Gays to Serve Openly in the Military?
Monday, November 17, 2008 at 08:14PM I'm not sure what to think on this one. Even with my he-man prejudices I had while on active duty, I think its a matter of time before this becomes the norm. I served for 20 years. I knew more than a few soldiers who were gay and did little to nothing to hide the fact and I'm sure for every "obvious" gay there were a dozen who to one degree or another hid their orientation. I remember, clearly during my first two years in the service two soldiers who I "discovered" were gay and perhaps due to the particular situation of those discoveries, it repulsed me. The images have stayed with me for a long time, unfaded in any meaningful way over the years. I made and joined in on the usual jokes, undoubtedly making some of those still in the closet feel uncomfortable. And I still, to this day, over a decade after Clinton's Don't Ask Don't Tell policy, don't know if this is the time or not, but I have three observations.
1. Gays have been serving in the military all along.
2. The day will come when gays serve openly. Call it "progressive", call it a sign of the further decline of our civilization. It will happen.
3. I have stretched my brain trying to find one instance where I can say with any certainty that any mission failed due to anyone being "gay".
What a Great Idea The Bailout Has Been!
Thursday, November 13, 2008 at 02:44AM This from the AP:
"Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson announced Wednesday that the administration had decided to scrap what had originally been the centerpiece of the program — a proposal to buy troubled assets to get them off the books of banks as a way of promoting increased lending.
Instead, Paulson said the administration will proceed with an alternative plan to spend $250 billion to buy stock in the banks as a way of bolstering their financial situation and accomplishing the same goal — getting the institutions to return to more normal lending.
However, critics contend the administration should be imposing more restrictions on the stock purchases as a way of insuring that the banks will use the government resources to increase lending rather than just hoarding the cash or using it to acquire other banks or boost dividends for stockholders."
WUA Take: It seems that the warnings by GOP lawmakers and conservative think tanks that the $700 Billion bailout was a knee jerk reaction are proving to be correct. It was too much too fast, and shoved down the American people's throats. Instead of taking the time to study, confer, and debate the various appropriate responses (if any) to the credit and mortgage crisis, lobbyists for the banking industry, the very people who would benefit from any bailout, got their way...AGAIN. To show who REALLY pulls the strings in the halls of congress and at the White House, the banks brought together the most unlikely of allies, Bush and Nancy Pelosi together to ensure their plans were implemented. The banks were the doctor as well as the patient, prescribing their own medicine. From the lack of substantive commentary by most of those in congress, they were were either "yes" men or in typical, chicken little fashion, they simply decided to throw money at the problem without puting into place the oversights that those in congress themselves blamed for the crisis in the first place.
Now here is our government, changing the focus of the bailout. I'm sure that behind the scenes, the administration, long abandoning the most basic of fiscal conservativism is continuing to play the role of the puppet....and quite happy about it I might add. I believe that at this point, they feel it simply hurts too much to think.
Are We REALLY Ready for This?
Friday, November 7, 2008 at 02:40AM C'mon America. What on EARTH are we thinking? As an educator, I'm appalled. And although this article is somewhat dated and from before Proposition 8 was passed in California, it clearly shows the agenda. The battle lines are drawn. It will be an interesting 4-8 years.
This, from WorldNetDaily:
SACRAMENTO, Calif. – Some parents are shocked to find their children are learning to be homosexual allies and will participate in "Coming Out Day" at a public elementary school tomorrow – and they claim the school failed to notify parents.
One mother of a kindergartner who attends Faith Ringgold School of Art and Science, a K-8 charter school in Hayward, Calif., said she asked her 5-year-old daughter what she was learning at school.
The little girl replied, "We're learning to be allies."
The mother also said a Gay Straight Alliance club regularly meets in the kindergarten classroom during lunch.
According to a Pacific Justice Institute report, Faith Ringgold opted not to inform the parents of its pro-homosexual activities beforehand. The school is celebrating "Gay and Lesbian History Month" and is in the process of observing "Ally Week," a pro-"gay" occasion usually geared toward high school students.
The school is scheduled to host discussions about families and has posted fliers on school grounds portraying only homosexuals. According to the report, a "TransAction Gender-Bender Read-Aloud" will take place Nov. 20. Students will listen to traditional stories with "gay" or transgender twists, to include "Jane and the Beanstalk."
Some parents only recently noticed posters promoting the school's "Coming Out Day" tomorrow – celebrated 12 days after the national "Coming Out Day" usually observed on Oct. 11. When WND contacted the school to confirm the event, a female representative replied, "Yes, it is scheduled on our calendar."
When asked if the school made any efforts to inform parents, she refused to answer and said Hayward Unified School District would have to respond to additional questions. However, the district did not answer its phones or e-mails, and a voicemail recording would not take messages. "Coming Out Day" is not listed on the district's online school calendar.
Some of the parents contacted Pacific Justice Institute for representation when they learned the school was pushing pro-"gay" events for young children without warning.
Brad Dacus, president of Pacific Justice Institute, said opponents of California's proposed ban on same-sex marriage, or Proposition 8, often say the measure would not have an effect on public schools – but this is one of many recent developments that prove otherwise.
"Do we need any further proof that gay activists will target children as early as possible?" he asked. "Opponents of traditional marriage keep telling us that Prop. 8 has nothing to do with education. In reality, they want to push the gay lifestyle on kindergartners, and we can only imagine how much worse it will be if Prop. 8 is defeated. This is not a scenario most Californians want replayed in their elementary schools."
GOP in Tatters. What Went Wrong...
Thursday, November 6, 2008 at 02:43AM Well, here we are, eight years after being in full control of the Presidency, congress and the senate....a total reversal in fortune. What precipitated this total collapse of the Republicans in this election? I don't think there is any doubt but that it comes down to two major issues and several smaller ones. The first major issue, the Iraq war is an interesting study. However the war turns out, and irrespective of how history ultimately treats George W. on the issue, this war was THE major reason for his drop from the most popular president in history (for a time), to the most unpopular. And remember back some 7 years ago, when our economy was robust, the real estate market was a "boom" and our decision to invade Iraq was seen as the moral and just thing to do. Things started to change when it became clear that our leaders had seriously miscalculated in Iraq and our "quick little war" quickly morphed into something else entirely. Something in the mind of the public morphed into something else as well.....pessimism. Pessimism steers the economy. In the end our beautiful, steel and concrete economic base was a house of cards. Our economic downturn, fueled by both a pessimistic public and bad policies from the GOP AND the Democrats (don't let anyone tell you otherwise), created a perfect storm that became the second of the two major reasons I alluded to previously. And this economic perfect storm created the conditions for Tuesday's results.
Of course, as I said there were lots of smaller reasons that were in play as well. Guantanamo, gas and food prices, and the lack of any energy policy whatsoever contributed mightily to the call for change.
"Bush's chief strategist, Karl Rove, envisioned building a long-term Republican majority by broadening the party's base in part by building support among women, labor groups and Hispanics."
The problem here is that the GOP didn't have a plan building any support among women and labor groups, and their plan for building support among hispanics was largely limited to try to woo the Hispanic vote by opening the borders for illegal immigrants. The insane policies (or lack of current illegal immigration policy enforcement) was an enormously unpopular misstep. Bush and Rove seriously misjudged the effect on the vote. The idea that Hispanics would vote for the GOP if only Bush would adopt a Lassez Faire attitude for their illegal "brethren" was ludicrous and will continue to have negative repercussions for this country.
The American people, like all people, are fickle when it comes to basic ideals on conservativism versus liberalism. For the most part, I like to think that the buld of the American public still believe in Conservative ideology and not liberalism or worse, socialism especially when it comes to economics. But if history has taught us anything, everything is dependent upon one's situation. If I'm out of work and I need to feed my family, socialism and the government handouts it supposedly provides, suddenly becomes an attractive alternative. If you don't believe me, look at Italy in the 1930s. America, put on your seatbelts. You voted for change. For better or worse, its coming.
2000 Year Old Wisdom Especially True Today...
Monday, November 3, 2008 at 02:17AM "The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officials should be tempered and controlled, and foreign assistance should be curtailed lest our country become bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance."
Who said this you might ask? McCain, Obama? Not even close. These words, which are as true today as they were over 2000 years ago were written by none other than Cicero in 55 BC.
Barack Obama and the Change We Must Prevent
Saturday, November 1, 2008 at 11:18AM By Guest Contributor George The Banker
Barack Obama and the Change We Must Prevent
The United States of America is just a few days away from Election Day 2008.
In a very short time the citizens of this country will elect a new leader who will face unprecedented challenges at home and abroad. We, the people, have spent the past year listening to campaign ads, reading our local newspapers, watching debates and interviews on the evening news, and discussing with our friends and neighbors which man should be elected 44th President of the United States .
The distinctions between the candidates could not be clearer, or the rhetoric sharper. Barack Obama enthralls the masses with his sermon-like speeches in which he promises to bring forth "change" and reinvigorate "hope". John McCain talks of duty and putting country first to much smaller but no less enthused audiences. Two men who could not be more different, battling to the bitter end for that small percentage of undecided voters in states such as Missouri, Ohio, Virginia, Florida, and Colorado. If there were not such grave consequences for the country held in the outcome of this election, it would certainly be great entertainment and we could watch it, tub of popcorn in hand, with the unabated exuberance that is felt when viewing any high-stakes drama.
There has been one hole in the plotline though, large enough for a bitter, gun toting, bible hugging redneck from Pennsylvania to drive a tractor through. And with a mere week until the rolling of the red carpet it has yet to be resolved. The Democratic candidate for President, Barack Obama, has yet to be seriously investigated as a contender for the highest political office in the country, and arguably the world. Not one "hardball" question has been thrown in his direction, while the Republican Vice Presidential candidate, Sarah Palin, has been dissected to exhaustion over her family, her choices of clothing, and the nuances of her speech. It is a sad state of affairs when a duplicitous mainstream American media would go to such great lengths to shield a candidate who harbors their political views from any challenge to what they envision as his coronation on November 4th.
As an average "Joe The Plumber" type of American, I desire (and deserve) to have a full accounting of the backgrounds and beliefs of the candidates who are running for political office, whether it be Mayor of Wasilla or President of the United States. In this I and every American have been failed by the mainstream media, and a vast majority will head to their local polling venue next week with little knowledge of whom they are voting for. That is, if they are voting for someone besides John McCain. His service to this country is well-documented and his reputation as a patriotic maverick is well-earned.
What very few of us seem to know is what lies in Barack Obama's past, and what drives his desire to become President. Unfortunately, this may be a willful blindness on the part of those who know that his distinctions are dubious and his plans for this country chafe against the grain of everything that our forefathers risked their lives for centuries ago.
So let's talk about a man who knows how to bring about change. Change, change, change-on a scale never before imagined. He was a distinguished student, earning a law degree while proving himself a man of the world by also studying French, German, Greek and Latin. He spent the better part of his twenties and early thirties associating with a host of questionable revolutionaries who helped form his populist agenda and disdain for democracy and capitalism. Although the practice of law was his profession, he found his true passion in liberal political movements, and left his law practice in order to become a community organizer and propagandist. He stood against his own country during a time of war, and insisted that capitulation to the enemy, not victory, was the swiftest way to bring about peace. Holding the teachings of prior social revolutionaries close to his heart, this man believed that there should be a "classless" society in which wealth is equally distributed, or "spread around", amongst members of the working class and capitalism would be abandoned to its own miserable fate.
Does this sound like a Readers Digest version of Barack Obama's autobiography?
We know that Mr. Obama studied law at Harvard, left a promising career as a civil rights attorney to focus on his work as a community organizer and make his first venture in politics as an Illinois state legislator. The individuals he chose to associate with in his formative years include a known domestic terrorist, William Ayers, and an anti-American hate monger, The Revered Jeremiah Wright. As a United States Senator, he continually voted against supporting our troops in the field, and also voted against the Surge of 2007 that brought about significant change in Iraq and has tremendously reduced the levels of violence in that country. Upon meeting a local Ohio plumber on the campaign trail, he was quoted as saying his goal as President will be to "spread the wealth around", bringing a new level of transparency to his most socialist inner beliefs which have been kept secret from the public during his presidential campaign.
Well, dear reader, I regret to inform you that the man I spoke of earlier was Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, not Barack Hussein Obama (who knew he had a middle name?). The similarities between these two individuals could not be more easily connected. The old saying that "history repeats itself" continues to ring true, as before our eyes we witness a populist demagogue preparing to lead a socialist revolution as if he has received a mandate from Heaven.
The difference is that this is 2008 America, and We The People do not desire, nor have ever desired, to turn the greatest democracy on Earth into a neo-Marxist society where the people are solely dependent on the state for their well-being. The Constitution was written by men of courage who risked their lives to throw off the yolk of a government that was excessive in power and negligent of liberty. It is a timeless document that limits the role of government and expressly states the individual rights of the people. The Democratic candidate for President, Barack Obama, has stated that the Constitution's central flaw is that it does not outline what powers ARE granted to government; he calls this a document of "negative liberties". In this Obama displays his overt disdain for the principles of American democracy.
As you step into that voting booth on November 4th, you have the distinct choice between a veteran who has served America his entire life out of love for country, and a man who wants to change the fundamental principles your country was founded upon and countless thousands have died to protect. The greatest document of freedom ever composed in human history, our United States Constitution, was written to protect us from a government like that envisioned by the Democrat Party of 2008. And to protect us from a man like Barack Obama.
Iraq wants guaranteed U.S. departure by 2011
Thursday, October 30, 2008 at 09:33PM This from the Associated Press: BAGHDAD - Iraq wants to remove any possibility that U.S. troops could remain after 2011 from a proposed security agreement now under negotiation, a Shiite lawmaker close to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said Thursday.
Ok....if this doesn't doesn't illustrate why the Iraq policy is a failed experiment, then nothing does. Why are we hanging on to this ill planned, devastatingly expensive war is beyond me. Simply put, after the hundreds of billions of dollars and over 4200 U.S. deaths not to mention the untold injuries, and the devastation all this causes to their families, the Iraqis don't want us in their country. We are holding on HOPING the the Iraqi leadership will somehow "come around" and celebrate the United States as liberators. Hello! The Shiite's and the Iraqi leadership doesn't want us, and they hold the cards. We have done their work for them, thank you very much...now they want us to go home.
At the end of the day, what the invasion, the occupation, the surge, and the costs involved bought us is ungratitude and the very real possibility of an Iraqi - Iranian coalition bought and paid for by the United States! To show how much the Iraqi government values and appreciates the U.S. military for removing a vicious dictator from their country, they refuse to even use their considerable oil profits to help pay us back or even for their own infastructure. That too is largly the burden of the U.S. taxpayer. They now have made it clear that they are using us to the bitter end to drain further our dwindling economic base.
As a conservative, maybe I'm supposed to somehow agree with the war. I don't. Maybe I'm supposed to continue to make excuses for our continued presence. I won't. And if you think that this is a new position I have, it isn't. (See the tab "My Ten Truths on Terrorism" which I posted years ago when I started this blog.) Have we done some good in Iraq? Yes. Is the average Iraqi better off now? You bet. But the better question is, Is the average American better off? How can anyone answer that question with any answer other than "No"? And we aren't going to be better off, irrespective of whether we "win" militarily. We are holding on to a dream but the winds of reality are pointing in another direction. I think its time for us to wake the hell up America and get the hell out of Iraq as soon as possible. They want to give US a timetable to leave??!! Well, let's give the single finger salute, stop the sacrificing of our Marines, Soldiers, Sailors and Airmen for an ungrateful Iraqi government and get the hell out. They are obviously more than capable of taking care of themselves. Let their new friends in Tehran fund them from here on out.
Iran, Iraq, Middle East, Military Sharia Law Revealed
Monday, October 27, 2008 at 09:59PM The following is an article from the BBC:
|
Somali woman executed by stoning |
|
A woman in Somalia has been stoned to death after an Islamic Sharia law court found her guilty of adultery. The woman was buried up to her neck and then pelted to death with stones in front of a large crowd in Kismayo. It was the first such execution in the southern port city since Islamist insurgents captured it from government-allied forces in August. A local Islamist leader said the woman, Aisho Ibrahim Dhuhulow, had pleaded guilty to committing adultery. "She was asked several times to review her confession but she stressed that she wanted Sharia law and the deserved punishment to apply," said Sheikh Hayakallah. A group of men performed the execution in one of the city's main squares in front of thousands of people, AFP news agency said. This is what the Islamic apologists are fighting for. They defend Sharia law to be implimented not only in Britain and the rest of Europe, but here in America as well. They defend it in the name of "diversity" and "religous tolerance". Too bad the "tolerance" no longer applies to Christianity in America. These apologists, almost always liberals living in the fringe area of the Democratic Party are fond of separating the terrorists from the mainstreem Islamic faith and arguing the tenents of the Islamic Sharia Law as honorable. Well, no longer can they argue the veracity of statements like that. It's time for us to wake up and call a rose a rose. - J Dickson |
|
Well if THIS Doesn't Piss You Off....
Thursday, October 23, 2008 at 09:45PM In typical fashion, Congress's knee jerk bailout, that was supposed to be an influx of liquidity into the financial system encouraging banks to start lending again was rushed through to law so fast that congress forgot one critical thing. They forgot to establish adequate standards to assure that banks actually used this capital for the purposes it was meant for! Instead, the banks are planned to employ the new capital to help finance purchases of weaker rivals.
$700 BILLION just went to the nine richest banks so that they further dominate the banking system by buying up their rivals. Instead of helping the country get out of the financial morass, these banks just got richer.
It's time folks to hold congress, the treasury, and these scumbag bankers accountable. PERIOD!
Economy Sanctuary Cities...ENOUGH ALREADY!
Wednesday, October 22, 2008 at 09:38PM From 9/11 Commission hearings:
COMMISSIONER JOHN LEHMAN: "Were you aware that it was the US government established policy not to question or oppose the sanctuary policies of New York, Los Angeles, Houston, Chicago, San Diego for political reasons, which policy in those cities prohibited the local police from cooperating at all with federal immigration authorities?"
CONDOLEEZA RICE: "I do not believe I was aware of that."
The above reflects the governement's lack of dedication to the problem of illegal protection of illegal immigrants by local politicians throughout this country. The list of sanctuary cities in this country is over 100 and growing. Just this week two New York City police officers were shot by an illegal from the Dominican Republic. The fact that the illegal had been previously deported on drug charges further illustrates the total lack of respect for existing federal laws. The New York Times, as expected, reported very carefully that the suspect was respectfully identified as MR and didn't mention the illegal immigrant status until the end of the piece.
Have the city councils and mayors of these cities lost their minds or is it simply, as many apologists suggest, a "common form of civil disobedience" meant to protect these unfortunate souls who simply want to provide for their families? Well, I want to provide for my family too and I do empathise with men and women who simply are trying to make their way. But I can not and will not accept that those who are elected to maintain law and order, the very basis of a civilized society, ignore existing laws and in many cases enact unlawful policies requiring other city and local officials to also ignore federal and state laws.
Yes, I have read the reports that illegals are "valuable and necessary" to our economy, etc etc.
And?
Well let's see. If I decided that after a night of binge drinking that I was still a terrific driver, shouldn't I be able to rely on the local mayor's office to ensure that the police don't arrest or otherwise harrass me? Well, I guess that would depend on whether or not I was an illegal.
In these sanctuary cities where Robin Hood laws are common, they ignore the ugly realities of "consequences". For the past several years gangs such as Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13) have been a growing plague in many Central American countries. As these gangs and their crime grow, many of these countries have passed aggressive anti-gang laws. Because our border operates like a sieve and our cities encourage illegal immigration, many gang members from Mexico, and Central and South America have imported not only their illegal immigration status, but their crime as well. Law enforcement officials estimate 9 out of 10 Mara Salvatrucha gang members are here illegally.
According to a recent National Gang Threat Assessment, MS-13 is active in 31% of the cities that responded to the gang survey which includes nearly every major city in the U.S.
MS-13 is a gang in every sense. They have increasingly been involved in shooting at border officers, murders, extortion, and drug trafficking. And guess how the mayors in these sanctuary cities are responding to this threat? If they are stopped by police officers and arrested for a crime, you would assume that the gang member would be deported but you'd be wrong. They are protected.
They are protected just like a 19-year-old illegal immigrant who was stopped and arrested 3-times for law violations. Even though officers knew he was here illegally the officers were prohibited by their department's policy from taking any further action. This same 19-year-old illegal immigrant later murdered a Denver police officer.
WUA Common Sense: Its time to take action. All around the country there are signs of a backlash against these idiotic policies. In many communities, there are ballots and measures intended to force local officials to obey the laws they were sworn to enforce. My take is this. The laws already are on the books. Impeach and remove those in office who refuse to perform their duties as elected or appointed officials. If that doesn't work, hold back any and all federal funding to the sanctuary cities. The ability for the federal governement to withold funds is also already in the books. No endless debate is necessary. In short, enforce the laws at the federal level that the local governments refuse to. Its utterly insane what these cities are costing all of us .... illegally and in the name of "compassion".
Why I'm Voting Democrat - NOT!
Tuesday, October 21, 2008 at 02:41AM I found this little gem while surfing the net trying to decide whether to give up my life long ideals of conservativism and take up the liberal standard and join a cult. I am pleased to announce that from this day forward, I'm burning my copy of the Constitution and voting for Barack!
Why I'm voting Democrat!
- I'm voting Democrat because English has no place being the official language in America .
- I'm voting Democrat because I'd rather pay $4 for a gallon of gas than allow drilling for oil off the coasts of America .
- I'm voting Democrat because I think the government will do a better job of
spending my money than I could.
- I'm voting Democrat because when we pull out of Afghanistan and Iraq ,
I know the Islamic terrorists will stop trying to kill us because they'll
think we're a good and decent country.
- I'm voting Democrat because I believe people who can't tell us if it will rain in two or three days, can now tell us the polar ice caps will disappear in ten years if I don't start riding a bicycle, build a windmill or inflate my tires to proper levels.
- I'm voting Democrat because it's alright to kill millions of babies as
long as we keep violent, convicted murderers on death row alive.
I'm voting Democrat because I believe businesses in America should not be
allowed to make profits. Businesses should just break even and give the rest to
the government so politicians and bureaucrats can redistribute the money the way
they think it should be redistributed.
- I'm voting Democrat because I believe guns, and not the people misusing
them, are the cause of crimes and killings.
- I'm voting Democrat because when someone with a weapon threatens my family
or me, I know the government can respond faster through a call to 911 than I can
with a gun in my hand.
- I'm voting Democrat because oil companies' 5% profit on a gallon of gas
are obscene, but government taxes of 18% on the same gallon of gas are just
fine.
- I'm voting Democrat because I believe three or four elitist liberals should rewrite the Constitution every few months to suit some fringe element that could never get their agenda past voters.
- I'm voting Democrat because illegal aliens are not criminals, and they are
not sucking up resources through government aid, hospital services, education,
or social services, but are just people trying to make a better life by coming
to America illegally. We can't blame them for that, can we?
Elections North Korea Off U.S. Terrorist List!
Friday, October 17, 2008 at 08:06PM 
Well all I can say is THANK GOD! Thanks to heaven on high that the North Korean Fascho-communist government has FINALLY come to it's senses! I was really starting to worry that they would never give up their nuclear intentions! Now that they have AGREED to dismantle their nukes AND give up their state sponsored terrorist program, we can cross North Korea off our "to-do" checklist, give them white hats and instead concentrate on the other more pressing problems our country faces.
Yes. Good Ole Doublya has finally cracked the code in dealing with the North Koreans. He showed them who's boss. And my sources inside the negotiations have told me that that George warned the North Koreans not to renege on their agreement, "or else!" I for one see no reason for George to get so confrontational with them. I mean, if nothing else, the North Koreans are an honorable folk and wish nothing more than to live in harmony with thier neighbors. They simply want their rightful place in the world, as the caregivers for humanity, much like they have been for their own populace. By the way, I'll post a tasty North Korean grass soup recipe later in the week.
And here I thought George W. was slow.
The Immigration Issue is Dead
Monday, October 13, 2008 at 05:22PM I know, I know....the economy is near collapse, the U.S. has just bowed to N. Korea's demands, the world is about to overheat, and Obama bin Biden is running away with the election. Is anyone else concerned at all that the subject of illegal immigration has been shoved aside? I think now, more than ever, it is absolutely imperative that we secure our borders. We simply can no longer afford to pay the costs associated with illegals. And I don't want to hear all the "racist" crap either. I'm not. BUT I am sick and tired of the pandering from both the GOP and the Dems on this issue. But then again, I guess if we are becoming a socialist state, it won't much matter.
Sorry for the short diatrabe, I just moved. :)
Baldwin Blames Clinton, Dems and Barney Frank
Saturday, October 11, 2008 at 10:23PM When ya got perennial Bush hater Alec Baldwin placing at least some blame on the dems...on Bill Maher's show no less, it will turn heads. It's too bad no one else in the press cares. If you listen really close you can hear the three people in the audience who agrees with Baldwin's assessment.
Political Science for Dummies
Friday, October 10, 2008 at 07:24AM I usually don't post this kind of stuff but this really does spell things out more or less correctly!
DEMOCRAT
You
have two cows.
Your neighbor has none.
You feel guilty for being
successful. You push for higher taxes so the
government can provide cows for
everyone.
REPUBLICAN
You have two cows.
Your neighbor has
none.
So?
SOCIALIST
You have two cows.
The government takes
one and gives it to your neighbor.
You form a cooperative to tell him how to
manage his cow.
COMMUNIST
You have two cows.
The government
seizes both and provides you with milk.
You wait in line for hours to get
it.
It is expensive and sour.
CAPITALISM, AMERICAN STYLE
You
have two cows.
You sell one, buy a bull, and build a herd of
cows.
BUREAUCRACY, AMERICAN STYLE
You have two cows.
Under the
new farm program the government pays you to shoot one, milk
the other, and
then pours the milk down the drain.
AMERICAN CORPORATION
You have
two cows.
You sell one, lease it back to yourself and do an IPO on the 2nd
one.
You force the two cows to produce the milk of four cows. You
are
surprised when one cow drops dead. You spin an announcement to
the
analysts stating you have downsized and are reducing expenses.
Your
stock goes up.
FRENCH CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You go on
strike because you want three cows.
You go to lunch and drink wine.
Life
is good.
JAPANESE CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You redesign
them so they are one-tenth the size of an ordinary cow and
produce twenty
times the milk.
They learn to travel on unbelievably crowded trains.
Most
are at the top of their class at cow school.
GERMAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You engineer them so they are all blond, drink
lots of beer, give
excellent quality milk, and run a hundred miles an hour.
Unfortunately they also demand 13 weeks of vacation per year.
ITALIAN
CORPORATION
You have two cows but you don't know where they are.
You
break for lunch.
Life is good.
RUSSIAN CORPORATION
You have
two cows.
You have some vodka.
You count them and learn you have five
cows.
You have some more vodka.
You count them again and learn you have
42 cows.
The Mafia shows up and takes over however many cows you really
have.
TALIBAN
CORPORATION
You have all the cows in Afghanistan , which are two.
You don't milk them because you cannot touch any creature's
private
parts.
You get a $40 million grant from the US government to
find alternatives
to milk production but use the money to buy
weapons.
IRAQI CORPORATION
You have two cows.
They go into
hiding.
They send radio tapes of their mooing.
POLISH CORPORATION
You have two bulls.
Employees are regularly maimed and killed
attempting to milk them.
BELGIAN CORPORATION
You have one
cow.
The cow is schizophrenic.
Sometimes the cow thinks she's French,
other times she's Flemish.
The Flemish cow won't share with the French
cow.
The French cow wants control of the Flemish cow's milk.
The cow asks
permission to be cut in half.
The cow dies happy.
FLORIDA CORPORATION
You have a black cow and a brown cow.
Everyone votes for the best
looking one.
Some of the people who actually like the brown one best
accidentally
vote for the black one.
Some people vote for both.
Some
people vote for neither.
Some people can't figure out how to vote at
all.
Finally, a bunch of guys from out-of-state tell you which one you
think
is the best-looking cow.
CALIFORNIA CORPORATION
You have
millions of cows.
They make real California cheese.
Only five speak
English.
Most are illegal.
Arnold likes the ones with the big udders.
If McCain Hadn't voted "yes" on the Bailout....
Thursday, October 9, 2008 at 06:23PM It would seem that among other stated objectives for the Bailout was a supposed "confidence boost" effect. Well, if today's drop is any indication, that didn't work. I'd hate to think that we just wrote another check that at the end of the day is useless and will be paid by us, the taxpayers. That said, with his yes vote, its likely that McCain may have lost his last opportunity to turn the tide of the election in his favor.
What REALLY Caused this Economic Mess?
Thursday, October 9, 2008 at 07:39AM This is utterly amazing. Watch, learn, react. I spent several hours researching the information in this video and other than not being able to substantiate the totals dollar amount of a compensatory golden parachute for one Fannie Mae former exec, the info is right on. After watching this video and conducting my own research, I am even more disgusted with the likes of Nancy Pelosi. Even though I disagree with the democrats on any number of issues, I have for the most part, maintained respect for the person, if not the politician. She is among the select few who do not deserve the respect of their offices.
Now, to be fair, I'm sure that the GOP hand's aren't completely clean on this, but the breadth and scope of the problem largely has a democratic face. The lies perpetrated on the people of this country and the world need to be exposed.
I want to thank the reader who forwarded this.
Dems Refuse to Discuss Fannie and Freddie in Hearings
Tuesday, October 7, 2008 at 08:40PM What a surprise! Henry Waxman’s Oversight Committee hearing grilled Lehman Brothers executives over CEO pay and deregulation, but somehow never mentioned the names Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
"The reason we haven’t scheduled hearings on these two institutions and haven’t requested documents from either is because their demise isn’t someone else’s fault — it’s ours, and we don’t want to own up to it.”
- Christopher Shays, R-CT
If I Had One Question for the Candidates...
Sunday, October 5, 2008 at 05:00AM As I look around this (once?) great country of ours I must admit, the problems we face are enormous. Our plate was already full before this latest financial upheaval. From a myriad of social issues such as immigration and social security to daunting International concerns ranging from Iraq and Afghanistan, Iran to North Korea, the re-emergence of Russian influence to China's unchecked and growing power, the enormity of it all is overwhelming. Some out there attempt to reassure by exclaiming that, "we have faced tougher problems in the past", and "We'll get through this just like always". And yet, a growing realization is emerging. Many Americans sense that this is different. This isn't World War II; We aren't facing a static, well defined enemy. We can't simply rally the troops and the homeland against our common foe. The "rally" in us is largely gone. Which brings me to my topic today. What would I ask the candidates if I were a moderator at a Presidential debate and I had just one question to ask? It is simply this?
Where are we headed, as a country?
That's it. Nothing about lipstick, not a word about the candidates' health issues, and no mention as to previous gaffes made to the press. Just a single, simple question. I don't even want to know what they would do to fix the problems we all have....experience should have shown us already that pandering for votes does not translate to policy once in office. Besides, there will be time for those question later. I simply want to know the candidates' snapshot view of where we are right now and where they see America in the next few decades.
Each of us should be asking ourselves the same question. This country is so completely different from what it was even 20 years ago. After World War II, America truly was seen as a beacon of light throughout much of the world. The term "liberty" really meant something. We had a purpose then. What do we have now? We have a country in turmoil. The problems we face will impact every American as well as the rest of the world. And we have the tools to do something about it. However, we are no longer headed in any particular direction. Our leaders, and I use that term VERY lightly, have proven that they are unable to come together for the common good and instead make decisions on partisan politics. Of the major problems we face, NOT ONE has been resolved to anyone's satisfaction over the past several years. NOT ONE. Our leaders' focus has been on infighting versus service to the people.
We need a person with a true vision in this country. I am not convinced that either candidate is that person. We need to pull that other hand from behind our back and confront our problems head on. Action is needed and it's needed now.
I know this is ranting, but I'm really pissed off at the state of affairs. I'm a conservative and I know Bush means well, but his leadership can be summed up with, "Bush fiddled while America burned". I mean that in the sense that George W. doesn;t have the tool set necessary to LEAD this country upwards. Sure, the partisanship was there before him, but his leadership style made it much worse here and abroad. This fight we are in, we are in it alone.
Before you Point Fingers, Pelosi....
Tuesday, September 30, 2008 at 05:23AM 
As usual, Nancy Pelosi, when faced with a defeat of literally ANYTHING she votes on, she quickly laid blame at the feat of the Republicans. Despite supporting the bill, Pelosi spent most of her time criticizing Bush
policies and voicing some of the liberal criticisms of the bill.
She spent less time saying why she was supporting it. As a result, those fence sitters on both sides of the aisle found the road easily paved to vote "no". I guess she missed the class about playing nicely to those who's vote you are courting. The "no's" also included 95 democrats. Including 15 of 34 democrats in her own state of California! How's that for House leadership?! By the way Nancy, don't call your democratic House members and give some of them "permission" to vote "No" and then blame the GOP for killing your precious Bailout.
I don't know if the bailout would be a good thing or not. I don't have a crystal ball, but niether does Congress. I'm not trusting such a monumental plan to those who got us into this mess in the first place. What I do know is this: before our elected officials vote on such an important piece of legislation, the details of the plan is probably best to written in comic book form instead of written much like the current tax code. At least that way, the majority of the knuckleheads in congress might actually read it.