Punching Stupid and Evil in the Face Since 1986!
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Saturday, January 23, 2010
President Obama is reconstituting the team that helped him win the White House to counter Republican challenges in the midterm elections and recalibrate after political setbacks that have narrowed his legislative ambitions.The most intriguing part is he seems to have no clue it is his own radical agenda and his refusal to listen to what the majority of Americans want that is causing this hemorrhage. Even at this stage in the game Obama does not see the correlation between advancing things like the Health Care take over, more government involvement and regulation of industry, continually pushing the lie of global warming and his falling poll numbers. Democrats that support these radical agenda items will feel the wrath of the American voter at the polls. As I pointed out earlier, Tea Party is no longer a movement for conservatives alone. It is the mind-set of the majority of the American people and we now see we have the power to take control of elections-ANYWHERE.
Mr. Obama has asked his former campaign manager, David Plouffe, to oversee House, Senate and governor’s races to stave off a hemorrhage of seats in the fall. The president ordered a review of the Democratic political operation — from the White House to party committees — after last week’s Republican victory in the Massachusetts Senate race, aides said.
President Obama need not worry that it is his team failing to get elected the people he wants elected. It is his failed ideas and radical agenda that is failing to get these folks in office. Listen to what the majority wants President Obama, stop campaigning and start presiding-that's your job.
Two Democratic senators who are up for re-election this year announced that they would oppose Mr. Bernanke, whose four-year term as head of the central bank expires at the end of this month. Their decisions reflected a surge of opposition among some Democrats and Republicans to Mr. Bernanke, a primary architect of the bailout of the financial system and a contributor to policies that critics contend put the economy at risk in the first place.The fact is this is the same guy who, on the one hand designed and approved not only the plan for TARP, but then the subsequent bonus payouts to the top executives. THEN testified he didn't know the bonus pay-outs were in there. Yeah. Right.
He was also right behind President Obama and his crew when they proposed the $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. This fine feat of monetary wizardry was supposed to keep unemployment from going into double digits and make all the world sunshine and butterfly farts. With unemployment now at something over 10%, we see how well that's working out.
However, rejecting Bernanke might not be a boon to Republicans either. At this point the minority may be in a dammed if you do, dammed if you don't situation.
While some Republicans were certain to oppose Mr. Bernanke, the minority leadership had its own strategic calculations to make.The best candidate would actually understand what has happened to the economy and have a real plan in place to guide this Administration in fixing it. Unfortunately, I remain unconvinced Bernanke is our guy. If the parties truly want to understand the anger toward government, Wall Street and other institutions they might want to start by not continuing the failed policies of this Administration.
Rejecting Mr. Bernanke, a Republican economist who was named chairman by President George W. Bush in 2005 and took over in 2006, could lead Mr. Obama to appoint someone from the ranks of Democratic economists that Republican lawmakers find less appealing. And if markets swooned, Republicans would share in the blame.
But even if the nomination is approved, the spasm of anxiety surrounding it will have highlighted how members of both parties are reassessing their stands on many issues as they try to understand the strain of anger toward the government, Wall Street and other institutions.
The American people were told our money must be spent in order to save companies too big to fail. Those same companies were allowed to pay out huge bonuses and make extravagant budget decisions; the people got a little annoyed. The fact is Government made the American people mad at Wall Street and Big Business. They demonized them with one hand, while stroking their collective backs with the other. Government seems to be great at making those it wishes to control into the bad guys.
They created, then fed the anger of the American people. The fact that they still don't understand that is very telling.......
As is proven by the election of Scott Brown, Tea Party isn't a conservative only movement, it's a smaller, fiscally responsible government, stay out of my pants/pockets/bedroom movement. Overwhelmingly America is seeing the false promises of government and it's inability to provide.......well, anything really. Independents and moderate Democrats are finding their leaders going much too far and they are joining in the Tea Party. Especially in a true blue state like Massachusetts, conservatives did not get Scott Brown elected. Intelligent, thinking human beings, tired of being ignored by their representatives got Scott Brown elected. Most assuredly, the majority of those folks were not only decidedly not conservative, they weren't Republicans either.
The Republican party and the media need to let go this idea of harnessing and controlling Tea Party. From this point forward you will see candidates win who support values and policies based on the Founding Fathers and the documents they created. Over so many years these ideas and our foundation have been forgotten. Tea Party is the driving force bringing those things back to the awerness of the American people.
Some are wild about Harry; Harry’s wild about Haiti.
God in his infinite wisdom gave a powerful reminder of his dominion over our insignificant Earth by shaking the ground under the small Caribbean island. The scene has unfolded as a massive human tragedy with a possibility of 200,000 dead. I pray for the survivors, and I pray for the families of those that lost loved-ones.
Now, cynicism. The Haitian earthquake took the focus off a gathering storm over the leader of the Democrats in the Senate. Harry Reid can breathe a sigh of relief, well, thanks to God. His racist statement about candidate Obama was fueling a firestorm of criticism from Republicans and Conservatives throughout the nation, and given more kindling, the calls for his ouster as majority leader would have bled to certain members of the Democrat party. His support would have dwindled. His end was near.
Let’s take a step back to review the situation logically. First, the definition of Racism according to Webster is: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.
Let’s look at two examples of racism. Reid’s and Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor:
From the book Game Change, “he (Reid) was wowed by Obama's oratorical gifts and believed that the country was ready to embrace a black presidential candidate, especially one such as Obama - a ‘light-skinned’ African American ‘with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one,’ as he said privately. Reid was convinced, in fact, that Obama's race would help him more than hurt him in a bid for the Democratic nomination,"
At a 2001 lecture, Sonia Sotomayor said, "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."
In the estimation of these two fine, open-minded liberals, based solely on race, there are differences in a person’s abilities. In Sotomayor’s estimation, her race (and sex) makes her a better jurist; and in Reid’s estimation, dark-skinned people with Negro dialect have less chance of becoming President. However true these statements may or may not be, they make their assertions based solely on race.
In both cases, liberals, Democrats and the media circled the wagons around their racially wayward friends. Obama declared the matter closed after immediately accepting his apology. And, we all know that Sotomayor was later confirmed to the Supreme Court. Newt Gingrich was chastised for even asserting that Sotomayor was racist; but not the nominee.
Let’s look at another example:
In December 2002, Trent Lott said, “I want to say this about my state: When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either,"
On its face, the statement from Lott does not mention race. Certainly the words Negro and Latino do not appear. But, Al Sharpton, in his recent 2010 interview asserted that Lott was referring to Thurmond’s racial, segregationist run for President. I guess one could “infer” that was the case, but it certainly does not directly appear in the statement like the other examples of racism above. In interview after interview, Sharpton continued to chastise Lott’s statement as racist and forgave the obviously racist statements from Reid and Sotomayor.
But, no one asked Sharpton this simple question that had me yelling at the TV. Al… boobie… are you telling me Lott was so racist and so STUPID in 2002 that he wished aloud for the country to have continued down a path of racial segregation? Al, are you telling me in 2002 you could read his mind and knew, without evidence in the statement, that Lott wanted ‘whites only’ fountains? Blacks in the back of the bus? Whites-only schools? Is that what you really believe Mr. Sharpton?
No, Al Sharpton doesn’t believe Lott’s statement was racist. Lott was a pariah because he doesn’t follow Sharpton, Reid, Sotomayor, and Obama’s ideological playbook of using minorities to gain personal wealth and power. Lott believed in lifting all people, including minorities, based on their own hard work and efforts! And, how could the liberals and Democrats use THAT to control the masses. So he had to go.
Harry Reid, Barack Obama, a host of liberals and Democrats, and the media called for Lott’s ouster. But none of them are calling for the same from Reid. Double standard much? Harry Reid should leave Congress and return to Nevada in shame. However, he will not.
The racism of liberals and Democrats will continue ad infinitum.
So, yes, our focus should stay on Haiti for now. Republicans and Conservatives can quiet their calls. Our attention is needed elsewhere. But, soon the focus will shift back to America and the 2010 elections. And, the latest poster-child of racism will still be there – supported by the Liberals and Democrats in the Congress, White House, and the press. Thanks for the electoral help folks; keep making it easy for us.
STATEMENT OF CONFIDENTIALITY: The information contained in this message and any attachment(s) is privileged and confidential and may contain proprietary information and, as a result, is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you are prohibited from disseminating, distributing, or copying the information contained in this message.
If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies of the original message.
Friday, January 22, 2010
Live video by Ustream
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Martha Coakley-Don't worry Martha, I'm sure even though the smelly, stinky fans from Fenway Park, Curt Schilling and that poor reporter knocked down by your campaign worker won't vote for you....the terrorists definitely will-after all they aren't in Afghanistan any more so surely they are at the polls. I just don't know if it will be enough to get you in office. For being yet another clueless politician, looking to get all the votes in the 57th state 7 punches
John Kerry-Seems Mr. Kerry is so upset about at the thought of a Republican winning that MA seat he's afraid of the crowds and throwing out vulgar names. He also wants to blame tea partiers for "hijacking health care reform and [....any] chance we have at making progress in Washington." It's so weird to me....you would think a man with so much of his wife's money to count could do easy math-Dems could have passed heath care control any day of the week. You don't need the Tea Partiers for that baby. Stop your whining and go suck on a tomato dude-7 punches
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
The Associated Press called the race for Brown as the Republican held a 53percent to 46 percent edge over Coakley with more than 70 percent of precinctsScott Brown worked hard, got the eye of the people and was successful in taking back the PEOPLE'S SEAT. Other political candidates should take that as a mandate by Tea Party.
reporting. Coakley conceded defeat to Brown in a phone call shortly before the
race was called....
Voinovich isn’t seeking reelection to the Senate this year, which makes him perhaps the most dangerous Republican in the Senate given his proclivity forOf course this is the same guy who cries about the children when talking about the nomination for United Nations Ambassador, led the charge on the auto bailout, and thinks amnesty is swell.
stabbing his party in the backsorry, crossing the aisle. RedState’s Erick Erickson tweeted
yesterday that Voinovich is reportedly meeting with President Obama today,
and Weapons of Mass Discussion also reports that Democrats are going to target Voinovich to become their 60th vote for ObamaCare should Scott Brown be elected in Massachusetts.
Excellent. Thanks Voinovich-please pass the lube first.
New York Sen. Charles Schumer, who famously hammered then-Sen. Alfonse 'Amato for calling him a "putz-head" in their hot 1998 campaign, was accused Thursday of stepping into the gutter himself after he sent out a fundraising e-mail in which he called Massachusetts Republican Senate candidate Scott Brown a "far-right tea-bagger."How cool is it that a non-sense word is far more offensive than an actual word referring to a sex act?
The two-term Democrat, in accusing Brown of being aligned with the conservative "tea party" movement, used a term that every tea party critic knows refers to a sexual act.
How about calling a flight attendant a "bitch"....for doing her job.
I'll give you credit for being consistent. Whatever. How about this Chuck Schumer-shut your pie hole you douche bag.
British Airways has been accused of treating all men passengers as potential sex offenders after it was revealed it has banned children from sitting next to male strangers - even if their parents are on the same flight.It is unconscionable to me that it is acceptable to label men in this manner with no provocation what-so-ever. Over and over we see double standards and unfair standards applied to the sexes-men shouldn't show emotion, yet women want to bitch when they don't; men shouldn't hit women, but it is fine for a woman to bash a man with the nearest frying pan every chance she gets. Men are the root of everything evil. Now we can cap all of our "be strong, silent, and awesome-even though you totally suck" with the added caveate of knowing you are a horrible sex pervert just wating to jump at the chance to touch a child.
The bizarre regulation came to light when a nine-year-old girl was moved from her seat next to a 76-year-old passenger and his wife on a flight from Malaga to London.
Please, be sure to tell your sons.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
With the announcement comes some controversy. There are those concerned this means Beck has sold out his independent, conservative, street cred by speaking at CPAC. The Conservative Political Action Conference is the must attend event for Republicans, no doubt about it, however, I'm not sure just because Beck will speak it means he is "throwing in with Republicans". The feeling is that because some folks speaking at the Conference are "establishment" Republicans-i.e. heavyweights in the political arena-Beck's participation means he is now joining with them. Beck seems to dismiss this criticism:
CPAC is different, though, Beck said, asserting “CPAC is my kind of people. CPAC is — I think they’re as angry at the Republicans as I am.”I would agree with that. Over this last year, between Tea Party, 9-12'ers and countless other activist groups that have sprung up around the country, there is no doubt Conservatives are done with Republicans playing Democrat lite and selling out the base time and time again. These groups have attacked and gutted those in our own party who do not represent what we-THE PEOPLE-want the GOP to represent. It has become clear there is a new attitude afoot in the Republican Party and those voices are here to stay.
Within the controversy surrounding Beck speaking is another pervasive message we see a lot these days-establishment GOP are to be vilified and eviscerated. In many instances this is true, but not always. As conservatives fighting for a return to core values and small government, we need to identify the politicians and candidates that are already in office who will support us in our movement. Keep in mind, while folks like Eric Cantor (R-VA) and John Boehner (R-OH) may not have always done exactly as we would have liked, they also have not had the support and voices of the people behind them for all that long. As conservatives, we have gotten the government we have asked for. We spent years living our lives, raising our families, and voting for the "R" behind someones name. Those folks got in government, made deals, passed laws and did whatever they wanted and few of us held them accountable for much. Once things reached a crisis level, conservatives woke up and started screaming "Hey, what's the matter with you people! What are you doing to my country!"
Its not too little, too late (we hope), but it could be if the only thing we aim to do is rid the party of everyone currently in it. Better to re-train those we identify as mostly having done the right thing over the last few years and replacing those that deserve to be replaced-such as Olympia Snowe (R-ME) and Susan Collins (R-ME)-with candidates who will better represent the conservative viewpoint....rather than representatives who defect to the Democrats side at every turn. A third party will not work and I believe throwing out every single Republican on The Hill also won't work. There are people up there who represent what we want. They just need to hear from us.
If indeed it is our goal to take back the governement this year we need to be realistic about what a true sell-out is. We need to be mindful of those who look to be working for us, while not being co-opted by those that want to use us. No politician was anxious to jump on the Tea Party bandwagon right at first; can you blame them really? We had been complacent for so long, they really were scared we were a bunch of crazies. As our message has solidified and our resolve has hardened into steel, they are starting to get it. We must guide our party now. It is our time and our responsibility. We must be clear: if they want to work for the people, we want them. If they want to work for themselves, they will be shown the door.
I can relate....I don't like being forced to buy something with a gun to my head either.
Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) issued a blunt, angry statement on Wednesday,
accusing the Senate of conducting negotiations with the House while holding "a
gun to our head."
"The House has shown deference to the Senate in this process. But I am tired of hearing how hard it was to get 60 votes in the Senate — getting 218 votes to pass our healthcare bill in the House wasn’t easy," said Weiner, who has taken an increasingly prominent role during the healthcare debate.
Democratic leaders are working to reconcile the House and Senate bills, particularly a handful of issues — including a tax on "Cadillac plans" and restrictions on abortion funding — that have the two chambers at loggerheads
Funny though, while the left likes to point to Republicans as being the party of no and the reason this deal has not been done, it is clear that the most radical on the left cannot reconcile with the more moderate Dems. When you have some in their own party that want nothing to do with abortion funding or a public option and yet others that will not pass it without either, it would seem they have a loooong way to go. Fortunately, Obama has flown in on his white horse to make sure they get it done-no matter the cost to the people.
President Barack Obama is expected Thursday to propose taxing large banks and other companies based on their exposure to risk, White House officials said.I wonder if anyone remembers how some banks were forced to take TARP funds even though they didn't want them? I wonder if anyone remembers that much of the financial crisis was caused by Democrats insisting that these institutions give mortgages to people who couldn't afford them, at rates that were often ridiculous, on homes not worth near the amount those institutions wrote down on loan applications? Hmmmmm.......
The plan marks the latest in a slew of proposed fees, penalties and constraints the White House envisions slapping on Wall Street during the cleanup of the U.S. financial crisis, and marks a new stage in the White House's populist assault on the finance industry.
Administration officials went out of their way Wednesday to show no sympathy for big banks they acknowledged would lobby hard against the proposal.
"The banks that are in question were significantly responsible for the enormous degree of the reckless risk-taking that was borne throughout the economy," one official said.
If approved by Congress, the new tax -- which the White House calls a "financial crisis responsibility fee" -- would force about 50 banks, insurance companies and large broker-dealers to collectively pay the federal government roughly $90 billion over 10 years. Of the 50, about 35 would be U.S. companies and 10 to 15 would be U.S. subsidiaries of foreign financial firms.
Finally, it is mind-blowing that financial institutions are being forced to pay these fees and taxes in part to re-pay money that was given to the automotive sector. Only under socialism would one (nearly) government run/owned industry be made to pay for the sins of another. The reasoning?
The taxed firms are expected to pay the cost of bailout money that went to General Motors Co. and Chrysler LLC, which are exempt from the tax. The administration official defended the omission by contending that U.S. auto makers collapsed in part because of a financial crisis of the banks' making.Not only is that a stretch, it is flat out wrong. Union mismanagement and industry mismanagement are the reasons behind the automotive collapse. Banks failing had nothing to do with GM and Chrysler failing. The automotive industry didn't get into this predicament overnight; this failure has been a long time coming. People who knew better have been telling these companies for years to get their collective heads out of their butts and make some changes.
It is a sad day in America where government is increasingly used to punish and marginalize people and industry. I think if you look back at Russia's history, you will see they did (still do) the same thing to their country.
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Al Sharpton-From one of the most vicious and prominent race baiters around we get forgiveness for the poorly worded comments out of Harry Reids mouth, but not one ounce of compassion or understanding for Trent Lott, Don Imus or any number of other people who have used poorly chosen words at various times. He crucified Don Imus for what was absolutely a poor word choice made by an entertainer-not the president of the senate. And in 2002 Sharpton apparently acquired magical mind reading powers and was able to know what was in Trent Lotts mind when he was clearly just making an old man feel good on his 100th birthday. For being a pick and choose race defender Al Sharpton gets 10 punches
Janet Napolitano-On Christmas day we had a guy set his crotch on fire in an attempt to blow up a plane...to which Janet Napolitano stated the "system worked", when he was unsuccessful. I was not aware that our new Homeland Security defense system is to hope all terrorists are too stupid to work their panty bombs and defenseless citizens will take matters into their own hands. Of course what else would you expect from the woman who cannot tell the difference between Tea Party grandmas or Canadians and an actual terrorist and who is also unfamiliar with the law where it is in fact illegal to cross the border, um.....illegally. For just being completely clueless and ridiculous Ms. Napolitano gets 9 punches
David Gergen-This week CNN senior political analyst David Gergen asked Republican candidate Scott Brown whether he'd be willing to "sit in Teddy Kennedy's seat and [say] I'm going to be the person who's going to block [liberal health care policy] for another 15 years."
Brown responded with: "Well, with all due respect it's not the Kennedys' seat, and it's not the Democrats' seat, it's the people's seat." Obviously Gergen and all Democrats for that matter think Kennedy's name is written in sharpie on that seat and it will forever remain in the hands of democrats like some kind of birth-right. For pulling up your skirt and showing us your truly liberal underpinnings David Gergen gets 6 punches
Monday, January 11, 2010
"He [Reid] was wowed by Obama's oratorical gifts and believed that the country was ready to embrace a black presidential candidate, especially one such as Obama -- a 'light-skinned' African American 'with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one,'is fully deserved.
Then to have those clearly inappropriate comments excused by saying they were said "in private" is utterly ridiculous.
I can only assume poor Harry thought that "What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas" was more than just a catch phrase.
Prosecutors, who are trying Mr. Roeder on a charge of first-degree murder, want to bar defense lawyers from presenting a theory that might lead to a conviction for voluntary manslaughter, which carries a far milder punishment and which could offer Mr. Roeder a chance to present his views on abortion in court.While I would never support the murder of another human being-EVER-under any circumstances, this case does present several interesting points that must be considered-not only the abortion issue and human rights issues, but also the issue of murder itself. While those that support abortion rights would tell you Dr. Tiller had every right to perform those late term abortions under the law, I would argue that the issue of viability and what exactly is murder applies to abortions performed so late in pregnancy.
Generally speaking, under the law if you kill a pregnant woman and her baby would have been viable outside the womb, you are charged with both murders. In the case of Lacy Peterson, brutally murdered by her husband Scott Peterson, he was also charged in the death of his unborn son. He was charged with both murders because his baby could have easily lived outside the womb.
So, how is it this is not a double standard? The babies Dr. Tiller was aborting had an excellent chance of surviving outside of the womb....therefore there is no arguing that they were not "alive". In fact, I have living proof. If it is murder for me to kill a pregnant woman's baby, how is it not murder when a doctor does it? To lean on the old and tired excuse of saving the mother's life doesn't really fly. If the mothers life is in danger, the baby can be delivered and nature and God will decide if the child is strong enough and healthy enough to survive.....just as these things are decided everyday.
Another oft used argument concerns children with severe disabilities. Most disabilities are found long before the 21st week. For those that are not, is it acceptable to kill those children anyway? How about extending that time up to one hour after the child is born? How about two or three hours? Appalled? You should be, but there is essentially no difference. Once the baby can survive outside the womb, there can be no argument, there is never an acceptable time to kill it. Murder is murder, no matter who you are doing it to.
There is no chance I would ever change my personal feelings on the abortion issue, but one thing is glaringly obvious, we need to set a standard and that standard must apply across the board to ALL people. Even the tiniest people. We can't claim to live in a decent and honorable society and still promote the falsehood that until a baby passes out of it's mother it is not a human being. In that one split second of being born life does not magically enter the body of the baby. It is there the whole time, growing and expanding from day one.
Thursday, January 7, 2010
White House national security adviser James Jones says Americans will feel "a certain shock" when they read an account being released Thursday of the missed clues that could have prevented the alleged Christmas Day bomber from ever boarding the plane.It may shock Mr. Jones to know that I will NOT be shocked. This Administration has done nothing but ignore the threat against this country, minimize the importance of national security and kiss the egos of our enemies. Not only has the system been poorly designed from the start, but the measures being taken now to "tighten" security are going to do nothing to less-than-nothing to make this country safe. Ripping toys and pillows from the hands of tots isn't a security measure. Searching Grandma isn't a security measure. Clearly defining and advertising the tell our TSA will look for in a "single extremest" isn't a security measure. Playing politically correct politeness games with our lives isn't a security measure.
No Mr. Jones, I will not be shocked at anything you tell me about the system and it's failures. If this country wants to actually be safe and protect it's citizens this Administration must begin to take seriously the terrorist threats against us. They must stop pretending these are just crimes like robbing the liquor store. When we begin to treat terrorists as common criminals and as though they pose no more threat to us than a 14-year old robbing a bank we end up with more bodies, another date to remember...another day to call a National Day of Service in this country.
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
MOPNS points us to a silly Claire McCaskill video where she "answers the phones"
on health care. She posted it to her YouTube channel, so I posted a video response. It's doubtful they will approve my video, So I'm posting it here.
YOU MUST GO WATCH THESE VIDEOS
First, using this tactic, they were successful in swelling the welfare rolls in NewYork City to such a size that in 1975 New York had to file bankruptcy.
Later, the strategy was refined and the next target, voter registration, was attacked. In 1982 Project Vote and Human SERVE were founded. (the later being started by Cloward and Piven themselves, along with former NWRO organizer named Hulbert James) The idea again was to over-whelm the system, but this time the tool was invalid registrants and voter fraud.
All three of these organizations -- ACORN, Project Vote and Human SERVE -- set to work lobbying energetically for the so-called Motor-Voter law, which Bill Clinton ultimately signed in 1993. The Motor-Voter bill is largely responsible for swamping the voter rolls with "dead wood" -- invalid registrations signed in the name of deceased, ineligible or non-existent people -- thus opening the door to the unprecedented levels of voter fraud and "voter disenfranchisement" claims that followed in subsequent elections.Now, in a time of crushing economic debt, mounting public dissatisfaction and lefts seeming disregard for the opinion of their keepers, we have a doubling-down of this attempt at eviscerating the Republic.
The new "voting rights" coalition combines mass voter registration drives -- typically featuring high levels of fraud -- with systematic intimidation of election officials in the form of frivolous lawsuits, unfounded charges of "racism" and "disenfranchisement," and "direct action" (street protests, violent or otherwise). Just as they swamped America's welfare offices in the 1960s, Cloward-Piven devotees now seek to overwhelm the nation's understaffed and poorly policed electoral system. Their tactics set the stage for the Florida recount crisis of 2000, and have introduced a level of fear, tension and foreboding to U.S. elections heretofore encountered mainly in Third World countries.
Speaking at the David Horowitz Freedom Center forum, John Fund says get ready for Universal Voter Registration. (VIDEO) The plan? Implement a federal mandate which overrides State law taking everyone on every list of welfare, unemployment, property owners and driver's license holders and register them to vote automatically. There is absolutely no doubt this will render the voting system in America completely impotent.
Universal voter registration will create massive vulnerabilities to systemic voter fraud nationwide, and if Democrats have proven anything in recent years, it is that they can win elections that way. The George-Soros-funded Secretary of State project (SOS) was designed to take advantage of such vulnerabilities and may have been developed in anticipation of the universal voter registration plan. Al Franken's stolen election in Minnesota was a trial run for the SOS project. Longtime ACORN friend Mark Ritchie was elected Minnesota Secretary of State in 2006 with Soros's SOS and ACORN money, and what followed in Norm Coleman's Senate runoff election was a frightening demonstration of just how far Democrats will go to win. Franken won the runoff, and the Democrats got their filibuster-proof sixty-vote Senate majority.It is imperative we not take our eye off the ball. The problem is there are so many balls. With health care on the dawn of passing and the economy in shambles, there is nearly the perfect storm for Cloward-Piven's strategy to have real teeth on a much larger stage than ever before. Once such massive voter registration fraud has been perpetrated on the American Republic as a whole, there will be no stopping the socialistic Garden of Eden.
Universal Voter registration just may be the ultimate Trojan Horse the liberal left is looking for.
Sunday, January 3, 2010
Over the years, not only has the "traditional" family been scoffed at and maligned by liberals, but the lure of easy credit and an uptick toward a consumer society have led people to find comfort and joy in material things rather than their families. Shopping and buying have replaced talking and bonding. Its easy to see in the children and their tantrums for the latest toy or gaming system or the expensive clothing the teens must have. Even the parents, rather than taking time with the spouse or the family everyday they are buying or working so they can buy more......never quite meshing with each other because that can only be done through shared experience.
But maybe we are about to see a new trend, a trend back toward family and the rewarding experiences that can be found there, rather than the false comfort of consumerism. In a recent poll by New York Times/CBS it looks like the family unit may be seeing a resurgence, oddly enough because of the recession.
....a recent New York Times/CBS News poll has found, nearly half of Americans saidWouldn't it be a nice side-effect of the economy bursting for the traditional family to make a come back? Wouldn't it be great if less spending of dollars leads to more spending of time? While it is hard to find anything positive about the current state of the economy, maybe this is a glimmer of hope. As families shift away from going and doing and spending and toward being entertained by each other going and doing and participating together, it could strengthen our bonds to each other once again. As we learn to know the people in our family, we begin to care about them in a deeper way. When you care about something deeply, its worth fighting for. Maybe the recession will remind everyone why things like family, love, respect, and personal responsibility are values and the "things" worth having.
they were spending less time buying non essentials, and more than half are spending less money in stores and online.
But Americans are not just getting by with less. They are also doing more.
Some are working longer hours, but a larger proportion, the poll shows, are spending additional time with family and friends, gardening, cooking, reading, watching television and engaging in other hobbies.
The Obama administration’s $75 billion program to protect homeowners from foreclosure has been widely pronounced a disappointment, and some economists andIt is unfathomable to me the folks in charge didn't know this would be the result of temporary relief-especially when done like this. There is no value in staving off most of these foreclosures, they are going happen anyway. It's only a matter of time. The only thing accomplished with this program is some folks went into foreclosure right away and some will go into foreclosure over the next several months. While I'm sure a reduction in interest rates did help a few, there is no way it was worth $75 billion. Many spent tons of money and time only to find they lost (or will lose) their homes anyway. We cannot continue to think the way to save this economy is to put off that pain which must happen. We are loading up future generations with debt in the form of health care, stimulus, bailouts and pork. To undermine the natural ramifications of a bubble burst only adds to the burden that will be carried by our children and grandchildren.
real estate experts now contend it has done more harm than good.
Since announced the program in February, it has lowered mortgage payments on a trial basis for hundreds of thousands of people but has largely failed to provide permanent relief. Critics increasingly argue that the program, Making Home Affordable, has raised false hopes among people who simply cannot afford their homes.
An economic policy of "kicking the can down the road" is not sustainable or realistic. I wonder if the next President will just say "I inherited this mess from Obama....wadda you want me to do about it?"
Saturday, January 2, 2010
Writing in The New York Times, Jane Brody told a very compassionate story of an 11-year-old girl who was born after just 25 weeks gestation, weighing only 13.5 ounces, but who is now, amazingly, an accomplished writer and illustrator. Brody did not cite the costs of the child's neonatal intensive care, other than to say that the infant spent the first five months of her life in a Falls Church, Va., hospital. (It is difficult to find data on such costs; one hospital in Rhode Island estimated the daily expense at around $2,000, which means that a five-month stay would cost upwards of $300,000.) The Times article concludes with a comment by Dr. Michele Walsh, a neonatologist in Cleveland, who says that although it is expensive to maintain "million-dollar babies," it becomes very cost-effective over time: "There is a return on investment when they get out into the work force and pay taxes."I must tell you as the mother of an extremely premature baby, with low birth weight, who had zero percent chance of survival 18 years ago-there is NO DEBATE in my mind.
Being an economist, I was struck by this explicit link between the cost and benefits. Even though the United States is on the verge of implementing a health care reform that explicitly calls for "bending the cost curve," only rarely does the issue of "cost effectiveness"arise when considering whether, for example, to take measures to save the life of a child. And, when the issue does arise, it is usually generates howls of
outrage, such as occurred in 2006, when a U.K. research group recommended that
doctors not routinely resuscitate extremely premature babies (those born before
22 weeks of gestation). The recommendation was based on data showing that such babies rarely survived --- only 1 percent of those born between 22 and 23 weeks left the hospital.
Read the story of my daughter, born 22.5 weeks, weighing 1 pound 3 ounces posted HERE:
Friday, January 1, 2010
Starting Jan. 1, estate taxes will be repealed for 2010 only. That means unless Congress acts otherwise, there is no limit to the wealth that can be passed on to heirs without incurring estate taxes through the end of that year.As is the norm with our government though, this tax holiday may be short lived. Not only was it the Dems plan all along that surely someone would introduce legislation to get rid of this fair treatment of the American people...you know, where they get to keep money they have worked for and already paid taxes on several times over, but now that it hasn't been stopped, there are a few on Capitol Hill looking to repeal this tax break. The plan would be to put something in place next year that will repeal the tax break retroactive to this year.
"Ten years ago, there was a lot of gallows humor about repeal when everybody said it would never happen," said Rep. Richard Neal (D., Mass.), who chairs the House Select Revenue Subcommittee. "Now, one of those never-happen moments has happened, and nobody's laughing."Granted, this is not the first time Congress has made changes to tax laws and made those changes retroactive. None-the-less it doesn't make it fair or reasonable. The death tax has always been a ridiculous and unfair tax; repealing it permanently is the right thing to do.
Mr. Neal said "there is no question" that Congress will reinstate the tax, retroactively to Jan. 1, early next year. That is also the intention of Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D., Mont.). But others aren't so sure.
I have no doubt no one is laughing. Why wouldn't our legislators feel it is OK to rape and pillage the dead? They do it to the rest of us all the time.