Obama's Department of Justice has dropped all charges against three New Black Panthers, who had been charged by Bush's DoJ after the 2008 election for voter intimidation.
The incident, caught on camera at a Philadelphia polling place, clearly shows three NBP members standing in the doorway of the polling place, threatening people as they entered to cast their votes. One is even brandishing a weapon out in the open. They wore police style uniforms, called themselves 'security', and hurled racial slurs and threats at anyone they felt would not be supporting Obama.
Here is proof that they were there, and that one of them is indeed carrying a weapon ...
"The Justice Department was successful in obtaining an injunction that prohibits the defendant who brandished a weapon outside a Philadelphia polling place from doing so again. Claims were dismissed against the other defendants based on a careful assessment of the facts and the law. The department is committed to the vigorous prosecution of those who intimidate, threaten or coerce anyone exercising his or her sacred right to vote." - Obama DoJ spokesman replying to Fox News when asked why the charges had been dropped
Allright .... Obama's regime has stated that voter intimidation is perfectly acceptable if performed by a Democrat/minority. The only action taken was to slap the wrist of the one carrying the nightstick, telling him 'don't do that again'. Falls perfectly in line with all the other crap coming out of Washington these days ....
If this was three white guys doing exactly the same thing in front of a polling place in Alabama, do you really think that Obama's DoJ would drop the charges?
Friday, May 29, 2009
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
HOA Run Amok!
HOA - Home Owner's Association. Originally this was come up with to allow neighborhoods to have some control over what goes on in them, from a property perspective. There are things you don't want your neighbors to do in order to protect your own property's value, and your standard of living. However, as with all things that gain control over people, it tends to run wild when idiots with delusions of power in their heads start running them. Then ... look out ... The Homeowner's Nazis go on the rampage....
(Information from a column by James Ragland in today's Dallas Morning News.)
Frank Larison is a resident of the "Woodlands II on the Creek" condominium development in the Lake Highlands area of Dallas. Has been since 2001. By all accounts, he is a good neighbor, not causing any problems, keeping his property and his vehicle in great shape.
Frank is a 14 year veteran of the Marines and Coast Guard, and served in Vietnam. About 5 months ago he put a large USMC emblem decal on the rear window of his 2008 Chevy HHR. He also put on a 'Support our Troops' ribbon, and a 1st Marine Air Wing insignia.
The 'president' of the homeowner's association that rules the condos sent him a letter, stating he was in violation of Article 7.05 of the Bylaws and Item 3 of the Rules and Regulations - decal advertising not allowed on vehicles owned by condo owners.
He was threatened with having his vehicle towed, and having fines levied against him for $50.00 each time a member of the HOA Board of Directors saw his vehicle with the 'advertising' on it. Now, that can be serious - most HOA membership documents state that they have the right to place a lien on the property if they levy fines against the owner.
Now, by what definition can a USMC emblem be considered 'advertising'? What kind of A-hole threatens a law abiding veteran over bullshit like this?
With all the publicity this is receiving locally, I suspect that the HOA will release a 'one time exemption' to their rules. What ought to happen is tar and feathering of the 'president', and running her out of town.
I would lay money on her having an 'Obama/Biden 2008' sticker on her car - now that ought to get her thrown in jail!
(Information from a column by James Ragland in today's Dallas Morning News.)
Frank Larison is a resident of the "Woodlands II on the Creek" condominium development in the Lake Highlands area of Dallas. Has been since 2001. By all accounts, he is a good neighbor, not causing any problems, keeping his property and his vehicle in great shape.
Frank is a 14 year veteran of the Marines and Coast Guard, and served in Vietnam. About 5 months ago he put a large USMC emblem decal on the rear window of his 2008 Chevy HHR. He also put on a 'Support our Troops' ribbon, and a 1st Marine Air Wing insignia.
The 'president' of the homeowner's association that rules the condos sent him a letter, stating he was in violation of Article 7.05 of the Bylaws and Item 3 of the Rules and Regulations - decal advertising not allowed on vehicles owned by condo owners.
He was threatened with having his vehicle towed, and having fines levied against him for $50.00 each time a member of the HOA Board of Directors saw his vehicle with the 'advertising' on it. Now, that can be serious - most HOA membership documents state that they have the right to place a lien on the property if they levy fines against the owner.
Now, by what definition can a USMC emblem be considered 'advertising'? What kind of A-hole threatens a law abiding veteran over bullshit like this?
With all the publicity this is receiving locally, I suspect that the HOA will release a 'one time exemption' to their rules. What ought to happen is tar and feathering of the 'president', and running her out of town.
I would lay money on her having an 'Obama/Biden 2008' sticker on her car - now that ought to get her thrown in jail!
Now We Know How Far Left He Will Go
Back on May 1, I asked in this blog 'how far left will He go' in regards to Obama's Supreme Court nominee. Now we know - as far left as is possible.
Judge Sonia Sotomayor, from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, is a female of Puerto Rican descent. She is a far left liberal activist judge, who has used her position on the bench to try and force social reform. She has been caught on tape stating that the Court of Appeals is where policy is made. She has been caught on tape stating that a Hispanic woman would provide a wiser opinion than a white male.
Obama's pick is brilliant. She has a judicial background. She is a double minority. She is an activist judge, who believes that life experience and fairness trumps the law and the Constitution. She, at 54, is young enough to sit on the court for a couple of decades at least. She will be a lapdog for Obama, rubber stamping every liberal ideal and agenda that comes before the court. She's a Ruth Bader Ginsburg clone, only a bit more to the left.
Rebublicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee ought to go after her big time. She's had four decisions overturned by the Supreme Court. She's been chastised in writing by another liberal on the Second Court of Appeals for her failure to understand case law. She's a racist, as evidenced by her statement about while males. She's an unabashed activist, activity which is strictly prohibited by the Constitution for members of any court, much less the Supreme Court.
Do you think the Republicans will fight her nomination? I seriously doubt it. Obama knew this - Republicans will not fight her for fear of being labeled racist by the left and the mainstream media. Her double minority status will guarantee her an easy time through the Committee. This is a chance for Republicans to stand up and show their differences with Obama and his cronies - they won't.
Update - more and more is coming out about Sotomayor:
4 out of 5 cases she wrote majority opinions for while with the 2nd Court of Appeals were overturned when reviewed by the Supreme Court. That's an 80% failure rate. Most jurists believe that an 80% success rate is too low. The very court that she wants to sit on has determined that her interpretation of the law was wrong 80% of the time.
Sotomayor ruled in 2004 that there is no Constitutional right to own a firearm. Apparently, the 2nd Amendment page was left out of her copy of the Constitution.
Dems are threatening, in public, any Republican who dares ask any tough questions of Sotomayor, or otherwise stand in her way. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) , in a newsconference, said Senate Republicans have to cooperate 'or else'. Obama's press secretary, Robert Gibbs said in response to an ABC news reporter's question about Sotomayor's statement concering her belief that a hispanic female would render a wiser decision than a white male 'you have to be very careful talking about this issue as we go forward'. The message is clear - to the mainstream press, don't you dare ask anything tough of her - to the Republicans, don't make trouble, or you'll regret it.
Sotomayor is a piss poor candidate for the Supreme Court, and there is no way in a democracy that she should gain confirmation. However, remember that we now live in the USSA, not the USA.
Judge Sonia Sotomayor, from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, is a female of Puerto Rican descent. She is a far left liberal activist judge, who has used her position on the bench to try and force social reform. She has been caught on tape stating that the Court of Appeals is where policy is made. She has been caught on tape stating that a Hispanic woman would provide a wiser opinion than a white male.
Obama's pick is brilliant. She has a judicial background. She is a double minority. She is an activist judge, who believes that life experience and fairness trumps the law and the Constitution. She, at 54, is young enough to sit on the court for a couple of decades at least. She will be a lapdog for Obama, rubber stamping every liberal ideal and agenda that comes before the court. She's a Ruth Bader Ginsburg clone, only a bit more to the left.
Rebublicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee ought to go after her big time. She's had four decisions overturned by the Supreme Court. She's been chastised in writing by another liberal on the Second Court of Appeals for her failure to understand case law. She's a racist, as evidenced by her statement about while males. She's an unabashed activist, activity which is strictly prohibited by the Constitution for members of any court, much less the Supreme Court.
Do you think the Republicans will fight her nomination? I seriously doubt it. Obama knew this - Republicans will not fight her for fear of being labeled racist by the left and the mainstream media. Her double minority status will guarantee her an easy time through the Committee. This is a chance for Republicans to stand up and show their differences with Obama and his cronies - they won't.
Update - more and more is coming out about Sotomayor:
4 out of 5 cases she wrote majority opinions for while with the 2nd Court of Appeals were overturned when reviewed by the Supreme Court. That's an 80% failure rate. Most jurists believe that an 80% success rate is too low. The very court that she wants to sit on has determined that her interpretation of the law was wrong 80% of the time.
Sotomayor ruled in 2004 that there is no Constitutional right to own a firearm. Apparently, the 2nd Amendment page was left out of her copy of the Constitution.
Dems are threatening, in public, any Republican who dares ask any tough questions of Sotomayor, or otherwise stand in her way. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) , in a newsconference, said Senate Republicans have to cooperate 'or else'. Obama's press secretary, Robert Gibbs said in response to an ABC news reporter's question about Sotomayor's statement concering her belief that a hispanic female would render a wiser decision than a white male 'you have to be very careful talking about this issue as we go forward'. The message is clear - to the mainstream press, don't you dare ask anything tough of her - to the Republicans, don't make trouble, or you'll regret it.
Sotomayor is a piss poor candidate for the Supreme Court, and there is no way in a democracy that she should gain confirmation. However, remember that we now live in the USSA, not the USA.
NAACP Wants to Protest NASCAR
The local NAACP chapter in Miami-Dade has served notice that it will protest the NASCAR event held at Homestead Speedway in November unless the Confederate flag is banned.
NASCAR currently prohibits use of the Confederate flag on any official publication, merchandise, or event, and has done so for years. In fact, it banned a car sponsored by the Sons of Confederate Veterans in the early '90s, because it had a rebel flag painted on the roof. It does not, however, have any control over what fans bring to the track.
Bring on your protest, NAACP. You'll probably have three people with a sign out front trying to mug for the TV cameras, surrounded by New Black Panthers for security. While you're at it, protest the display of African colors (because, after all it was Africans who captured and sold their ancestors into slavery), and the display of the American flag (Native Americans certainly have a beef with the US government over how they've been treated), and the display of the Spanish flag (for all of those South and Central American natives who were captured and enslaved by Cortez and his gang).
Funny thing - the NAACP's long time partner in crime, the ACLU, is siding with anyone who wants to display the Confederate flag at the speedway, saying that it is free speech protected by the First Amendment.
NASCAR currently prohibits use of the Confederate flag on any official publication, merchandise, or event, and has done so for years. In fact, it banned a car sponsored by the Sons of Confederate Veterans in the early '90s, because it had a rebel flag painted on the roof. It does not, however, have any control over what fans bring to the track.
Bring on your protest, NAACP. You'll probably have three people with a sign out front trying to mug for the TV cameras, surrounded by New Black Panthers for security. While you're at it, protest the display of African colors (because, after all it was Africans who captured and sold their ancestors into slavery), and the display of the American flag (Native Americans certainly have a beef with the US government over how they've been treated), and the display of the Spanish flag (for all of those South and Central American natives who were captured and enslaved by Cortez and his gang).
Funny thing - the NAACP's long time partner in crime, the ACLU, is siding with anyone who wants to display the Confederate flag at the speedway, saying that it is free speech protected by the First Amendment.
Saturday, May 23, 2009
Obama Picks New Head of NASA
Obama is set to announce the selection of Charles Bolden as the new head of NASA. Bolden is a retired USMC general, astronaut with 4 shuttle missions under his belt (including the 1990 mission that deployed Hubble), and fighter pilot with over 100 missions during the Vietnam War. He joined NASA and became an astronaut in 1980.
Bolden flew A-6A Intruders with VMA(AW)-533 in Vietnam, flying missions into both the North and South in the '72-'73 time frame. He is a graduate of the USN Test Pilot's School, and has logged over 6000 hours in military aircraft.
This man would appear to be a good choice to lead the agency in a very troubled time, when NASA's very purpose is being questioned, and huge budget fights loom in Congress.
Bolden is an African-American, which should play absolutely no significance in his ability to take control of NASA. Skin color should have nothing to do with his appointment - I don't know if that is the case, but sincerely hope it is. I wish him the best of luck, and will actualy praise Obama for making this choice.
Interestingly enough, I read that unnamed 'agency watchers' were concerned about his ability to succeed, given his lack of a close relationship with Obama. So, people 'in the know' think that unless you're an Obama suck-up, you shouldn't be in his administration. Isn't that pathetic?
Friday, May 22, 2009
O-TV - All Obama, All The Time
A recent visit by the women's NCAA hoop champ UConn to the White House has spurred a mild outrage amongst the White House Press Pool. The Pool reporters, who normally have free run to cover all events the President is involved in, were prevented from filming or reporting on Obama shooting hoops with the ladies on the White House basketball court.
There was nothing secret about the hoops play. Indeed, the White House did its own filming and production of a 'news' spot of the occasion, complete with reporter and logo on screen.
Mainstream media hacks, normally in the tank for all things Obama, are now speculating about what this means. Chances are this is a trial balloon sent up by Obama, to see if he can get away with it. If so, it opens up all kinds of possibilities. Obama hates to have his policies questioned, or to have anything he does questioned or put into a bad light. The mainstream media does occasionally ask him an uncomfortable question, and he does not like it. If he can get away with shutting out the media, and providing his own 'news', then he controls what is said, what is filmed, and what is reported (even more than he already does).
One more step towards socialism - state control of news reporting.
One can only imagine the incredible uproar we would be hearing now if President Bush had done this.
There was nothing secret about the hoops play. Indeed, the White House did its own filming and production of a 'news' spot of the occasion, complete with reporter and logo on screen.
Mainstream media hacks, normally in the tank for all things Obama, are now speculating about what this means. Chances are this is a trial balloon sent up by Obama, to see if he can get away with it. If so, it opens up all kinds of possibilities. Obama hates to have his policies questioned, or to have anything he does questioned or put into a bad light. The mainstream media does occasionally ask him an uncomfortable question, and he does not like it. If he can get away with shutting out the media, and providing his own 'news', then he controls what is said, what is filmed, and what is reported (even more than he already does).
One more step towards socialism - state control of news reporting.
One can only imagine the incredible uproar we would be hearing now if President Bush had done this.
US Army on the Pole
Ryan Newman, driver of the #39 US Army sponsored Chevy in NASCAR's Sprint Cup Series, won the pole for Sunday's Coca Cola 600 race.
Ryan, nicknamed the Rocket Man for his numerous pole wins over his years in NASCAR, averaged 188.48mph around the mile and a half track at Charlotte NC in Thursday evening's qualifying session.
The Coke 600 is NASCAR's longest race - 400 laps, equalling 600 miles. Think of that - 4 to 5 hours of driving around in circles at better than 185mph.
Ryan, in support of his sponsor, the US Army, will host Sgt. Joseph Goodloe, a Green Beret whose seven tours in Iraq and Afghanistan resulted in four bronze stars, and a bronze star with V device (for Valor). Sgt. Goodloe is currently an instructor at Ft. Bragg, and a resident of Charlotte.
Folks, if you have never been to a NASCAR race, you need to go at least once. If you can't stand to be there for the entire race, I suggest going for qualifying day. In any case, you simply cannot believe how fast these big machines really go, and you won't believe something going that fast can actually turn around a corner. TV does not do it justice ....
Army Strong.
Ryan finished second in yesterday's rain shortened, rain delayed Coke 300 and something. Overcoming an early pit road penalty, Ryan and his crew chief pulled some strategy out of their hats as the yellow flag came out for the third time, indicating rain. After a lengthy red flag for the rain and drying efforts, NASCAR finally called the race. The finish vaulted Ryan into 7th place in the points race, quite a change fromt eh dismal start of their season.
Shelby Sells Out
Any I'm not talking about his Mustangs ....Carroll Shelby is arguably the most recognizable name in the performance car industry. Since the late 1950s, he has been involved in developing, racing, and selling modified versions of production cars, such as his Cobra, GT-350 and GT-500 Mustangs, and the recent revival of GT and GT-500 Mustangs available from Ford.
Carroll is getting up there - 85 years of age, I believe. He has fought health problems for many years, so it is surprising he's lasted this long and is as energetic as he is. A few years ago, his company started vigorous efforts to protect and profit from his naming rights. His heirs aparently want to make as much money off his name as they can before he passes on. Nothing wrong with that, I suppose.
Recent years have seen Shelby Wine and Shelby Chili Fixins' offered. Well, those aren't too bad, considering his heritage with the Terlingua Racing Team back in the 60s.
However, it has now gone too far....
Shelby's company has formed another company, Shelby Signature Foods. Their offerings will be culinary items such as salad dressing, cornbread, salsa, and fried chicken batter mix. The only thing that sets these items apart is his picture and faux signature on the label.
I'm going to go right out and get me some Cobra cornbread. How about salsa in three different heat offerings - GT-350 (mild), GT-500 (hot), GT-500KR (atomic)....
You know, I'd love to have a Shelby Mustang, new or old, and respect the man for what he has done for the automotive performance hobby, but this is just degrading ....
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Napolitano's DHS Nazis Sieze Rare Warbird
This is a Douglas AD-4N Skyraider, a Navy attack aircraft made in the 1950s. Very few of these massive aircraft still survive today, and one in flyable condition is extremely rare. There are a handful on the warbird circuit here in the US.This specific aircraft, registered N121CH, last served with the French Air Force. It was restored in France, and found by a US based collector, who purchased the airplane and imported it to the US last year. Currently located in Alabama, the aircraft was registered with the FAA in September 2008.
On April 13, 2009, Department of Homeland Security agents showed up at the Alabama airfield, siezed the airplane, and padlocked the hangar. Their story is that some paperwork was incorrectly filed, even though the exact same procedure has been used for multiple warbirds brought into the US over the past 30 years. DHS has announced their intention to have the aircraft scrapped.
DHS, since its inception under President Bush, has never done this. Dozens of warbirds have moved into and out of the country over the past 8 years - the procedures and paperwork are well known. Now, DHS under Obama/Napolitano has decided to flex its muscles by siezing private property legally imported into the country. Not only that, they are threatening to destroy a very rare piece of our military aviation heritage.
The EAA (Experimental Aircraft Association) has gotten involved on the side of the owners, and a legal fight will ensue.
For more on the story, go to www.savetheskyraider.com . The owner and EAA are asking everyone who is interested to contact their congressional representatives and ask for their assistance in saving this aircraft.
Another Example of the Global Warming/Eco-Friendly/Green Scam
I was walking down the aisle in my local Target store yesterday. Each of these stores have endcaps that have 'Clearance' signs on them, with items at reduced prices. I happened to see some legal pads on one of these Clearance racks.
I use quite a few legal pads in my work, so the opportunity to pick up some at cheaper than retail sounded good, so I took a look. Upon closer inspection, these three pad packs were labeled as 100% recycled material. 'Green' ... 'Buy these and save a tree' ... Well, ok ....
The clearance price on this three pad pack was three time more expensive than a normally priced 5 pack of standard legal pads. WTF?
Just another example of the green scam. Put 'recycled', 'eco-friendly', 'save the planet', or 'green' on anything and you can charge 2 to 3 times as much as a product that doesn't carry those magic words. This is decades old marketing at its best - take advantage of dim-witted consumers and their gullability to make a bunch of money.
This is what Algore does best - talk up a line of B.S. about climate change, and cash in big by investing in technologies/companies that he says are 'saving the planet'.
What a scam .....
I use quite a few legal pads in my work, so the opportunity to pick up some at cheaper than retail sounded good, so I took a look. Upon closer inspection, these three pad packs were labeled as 100% recycled material. 'Green' ... 'Buy these and save a tree' ... Well, ok ....
The clearance price on this three pad pack was three time more expensive than a normally priced 5 pack of standard legal pads. WTF?
Just another example of the green scam. Put 'recycled', 'eco-friendly', 'save the planet', or 'green' on anything and you can charge 2 to 3 times as much as a product that doesn't carry those magic words. This is decades old marketing at its best - take advantage of dim-witted consumers and their gullability to make a bunch of money.
This is what Algore does best - talk up a line of B.S. about climate change, and cash in big by investing in technologies/companies that he says are 'saving the planet'.
What a scam .....
House Dems Block Pelosi/CIA Lie Investigation
Today, House Democrats defeated a measure brought up by Republicans that would have created a bi-partisan congressional panel that would investigate Pelosi's claims that the CIA had lied to her during briefings on national security matters, including enhanced interrogation techniques.
Pelosi has had so many different stories about this over the past few weeks, it is hard to tell which lie is her latest. One day, she changed her story three times.
If she is correct and the CIA misled her, she has a duty to hold an investigation to get to the bottom of it - lying to Congress is a serious offense, just ask Pelosi or Reid.
Or, if she wasn't present at the briefings, or she wasn't presented with enough information (both stories from her over the past two weeks), then she is incompetent.
Or, if she is lying, and the CIA is telling the truth, then she has committed an offense that should cost her the speakership, and also should bring impeachment proceedings. Past Speakers of the House have lost their positions for far less than that.
Once again, if the Democrats have nothing to hide, nothing to fear, and want the truth to come out, why do they continue to block all investigations into their behavoir? The answer is pretty obvious ... they want to keep their jobs and positions of power at any cost.
This is going to catch up with them ....
Update - at a press conference this morning (Friday), Pelosi defended her remarks about the CIA lying to her:
"I have made the statement that I'm going to make on this. I don't have any more to say on this. I stand by my comments. And what we are doing is staying on our course and not being distracted from it." - Nancy Pelosi, 5/22/09
In other words, she is telling the mainstream media to drop it and move on so she doesn't have to defend herself anymore.
"Speaker Pelosi stammered and filibustered around the elephant in the room because she knows full well that she has become a political liability to her fellow Democrats in Congress. Her obsession with the previous administration and her disdain for America's intelligence officials has reduced her to cheerleader status within the far left wing of her party and a distraction to the substantive debate over how to best move our economy forward." - Ken Spain, National Republican Congressional Committee spokesman
Well said, Mr. Spain ....
Pelosi has had so many different stories about this over the past few weeks, it is hard to tell which lie is her latest. One day, she changed her story three times.
If she is correct and the CIA misled her, she has a duty to hold an investigation to get to the bottom of it - lying to Congress is a serious offense, just ask Pelosi or Reid.
Or, if she wasn't present at the briefings, or she wasn't presented with enough information (both stories from her over the past two weeks), then she is incompetent.
Or, if she is lying, and the CIA is telling the truth, then she has committed an offense that should cost her the speakership, and also should bring impeachment proceedings. Past Speakers of the House have lost their positions for far less than that.
Once again, if the Democrats have nothing to hide, nothing to fear, and want the truth to come out, why do they continue to block all investigations into their behavoir? The answer is pretty obvious ... they want to keep their jobs and positions of power at any cost.
This is going to catch up with them ....
Update - at a press conference this morning (Friday), Pelosi defended her remarks about the CIA lying to her:
"I have made the statement that I'm going to make on this. I don't have any more to say on this. I stand by my comments. And what we are doing is staying on our course and not being distracted from it." - Nancy Pelosi, 5/22/09
In other words, she is telling the mainstream media to drop it and move on so she doesn't have to defend herself anymore.
"Speaker Pelosi stammered and filibustered around the elephant in the room because she knows full well that she has become a political liability to her fellow Democrats in Congress. Her obsession with the previous administration and her disdain for America's intelligence officials has reduced her to cheerleader status within the far left wing of her party and a distraction to the substantive debate over how to best move our economy forward." - Ken Spain, National Republican Congressional Committee spokesman
Well said, Mr. Spain ....
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
How Republicans Can Win Back Congress
Everyone in mainstream media seems to know how Republicans need to reinvent the party in order to become relevant again. They have pronounced the GOP dead, buried, and irrelevant. Does anyone in their right mind think that these liberal media types actually want the GOP to be successful? Of course not ... So, why are they offering their opinions so strongly on how it needs to be fixed?
The results of the last election were poor for Republicans, that is a fact. However, why it was so bad has been misrepresented, on purpose. If you just listened to CNN, you would think that the GOP got thrashed because it was too conservative. Bullshit. It got thrashed because it was trying to act like pseudo-Democrats, didn't have a coherent message, and had a presidential candidate who was weak and really didn't want to be elected. This mess caused many strong Republican voters to stay home rather than vote. A lot of them did this as a protest, to show that they wouldn't support a candidate that didn't represent their views. Unfortunately, that protest has led to Obama and his henchmen being in full control of the government.
Moderate Republicans, like Steele, Powell, McCain ... are demanding that Republicans tack more to the left, to adopt more of the Democrat ways of big government, high taxes, and socialism ... in order to regain standing with the country's voters.
Bullshit ... that is just stupid.
Becoming the pseudo-Democrat Party, or Democrat Lite is a way to make sure the party will be impotent and irrelevant for years to come. Does anyone in their right mind think that a leftist, given the choice between a real left wing Democrat and a Democrat Lite, will choose Lite?
Becoming the Democrat Lite party will not gain the GOP a single vote. Indeed, it will lose them millions of votes, those who would be cast by the conservatives the party is abandoning. Remember that 55 million folks voted Rpublican in the last presidential election (that's more votes than Bill Clinton received in either of his successful election bids!). That's a lot of votes to lose.
Ronald Reagan won two landslides by running as a conservative Republican. The Congressional Sweep of 1994 happened because it was led and represented conservative ideals. Bush 41 and 43 won their elections because they were running against weak far left candidates, and were sporting a semi-conservative message. History shows that conservatism wins national elections. If Reagan had been running against Obama, the GOP would have the White House and the Senate - and the elections wouldn't have been that close.
GOP leadership is trying to distance themselves from the legacy of Reagan. Democrats and mainstream media are encouraging them to do so - to keep them weak and out of power.
Obama is destroying this country. The backlash against his socialism, big government, and sky high taxes has already started, and we're only 120 days into his regime. Retaking the Senate and a good portion of the House in 2010 is very doable. The White House in 2012 should be a slam dunk. However, it isn't going to happen unless the Republican leadership pulls their heads out of their collective asses, find the next Reagan and get him/her out in front of the Party, and stop this stupid non-sense of being pseudo-Democrats.
The results of the last election were poor for Republicans, that is a fact. However, why it was so bad has been misrepresented, on purpose. If you just listened to CNN, you would think that the GOP got thrashed because it was too conservative. Bullshit. It got thrashed because it was trying to act like pseudo-Democrats, didn't have a coherent message, and had a presidential candidate who was weak and really didn't want to be elected. This mess caused many strong Republican voters to stay home rather than vote. A lot of them did this as a protest, to show that they wouldn't support a candidate that didn't represent their views. Unfortunately, that protest has led to Obama and his henchmen being in full control of the government.
Moderate Republicans, like Steele, Powell, McCain ... are demanding that Republicans tack more to the left, to adopt more of the Democrat ways of big government, high taxes, and socialism ... in order to regain standing with the country's voters.
Bullshit ... that is just stupid.
Becoming the pseudo-Democrat Party, or Democrat Lite is a way to make sure the party will be impotent and irrelevant for years to come. Does anyone in their right mind think that a leftist, given the choice between a real left wing Democrat and a Democrat Lite, will choose Lite?
Becoming the Democrat Lite party will not gain the GOP a single vote. Indeed, it will lose them millions of votes, those who would be cast by the conservatives the party is abandoning. Remember that 55 million folks voted Rpublican in the last presidential election (that's more votes than Bill Clinton received in either of his successful election bids!). That's a lot of votes to lose.
Ronald Reagan won two landslides by running as a conservative Republican. The Congressional Sweep of 1994 happened because it was led and represented conservative ideals. Bush 41 and 43 won their elections because they were running against weak far left candidates, and were sporting a semi-conservative message. History shows that conservatism wins national elections. If Reagan had been running against Obama, the GOP would have the White House and the Senate - and the elections wouldn't have been that close.
GOP leadership is trying to distance themselves from the legacy of Reagan. Democrats and mainstream media are encouraging them to do so - to keep them weak and out of power.
Obama is destroying this country. The backlash against his socialism, big government, and sky high taxes has already started, and we're only 120 days into his regime. Retaking the Senate and a good portion of the House in 2010 is very doable. The White House in 2012 should be a slam dunk. However, it isn't going to happen unless the Republican leadership pulls their heads out of their collective asses, find the next Reagan and get him/her out in front of the Party, and stop this stupid non-sense of being pseudo-Democrats.
Chrysler Dealer Shutdowns - What is Obama's Plan?
Chrysler, at the direction of its new owner Obama/Geithner, has informed 789 dealerships across America that they will be shut down as part of the Chapter 11 reorganization. When this was first announced, I think everyone assumed that the dealers on the chopping block would be the lower performing ones, ones that cost the company money. Well, apparently not.....
Here is an interview Neil Cavuto (Fox News) did with a long time Long Island Chrysler dealer, one who is in the top 2% of dealers ranked across the country. He got the dreaded 'shut down' letter, while other lower performing Chrysler dealers in the area did not. It's a long interview, but interesting in how it points out how poorly the federal government is handling the automaker it now owns.
It is amazing to me that Chrylser will not tell the dealers, nor the press, what criteria it used to determine which dealers to close down. I don't know what criteria were used, but the cynic in me wants to know if the shutdown dealers had some connection to Republicans, or maybe they didn't donate enough to Democrat election funds ....
It also amazes me that the dealers being shut down are being stuck with the unsold inventory - Chrysler will not take the cars back. In addition to throwing tens of thousands of employees out of work, it is financially ruining the dealership owners. Some of those dealers had been approached by Chrysler last fall to take additional inventory so that the assembly lines would not be shut down. Much of that additional inventory is still sitting on their lots.
Chrysler needed to be cut back to survive, but this is being handled very poorly. We should expect that from anything run by the Obama regime. When they push GM into Chapter 11, I am sure it will be just as messy, painful, and disorganized as Chrysler has been.
Update - A lot of the dealers closing down are already having fire sales to get rid of as much as they can, as fast as they can. I heard a large dealer chain (14 dealerships of different makes) in my local area this morning advertising on the radio their big Memorial Day sale. Their ad started by saying that their varied dealerships were staying open, but they were 'getting the hell out of Dodge' ... I'd say they aren't too happy about being blindsided like this. Again, this is a top 2% Chrysler dealer - no one in their right mind would close them, yet Obama has done so. Lunacy ....
P.S. - I would have loved to get a fire sale price on a new Hemi Challenger RT, but those apparently are not being discounted ......
Monday, May 18, 2009
The Sarge Rolls Again
Tony Schumacher and the US Army Top Fuel team won their third national event of the year yesterday. His win at the Thunder Valley track in Bristol TN vaulted him into the Top Fuel points lead.
Army Strong!
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Elliott Crashes Trying to Better NASCAR Speed Record
Bill Elliott set the NASCAR speed record back in 1987 at Talladega, with a qualifying lap in excess of 212mph. The record still stands, and is unlikely to be broken. Due to safety concerns with full bodied stock cars (see video below), NASCAR implemented restrictor plates and other measures to slow the cars down.
Yesterday, Bill tried to best his own record at Talladega, driving a Hajek Motorsports prepared Ford Mustang FR500C. This race only CobraJet Mustang was heavily modified to attempt speed records, while running on E-85 ethanol. The car was clocked at 252mph at the Bonneville salt flats earlier this year.
While this wouldn't affect the NASCAR record, it was a publicity stunt for Bill, Ford, Hajek, and Ethanol producers. It was thought that given the car's high straight line speed, that besting 212 at Talladega would be easy.
Well... maybe not....
The right front tire blew on lap two of his second warmup run, putting the car into the outside wall. Bill was not injured, but the same can't be said for the car.
Now, there is probably a sound technical reason for the tire to blow, but I tend to believe that the Talladega mystique (supposedly built on an Indian burial ground), coupled with God being upset over ethanol being uttered in the same breath as NASCAR probably had something to do with it.
Yesterday, Bill tried to best his own record at Talladega, driving a Hajek Motorsports prepared Ford Mustang FR500C. This race only CobraJet Mustang was heavily modified to attempt speed records, while running on E-85 ethanol. The car was clocked at 252mph at the Bonneville salt flats earlier this year.
While this wouldn't affect the NASCAR record, it was a publicity stunt for Bill, Ford, Hajek, and Ethanol producers. It was thought that given the car's high straight line speed, that besting 212 at Talladega would be easy.
Well... maybe not....
The right front tire blew on lap two of his second warmup run, putting the car into the outside wall. Bill was not injured, but the same can't be said for the car.
Now, there is probably a sound technical reason for the tire to blow, but I tend to believe that the Talladega mystique (supposedly built on an Indian burial ground), coupled with God being upset over ethanol being uttered in the same breath as NASCAR probably had something to do with it.
Cap and Trade - What it is Going to Cost You
Obama's Cap and Trade is a huge tax - I've already stated that. Well, here's some more proof ...
Cap and trade, essentially, is a plan to cap CO2 emissions from power plants. The government levies huge fees on those power plants for their emissions. If the plant can't meet the cap, then it can buy additional cap extensions from other power plants, or from the government.
The government keeps the billions of dollars it will take from power producers. Supposedly, some of that money is redirected into producing renewable energy sources. Some of the money is to be given to consumers, to offset the higher electricity bills they will receive as a result of the power plants taxes going up. Yeah, right ....
The Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT), a non-profit group made up primarily of power producers, has studied this and its impact on Texas. They conclude that in the absolute best case scenario, cap and trade will increase the average Texan's electric bill by $27 a month. Now that's not a one time jump, it's a permanent addition to the monthly bill.
By best case, I mean that other factors, such as the cost of natural gas, remain constant. The figures are hard to pin down. If natural gas, for instance, rises by 35%, then the bill increase doubles to $54 a month.
Renewable energy coming on line will have a negligible affect on these increases. If the maximum amount of wind turbines were brought on line, the highest number of units that can be supported by the Texas power grid, then the monthly bill increase drops to $22 a month.
"I am more concerned about climate change legislation than I am about climate change." -Texas Public Utility Commission Chaiman Barry Smitherman
Cap and Trade has two goals - First, to generate a tax revenue windfall for the Federal government. Second, to make energy so expensive that it will force consumers to use less.
This is Obama's energy plan .....
Cap and trade, essentially, is a plan to cap CO2 emissions from power plants. The government levies huge fees on those power plants for their emissions. If the plant can't meet the cap, then it can buy additional cap extensions from other power plants, or from the government.
The government keeps the billions of dollars it will take from power producers. Supposedly, some of that money is redirected into producing renewable energy sources. Some of the money is to be given to consumers, to offset the higher electricity bills they will receive as a result of the power plants taxes going up. Yeah, right ....
The Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT), a non-profit group made up primarily of power producers, has studied this and its impact on Texas. They conclude that in the absolute best case scenario, cap and trade will increase the average Texan's electric bill by $27 a month. Now that's not a one time jump, it's a permanent addition to the monthly bill.
By best case, I mean that other factors, such as the cost of natural gas, remain constant. The figures are hard to pin down. If natural gas, for instance, rises by 35%, then the bill increase doubles to $54 a month.
Renewable energy coming on line will have a negligible affect on these increases. If the maximum amount of wind turbines were brought on line, the highest number of units that can be supported by the Texas power grid, then the monthly bill increase drops to $22 a month.
"I am more concerned about climate change legislation than I am about climate change." -Texas Public Utility Commission Chaiman Barry Smitherman
Cap and Trade has two goals - First, to generate a tax revenue windfall for the Federal government. Second, to make energy so expensive that it will force consumers to use less.
This is Obama's energy plan .....
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
NASCAR Ratings Down - Blame it on the Gopher
NASCAR races during the first half of the season are broadcast on Fox. TV ratings have been down an average of 10% for all of the races broadcast so far. This has got NASCAR, Fox, advertisers, and team sponsors worried. Most of the blame is being directed towards the economy.
I have a different take ... blame it on the damn gopher.
Fox came up with a camera buried in the pavement, which captures some truly dramatic shots of cars as they pass inches overhead. Shortly after introducing it, they added a cute little graphic of a gopher diving into his hole just before a car went overhead. People supposedly fell in love with the gopher, and Fox held an internet contest to name it. "Digger'' won.
Digger became a marketing opportunity for Fox. All kind of merchandise appeared with the gopher's likeness on it.
Over this past offseason, the folks at Fox decided to push this little critter more and more. At Daytona, we were subjected to an obnoxious cartoon with him and his NASCAR loving family during the pre-race coverage. We are repeatedly assaulted with this gopher during race coverage, and not just when the pavement cam is active.
I like Fox's broadcast team. However, their constant attempts to 'gimic' up their coverage is offensive, and tiresome. From Digger to the obnoxious theme music and patting themselves constantly on the back on air, it is too much.
NOTE to Fox, NBC, ESPN, TNT, and Speed (all broadcasters for NASCAR) - dump the gratuitous B.S. and get back to basic, thorough coverage of the race, the drivers, and the teams. That is what your audience is tuning in for, not crappy little cartoon characters.
That's why people are tuning out (or at least turning down the sound).
Waffle Attack Almost Turns Deadly
This is just too funny .... From WLTX.com, Columbia South Carolina, comes the story of an almost deadly incident at a Manning, SC Waffle House, sparked by a waffle.
Crystal Samuel, patron, was attempting to eat with some of her friends ...
"I thought I was gonna get me a All Star" - Crystal SamuelMs. Samuel apparently didn't get what she ordered, and became abusive towards the waitress, a Ms. Yakeisha Ward. Samuel ended up throwing a waffle at Ward. Even though it didn't hit her, it was on. Ward came over the counter to tackle Samuel. The fight spilled out into the parking lot, where Ward went to her car and grabbed a pistol. The pistol went off during the scuffle, hitting Samuel in the arm. Ward then pistol whipped Samuel in the head, before Sheriff's deputies arrived and seperated them.
Ward was arrested, and posted $500 bond. She was back at work at the Waffle House the next day.
Samuel was released from the hospital after bullet fragments were removed from her arm. When contacted by local news, she reportedly said "bad customer service...." .This just goes to show that you never, ever, want to complain about food you are served.
House Dems Block Campaign Finance Ethics Investigation
House of Representative Democrats, led by Nancy Pelosi, have blocked, for the eighth time this year, a largely Republican effort to launch an ethics investigation into campaign finance irregularities.
Three House Democrats, John Murtha (D-PA), Jim Moran (D-VA), and Peter Visclosky (D-IN) are under scrutinuy for the millions of dollars their campaigns received from companies and lobbyists that they steered lucrative federal contracts to. I don't know much about Moran or Visclosky, but Murtha has been embroiled in kickbacks, payoffs, and shakedowns for many years, even being caught on tape by the FBI trying to extort money in exchange for political favors.
Murtha is a Pelosi lap dog. There is no way she will allow any inquiry into his actions to take place. Why is she blocking? If they are innocent, then the Democrat run ethics committee will exonerate them and clear the matter up. But, they are guilty, everyone knows it, and the only way to keep them in Congress and out of jail is to keep the investigation from happening at all.
Where is all the B.S. from the Dems about the Republican Culture of Corruption, their key talking point during the 2006 Congressional elections? Don't hear much from them now about that, do we?
Oh, by the way ... this is the same John Murtha who accused our Marines, in print and on video, or rape and murder in Iraq. The same John Murtha who refuses to apologize now that those Marines have been proven innocent of any wrongdoing.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Obama Cuts Funding for Hydrogen Powered Cars
Despite all the hype from Obama's regime about having to get away from reliance on that nasty oil, and the need for alternatively fueled vehicles, Obama's 2010 budget cuts funding for hydrogen fueled cars.
I didn't know this, but GM has had hundreds of hydrogen powered cars running for years now in tests, rolling up millions of miles. These miles have been on the street, by individuals - not on a test track. Other car companies have had similar efforts ongoing. The technology apparently works. For those of you in the dark on this, it's a car that runs on water ....
Wow ... a car that runs on water, and who's only byproduct is oxygen released into the air. Sounds like the perfect green method of transportation. It is very close to being production ready. The Bush Administration funneled millions of dollars into helping GM and others developing the technology.
Now, Obama has pulled all of the funding out of his budget, apparently with no explanation. Some folks at GM, and a few active eco-orgs have picked up on this, but the mainstream media and the Obama regime has been silent on it.
Why pull funding? I have no idea, but as with almost everything else this administration is doing, follow the money if you want to find out why ....
Note: The car pictured above is the Honda FCX Clarity, a current functioning hydrogen vehicle.
Obama's Election Triggering a Rise in Racial Hatred
The election of Obama the Immaculate is spurring a rise in racial hatred across the country. Now, before you fly off the handle, I do not think Obama is purposely causing this, and I do not think he wants it to happen. However, it is happening ....
This country is divided more than it has been at anytime since the Civil War. The Far Left has declared war on anyone that does not follow their politics. The Far Right defends itself, and is called racist, elitist, and worse for doing so. More and more people are moving out of the middle and towards the opposite poles. Racial relations, particularly between whites and blacks, are being pushed to a higher intensity as a reaction to Obama's heritage.
Two things triggered me to write this today. First, breakfast. I was in a popular local cafe, a place where many folks gather to visit and start their day. A large group of fellows seated around a table near me were voicing their concerns over Obama and what he is doing. The hatred I heard in their speech was scary - beyond political disagreement by far.
Second, the Dallas NAACP held a press conference yesterday, where their president, a shrill woman named Juanita Wallace, complained to anyone who listened that the KKK was running a membership drive in a small local town, and this was evidence of 'grass roots hate'. Surrounding this woman were members of the New Black Panthers. Now if that isn't the pot calling the kettle black, so to speak ....
I think this explosion of hatred and racial posturing is an occurence that was inevitable to coincide with the election of the first black President, whoever that person turned out to be. With all the bad racial history this country has, I think that this outpouring of racial bias and hatred is part of the process of getting to the point where the color of skin is not that important when electing officials. The election of Obama is not the action that puts the United States over the racial hump - it is an important action that will move us further along that path. The next minority elected to that position will be far more likely to be elected and judged based upon their qualifications than the color of their skin. Rosa Parks sitting in the front of the bus didn't end racism - it was a step. Obama's election isn't ending racism - it is a step. Each step gets us further along, even if the step is painful.
The fact that Obama is a hard core leftist has ramped up the situation, adding dislike and hatred of his policies to the racial component. This is making the wound wider, more painful, and it will take longer to heal.
Personally, I don't care whether the President's skin is white, black, brown, purple, green, or pink with yellow polkadots - I care about their qualifications, their experience, and their policies. THAT is why I don't like Obama and want him out of office - not because he's half black.
Eventually, the United States will be better off racially for Obama having been in office. Now, how much of the United States is left to benefit from it after he gets through socializing our country remains to be seen. I think we'd have been much better off with the first minority President being Condi Rice, or maybe even Colin Powell (although they aren't 'authentically black' according to race hucksters like Jackson and Sharpton).
And one more thing .... to all those people who voted for Obama just because he is black (or half-black) - you are just as racist, just as bigoted as those who voted against him because he is black.
This country is divided more than it has been at anytime since the Civil War. The Far Left has declared war on anyone that does not follow their politics. The Far Right defends itself, and is called racist, elitist, and worse for doing so. More and more people are moving out of the middle and towards the opposite poles. Racial relations, particularly between whites and blacks, are being pushed to a higher intensity as a reaction to Obama's heritage.
Two things triggered me to write this today. First, breakfast. I was in a popular local cafe, a place where many folks gather to visit and start their day. A large group of fellows seated around a table near me were voicing their concerns over Obama and what he is doing. The hatred I heard in their speech was scary - beyond political disagreement by far.
Second, the Dallas NAACP held a press conference yesterday, where their president, a shrill woman named Juanita Wallace, complained to anyone who listened that the KKK was running a membership drive in a small local town, and this was evidence of 'grass roots hate'. Surrounding this woman were members of the New Black Panthers. Now if that isn't the pot calling the kettle black, so to speak ....
I think this explosion of hatred and racial posturing is an occurence that was inevitable to coincide with the election of the first black President, whoever that person turned out to be. With all the bad racial history this country has, I think that this outpouring of racial bias and hatred is part of the process of getting to the point where the color of skin is not that important when electing officials. The election of Obama is not the action that puts the United States over the racial hump - it is an important action that will move us further along that path. The next minority elected to that position will be far more likely to be elected and judged based upon their qualifications than the color of their skin. Rosa Parks sitting in the front of the bus didn't end racism - it was a step. Obama's election isn't ending racism - it is a step. Each step gets us further along, even if the step is painful.
The fact that Obama is a hard core leftist has ramped up the situation, adding dislike and hatred of his policies to the racial component. This is making the wound wider, more painful, and it will take longer to heal.
Personally, I don't care whether the President's skin is white, black, brown, purple, green, or pink with yellow polkadots - I care about their qualifications, their experience, and their policies. THAT is why I don't like Obama and want him out of office - not because he's half black.
Eventually, the United States will be better off racially for Obama having been in office. Now, how much of the United States is left to benefit from it after he gets through socializing our country remains to be seen. I think we'd have been much better off with the first minority President being Condi Rice, or maybe even Colin Powell (although they aren't 'authentically black' according to race hucksters like Jackson and Sharpton).
And one more thing .... to all those people who voted for Obama just because he is black (or half-black) - you are just as racist, just as bigoted as those who voted against him because he is black.
Monday, May 11, 2009
Who Says the French are Woosies, Part Deaux
Another example of those crazy French guys, aviating and such .....
Democrats Declare Capitalism Dead
Meet Howard Dean, the absolutely insane goof that is the former head of the DNC (Democrat National Committee). This man was the figurehead of the national Democrat Party (although Obama is recognized as the Imperious Leader, due to his office).
Howard Dean has demonstrated that he is mentally unstable over the years, with evidence becoming evident during the 2004 presidential campaign.
Last week on CNBC, Dean stated in an interview on Obama's economic policies:
"We've had quite enough capitalism over the past 8 years. I think we need some regulation now."
There it is. This loose cannon has just stated the Democrat Party's economic policy in two sentences.
Howard Dean has demonstrated that he is mentally unstable over the years, with evidence becoming evident during the 2004 presidential campaign.
Last week on CNBC, Dean stated in an interview on Obama's economic policies:
"We've had quite enough capitalism over the past 8 years. I think we need some regulation now."
There it is. This loose cannon has just stated the Democrat Party's economic policy in two sentences.
Sunday, May 10, 2009
You Can't Even Tell a Joke Without the Left Blowing a Gasket
'D' Magazine is a local publication dedicated to things involving Dallas. A recent issue focused on our newest high profile resident, President Bush.
There were a series of five articles in that issue from local writers. One of them is David Feherty, a golf analyst for CBS and a resident of Dallas. Feherty ended his column with a joke:
"From my own experience visiting troops in the Middle East, I can tell you this though ... Despite how the conflict has been portrayed by our glorious media, if you give any US soldier a gun with two bullets in it, and he found himself in an elevator with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Osama Bin Laden, there's a good chance that Nancy Pelosi would get shot twice, and Harry Reid and bin Laden would be strangled to death."
Now, I think that's pretty damn good for a joke, and probably not far from an actual truth.
However, Feherty has drawn the wrath of his employer, CBS:
"We want to be clear that this column for a Dallas magazine is an unacceptable attempt at humor and is not in any way condoned, endorsed, or approved by CBS Sports." - LeslieAnne Wade, CBS Sports spokeswoman
Ferherty forgot that you can only make fun of people if they are Republicans. Democrats cannot be spoofed in any way in the mainstream media. If his joke had included Bush and Cheney instead of Pelosi and Reid, then the goofballs at CBS would be laughing their asses off instead of being upset. Feherty's job with CBS is probably very much at risk, because he offended some liberal sensibility.
Democrat attacks on the first Amendment continue.
Update - While Feherty has been apologizing for his joke to anyone who will listen (I would bet that he's been told to by CBS, or lose his job), left wing 'comics' can make jokes worse than this, and Obama and the mainstram media howls with laughter.
During the White House Correspondent's dinner, comic Wanda Sykes attacked Rush Limbaugh verbally in front of the crowd:
"Rush Limbaugh said he hopes this administration fails, so you're saying, 'I hope America fails,' you're like, 'I don't care about people losing their homes, their jobs, our soldiers in Iraq.' He just wants the country to fail. To me, that's treason."
"He's not saying anything differently than what Usama bin Laden is saying. "
"You know, you might want to look into this, sir, because I think maybe Rush Limbaugh was the 20th hijacker. But he was just so strung out on OxyContin he missed his flight."
"Rush Limbaugh, 'I hope the country fails' -- I hope his kidneys fail, how about that? ... He needs a good waterboarding, that's what he needs." - Wanda Sykes
This photo was taken at the dinner, and is reported to have been snapped during Syke's tasteless tirade:
Some in attendance where shocked by the comments, and dismayed by Obama's responses:
"That's way, way beyond reasoned debate or comedy and Obama's reaction to it was astonishing. Imagine if a comedian 'joked' that Obama was a terrorist who was guilty of treason and should be tortured and allowed to die. There would justifiably be an outcry."
-Toby Harnden, Editor, Britain's Daily Telegraph, an attendee
Saturday, May 9, 2009
Constitutional Illiteracy
The Constitution of the United States is the founding document of our country. It was painstakingly constructed by our founders after a lot of give, take, discussion, debate, and negotiation. It defines the best form of government this world has ever known.
The Constitution defines our system of government. It defines the role of the Federal Government in our Union. Anything not explicitly stated as a responsibility of the Federal Government in this document is the responsibility of the individual states, their state level governments, and their populations.
There is an alarming lack of knowledge and understanding of the Constitution by our elected officials, and it has been this way for years. Our current President, everyone I've heard speak in his cabinet, the leadership of the House and the Senate, the vast majority of Democrats serving in federal office, and quite a few Republicans have absolutely no idea what is in this document or its meaning, and how it is supposed to be applied to how the government runs. Pretty damn sad ....
For instance, I'll use abortion as an example. Without choosing a side on the issue itself, I'll state this as an absolute fact - there is no Constitutional right for a woman to have an abortion. Nowhere in the Constitution does the word 'abortion' appear. As such, laws concerning abortion are the responsibility of the individual states to decide. That's a fact, that's how our government is defined to work - yet somehow we've allowed people in charge to twist things around so that many Americans think that the Constitution gives them that right.
That's just an example ...
Our Founders foresaw the need for the Constitution to be changed and updated as time goes on. Constitutional Amendments can be made to clarify, add, or even change the responsibilities of the Federal Government. The process is simple but lengthy - an Amendment is passed by both the House and Senate, and then if it is ratified by 2/3 of the states, it becomes part of the Constitution. The reason for the high standard for ratification is simple - Amendments are serious business, and not to be taken lightly.
The idiots running our Federal Government now don't have a clue on this. They only believe in the Constitution when it suits there needs. They misquote it, misrepresent it, and misuse it constantly. they flat ignore it most of the time.
I propose that every person running for a federal office be tested on their knowledge of the Constitution and government structure. No pass, no play, so to speak ...
Currently, any fool who can buy, steal, or cheat his/her way into Congress can do so without having to know anything about how it works, or how it is supposed to work.
All elected federal office holders take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution - too bad they have no idea what that Constitution is.
First person I'd test - Obama - it is clear he hasn't got a clue, or more likely just sees the Constitution as a road block to his agenda. He sure doesn't have any intent to abide by it.
The Constitution defines our system of government. It defines the role of the Federal Government in our Union. Anything not explicitly stated as a responsibility of the Federal Government in this document is the responsibility of the individual states, their state level governments, and their populations.
There is an alarming lack of knowledge and understanding of the Constitution by our elected officials, and it has been this way for years. Our current President, everyone I've heard speak in his cabinet, the leadership of the House and the Senate, the vast majority of Democrats serving in federal office, and quite a few Republicans have absolutely no idea what is in this document or its meaning, and how it is supposed to be applied to how the government runs. Pretty damn sad ....
For instance, I'll use abortion as an example. Without choosing a side on the issue itself, I'll state this as an absolute fact - there is no Constitutional right for a woman to have an abortion. Nowhere in the Constitution does the word 'abortion' appear. As such, laws concerning abortion are the responsibility of the individual states to decide. That's a fact, that's how our government is defined to work - yet somehow we've allowed people in charge to twist things around so that many Americans think that the Constitution gives them that right.
That's just an example ...
Our Founders foresaw the need for the Constitution to be changed and updated as time goes on. Constitutional Amendments can be made to clarify, add, or even change the responsibilities of the Federal Government. The process is simple but lengthy - an Amendment is passed by both the House and Senate, and then if it is ratified by 2/3 of the states, it becomes part of the Constitution. The reason for the high standard for ratification is simple - Amendments are serious business, and not to be taken lightly.
The idiots running our Federal Government now don't have a clue on this. They only believe in the Constitution when it suits there needs. They misquote it, misrepresent it, and misuse it constantly. they flat ignore it most of the time.
I propose that every person running for a federal office be tested on their knowledge of the Constitution and government structure. No pass, no play, so to speak ...
Currently, any fool who can buy, steal, or cheat his/her way into Congress can do so without having to know anything about how it works, or how it is supposed to work.
All elected federal office holders take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution - too bad they have no idea what that Constitution is.
First person I'd test - Obama - it is clear he hasn't got a clue, or more likely just sees the Constitution as a road block to his agenda. He sure doesn't have any intent to abide by it.
Monday, May 4, 2009
This is Chris Matthews?
I have absolutely no use for Chris Matthews, host of MSNBC's Hardball and overall lunatic fringe rabid liberal media attack dog. I can't even watch this guy, he's so abrasive and blatantly partisan - supposedly no-nos for a media representative?
Mark Davis is a local conservative radio talk show host, he plies his trade on WBAP-820 in the Dallas area. To give you an idea of how conservative Mark is, he occasionally guests hosts for Rush Limbaugh (and does very well at it).
To my surprise this morning, while semi-listening to Mark's show, I hear him say that he's interviewing Matthews up next. ??????? Well, this ought to be interesting ....
Matthews is making the radio talk show rounds promoting his new book. I listened to his back and forth with Mark for 8-10 minutes, and was shocked. What I heard was a thoughtful, respectful man, who while standing by his liberal principles, was gracious about it. He had great things to say about Jack Kemp, who he considered a friend. He waxed poetic about the good old days of Reagan and Tip O'Neil - where these political titans fought over principle but did it with style and respect. He said he voted for Bush in 2000, and admired him in the aftermath of 9/11, and said his only real problem with Bush's policies was Iraq. No hatred, no far left propaganda ....
I don't know if I heard the real Chris Matthews, who uses a different persona on the TV to generate ratings (as poor as MSNBC's are), or if I heard the sham of someone trying to sell a book on a conservative talk show. Hearing his words, and how they were delivered, I tend to believe the former.
Doesn't mean I'll watch his show ....
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Reframing the Global Eco-Scam
ecoAmerica, a 'non-profit' environmental marketing firm in Washington, has been conducting research and focus groups for the past couple of years. The goal - to reframe the global warming message into something that is easier to attract people.
Now, first .... Global warming is an absolute scientific fact, according to the left. No argument is allowed, no dissension is accepted. If that is so, then why does a environmental marketing firm exist?
ecoAmerica has decided that key phrases need to be substituted when talking about global warming. The American public has grown weary of hearing 'global warming', and equates the phrase with left wing eco-terrorists, treehuggers, fruits, and flakes. Well, duh ....
Out: global warming
In: our deteriorating atmosphere
Out: carbon dioxide
In: moving away from dirty fuels of the past
Out: cap and trade
In: cap and cash back
In: pollution reduction fund
Out: energy efficiency
In: saving money for a more propserous future
Out: the environment
In: the air we breathe, the water our children drink
Apparently, a slick marketing campaign is needed to rescue this 'absolute science' in the public's eye.
eco-America held briefings on their findings for environmental groups and the Obama administration this past week. The presentation, which was not supposed to be made public, was leaked to the press, either by accident or by someone with a conscience.
I've got my own word exchange I feel is more appropriate:
Out: global warming
In: scam
Out: climate change
In: natural warming and cooling cycle of the earth's environment
Now, first .... Global warming is an absolute scientific fact, according to the left. No argument is allowed, no dissension is accepted. If that is so, then why does a environmental marketing firm exist?
ecoAmerica has decided that key phrases need to be substituted when talking about global warming. The American public has grown weary of hearing 'global warming', and equates the phrase with left wing eco-terrorists, treehuggers, fruits, and flakes. Well, duh ....
Out: global warming
In: our deteriorating atmosphere
Out: carbon dioxide
In: moving away from dirty fuels of the past
Out: cap and trade
In: cap and cash back
In: pollution reduction fund
Out: energy efficiency
In: saving money for a more propserous future
Out: the environment
In: the air we breathe, the water our children drink
Apparently, a slick marketing campaign is needed to rescue this 'absolute science' in the public's eye.
eco-America held briefings on their findings for environmental groups and the Obama administration this past week. The presentation, which was not supposed to be made public, was leaked to the press, either by accident or by someone with a conscience.
I've got my own word exchange I feel is more appropriate:
Out: global warming
In: scam
Out: climate change
In: natural warming and cooling cycle of the earth's environment
Friday, May 1, 2009
Obama's First Supreme Court Choice - How Far Left Will He Go?
Supreme Court Justice David Souter announced he will be resigning his seat on the court after it ends its current session, this coming summer. Souter, appointed by President Bush (41), had been generally considered one of the liberal members of the court, siding with the leftists on the vast majority of decisions. Given this, it is unlikely that Obama's new appointee will have any impact on the power balance on the court.
Souter promoted himself as a conservative during his vetting process, one who would uphold strict interpretation of the Constitution. Shortly after he was seated, it became apparent he had misled the President - he was a moderate left winger in sheep's clothing.
Early speculation in the news is that Obama will nominate US Appeals Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor. A female, of Puerto Rican heritage would fill two of Obama's stated criteria for the position - female, and a minority. However, it is far too early for a favorite to emerge.
This will be a very revealing pick for Obama. Will he choose a moderate liberal in the mold of Souter, or will he pick a far left nutjob - a clone of Ruth Bader Ginsburg? I would place money on the latter, especially since there is nothing Republicans can do to oppose the pick - he will jump at the chance to give a lifetime appointment to a radical judicial activist.
Obama is not constrained by many rules concerning his pick - a Supreme Court Justice does not have to meet any qualifications - doesn't have to have been a lawyer, or a judge, or have any judicial training or experience whatsoever. It could be Hillary Clinton ... Eric Holder ... Janet Napolitano ... all three have been mentioned as possibilities. He could nominate Bill Ayers, for pete's sake ....
Update - The more I hear in the media about this as the days go by, the worse it gets. There is no pretense of argument from the left about who the pick should be. The most important factor to them is which minority (or minorities) are represented by the pick. The only experience that Obama thinks is credible is how downtrodden the person and his monority affiliations are. He's flat come out and said that several times, that he wants someone who has been failed by the system, who has experienced being shafted by the government and big business. Judicial and Constitutional experience/knowledge are not necessary, and may not even be wanted. It is a given that such a minority person will be far left - any minority who is considered moderate or conservative is not a 'real' minority.
The argument from the right is still partisan, but much more logical. They want a conservative jurist, or at least a moderate one, who is judicially qualified, and will apply the law and the Constitution as it is written.
Our framers, the incredible people who established the foundation for this country, established the Supreme Court as a check on the power of the President and Congress - to make sure that what those two branches did was in agreement with the Constitution. The Supreme Court cannot make laws - it cannot make policy - that is an absolute mandate of our Constitution. However, Obama has made it very clear that he sees it differently - to him, the court is a tool to be used to make social changes . Apparently, Obama believes He knows better than the people who founded this country. No surprise there .....
Souter promoted himself as a conservative during his vetting process, one who would uphold strict interpretation of the Constitution. Shortly after he was seated, it became apparent he had misled the President - he was a moderate left winger in sheep's clothing.
Early speculation in the news is that Obama will nominate US Appeals Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor. A female, of Puerto Rican heritage would fill two of Obama's stated criteria for the position - female, and a minority. However, it is far too early for a favorite to emerge.
This will be a very revealing pick for Obama. Will he choose a moderate liberal in the mold of Souter, or will he pick a far left nutjob - a clone of Ruth Bader Ginsburg? I would place money on the latter, especially since there is nothing Republicans can do to oppose the pick - he will jump at the chance to give a lifetime appointment to a radical judicial activist.
Obama is not constrained by many rules concerning his pick - a Supreme Court Justice does not have to meet any qualifications - doesn't have to have been a lawyer, or a judge, or have any judicial training or experience whatsoever. It could be Hillary Clinton ... Eric Holder ... Janet Napolitano ... all three have been mentioned as possibilities. He could nominate Bill Ayers, for pete's sake ....
Update - The more I hear in the media about this as the days go by, the worse it gets. There is no pretense of argument from the left about who the pick should be. The most important factor to them is which minority (or minorities) are represented by the pick. The only experience that Obama thinks is credible is how downtrodden the person and his monority affiliations are. He's flat come out and said that several times, that he wants someone who has been failed by the system, who has experienced being shafted by the government and big business. Judicial and Constitutional experience/knowledge are not necessary, and may not even be wanted. It is a given that such a minority person will be far left - any minority who is considered moderate or conservative is not a 'real' minority.
The argument from the right is still partisan, but much more logical. They want a conservative jurist, or at least a moderate one, who is judicially qualified, and will apply the law and the Constitution as it is written.
Our framers, the incredible people who established the foundation for this country, established the Supreme Court as a check on the power of the President and Congress - to make sure that what those two branches did was in agreement with the Constitution. The Supreme Court cannot make laws - it cannot make policy - that is an absolute mandate of our Constitution. However, Obama has made it very clear that he sees it differently - to him, the court is a tool to be used to make social changes . Apparently, Obama believes He knows better than the people who founded this country. No surprise there .....