Wednesday, December 31, 2008

UN Goes Ahead on Gun Control Measure

People who believe self defense involves DISARMING ourselves are idiots. They’re stupid. But that doesn’t slow down the United Nations, which thinks of itself as a “world government,” although it is NO kind of a government, and hopefully will not be one in my lifetime (admittedly short). What the hell makes them think that disarming the populace is the way to self-defense? That way lies idiocy! But you can never “shut up” the anti-gun idiots. They think they know more than the rest of us, although it’s painfully obvious to intelligent people they’re not. When are they going to “wise up?” Never, if I know the anti-gun jerks. (WTOP News)

More Guns, Less Crime

That’s the name of a best-selling book and a basic truth, as some people in England are discovering. The shootings in Mumbai should have stilled forever the voices of those who think defending ourselves requires that we disarm the populace. It should have destroyed forever the MYTH of “gun control.” But that won’t shut them up. They’re not smart enough. Anybody who really thinks disarming ourselves is the way to self defense is an idiot (and that includes politicians). That’s why a think tank in England is mulling the idea that “if each of us carried a gun…” They’re taking note of the fact that every gun used in the Mumbai massacre was a “prohibited weapon” under Indian law, yet the gunmen had no trouble getting them. So where did they get them? The black market, of course. Those “gun control laws” guaranteed they would not be met with real resistance, as usual. No massacre in history ever happened where mere mortals (not cops or “government agents”) find it easy to be able to carry concealed guns (as in Florida, whose violent crime has gone down since they made it easier to carry a gun). When violent criminals can’t be sure people aren’t “carrying,” they’ll soon go into a less violent kind of crime. That’s what I’ve been preaching for years, but nobody has been listening. (Times Online)

Rewarding Failure

"Recession has left many of the world's worst-run economies in roughly the same condition as General Motors. Russia is one of them, and the World Bank thinks they're going to need a bailout. Not so fast." Remember not so long ago we were fervently wishing for Russia’s demise? Now they’re suggesting we should reward their failure by “bailing them out.” I think we need to stop bailing everybody who fails out. It’s counterproductive. It sends the message that to fail is okay. The United States is waiting to send you money. So more and more people (and even governments) will line up to prove they’re the most needy. Come to think of it, we’ve been “bailing out” governments for years. They call it “foreign aid.” (IBD Editorials)

Tuesday, December 30, 2008

Contradiction in Terms

"I've abandoned free-market principles to save the free-market system," President Bush told CNN, defending his offer of $17 billion in loans to the Big Three "to make sure the economy doesn't collapse." How does loaning a few billion to the auto unions keep the economy from collapsing? Apparently, he’s “swallowed” the socialist scam that free markets don’t work. The way the Democrats have been “messing with” them, it’s surprising ANYTHING has worked. Now they’ve got what they think is a “mandate” to manipulate the free market some more in the Obama administration. I got news for him. It ain’t agonna work! (IBD Editorials)

Changing History 101

Blaming Bush #2623; Democrats CREATED the financial meltdown with the passage of the CRA (“Citizen’s Reinvestment Act of 1976”) passed in a Democrat-controlled Congress and signed into law by a Democrat president, strengthened by yet another Democrat-controlled Congress and another Democrat president, that FORCED lenders to lend money to people they KNEW could not repay (under threat of “investigation and prosecution” for “redlining” by Janet Reno), backed by the promise that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would “buy up” all those bad mortgages. This promise was purposely broken just before the 2008 election to ensure Obama’s win. Now they’re trying to blame the whole thing on Bush’s “lassez-faire policies,” IGNORING the Bush administration’s TWELVE attempts to “rein in” Fannie and Freddie and the Democrats’ (in the person of Barney Frank) consistent assurances that “there’s nothing wrong with Fannie and Freddie.” Now we know there WAS “something wrong” with them, they’re trying to “scream the loudest” about “Bush being responsible” so nobody will notice their own responsibility. They created the financial meltdown to win an election, but it is now out of control and they don’t know what to do about it except to “throw money at it,” which they are gaily doing. (IBD Editorials)

Soros Stealing Minnesota Election

George Soros, the notorious liberal (Democrat) money-man who pumped so much money into Obama’s campaign that McCain couldn’t compete, is doing the same for Al Franken’s attempt to unseat a Republican incumbent senator by “finding” enough questionable votes and finding a way to put them in his column to beat Norm Coleman. He’s doing it with the help of Soros (and his millions) and the Democrat Secretary of State, with the willing cooperation of the Minnesota Supreme Court, which has agreed with Franken that MOST of the “questioned” votes should be his. The Wall Street Journal disagrees. “"The Wall Street Journal has noted that it is simply statistically impossible for all of the questionable ballots falling so much in favor of Franken--when the race was so close to begin with." But they merrily continue “finding” vote after vote and just might pull it off, and steal yet another election for a Democrat. I guess it pays to have your people in important positions to be able to skew an election. (Just common sense)

Sunday, December 28, 2008

HAMAS Decries "Israeli Violence"

Completely forgetting (ignoring) Hamas rocket attacks precipitated the “Israeli violence.” Now they’re demanding other Islamics “rally” to defend Gaza, from where they launched their rocket attacks that were so inept they only killed one Israeli while Israel’s counter-attacks killed 250 Palestinians. (Hamas makes a “big thing” about “civilians being killed, including a 15-year-old boy in a greenhouse, while saying they’re [Hamas] the “good guys” because their attacks were so inept as to kill only one, which they say is “none.”). They’re now calling Israeli counterattack “war crimes.” If so, what were THEIR rocket attacks, which came first? Sounds like the “Six-Day War” all over again to me, where Israel kicked the rear ends of Islamics who attacked them then. Something Islamics are still steaming about. Looks like Islamic terrorists never learn. They’re just not up to fighting Israel in any way. The only thing keeping them alive is Israel’s forbearance in the face of murdering Palestinians. With Israel massing troops on the Gaza border, it looks like Israeli’s patience is at an end and they’re ready to finish the job; no matter how much they insist they are not ready to invade Gaza, which they stupidly gave up a few years ago. They’re good at war, but not so much at negotiation. Hamas says Israel can end the vilence (from Hamas) by "bending over and grabbbing their ankles and agreeing to a cooperative government [with Hamas in charge, of course]). (Yahoo News/AP)

Innocent Civilians Killed

We always hear in the liberal news media about all the "innocent civilians" who are killed and injured in American (or Jewish) RETALIATION attacks on terrorist (and Palestinian terrorist) positions. The liberal news media dutifully reports matter-of-factly about some civilians being killed by the terrorist attacks, but usually show NO outrage and no "singling out" of children who are victims of terrorist attacks. Nor do they show pictures of Jewish or American victims carrying their dead children through the streets over their heads as they do for the dead children of terrorists (and Palestinians). Why is this? Could it be that the liberals who control the output of these news outlets WANT the Islamic terrorists to win to make Bush the "bad guy?" I'd bet on it. As soon as a Democrat president is installed watch for the coverage of these events to change drastically as the coverage of the economy ALREADY has changed, just on the knowledge that the Dems will be in control after January. They'll probably even try to take credit for the lowered national debt. (Just common sense)

Efforts at Censorship

In Italy, they passed a law requiring newspapers to register with the government. They can't do that here--yet. Anyway, one blogger found out that they had sneakily included blogs that have headlines and he found out he was publishing a "clandestine newapaper" without registration. He paid a big fine to stay out of jail. It it ever happens here, I'll be a criminal--until they catch me because I will not stop saying what's on my mind until they drag me away. (Common Sense)

Tuesday, December 23, 2008

Bush Pardons 19

But among them are NOT Ramos and Compean, the Border Patrol agents imprisoned for doing their jobs; two men who SHOULD have been pardoned, and nobody can figure out why Bush will NOT pardon them. Apparently, “the fix is in,” and these men can expect to serve their entire sentences and have to live as felons after their release when all they were doing was trying to enforce the law. I’ve always tried to support Bush against all the spurious charges laid against him by his enemies (mostly liberals and Democrats). But I wonder about his judgment as he ignores the plight of these two good cops. (Breitbart)

How Liberals "Compete"

They outlaw the competition in one way or another. Their best-known effort until now was the “Fairness Doctrine,” REQUIRING radio stations who carry such as Rush Limbaugh with his 20 million listeners to GIVE air time to such as Al Franken with his 6 listeners to present “the other side.” But what IS “the other side?” There are so many “sides” that these radio stations would never finish giving free time to people nobody wants to listen to. Rush has PROVEN that at least 30 million people WANT to listen to him while they have also proven (by turning him off), they did NOT want to listen to Al Franken. That’s why “Air America” went bankrupt and couldn’t pay Franken (so he quit). Should they also give free airtime to “Calypso Louie” Farrakhan (and other crazies) so he can expound on his “mother ship” and other stupid ideas? Do we really NEED to listen to such gibberish? I certainly don’t. That’s why I stay away from the liberal media (which is almost all of it) because I don’t want to have to listen to such drivel. Liberals had better watch out what they wish for because the “Fairness Doctrine” works both ways. They’ll never be able to espouse their views because conservatives will demand “equal time” and the law will dictate they get it (unless the liberals at the FCC ignore the law). A revival of the “Fairness Doctrine” would mean the end of talk radio, conservative OR liberal because radio stations just would not carry talk radio. That’s what liberals want. (Just common sense)

Famous for Being Famous

Caroline Kennedy (Schlossberg) is the daughter of a famous father (former President John Kennedy) and niece of another one, “Teddy” (Chappaquiddick) Kennedy. That’s ALL she has to offer beyond being the “figurehead” of a charity (which most rich people try to be). What does she have that Sarah Palin doesn’t have? Certainly not the kind of experience required to be a senator. She has told her governor (a Kennedy Democrat) she “really, really wants to be a senator.” Apparently, that’s all it takes to be seriously considered to take the “Kennedy family seat” in New York that Hillary still holds, even after being appointed Secretary of State. Apparently, Caroline usually gets what she wants, and she hasn’t wanted to vote lately so we can’t even include VOTING among her experiences. Will she get this because she “wants” it? Only time will tell. "As the Kennedy du jour tours New York seeking Hillary's seat, will she be asked tough questions by Couric, Gibson, et al.? [Doubtful -RT] We'll see what Sarah's critics say about someone who's famous for being well-known." (IBD Editorials)

Monday, December 22, 2008

Climate Control Swindle

The “Junk Science” site from Australia has presented scientific proof (not “junk science,” as AlGore pushes) that global warming is a con. A swindle perpetrated by former Vice President Al Gore, who has used it to make himself a millionaire several times over and he’s still pushing it, and still gaining gullible adherents, including some of the highest-ranking politicians in the country (USA). The world “warmed slightly” in the latter part of the 20th century but has been COOLING since 2002. Climate is CYCLICAL and is constantly warming and cooling. Al has taken advantage of that to enrich himself and his accomplices. The whole idea that CARBON DIOXIDE is “poison” is stupid. Carbon dioxide is breathed in by plant life, which then breathes out oxygen, which we need to survive. If the amount of carbon dioxide DOUBLED, it would not make a lot of difference to the climate, and that has been proven. Still, the Australian government is planning to tax carbon dioxide. Anything to increase taxes, I guess. (The Australian)

You CAN Beat City Hall!

At least you can in Wilkes Barre, NJ. The citizens didn’t want the mayor to tear down a firehouse, so they petitioned to change the city charter to allow a petition drive to retain it. So the mayor su=ed them for almost $20,000 in lawyer’s fees. Sounds like hizzonor is trying to shut them up. Unfortunately for him, he lost, and had to pay THEM $67,000. I guess he thought he was king. He found out he wasn’t. (Common Sense)

Congress Can't Even Run the Country

So what makes them think they can run the auto industry? It was the silly and outrageous demands by the unions (That the government pushed) that made them so weak they were the first to fall to the Democrat-created financial crisis. So why are we allowing the Congress to “bail them out” with OUR money while putting in a “car czar” to force them to make cars nobody wants to buy? (I think they sold 165 electric cars last year). Another thing: electric cars need electricity, which needs COAL to produce. So what happens when Obama BANKRUPTS the coal industry, as he has PROMISED to do? (IBD Editorials)

Sunday, December 21, 2008

There's No Recession in Congress

"Hypocrisy: With workers losing jobs by the millions and taxpayers forced to rescue banks and car makers, how does Nancy Pelosi's Congress show it cares? By giving themselves a big pay raise." They certainly don’t have to worry about unemployment, or even having to live on the same amount of money the rest of us must live on. A “newly-minted” congressperson makes $167,000.00 a year. I’ve been a “skilled worker” all my life, and I thought I was “doing okay.” But compared to them, I’m a piker. They SAY they “care about the poor,” but there are no “poor,” compared to “poor” in other countries. Such as the one in which one of Obama’s brothers lives, where he must live on one dollar a day (Or was that a month. I’m never sure). The “poor” in other countries would KILL to be as “poor” as people in this country, who have their own homes, color TVs, cars, air conditioning, garbage disposals, dishwashers, etc. (IBD Editorials)


They’ve been “circling the wagons” to protect CRA (Community Reinvestment Act of 1976) for many years. They did it each time Bush tried to “rein it in” (12 times), with guys like Barney Frank repeating over and over that “Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are fine.” Now that we all know they were NOT, CRA was a swindle, and Freddie and Fannie were both designed to be a “safety valve” that could be “pulled” at any time to elect a Democrat president and a Democrat majority, while putting BILLIONS of dollars in Democrat pockets, they’re STILL “circling the wagons” and trying to hide the truth. They’ve been successful with most people who “don’t pay attention to politics” until just before an election, but to those of us who PAY attention all the time, their scam is obvious. Sooner or later the rest will catch on, and the Democrats will be “banished” again, as they were when Reagan and Bush were president, with a Republican majority. Unfortunately, the Republicans don’t know how to lead and let the Democrats “lead them by the nose.” Those who DON’T pay attention blamed them and elected Democrats again. Oh well, I guess it takes a Jimmy Carter or a Barack Obama to get a Ronald Reagan or a Sarah Palin elected. (One News Now)

Iraqi "Reporter" An Activist

He’s not a “reporter, and he got in there under false pretenses. Yes, he DOES work for a local television station, but only as a "cover" for his activism.If he had done that under Saddam, he’d have been executed within 24 hours. So what is it he doesn’t like about us? I think he’s a “hidden Saddam supporter” who thinks he can “overturn our rule” by throwing his shoes at Bush. Islamic terrorists think little of us because we ALLOW such demonstrations without applying meaningful punishment; but in reality it is THEY who are stupid. (Just common sense)

Saturday, December 20, 2008

Global "Warming?"

Not from where I sit. Not with some of the coldest temperatures on record all over the country. Not with it snowing in Las Vegas for the first time in many years; or snowing in Arizona or even Malibu, California. AlGore says ANY “extreme” in temperature, cold or hot, is because of global warming. Comeawn, Al; do you really expect intelligent people to believe that? I’ve NEVER believed it, but then I pay attention all the time, not just before an election, as most of the voters in America. You can maybe sell your swindle to those who DON’T pay attention, but not me. "The mean global temperature, at least measured by satellite, is the same as it was in the year 1980. In the last couple of years, sea level has stopped rising, hurricane and cyclone activity in the Northern Hemisphere is at a 24-year low and sea ice globally is also the same as it was in 1980." (David Deming, a geology professor at the University of Oklahoma.) (IBD Editorials)

That "Twenty Percent"

I’ve never been in debt, my whole life. I don’t do credit cards and the only credit I have ever done is to buy a car and once, my first IBM compatible computer; all of which I paid off promptly. Now I have bad credit, and it’s ALL due to the 20% of hospital and doctor bills Medicare won’t pay, leaving it to me at a time when I can’t work and don’t have any money. Who the hell designed this system, anyway? I’ve been on Social Security and Medicare since my first stroke, because after that, I couldn’t work more than one or two days a week, if that. After my quadruple bypass, it got worse. Then they came up with that equally badly-designed medicine program that is MANDATORY. I refused to sign up for it for two years, so they signed me up anyway, and tried to “fine me” for not signing up. Of course, when they have paid for $5,000 worth of medicine, their “donut hole” then leaves me on my own until I’ve spent another $5,000 for medicine (somehow). Who designs this crap, anyhow? The hospitals and doctors gaily charge me $300 for a band-aid and equally overcharge me for everything they do, then bug me and threaten me with lawsuits if I can’t pay what they’ve already overcharged me for. They think I have assets they can levy on. I don’t have ANYTHING but an old car and an equally old computer. They’re going to waste their money trying to sue me. I don’t think they planned on that. (Just common sense)

Do-Gooder Liberals Ban Rudolph

What the hell is “religious” about “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer? One silly parent in North Carolina was “offended” at the use of the words “Christmas” and “Santa.” Doesn’t she know the HOLIDAY is called “Christmas” and “Santa” originated in a Pagan ritual many years ago? This is an illustration of just how STUPID liberals are. They think just because the Constitution does not allow the GOVERNMENT to ESTABLISH a “government religion” that they can eliminate ANYTHING that MIGHT have “religious overtones” from the world? What stupid jerks these people are! What makes it REALLY stupid is that this mother wanted a JEWISH song included in the place of “Rudolph.” She didn’t want to eliminate any sign of RELIGION, only a religion that was not hers. You “Antisemitism” searchers out there don’t bother to accuse me. You could substitute any religion for “Jewish” and I’d say the same. (One News Now)

Thursday, December 18, 2008

Franken Lost 67 Votes

“So let’s ignore the hand recount and go with the election night count,” says the secretary of state in Minnesota. The hand recount found 133 FEWER votes than that reported by one liberal district, and AL Franken, whose latest joke is that he is qualified to be a Senator, lost 67 votes. So the Democrat Secretary of State (supported by George Soros) decided to go with the erroneous election night results. Talk about ignoring the law! But then, the Democrats are good at that. Which is why a majority of election officials are Democrats, so they can “tweak” election results any way they wish. (Ann Coulter)

"Conservative Sources?"

Some people ask me why all my sources (or most of them) are "conservative sources," and why I don't use more "mainstream media" sources? There's a good reason for that; most of what I write about you won't FIND in the misnamed "mainstream media." The only time I use liberal media sources is to show just how they're lying or distorting what they DO report. It's difficult to show them completely ignoring news that doesn't agree with their preconceived notions and socialistic (liberal) views (Such as the good things happening in Iraq). If I tried that, any links I provide would go to empty spaces. (Just common sense)

Journalistic Malpractice?

"A conservative media analyst says a Newsweek cover story suggesting that the Bible condones same-sex "marriage" is evidence the publication is a "fully owned subsidiary of the gay rights movement." Twisting the words of sources people respect is a standard modus operandi of the liberal press to prove their erroneous theses. " '[To] try to take the Bible and make it say something it flat-out does not say is journalistic malpractice,' he argues. 'You're talking about the religion editor at Newsweek magazine and a cover piece twisting scripture, using every gay talking point out there without any effective rebuttal.' " That’s how they do it, folks. Get used to it. If you’re now paying attention to politics, you’ll see it all the time. (One News Now)

Wednesday, December 17, 2008

Obama A "Conservative Democrat?"

What a LOAD! If you believe that you’re REALLY gullible. You probably also believe global warming is real, too. Obama is a SOCIALIST! In no way is that “conservative.” He just figures if he tells that lie often enough to all who will listen, he can make it true (As Hitler's PR man said). If you don’t believe that, listen to what he promises. Every word out of his mouth is SOCIALISM. “Share this.” “Give back that.” They SAY his cabinet picks prove it. Hillary, for instance. She has spent a lot of time and money trying to convince voters SHE is a “conservative Democrat,” but she is no more a conservative than Obama is. It must be hard to try and lie your way into office and lie your way through each day if you win. Obama could not be FURTHER from being conservative, and to say so is a LIE. (One News Now)

The (Legal) Pyramid Scheme

What is the biggest, richest, pyramid scheme going right now? No, it’s not the one Bernard Madoff ("made off") has been running for fifty years. That only involves fifty billion dollars. The one to which I refer is the federal government’s trillion-dollar pyramid scheme called Social Security. You know, the one in which you’re FORCED to participate at the point of a gun (If you don’t believe that, try and NOT participate and see how quickly the guns come out). That is, unless you work FOR the government, in which case they have a much better scheme going, requiring much less of a contribution from you and more from the taxpayer, paying a LOT more. In Colorado, the plan for government employee retirement is broke. So they’re demanding that the people who could be MILLIONAIRES if they could have invested the Social Security money themselves. The frustrating thing is that if an individual such as Madoff runs a pyramid scheme it’s a CRIME. But when the government does it, it’s not. Like all pyramid schemes, it will eventually collapse when it requires more people than there are in the world to pay off the last suckers. (Just common sense)

Can't We Trust ANYBODY?

Wall Street money manager for nearly 50 years who built an influential firm has confessed to a massive fraud scheme that will cost investors at least $50 billion, federal authorities say. Bernard L. Madoff, 70, facing a single count of securities fraud, declined to speak with reporters after a federal magistrate judge in U.S. District Court in Manhattan ordered him released Thursday night on $10 million bail." This is a man many people trusted with a LOT of money, but all this time he was fleecing them. How many other people in similar positions are doing the same? His name rhymes with "made off," which is proper, because he "made off" with a lot of other people's money. (IBD Editorials)

Tuesday, December 16, 2008

Multiple Computer Failures

I’ve spent most of last week dealing with three computer failures. My main (and oldest) computer died; then the backup computer died. Then I bought another one and IT died. They had to wipe my hard drive (which had nothing much on it) and put in a new operating system. Luckily, most of my important stuff was backed up on a memory stick so I didn't lose much (I hope) I spent most of the day today uploading software. I hope everything works right. I WAS able to post a couple of times over the weekend by using my son's computer.

The Richest Poor in the World

Liberals constantly talk about "the poor" in America. But the “poor” in other countries wish they were as “poor” as American poor. “Poor” Americans have more things than the “poor” in any other country. 46% own their own homes; 73% have a car or truck; 31% have TWO; 80% of their homes are air conditioned. Most have refrigerators, clothes washers and dryers, dishwashers and garbage disposals, microwaves, etc. 97% have a color TV and 55% have TWO; 63% have cable or satellite TV with large screen TV. They have many other things the world’s “poor” DREAM of having, yet the liberals still call them “poor.” I’m not poor, but I don’t have many of those things. It’s all a liberal (Democrat) scam. “Poor” is a state of mind. When you just temporarily are short of money, you’re not “poor,” you’re just broke. Obama campaigned on the “poor problem,” but it’s an imaginary problem. Yes, there IS “the homeless problem.” But most of them are homeless because they are either unemployable or just won’t work. They’d rather stand on a corner 14 hours a day in all kinds of weather and beg, rather than work for 7-11 at $8 or $9 an hour, which they think is “beneath them.” But begging is apparently not. (Heritage Foundation, the U. S. Census Bureau, and the Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration)

Scanning Your "Secrets"

"Big Brother" is here. The feds now have a scanner that can read your private documents, right through your pants and your wallet, from 50 feet away. Currently, they're only using them at five border points, but do you think that will end it? Do you think they won't eventually have agents standing on the street, scanning everybody who passes by to see if they're carrying anything that could be thought of as "anti-government?" They already have a scanner (in general use) capable of telling them exactly how much money you have in your pockets, using that tiny "strip" embedded in ALL the new bills, which broadcasts its existence. In this manner, they can know in advance if there's enough money in your pockets to warrant a "stop and frisk," stealing all the money you're carrying, claiming "it's probably drug money," while before you can even sue to get it back, you have to post a bond promising to pay THEIR legal costs (which you can count on being monumental), whether they win or lose. They don't have to prove it IS, you have to prove it ISN'T. Which is contrary to the constitutional provision of "innocent until proven guilty." (News Max)

Told Ya So!

A congresswoman, Democrat (naturally) Rep. Laura Richardson (California, of course), is asking (demanding) the feds to “bail her out” since she (says) she can’t afford to make the mortgage payments on THREE properties she “owns.” She’s “joining the line” to prove she’s one of the “most needy.” While making $169,000.00 a year. Do YOU make that much? Have you EVER? Apparently she doesn’t understand that the bailouts are for BIG businesses, who are “too big to fail” because they would create a “domino effect” on other businesses, thus increasing the economic woes in this country. Congress doesn’t care about her because she isn’t “big enough.” In any case, she apparently planned this when she ran for Congress. That’s when she stopped making payments. She also stopped paying her property taxes. But she IS paying the personal loans she took out to pay for her campaign. These are not the first mortgages for which she has failed to pay. She defaulted on two other properties FIVE TIMES before losing one of them. And THIS is the kind of person Californians have elected top represent them? (Town Hall Magazine)

Sunday, December 14, 2008

Government "Running" the Auto Business

What the hell makes these politicians, who have screwed up the entire financial system in this country with their Pollyannaish "Citizen's Reinvestment Act of 1977," think they know how to run the auto companies, just because they "hold the purse strings" that can "allow" the auto companies to remain in business? They don't control that money by dint of their expertise, but only because gullible Americans keep re-electing them to offices they aren't competent to hold. They're "sitting on top of" BILLIONS of taxpayer dollars they don't own, and could not ever honestly earn, making the auto company executives "jump through hoops" to get any of it, while they (The Democrats) are responsible for the very situation the auto makers find themselves in. I remember why I consciously decided to "ignore politics" for many years. It is so disgusting to watch these incompetent politicians mess everything up, then sit on their "high thrones" while the VICTIMS plead for mercy from the very people who put them in that position. I "pay attention" today because I discovered that even if I ignored politics, politics would not ignore me. Paying attention to politics is painful, but I have to do it. (Yahoo News/AP)

How Many Homes Does BUSH Own?

I don't understand politicians; Democrat or Republican. I don't understand what George Bush needs with an expensive home in Dallas. He OWNS a "ranch" in Crawford. Why not live there? The Secret Service already has expensive security measures there, and will have to spend a lot of money and manpower protecting this unnecessary home in Dallas. Yes, he is (was) the president. But does that give him a reason to spend money unnecessarily? Does he even care what we think? I have my problems with some of his policies as president, but I have largely defended him. But this is too much. They gave McCain hell because he couldn't remember how many homes he owns (they're owned by his wife, and only technically by him). (Yahoo News/AP)

Friday, December 12, 2008

The "Need" for Abortion?

What the hell is that? There is no "NEED" for abortion, the murder of defenseless babies still in the womb. Yes, sometimes it becomes necessary to abort a child to save the mother's life. Some people think rape is a good reason to abort the result. I don't. An abortion takes just as much a toll on a woman as does birth and adoption. Too many people see abortion as a good substitute for a rubber. They gaily have unprotected sex and cheerfully KILL the result. They SAY "pro-abortion laws" are made to "protect a woman's right to say what happens to her body." There is no such thing, or there would not be laws against prostitution. But prostitution does not stop a beating heart. Abortion does. An abortion is NOT about HER rights. It's about the rights of that unborn infant, which are not considered. Abortion is a selfish choice, and using abortion as contraception is criminal. (One News Now)

Protecting Islam and No One Else

"The United Nations General Assembly is considering passage of a resolution called 'Combating Defamation of Religion.' Angela Wu of The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty notes the resolution mentions only the protection of Islam -- and that is one of several concerns for her. 'Because it's protecting defamation against religion -- an idea -- rather than defamation against a person, it essentially controls what people can say about religion, which we think is ultimately quite dangerous to have the state moderate what people can and can't peacefully say about religious ideas,' she contends." This is becoming a trend; organizations and governments making provisions to "protect" Islam to the exclusion of all other religions. Now I have nothing against ANY religion. But I think ANY organization, even a completely ineffective one such as the United Nations, should make their "resolutions" apply to ALL religions if they take the trouble to make them. The UN has a bad tendency to "bend over and grab the ankles" for Islam these days, mostly because it is run by, and FOR dictatorships (some of them Islamic) all over the world. What they think they're gaining by making ANY "resolutions" like this I don't know. They have NO actual authority, anywhere that is not GIVEN them by their signatory countries. I certainly will not abide by ANY "resolution" they make. I am protected by the Constitution of the United States (so far). I will say what I think until someone puts me in prison for my words. That's what will be necessary to shut me up. (One News Now)

A Matter of Principle

"According to the AP, President Bush has granted pardons to 14 individuals and commuted the prison sentences of two others convicted of a variety of acts including drug offenses, tax evasion and embezzlement... Meanwhile former U.S. Border Agents Nacho Ramos and Jose Compean--two dedicated lawmen, continue to sit in solitary confinement for attempting to apprehend a fleeing drug smuggler." Yet, for some unknown reason, Bush will not pardon these men and allow them to go on with their lives. Is shooting a fleeing drug smuggler who has a gun pointed at them (they thought) so bad? Worse than say, drug dealing, tax evasion or embezzlement? Frankly, I think "the fix is in" and Ramos and Compean will not see the light of day for at least ten years because they "angered" someone high in the government and are being "dealt with." Bush's handling of this (or his refusal to handle it) has caused me to lose a LOT of confidence in his intelligence. (Just common sense)

They're So Worried!

Liberals are so worried about the life of Guantanamo detainees. But I'm not. I think they "bought" anything they get, by trying their best to KILL innocent people, primarily Americans, for not believing the same way they do. They have SAID so. Their word for such people is "Infidel" and it means ALL people who don't believe in Islam, especially those who have CONVERTED tom Islam to another religion. I don't worry about the lives of such people and whether or not they are "given" the same rights American citizens enjoy. I think they should have been KILLED on the spot when found "in the act" of killing "Infidels." This leaves no room to "worry" about their treatment as GITMO. Life is hard for these people (including the "Game Boys," and, as reported by the Miami Herald, movie nights, art classes, English language lessons)" and $75,000 pr4osthetic legs they can use when released to go home and kill more people)., and it SHOULD be. They "made their own bed," and should be made to sleep in it. (IBD editorials)

Wednesday, December 10, 2008

Self Esteem vs. Self Image

There is much too much activity regarding student's "self-esteem" vs. their "self-image." Those terms seem to be used interchangeably by educators, and they should not be. "Self-image" is the student's view of his/her talents and abilities, based on TRUTH. "Self-esteem," however, is that same view, but based on HIDING the truth from them so they will think well of themselves whether or not they are capable. One form of this is banning the use of red pens or pencils for use in grading. Another is having sports games without scoring. These kids NEED the "negative feedback" to know what areas in which they need improvement. They don't need the schools to HIDE the truth from them so as not to "injure their precious psyches." These measures are STUPID, and anyone who suggests their use should be FIRED. (Just common sense)

Still Trying to Blame Bush

It's transparently evident that their own laws and policies (enforced by Clinton and Janet Reno) that FORCED lenders to lend money they KNEW could never be repaid, coupled with a promise that Fannie or Freddie would "bail them out" by buying the paper, then "pulling the plug" on Fannie and Freddie, CAUSING a "financial meltdown" just before the election helped Obama win. This created a "bloodless coup" by the Democrats, who are now in the (almost filibuster-proof) majority, and have a Democrat president. Which means they can do just about anything they want, including moving us much more quickly toward complete socialism--and if you don't know what socialism is, you'd better find out, and quick. (IBD Editorials)

Penalizing CEOs

Obama and his accomplices want to punish the very people responsible for the profit that makes this world go around. As with most liberal (Democrat) policies, this policy is full of contradictions (such as "defending ourselves" against illegally armed criminals by DISARMING ourselves while the criminals, who don't obey laws, never have a problem getting guns). Obama wants to raise taxes on people who are rich by dint of making others rich or creating jobs for them, just because they have more money than most and the "leeches" on society want some of it without EARNING it. One CEO promises to work for $1 a year if his company gets a government bailout. But I'll guarantee you that he'll be getting some "bonuses" along with it. CEOs don't work without getting paid in some fashion, even if they find it necessary to make it look like it in a world where a radical socialist president insists on PUNISHING the very people who make this economy work. (Yahoo News/AP)

Sunday, December 7, 2008

Bipartisanship: A Liberal Swindle

Yes, it does exist, but it is not a desirable thing in politics. That's why we have a two-party system in the first place. A "one-party system" is a dictatorship where those in power do pretty much as they please, with nobody to oppose them. That's what the Democrats want; everybody forgetting their own principles and agreeing with THEM. They want to SILENCE all disagreement with their socialist principles and have nobody to criticize their actions, be they simply disagreeable to the opposition or patently illegal. They want NO OPPOSITION at all. The word "bipartisanship" is simply a "code word" for "agree with us, no matter what your principles may be." I will NEVER be "bipartisan" because liberals have principles that are the exact opposite to mine. So I will NEVER pretend to agree with them. If that keeps me from their favor, who cares? I don't need their favor. (Just common sense)

Clintons Like A Bad Cold

Always around, but never goes away. I'd have thought Obama would have been smart enough not to include her in his cabinet; but apparently not. He has named Hillary Clinton Secretary of State; a very powerful position, some say second only to the president. There, she will be privy to all the most secret of secrets and can use them to undermine his presidency at will until she's ready to use what she learned there in another run for president in 2012. And don't say she can't do that as "secstate." She will not be afraid to resign that job in her effort to take over Obama's job. And if Americans haven't started "paying attention" by then, she might even be elected; especially if the Republicans don't start fighting back. Don't expect Bill to stay out of it, either. (Yahoo News/AP)

The "Reregulation" Mantra

The liberals are using it to try and convince Americans that THEY did not CREATE the financial crisis with their 1976 law, passed by a liberal Congress and signed into law by a liberal president, to FORCE lenders to make loans that could not be repaid and promising them Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would "bail them out," then "pulling the plug" on Fannie and Freddie just before the election to ensure the election of radical socialist Barack Obama. Now they want to fool the American people once again by blaming it all on IMAGINARY "deregulation." I'm still waiting for them to tell me what SPECIFIC deregulation caused the problem while also telling me why THEY obstructed 12 efforts by George Bush to stop their scheme? (The Atlasphere/John Stossel)

Thursday, December 4, 2008

Tell Them to "Go to Hell"

Auto makers should go to Washington and tell the Democrats, who CAUSED all their problems, to "go to hell." They should tell them to just "get out of our way" with their incompetent roadblocks and just let them build their cars without demanding they make cars nobody wants and won't buy. The oil companies did that, and for that I applaud them. They told the Congress to just let them drill for oil in U. S. territory. Disallowing that is responsible for ALL the oil price problems, and it is the DEMOCRATS who did it. If they "get out of the way" and let the oil companies do what they do best, while the incompetent politicians stay out of it, things will get better. They should go ahead and file Chapter 11, which will allow them to abrogate (get rid of) those amazingly stupid, usurious union agreements that create $24 an hour janitors. Their contention that people would not buy cars from a company in bankruptcy is silly, and designed to fool politicians who aren't smart enough to know better. There was not a noticeable reduction of airline traffic for those airlines who were in Chapter 11, and some of them have even emerged from bankruptcy in much better shape. It pains me to see competent executives "tugging their forelocks" before incompetent politicians who have grasped the pursestrings. (Just common sense)

Muslims Slowly "Taking Over" U. S.

"An Arab-Christian woman and critic of Islam says it is unfortunate that Islamic intimidation is forcing American companies to give Muslims special privileges not afforded to other groups." The most recent victory for Muslims is the lawsuit they filed when they weren't allowed to take time off (at their employer's expense) for "fasting and prayer." Tell me how many adherents to OTHER religions get time off at their employer's expense for religious observances. Such things should be reserved for their own time, but NO! They sue and the judge "rolls over," as so many judges in our courts do these days. What they can't win in battle and by killing innocents, they win by challenging our ways in court. And with so many gullible "activist judges," they're often victorious. It'll take a long time, but they'll eventually "take us over" this way. I hope I don't live long enough to be forced to "pray to the East" five times a day after "Sharia Law" is declared to be a legal system in the U. S. (One News Now)

Get Rid of "Activist Judges?"

I'd say a resounding YES! Any judge or justice that rules for ANY reason but the CONSTITUTIONALITY of a question should be disciplined, and if he/she does it more than once, should be REMOVED. There is no rational reason to allow judges to "make law from the bench." That's not their job. Laws are made by elected representatives, and the Constitution lays out exactly how. Being a judge is not there. The Constitution says simply that judges and the Supreme Court are to rule on the CONSTITUTIONALITY of a measure ONLY. If they rule for or against for ANY OTHER REASON, they should be dealt with. (One News Now)

Wednesday, December 3, 2008

Why "Cooperate" With Obama?

Liberals say that now Obama has been elected, we ought to "cooperate" with him. David Limbaugh says, "Many say that now that Barack Obama has been elected, we should all work together for the common good. That sounds wonderful until you realize that we don't all agree on what is the common good. Notice I don't take the position that Republicans should refuse to cooperate with Mr. Obama because Democrats have been indescribably partisan, cruel and unfair to President Bush for the past eight years." But that is the truth. Obamamaniacs are SILLY to even suggest WE "COOPERATE with him, because we don't AGREE with what HE considers "the common good." It's a BASIC belief, and we will not submerge our PRINCIPLES to "cooperate" with his socialism. Especially, we should not "cooperate" with his CENSORSHIP" of conservative thought, which his minions call "pornography." Anybody who thinks opposing thought is pornography is STUPID. They should not be "cooperated" with, they should be SHUNNED. Limbaugh didn't say that. I did. (David Limbaugh)


That's the scam Obama and other liberals could use to shut Rush and Hannity and other nationally-syndicated radio shows down without resorting to the "fairness doctrine." It's already on the books, and all Obama has to do to get it enforced is gain three votes on the FCC board. They sneak such things into "regulation" all the time, "under the radar" so they can be used later after they've been there long enough not to be questioned. In this manner, they can take away the broadcasting licenses of ANY radio station that airs such a thing as Rush or Hannity's show because it is a "national feed and is not "local." This is the kind of thing we can expect under Obama. If he is successful here, look for him to try and take over content on the Internet and put people like me out of business. Maybe we need CABLE radio, which they can't "regulate" (yet). (News Max)

Tuesday, December 2, 2008

Thai Government Falls, Airport Reopens

Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat resigned after the Thai Supreme Court "dissolved" all the main political parties for voter fraud, So dissidents who had taken over the Thai airport allowed it to reopen. The PM ought to have been fired, simply for that name. We "feel his pain," since WE recently suffered a "bloodless coup" allowing the Democrat Party to (mostly) take over Congress while electing a Democrat president by CREATING a "financial crisis." This was accomplished by passing a law FORCING lenders to loan money to people who could not pay it back; promising Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would "buy the paper." Then they "pulled the plug" on Fannie and Freddie just before the election and blamed the crisis on "eight years of bad Bush policies." The fact that they could not name REAL "bad policies" didn't seem to dawn on anybody (They talked about Bush's 'not regulating' the lenders while blocking 12 different Bush efforts to do just that). But that "crunch" brought down the Bush administration (and any chance at a Republican government) while saddling us with a radical socialist president, coupled with a radical socialist Congress. Go figure. There; I said it again. Is anybody listening? (Yahoo News/AP)

"Experts" Are Not Expert

I'd write a book detailing all the ways "the experts" have been wrong in the past if that book had not already been written. I've given up even COUNTING the number of times "the experts" have been "stunned" by things that have happened. This book details many of their screwups. Such as "fawning" over Mao Tse Tung and Fidel Castro, telling us the USSR isn't really "bad" and that it is a good example of how communism can work--until it collapsed of its own weight while trying mightily to support other communist nations who weren't able to do it on their own. I'm beginning to think that being wrong is a REQUIREMENT for you to be considered "an expert." Go to this link and find a copy of this book. You will be enlightened about "the experts." (Café Hayek)

How Stupid is a Politician?

"According to the Sunshine Review [A newsletter of the Sam Adams Alliance -RT], this troublemaker (politician) “posted [to the Web] tens of thousands of circuit court records containing Social Security numbers and other personal data including bank account numbers, birth dates and check images." Apparently he isn't smart enough to know why he shouldn't do this, since it is a "smorgasbord" of information for criminals to use in ripping people off. And people wonder why I resist giving my personal information to ANYBODY, especially my Social Security number! . . . (Common Sense)

Monday, December 1, 2008

Bailing Out the Auto Unions

BAILING OUT THE AUTO UNIONS: The government is debating on how to "bail out" the auto-making business. When they do, it will not be the automakers they're bailing out. It will be the United Auto Workers Union, who have worked diligently to "price them out of the market with such things as FLOOR SWEEPERS being paid $24 per hour! I was a skilled worker for 45 years and I never made anything near that much. What makes the union think a floor sweeper is worth $24 an hour? Other jobs pay more, with top workers making up to $75 an hour! NOBODY is worth $75 an hour to turn a screw every five minutes or more. Obama talks of "bankrupting" the coal business while saying automakers are "just too big" to fail. Never mind how many energy forms rely on the coal industry to GENERATE their energy! Liberals have talked about the "stupid things" Bush has done (without being able to point out a SINGLE stupid THING" he has done that is not stupid anywhere but in their own feeble imaginations) while doing REAL "stupid things" even before being sworn in! (IBD Editorials)

Teaching Children About Gay Sex

They're giving KINDERGARTENERS "pledge cards" so they can pledge" to recognize homosexuality (something they don't know about, and which, at that age, they should NOT recognize) as being "normal and natural." Does anybody think these children will not try and find out what homosexuality is? And maybe practice it? That's what militant gays are hoping. Especially those who like their boys "little." Asking children this young to sign such "pledges" is criminal because they don't even know what homosexuality is, and should NOT know yet. To reiterate: I don't care WHAT they do in private. I don't care if they make contracts just like a marriage contract as long as they don't call it "marriage." But when they attempt to recruit children this young, I rebel. Any gays who would like to take me to task about this post, forget it. I'm not changing my mind about this. (One News Now)

The World We Live In

I haven't seen it put much better than this post to "Café Hayek" by Don Boudraux: "The People order, spur, nudge, encourage, politicians to go out and play with the market. The Politicians do. They fiddle, tweak, castrate, pick wings off, etc….and eventually things go terribly wrong. A catastrophe ensues. The People get very angry. They shout and tell the Politicians to fix the mess. "It's your job to fix this!". The Politicians in turn, like three-year olds charged to put grandmas set of crystal glasses back into the cupboard, go busily about their business, hauling over-sized delicate objects above their heads, struggling to hang on to several heavy and mis-shaped precious items. This is the world we live in." They let the politicians screw everything up, then insist the politicians "fix" what THEY'VE screwed up. Mostly because they don't know any better, never having paid attention until just before an election. (Café Hayek)