HIV?
McCain:  Of course they help, but we can’t remove responsibility from the equation. Condoms aren’t fail-proof. People must behave responsibly and make wise decisions. Government can help with prevention strategies, but all people must choose to take responsibility for their own health.
Blade: Will you support the Employment Non-Discrimination Act if elected president?
McCain: Gay and lesbian people should not face discrimination in the workplace. I’ve always practiced that in my hiring. I select the best people, regardless of their sexual orientation. I support the concept of non-discrimination in hiring for gay and lesbian people.
However, we need to make sure legislation doesn’t lead to a flood of frivolous lawsuits or infringe on religious institutions. What I can say now is I will give careful consideration to any legislation that reaches my desk, and confer with Congress before making decisions.
Blade: Del Martin died on Aug. 27. She and Phyllis Lyon, her partner of 55 years, got married in the first legal gay union in California in June —affording Phyllis many of the basic protections and rights granted to married couples, such as hospital visitation and estate planning issues. Do you envision a time when all GLBT citizens will have similar basic rights? During your administration?
McCain: I respect that Del and Phyllis spent a lifetime together. As I stated earlier, however, I believe that issues regarding marriage and family laws are best decided by the states and not the federal government.
Blade: What are your thoughts on the Matthew Shepard Act?
McCain: I have voted against the proposal several times. Let me make it clear that no one should face violence because of who they are. It’s un-American and morally repugnant. People who commit any violent crime should face tough penalties. However, I am not convinced that this is properly a federal issue, or that criminal sentences for terrible crimes should be longer because of the views of the perpetrator or the identity of the victim.
Blade: How would you handle institutions such as the Boy Scouts and Salvation Army, which have been known to engage in discrimination against gays, to underscore your message?
McCain: I don’t believe that’s an issue for the President to deal with. I supported the Supreme Court’s decision in the Dale case. The Boy Scouts are an important institution in our society and they should decide this issue on their own.
Editor’s note: John McCain’s presidential campaign this week agreed to respond in writing to these questions, which were drafted by William R. Kapfer, co-president of Window Media, the Blade’s parent company, and Blade staff and submitted to the campaign by Kapfer.

So basically, yes, McCain is against the term "gay marriage." That's all he said. He didn't say he was against giving GLBT individuals equal rights. In fact, he said it was not for the President to decide - which is true. It isn't. I have no problem inventing a new word called "garriage" to describe a gay marriage. BFD. Do you really want a wedding? I don't. If liberals can agree to write off their own failures and shortcomings in the guise of a president who will tell them it's not their fault, and then marginalize the hard work and excellence of the top tier of society who earned their keep, insinuate it's a game of chance as to who lands in which income bracket, take their money and give it to people who never bothered making enough money to pay their taxes anyways, which in my opinion is a much more heinous violation of individual rights than the gay marriage issue, you should be able to accept that it's up to each state to decide what their policy will be. News Flash: Obama doesn't support "gay marriage" either.

The Case for McCain

2008-11-02T22:48:00.001-08:00

I know many people associate the Republican party with uber-Christian Bible bangers who adhere to hyperconservative morals and ideas. This could not be further from the case. Coast-liberals, and I refer to them that way because they are most prolific on the coasts' megalopolises of BosWash and San-San view conservatives as backwater hicks who live in the Sunbelt or the "flyover States." The Republican party, let's remember, was progressive enough to produce visionaries like Abraham Lincoln who issued the Emancipation Proclamation, and Reagan, who brought the economy and America's greatness back into prominence. Please hold off on any comments lambasting me for using the two men in the same sentence - I know Reagan had a couple of detractors. I don't want to get away from my point anyways.

Many people ask me how I can be gay and vote for a Republican. In this election, however, I personally feel McCain has more to offer to GLBT rights than Obama. Months ago, Obama promised to support GLBT marriage initiatives and rights, but now as we are in the final stretch, he says he would not support gay marriage amendments. McCain's top advisor is an openly gay man. He gave a heartfelt outpouring of his appreciation and thanks to GLBT supporters and Log Cabin Republicans. Even without that, his patriotism and dedication to preserving the American way of life - the way of life that allows GLBT individuals to pursue their dreams and live lives free to realize their potential without persecution and is evidenced by his war history and the fact he was p.o.w. for the better part of a decade - is more than enough to make me respect, admire and support the man. Even if he is against a gay marriage amendment, he never once promised me one thing and changed his mind to appease the lowest common denominator and say whatever it was to make the statistically largest number of people happy. He is a man of conviction who believes in something with enough integrity that he defends his beliefs rather than changes them to accommodate people.

Inaugural Entry

2008-11-02T20:13:00.000-08:00

I suppose since the election is two days away, and this being a political blog, I guess I should mention things about the upcoming 2008 presidential election. I support McCain / Palin. It's funny how the election draws so much heated emotion and passion among people, and that's good. Quite frankly, a presidential election is a great thing to get passionate about. The line I am careful not to cross is when emotion - as it is prone to doing - doesn't cause me to make irrational decisions.

Although I have always viewed myself as a social conservative, I have not always supported the Republican ticket. In the past, especially during the Clinton years, I found myself more attracted to the Democrats. I am voting for the Republican ticket because quite frankly I agree more with the Republican party on issues such as the economy, personal finance, venture capitalism and its stance on social welfare programs. I come from a family that is in that top 5% of people whose wealth is going to be "redistributed." However, that does not mean by default I am anti-Obama. My cousin actually worked very high up in his office shortly after he moved to Washington as a senator, and I entertained a lot of her discussions of his policies. Based solely on Obama's proposed tax reform, I would vote Republican, and I personally am in a tax bracket that has a lot to gain from an Obama presidency. I'm not going to quote dozens of industrial and imperialistic-era philosophers like Hume, Marx, Neitzsche and whoever else - it's not my forte. I think in a modern era we should rely on modern philosophy, using the minds of the past as framework or as examples. From a moral standpoint, I think people should be allowed to keep what they earn. Reap what you sow. Not all people are given equal gifts. The people who are able to profit more financially from their gifts, others are just good at being enterprising industrialists. To take money away from them and "redistribute" it to people, some of whom don't even pay taxes, just seems like sending the wrong message. How inclined would you be to work to attain something if somebody waved a magic wand and said you were going to get it for free from now on? That goes for health insurance as well. I'm sorry, I may sound elitist, but I don't believe that top notch healthcare is a right, I think it's a privilege. Here's something ironic too. We're always hearing about how the middle class is "the backbone of American society," and how "the middle class gets burdened with the most taxes." Actually, the people with the middle incomes only pay 30% of the taxes. Less than 10% of people - the top 10% - pay more than approximately 65% of the taxes. The bottom 30% of people pay something like 5% of the taxes. Instead of rewarding success, I feel an Obama presidency would marginalize and penalize it, or at least make it seem undesirable. I know the figure of Robin Hood is steeped with an air of romance and idealism, but to the people on the short end of the stick, it was hellish. I hear a lot of people say "well, there's more people in the middle class than the upper class, so too bad for them." I really don't think that's fair. You're going to imprison the upper class for your own gain? Did they do that to you? Just because there's "more of you" doesn't mean you have the right to dictate how everybody else is going to live. That's not capitalism and it's not democratic. I feel some people need to accept more personal responsibility for their lot in life, not band together with other disenfranchised people and other people who feel powerless and aggravated, rationalize your jealousy and resentment for those who are better off than you and claim what they have earned as belonging to everybody. That's called socialism.

Welcome to Log Cabin Republican!

2008-11-02T19:49:00.000-08:00

"Hello world!"

I'm sorry - a bit cliche, I know. I remember when I started college as a computer science major, in the vein of those "C++ For Dummies," "Java for Dummies," " For Dummies," we were encouraged to create our introductory program to simply say "Hello World" in a standard font. That was a million years ago. I ended up graduating with a double major in Classical Studies and Psychology, a minor in Anthropology, and was pre-med. I'm...not in medical school now. In order words, I have possibly the least marketable combination of degrees ever. However, my hodgepodge life since college, my fondness of writing, and my atypical lifestyle (conservative homosexual, what?) has inspired me to start writing some of my thoughts down.

My goals: I hope to change some of the stereotypes people have of gays and lesbians. I am neither trying to alienate my community nor am I trying to push an agenda. I just want to share some of my ideas and hear what other people think as well.