Scary October for voters

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

Helen Thomas: The Anti-Zionist Troll

Helen Thomas, what some have called the Grand Dame of the White House press corps, put her gnarled foot in her mouth. The other day at the Jewish Heritage Celebration, she claimed that the Jews should move out of Israel and back to Germany and Poland. She was forced to apologize by her masters at the Hearst Company. However, just after her "apology" she accosted White House press secretary Robert Gibbs. She claimed that the Israelis were monsters and that the administration should have been more forceful about condemning the raid that the Israeli defense force made on a ship trying to run its blockade of Gaza.

Perhaps some Lebanese immigrants should return to Lebanon. That little troll is the only monster I see.

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.

All bank transactions now in Swedish

I read that Lindsey Graham and Alan Greenspan are supporting a move to a "Swedish model" for our banks. This means nationalization of the struggling banks in this country.

My question is this: "Does this mean we get a free member of the Swedish bikini team with each new account opening?" Because that's basically all the Swedish ever gave us. Well that and the Nobel Prize and we all see how valuable that is.

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?

Gimme, gimme

Come and get it. The trough is open. First, it was the banks and insurance giant AIG. Then it was individual citizens. Now the Big 3 automakers are coming to Congress with their hands out and it appears that municipalities throughout the country will be next. Everybody wants a piece of the bailout pie and you and I are footing the bill.

The problem of course is that we are already spending at a deficit. Between two ongoing wars, the spendthrift nature of recent congresses and the dwindling revenue due to the financial crisis itself there's no way that the government can make up that gap. This is why the government uses credit from foreign nations to prop up its budget. But other nation's are feeling the credit pinch as well. And that brings us to an even more troubling situation.

The United States may lose its 'AAA' rating which will make it more difficult to get loans to pay all of the deficit spending that we are doing. And in the unlikely event that some nation calls in its loans, it will make the Great Depression look like a mild correction. I say that it is unlikely because the debt could not be paid off and trying to seize the assets of the U.S. would cause a catastrophic crisis around the world including the nation or nations that call in that debt. But we live in a world filled with suicide bombers and socialist dictators that would love nothing better than to destroy capitalist nations, especially America. The suicide bombers would have nothing to lose because the believe they answer to a “higher power” than Wall Street. The tin-pot dictators who believe they are the second-coming of Marx aren't bright enough to realize that socialism is no replacement for the free market. Case in point: Hugo Chavez. Since he nationalized most of the Venezuelan economy and put price controls on food, rationing of essentials and economic collapse has been the result. And let's not even get into Cuba.

So there are worries involved in any economic crisis, especially this one. But that's all the more reason to take a measured, judicious approach to the treatment of these crises. Republicans warned that the socialist bailout plan that Congress passed a few months ago would result in more problems than it would solve. Now that the nation knows that its so-called leaders can be cajoled to give handouts, everyone wants a piece of the action.

Props go to Drudge for the article on the 'AAA' threat.

SOURCE: CNBC article

An open letter to Democrats

Dear Democrats,

I just thought that you should know that in 2006 you did not win back control of congress. I know that it may seem that way at times, especially since you have a good chance at winning the trifecta this year, but you are wrong. It was the Republicans that lost.

You may ask yourself, “What's the difference?”. The difference is that you win by having better ideas than the other guys and by capturing the hearts and minds of the electorate. That is not what happened in 2006 and it is not what is happening this year.

The thing that you don't seem to comprehend is that the majority of Americans are still center-right in their political leanings. They know that you are controlled by far left-wing groups and individuals like Moveon.org, Daily Kos and George Soros, as well as ninety-nine percent of Hollywood. But they were angry at the Republicans for what they had failed to do, which was shrink the size of government and cut spending. They were also angry that not only did the Republicans not decrease the size of the imperial federal government, they doubled it's size and its spending.

Now if this was the election after the 9/11 attacks, you wouldn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of getting elected. This is because another flaw of the Democrat party is that you have a great disdain for the military. You believe that all conflict resolution should be handled by the UN. You call terrorists “freedom fighters” and give them cushy, tenured positions in your liberal colleges. And most of all most of the current Democrat party is truly anti-American. This might play well in San Fransisco or Hollywood, but not in the rest of the country.

Unfortunately, the American people are scared about their financial freedom this election. They see the damage caused by unscrupulous mortgage lenders—some of which were protected by Democrats in congress—that gave loans to people who really could not afford them and had bad credit. Unfortunately for the Republicans, they are seen as the party of the business sector and this is largely true. Also to the Republicans' detriment is the fact that the current president is a Republican and people usually blame the party of the sitting president. President bush has very low approval ratings but congress' approval ratings are much lower than his, and congress has been in your hands for the past two years. This helps to prove the case for saying that you didn't win, the Republicans lost. If the president, who is a Republican, has higher approval ratings than the Democrat controlled congress, then the only reason for your success in 2006 and your predicted success this year is that the country is really punishing the Republicans.

I say all of this to give a warning. You will not be able to get away with your extreme liberal agenda, at least not for very long. You may achieve total supremacy in both house of the legislature along with the White House and you may attempt some of your goals but in two years the entire House and a third of the Senate come up for reelection. If you overreach the American people will slap you down. In addition, the majority of the electorate are people of faith, so your secular/atheistic agenda won't fly either. Even if you win the big prize this year you may not be able to follow through on your machinations because your desire to be reelected is stronger than your agenda.

But we know you too well. You can't resist a power grab. After all for the past twelve years you have screamed that you're going to take America back, as if it were your own personal plaything. The American people own this country not one party. So watch your back. You can try redrawing electoral maps and stacking the states' AG offices and the judiciary with liberals, but Americans won't tolerate that for too long. Yours is the party of dependence on government, of welfare and redistribution of wealth, of abortion and disdain for religion and faith, and of socialism and the supremacy of the State. We don't want rationed health care or to be taxed by the UN and the rest of the world. We don't want to save the environment at the expense of our standard of living or our jobs. Sooner or later no matter what you do to try to stop the inevitable backlash, the American people will slap you back down.

Love,
The America Report

The True American People

For decades the world has claimed that Americans are selfish and boorish. In the past it was easy for those of us firmly seated on the Right to put that down as nothing more than envy and jealousy for the standard of living and freedom that we enjoy in this country. However, as is usually the case in times of hardship the true character of a people comes out, and it certainly has reared itself here in America.

For nearly twelve years the American people put their morals ahead of selfishness. This "moral center" dictated their political choices and ushered in the Republican revolution and helped to put George W. Bush in office for two terms. But by 2006, the American people had become disillusioned by the Republicans refusal or inability to reduce the size of government and spending in general. They had also been stung by scandals that had attacked Republican politicians. The final straw (and one that the MSM gave far too much weight to) was the war in Iraq. So in November of '06 Republicans lost control of both houses of congress and the Democrat takeover began.

I have been unclear as to the ACTUAL reasons behind the shift in loyalties, vacillating back and forth between believing it was due to honest outrage and that it was simply "anybody but the Republicans". In fact I do believe that the Dems did not WIN in '06, the Republicans LOST.

But now I have a firmer grasp on what led to the ouster of the Republicans. People in this country are selfish. This was not so clear two years ago but the success of a neophyte candidate like Barack Obama has shown me that selfishness is the true dominating factor in this whole mess. We have the choice in this country between a man who served his country and nearly died TWICE doing so, or a man who spent the better part of his life disdaining America and attending a church that spewed anti-American vitriol on a regular basis. If we were living in the better times of the late '90's or early '00's I do not think that Obama would be anywhere near as popular as he is now. But we don't.

So what is it about Obama, and the Dems in general, that is convincing the majority of Americans to sweep them into unprecedented power? The Dems are promising "to spread the wealth". Somewhere along the way, probably in government schools among other places, Americans have been taught that it is the job of the imperial federal government to spread the wealth from the people who earn it to the people who didn't.

And now the Dems are couching it in terms like "fairness" and "patriotism". When you hear any politician tell you that it is your patriotic duty to share your wealth at the point of a gun with people who didn't earn it in the interest of fairness, you've walked into the land of socialism. "From each according to his means, to each according to his needs". That was Karl Marx the father of modern socialism and communism. We spent the better part of the twentieth century fighting communism and socialism around the world. But now times are tough and because the liberal politicians in this country promise people that they are going to give them something for nothing they are willing to throw away their freedoms in the hopes of a quick buck and a pacifier to suck on at night.

Oh yeah that's fair.