Scary October for voters

Four more years of Obama? Now that’s SCARY! Happy Halloween 2012.

Vitriolic Hatred From The Left

The people on the Left have for decades claimed that it is we on the Right that are hate-filled bigots. Well here is some more proof of Liberal hypocrisy:

Ellen Barkin

Samuel L. Jackson

L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa

MSNBC

L.A. Times

Obama can’t take a legal “no” for an answer

It seems that President Obama can't take no for an answer, even when comes as a legal order from a federal judge. After Judge Martin Feldman issued an order that lifted the administration's insane moratorium on offshore drilling, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar said that he would issue a "reworded" order to ban drilling for a six month period of time.

Not only has the president wasted nearly two months golfing while oil spilled from a single oil rig, he makes the mistake of killing off more jobs by closing down all of the other deep water rigs. The judge compared this to grounding every airplane because one crashes.

Or maybe it wasn't a mistake. Considering how capricious this order was and the fact that the president is willing to violate a legal order from a federal judge just to get his way it seems like he may be deliberately allowing this situation to continue for his own political reasons. Especially since this is mostly the government's fault to begin with. Certainly the oil companies are no saints, but the government has been lax in its oversight. Now it suddenly wants to take the reins and do so in the most asinine and over reactive way possible? Something smells and it's not just the crude oil some forty miles south of where I am writing this.

The Dems have argued that this is all Bush's fault for lack of oversight. Again the liberal's favorite boogeyman rears his head. However, Obama has been in office over a year and a half, and the Dems have controlled both houses of congress since 2006, and they have failed to do any better than they claim the Republicans did.

So far, outside of the inane ban on drilling, what has been the administration's big answer to the problem? They renamed the Minerals Management Service, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement. These idiots are so inefficient they went from a three word name to a six word name. That's double the amount of paper that would be required to print letterheads and business cards with the moniker. Oh the poor trees.

How about this for the new name: Bureau of Nonsensical Energy Regulation, or BONER for short.

SOURCES:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-06-22/u-s-deepwater-oil-drilling-ban-lifted-today-by-new-orleans-federal-judge.html

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jun/22/judge-halts-obamas-oil-drilling-ban

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9GGL7R06&show_article=1

The white coats at the White House

The president had another photo-op yesterday. Supposedly a bunch of doctors showed up. I wonder how much it cost us to buy those new jackets.

Groveler-in-Chief

I don't need any more excuses to dislike the Obama administration but the president and his people seem to like coming up with excuses to mistrust them. Over the weekend the president darn-near snapped his spine while bowing to the Japanese emperor.

The article, cited below, tries to equivocate the gesture with other presidents trying to appear culturally sensitive. However, never has a sitting U.S. president ever bowed as low to another foreign leader as Obama did. The article also uses the standard foreign service protocols from the State Department for department officials as either a justification or an excuse for the back breaker that B.O. pulled. However, those protocols are for foreign service personnel, including ambassadors, not for the President of the United States of America.

What makes the bow even worse is that Dems are applauding it as a friendly gesture, respecting the culture of an ally nation. However, when George W. Bush held hands with the Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah--which according to the AP is a traditional sign of friendship in the Middle East--liberals were positively apoplectic that the president would do such a thing. In fact, those bastions of "gay rights" even went so far as to make gay jokes about the gesture. But of course the Left is nothing if not hypocritical. And just so we are clear Obama did another bow to the Saudi king earlier this year.

But maybe it's inevitable that POTUS would eventually have to bow to other heads-of-state. We owe so much money to other countries that we have effectively been neutered as international power. This of course is not solely the fault of the Dems. The Republicans have a lot to answer for as well. And as long as so many Americans see it as their right to take money away from the people who earned it to give to themselves, by force of government, then our debt will continue to increase. It will not be long before we'll all be bowing before foreign masters.

SOURCE: Associated Press article

The tea's a brewin'

The tea's a brewin' and the Dems are about to get scalded.

Last night Americans showed President Obama and the Dems in congress just how fed up they are with their tax and spend policies. New Jersey, chafing under the heavy property taxes of John Corzine's administration, decided that they had had enough. Out with the Goldman-Sachs, in with the fiscally conservative.

Conservatives scored big in Virginia as well. They swept the top spots in the races there. And while these two races were only a blip on the map compared to next year's midterms, hopefully Conservatives will be able to build on the momentum from here on out.

Now you have may have noticed that I said Conservatives and not Republicans. Even though the winners in these races had an "R" at the end of their name, the loss in New York's 23rd Congressional District points out that it' not about party affiliation, it's about Conservatism. If there had been a primary instead of a back room appointment then I truly believe that Conservtive candidate Doug Hoffman would have won without any problems. However, the Republican old guard appointed Dierdre Scozzafava to run as the Republican on the ticket and most of the 23rd's Conservatives rebelled. When she realized she could not win, she showed her true colors and dropped out at the last minute putting her support behind the Democrat candidate, Bill Owens.

Obama and the Dems should not look at the New York election as a win. They should see it as a wake up call that Conservatives have their number and that next year may be a major turning point.

Your new tax

Obama was elected partially on the promise that he would give the middle class a tax cut. What he didn't tell you was that the tax cut would be necessary just so you can make ends meet after the liberals in congress pass the "Cap and Trade" tax.

On the surface the C&T will not directly affect individuals. It is only a tax on businesses that produce greenhouse gases. However businesses cannot stay in business if their costs go up but profits don't. So naturally they will pass their new expenses on to you. So if you voted for Obama, thanks loads.

To paraphrase Dante, "Abandon all hope ye who live here".

Enraged over abortion doctor killing

I am enraged over the killing of the abortionist George Tiller. Let me be clear, I am not enraged about the murder. I am saddened that a life was taken. However, I am enraged that the Left in this country has used this incident and hypocritical rhetoric to blast everyone who calls themselves Christian or Conservative.

It doesn't surprise me that the Left would use this tragedy to stoke the flames of hatred against Christians and Conservatives and it doesn't surprise me that they would use hypocrisy to drill their message into the gullible American people. I mean their president did the same before, during and after his campaign. I mean he's the one that told everyone to just chill out over the abortion debate at Notre Dame. However, now his lackeys on the Left are decrying God-fearing Americans as terrorists and hate mongers. There was one abortionist on Anderson Cooper's 360 that said that all Prolife Christians rejoiced when Tiller was killed and that we got exactly what we wanted. Even when Cooper tried to help him modify his statement to say that maybe he didn't mean all Christians since many had come out against the killing, the monster sat there and said that that was a lie. That all Prolifers are for killing abortion providers.

The Left has declared war on free speech and Conservatives and Christians. Today will be remmebered as one of the first salvos in the war agianst the Right. It may only be rhetorical terror now, but how soon will it be before the Left begin using violence against us? And how long will we be able to survive as a nation under the onslaught of thost that hate us?

It is my opinion that America will not be safe until the Left in this country is marginalized to the point of nonexistence.

Beginning of State-controlled media

The state of Washington has begun the inevitable shift toward State-controlled media. Governor Christine Gregoire has approved a 40 percent tax cut for newspapers in her state.

This is the first subtle step in moving the already liberal mainstream media toward government control without actually seizing the presses themselves. For the past several months liberals throughout the country have been calling for a bailout of the newspaper industry. They have used a modified "too big to fail argument" saying that they are "too important to 'democracy' to fail".

What good does a tax cut do for an industry that's not making any income to tax? This is window dressing for currying favor with the libs in government. For instance, if a newspaper decides to run an expose on corruption in government or on a liberal darling like unions, all that the government has to do is threaten the newspaper's tax cut or bailout money. Story killed.

In the interest of full disclosure the newspaper industry itself is mostly against the bailouts. But one wonders as the industry gets closer to a fundamental shift in their business model and possible shutdown, will they knuckle under and take the money?

SOURCE: Seattle Times story

Specter finally shows his true colors

Well the other shoe has finally dropped: Arlen Specter has switched to the Democrat party. Republicans have known for years that Specter was a Republican-In-Name-Only (RINO). But today he made his party affiliation official.

Now Dems will say that this shows that the Republican party has lost its way or that it has become too extremist. But we conservatives know that this is a tired, old, pathetic Democrat in Republican clothing that has finally pulled the costume off. He was already in a battle for his Senate seat and he had no support from true Republicans. And since he was officially in the minority party he was no longer in charge of the Senate judiciary committee. We saw after 2006 how many Republicans "retired" because they no longer were the party in power.

Some Republicans may be scared that the Dems may now have the 60 vote majority that they had long sought. But they already had that since Specter usually voted with them. Now we can dispense with the whole idea of an incumbent Republican in Pennsylvania which usually holds a lot of weight in the primaries. Now Pennsylvanian voters can vote for a true Republican and we can start bringing this country back from the brink. Or better yet, vote Libertarian.

Ted Stevens was railroaded

I have never been a big fan of former Alaska Senator Ted Stevens. He always had a reputation as a porker and he had the attitude of a wolverine with a tooth ache. But what happened to him last year was in my opinion, nothing less than a Democrat coup through the Department of Justice.

Just a few months after his loss in the Alaskan senatorial election and subsequent "conviction", the Department of Justice and a federal judge has set aside the conviction. The judge has also called for criminal contempt charges to be filed against the prosecution team from the case.

It was largely due to his indictment for the case that Stevens lost his long-held senate seat. At the time he was the longest, continuously serving Republican in the senate. It was considered by some pundits as a bellweather moment for the shift in power from Republicans to Demcrats. Considering the fact that it was largely due to this loss that the Dems were put into a near super-majority control of the senate, that I believe that liberal member of the DOJ actively sought to withhold evidence during the case to insure that he would either be voted out or convicted.

Let's hope that justice is served both criminally and politically.

SOURCE: Politico article

DNC attacks a patriot

The Democrat National Committee is attacking the Republican governor of South Carolina. Mark Sanford has said for weeks that he would not accept federal stimulus money for his state. he wants to use a quarter of that money to pay down the state's debt. He says that the stimulus would actually make the financial situation in the state worse in the long term.

However, being financially responsible and paying off an already existing debt doesn't sit well with them. Some Republicans have learned from the mistakes of the party's past. The Dems apparently didn't.

SOURCE: CNN article

The Republicans are still the best option

Since the 2006 midterm election we have heard things from the Left like, "elections have consequences" and "don't preach about fiscal responsibility when Bush grew the debt greater than any president since FDR". And they're right on both counts.

The fact is that the Republicans screwed up royally. They were more concerned about maintaining a semblance of power so that they betrayed the fiscal responsibility that got them elected in the first place. And I still say to this day that the Democrats didn't win the 2006 and 2008 elections; the Republicans lost. In fact, you could say that they went out of their way to lose.

But this is a new year. The new congress and the president have been in control for a little over a month and things are worse now than they were before. The stock market continues to decline because investors are worried about the socialist moves that the new government has begun to put in place. And the only answer that the Democrats offer is more government spending, more regulation and higher taxes on the high achievers--the ones that provide most of the jobs in this country. The thing that the Republicans warned against has come to pass. So now what do we do?

The only thing to do is reelect the Republicans in 2010. They aren't perfect but hopefully they have been sufficiently chastised that they will not make the same mistakes again. We should redouble our efforts to show that the Democrat plans are not only counterproductive, but are in fact harmful. We should take the high road and not issue juvenile personal attacks. We should modernize, not hip hop-ize the party. We should use the same techniques (i.e. internet video, blogging, email campaigns, etc.) as the Dems, without stooping to the same type of false accusations and mindless repetition of talking points. We have the facts on our side. It's time that we use modern campaigning techniques and technologies to get our message out.

And once we are back in control we need to put the party's feet to the fire to make sure that they don't make the mistakes of the past or come up with new mistakes that they can make. This is too important.

We also need a special 10th amendment commission to explore ways to return power to the states. The size and power of the federal government are truly unconstitutional. We must challenge the big government types on this. They claim that they are supporting and defending the Constitution but they do the exact opposite of what they say.

Winning in 2010 is going to be harder because the Left has decided to politicize the census by putting it under the control of the White House. They are also bantering about the atrociously name "Fairness Doctrine". And some of the higher taxes on the job providers that I mentioned earlier won't go into effect until 2011. That means that even if we win in 2010, by the time we take control of the congress these oppressive taxes will start to ruin the economy even further.

Personally I would like to see a more libertarian form of government. But truthfully the Libertarian Party doesn't stand much chance of winning a national election campaign. There are still too many people in this county that want a nanny government to take care of them, than want liberty. The Republicans aren't the perfect choice but they are still the best option that we have. The more we can move the party toward constructivist, libertarian policies the better the county will be for it.

The sorry state of the Union

I didn't watch the State of the Union address last night. That means one down, three to go. The thing about the SOU is that you really know what the president is going to say beforehand especially in this day and age of 24-hour news and the internet. And quite frankly President Obama has nothing to say that I want to hear. The only reason anybody wants to see it is to bask in the warm glow of the Dem chosen one.

Today I was watching CNBC and I saw Rep. Spencer Bacchus from my state, Alabama. He said something that is going to become a battle cry for Conservatives for the next four years.

"The government never solved anything by throwing more money at it."

We have known this for years. Look at the government school system. Every time we get a liberal president and congress we see the budget for government education explode. And every time it's like throwing money down a bottomless hole. It makes liberals think good about themselves and it placates some voters. But when everything is said and done it's just a useless waste of time. It always will be as long as teacher's unions are allowed to set policy.

Another example is the nation's infrastructure. When tax money goes to states and local communities, ostensibly to improve roads, bridges and levees, politicians, conservative and liberal alike, spend that money on pet projects. There was the instance in New Orleans where the local government spent infrastructure money meant for the levees on a fountain. A few years later Hurricane Katrina slammed into NO and the rest is history.

Just a few years ago there was the bridge collapse that was caused by stress fatigue and age. The money that should have been spent repairing that preexisting bridge was instead spent on building new structures just so politicians could get their names placed on them. And again people died.

In other words you have to change what you are doing to improve, not just throw money at it.

The new "octomom" delivers (new cartoon)

Well most of you have heard of the welfare mom that recently had octuplets, bringing her brood to fourteen. Now that the imperial congress has passed the new stimulus bill and along with all of the other liberal spending that's going on, we now have a new "octomom": the federal government.

Uncle Obama Wants Your Free Will

This is something I did for one of my Cafe Press designs. It's based on the famous World War I recruiting poster by James Montgomery Flagg.

Roland Burris: Typical Democrat

This stuff just keeps getting better and better. I mean for eight years the Dems kept telling us that the Republicans were the source of all the country's woes and that the Republicans had created a "swamp" (Nancy Pelosi) in the Congress. Well it seems that the party of the jackass can't even get out of the starting gate without creating a swamp of their own.

Roland Burris, the man appointed by Rod "The Rug" Blagojevich to fill the Senate seat vacated by OB when he was elected to the presidentcy, has just been found to be exactly what the Republicans and even some Dems warned against: just another corrupt Chicago politician who pays to play.

I found a Washington Post article from "The Fix" (perfect name for a Dem shill) that illuminates some of the fears that the Dems are suffering from less than a month after they forced this yahoo on the citizens of Illinois.

The beauty of this is that the Dems can no longer blame the Republicans for their problems. They seem to have no trouble creating their own.

SOURCE: Washington Post "The Fix" article

Big man Rahm

Rahm Emanuel, former congressman from Chicago and current chief of staff for Barack Obama, has found himself in the middle of the “ Hot Rod” Blagojevich saga. There is speculation amongst the MSM that he is the Obama staffer that spoke with the governor's office regarding the appointment of a replacement for Obama's Senate seat.

In tapes that the FBI released earlier this week Blagojevich is heard angrily demanding that the Obama camp pay-to-play if they wanted Obama's friend to be appointed to the Senate. He claimed that the seat is a valuable thing and that if they wanted Valerie Jarrett to be the next senator from Illinois that they should either pay money to his campaign fund or give him a high-level appointment.

Emanuel was confronted at Chicago City Hall, where he was listening to his children perform with their school. Instead of answering the question like a good servant of the people should, he hid behind his children. As the Chicago Sun-Times put it regarding Emanuel's evasion:

Emanuel was uncharacteristically absent from Obama’s news conference this morning. He was spotted two hours later in the lobby of Chicago’s City Hall. He was there to listen to his two children performing in a concert with their school, Anshe Emet.

A Sun-Times reporter pressed him to comment about whether he was the emissary named in the criminal complaint.

“You’re wasting your time,” Emanuel said. “I’m not going to say a word to you. I’m going to do this with my children. Don't do that. I’m a father. I have two kids. I’m not going to do it.”

Asked, “Can’t you do both?” Emanuel replied, “I’m not as capable as you. I’m going to be a father. I’m allowed to be a father,” and he pushed the reporter’s digital recorder away.

You're a real big man there, Rahm.

Props go to Drudge for the heads up.

SOURCE: Chicago Sun-Times article

Economy vs. defense

Events over the last few days have shown that the worst of the financial crisis has already occurred: fifty-two percent of Americans elected Barack Obama president. It is a cliché that in tough economic times people vote for Democrats, but it is what it is. The opposite cliché is that when the issue is national security, the people usually vote for Republicans. In this year’s election, people only saw the economic trouble and not the threat from Islamic terrorists and rogue nations. After all, 9/11 was seven years ago. That kind of thing can’t happen again, right? Wrong.

As I am writing this, the Indian people are picking up the pieces from a major coordinated attack in the city of Mumbai. There are hostages and over one hundred people are dead and hundreds are injured. Of course, Islamic terrorists have claimed responsibility. Witnesses claim that some of the terrorists were demanding American and British tourists.

Closer to home intelligence officials claim that they have credible evidence that terrorists are targeting New York City subways for Thanksgiving. The believed goal is to close down Amtrak’s Northeast corridor. This would shut down holiday traffic, as well as Black Friday traffic between Boston and Washington, D.C.

As I said earlier the problem is that the Americans’ that voted for Obama were only concerned with the economy. They apparently forgot the harm that September 11 caused to our economy. And there are worse threats than airplanes slamming into buildings.

Many on the Left have argued that they are just as strong on national defense as Republicans. Yet Barney Frank (D-Mass.), the chairperson of the House Financial Services Committee wants to downsize the military. In addition, Vice President-elect Joe Biden told backers during the campaign that he believed that there would be a major terrorist attack within six months of Obama’s inauguration, “to test” the new president. He added that then-candidate Obama might do some things in response to such an attack that people might not understand. However, he pleaded with people to be patient with him. This statement has always raised the hackles on my neck. It’s not because I feel it confirms what Republicans said about Obama’s lack of experience. It’s because it sounds much more Orwellian than I care for.

We are about eight weeks from the inauguration of a man who has only three years of service on the national level. He did not sponsor any meaningful legislation during that time and mostly voted “present” during legislation. Somehow, he has become the “Chosen One” that will lead this country out of the wilderness that the Left have claimed for the last eight years that we have been wandering in. The Left claim that he has the practical understanding to appoint experienced people that can make up for any lack of experience in any given area. But in the end it will be Barack Obama that has to make the final decision. If the American people have any sense whatsoever they will remember that in 2012. Assuming that is, of course if some group hasn’t irradiated a major city or infected large numbers of people with some horrible plague. If this has happened then the only people that can be held ultimately responsible for such a tragedy will be Barack Obama and the people that voted for him.

What's in a name?

Fascist, communist and socialist. These are all familiar epithets that are used in political discourse. This has been especially true in this country over the past two decades, with the Right calling members of the Left communists or socialists and the Left calling Conservatives, fascist. And every now and then you'll hear the dreaded “n” word: Nazi. The fact of the matter is that these are all slightly different flavors of the same philosophies. The core of all of these political systems is the supremacy of the State.

During the early part of the 20th century governments and philosophers began to break away from the monarchies and empires of the past. They felt that royalty and oligarchs always put the people, the proletariat on the bottom of the totem pole. Socialists and others felt that the way to end this was to put the control of the government into the hands of the people. Something similar had been tried before with republican forms of government, first with the Greeks, and more recently with the United States of America and the French Republic.

However, the political philosophers saw what they felt was a flaw in the republican model. They knew that some would achieve more than others. Some would be richer, smarter, wiser. The socialists believed—and still believe—that all men are equal, not just in the basic rights of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”, but also in every way. They believed that no one should have more than another. That regardless of whether a person works hard they should be given room, board and food, that everyone should drive a similar model of car or live in a similar house. Socialists believed that it was the duty of the State to provide an equalizer for all citizens. This is antithetical to what it means to live in a free society.

However, what Liberals don't tell you is that Nazism started in the same way. Nazi stood for the “National Socialist Workers Party” in Germany. The like all fascists believed in government control of private business. Now this differs slightly from socialism as it was envisioned by Marx, Engels and other founders of socialism in that they believed that the government should not only control businesses but that they should also own all businesses. But with modern socialism this has been modified more in keeping with fascist principles of private ownership, with heavy government regulation. Perhaps the fall of communism throughout the world has led to this modification of core principles. One need look no further than China, which has a communist government with much of the businesses being owned by private individuals. Both fascism and socialism believe that utilities and transportation, as well other services, should be owned and operated by the government.

In the final analysis, the names and terms that people use for the various political groups in this country are more similar than politicians and pundits—particularly Liberals—would have you believe. Instead of being an accurate description of the opposing side, they are simply different names than the standard “Republican” and “Democrat”. The Left uses “fascist” and “Nazi” against those on the Right, even though those terms have very little difference in meaning from Left-oriented “socialist”. While the Right uses the “socialist” tag for the Left even though there are elements to the neo-conservative movement that are firmly entrenched in socialist beliefs.

So, what is in a name?