Sunday, February 28, 2010

Will the Real Louis Farrakhan Please SHUT UP!

The Fox News website has just posted a story in which Louis Farrakhan, racist America hater extraordinaire, claims that the "white right" is what is keeping Obama from passing his monsterous big government agenda, and apparently the proof is that healthcare has been brought to a screeching halt by, as he sees it, the obstructionist right wing Republicans, both in and out of Washington. Excuse me, but the Republicans are about as powerful right now as Bob Dole without his Viagra. Just which Republicans have been obstructionists in the health care debacle? Anyone? I didn't think so.

Louis Farrakhan needs to keep his big mouth shut. He's even worse than Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton when it comes to race baiting. We all know his history so I won't go into it here. What I will go into is the reason no one should ever listen to someone as blind as Farrakhan

Reason 1: He actually believes that Islam seeks to reform criminals in prison. If by reform he means turn into suicide bombing America hating fanatics, like the guy who shot the army recruiter down in Virginia, then I guess he's right on. Religion of Peace my ass.

Reason 2: He thinks he can tell the future because of some vision he had in the eighties. Look, I'm not going to discount that maybe he did have a vision in the eighties, but how do we know it wasn't enduced by mind altering drugs? Some of the things Farrakhan spouts, like the above, makes me wonder if he's ever OFF mind altering drugs or not. The jury's still out on that one, I think.

Reason 3: Apparently he is using President Obama's election as a rallying cry for him and all his Black Nationalist sheep. Just what does he expect to happen? Is everything going to randomly become a paradise for anti-Semetic dillholes now that Obama is president...? Well, maybe. Just look at what's happening over in Europe. Hack Wilson has an example.

Reason 4: Apparently Farrakhan isn't done hearing Obama yap and blather on about himself in his speeches: "You can't ease their plight, but you can use your bully pulpit. Speak for the poor. Speak for the weak." Does this moron not realize that Obama has used that bully pulpit more times in one year than his predecessor used in 8? Apparently not.

There are many more reasons not to listen to Farrakhan, but I have better things to do than list them.

Here's to hoping he fades into the background soon...

Saturday, February 27, 2010

No Coffee for me, Thanks.

So I turn on my blogroll yesterday and what do I see? Aside from all the leftist garbage that I USUALLY have to bitch and moan about these days, I see a whole slew of new crap being shoveled out of the White House and the Capital Building with renewed fervor. Just as I think the machine is about to go over the brink, something new pops up. These morons are like the multi-headed Hydra of Greek mythology. Get rid of one, two more pop up.

As we all know from watching various Sci-Fi and Fantasy programs, as well as reading novels of those genres, pretty much every hero ever conceived, from Hercules to Captain Kirk of the starship Enterprise, has an evil twin. Well, now I've come to be acquainted with the latest in a slew of evil twins that exist to oppose the good guys, except this one actually exists. This is not like the goatee-sporting Spock from the Star Trek episode "Mirror Mirror". It's a new movement, created supposedly as a response to the TEA parties. They call themselves...wait for it...the Coffee Party.

Shocked? I didn't think so. Not much for originality, these guys. Long story short, the Coffee Party is basically a bunch of left wing loons that think the TEA party is not representative of the majority of Americans. While I don't begrudge these people their right to speak out about what they feel is important, I do wish they would exercise a bit of intelligence before doing so. Have they NOT been reading the newspapers? Have they NOT been watching anything other than the State Run Lame-stream Media? I don't know, but after watching these videos I can't really say they have been.

Are you telling me that the majority of Americans WANT their hard earned money taken from them against their will and given to lazy dillweeds that would rather snarf down schnapps than work for a living? Are you telling me that most Americans WANT Big Brother intruding into every aspect of their lives and tell them what to eat, what to do, what to think and what to say? I certainly hope you're not saying that, because if you are, you need your head examined in my opinion.

To be fair, the woman in the first video was very well spoken in her beliefs, and I could tell that she wasn't just shilling for her so-called "movement". She really believes what she's saying and I can respect that much. I cannot, however, agree with her or the weirdos in the second video because they quite frankly make no sense.

They want a better process. Okay, I want a better process too. They think the system is broken. Well, so do I. They want healthcare reform. Well, so do I. Sounds like we have a lot in common, right? Well, not so much when you look below the surface.

As I mentioned above, I don't want the government taking control of my life. I don't want the government taking control of what I eat, what I drink, what I do in my spare time, or what kind of TVs I can watch. I want to live MY life on MY terms, with little to no interference from Big Sister Pelosi, Prince Harry Reid, or our Commissar in Chief. The Coffee Party, though, seems to think that the government is the greatest thing since sliced bread, and that the people are the ones getting in the way of the government. They touted such claims as wanting "progress" and "change". Sounds familiar, doesn't it? Well, it should.

I also noticed an emphasis on "collective will" that permeated the videos. We are not a hive mind, people. We are individuals, with individual thoughts, fears, needs, hopes, wants and dreams. Why is our individuality being derided as a fault when just ten to twenty years ago it was lauded as our greatest asset, as has been proven many times over by those very same individuals? It wasn't the government who helped out with Katrina, remember. It was the American people who raised that money while FEMA and the state government were still sitting on their hands.

Anyone who thinks the government has been doing a great job these days is living in Honalee with Puff the Magic Dragon. Government intervention CREATED the problems we have now. The Fair Housing Act was a direct catalyst for the housing bubble. Obama has spent us into bankruptcy and then goes on TV and with a straight face calls himself a fiscal conservative. Bush did his fair share of bad spending too, don't get me wrong, but he WAS fiscally conservative compared to what we're going through right now.

Personally, I don't think the Coffee Party will be going anywhere once the GOP retakes Congress in November. They are a sad attempt at imitating a true movement that is sweeping the nation. After all, if these nimrods are so angry, where were they a year ago when the Tax Day TEA Party's took place? Were they counterprotesting the 9/12 March on Washington? I didn't see any of them there.

If they REALLY believe that more government is the answer I can't begrudge them that. That's their choice and I don't wish them any harm or malice. I just believe them to be fundamentally wrong and out of touch, just as they most likely believe ME to be out of touch and factually wrong. However, they don't realize that what they want is the SAME THING THAT THE TEA PARTY WANTS. The only difference is who is the best entity to get it done: The individual American or the Collective.

I'm putting my money on the Individual American, myself. How bout you?

Friday, February 26, 2010

Small Miracle, Major Effect.

Today started off kind of rocky. I was a little late to work, though no later than usual thanks to a little "creative driving." Got to work five minutes late, but still in pretty good spirits. I started working on my assigned tasks and, despite a few bumps, managed to get them done, though I was getting pretty miffed at the fact that my machine wasn't working the way it was supposed to. I didn't really start to get angry until I started making rookie mistakes. Things I should have caught I missed, probably due to my bad mood, though I'm not entirely sure. I was pretty miffed, but still managed to get through the day with all my work completed with minimal hiccups.

Still, I was upset enough that by the time my day was over, I was grumpier than the Dwarf of the same name could ever be. I was leaving the workplace at five thirty, since I had to stay late to cover one of my fellow coworkers' lunch breaks. Not really a problem since I can always use the extra cash. The big event, thoulgh, was what I saw when I left the building, clear as day, and more perfect than I thought anything could ever look:

A rainbow.

That's right, a rainbow. A splash of color created by a mix of sunshine and rain. It was on display as if it were placed there just for me to find, and it immediately cheered me up, as I haven't seen a rainbow in years, much less one that visible and that perfect.

When I saw the image, I immediately remembered the Bible story of Noah and the ark, and what the Rainbow actually means to Christians and Catholics the world over. The rainbow is more than just a ribbon of pretty colors. It's a symbol. A reminder. Specifically, it's a reminder that God will never flood the Earth again, a promise made to Noah and his family once the waters of the Great Flood receded and allowed humanity to flourish once more.

I've been in a bit of a bad place lately. Emotionally speaking, that is. I'm struggling through paying down over 2000 dollars of debt that I racked up because I was a bit freer with the plastic than I should have been, my fiance is unemployed and having trouble finding a job despite all her work at it, and let's not even get into all the crap that's being shoveled out of the White House and Capital Building.

Still, the simple sight of this rainbow reminded me that there are other forces at work in this world. Forces that are way beyond human understanding. It was, I suppose, a reminder that no matter how bad things get, they can always get worse, and they WILL always get better. I wish it were easier for me to remember that from day to day, but apparently I'm having a bit of help in that regard from on high.

I have to confess that I've been questioning my faith this last year as well. Some questions I've been asking haven't been able to answer themselves satisfactorily to me. Why are people who believe as I do ridiculed, mocked, and berated for doing nothing more than standing for their principals? Why is it not okay to be Christian in the most Christian nation on the planet? Why is it okay to believe in a hoax like global warming, but daring to teach children about the Ten Commandments in school is seen as hateful and "backward"?

It just doesn't make any sense to me, the hate. But maybe I'm over complicating this. Maybe I'm so busy analyzing events that the simplest explanation is immediately thrown aside as "too obvious". Simply put, the hate I see, the vitriol I hear, and the events that occur in opposition to any such even slightly religious happening can be summed up in one word: Evil.

Darkness always rails against the light, as they say, and I can only make any sense out of what's happening if I look at it in that regard. The ACLU, for instance, tries to destroy any and all depictions of religious activity in any part of the public square. The attacks on Sarah Palin continue to escalate, with the latest one being a heartless attack on her son Trig, who has Down Syndrome.

I could go on and on about the idea of Darkness railing against the Light as it pertains to Sarah Palin all day long, as new attacks mount about her by the hour. I could go on for an equal amount of time about the ACLU. I won't do that because we all know how bad those things are already.

The point I'm trying to make is that I see so much evil in the world now that I am beginning to lose sight of the good that exists as well, though I am reminded of it from time to time, as I was today with the sight of the rainbow.

I always believed that evil existed, but now I realize that it was largely from an academic point of view that I believed in it. I knew people did evil things, but I always thought that they'd get theirs eventually, and never really noticed the impact those evil deeds and individuals had on other lives. I also knew not to do those evil things myself, and am happy to say that as far as true evil goes, I don't fit the bill. Forgive me if I sound like I'm tooting my own horn here.

Heh. And just now I'm confronted with yet another small miracle. Somehow, some way, I was inspired to go looking for Youtube vids appropriate for complimenting this post, and I find this little gem:

Good advice...I think I'll take it.

Continuing to Fight the Good Fight...

Thursday, February 25, 2010

Not Much at all, in Fact

Sometimes I wonder how much time Obama's other detractors have on their hands. I've seen some pretty bizarre videos on Youtube deriding Der Commissar and his agenda, but this one takes the bloody cake by far. With apologies to Toby Keith. Severe, long and drawn out apologies:

Better Dead Than Red

This story was something I found on Drudge Report. I am thrilled that there are students out there willing to go that far to teach kids about the evils of Communism in such creative and effective ways.

Capitalism now! Capitalism forever!

Remeniscent of 1776

Declaration of Tea Party Independence

I. As the course of human events winds its way through History, it has found some paths lead to Tyranny and some to Liberty. In seeking a path to Liberty, a great and powerful movement is now rising from every corner of our land. Created by the Will of the American People, it rejects unconstitutional domination by the Government that is supposed to be its servant. This movement has arisen, in large part, because our elected officials have failed us.

For much of its history the United States has been a land of prosperity and liberty, sound policies such as fiscal responsibility, constitutionally limited government and a belief in the free market have safeguarded this condition. In recent years however, Congress, the President, the Federal Reserve Board and the Courts have replaced those practices with profligate government spending and expansion of the government power beyond what is
constitutionally permissible.
This course, if not reversed, can only lead to economic collapse and tyranny.

Therefore, Individuals acting through the Tea Party Movement, seek to restore the policies, which are proven to safeguard liberty and prosperity for all. We will organize, demonstrate and vote until this restoration has been achieved. We will stay focused on this goal and remain INDEPENDENT from any persons or political parties who seek to distract us from this end.
Many seek to define this Movement, to use it, to lead it, to co-opt it, to channel it, to control it, to defeat it.


The Tea Party Movement is in agreement with our Founders that the government that governs least governs best. We believe that Capitalism – NOT GOVERNMENT - is essential to the creation of wealth and a vastly reduced government provides the foundation for a thriving Capitalist system.

The Tea Party Movement of America embraces and serves people of all races, creeds, religions, and political affiliations, and we declare ourselves to be independent of all those forces that seek to manipulate our actions or control our destiny.

II. We Declare ourselves INDEPENDENT of the Democrat Party and its power drunk junta in Washington DC, which is currently seeking to impose a Socialist agenda on our Republic.

We reject arrogant Left-wing politicians who furtively hide from public scrutiny, as they cut corrupt deals loaded with earmarks and pork in order to produce 2000 page pieces of legislation so purposely incomprehensible, they do not even bother to read them before foisting them upon us.

We reject the endless creation of myriad federal government agencies that drown free enterprise and local control in the swarms of education, energy, ecology, and commerce bureaucrats who style themselves “czars” sent to harass us. We reject the creation of federal govern¬ment regulations and agencies which demand the States pay for unfunded Federal mandates.

We reject a Democrat Party which refuses to give credence to our demands for just redress of grievances and which insults and seeks to demonize our legal right to peacefully protest the unjust laws it inflicts upon us.

We reject a profligate Government that is spending TRILLIONS of dollars on worthless socialist schemes designed to bankrupt us and put the American people in a position of dependence on the State, as peasants begging for their very sustenance from self-styled “educated classes” and so-called “experts”.

We reject a foreign policy which bows and scrapes and apologizes before the world for America.

We reject an Attorney General of the United States who offers succor and rights to vicious terrorist murderers and seeks to protect them with a mock civilian trial when such enemy combatants, captured on the field of battle, should be tried in secure military courts.

We reject the claims of an un-elected Federal Judiciary to violate the separation of powers by demanding its decisions be enforced by the other coequal branches of government, regardless of how unconstitutional the other branches of government may think those decisions are.

We reject all acts that ignore or diminish the 2nd and 10th Amendments to the US Constitution and we seek to have all powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution to be reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

III. We Declare ourselves INDEPENDENT of the Republican Party, which has in the past manipulated its Conservative Base to win election after election and which then betrays everything that Base fought for and believed.

We reject the idea that the electoral goals of the Republican Party are identical to the goals of the Tea Party Movement or that this Movement is an adjunct to the Republican Party.

We reject the Republican Party professionals who now seek to use the Tea Party Movement for their corrupt and narrow political purposes.

We acknowledge that standing on our principles does not mean throwing out our common sense; we will NOT abandon our principles in the name of a nonexistent bipartisanship or a misguided devotion to an illusion of “pragmatism”, which disguises a desire to betray us in its name.

We reject the scare tactics of the Republican Party, which seeks to herd us into voting for candidates who supposedly represent the “lesser of two evils” in the name of fealty to the principle of small government and then having to suffer such candidates as they betray that principle. We are not well served by parasites whose livelihoods depend on the very State whose power to reward or sanction we elected them to limit and proscribe.

We insist that the Tea Party Movement does NOT consider the election of Republicans in and of itself to be necessarily beneficial to our goals.

We demand the Republican Party understand that we reject its attempts to co-opt us.

WE WILL WORK AGAINST THEM when they oppose our views by trying to force Repub¬licans In Name Only (RINO) on us. When Republicans are in accord with their Conservative Base as well as the Independent voters who align with it, IT WINS; when they are NOT in accord with the Conservative Base and the Independent voters who align with it, IT LOSES.

We reject RINO money; we reject RINO “advice”; we reject RINO “professional experi-ence”; we reject RINO “progressivism”; we reject RINO support of Big Government; we reject RINO back room deal making; we reject RINO pork spending; we reject false RINO profes¬sions of Conservative views and we reject the RINO’s statist subversion of the principles of small government for which the Republican Party is supposed to stand.

Republican Party attempts to ignore the will of the Base, as it did in 1976, 1992, 1996, 2006 and 2008, resulted in disaster; when it embraces the will of the Base, as it did in 1980, 1984 and 1994, it wins historic victories.

We demand the Republican Party recognize that while the Tea Party Movement cannot guarantee their aid will help them win elections, it is very likely WE CAN MAKE THEM LOSE if they are disdainful of our goals.

IV. We Declare ourselves INDEPENDENT of the Media, which has proved itself to be anything BUT a fair and balanced enterprise and which focuses more on entertainment, fear mongering and shock value than investigation and unbiased fact.

We reject the fiction that an unbiased media still exists; there is friendly media and there is unfriendly ENE-media. The Tea Party Movement refuses to give false credence to the self-aggrandizing, self-deluding lie that ANY PART of the Fourth Estate is free of the self-serving agendas of those who own them.

V. We Declare ourselves INDEPENDENT of self-styled “leaders” who claim to speak for the Tea Party Movement. This movement is not a brand name to be used to sell product; nor is it a logo to be used to justify profiting off its name.

We reject those who seek to personally capitalize on our popularity and momentum by trying to asso¬ciate with our cause.

We reject the idea that the Tea Party Movement is “led” by anyone other than the millions of average citizens who make it up. The Tea Party Movement understands that as a Free People, we need to SAVE OURSELVES, BY OURSELVES, FOR OURSELVES.

The Tea Party Movement is not “led.” The Tea Party Movement LEADS.

VI. We are united in our common belief in Fiscal Responsibility, Constitutionally Limited Government and Free Markets. This threefold purpose is the source of our unity in the Tea Party Movement.

We reject the idea that the Tea Party Movement must all be unanimous in our specific policy views in order to win. We recognize that the current situation requires we come together in confederation to achieve the MANY MUTUAL GOALS we all seek to accomplish.

We recognize that the current situation requires that we concentrate on the many things we have in common rather than those few things about which we may disagree.

We are the Tea Party Movement of America and we believe in American Exceptionalism.

We believe that American Exceptionalism is found in its devotion to the cause of Liberty.

We believe that Liberty is based in rational self-interest, in freedom of thought, in free markets, free association, free speech, a free press and the ability granted us under the Constitu¬tion TO DIRECT OUR OWN AFFAIRS FREE OF THE DICTATES OF AN EVER EXPAND¬ING FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WHICH IS AS VORACIOUS IN ITS DESIRE FOR POW¬ER AS IT IS INCOMPETENT AND DANGEROUS IN ITS EXERCISE.

We believe that either fate or history has chosen this Country to be a beacon of freedom and prosperity to the whole world because of America’s belief in and vigorous defense of political and economic Liberty. The United States has been the instrument of Liberty against the many tyrannies that have threatened the people of this world.

The Tea Party Movement rejects the idea that America has to apologize to a far guiltier world that has been largely unappreciative of the sacrifices made on their behalf by the brave and noble members of our Armed Forces, whose sacrifice and patriotic service in our defense makes all else possible.

The Tea Party Movement rejects the imposition of “transformational change” performed on our Nation by smug elites who call themselves the “educated class”.

The Tea Party Movement understands that our Nation is NOT the same thing as our government and that America is much more than simply a militarily and economically powerful State.

The Tea Party Movement sees America as something exceptional, as something unique, as something that came into existence to fulfill the hope of all previous generations that longed for freedom.

It came into existence because it is more than simply a country with land and population and riches and armaments. America came into existence because LIBERTY is an eternal con¬cept in the mind of both God AND Man.

The United States of America came into existence because Mankind needs freedom the same way it needs food and air and property and security and love.

And what is freedom other than the RIGHT to be free of the tyranny of Government and the elitist, self-styled aristocrats who seek to run it at our expense and to our detriment?

The Tea Party Movement will fight this danger to our Liberty as long as its members have breath in their bodies.

When America didn’t exist men and women were compelled to invent it, BECAUSE MANKIND CANNOT EXIST WITHOUT FREEDOM AND STILL BE FULLY HUMAN.

To this goal we mutually pledge to each other, as our Founding Fathers did over two centuries ago, our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

February 24, 2010

Pretty much sums it up, don't you think?

Let the Dog and Pony Show Commence

I sit here wondering just why I'm watching this joke of a healthcare summit, even as I listen to Der Commissar and his goons go on and on about how they want to reduce healthcare costs and reduce the deficit blah blah blah...

State run healthcare DOES NOT WORK! Look at Massachussetts. They have it. They don't like it. They elected Scott Brown because he promised to be the 41st vote against healthcare. Massachussetts premiums have gone up steadily every year since Romneycare was invented and put into practice.

This is what they want to do to the nation? Group doctor visits? higher premiums?

I came in listening to the Commissar-in-Chief yak about how great his bill is, but whenever someone else was speaking, he looked like he wanted to be anywhere else than where he was. He's speaking currently, yakking about how the Republicans' ideas have been included in the bill, even though they aren't in the bill. I'm sure if they were, someone somewhere would have reported on it in the media, be it in the LSM or somewhere on the internet.

Senator Alexander seems to be a voice of reason in this joke of a summit, and even just now called out the president for not letting other members of congress present speak.

Tom Coburn just started speaking, and he's really taking it to them. Specifically even mentioning that most of the healthcare cost roadblocks were because of government regulation!

Too bad I'm not going to be able to stick around longer to see how much more the Republicans rip the democrats to shreds. Gotta go to work and pay for Nancy's Botox injections.

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Mister Obama, TEAR UP THIS BILL!

I've been thumbing through a book my fiance gave me recently, called "The Wit and Wisdom of Ronald Reagan." The book contains quotes, witty remarks, zingers, and speeches from the Great Communicator, as well as opinions of what those who knew him and worked with him thought about our 40th president.

That being said, I believe Ronald Reagan would have had many choice words for our 44th president, who has now joined the healthcare debate in full by writing his own Frankenstein's monster of a bill. Well, I, though certainly no Ronald Reagan, I believe a variation on his famous "Tear Down This Wall" remark would be appropriate. Here goes:

President Barack Hussein Obama, if you seek bipartisanship, if you seek prosperity for the people of the United States of America, listen to those people. Mister Obama, TEAR UP THIS BILL!

For the Great Communicator's own words on socialized medicine, watch the video below:

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

With a Side of Economic Prosperity

This pretty much says it all:

Put the Lime in the Coconut...

MSNBC Regular Donny Deutsch Slams Marco Rubio With Racially Charged Attack: He's a 'Coconut'

And the liberal slur wagon continutes to roll...

Utah Still Seems to Remember That Life is Precious

The Salt Lake Tribune has an interesting story today, and I never would have found it if I hadn't strayed into enemy territory and read a liberal blog. Don't worry, my head didn't explode because I was protected by my ability to rationalize a situation and realize that liberals generally have no idea what reality is.

Sarcasm aside, the story, which can be read at the above link, is about the Utah state legislature passing a bill that would make it a criminal act to intentionally cause a miscarriage or arrange illegal abortions. Sounds all right to me. But as usual, the liberals think they know better and must tell us dumb hicks that we're too stupid to walk in from the rain.

One such blog commented that it was "monstrous, barbaric" and of course "right wing."

How is it right wing or monstrous to want to discourage people from intentionally killing unborn children? Whatever happened to that age-old motherhood instinct where women would PROTECT their young rather than annihilate them. Oh, before I forget, the blogger also mentioned that if they were going to outlaw this, they should also outlaw menstruation. What?

Obamacare 2.0: Still the Same, but With a Nifty Number at the End

The White House Blog, via Memeorandum, has posted some drivel about how the new healthcare plan proposed by the president whill have everything everyone wants, but most importantly we heard that magical word that means nothing: Bipartisan.

This whole business is a sham. We know it, they know it. They don't care, we do. Whatever monstrosity of a bill this president has dreamed up, it takes the worst of both worlds (tax hikes, redistribution of income, rationing of care, nationalization of the health insurance industry) and throws them all out on the table with a pretty pink bow wrapped around it to make it look all nice and spiffy.

Typically, the bill was too vague to be scored yet by the CBO, but the president insists that it will be deficit neutral. Right, and I'm Ronald Reagan.

We have to kill this bill before it becomes another Frankenstein's monster. Grab the torches and pitchforks, fellow peasants, it's time to storm the castle again!

Monday, February 22, 2010

Bipartisan Shmipartisan

It's official. Via Memeorandum the dems are now on record as saying that they will in fact go it alone if the Republicans dare try to filibuster the monstrosity that they and the American people have soundly rejected by a 2/3 margin.

Those silly silly Liberals dare to think that this will fly in this political climate? But then, maybe they don't care. Maybe they're willing to kamikaze themselves to get this passed because it means that once Healthcare is in the hands of the government, there will be nothing stopping the supposed fundamental transformation of America into the U.S.S.A once and for all. We've fought them to a stand-still and now they're desperate. is

This can be used to our advantage, however. As Napoleon once said, "never interrupt your enemy while he is making a mistake." The Dems are making a HUGE mistake in underestimating the people of this country. November will be a bloodbath for them and any RINOs that dare show their false colors during the midterms. Massachusetts, it seems, wasn't as big a wake up call as we would have liked it to be, though I doubt a rock to the face would wake these morons up now. Still, might be worth a shot...

Anyway, this just proves what we've all been grousing about for the last year. The dems don't want bipartisanship. they want the repubs to sit down and shut up, same as they want with the American people. Well, that, much like an eagle with only one wing, isn't gonna fly.

Sunday, February 21, 2010

We're not Just Going to Shoot the Bastards. We're Going to rip out Their Living guts, and use Them to Grease the Treads of our Tanks.

The above is a quote from actor George C. Scott, portraying one of my personal favorite military generals, General George S. Patton, who helped lead the Allies to victory in World War II.

I just recently (today, in fact) had the pleasure of watching the movie Patton with my fiance and mother-in-law-to-be. I've seen only a scant few WWII movies to date, but I can already tell you that Patton is one of my favorites. A very accurate portrayal of the firebrand general at his best and his worst, the movie highlights both his successes and his failures.

Of all, though, the most fun I got out of the movie was watching his introductory speech to the 3rd army that is given just as the movie starts. If only our Commissar-in-Chief had as much backbone as Patton had, we'd have already won in Afghanistan AND Iraq, instead of just Iraq.

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

States are Starting to Remember what the Tenth Ammendment Actually Means!

I am currently watching the Glenn Beck Program on TiVo, and I have just been served up a healthy dose of real hope. Apparently a majority of the states (2/3rds according to Beck himself) are reading some wierd document called the United States Constitution. Huh. And here I thought we weren't supposed to read that thing...oh, well. Might as well look at it myself...oh, looky here...the Tenth Ammendment...let's see...the rights not specifically granted to the federal government in the U.S. Constitution shall be retained by the states or the people...

Wait...did I read that right? The rights not specifically granted to the federal government...yeah...states or the people...okay, yep. Read it right. States and people have rights.

Well, it seems to me that several dozen states have realized that the health care bill is...wait for it...UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!! Holy Church and State, Batman! What a revelation!

Now, as an added sort of protection against this horrific mess of a bill, two thirds of the states are passing CONSTITUTIONAL AMMENDMENTS to prevent that damn thing from becoming law in each state that passes one!

Amazing. 2/3. Can all of these people be that racist? How dare they!

Tuesday, February 16, 2010

A Man's Home is his Castle gave me a little gem that points once again to PETA and their moronic stance on animals v. humans.

Apparently, according to the article, Congressman Steve King of Iowa shot an alledgedly rabid raccoon that had attempted to "claws its way into [his] house."

PETA responded by saying that he shouldn't have shot an animal that was "just trying to get into a large, warm house."

This is yet more idiocy from the left. What right do they have to be telling people whether they can't shoot a wild animal that tries to burrow its way into a private residence?

None, that's what. Who the hell do these idiots think they are? Oh, right, they're the tolerant, big-tent, loving Lefties. These are the same people who bitched and moaned about President Obama swatting a HOUSEFLY!!! (One of the few things I actually could get behind.)

If only PETA were as concerned with HUMAN rights as they are with non-existent animal rights, I might actually be able to support something they do. I don't think that's the case, though, so I won't hold my breath.

Sunday, February 7, 2010

Political Correctness and You

This is a shocking story just posted by my fellow blogger at TOTUS about certain counter jihadists being removed from facebook. Go to link at bottom of this excerpt to get full story.

Recently Facebook removed the accounts of the following counter jihadists in a move that reflects the mindset of dhimmitude and allowing one side to continue(Islam and Islamofacists) while censoring the counter jihadists. Here are the groups, individuals who had their accounts cancelled: Anders Gravers, Stephen Gash, and Harald Andersen of SIOE and SIAD (Denmark), Organizers of Stop Islamization of Bulgaria (Pavel Chernov), and Stop Islamization of America (Kendra) also had their personal Facebook accounts removed. I will post any and every article that these individuals publish, on Facebook. This is nothing more than caving in to political correctness, possibile 'subtle' pressure from the trolls within the Obama administration, fear of allowing anything being critical of Islam, Muslims or shariah law. Please feel free to repost this or go to SIOA site and support them. I have posted the entire article here by D.L. Adams. We are at war with Islam, their march to force their brand of perverse ideology and shariah law upon the upon the free world.

As I post alot of links to articles, editorials about Islam and islamofacism on Facebook, it would not surprise me to have my account get the boot, and that of many others as well. This is a long post but I hope you will read all of it and support SIOA and those of us standing up to Islam, shariah law and jihadist.
A Facebook Controversary

D.L. Adams

In the internet world of social networking Facebook is the premier platform. Its reach is global and its user community numbers in the hundreds of millions. According to statistics about Facebook posted on Facebook’s own site there are 350 million users, 50% of whom log in on “any given day”. This means that at any given time there are likely at least 150 million people logged in on the site. Facebook has deeply affected the way that individuals and groups communicate and interact with one another.

Facebook’s rules are extensive and clearly listed on their “Statement of Rights” page. However there are terms used that are open to interpretation. Most specifically the nature of content posted on personal and group pages is open to scrutiny and judgment by Facebook staff; action taken by Facebook against its users sometimes appears arbitrary and harsh. Accounts are disabled or removed generally with no warning or explanation. Returning to the site and recovering one’s content can be difficult or impossible. For people with large “friends lists” or who use Facebook for professional purposes loss of their Facebook account can have unpleasant consequences. For many users especially those who access their accounts throughout the day via mobile device (blackberry, etc.) Facebook is an almost ubiquitous communications tool.

Many Facebook users express political views and opinions – often challenging and unpopular views. There are millions of pages dedicated to discussion of issues across the political and cultural spectrum. SIOA, SIOE and other like-minded groups as well as those holding opposing views use Facebook extensively to get their messages out. With a potential audience in the hundreds of millions the significance of Facebook to those who wish to spread knowledge and engage in direct discussion with interested people, often in real-time, the loss of a Facebook presence can be significant.

Several days ago, without warning or explanation, and in an apparently simultaneous action Facebook removed the personal accounts of Anders Gravers, Stephen Gash, and Harald Andersen of SIOE and SIAD (Denmark). Organizers of Stop Islamization of Bulgaria (Pavel Chernov), and Stop Islamization of America (Kendra) also had their personal Facebook accounts removed. As no explanation for these actions has been provided, one can only speculate as to the cause and purpose of these account removals.

While it is understood that Facebook is privately held and is not required to provide access the removal of SIOA/SIOE organizers’ personal accounts appears to demonstrate a particular opinion on the part of Facebook management, a certain bias against the message if the not the individuals themselves. Notably, the organizer of the Jewish Internet Defense Force (JIDF) has long been banned from Facebook.

Facebook’s user guidelines regarding content can be interpreted in any number of ways. Simultaneous account removal of multiple users having a common viewpoint appears to demonstrate a negative bias relating to the philosophical and political positions espoused by the individuals mentioned above. Because almost every user of Facebook could be said to be in violation of one or more guidelines at any given time the removal of accounts of users with the same political positions must therefore be specific and targeted rather than arbitrary.

There are many controversial individuals and groups on Facebook including Islamists, supporters of terrorism, Nazis, and even terrorists themselves, etc. People having these views and worse remain on Facebook but those having anti-jihad perspectives apparently are now targets for account removal. How can this be explained?

What he Believes: Why we Should Watch Iran Like a Hawk.

I've made some very interesting discoveries of late about that little thorn in our side named Iran, and it's "elected" leader, President I'm-a-Nutjob". This man is far more than just a nutjob, however. He is a religious fanatic (a TRUE religious fanatic, not the weirdos that the left always touts as being a danger in this country). Mahmoud Amidenijad is what we call a "twelver". There are very few of these people around, thank God, because they are, to put it mildly, batshit insane. These people are so batshit crazy, in fact, that the Ayatollah Khomeni himself (yes, THAT Ayatollah) banned the practices of the so-called "twelvers" within the borders of his country. Nevertheless, they're obviously still around.

What's a twelver, you ask? Well, put simply, twelvers are people who believe in the return of their version of the savior, the Mahdi, who is the Twelfth Imam.

According to Muslim beliefs, the Mahdi will, at a time of great discord in the world, appear to deliver us all from the evils of the world into paradise, much in the same way Jesus will return at the onset of Armageddon to rescue the faithful and punish the wicked.

With the Muslim version, though, there are a few caveats we need to worry about, as I'll explain now:

First, in order for the Mahdi to return, the world must be "awash in blood" and conflict must span the entire globe (sounds like WWIII to me). This is, I believe, a message saying that mankind must be experiencing its absolute darkest hour before the Mahdi returns. Makes sense, until you get to the bottom of how these whackjobs in Iran actually interpret those words.

Firstly, let me point to Amidenijads words at the UN summits that he and his fellow third-world thugs attend every year to denounce capitalism and the United States. Every year, it seems, this fool gets up to the podium and, after a seemingly harmless blessing, says this: "Hasten the return of the Mahdi" so that the world will know peace and justice. I didn't quote the second part because my memory is a bit fuzzy there, but the first part is right.

Hasten the return of the Mahdi. What exactly does he mean by that, you ask? Well, in another UN summit, he actually said "HELP ME" hasten the return of the Mahdi. Now, however in the in world would he "hasten the return of the Mahdi"? Well, let's go back to what the twelvers believe: The world must be AWASH IN BLOOD in order for the Mahdi to return. I'm sure it's only a coincidence that this wacko is chomping at the bit to develop nuclear weapons and "wipe Israel off the map." Sure, yeah. And if you believe that I've got some lovely oceanfront property in Arizona to sell you.

Secondly, what is it that the Iranians love to call this great country when nobody's looking, and sometimes when people ARE looking? Well, they call Israel the "Little Satan", and we, dear drones, are the Great Satan. Or, perhaps a better term would be, to the Muslims, we are the ANTICHRIST!!! That is why I laugh every time I hear Obama say he wants to talk with Iran. How do you talk with people who think you're the essence of all that is evil in the world? How? Still waiting...yeah, that's what I thought.

Thirdly, how many of you know which side Iran was on in World War II? I admittedly didn't know this until after watching Thursday's Beck episode on DVR on Friday, and so was pretty shocked to hear it. Iran was bound and and fist to Germany in World War II. Surprised that a religious nation would back an atheistic one? Just wait. Not only were they allies, but Iran actually changed its name from Persia AT THE SUGGESTION of the ambassador of Germany to Iran. Anyone know what Iran translates to from Farsi into English?


Chew on that for a while and let it sink in.

Monday, February 1, 2010

Sarah Palin Spends $63000 of her Own Money. LSM in State of Hysteria.

Here's something for all you fellow Palin supporters out there: (

That article bloviates on and on about how Sarah Palin supposedly used $63000 of her own money generated by SarahPAC to pad the best-seller list and stay on top for a bit longer. Blatant editorializing aside, this article is full of hogwash for one reason and one reason only: Going Rogue has sold over 2.5 MILLION copies. Most of which were bought on order before the book was even in stores! And these idiots think sixty thousand bucks will even register on the free market radar after that? Bull! Bull I say!

First off, it's not taxpayer money. it's money that was freely given to her by supporters. Second, the article mentions that Palin stated that the funds were spent for "fundraising purposes". If Sarah wants to buy copies of her own book to donate to fund raising events, who the hell are we to tell her she can't? She's an American citizen just as you or I am, and as this action violates no law, it warrants no attention by any free-thinking American.

That being said, some of you may use the above statement as a means to suggest that I am drawing attention to something that shouldn't be drawing any attention at all, but no. I am drawing attention to the inflamatory article. As a supporter of Sarah Palin, I feel that part of my job as a blogger is to voice my opinions about her as well as my opinions about other issues, more and more of which these days have to do with violations of the U.S. Constitution, though there are so many of those these days that it's hard to keep up.

But back to the subject at hand:

Long story short, leave the poor girl alone. She's been getting flak from every corner simply because she's a conservative woman. it's time we put these idiotic playground tactics aside and embraced each other as Americans. Nothing more, nothing less. Sarah is one of those Americans, whether the libtards and lefties like it or not.

Suck it up, libbies! She's here to stay!

Continuing to fight the good fight.

Congress Shall Make no Law...Except McCain-Feingold, if Chuck Schumer has his Way

Well, fellow tin-foil-hat-wearing drones, today marks an interesting yet predictable turn of events for McCain-Feingold, or rather, the death of it. Senator Charles Schumer of New York opened his fat mouth again and spewed some vitriol about corporate free speech being "un-American". Excuse me? Corporate executives don't have the same rights as others? I believe the Left has a word for that, which they throw out any time someone stands up for themselves or their beliefs: Discrimination. And don't even get me started on the idiocy over in the UK about advertisers not being able to advertise specifically for "reliable" workers. That's for another post.

But back to our own Useful Idiots in question:

Among others, Senator Schumer was apparently a supporter of the McCain-Feingold bill, as were the two sponsors of that bill, obviously, John McCain and Russ Feingold, all of whom are incumbent Senators. *cough*corruption*cough*.

Corporate free speech is not un-American.

'Nuff said.

I believe the Supreme Court made the right decision in this matter simply because of a few simple words: "Congress shall make NO LAW" regarding Freedom of Speech or Press. (emphasis mine). Is that REALLY so hard for people to understand? President Woodrow Wilson tried to outlaw anti-war speech during WWI. Didn't work. FDR used his 9th Fireside Chat to lambaste the Supreme Court for opposing his New Deal programs. Worked, but not as well as he would have liked.

What exactly is un-American about a corporation, which is made up of, when all is said and done, some of the very people whom the Constitution protects, endorsing who they want to endorse for whatever political office that person might be running? I see nothing wrong with it.

President Obama disagrees, however. He pledged a "strong bi-partisan response" to overturn McCain-Feingold, which of course just goes to show how laughably arrogant this administration is. He can't even get his signature piece of legislation passed with bi-partisan support. What makes him think he can do this? Oh, right. He's Barack the Magic Negro. He can do anything. Or at least he can pretend to do anything while doing absolutely nothing.

I have several questions, in fact, about what the Obama Administration sees as an attack on "democracy itself". Allowing people to speak their minds through any forum they wish is the very ESSENCE of our Republic, and when they start chipping away at that, it's the SCOTUS's job to patch the wall. Separation of Powers, right? Not under this joke of a president, apparently. I believe he said something in the SOTU speech about issuing an executive order to overturn a Constitutional Ruling. No abuse of power there, no sirree.

Note above that I mentioned all three supporters of this bill were INCUMBENT senators. I don't know if any freshman congressmen supported this bill, but if they did they apparently were woefully ignorant about what it would mean. The article specifically states, quoting one of those Washington Elitists that the law gave them the power to ban books during election cycles.

Does that sound like these senators were protecting free speech to you? I didn't think so.

As the article says:

The panic felt by incumbents cannot be because they are concerned with corruption. After all, the majority of states do not bar independent expenditures by corporations and unions in campaigns. One of those states is Washington. Somehow we have managed to survive since 1889 with such an "un-American" system in place.

This hits the nail right on the head. The INCUMBENT senators are not concerned with corruption. They are concerned with their seats in congress and nothing more. That's why this bill was passed, and that is why the SCOTUS struck it down, to their credit.

Sometimes I forget that there are good people on the court, given that it has had a liberal majority for so long. I remember vehemently opposing Sonya Sotomayor's appointment to the court, given her decision in the infamous Firefighter Case she presided over months ago.

still, whether liberal majority or not, the SCOTUS did the right thing here.

Oh, and Mr. Schumer, don't go calling free speech un-American. You sound like an idiot when you do that.

Continuing to fight the Good Fight-



Here's the article since I couldn't link to it for some reason:

The U.S. Supreme Court decision clearing the way for corporations to contribute more freely to political campaigns has been maligned by many U.S. leaders as "un-American," writes guest columnist Bill Maurer. He argues that the court majority in the 5-4 ruling did the right thing under the First Amendment.

By Bill Maurer

Special to The Times


SEN. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., called it "un-American." Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., said the American people "would pay dearly" for it. President Obama said that it "strikes at democracy itself" and that he could not think of "anything more devastating to the public interest." The president went quickly before the cameras, pledging an immediate and "forceful bipartisan response."

What was this threat to the Republic? What horrific occurrence caused these public servants such alarm?

It was a Supreme Court decision — Citizens United v. FEC — that said the government cannot ban speech by people it does not like.

Most Americans would assume that the First Amendment means the federal government cannot ban any speech. After all, the Constitution says "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech." As Justice Hugo Black was fond of pointing out, "no law" means "no law."

Nevertheless, a bipartisan group of incumbents passed a law — McCain-Feingold — in 2002 that made it a felony for all corporations, including nonprofit advocacy corporations, to expressly advocate for the election or defeat of a federal candidate or to broadcast communications that refer to a candidate for federal office within 30 days of a primary election and 60 days of a general election. In other words, the government made it a crime for a group of citizens to come together and choose to speak about elections if they picked the wrong form for their association.

The government even said this law gave them the ability to ban books before elections. It is difficult to see how a law that gives the government the power to ban books is not one "abridging the freedom of speech."

The proponents of McCain-Feingold said it was necessary because when people associated using the corporate form, they would be too persuasive. In other words, once corporations, comprised of individuals, could "interfere" with elections, Americans would simply march to whatever tune corporations called.

This is nonsense, of course. Sometimes corporate advertising is influential. Sometimes it is not. How many Americans watch the XFL while drinking the Pepsi Clear they brought home in their new Oldsmobile?

Of course, the law already permitted some corporations to use their products to try to influence political elections, and rightfully so. You are reading one of those products right now. It makes no sense to make it a crime for a small technology company to advocate for the election of a pro-intellectual-property politician, while The New York Times can urge the defeat or election of any candidate it chooses.

The panic felt by incumbents cannot be because they are concerned with corruption. After all, the majority of states do not bar independent expenditures by corporations and unions in campaigns. One of those states is Washington. Somehow we have managed to survive since 1889 with such an "un-American" system in place.

Corporations are each different. Some will see this decision as an opportunity to support pro-free-market politicians. Some will use it use it to support liberal politicians. And some will ignore politics completely and simply try to provide goods and services the public wants. This is because a corporation, like every association — a marriage, a neighborhood association or a nonprofit organization — is made up of people. It is the people who are now free to speak and to choose the form they believe is the most effective for disseminating their message.

This is America. We do not ban books. We do not make it a crime to speak because the speech may be too influential. With this decision, Americans will get more information, hear more debate, and learn more about their elections. With all due respect to Sen. Schumer, what could be more American than that?
Bill Maurer is the executive director of the Institute for Justice, Washington Chapter. IJ's brief in Citizens United was cited in the U.S. Supreme Court majority opinion.