A Conservative's Thoughts

Gingrich the slimeball.

2012-01-30T20:23:00.000-05:00

One of my liberal friends likes to call Gingrich a slimeball. I have another that whenever Gingrich is mentioned starts going into spasms and keeps repeating "what about the ethics charges huh? What about the ethics charges?" over and over. It is obvious that liberals go crazy over just the mention of Gingrich's name, which should tell you he is a threat to them. They make jokes about him. Laugh at him, call him names, and tell us conservatives how stupid we are to even think of voting for him. Reminds me of how the liberals went crazy over Reagan. But that is another subject for another day. Right now, let's look at Gingrich. So what about the ethics charges? I was following him back in the day, (90's) and Gingrich was popular with conservatives. He led the republican revolution, but as time went on, he seemed to lose his mojo. Looking back at that time through the eyes of today, he was clearly Palinized. The liberal elites pulled out all the stops as they have now, to get him out of the way and make him lose his support. Knowing republicans as well as I know them, it really is not that hard to do as the republican party will dump on one of their own at the least sign of any trouble. The Gingrich story of ethics charges is really a story that could make a movie. It is at least as interesting as Charlie Wilson's war.

It seems that it started with a personal vendetta by Ben Jones (Cooter on Dukes of Hazard). After losing his house seat after re-districting, he ran against Gingrich and lost badly. Seeing that he was going to lose, Jones hand delivered a complaint to the ethics committee claiming that a college course Gingrich was teaching was political, instead of educational. After the democrats lost bad because of Gingrich, and his engineering their defeat, they threw the kitchen sink at him hoping something would stick. Just like they did to Palin in Alaska, they were trying to overwhelm Gingrich, even though the charges were false, the amount of charges must mean something is wrong, which is a favorite tactic of the left. They love to put someone on trial in the media, whether or not the law finds them guilty. The course was funded by a 501c3 corporation, and this gave the left an opportunity to tie it all together by making Gingrich look like he was furthering a political cause.The media got on board as usual, and they were calling for the justice department, FBI, ethics committee, and anyone else they could get to put pressure on the republicans.

At this point, Gingrich was getting pressure from the Rino's to put this behind him. So get this. Gingrich agreed to plead guilty for "failing to seek sufficiently detailed advice from a tax lawyer before proceeding with the course". Gingrich also admitted that he had provided "inaccurate, incomplete, and unreliable" information to Ethics Committee investigators. That "inaccurate" information was Gingrich's contention that the course was not political -- a claim The investigating lawyer and the committee did not accept, but the IRS later would. The ethics committee fined Gingrich $300,000 (which he had to borrow, which tells you he was not a typical rich politician), for costs of the investigation.

But all this was not enough. The left decided to push even more (which tells me Gingrich is a threat to them) and have him investigated further. The only one to take them up was the IRS. The IRS investigated all three years of the course, examined tapes, teaching materials, and even the students evaluations of the course, and after 3 years, found nothing wrong with the course, and ruled it politically neutral, and determined Gingrich was innocent of wrongdoing. Wow! So the bottom line was Gingrich acted properly and violated no laws. But by that time the damage was done and Gingrich lost his support and decided to resign.

When he was exonerated, there was one or two small articles, CNN ran a short story, and after hours and hours of negative coverage from ABC, NBC, CBS, they never ran a story about his exoneration.

So what is the bottom line? This whole thing started with a personal vendetta, the left saw a chance to take a prominent republican leader out, the republican establishment would not stick with their own and threw Gingrich under the bus, and the news media was a willing accomplice in the take down. To this day, the truth is buried and the press (including Fox news) will not report the truth. "Gingrich resigned in disgrace" Romney said twice during the last debate. Which brings up the question. Does he know the real story of Gingrich and is lying about it, or is he ignorant, just repeating what he is told? The sad thing is the media does not care to report the truth, not even trying to find out what really happened making many people hate Gingrich. He should be judged on the issues, not lies.

I look at it this way. If he was furthering the cause of conservatism, so what? We need more of it. Do you think the left has ever let the law stand in the way of furthering their cause? Of course not. This whole thing makes me like Gingrich even more. It looks like the worst thing he has done is set on the couch with Pelosi. Now if we can get him focused back on conservatism, he will be a winner.

What is a conservative to do?

2012-01-27T19:31:00.000-05:00

I can't believe what I see in the republican party. Alinsky tactics used against Gingrich, by liberal establishment republicans. The republican establishment is again trying to destroy Gingrich by a barrage of untruths and rewriting of history. Gingrich has enough problems on his own, he is a conservative that wanders off the reservation every once in a while. But he is still a conservative. The most consistent conservative that we have in the race is Santorum, and he is heading home before Florida votes, essentially giving up that state. As a conservative, I have to look at where the party is going, and it is not good. In 2008, the establishment republicans told conservatives that we have to put aside our convictions, and vote for McCain. Many conservatives stayed home. The establishment did not have Perot to blame like they did for Bush 1 and Dole. Of course, their candidate could not be the problem. So it looks like we are well on the way to another establishment liberal. Mitt Romney is not a conservative. He is a liberal. Again, the conservatives will be told to give up our convictions and vote for Romney.

When watching all this unfold I have to wonder something. Will the republican establishment with Romney at the helm go after Obama as hard as they are going after Gingrich? I seriously doubt it. I believe when (if) they get Romney the nomination, they will go back to the safe attack method they took with McCain.

So what is a conservative to do? It will be really hard to vote for a liberal that is more liberal than McCain. On top of that, a liberal that not only dreamed up statist health care, was successful in implementing it in the state of Massachusetts. Who said the other day he would not repeal Obamacare, just fix what is bad with it. Who also said that the rich needs to pay more taxes (class warfare). Does the republican establishment really expect me to vote for someone like this? I am beginning to think they do not care if they get my vote or not. Then again, maybe they want to lose.

Gingrich wins South Carolina

2012-01-21T20:57:00.001-05:00

The numbers are not all in yet but it looks like Gingrich is going to win South Carolina. The surprising thing is that he is going to win big. Like I have said all along Romney is not the candidate that the conservatives in America want. He does not have what it takes to take it to Obama in the way it needs to be done. Maybe in a more normal time, Romney would be the guy. But not now. I am not an Oracle. I just am speaking my mind. It seems that many other Americans feel the same way I do. One of the things that has bothered me about this campaign, is the fact that conservatives are being torpedoed every time they threaten Romney. All the while Romney stands back, does not get his hands dirty, and his opponents conveniently get shot down. This is just too reminiscent of Obama's style for me. I think that Romney is a lot nastier than he let's on, and another reason I do not like him. Gingrich comes out and says what he thinks, gets his hands dirty, and takes them on. This is what we need. We know what we have with Gingrich, he may go off the reservation every once in a while, but we know a lot about him.

Romney showed his nastiness in his concession speech. Not congratulating Gingrich shows something of Romney's character. In fact, his concession speech was one long attack on Gingrich. If only he would attack Obama in the same way. More proof that he is not what we want.

Give me more power Scottie!

2012-01-15T21:45:00.000-05:00

Well the captain of the Enterprise says he needs more power. But instead of trying to slingshot around the sun to travel back in time to save the earth, our commander in chief says he needs more power to make government smaller. Obama make government smaller? Did I hear that right? No way. I don't believe it. Bush had a bad habit of asking for more power, and growing government. I still cringe when I think about the Patriot Act, and the department of Homeland security. Where is the forward thinking of our politicians? Even though they may have the best intentions what they do in many cases outlasts their time in office. Obama already has too much power, thanks to Bush and congress and their power grabs after 9/11. Then we have the power grabs the government made after the financial crises. Many of the so-called laws passed to keep us financially safe are nothing but power grabs by congress and the president. It seems that more and more, the laws passed and the requests made by our government are thinly veiled excuses to centralize power from the rest of the country to Washington. Regulations to protect us from meanies in business, to programs to keep us in houses to student loans all seem to be accomplishing the same thing. That thing is putting everything under the thumb of Washington.

When I hear Obama calling for more power to make government smaller it reminds me of a family that I used to live next door to. They would do a spring cleaning every year putting everything away that they did not need into the attic and garage, fill up the closets, and then eventually they rented a storage shed. After every spring cleaning they would discover all kinds of new found room and would then go out and buy things to fit in the new found spaces they had. Every year they would just accumulate more stuff. Something tells me that this whole spring cleaning thing Obama is asking for is just him getting ready to take on more stuff. If a conservative went to Washington to clean house, he would not just re-arrange, he would start throwing stuff out until government would have to start selling stuff off it did not need. But it does not look like that kind of conservative is going to get into Washington this time.

Obama already has too much power, thanks to Bush and the congress. Clinton did a fair job of grabbing power too. Right now, the country does not have three but equal branches of government. All thanks to people like Rahm Emmanuel who does not let any crisis go to waste. Actually, Emmanuel just let that one slip out. It has been going on for quite some time in our government. Looking back at 9/11 and other crises in the past 20 years or so it has been the driving force in our government. So how should we answer Obama and his request? The answer should be a list of agencies to cut from government starting with the NEA, with a note that says "NO".

Even more on Romney and Bain

2012-01-14T12:15:00.000-05:00

After thinking about my last post, I am not sure that I made my point. The whole Bain capital fiasco is something that goes to the core of conservatism, and I think that it needs to be pointed out as it is telling on the positions people are taking in this issue. The way that a lot of people are responding to this issue is the attack is anti-capitalist and looks more like what the left would do. Going by this view, we should call ourselves capitalists instead of conservatives. In order to explain this you have to look at the core of conservatism. The way I see it is the core of conservatism is free market capitalism, and morals. Part of what makes us who we are is our moral compass, that is based in religion. If it were not for that, we would be no different than liberals. In my mind, it does not matter what religion you belong to, as they all have a very similar moral base (we are talking the major religions here). Character falls right in with morals.

This is at the root of what Newt is bringing to the surface. Like in my last example, someone can be a good capitalist and not a very good person, and this would reflect in their decisions. Now whether the accusations about Romney are true or not, I don't know. That is for everyone to decide. But character in a candidate matters. This is one of the things that separates us from liberals, we not only believe in free market capitalism, we have a moral compass, based on our religious beliefs to guide us. This is why we cannot stand by and let Israel fail, because they are the same as us. Because of our moral compass, we know deep down that it is up to this country to defend liberty and freedom around the world. This is also why Ron Paul with his isolationist policies can't gain ground with conservatives, our moral compass won't let us. I think that conservatives are buying the Fox news / establishment republican mantra on these attacks being an attack on capitalism. This is a attack on the character of Romney while he was at Bain capital. Nothing else. The decision needs to be made if the stories are true or not, and if if they are true, whether it disqualifies him as president. Then let's move on.

More on Romney and the attack on capitalism

2012-01-14T00:26:00.000-05:00

This whole thing about Newt and the attacks on capitalism is starting to bother me more and more. For the past three days I have been listening to a barrage of conservatives bashing the attacks on capitalism. From Rush to Hannity to Fox News the narrative seems to be from the right that this whole thing from Newt is an attack on capitalism. Let's get one thing straight before we start here. I am not pulling for Newt any more that any other candidate. But let's look at this whole premise from a different angle. The conservatives always make the statement that whenever we criticize Obama we are labeled racists, and for the most part it is true. Now it looks to be that if you criticize Romney and his time at Bain capital you are labeled anti capitalist. Let me clarify.

Let's take a example of a used car lot. Every town has one that is shady and most people know not to go there. They have a reputation of ripping people off and everyone knows it. They basically have cars that cost between 2 - 3 thousand dollars, and they sell them for 5-6 thousand. But they stay in business because they sell cars to poor people. The poor people have nowhere else to go as no other bank or car lot will give them credit. So the owner of the lot sells cars to these people on weekly payments and by the time the car is paid for the person has paid between 14 - 16 thousand dollars for a car that is really only worth 2-3 thousand. These car lots exist in every town and are real.

Now let's say the owner decides to run for president.

I would not want to vote for the owner. Why? Because I would not like someone of his character being the president of the United States. He takes advantage of people because of their situation and the other candidates should be able to espouse their opinions of his background and character. He is operating a car lot within the law, and he is obviously a successful capitalist. Just because the other candidates point this out does not make them anti-capitalist. They are pointing out a character flaw in him, not a flaw in our system. Listen to what Newt said, this is the exact argument he has made time and time again, and it is falling of deaf ears.

This whole attack on capitalism thing is a smokescreen by either the Romney campaign or the republican establishment. It really makes we wonder where this narrative came from as it is everywhere, and you better not go against it or you will be called anti-capitalist. The worst thing that a conservative could be called. Rush said yesterday that the Romney camp had to see this coming and he was surprised that they did not have a answer for it. They did have a answer, and it spread like wildfire, and we all fell for it.

Newt's attack of Romney at Bain

2012-01-11T16:24:00.000-05:00

After Romney derailed Newt in Iowa, Newt has been attacking Romney on his time as CEO of Bain Capital. It is funny how Romney told Newt that he should be able to handle the criticism from Romney's super pac, but now everyone is jumping on Newt for being a "Angry little man". Romney just plain lied about Newt. Why should he not respond? He was very patient in my opinion, being positive for 2 weeks or so until he could no longer take any more. In fact, looking back he should have blasted Romney on day 1 but you can't be nice in politics, and this is proof. The latest in the saga is that Newt's super pac is now portraying Romney as a corporate raider that sucked companies dry, leaving people unemployed, taking the money and running with it. Most conservatives from Rush on down are now on this train that Newt is attacking capitalism and being a liberal. I don't get it. The attack is on Romney and his time at Bain, and the decisions he made. Not on capitalism at all. I have seen companies that are taken over and basically raped by the vultures. There is a huge difference between someone starting a company and building it up. That is capitalism. A bunch of millionaires getting together and forming a company to take advantage of situations to pull money out of them is another. Kind of like a bunch of millionaires getting together and forming a solar panel company to take advantage of government loopholes to get loans. Seems like the same thing to me. Anyway, the spin from the Romney camp is an attack on Romney and his character is an attack on capitalism, and conservatives have taken the bait. Now Newt looks like the heel. I have heard all day how Newt is really a progressive anti capitalist, and Romney is now the pro capitalist saint.

Really?

The other thing I am not liking about Romney is his Obama approach to this and other situations. Have you noticed that he is always above the fray, but attacks that benefit him are always waged against his opponents? Like Obama, he must have his Axlerod or Emmanuel doing his dirty work in the background, and frankly I am tired of the thug politics. Wonder if any of the candidates received any dead fish in the mail? Then again what happened to Cain is just as good as a dead fish, maybe better.

Look at this situation we have gotten ourselves into. After just 2 liberal states, Romney looks like he is the nominee. Why is this happening? I think that the republican establishment set this up so the liberal states go first so by the time we get to super Tuesday, everything is decided for us. At this rate, we might as well not even go vote as everything will be decided by then. Look at New Hampshire. 50% of the people that voted were democrats and independents. How come Republicans are not deciding who the nominee is? This whole thing smells, from the attacks on Newt in Iowa, to the liberal states going first. All the way down to Fox news bashing Newt this time for his anti-capitalist stance. We know Newt is for capitalism. We don't know Romney is though. Then we have Ron Paul, being another spoiler. Don't forget, Romney got 25% in Iowa, 39% in New Hampshire. That means 75% in Iowa and 61% in New Hampshire don't want Mitt Romney! Hello! The base does not want Romney. Running him will produce a big yawn from the base. We survived Obama for 4 years, I guess we could get by with 4 more if congress is republican.

Romney wins New Hampshire

2012-01-10T21:38:00.000-05:00

Romney winning New Hampshire is no big surprise. Us conservatives gave up hope for them before the primary even was a month away. What bothers me is the fact that now everyone is declaring Romney the nominee. Here we have a guy who won Iowa with 25% and New Hampshire with 36%. (It's not over yet but that is what is being predicted). How can this be over? We have a front runner that 75% of the people in Iowa did not want, and 63% in New Hampshire. That is not a nominee that everyone wants. What we have is a very fragmented field and two primaries in very liberal states. I just can't back Romney. It came out today that he will not repeal Obama care. That's not acceptable. Everyone I know does not want Romney, and almost all conservatives don't want him, it's obvious. I still don't think it is over yet and there is some reason the establishment wants it over right away.

On to another subject though. I was thinking back to the Reagan era, and how much was done. He did not get everything he wanted, but towards the end of his presidency, they started to wear him down. The liberals never give up. Then we got Bush 1 and the establishment declared that the era of Reagan was over. Things became worse with Clinton, then Bush2, then Obama. Thinking about that, something occurred to me. Bush 1 was a liberal establishment Republican. He created the environment that gave us Clinton, and things went downhill. Then Bush 2 came along, another big government liberal. He created the environment that gave us Obama. Now we have Romney, which I think is more liberal than Bush 2. What kind of environment will he create? It does not look promising. Because he will not do what needs to be done - we all know it. People will be mad, and what will that give us? Someone worse than Obama I am afraid. Looking at the precedents Obama is setting, taking power, ignoring the constitution, it does not look good. Don't get me wrong, I don't think Romney will abuse power like Obama does, but the next power hungry socialist we have will have more power to abuse than any president ever has had. We are heading down a path that is easy to see, and scary at the same time. This is the time we need to reverse the power Washington has, but I am afraid Romney does not have what it takes to do so, nor does he want to.

Looking at the timeline in this way, America has been making wild swings back and forth over the years, but with the one exception of Reagan, it has been steadily moving left. Case in point? Romney. 20 years ago, he would be a democrat, hands down. I am afraid that one day in my lifetime, we will swing left and never come back.

What bothers me about Ron Paul

2012-01-10T18:48:00.000-05:00

Really not too many things. Ron Paul has a lot of great ideas. Who does not want to overhaul or abolish the fed, cut several of the biggest government agencies, and get government under control. There is really two things that stop Ron Paul from winning the nomination. One is drug legalization, the other is foreign policy. Let's take them one at a time. First drug legalization. This is one of the biggest reasons for his support, as we all know most of the potheads are rallying behind Paul. Legalizing Marijuana may be something that he could pass because many Americans want it. The problem is he also wants to legalize all the other drugs. Bad Idea. Will never fly with the American people. This has been tried overseas and the results have been devastating. There is plenty of documentation to back this up so we won't go any farther than to say it is a non-starter. The other problem Paul has is his isolationist policies. There is a good reason Americans are leery of being isolationist. Every time we have tried it in the past it has been disastrous. Bill Clinton gutted the military and intelligence agencies in the 90's and this gave us 9/11. That is just the most recent example. Paul likes to site that we have spent billions overseas with nothing to show but a broken bank account and more bitter feelings toward the USA. He also says that if we would quit meddling overseas then everything would be better. Nothing could be further from the truth. Ask any true conservative that remembers the cold war and they will tell you we need to be overseas. We are the leaders of the free world, and whether we like it or not, being the leader means we have a responsibility to further the cause of liberty and freedom. It does not mean that we should be the world's policemen though. But look at it this way. Yes, we have spent billions in Afghanistan and Pakistan. But the reason for this is to meet the enemy on THEIR own ground and not on OURS. 9/11 should have shown us that if we do not do this, they will bring the war to our own turf. They hate us. They want to destroy us. They want to destroy Israel first, because they are a democracy, then us. They say it all the time, so we should believe them. So the bottom line is Paul is wrong on this, Americans want to go to the local mall and shop on the weekend, and be safe. If we pull back as much as he wants to, we will be fighting the war right here, and none of us will be safe. No thanks Ron Paul, we would rather be safe, no matter what it costs.

Santorum places second in Iowa

2012-01-05T19:13:00.000-05:00

This really was a surprise. I watched all night as the lead went back and forth between Romney and Santorum, and Romney finally won by 8 votes. Now it's time for the republican establishment to start attacking Santorum. He really is not my favorite, but he is better than Romney any day in my book. What we will see is a attack on every little thing he has said or done, and they will put him in the worst light that they can. Why the republican establishment does this to other republicans, but can't do this to Obama is beyond me. They just don't know how to win, like I have said many times before. The Establishment machine has destroyed Newt and he is out to get them, which is good in my mind, as we have failed under their leadership for too long. So where is this all going? Don't know. Ron Paul made a good showing, but his base is mainly young people wanting to legalize drugs, and some independents. We could learn a lot from his organization though, as they are savvy at getting a lot done with little, and they make some brilliant political moves. The republican party needs to incorporate some of Paul's views into their platform, it would not be hard as most conservatives agree with his views, especially on the economy.

Obama disregard for the constitution

2012-01-05T18:50:00.001-05:00

It's a new year and a lot has been happening. Obama continues to threaten our laws that he swore to uphold. Almost every day he gives a campaign speech declaring that if congress does not act the way that he wants, he will just bypass them and do what he wants anyway. Here is what he said today.

I refuse to take ‘no’ for an answer,” Mr. Obama said in Shaker Heights, drawing applause from his audience. “When Congress refuses to act and as a result hurts our economy and puts our people at risk, then I have an obligation as president to do what I can without them.”

What happened to working with congress? After all, he used to be a senator, so that would make you think that he would be sympathetic to working within our constitution. He made a recess appointment today, even though congress was technically in session. By doing this he even ignored his own legal advice from his staff. How arrogant can he be? I think we are really just beginning to see what he is capable of. Never in our history has a president been so lawless, the closest was Nixon. Like I said before, the democrats have to secretly be horrified to see this happening to their party, and why they are not doing something about this is beyond me, unless they are living in fear of the repercussions of speaking out. We know that the republicans do not have the backbone to do anything about this, Romney will not call Obama a socialist, let alone call him on this. Maybe the political elite are laying back, waiting on the election to get rid of this problem. I don't know. I think that when congress goes back in session, there should be impeachment proceedings started to at least make the point that Obama needs to be put in check, if not that, then at least a lawsuit. If a republican tried this, the democrats would not blink an eye to start proceedings. Anyway, what we are seeing is the beginning of a president that is acting out very badly, and if he is not put in his place by the separate but equal powers guaranteed us by the constitution, we will have more bad behavior the closer election time comes. If he wins re-election, his bad behavior will be unstoppable.

Repeal the Electoral College

2011-12-30T22:34:00.001-05:00

There is a movement afoot by the liberals. It is called the National Popular Vote. It is basically another way for them to tear down our system and try to give themselves another advantage to turn the USA into a European style socialist state. As usual with the liberals, what they are proposing sounds good on the surface, and if you ask the average American on the street he or she would say that it sounds like a good idea. After all, shouldn't the candidate for president who gets the most votes win? Much like the 17th amendment when the liberals sold America the idea that directly electing senators would be more "American", than the state's appointing them, dissolving the electoral college would lead to more power for the socialists. Just as the 17th amendment changed the balance of power forever. The electoral college serves a function that on the surface seems silly, but it has probably kept this country more stable than any other institution we have. I would really recommend anyone to study up on the benefits of the electoral college before making any judgments about its purpose. One of the biggest things it does is encourages a two party system. On the surface this does not seem important. But if we did not have it we would probably wind up like Europe and have ruling coalitions (not working at all over there). The other thing it does is keeps the major population areas from ruling the country. Without the college, Voters in the Northeast big cities and California together would probably rule the rest of the country. The rest of us might as well stay home as our votes would not matter. The college is not perfect, as in Bush - Gore, but it is a cornerstone of a representative republic. If we did not have it, we would be a democracy, and that is what scared the founding fathers to death. They knew that democracy was mob rule. Studying the founding fathers and their writings is a great education. More people need to study that era. Many Americans now seem to think that people of that time were ignorant and we have learned so much and have become so much more educated. I say it is the opposite. These people were brilliant, had clarity of thought, and I really believe that they would run circles around our best political science professors of this time. They had a knowledge of politics, philosophy, and history that is very impressive. Before we start throwing away their work, we should make sure we know what we are doing. I am not so sure we do.

Obama's true feelings coming out

2011-12-30T19:01:00.001-05:00

We all know Obama has communist tendencies, and the more that is found out about his past the more we know it to be true. Here is his an excerpt of his recent speech that has everyone up in arms.

Now, just as there was in Teddy Roosevelt’s time, there is a certain crowd in Washington who, for the last few decades, have said, let’s respond to this economic challenge with the same old tune. “The market will take care of everything,” they tell us. If we just cut more regulations and cut more taxes -- especially for the wealthy -- our economy will grow stronger. Sure, they say, there will be winners and losers. But if the winners do really well, then jobs and prosperity will eventually trickle down to everybody else. And, they argue, even if prosperity doesn’t trickle down, well, that’s the price of liberty.

Now, it’s a simple theory. And we have to admit, it’s one that speaks to our rugged individualism and our healthy skepticism of too much government. That’s in America’s DNA. And that theory fits well on a bumper sticker. But here’s the problem: It doesn’t work. It has never worked. It didn’t work when it was tried in the decade before the Great Depression. It’s not what led to the incredible postwar booms of the ‘50s and ‘60s. And it didn’t work when we tried it during the last decade. I mean, understand, it’s not as if we haven’t tried this theory.

Wow. We have elected a president that does not believe in our system. I thought part of his oath was to uphold our system of government. How can he uphold it if he does not believe in it? He claims our system is based on a simple theory. That part is true. Simple is better. The Harvard pointy heads like Obama really think they can craft a system in their classrooms that will suit this country. First he says it is part of America's DNA, then he says it fits well on a bumper sticker, but it doesn't work? Well then, what the hell got us this far? He claims it did not work before the great depression, and it did not work during the last decade. All I can say is he has a very selective memory, and he is in his own little world and not based in reality. What do you say to someone that is this far gone? Nothing. He cannot be changed, and this is because of his upbringing within communist circles. He has nothing else to compare his views with because he was indoctrinated at an early age and was force fed the Kool Aid. What we have here is a angry lost soul that never will understand capitalism and freedom. Let's hope more Americans hear this speech, in fact, let's hope Obama gives this speech at every campaign stop this upcoming elections year. Let's hope that the republican nominee has the nerve to bring this up and call him on it. The more this is known the better the chance he will be a one term president.

Pseudo Conservatives

2011-12-29T18:09:00.000-05:00

Been noticing this for some time but now that the primaries are getting closer a lot of so called conservatives are backing liberal republican Romney. We still have Santorum, Bachmann, Perry, and Gingrich to choose from, but it looks like people are bailing and going for Romney. I am sorry but the only way I will vote for him is if he is the nominee, I will not support him in the primary. Again the republican establishment has pushed Romney hard, and every candidate has been smeared through the media except for Romney. To me this is very suspicious. We need to get the most conservative candidate we can, instead we get politics as usual. You would think after the McCain disaster the republican establishment would learn. It is not over yet as of this writing, but it looks like Romney has momentum. The democrats want to run against Romney in the worst way, because it is to their advantage, much as Clinton wanted Dole to run against. It looks as though the Tea Party nor the conservatives are not very effective in picking a presidential candidate, and I think it is because of leadership. The Tea Party and Conservatives are leaderless, and it shows. The republican establishment blew us away on this one, so we need to concentrate on senate, house, and local politicians to pull Romney to the right. We need to work the establishment next time for president, and in the mean time make Romney be a conservative. It will be a lot of work though, he was on O'Reilly the other day and would not call Obama a socialist. If he does not have the nerve to call Obama a socialist on O'Reilly then he will not take on Obama in the debate. I look for a Bob Dole / Clinton debate with Romney in there, declaring how they really are "Buddies". Romney is a dream for the democrats, another McCain. But enough of that.

Pseudo conservatives. I think that we have been duped by a few pundits that are supposedly conservatives. Look at it this way. I really believe that most Americans are conservative. That makes us a huge market. It is easy to write books, go on talk shows, and play along, tell us what we want to hear all the while making money. In the past, people's memory was short, but this is a new time and the internet has changed everything. We see things almost when they happen, and we have documentation. I think that quite a few pseudo conservatives will earn the title of RINO and in the future will be treated as such, instead of conservative icons. This will make room for true conservatives to move in and start leading. Our movement is still strong, just leaderless at this time

Class warfare

2011-12-28T22:09:00.000-05:00

This is one of the favorite words of the republicans of late, mainly because we have a president who cannot go for a day with out mentioning wall street rich fat cats or taxing the 1%. Then we have the occupy wall street crowd who really think that they are on to something new with the 99% movement. Let's just go back in history (not too far) and look at class warfare for what it is, a deep rooted feeling that is easy to exploit by politicians. You could go way back and look at the Bible for some class warfare tips, or actually sit down and read Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith, or Bacon's rebellion in Virginia but more recent history is easier to relate to. Class warfare is a cornerstone of communism. Lenin used it in his writings, and it led to revolution. Class warfare is powerful and dangerous, I wrote about it a few posts back pointing out that Obama uses it as one of his favorite tools to fire people up. In an earlier post I also mentioned how Hitler used class warfare and how this lesson needs to be remembered by any leader who would turn any group of his own people against another, as Obama does daily. What people do not realize is the classes are one of the things that made the United States so great. Even in communism, where everyone was supposed to be equal, there were classes. The ruling elite lived like kings, then there were the other lesser classes. Look at North Korea as an example of classes in communism, the leaders live like kings, while everyone else fights for their daily food. In the USA, the classes have always worked together to raise the standard of living for everyone. Personally, I have nothing against the rich. Because I know that by just living the way they do, they support others. The classes need each other. The rich need the lower classes, as much as the lower classes need the rich. It has always been this way. A similar argument can be made like this, not everyone can be a doctor or a lawyer, and not everyone can be a plumber or auto mechanic. A man that spends 12 years or so studying and building his skills to be a brain surgeon, naturally should be paid more than a person who digs ditches. But don't get me wrong, ditches are needed just as much as brain surgeons, if not more. Not everyone can be a brain surgeon, just like not everyone can be a car mechanic. The jobs are just as important for our society to function, and the auto mechanic should be just as proud of his skills as the brain surgeon. In capitalism, the standard of living is raised by everyone pursuing their calling in life. There really should not be any class envy as we are all important in this society, and all work to raise the standard of living.

Class envy is a human emotion based in greed, and that makes it a negative emotion that no good comes from. But it is easy to play on this emotion. It is no different than when communists seized property in Russia to redistribute for the common good. It is easy to get people to act as a mob and take things away from others. What we need is a president who is positive, not what we have now. Because of Obama's rhetoric, we now have mobs who feel it is Ok to take from others and to destroy property of the "other people". They are called Occupy Wall Street.

If it is not stopped soon, it will be OK to take from you.

3rd Party History.

2011-12-28T20:26:00.001-05:00

Lots of noise has been made lately about 3rd parties. Gary Johnson, Ron Paul, and Donald Trump all are toying with the idea. After reading my post about Donald Trump and possible 3rd party forming a friend recommended that maybe a history of third parties would be interesting. After doing some research, he was right. Here is a quick summary of what I found, and it goes to show that things never really change. The chance for a third party really winning is slim due to a number of factors, money being the biggest one. Just the organization to get on all the ballots is daunting. Look at what Newt Gingrich is going through right now in Virginia. The electoral college is another obstacle, and I will take that on in a later article. But then what would happen if a 3rd party candidate did happen to win? He or She would surely be faced with having to work with 2 other parties, bitter with the fact that an outsider had won. So what has happened to 3rd parties in the past? Most of the time they are the spoilers in a election as they pull votes from one side or the other, and when they do well, we wind up with a president that has been elected with less than a majority. Usually a third party only lasts an election cycle or so and then its issues gets absorbed by one of the major parties and it no longer needs to exist. Third parties usually bring about change. Here are some examples.

Both the Prohibition and Socialist Parties promoted women's suffrage during the late 1800's. By 1916, both Republicans and Democrats supported it and by 1920, the 19th Amendment giving women the right to vote had been ratified.

The Socialist Party first advocated laws establishing minimum ages and limiting hours of work for American children in 1904. The Keating-Owen Act established such laws in 1916.

The Immigration Act of 1924 came about as a result of support by the Populist Party starting as early as the early 1890's.

You can thank the Populist and Socialist Parties for the 40-hour work week. Their support for reduced working hours during the 1890's led to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938.

In the 1890's, the Populist and Socialist Parties supported a "progressive" tax system that would base a person's tax liability on their amount of income. The idea led to ratification of the 16th Amendment in 1913.

The Socialist Party also supported a fund to provide temporary compensation for the unemployed in the late 1920's. The idea led to the creation of laws establishing unemployment insurance and the Social Security Act of 1935.

In 1968, the American Independent Party and its presidential candidate George Wallace advocated "getting tough on crime." The Republican Party adopted the idea in its platform and the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 was the result. (George Wallace won 46 electoral votes in the 1968 election. This was the highest number of electoral votes collected by a third party candidate since Teddy Roosevelt, running for the Progressive Party in 1912, won 88 votes.

A lot of historians say that the George Wallace campaign made the biggest impact of all the third parties. Theodore Roosevelt was a republican and when he left office William Howard Taft was elected. Roosevelt was so unhappy with Taft he formed the Bull-Moose Party and ran in the next election. He wound up being the Spoiler and Woodrow Wilson was elected. (Gee thanks)! It is going to be interesting to see what happens this time, as everything is so unsettled. Let's just hope that Obama is the loser.

Liberals 100 years ago

2011-12-28T19:14:00.000-05:00

While doing research on third parties in the United States, I was reminded of the progressive movement in the early 1900's and what they accomplished. Our country has been under assault since day one when the constitution was being written, so I thought it would be cool to remind everyone that the fight against liberals never ends. In many ways some of the progressives victories in the 1900's did help the country. Women gained the right to vote, the food industry became safer because of government oversight, and don't forget the labor conditions improved during this time. One of the biggest problems though was the tampering with the constitution, 100 years ago (1913) the election of senators was changed from being appointed by the state legislators, to being elected by the people. This changed the balance of power forever and many conservatives today want this repealed. 100 years ago Woodrow Wilson was campaigning for president, and would be elected in 1912. He was one of the biggest liberals ever. His election put liberalism in high gear. Giving us the Federal Reserve, the Federal Trade Commission, and Minimum wage laws were beginning to take hold. In 1911, the Standard Oil Company was broken up by the government because it was declared a monopoly. Looking back a little, in 1901 the Socialist party was formed in the United States, which greatly influenced the Progressives.

So while it seems that we are all in the middle of a liberal takeover, in reality it is just part of an ongoing battle that the United States has been fighting over since it's inception. It goes to show that liberals never give up, and we will be fighting for conservatism for the rest of our lives.

Progressives destroying America piece by piece

2011-12-26T18:01:00.001-05:00

Looking back trough history it is clear that liberals have been at work for years to destroy America. In the early 1900's they made a lot of progress that we are still trying to undo today. The federal reserve, income tax, direct election of senators, workers comp, and a whole host of other liberal causes were started in this time. WWII and FDR furthered government control by taking over almost everything, and starting social security. Luckily after the war, some things were wrestled away from the government by congress. Just like now, liberals use chaos and crisis to grab power, right out of the socialist handbook. Obama made a speech the other day, stating that capitalism has never worked. True to his socialist roots. So one must ask the question, If capitalism does not work and never has, what does work? We all know what the answer is. Socialism. What else is there? Obama is getting bolder, as is all the other Democrats. So it makes you wonder if they know something we don't. Liberals have never been able to tell us who they are and what they believe because they know that if the American people knew the truth they would never win a election. Makes you wonder why they are so bold.

Is it time for a third party?

2011-12-22T10:40:00.000-05:00

Like a approaching thunder storm, I hear rumblings off in the distance, and they are getting louder. The rumblings are the noise of a third party forming. Before you discount this, let me explain. Look at the state of politics. We have the Tea Party that is within the republican party trying to wrestle control from the elite republican establishment. The Tea Party is losing. We all look at the fiasco's happening in the house and see the Tea Party getting the blame when in reality it is the republican leadership. The republican leadership has time and again gone against the best interest of the party and made bad deals, then the media goes to work and the Tea Party gets blamed. I have always said that the Republicans are happy being a minority party, so maybe this is being done on purpose to solidify their hold on the Republican Party and put the Tea Party in it's place. After all, the elites are the elites, republican and democrat, so why would they not work together to hold on to their power? Just throwing that out there. They could not do any worse than what they are, unless all this is being done on purpose. What I think is that they are underestimating how mad the people really are. Look at the primaries. So far, it has been anyone but Romney, and everyone but Romney has been shot down. The Tea Party formed out of the frustration of the parties not listening. Look at the last election. We had McCain and Obama. That is frustrating just thinking about it.

Now before you take the Rush Limbaugh / Shawn Hannity route and say that third party means automatic democrat win let me throw something else out there. Back when Ross Perot came along and started his third party movement there was a lot of discontent with Bush 1. Sort of the same feeling at the end of Bush 2 if you were not around or don't remember. Perot was on Larry King and said a lot of things that got people riled up. Basically common sense and anti-establishment stuff. Next thing you know he was running for president. It all happened very fast and it could happen again. But this time things are much different. The Tea Party people are mad but don't really have anywhere to go, that is a given. So they are ripe for a third party, especially the way the republicans are treating them and the republicans ridiculous leadership. Here is what is different this time. We have the draft Hillary movement on the Democratic side. Last time the democrats were united. This has been overlooked but is very real. I will make a statement here that should cause you to think. There are as many people mad at Obama for destroying the democrat party and taking it hard left socialist as there are Tea Party people on the republican side. Think about it. Because democrats stick together so well, and the media covers for them so well, this is not widely known. But it is there. And it is huge. The old time centrist democrats are lamenting the demise of the democratic party. The party has left them, the same as the republican party has left the conservatives. If you want proof, read some of Pat Caddell's stuff. He speaks for a lot of democrats.

So what will it take to get this whole thing going? It will take a lightening rod. Someone who can bring conservatives, independents, 99 per centers, libertarians, fringe world net daily types, and centrist democrats together. With the current state of affairs in Washington, and in the parties, it may not be as difficult as it seems. I hate to say this, but Donald Trump fits the bill. Stop right here. I am not endorsing Trump, just pointing him out, it could be anybody. He has purposely set himself up into this position to take advantage if need be. And if he made the correct running mate choice, it could change politics for quite some time. Don't get me wrong before you call me a whacko, I really am not a Trump fan. But stand back and look at the big picture. He is an outsider, but he is a player, he has business sense, he takes Obama head on with the birther issue, he is not afraid, he blasts China (which is popular), he knows how to negotiate (big one considering the state of congress). In short, he could appeal to all these groups and could be formidable if he does this right. Don't think it is too late either, Ross Perot started rolling along pretty good in the spring of the election year. In fact, looking at things this way, the stars are aligned like at no other time in my lifetime. It could get interesting.

Romney and his flip flops

2011-12-22T09:55:00.002-05:00

Conservatives have been leery of Romney during this whole primary season. Personally he says many of the right things and makes quite a few good points. Yesterday he flipped on his stance of the war Iraq saying that "of course" going into Iraq was a bad decision knowing what we know now. This is nothing but Romney trying to get liberal support. If he was a true conservative, interested in the cause he would not say this. Especially after it has been proven that there was WMD's there, just not as sophisticated as Bush led to believe. But that is only what we can prove. Just ask Santorum. He came out a few years ago with proof that Iraq had WMD's and that they had fallen into Al-Qaeda's hands. Then Wiki leaks came out, not that long ago, and showed the world that there was WMD's in Iraq after all. Of course the liberal's selectively ignore this from their precious Wiki leaks site, which makes me wonder. Who's side is Romney on? Looks to me he is on the side that benefits him the most. So how come the conservatives just can't support Romney? Look at the way he treats us. Just like the elite republican establishment that the conservatives hate so much, he thinks that we will support him if he just throws us a bone every once in a while. Now it looks like he thinks the liberalswill support him if he throws them the WMD - Iraq bone. This guy does not deserve conservative support. No wonder the primary is all over the place, and Romney cant get over 25%.

The 1%

2011-12-21T22:31:00.000-05:00

I haven't wrote much about this but it is about time. Why anyone would be upset about the 1% is beyond me. According to the IRS they pay a very large part of the taxes every year, so that should not be a problem. People are jealous of the 1% because they know that they will never be a part of that group, so instead of admiring them, it is easier to hate them, especially when the media portrays them the way that they do. Ask anyone what they think of the 1% and the typical stereotype image of the little guy on the monopoly cards comes to mind. Fat little guy with a cigar counting his money, or Mr Howell on Gilligan's island washing his money. Our stereotypes are formed at an early age. The socialists know these stereotypes and capitalize on them. Marx knew this. Class envy is the most powerful tool of the left. It is easy to get people riled up about something that they envy. Just look at history. Hitler and his national socialist party had to have something to rally people behind. So they picked the Jews. They fit the stereotype of being rich, even though that is not necessarily the case, the stereotype of the day fit perfectly. Of course it all started out as a way to rally the people behind their cause, and later it turned into something else because of racism, hatred, and too much government power. This is the danger of a leader turning a group of his own country into a scapegoat. When the Jews started getting old, he turned to Masons, Gypsies, Slavs, and was seriously planning a way to take on the Catholics. For those of us who have studied history, Obama and his straw men are taking this country into dangerous territory. He is getting more bold as time passes and the occupy movement is a direct result of his class envy rhetoric. I never thought I would see the day when a president (or his party) would back such a movement. This is not the America I grew up in. If this is allowed to continue, the 1% will take hold and the left will pick a new group. The Tea Party. Then anyone who professes to be a conservative. It already is happening. Look at the hatred that is expressed regarding the Tea Party. In the America I grew up in, this hatred did not exist. People had their opinions and were allowed to express them, on election day one side won and another lost. If you lost then you kept working. Peacefully. Now many people are condoning the occupy movement and their violence. Saying that they are justified in their hate. This is history starting to repeat itself, hopefully America will see this for what it is and correct the problem.

If it were not for foreign Policy

2011-12-21T20:48:00.000-05:00

I love watching Ron Paul in the debates. He is the only one up there that sticks to the constitution and tells it like it is. I really like his stance on closing down all the government agencies and making the federal workforce go out and get real jobs. Just think what this world would be like without the education dept., the EPA, the IRS, Federal Reserve, Commerce dept, and a host of others that we all would love to see axed. It would be heaven on earth for us free thinking conservatives. Just think, if Ron Paul would be president the government would do what it is supposed to and get out of our lives and out of the way. But then he talks foreign policy. I know that he is sticking to his libertarian ideology, but if he would just bend a little bit on this the election would be a whole different ball game. I have to apologize to my libertarian friends, but he sounds like the villain Toon on Roger Rabbit melting in dip when talking foreign policy. He is sticking strictly to libertarian ism while throwing common sense out the window. His stance on Iran is one case. Sorry, but they are our enemy. If we know they are planning to do something that effects us, then it is the governments job to head off the problem, after all it is in the constitution that one of the main reasons government exists is to protect us. And that goes for our allies also. We are not privy to a lot of what goes on, but I can safely bet that Israel has given a more than a few tips on terrorist activity. Therefore they are our friends, and like it or not it is in our best interest to help them. Of course, it does not mean that we blindly give money away, Pakistan is a good example that comes to mind, but Ron Paul is just hurting himself with this stance. We also have a duty as the leader of the free world to export capitalism every chance we get, as it makes more friends for us and helps free oppressed people. It works every time it is tried. Rick Santorum is right on this. I just wish Ron Paul would give a little, it would help him and the country. He would more than likely be elected if he would do this, instead he is killing his chances.

Watching the Republicans self destruct.

2011-12-21T18:37:00.000-05:00

I have been watching the news the past couple of days and have been totally thrown off my game. Watching the assault on Newt by the republicans is probably the most amazing feat of self destruction I have ever witnessed. In fact, this whole primary process this year is a lesson in how not to win public opinion. I have watched the republican establishment assassinate every front runner in this race, starting with Bachmann, then Perry, then Cain, and now Gingrich. Isn't it interesting that the only candidate to escape the wrath of the powers that be is Romney? It has been nasty. But watching what is being done to Gingrich is over the top, in fact, it smacks of desperation. Desperation that all of us ignorant rank and file just cannot see the wisdom of the pick of the elite. Ann Coulter wrote a column today mocking Gingrich and painting him to be a big government liberal. All this after swooning over Christie, a big government liberal, and backing Romney, a big government liberal. Am I missing something here? It seems as though when someone becomes a front runner that the establishment RINO'S can't control the big guns come out. Now why can't the same effort be put towards Obama? Romney would not even call Obama a socialist the other day. Somehow I can't see that this is what we need. The establishment thinks so. I am sorry but the establishment leadership's record is not very good. Now I don't know who Bohner is listening to but the whole deal of the 2 month payroll tax extension is political suicide. This whole thing has not even played out yet but the republicans have already lost this one and it is the fault of leadership. Why the republicans allowed themselves to be put into this situation is a perfect example of what I have been saying. Of course you take a stand on bad legislation, but don't allow yourself to be painted in a corner like has happened here. Like Pat Caddell said today, the republicans are so stupid they might have just set themselves up to lose the house next election. I never thought I would agree with Pat Caddell on anything, but here lately the republicans would be smart to enlist him for some strategy help. At what point is the republican establishment going to wake up? Never. We already have a Tea Party because of their lack of leadership, and if Romney gets the nomination we are liable to be stuck with Obama for another four years, this will probably lead to a third party the following election, if not sooner. We have the worst president ever in office who is cooking the books, spending us into oblivion, going against the wishes of the majority of Americans, and the republican party cannot get their act together. Now maybe I will be proven wrong as only time will tell, but the closer the election gets, the worse things are looking.

Part of the reason liberals believe in central planning

2011-12-20T18:12:00.000-05:00

Been thinking about this for a while and it finally hit me. Look at the democratic party and their willing accomplices in the media. Have you ever noticed that they are all in lockstep? Usually by 10 Am you know what will be the mantra of the day. One liberal whacko comes out and says the sound bite of the day, and then the rest of the day they all come out like lemmings repeating the same line. It's like they are mindless robots. And they are mindless robots. They practice what they preach. I don't know how they do it but they are on the same page, all the time. It is rare that a liberal goes off the reservation of thought. They live central planning. That is why they are so much into the cause of central planning. Look at it this way. Somewhere in the world every day, someone or some group makes policy for the left. The instructions go out. And every lemming left whacko that writes an article or goes on TV gets the memo and repeats it. It is central planning on parade, every day, right in front of our eyes. From Jon Stewart, to Chris Matthews, to some little journalist in Podunk, where ever, they are on the same page. Now how they do this I don't know, but it is pretty impressive. Of course there is no independent thought here and that is their downfall. I love to watch liberals on TV anymore as I can almost predict line for line what they are going to say, just by watching other liberals earlier in the day. You know that they won't dare say anything different, that would get them in trouble with whoever the head honcho is. Where does this leave us free thinkers? I think it leaves us in a very powerful position. Central planning always fails. It has never worked and it never will. As long as there are people who are free thinkers and will not go along with the flow of the central planners there is hope. The problem is that central planners like power and will use it to force free thinkers to shut up one way or the other. Because free thinkers are a threat to the central authority. Let's hope that enough people see history repeating itself and put a stop to the big government central planners next election.

Battle of the ideologies

2011-12-20T17:36:00.000-05:00

In my lifetime, this upcoming election probably is the most important. We are at a crossroads in this country, we will decide if the future is going to be free market capitalism, or if we slide into the abyss of central planning. There have been times in the past where the country has made a choice between these two ideologies, specifically in Woodrow Wilson's election, and in FDR's election, and both times the central planning socialists have won the day. Each time we get to this juncture, we have moved to the left as a country, but there is a difference this time. This time, if we elect Obama for a second term, the country will move so far to the left that there will be no turning back, other than revolution. I don't say this lightly, but we are indeed at a tipping point because the amount of power that Washington has is staggering, and they are at the point to where if they get more, they will take the rest that they need. It is already happening. Look at the executive orders that Obama is now writing. We are very close to a dictatorship at this time. Of course the federal and state workers do not see the problem of what is happening as they are happily getting a paycheck. Those of us in the private sector are horrified though. If you ever get a chance to read Atlas Shrugged by Anne Rand, do so. It is what is happening to the private sector right now. Up until this point, the private sector has been taking up the slack, just hanging on waiting for things to free up. If Obama gets another term though, many businesses will just quietly close down. IT will not be worth it to them to continue to give more and more, and to support all the Federal and State workers. More people are on the government payroll than in the private sector, and the private sector pays the salaries of the public sector. We are already at the point where the private sectors tax burden no longer supports the payroll of the government, thus the debt. Government just grows and grows, look at Washington. They are in their own little world up there. Unemployment is low. Things are moving and shakin up there. We have become the slaves of the Washington elite. There has to be an awakening soon.

Central Planners Vs. Free Thinkers

2011-12-20T17:26:00.001-05:00

One of the wars that the conservatives are losing is the battle of words in the media. We keep calling the democrats liberals, socialists, communists, and in many ways this turns the american public off. Because of conditioning by the media just the mention of these words automatically causes many folks eyes to glaze over and tune out. I think that we need to start using the terms of free thinkers to describe ourselves and central planners to describe democrats. These terms describe each side as they are. We are the free thinkers. We promote new, fresh ideas. We want everyone to have freedom and smaller more efficient government. We want power to be given to the individual. On the other side, they want more government power, less freedom of choice, all power to be concentrated in Washington and everyone to live by the rules set by the central planners. We are the future, the new way of thinking. They want the old way of thinking, everyone serving the elite, and we fight for the scraps they decide to give us. This is one war that need to win, but we have to start first.

Newt and the judiciary

2011-12-19T22:26:00.000-05:00

It seems as though Newt is taking on the judiciary. I find it very interesting that the Fox news debate lead up to the question of the judiciary. They kept leading up to the fact that some questions were going to be asked that were not asked at the other debates. Newt jumped in with both feet. It makes me wonder if Newt had some inside info on that one. Anyway, I think that he has jumped the shark because of his stance on this issue. He is now talking of not enforcing the laws he does not agree with and bringing judges up in front of congress if he does not agree with their rulings. Now we all agree that the judiciary has been out of control for a long time, I was sent across town to go to school because of a federal judge when I could have walked a few blocks to school. But what Newt is proposing sounds an awful lot like a dictatorship to me. One of the problems I had with Bush was the patriot act. We might trust Bush with this power, but what about his successor? I am not comfortable with the power Obama has. He has much more power than Clinton did, thanks to Bush and big government policies. If Newt sets the precedent of bringing judges up for impeachment, and ignoring their rulings, what do you think that a democrat would do with that power? Just think what Obama would do if he had this precedent to work with? He could impeach every judge that ruled against health care, or use the threat of impeachment to get his way. I think that if congress would just follow the laws the problem would be solved. Maybe term limits also. Let's take Kagan for example. My dog has as much business being a supreme court justice as she does. Obama went to the worst pick for this country as he could make when he nominated her. If congress was doing their job, they would have thrown that nomination right back in Obama's face. But they do not have the nerve. Newt sounds like a big government central planner on this one to me, using a sledgehammer to fix a problem. Not a good sign.

Why do republicans keep making bad deals?

2011-12-19T19:39:00.001-05:00

Sometimes I really wonder about the republican leadership. The senate passed a bill for extending the payroll tax for 2 months. The only problem is that most smaller payroll systems will not be able to adjust for this short notice and for only two months. So this is really a stupid idea. The problem is that the senate passed this bill and went home for vacation. Now the house has to deal with the mess that the senate has made. They either have to pass a stupid bill that will cause all kinds of problems, or not pass it and get the blame for not doing anything. Why do the republicans allow themselves to be set up like this? There is a reason that Harry Reid closed the senate and went home. He knew he had the republicans over a barrel. Whenever Harry Reid goes along with anything the republicans need to see all kinds of red flags and take a second look. One day, the republicans will realize that there is no such thing as bipartisanship. The democratic party is the most partisan people ever to hold office. We need to get serious.

Why we need to take over the media

2011-12-14T21:02:00.001-05:00

It is not good enough to have Fox News. We have to infiltrate main stream media. Many conservatives do not believe that this is important but they are mistaken. The media has so much power that it wields every day in favor of the democrats. Conservatives have been reacting for so long that we just don't understand the power the media has. On a daily basis, the media shapes opinions of Americans before conservatives even have a chance to express their view. This is one of the main reasons we have to react. Because they set the agenda. Look at what they do to our candidates. The first thing they do is make them fit a template that puts them in a negative light. Then they use every least little thing that happens to make them fit that template. Look a Cain. Womanizer template. Newt. Unstable insider template that also is a womanizer. Low look at Obama. Smart, articulate, above the fray template. Everything that is reported about each person has to fit the template to fit the democratic agenda or else it don't get reported. We need to take over media and set our own agenda, and make our own templates. But that is only if we are serious about winning.

It's progress

2011-12-14T20:48:00.000-05:00

I keep hearing this from a lot of the 20 something's that I know. It seems to be the generic answer as to why things are going the way they are on a number of subjects. From Gay marriage to the socialism of america, it seems to be the answer of choice. I had a discussion with a 20 something about the indoctrination of kids into the gay and lesbian movement and the answer was "it's progress, everyone will be gay in a couple of decades". Now us conservatives see this for what it is. Regression. It is the result of liberal brainwashing at a early age. If proper values had been taught to this person, they would have been able to recognize indoctrination. Instead this person was raised by our public school system.

Is it no wonder Obama is president. Anyone who is taught the history of our country and traditional values would be able to spot Obama's rhetoric right away. Instead we are now a couple generations removed from the lessons everyone was taught during the cold war, and we now have a communist as president. In fact, the democratic party is communist, at least socialist. We have a regression in this country, in our values, in our system. One of the most dangerous things that Obama is advancing is class warfare. Whenever any leader in the past starts to demonize any group of citizens in his own country, the historical outcome is not good. Look at the occupy wall street movement. It is a direct result of the administrations class warfare strategies, and I am afraid it is only the beginning. If any other president in history had ever started a movement like this, or even condoned this type of behavior, he would be raked over the coals by the media. But we all know why this is not happening. Notice Obama has not condemned any of OWS behaviors? He knows that after the 1% there will be other groups that fall under the cross hairs of the OWS movement. Any group that does not agree with him will be a target. Let's hope that we get a new president before we all wind up in a concentration camp.

Elite republican's trying their best to lose again

2011-12-09T19:39:00.001-05:00

There is a small rumor out there about the republican powers that be. It seems that a memo was sent out telling republicans not to attack Obama. You have to love this. The bad part is that they really believe that they are taking the high ground here. Meanwhile at the time of this writing, it is open season on Gingrich. Can't you just see a memo coming out from the democrat party saying not to attack the republican nominee and to be nice to him? What a joke. One day, the republicans will learn that this is a war over the direction of this country, and the war never ends. Then again, maybe not. I really believe that the republicans are happy playing "safe" and just winning enough to be in Washington, not having any real power, just being there to make some noise from time to time. When I raced in NASCAR we called these types "riders". These were folks that never tried to win a race, they would just show up on Saturday, have a cookout, qualify last or next to last, rode around a few laps to start the race and then park the car. They would then watch the rest of the race, talk to the girls, pack up and go home. I never really figured out what the riders were up to as we were always doing our best to win. Why else you would go to a race and not try to win is beyond me. But believe me, these folks exist, go to any racetrack on a Saturday and watch them. I think that the folks in control of the republican party are riders. How else do you explain the stupidity? Like Pat Caddell says, "The republican party is the party of stupid when it comes to political strategy". Can't disagree with that.

Now they are attacking Newt

2011-12-09T18:45:00.001-05:00

It's predictable. Now that Newt has become the latest anti Romney candidate, out come the knives. I find it really interesting that the only one that seems to never get attacked is Romney. I still can't decide if it is the establishment or the media or both in cahoots. Anyway here is the latest complaint that has been dug up again. Gingrich stating part of his thoughts on Paul Ryans plan. Here is what he said

I don’t think right-wing social engineering is any more desirable than left-wing social engineering. I don’t think imposing radical change from the right or the left is a very good way for a free society to operate.

Here is what he said later on Hannaty

I was asked a question, “Should Republicans impose a plan that is deeply unpopular. And, I said something that Hayek wrote about in The Road to Serfdom, rightwing social engineering is as dangerous as leftwing social engineering. I made a lot of my conservative friends mad at me. But, in fact, Hayek wrote this and he’s right. We have an obligation to explain to the country that any major reform that affects their lives until they decide they’re going to accept it… I was trying to say something very profound but I frankly backed off because it was too much noise to communicate.

I agree with Newt.

One of the problems with Newt is he says so much that you have to listen to what he says very carefully. The elite establishment republicans know what he said, just like they knew Cain was innocent and that Bachmann was right about vaccines in Texas. They just are looking for any opportunity to get Newt out of the way so Romney can be the candidate. They have taken the first sentence of what he said and have used it to demonize him. Of course, Newt always says a lot so look for this to continue. They have successfully built a template for Newt and we will be stuck with it for as long he is in the public eye. Just like Cain's template is a woman chaser - pervert. That template is Newt shoots his mouth off and says things that embarrasses the elites. This has been set and will be used every chance they get. In fact, just about anything Newt says will be parsed and put into this template to help make him look stupid. Now why this is done is beyond me but it must be that the elites think that they cannot control Newt. That is good in my mind. The elites are the problem with the republican party and I really believe that they are just democrats in disguise. They used to be called Sam Nunn democrats a few years back. Now they are alive and well within the republican party and trying their best to make the party the democrat lite party. Thank god for the Tea Party. It is our only hope.

Cain bows out.

2011-12-03T18:28:00.001-05:00

Cain called it quits today, mainly because of the allegations against him, but also because he is losing money due to lack of support from the base. He had a couple of weaknesses that were hurting him with the base, mainly foreign policy issues. He had some problems communicating some of his opinions and seemed to not giving a clear message on some issues, like abortion. Enough of the negatives though, all in all Cain added a lot to this race and I hate to see him go. One of the things that really upsets me is the flat tax is not even being discussed anymore, Newt and Romney don't seem to have any stomach for it, at least so far and it looks like this issue is now on the back burner. Let's hope that I'm wrong, we really need a flat tax as it takes power away from Washington. There are many things that have been disturbing about Cain's run in the primary. The one that disturbs me the most is the disunity in the party. You should see the comments in the blogs about Cain. It is really bad in my opinion. Cain seems to be a good man and really does not deserve the comments coming from our side. He added a lot to this campaign and his voice is needed in our party. One of my observations is how divided this country has become under Obama. The republican party is just as divided. The Ron Paul crowd is a good example. It's Ron Paul or no one with many of his supporters. Many are saying that Cain has become nothing but a distraction and he needed to bow out. This is looking at Cain in a negative light instead of a positive one, and is dangerous for the republicans. With that said, let's look at an even more disturbing problem. Someone, either the establishment republicans, or the Obama crowd, has taken Cain down. We all know that Cain was hated by both of these, and they both benefited from him quitting. This shows how bad politics have become in this country. I really don't know if Cain has done any of the things he is accused of, and really no one else does either. All we know is what has been presented in the press and our own judgement. Now maybe something else will come out. But if I were Cain these women would be kept under close scrutiny by me and when they received their payoffs it would be made public for everyone to see who is behind this. I would clear my name unless I died first. America needs to know these things. Like I said in another post, Republicans scatter like roaches from the light when one of their candidates are accused of something and here is another example. Many people stuck with Cain, which is good, but we just don't have what the democrats do when it comes to sticking together. If these same charges were leveled against any Democrat, it would not make an inch of difference in support, as it should be. These charges were paper-thin, and the women making the charges just were not believable. This was a take down and is a shameful day for the republican party. I like Cain, regardless if these charges are true or not. He should have been judged on the issues and not on this. In the end he probably would not have won anyway as he is just not ready in my opinion, but he would have made a difference for us conservatives as he would have steered the debate our way, especially on the flat tax. Anyway, because of short shortsightedness on our side our cause has been weakened. Let's hope we do not get Romney, I probably will pull the lever for but this will be the last time. He is an Establishment liberal, but better than Obama. Newt is closer to being a conservative and I can go for him. The others just need to hang in there and push conservatism.

Politico traffic dives

2011-12-02T18:11:00.001-05:00

Sometime when you see these things, it makes you have some hope. It seems that Politico's web traffic has taken quite a dive recently, and there seems to be some speculation that it has to do with it's liberal bias. The new media is a boon for us conservatives. It allows us to meet other conservatives, and it helps solidify our viewpoints. There was quite some time that I thought something was wrong with me as every night the news would seem to be defying common sense. I think the first time I felt some relief was hearing Rush Limbaugh. I never will forget thinking that maybe I am not a weirdo after all, and that many other people thought the same way I do.

As conservatives, we need to look at this politico thing very closely. I really believe that conservatives are much more informed than liberals, and where we go makes a difference. After Politico ran their clearly biased articles about Cain, many people became angry and stopped visiting their site. Just read some comments and you will see that a LOT of folks refused to go to Politico. Maybe we have more power than we think. Like I said many times, the left does boycotts on a regular basis as it is part of community organizing 101 and what we need to do is take some community organizing courses and start using some of their tactics. If we can somehow become organized and function as a group, the sky is the limit as we are the majority. We have to stop reacting to the left and make them react to us. If we can effect Politico, we can effect CNN, MSNBC, and the other whacko liberal sites. After many years of studying liberals, I have finally figured out something. I used to think that they were brilliant in their tactics. But the reality is that they are just not that bright, just organized. In fact, after studying quite a few community organizing books and liberal tactics, a startling fact comes to light. We are their teachers. They study us and use our tactics against us. When we do something that wins elections, votes, or sways public opinion, they file it away and put it in their playbook. We are not organised enough and seem to forget what works. Then they beat us with our own tactics. We just need organization.

This Politico thing is a hint at the power we have. We need to learn how to build upon it.

The Euro - Socialism true to form

2011-11-30T15:23:00.001-05:00

I wrote earlier this month about how the European union is failing and it would just be a matter of time before the euro was history. It seems to be happening quicker that I even thought. The fed is bracing itself for a euro failure within a few days and the central banks are making moves in the same direction. It does not help that even the leaders of the European union are giving themselves days to fix their problems or it is all over with. What is our stock market doing? Right now it is up 400 points. Back in the old days this would be a good thing but the markets now are just reacting to bad news that they think will be bailed out if trouble happens. Basically, they are smoking crack. Way back in the day I predicted the tech bubble, and then the housing bubble. Does that make me smart? No. I just have common sense. The reality of the market is that it should be around 6000 or so and it is way over inflated, and just like before, sooner or later, that air has to show that it is something tangible or it will blow up in our faces. It is getting ready to happen again. The market used to be based on economic circumstances. It was a indicator of the strength in the economy. No more. It has become a place to gamble money, with the assumption that it is safe as the government would deem it too big to fail and prop it up. One day, the government will not be able to come to the rescue. I have wrote how suspicious it is that after every major drop in the market that it slowly creeps back to 11500 or so, and something tells me Paulson at the fed is buying or propping up the numbers behind the scenes. We just learned a few days ago the fed gave the big banks $7 Trillion!!! dollars in 2009 to keep them afloat, so we really don't know what is going on behind the scenes, but something is fishy and it will come out sooner or later. Anyway back to the euro. It was doomed to fail. Why? Because it was based in socialism and not it capitalism. Anytime socialism is tried it fails as sure as the sun comes up in the morning, it is just a matter of when. One day people will learn that central planning never works. Europe is a mess. Because they are basing all of their decisions on a socialist model. Like I have said many times in the past, socialism cannot survive without capitalism, but socialism has to keep growing by pushing out capitalism until it becomes communism. One of two things happen when socialism reaches the breaking point where the capitalist can no longer produce enough to keep the state going. Either there is revolution where enough of the non producers start burning and looting causing revolution to communism, or people wake up before it is too late and conservatives take back over and clean up the mess. The liberals go back to their academia and start raising a new round of young commies for their next attempt at government control in the future, never learning the lesson that socialism is a failure, it just was not done right (again). Spain just elected conservatives, at least they are starting to see the error in their ways.

But look at it this way. The failure of the euro is a lesson. Here is socialism on parade, they did not even have to pay for defense, (The US does that) and their social justice programs still bankrupted them! Why? Because they hit that sweet spot, the point to where the producers could not take it anymore, the non-producers sucked things dry. The same thing is happening here, we are at our own tipping point, look at occupy wall street. The socialists know that when the state grows so big that the tipping point is reached, the non-producers out number the producers, and the state starts running in the red, people get uneasy. Instead of standing back and letting the people put conservatives in office, the socialists are on their game this time. They had Van Jones and the other troublemakers form the occupy movement to try to stir up unrest. It's not working, but the point is they tried a new tactic this time. They feed on the young idealistic socialists that come from our colleges to do their dirty work for them, and they are not done yet. As long as the economy is bad they will try to push the desperation that so many people feel into a vote for more socialism. This is why we must start teaching capitalism. If you listen to a socialist, they tell you there is no other way than their way, and we must give them control to make things right for us. It never has worked and it never will. They have a plan, (as they always do) and we are still reacting to their plan. We have to get organized - there is no other way. One day, there will not be enough people left that know capitalism is better, my generation is getting older and the new generation belongs to the socialists. We have a lot of work to do, and we need to start taking the time to teach why capitalism is the best system ever invented, if not, we may lose it all one day.

What an opportunity!

2011-11-27T19:08:00.001-05:00

It looks like the democrats are falling apart. Chris Matthews and many other liberals are starting to really worry about Obama. They are saying that Obama does not really want the job and he is tired and disengaged from the issues. I really believe that they see the handwriting on the wall. The american people are mad and Obama is not going to be re-elected unless there is some sort of miracle involved. We all know that they have tried to manufacture discontent by the occupy wall street movement and the 99% slogan. They have been trying to start their own Tea Party from the white house but face it, it really is a joke. The 99% party may get legs but I predict that it will not be a factor. What we have to worry about is a third party on our side, and I would not put it past the left to make it happen. We continually allow the left to steer the mood of the republican party through the media. They may be able to get us to start a third party. If I were on the left I would. Look at what the republican party has given us. Right now Newt is on top and he is OK but has some liberal tendencies. This makes conservatives angry as it looks like it will either be Newt or Romney. So in reality the conservatives will not get what they want but we need to take this and work hard to drive the nominee to the right. We can do this by ramming conservatives through in every primary that we can and make the next president have to work with us. We can do this and it is within our reach. We cannot take the bait of a third party no matter what, not this time because too much is a stake. What we need to do though is remember what liberalism has done, and when we win this time not let up. Even if we own the house, senate, and presidency, we have to get the liberals out of media, entertainment, churches, schools, nominate conservative judges, and get them out of every other aspect of american life. Make liberalism something that other countries do. We cannot let up when we win. They never do.

Taking a break for the holidays

2011-11-27T18:41:00.001-05:00

I saw this in the paper the other day, and it came from our side. The article was about how the republicans need to take it easy during the holidays and give the american public a break from politics as they are tired of the partisan bickering and if we don't it may hurt us next election. Like I said every once in a while you have to vent and here is another example. This is one of the stupidest things I ever have heard. I can see a Democrat saying this trying to get us to shut up but our own people are saying this! Like Pat Caddell said the other day, the republicans are the party of stupid. We shoot ourselves in the foot on a regular basis trying to be "fair". Let me put it this way. Do the liberals ever take a break? They have taken over our schools, our news media, our churches, and every other institution in this country. Do you think that the liberals ever said "well, people may get mad so let's allow them put a nativity scene up on public property this year, or let's let them display the 10 commandments at the court house this holiday season as we have been awful hard on those republicans this year. Give me a break.

We need to get a mindset. Never let up. Never give the liberals a break. When we beat them at the ballot box, work even harder to make sure they lose next time even worse. Chase them out of our schools and churches. Boycott their companies and put them out of business. Either take over CNN and the like with conservatives, or put them out of business, make them a footnote in history. Make them second class citizens. That is what they are doing to us! Sometimes I think that there is no hope when I hear stupidity on our side. And giving the liberals a break is stupid.

Colin Powell - Please stop calling yourself a republican

2011-11-27T18:28:00.001-05:00

Colin Powell shows up on the Sunday shows on occasion and always bashes the conservatives. He seems to also have a bad habit of blaming the republican party on a regular basis. What really gets me about this guy is the media keeps reminding us that he is a republican. This is one of my complaints about the Bush administration and is something that we should keep in mind the next time a republican gets in office. I really believe that Bush appointed RINOS like Powell and Rice in order to play nice with the democrats. This is a mistake that we are still paying for and should never make again. The Bush administration spent way too much time trying to be bipartisan. This is a losing game and Powell is a great example. The media always plays him up as a republican, and when we complain about something (name a issue) they point at Powell or another Rino or the Bush administration and say "well look at Bush" or "Bush did it also". This dilutes our points. We should stand for our positions and let everyone know how much of a difference there is between the parties. Colin Powell is a democrat. He voted for Obama. Don't call him a Republican or a "voice of reason" as he tries to make himself out to be. He has had it easy for too long and should be called out for his behavior. Unfortunately, the republicans are still playing "nice". One day they may learn.

Thoughts on Heritage debate and immigration hoopla

2011-11-23T19:30:00.001-05:00

I thought that the Heritage debate last night was really well done. The candidates all had great answers and I really can't see how the average american could find much fault with the issues discussed. Newt Gingrich seemed to cause quite a stir by announcing he would support a plan to give some long time illegal immigrants a type of amnesty. His plan would have a panel that would evaluate an illegal and if they paid taxes, had a family and had been here for a long period of time, they would be given a card that allowed them to stay in this country but not be a citizen. Right away Michelle Bachmann and Mitt Romney had a gotcha moment and called it amnesty for 11 million illegals. Now as we all know I am a conservative but this plan does not sound all that bad to me. I appreciate that Newt took a stand and announced his position, because now I know where he stands. Romney and Bachmann both said they would not support amnesty and they would turn off the "Magnets" that keep illegals coming into this country. I wish I were moderating this debate. I would have asked both candidates, if you do not support what Newt has proposed, then what would you do with the 11 million illegals in this country? I think we should have an answer to this question. It is easy to criticize Newt on his position, but what is yours? Look at it this way, if they are not for what Newt proposes, then they must be for either leaving things the way they are, or for rounding up all the illegals and deporting them. If they are going to round them all up, then how will this be done, what will it cost, and what do we do with the children who are now citizens? I can't believe Wolf Blitzer missed this opportunity.

I am not necessarily supporting Newt's plan, but at least it is somewhat thought out, and is a plan. Sorry, but turning off magnets ain't a plan. I cannot comment on Bachmann's and Romney's plan as I really don't know what it is. So I will comment on what Newt has said. It looks like he proposes a panel that would evaluate each illegals status in this country. Depending on what they have done, basically been a good person, and having a family, then they would be given a card that said they could stay, not have citizen status (can't vote which is important). If they don't meet this criteria, they are out of here. I can see Newt's stance of not breaking up families, as it does not make sense in the instance he stated. Now how many families this affects I do not know. Maybe it is a minority. I take issue of Bachmann and Romney acting like Dracula being shown a cross on this issue, as it is something that will have to be dealt with sooner or later. I also cannot believe all the press the next day on this either.

Let's see some alternatives folks.

More on China

2011-11-23T19:16:00.001-05:00

I keep going against the conventional wisdom regarding China. Maybe it is because I lived through the 70's and 80's when the same predictions of Japan owning the US was being circulated. So many people from the average talking head to Donald Trump keep saying that China owns us and we need to do something about it soon. The reality though is that most of the US debt is owned by the big banks and China only holds about 25% or so. But listening to the news you hear that China will surpass us in the next couple years. They do not take in account the poverty in China, or the fact that the Chinese communist government keeps propping up their economy. Just look at the empty cities that China is building to make the GDP numbers look good. It does not matter that these cities will likely fall down in a few years due to their shoddy construction, or that nobody lives there because the average Chinese Urban worker makes only about $4000 a year and cannot afford to move to the new cities. On top of that, they cannot find any foreign buyers to invest because it is just not marketable. And let's don't forget the biggest single reason not to believe the Chinese numbers, they are run by communists. When has a communist government ever reported true numbers? They lie on a regular basis and cannot be trusted. Like Rick Perry has said, the Chinese communist government needs to end up on the ash heap of other failed communists societies, and it cannot happen soon enough, especially for the people of China.

Here is a great article by Heritage.

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/04/the-united-states-vs-china-which-economy-is-bigger-which-is-better

Every once in a while - you have to vent

2011-11-15T20:19:00.001-05:00

Was watching the talking heads on TV today and they were lamenting the super committee and how it looks like they may not have a agreement. The so called journalists were saying how shocked they were that the committee was not going to reach a compromise. In fact, they were acting flabbergasted at these events. Every once in a while I blow up and today is as good a time as any. The very day this super committee was announced I predicted that it was the stupidest thing the congress has ever come up with and it would not work. Then when I heard that the Democrats appointed Patty Murray and John Kerry I stated that there was no way there would be an agreement and by just those two appointments were proof that the democrats were not serious and this fiasco was doomed to fail. This whole thing was set up to fail so the republicans could be blamed for it in the next election. Who is to blame here? The Republicans. Boehner did not have enough nerve to stand up to the democrats a few months ago, and this is the result. We should have let the government shut down and dealt with the democrats and their game of poker back then. The Tea Party members were ready to go for it and lead the way and the republican establishment again snatched defeat out of the jaws of victory, and now will make it a double defeat. Maybe I will be wrong but right now it does not look good.

What really burns me up is this. Here I am, living in a swamp in Carolina, and I am predicting these events on a regular basis, and most of the time I am right. These people are in Washington, doing this for a living and they really are stupid. Now I am watching TV with these so called educated journalists and lawyers from Harvard and Yale with their fancy degrees being wrong on a regular basis. Is something wrong here? These are the same people that tell me that Glenn Beck is a nut. But if you watch him he predicts things right most of the time. Then they tell me that Herman Cain is not capable of being president. They also tell me that the pick of the republicans will be Mitt Romney. How about doing us all a favor and quit acting like journalists and stop telling us what to think. Why? Because your track record seems to point to the fact that you all are wrong on a regular basis. Obviously they don't have a clue no matter how many degrees they have.

The elites have to go.

Normal people have more sense.

Proof media wants to pick candidate

2011-11-13T21:24:00.001-05:00

We all know this but when proof comes out it really burns you up. What gets me about the left is that they have become so blatant in their efforts to handicap conservatives, and their techniques are so obvious but we let it keep happening. The CBS debate on Nov. 12 was a joke. The whole affair seems like it was quickly thrown together, only one hour was broadcast (can't do with out NCIS), and now a E-Mail comes out that they deliberately did not ask Michelle Bachman many questions. They tried on a number of occasions to get the candidates to bicker among themselves, but none of them fell for it (good for them). It came out today that in a 90 minute debate Ron Paul only had 89 seconds to answer. Personally, I think that this has been going on in all the debates, and have noticed the candidates with the most questions tend to be the one who benefit the most from the debate. If I were a campaign manager they would hate me because I would demand up front the conditions of the debate and get the other managers together and demand that it made the candidates look good, not the questioners. I have thought all along this year that things were being done pretty sloppy, but that may be due to the number of debates.

Another thing. I have been hearing that folks on our side are complaining about too many debates. In my mind this is the wrong idea. The more our message gets out there, the better. We need to educate a lot of ignorant people on the ideas of conservatism and if it takes a debate every weekend then that's great. The Obama administration is the most dangerous threat this country has faced in my lifetime. Newt actually had a questioner arguing with him on the assassination of a enemy combatant. Of course arguing with Newt is not a good idea, especially for a liberal. The good thing is there are a lot of independents that will go our way when we properly school them on our positions. I think that independents don't follow politics as closely as conservatives do. Therefore their opinions of us are what they read that some liberal writes. We have to get our positions out there and explain WHY we believe the way we do. If we find a way to do this, we cannot lose and the liberals will go to the ash heap of history. In fact getting our message out is the biggest single failure of the conservative movement. So let's have more debates.

One final thing on this subject. When CNN, MSNBC and CBS run the debates it comes out terrible. This is done on purpose. Liberals know how to foul up just about anything, but then again destruction is a easy science, look at what they are doing to this country. But as I have said many times in the past, we need to take over media. That way one day in the future, when there is a democratic debate, we can ask them questions on OUR premise, and make them look bad. We have to use every little thing that makes our movement look better, no matter how small that thing is. Jefferson was right…
given enough time and resources…the America people WILL figure out what is Right and Wrong and will correct their mistakes.

Media bias destroying themselves

2011-11-11T21:47:00.001-05:00

Watching the media frenzy with Cain is sad and instructive. Most conservatives know all too well media bias and are fed up, which explains the reaction to the Cain scandal. But what is flying under the radar of many conservatives, is the mainstream media is destroying themselves because of their bias. The liberals really believe that they are in the majority, and by taking over the media they have convinced themselves that their own warped world view is mainstream. I think that they are in for a rude awakening soon. What they fail to realize is that media is big business, and sooner or later, market forces will effect their paychecks, and the liberals will pay a big price. First of all, the world is changing quickly, many news stories are filmed as they happen, and are unloaded to the internet, many times before a reporter has the time to get on the scene. This is the news part of the media, and it is changing fast. In fact it is changing so fast that news has become more of a product of the internet, and will become more so as time goes on. The second part of the media is political commentary. Because of liberal bias they have chased away many viewers. Of course they will always have the hard core liberals, and they really believe that that is mainstream, but the numbers don't lie. What numbers? The bottom line of the media outlets. The only thing that has kept the liberal media afloat is the fact that the news outlets are small portions of larger companies, and they could operate at a loss. Things are changing though. Because of liberal policies the economy is in a mess, and the big companies are looking at every division and the liberal media is just not profitable. So the liberal media is hurting itself on many fronts, and since the liberals don't understand free markets, they may be caught off guard and be out on the streets looking for a job. It is happening already. CNN is in the process of reorganizing, and will be laying people off soon, look for the others to follow suit. The folks than run CNN see the handwriting on the wall, and deep down they have to know what is hurting profits, so look for some conservatives to start making appearances on these networks. After all, Fox news is destroying all the other networks, you can't tell me that the owners will stay liberal outlets and let the companies go out of business just to stick to their ideology, they are capitalists deep down inside, they have no choice in the end as liberalism is their own destruction.

A long road ahead

2011-11-10T21:29:00.001-05:00

Watched the debate last night on CNBC. I think that it was one of the best debates yet, although most folks would think it was kind of boring. I am a political junkie and this type of debate is what the republican party needs more of. The questioning from the reporters was hostile and really disrespectful, but what I expected from a bunch of liberals. What I really liked about it was the republicans all look unified in most of their answers. Watching the pundits afterwards though is disturbing. The liberals are so stuck in their ideology that it is going to take generations to win them over. They do not even have the slightest concepts of free markets, capitalism, or the things that makes this country great. One of the questions was Italy and their troubles, and that it was too big to fail. The liberals do not have any concept that government does not have a obligation to bail out business, bank, or country. They really have bought into the socialist theories that government has a duty to redistribute wealth and make the playing field level or social justice if you will. The bad part is many people have fallen for this liberal utopia, and there are more converts every day thanks to the media and education system. Like I said many times before, we have to get organized, and it has to be more than the republican or the tea party. We have to infiltrate education, media, business, and stick together like never before. If Obama wins this next election, we will be just like the Euro Zone, and that is not good.

Cain unqualified to be president

2011-11-09T17:04:00.001-05:00

One of the elite's finally let it slip out. Tucker Carlson today said that Cain is unqualified to be president. After all of the elite's dirty tricks are not working, they are starting to flip out. Cain has been defying media logic as he should have been toast after the last woman came out and gave a face to the charges. The only problem is the stupid electorate is not playing along. Cain is raising more money that ever, and his poll numbers are not dropping (yet). I will never forget the faces of the media when the Luntz focus group declared Cain the winner of the first debate. They have been in denial ever since. I really don't know if Cain will make it or not, he has some pretty tall odds to overcome. But it at least is entertaining to see the Brook's, Krauthammer's and the other elites that gave us John McCain (and who would give us Romney) squirm. But let's look at this from another angle.

One of my pet peeves with liberals is that they seem to think that the president is the supreme ruler of the universe. Therefore, the president needs to be able to answer every question in a split second, without thinking about it, on any subject known to man. After all, the president is God. Now along comes Herman Cain. Ask him a gotcha question and he stumbles, and basically has to think about it for a little bit. Oh that's just terrible, Romney of Obama would never do such a thing. But look at what Romney and Obama do when they get a question that they don't know. They just give a line of bullshit, hitting around what the question was about, never really answering it. But boy, they look good when they don't answer that question now don't they. That makes them qualified to be president. I remember Reagan. He fumbled and bumbled and embarrassed the elites on a regular basis, but america loved him because he was just the president, not the supreme leader of the universe. I think that we need someone at this time that will be strong and just admit that he does not know and will get his advisers together, work it out and come up with a plan. It may not be pretty, but it might just work. After all, the slick politician types have been running things for quite some time now, and it ain't work'in.

Super Committee

2011-11-09T16:32:00.001-05:00

As of today the super committee that was setup by Boehner looks like it will not get it's job done. When I first heard about this "committee" it made me laugh. I posted on this blog that it will not work and was meant to fail. In fact, when you saw the choices the democrats put up there there is no way that they would go along with the republicans. I feel like the Tea Party has been vindicated here. They did not want this deal. The only reason it even happened is the republican leadership failed in it's duties to the america people. Lack of leadership and no backbone. Plain and simple.

This was also sold as a way to come up with cuts in spending to help get debt under control, but quickly was turned into ways to raise revenue by more taxes by the democrats and the media. I can bet that Obama and his crony's have calculated that if there is no deal then they can blame the republicans and get more mileage from that than running an honest campaign. So what we have here is Obama and his Chicago politics crowd doing what is in the best interest of the party, and to hell with the american people.

He will get out in every campaign speech and claim to feel your pain, but at the same time blame the republicans because they are unreasonable. He will use phrases like "I know you are hurting out there".

This is so easy to see what is coming, why can't the republicans see it and get ready to counteract it? They do not realize that we are in a cold war for this country, and that makes the democrats the enemy, and the only way to win this is to shut them down and keep them down. The democrats realize this, why else would Obama call republicans "the enemy" as he accidentally has a couple of times. They have been shutting us down, and keeping us down every chance they get. And they never give us a break.

We had better start getting serious.

We are stupid. Republicans deserve to lose if we keep this up.

The Christmas tree tax

2011-11-09T16:02:00.001-05:00

Hooray! The Christmas tree tax has been put on hold. After so many people looked at this and said "What the hell"! the tax has now been put on hold by the Obama administration. Let's get some background out of the way first.

Seeing their market share for fresh Christmas trees starting to dwindle. The Christmas tree growers lobbied congress to help market their product through a federal program that would help educate consumers on the merits of buying a fresh Christmas tree. In order to pay for this program, the government set a tax on all fresh cut Christmas trees at 15 cents each that would eventually have to be paid by the poor old consumer (again). Kinda like the old got milk thing.

There are so many things wrong here. First of all, this is what happens when government gets so big and out of control it is doing things that it has no business being involved in. We don't need the government running a public relations program on the merits of a Christmas tree. Of course this program will be run by the Christmas tree promotion board that is paid for out of the fees. Here is what they say it will do.

The National Christmas Tree Association says the fee would fund a program “designed to benefit the industry and will be funded by the growers” and is “not expected to have any impact on the final price consumers pay for their Christmas tree.” According to the Federal Registry, the proposed Christmas Tree Promotion Board, which would be funded by the new fee, would launch a “program of promotion, research, evaluation, and information designed to strengthen the Christmas tree industry’s position in the marketplace; maintain and expend existing markets for Christmas trees; and to carry out programs, plans, and projects designed to provide maximum benefits to the Christmas tree industry” and to “enhance the image of Christmas trees and the Christmas tree industry in the United States.”

Wow, we REALLY need this.

This is what happens when the government get too big. This is one of the best cases for smaller government that there is. If the government was smaller, it could not be lobbied like this. This is upside down and is socialist thinking at its worst. Why should the Christmas tree growers get together (like in the old days) and impose a fee upon themselves to run their own campaign? Then hit the airwaves with it. If it worked, then do more. If not forget it. But instead the thinking is to get the government involved with a tax, setup a committee and run the show. But what if it does not work? We all know what would happen. The program would go on and on and just be there forever. This really needs to be investigated to see if there is fraud involved here, or maybe money laundering somehow. My gut instinct on this one is something smells. Now how many other "programs" like this are being done that have slipped under the radar of the American People? I bet thousands. This is why Americans have no disposable income. All of these things added up are taking away money from the private sector and being sent out into a hole somewhere that produces nothing. We have to stop this. When the democrats come to us and tell us that more money is needed for essential services, think about this type of nonsense. If the government was doing what it is supposed to be doing, American's would have more money, life would be simpler, and we would be safer.

Republican strategist hat

2011-11-08T18:09:00.001-05:00

Since in my last post I speculated what a democrat strategist would do, Let's look at what I would do as a republican strategist. In general, I would do what Reagan did. Call each candidate one at a time and ask each to support each other in issues like the one with Cain. Just stick to the issues, and stick together. After all the republicans are one the same side against the liberals. The way to destroy the democrats is just to attack them on their stance of the issues. Obama has so many problems that it is almost too easy. He takes the side of our enemies, and on just about every issue facing america, is on the wrong side of the citizens. They just have to be told where he stands, and what he has done. It is really like shooting fish in a barrel. You just have to shoot, and the republicans have a hard time doing that.

Cain situation disturbing

2011-11-08T16:45:00.000-05:00

Been following the Cain situation closely all day and I am very disturbed about it. Cain is a pretty good conservative, but I could support Newt, Santorum or Bachmann just as much. After seeing the history of this latest accuser it is obvious to anyone that this woman is a gold digger as she has a rather long history of working the system and doing about anything to keep from having to work for a living. So for the time being let's just count her as being unbelievable. What really has me disturbed is the amount of republicans that are throwing Cain under the bus without a second thought. The latest is Carl Rove and Mitt Romney. I mean even Mika Brzezinski even is calling this a pathetic side show. I try to put myself into other folk's shoes and when I put myself into a Democrat strategist shoes I scare the hell out of myself. If I were a democratic strategist, this would be my presentation.

Whenever the republicans have a charge leveled against one of their candidates, the first thing they do is throw them under the bus, especially if the charge is on moral grounds. Liberals on the other hand, circle the wagons. The republicans would have their candidate lose rather than support a candidate that has a flaw, even if it is just an unproven rumor. The first sign of trouble for a candidate, they scatter like roaches from the light to a "safe" candidate. As liberals, we can affect the outcome of the republican primary, and the general election by leveling charges against the candidate we feel would be the most threatening. For example, Cain is surging and leading in the poles. We can find someone that needs money and get them to level baseless charges against Cain. The republicans, including their own media outlets will bring so much negative pressure on Cain that we can get opinion to turn against him. This is most effective if it is on moral grounds and it does not matter if it is true or not, the damage will be done. We can continue to do this until we get the candidate that we feel is the easiest for us to beat in the general election, essentially picking the republican nominee for the party. Every one of the nominees has baggage that can be exploited for this purpose. In the general election, we can continually float the idea of the republican candidate being a liberal by bringing up questionable votes or stances in the past and maybe even fabricating these out of thin air. Since the conservative base of the republican party is easily disheartened this should not be a problem. We can easily get them to stay home if the nominee appears to be liberal. This can win us the election and put Obama back for a second term.

I make a pretty good Liberal Democrat strategist don't I? The problem is that the liberals are easier to take down than we are, we just don't try to take them down, we are too "civilized". This is all basic strategy, and is being played out right in front of our eyes but we are too stupid to see this happening. But then again, maybe the democrats are not behind this, maybe it is the elite republicans, or even worse, maybe we are just so stupid we are doing this all on our own.

Republicans throwing Cain under the bus

2011-11-07T19:38:00.001-05:00

As of today we have another woman coming out with charges accusing Cain of sexual advances. This one has Gloria Allred (high priced celebrity democratic donor lawyer) by her side. This is what she said was the reasoning for her coming out now after 12 years of silence.

"I was very very surprised and very shocked," Bialek said, adding that she had come forward to be a "face" for women who had been harassed by Cain. "I want you, Mr. Cain, to come clean. Just admit what you did. Admit you were inappropriate to people ... I implore you. Make this right."

Ok. Let me get this straight. In 1999 you were too embarrassed to say anything when Cain was a nobody, but now that he is running for president you are not embarrassed to get in front of millions of people to tell your story. You are not going to get anything out of this, other than the fact that you will be a face for the other women who would not come forward.

Yea, right. How stupid do you think we are?

So you are not getting any money out of this, you are just a simple housewife. Who is paying Gloria Allred then?

This whole thing smells like a high level hit job to me. I like Cain, but I like Gingrich just as much, or Bachman. What we have here is someone trying to put the final nail in the coffin of the Cain candidacy because he is a threat to the elite republican establishment. So what am I saying? The republican elites are behind this. They want Romney, and that is why he is just being quiet while the media cuts down his competition one at a time. This is a setup and if we as conservatives allow this to happen, after Cain, then they will start on Gingrich. After him, Perry, Bachman or whomever poses a threat.

From what I see so far, this is dirty Washington politics on parade and if it ever comes out who is behind this, it would be the story of the year as america hates this sort of thing. Cain's contributions have been setting records up to this point as voters see this for what it is.

What really burns me up is how quickly the so called republicans throw each other under the bus. The liberals would never do this and we have a lot to learn about the war to regain america. Sometimes this type of thing makes you want to give up, especially when your own party turns on itself. We need a leader bad but it may not ever happen at this rate. This is all about status quo. The elite republican establishment is telling us ignorant rank and file they know who we are to vote for, and if we can't figure that out they will do it for us for our own good. This is not good.

Cain's appeal

2011-11-05T12:43:00.000-04:00

It really does look like the sexual harassment deal with Cain was a witch hunt. I cannot believe how many republicans just threw him under the bus. This may be the best thing that has happened to Cain, even though he was tied or leading in the republican race for the nominee. So, what is so appealing about Cain? He makes gaffs on a pretty regular basis. He is not very good at making his views clear on many issues like abortion. He definitely is not a politician, because he flub's the basic's of what a politician is. I think his appeal is that he comes across as genuine. He instills confidence in people that if he is given an issue, he will study it, and make the best decision from a conservative point of view. This is powerful. It is a trait that all leaders have. Does he make mistakes? All the time. He doesn't read from a teleprompter. He just comes out and says what he thinks. Sometimes, he has to come back and clarify what he says. We all have that happen, and if you do not, you are not being truthful to yourself.

I saw that women are still more likely to vote for Obama yesterday. This may be true but something deep inside tells me that may not be the case for long. I have a theory, and it is from talking to women at different times and circumstances. Women always ask something if you talk to them long enough, and it is where have all the men gone? I have heard this so many times. Women are tired of the metro sexual men tap dancing all around them every day. And I think that this is where Cain comes in, and Newt also. Look at Obama and Romney. They are a perfect case of today's wimpy man. Don't offend anyone, be slick, don't make mistakes. If these allegations against Cain fade away (and it looks like it) women will vote for him. A woman is not stupid, and by the time she has landed her first job, she knows how to handle anything a man can say to her. Cain is rough around the edges. But that does not matter. So what. He may have said something that made a woman "uncomfortable". Every woman knows how to handle that situation, it happens millions of times every day, and is nothing new to any woman. Woman are smart and make character judgments better than men do most of the time, Cain just needs to get his name out and be himself. Someone that just comes out and tells the truth is refreshing. Now that more of this story has come out, it looks like Cain really did not know the details of the settlement with the woman, as it happened after he left the NRA. So he told the truth. He never signed anything because he was not there, and the matter was handled at the HR level. The woman's attorney did not even have the paperwork, and it appears that he did not even show up for the signing as it was done over FAX. So his only crime was not remembering all the details, and just dribbling them out as he remembered them. Again, its refreshing to see this, it is someone being truthful, no matter how bad it makes them look. Of course, it makes the Rove's, the Krauthammers, the media, and the rest of the elite's flip out but so what.

In the end, we all want the same thing, when we hand the football (vote) off to the candidate of our choice, we expect them to run with it, make progress, and don't fumble. If too many fumbles happen, or if we start losing ground, time to hand the ball (vote) to someone else. Unfortunately, Obama not only fumbles, he loses ground on a regular basis and we are on our own 1 yard line and it's 3rd down.

More on what we must do

2011-11-05T12:01:00.002-04:00

In a previous post, I stated that we need to infiltrate business, government, media, etc, and start taking america back. In that post I put something in there about how we need to know where the political leanings are of our friends, customers, business associates, churches, etc. I made a statement about giving discounts to conservative customers, and only dealing with like minded people. I caught a lot of flack from friends about that, saying that I was too radical, basically they were calling me a nut. I keep telling folks that this is done all the time by the liberals. Then they tell me that am a conspiracy nut. So this post will be examples as I find them to prove my point. One day conservatives will realize that this is indeed a cold war with the left and we are not fighting. Hopefully it will not be too late when they get on board.

It appears that democrats do not do business with private companies if there is a union option available, wow imagine them being so biased.
http://www.foxcharlotte.com/news/top-stories/Charlotte-Businesses-Question-How-DNC-Contracts-Were-Awarded-133281693.html

More will come, liberal bias is easy to find if you. look around

A quick observation on occupy wall street.

2011-11-04T23:22:00.001-04:00

I can't seem to get over this occupy movement. It just fascinates me to no end, mainly because of the contradictions within the movement. They are all over the place in their complaints, but one of the main ones is the bailouts of wall street. I agree with them. The bailouts were just plain stupid. But then they come out and bash capitalism. Don't they know that government bail outs are something a socialist country does, and a capitalist country does NOT do?

This country is full of socialist experiments. Let's name a few. Public schools, Social Security, Medicare, Student loans, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, let's stop while we are ahead. Do you notice something about this list? All are things that are failing miserably, and we all agree on that. Look at government backed loans for green energy companies, it has nothing to do with free markets at all. Look at government subsidies. From alcohol to ethanol to tobacco. It's ridiculous.

Take tobacco as a quick easy example. The government gives subsidies to farmers in the millions to grow tobacco, then they spend millions to get people to stop smoking, all the while taxing cigarettes to the point that government makes more money on a pack of cigarettes that the tobacco companies do, then take that money and fund children's health care. That is an easy one. One day I will tackle what they do to a gallon of gasoline.

So, why blame capitalism on these socialist experiment failures? Free market capitalism would never have anything to do with this kind of nonsense, only government planners. We live under socialism every day, and it is the cause of our problems, hands down. The occupy movement is blaming the wrong ideology, all the time calling for more socialism. It is clearly a lack of education.

Liberals limiting freedom

2011-11-04T22:47:00.001-04:00

Since you can't turn on the news these days without hearing about Herman Cain and sexual harassment, let's explore this subject a little. In my opinion, the whole sexual harassment subject is just another way the liberals limit behavior through the laws. Not that long ago (early 90's), I worked in a office that allowed smoking. In fact, nothing was even thought about it. I would walk in to work and the place literally had a fog in it from all the cigarette smoke. People smoked at their desks. I think about how much simpler things were back then. Anyway, was there sexual harassment? Oh yeah. All the time. But women back then held their own pretty well. Which gets me to the whole sexual harassment premise. By the time a woman enters the workforce, she is fully able to handle anything a man can possibly say to her. Back in the day, if a man went too far, she would just put him in his place, and everyone would laugh it off. If it became really bad, she would go to her superior and it was taken care of like adults. Just think, the government did not get involved in these issues until the 90's, how did we ever make it before then?

Some of the lasting things from the Clinton administration was political correctness, sexual harassment, and anti smoking laws. Notice that all of this is intrusion from the federal level, and all is designed to limit freedom. So now if you are in the workplace, you have to be careful what you say about women, minorities, gays, and don't forget if you express any political views, you may be reprimanded. And don't forget you can't mention anything about religion, or smoke, or even make a "insensitive remark". All of these things are like a cloud hanging over every citizen, and where will it stop?

I am taking another approach lately. I am trying to find things that the government is NOT involved in. So some folks out there help me out, I can't find any which is really scary. The liberals have almost taken every freedom away that we have enjoyed in this country, all by creeping into our lives one thing at a time.

Founding of america - Rejection of Socialism

2011-11-04T19:58:00.001-04:00

I have been studying socialism most of my life, and it amazes me that otherwise very intelligent people fall for it. I wish they taught this in school, instead of how Christoper Columbus was responsible for genocide. Look at one of the reasons this country rebelled against England. Consider communication of the day. The powers that be in England only knew the conditions in America by what was told to them through people returning from America. They did not have any experience firsthand on the conditions in America, and therefore were making decisions for Americans in England and sending them back through their envoys. Socialism at its best. One of the main components of socialism is central planning and rule, therefore, decisions were being made on the back end without proper regard for the welfare of those on the receiving end. America knew that central planning would not work because they were living the nightmare. That is why they set up our form of government to have smaller governments (states). What is good for Texas may not be good for Kentucky and vice-versa. The more the federal government takes power, the further we get away from this concept, and the worse things are getting. It's simple really.

Let's take another example of this. Let's say that we are invaded by aliens from Mars. They win the war, and start ruling earth from Mars. All decisions come from a committee on Mars that have never been here, they just go by what their envoys tell them. Bad situation. If people on earth don't like what we decide, too bad. We know better. We won. (Sound Familiar?).

One more quick example. Take Netflix and the CEO's decision to spin off the DVD business. The CEO had plenty of input from staff that customers did not like his idea, but he figured he knew better and like any other good little ruler, forced his will on his customers. The only problem is this took place in the capitalist free market, and people made Netflix pay the price, other companies jumped at the chance to get the customers. Now if this took place under a socialist system, there would have been only one company to deal with, as duplication wastes resources, and the customers would have to take whatever was bestowed on them, because central planners know best, Marxist thinking only looks at the supply side, not the market (that is forbidden). This is a great lesson in capitalism, it is self healing. If a bad decision is made, it corrects itself quickly. It is always correcting itself, working through market forces to give the end user what the user needs, after all, he or she knows what is best for him or her self.

European Union - Socialism failing again.

2011-11-04T19:16:00.000-04:00

It is really interesting that when the European Union was being formed that Margaret Thatcher, along with Milton Friedman, and countless other conservatives, were basically beaten down in their opposition of the Euro Zone. Even back then, the socialists were claiming that the "neanderthal" conservatives and their "outdated views" were standing in the way of progress. Friedman did not think that the Euro would make it very long, and Thatcher believed that it was going to fail also. Now we are faced with Greece possibly defaulting on the Euro loans and pulling out of the EU. Personally, it would be the best thing that could happen for them, unfortunately it may cause a disaster for the world economy. Not many people know that Ben Bernanke (another socialist thinker) and the federal reserve (socialism again) has bailed out the Euro already to the tune of $1 Trillion of our tax dollars. Now you see why we have a stake in the Euro. He should be removed from his position for doing this. Don't get me wrong, Bush had a lot to do with this, he should have stood with conservative values and to hell with all these taxpayer bailouts. Now look at what we have. A huge mess that is just going to get worse, thanks to the fact that Bush, Obama, Bernanke keep kicking the can down the road, making the eventual failure bigger every time a bailout is done. The Euro is going to fail, if not this time, then it will not be long after. Why do I say this? It is socialism at work. The EU is a socialist entity, and going by the track record of socialism, it will not make it. Why? Simple. Socialism at its core is doomed to failure like I have said many times. In one of my earlier posts, I said that socialism cannot survive without capitalism to leach off of and this is a great example. The Greek people do not want the EU deal that is being offered. If they pull out of the EURO and default, they can start over using their own currency. Looking at their balance sheet, if they do not have the interest payment to the EU, they will have a surplus budget. Looking at it that way, they would be crazy to take the EU deal. Sure, there will be some short term pain, but how much do you want to bet that people will take the bet and invest in Greece, especially if the terms are worth the risk to investors. Anyway, back to the socialist failure part. It is pure socialism, and the people of Greece really have no say about Euro decisions, as there is a layer between them and the EU. This causes the good old central planning problem socialism always has, therefore, decisions come down from the EU, without meaningful input from the folks it affects. What does this mean in simple terms? Like Thatcher said, what is good for Germany of France, is not good for Greece. Of course, we can't listen to Friedman, Thatcher, or any conservative, even if they get lucky and predict things right. They are neanderthals, even if they are right.

Occupy movement and the creepy mask

2011-11-04T17:56:00.000-04:00

Been watching OWS on the news and I keep seeing people wearing a creepy looking mask. People wearing masks bother me anyway as it just seems like they have something to hide. I would never wear a mask like this, man it's just creepy. I had to find out what this thing was all about as cause I figured that by wearing one of these creepy looking things that it had to be some kind of statement, anyone who knows me knows about my curiosity. After some research on the internet, this is kind of laughable, and makes me wonder if most of the OWS crowd know the story of the mask. I bet that most of them identify with the movie of "V for Vendetta". Basically the movie hero uses the mask to protest against a facist government. This is a modern day version of the mask's use. It really goes back to England about 400 years where a criminal named guy Fawkes tried to blow up a government building. Back then there must not have been too many liberals in charge because he was executed for his bombing attempt. Over the years his image has been romanticized and co-opted for many causes. Like the website the blaze says, it is kind strange to think that one day people may be wearing Timothy McVeigh masks, which would be a parallel to this (except McVeigh really did blow up a building, Fawkes blundered). Over the years, this image has meant many different things according to the times. So this mask really means anything you want it to be, in the case of the OWS crowd, it means rebelling against the establishment. Well sort of. People asked in different protests say different things so maybe they really don't know themselves. One protester said that it is a symbol that unify's the movement. OK, that sounds good. Sorry, but if someone comes into my yard at my house wearing one of these things, I am going to rip it off and stomp it into a million tiny pieces, it is just creepy.

War of the ideologies

2011-11-04T17:21:00.000-04:00

Was listening to Rush today and actually said it. He said we are at war with the liberals (not exactly but something close to this). He could not be any more right. The liberals have been at war with the conservatives for a long time, and have been winning for the most part. Why? Because conservatives still do not realize that we are at war. Like I have said many times, conservatives mainly react to events, where the liberals set the agenda that we react to. Look at Herman Cain and the recent allegations against him. So far, we have alleged allegations from anonymous sources. Many people that have worked with Cain for years have been coming forward stating that these allegations are out of character, and Cain is the person he seems to be, likable, professional, generally a solid person. The problem is that this is not very exciting and the media does not report it. Fox included. Then we have the republicans who have thrown Cain under the bus. If they knew we were at war, they would rally behind Cain and fight for him until the bitter end, like liberals do. I was really getting worried about Cain as it looked pretty bad yesterday because of all the piling on, but now I think that he may weather this storm, and will come out the better for it much to the dismay of the republican elite. I even sent Cain $10 just to protest the elite republicans myself.

I really believe that the elite republican leadership are so out of touch that they need get to the back of the bus and just let the republican rank and file run the show. I remember back in the 80's we had the same situation as we do now, and we had to rally behind Reagan, pulling the elite kicking and screaming into the presidency. Thank god for the Tea Party. If we work within the republican party, we will be able to use the structure there to build the conservative movement into a lasting and strong force in politics for many years to come. The problem is that we have a war of ideologies within the republican party. We have to get rid of the elite republican liberals within the party (at least get them out of leadership positions)

Let's make better choices.

2011-11-02T22:43:00.000-04:00

Was watching Condoleezza Rice on her book tour the other day and I was reminded of one of the things that really made me angry at the Bush administration. She bashes republican policies on a regular basis. In fact, she is a female version of Colin Powell. There are many of her stances that I cannot believe that Bush would go along with. This really bothers me about moderate republicans. Of all the talent that we had to offer, why did Bush select her and Powell? I think he was trying to look good to the media and the liberals. What did it get him in the long run? Her and Powell are still bashing republicans, her stances on the Arab spring and Libya make me cringe. It was fun watching Hannity squirm with some of her answers. He did good not flipping out at her answers in what was in the best interest of this country. I mean really now, Colin Powell voted for Obama! What the hell! Like Pat Caddell said the other day, republicans are stupid. They go against their own best interest on a regular basis. If I could ask a question of the republican candidates it would be - Are you going to appoint any liberals in your cabinet? Secondly, when the media attacks your policies are you going to defend your self or be stupid like Bush and let them destroy you by not answering their charges? I never thought that I would agree with Pat Caddell on anything.

Media template for Cain

2011-11-02T22:27:00.001-04:00

I love the way that the media decides to put someone into a category and then they just can't get out of it. The template for Cain is that he is weak on foreign policy, and he needs to study issues more. I watched O'Reilly last night, and he was trying real hard to get Cain to fit the template and Cain really made him look stupid. O'Reilly asked what Cain would do about Iran. Cain said that one of the things he would do would be to drill or oil and make the US energy independent, but before he could even finish O'Reilly cut him off and said something like com'on we are talking about Iran not energy. After going back and forth for about 30 seconds, Cain finally said "work with me here" about 3 or 4 times and got O'Reilly to shut up for a second, where he explained that by drilling for oil in the US we would be able to drop world oil prices about a third and hurt Iran's ability to put money into its nuclear program. O'Reilly moved on to another question. There is more to Cain than meets the eye, and O'Reilly should know better, but sometimes arrogance can be blinding. The media needs to take more time before making judgments and putting people into categories.

Ruling by fiat

2011-11-02T21:58:00.000-04:00

Obama has decided to bypass congress and rule by executive order. Now by definition, this is not really ruling by fiat, but it comes really close. Ruling by fiat is bypassing everyone, making decisions, and getting the military to enforce these rules. We started hearing the other day that since Obama could not get congress to go along with his plans, he instructed his staff to find ways to enforce his wishes by going around congress. Only a liberal would be so arrogant. After the 2010 election, I was thrilled that we had divided government again. Some of the best times I can remember was turning on the news every night and watching Peter Jennings spend about 10 minutes every night reporting on gridlock between congress and the Clinton administration. The less government does the better in my opinion, and the only thing that made me angry lately was the super committee (doomed to fail), and Obama getting away with executive orders. Once we get Obama out of office we need to work on rules to keep this from happening in the future. Just like George Bush and the Patriot act. We may trust Bush with all these powers that the government took after 9/11, but what about his successor? Let's quit tweaking the constitution.

Piling on Cain

2011-11-02T21:38:00.000-04:00

It's been three days since the charges came out about Herman Cain and and inappropriate comments / sexual harassment charges. I really don't know what to think at this point. I just saw an article about how Cain made a statement that made a woman "uncomfortable". Here it is from the Register.

“Cain said, ‘Darling, do you mind doctoring my tea for me?’” Deace said.

Deace told the Register last month that he believes Cain was talking about adding honey and lemon, but that it was an awkward moment.

Man, that is really bad behavior now. Seems to me that someone is being REALLY sensitive. There is also a picture about Cain hugging Michelle Bachman, and Ron Paul shaking hands with her.

When things turn like this for a candidate it is not a good sign. Everyone is piling on now. As much as I like Cain, if things keep going like this, unfortunately, he will have to withdraw. He has been thrown way off message, and this looks like the beginning to the end. Let's hope not though, people like him are what we need. Unfortunately, many of his former co-workers and business partners are coming forward in support of him but are not getting any press.

Let me add an opinion to this about Cain's behavior. Looking at the comment from the Des Moines Register, Cain made this woman uncomfortable by asking her to "Doctor his tea". This is why I NEVER ask anyone to do things for me like this. People are sensitive anymore, and the woman probably thought that the request was demeaning. This may be age difference, as I have seen many men in Cain's age group act this way towards women. I really do not believe that this is reason to get rid of a great candidate, but that is just my opinion.

I have been in business for many years, and let me tell you, if you cannot take this, you would not make it in business, let alone in the corporate world. You need to have a thick skin, especially if you want to play with the big boys, and I think Mr. Cain is used to being in this world, just by his successes in business, I can tell you, this guy is tough. I also think that sexual harassment and being made uncomfortable is being used interchangeably here, and we really don't know the story yet. I have been lucky enough to see some corporate hard hitters, and see how they operate, they can make you feel about 1 inch tall, but a lot of times it is done to see how you handle a situation, many don't know that.

Another aside on this. I used to work with a guy, in fact he was my boss at the time. This was a sales environment, and this guy made women angry on a regular basis. He was well known for this and eventually was demoted because of it. I watched him many times and could never figure out what he did, but this guy REALLY pissed women off. In fact, he was replaced by another salesman (I was made the manager), and he did the same thing. He would wait on a woman, as far as I could tell was very nice, complete the transaction, and the next time the woman would come in, she would ask for someone else to wait on her. I even had women call me and tell me that something needed to be done with this man because of the way she felt he treated her. I even asked female staffers to tell me what he was doing, and they would say his manner was demeaning to women, and was surprised I could not see it. After being coached by female staffers about what he was doing, I really don't know to this day the things they considered demeaning really was worth the effort, but to women they were very important.

I guess that it is because I am a man, but maybe there is something in this little lesson that helps us to understand the Herman Cain issues. Many women will come unglued if asked to "doctor my tea". The way they look at it is this. They went to college, obtained a degree, worked their way up the corporate ladder, paid all the dues, and some asshole wants them to fix their tea because they are the only woman in the room. So, is this sexual harassment? Not by my definition. Sexist, maybe. But my dad's generation would not think twice asking a woman to do this. I would never ask this, I would do without until I could do it myself. Generational? Maybe, I don't know the ages of the people involved. Condescending? Maybe, I was not there so see the situation.

I still do not see this being a big enough issue to blow up like this. To me, what Obama has done is a thousand times worse than this, if he gets his way, none of this will matter at all, we will be worried about surviving day to day if he gets re-elected.

Tolerance of Capitalism

2011-10-27T21:21:00.002-04:00

It amazes me that the occupy wall street crowd bashes capitalism. I have seen several interviews and seen several pictures where socialism is being advanced by a majority of these folks, along with a couple of anti-semantic remarks. The only place this can happen is in a capitalistic country. Capitalism is by far the most tolerant system in the world. In a socialist country, you are liable to be shot for what is going down in wall street. In 2010 Kim Jong Il the North Korean president and supreme leader had several of his top advisers beaten and shot. What for? They enforced his policies to deal with famine in the country, when it did not work, he had them beaten and shot to take the heat off of himself. This is just a small recent example of socialism at work, and history is full of examples of what happens when socialism is ruling a country. They have no tolerance for the citizens complaining about the system. Look at Tienanmen square in China and what happened there. So why do they want socialism and hate capitalism so bad? It's what they have been taught. Getting through high school and college and having capitalism taught to a student is almost impossible unless you go to a private school. We all know that the vast majority of professors are socialists, so what do you expect them to teach? Occupy wall street is a great example of the product of our education system, and it is pathetic. Now the professional troublemakers are taking advantage of the situation and using the misguided, and there will be violence as a result. Like I have said many times, conservatives have to infiltrate education and start teaching the truth about our country. Until we do this will be the result that we will continue to see.

Power of the Media

2011-10-27T18:16:00.002-04:00

Watching the occupy wall street movement and how he press is falling all over itself to make the protesters look good, I can't help but wonder what things would be like if the press treated the Tea Party the same way. Looking at all the breaks the OWS crowd is getting, I just can't believe how biased the elite are in this country. The Tea Party in Richmond, Va is going to submit an invoice to the city because of all the permits and demands that were put on them to use the very same park that the Occupy group is getting for free. All this shows what we are up against. The media, and the Government on all levels. The media is powerful, and they know that most Americans only follow politics on the surface, and when you look at what is reported on the surface, the picture that is painted is disturbing. The Tea party is always put in a unflattering light, and the OWS crowd is portrayed as as a bunch of hapless kids that can't get a job because of corporate greed. In other words, the OWS are victims and the Tea Party is angry old white greedy rich men. When I see a poll that the Tea Party is very unpopular, it makes me wonder if the media sales job is working. The last election would make you think otherwise, but it was an off year election, and mostly made up of folks that follow things more closely. Time will tell how this all plays out. Next year's election will be a turning point in more ways than one.

National Right to work Petition

2011-10-26T21:54:00.002-04:00

Rand Paul has a petition that every conservative needs to sign. One thing that we need to do is to disarm the unions because they have just become a front for fundraising money for the liberals. The unions have been taken over by the liberals years ago, and have used their money and influence to take dues away from rank and file and give it to the democratic party. Rand Paul has a petition that if congress takes notice, will hopefully pass a national right to work law and keep the union fat cats from laundering money. The law would keep unions from forcing workers to join a union and pay dues. This is just another step that needs to be taken to disarm the liberals, there are many more and hopefully we will find them all out and take them down one small thing at a time. Go on Rand Paul's website or do a google search and sign the petition and help the cause out.

Death by a thousand cuts

2011-10-25T17:54:00.000-04:00

This describes liberalism's attempt to destroy the american way of life better than any other I can think of. We all know about the Obama administration and their crimes against america, but even when they are gone (hopefully soon), the march of liberalism continues. Debbie Wasserman Schultz referred to two elementary students today as "little democrats", and you may think this is a joke, but it is dead serious. Here is the link

http://www.heraldonline.com/2011/10/24/3466919/democrats-face-tough-election.html

Here is Elizabeth Warren saying This “I created much of the intellectual foundation for what they do. I support what they do.” She is commenting on the occupy wall street protests.

So as I said in a previous post, we have to infiltrate education, business, government, churches, civic groups, and whatever else we can. The liberals have been doing this for years, and they admit it. I just posted two cases, more will follow. Now don't forget that we must do this quietly or else the liberals will act like Dracula recoiling from a cross and accuse us of all kinds of things, even though they have been doing this same thing for years. It is one of their favorite tricks and the media lets them get away with it. Oh yea, we must take over the media also. Wherever you are, whatever your walk of life is, find out the political leanings of your friends, co-workers, acquaintances, church associates, neighbors, and customers. Bind together and further the cause of conservatism, support conservative businesses, help conservatives every way you can, infiltrate and gain power, and shun liberals. If you are in a business, make sure liberals stay in the mail room forever, promote your conservative co-workers, put liberal deacons back in the pews of the church, and make sure a conservative fills his spot as a deacon, work yourself up to the editor of a newspaper, and make sure the liberal point of view never gets published, if you are a teacher, work your way into the position of hiring new teachers, and only hire conservatives. This may seem harsh, but this is what we have been letting happen under our noses for years, liberals do it, so don't be afraid, put politics into everything, from a tupper ware party to local government, and only give the breaks to conservatives, hang the liberals out to dry. It has to be done in order to save this country. Lay a foundation that the next several generations can work on.

Obama yesterday went to Hollyweird and attended fundraising dinners that were between 30 - 70 K per plate to attend. We have to take over Hollyweird. There is a lot of power there. I know that there are conservative actors, producers, directors, screenwriters. We need to support them. It can be done, all we have to do is work together and get organized. We need to get to the people that fund movies and make sure that they only fund conservatives and conservative causes. Tell me this is not being done by liberals now. There are all kinds of stories about conservatives afraid to say who they are for fear of never getting work again. We need to infiltrate HBO and get Bill Maher retired. His liberal connections are the only thing that keeps him on the air, and we all know it. If we have to boycott HBO and put them out of business, then so be it. The next target will be Cinemax. What is the alternative? There is none if we want to be free. The same with MSNBC. We need to replace them with conservatives, and send all the liberal journalists back home to get dog catcher jobs. If we don't do this, these people will be ruling us, and soon. More will follow on this subject.

Conservative affirmative action.

2011-10-23T22:20:00.000-04:00

These are some things that we must do as conservatives. Keep reading my blog and I will add things as I think of them. The liberals have been working for years to gain the power they have now. It is time that conservatives start getting organized and turn this country around. The liberals have been very effective in shutting down conservatism in almost every aspect of life, and it is time we start fighting back (in a peaceful way of course). In public life, it is a bad thing to be known as a conservative in many places, such as at work. Political correctness has penetrated every aspect of this society, and conservatives cannot speak their minds without fearing for their jobs in many cases. So conservatives go along with liberal policies out of fear, fear of losing your job, or of being an outcast. Liberals do not have this problem, as they have worked themselves into places of power, and they set the norm, or the policies that suit them. Conservatives have to work ourselves back into education, government, and media, and work on ways to change the liberal agenda, and not be afraid to stand up. It may cause problems, but you will find that more people agree with you than with the liberals, and in the end, you will win, especially if we stick together. What do I mean by "stick together"? I mean working with like minded friends, co-workers, and customers. Know where all your acquaintances stand politically, friends, neighbors, church members, and co-workers, only help those that have the same belief system as you do. An example: You are the manager or president of a company, and you have a position open, only promote those that have the same belief system as you do. If the person is not quite as qualified, take them under your wing and make sure that they get up to speed, before or after they are given the position. Another example: Let's say you are a business owner, when you give discounts, only give discounts to conservative customers, and quietly let them know under the table why they received the discount. Build a network this way. Another Example: Let's say you are an educator, and you are in a position to recommend new textbooks, stack the deck, make sure that the only textbooks to be reviewed are conservative. Look at everything from a political perspective, and make your decisions accordingly. Does this sound wrong to you? It is done very day, by liberals. How else have they gained this power? Lot's of little things like this, done everyday, add up over time, especially if enough people are on board with the concept.

Don't be a George Bush and appoint some democrats to make it fair, or to be bi-partisan. Look what being nice to democrats got him, or his dad for that matter. This is a cold war. The liberals have been at this war for many years, we are just starting to fight. Don't be afraid, just do it, but don't brag about it, don't talk about this to anyone but like minded conservatives, if we all stick together there is nothing that can be done about it. Invite you like minded friends over to watch football, play poker, form a conservative club if you have to. Read books on community organizing, organize from a conservative perspective. Still feel like it's wrong? Just look at it like it is conservative affirmative action.

Update 10/25 Debbie Wasserman Schultz calls elementary kids "Little Democrats" Here is the link.
http://www.heraldonline.com/2011/10/24/3466919/democrats-face-tough-election.html
We have to infiltrate the School systems and start raising "Little Republicans"

What a conservative president will give us.

2011-10-23T21:54:00.001-04:00

Watching the mess unfold the past few years it is hard to see if things will ever be right again. I believe in the old saying "good comes after bad" and I think that it applies to this country and it's present state. The liberals have given us a great big mess, but good times are coming for this country if we make the right decisions in the next presidential election. If we send most of the liberals home, and elect true conservatives, this country will have growth like it has never seen. I really believe that conservative policies will bring companies back to this country, and manufacturing will return, and that american made products are wanted everywhere, and the public is ready for it. A new conservative will drill for oil, and america again will take off due to cheap and plentiful energy, which will make everything drop in price, putting more money in people's pockets, increasing commerce. A new conservative administration will lower taxes, and shrink government, allowing for a boon in this country like we have never seen. I was around when Reagan took office, and remember how america went back to work, how things turned around in just a couple years, all the while, the liberals were complaining all the way, kicking and screaming, complaining about Reagan. Even though things were getting better for liberals in the 80's, they fought all the way, they are that brainwashed, they could not see that things were better, or did not want to admit they were wrong (and they still don't - they just re-write history). The world will be a better place under a conservative leader, because there will be stability emanating from the US, and the world will see how much better things would be if they would just adopt our policies and be our friends. Will there be problems? Of course. The world is not and will never be perfect. Why? Because there will always be liberals to throw a wrench in the works. We need to be vigilant this time though, and make sure that people see what liberalism brings, and teach the stark contrast between the ideology's. We need this time to stay interested and watch what is taught in the schools, and make our wishes known. We also need to call the liberals in the media on their hate, and make fun of them, laugh them off of the stage if we can, never let them get the foothold they have now, but as Rush say's, just keep enough of them around to show the world how sick they really are, and what damage they can cause if given too much power. Good times are ahead for the US if we make the right decisions.

What may we lose in Iraq

2011-10-23T12:45:00.001-04:00

From bad policy we now are facing losing everything we have fought for in Iraq. We should not let this stop us from helping other nations though, if the policy had been correct from the Bush administration, we wold not be facing what we have now, we would be payed back for our cost of the war, and we would not leave until we would have a government that would be freindly to us, and they would not have elections until that bill was paid, with the amount if oil Iraq has, that would not be a problem for them, and we would be helping the people of Iraq in the process, the whole thing was bad policy. I remember Colin Powell making a speech in front of the UN, and at the time I thought that a case was being made, without not really knowing what was going on, but I had my suspicions. Did Saddam have weapons of mass destruction? I don't know, and I have never met anyone that knew, there is only speculation. But since we made the jump and did the war, right or wrong, we should finish this, and that means having a administration in Iraq that is friendly to the US, and having a representative republic in place there. We should take nothing else. Why do I say this? My dad passed away in 2005, and was buried in a military cemetery. It was a new cemetery, and I noticed at a later visit all around his grave site other veterans buried, almost all were in their 20's or 30's and were killed in Iraq. We owe it to them to make sure this job is done correctly, in the end the money really does not matter.

Crony Capitalism Killing the system

2011-10-23T12:36:00.002-04:00

You are hearing a lot about it lately, especially after the Solyndra scandal, but crony capitalism has been eroding away at our system for some time. I remember my dad yelling at the TV set when Chrysler was bailed out by the government in the 70's. "If this gets started, it will never end" I remember hearing him say, and now it looks like it may never end, especially with liberals in charge. The government is ever expanding, as I heard this week that even though we have been in a recession, the government has expanded by 5% last year. The year ends for the government on September 30th so I expect that is why we are hearing this now. What right does the government have to take taxpayer money and guarantee loans with it? None. Look at what Biden said a couple days ago. He claimed that if congress does not pass the jobs bill, there will be more crime on the streets. Now this is right out of the democrat playbook, they have been saying this one every time they need something passed that happens to do with the police. Just like Republicans want old people do die or be thrown off a cliff if anything is mentioned about social security. I have a better idea. Get the government out of the Bailout / Job Creation / Social welfare / Loan guarantee business all together. After all, they have no right to be using tax payer money for this purpose anyway. Guess what will happen then? Instead of backing Wall Street, or Student loans, or some phony company, they might have the money to do what the government is supposed to be doing, like taking care of our borders, or national defense. Why if this is done right, our taxes will drop and the economy will take off because of all the opportunity that will be created by citizens having more money in their hands. Wow, what a concept. What revolutionary thinking! But wait, it's nothing new, as this is the way our country has functioned up until recent times. Maybe going back sometimes is better.

Conservatives need to pick up their game

2011-10-22T21:48:00.000-04:00

I think that the liberal of today is the communist from the 70's. That is how much the norm has been changed in this country. Look at Bill Ayers, he is acceptable to a lot of people now days, I think that if the average american knew what he did, he would not be so popular. The conservatives have really dropped the ball on the media. Between hollyweird, mainstream news outlets, and the educational system, the conservatives have not done their job, and in reality have been derilict in their duty as citizens. This country has foreign and domestic enemies, while the conservatives have been very hawkish on foreign enemies they have been derilict in their duties of the domestic variety. I blame the Bush administration for this more than any other, not defending your positiions and policies in the media, and not answering the liberals by leaving their charges unanswered, is in fact not doing your duty to protect the country against domestic enemies, which the liberals in reality are. Bush not defending himself against the liberal media is what has given us the Obama administration, if they had put effort into answering EVERY liberal charge, and not letting up until their point is known by the average person, we would not have Obama today.

Liberals have re-written history, and it should not be so. This is what I mean by derelict of duty from domestic enemies, the democrats were the party of race hatred in the 50's and 60's, and the republicans were the ones that backed peaceful protest. I actually heard a black person call Charleton Heston a racist bigot after he died. Now don't they know he took a lot of heat from the hollywierd crowd, and risked his career by marching with Martin Luther King? This is how much history has been re written and how bad of a job the conservatives have done to present their case. This lady was just ignorant because of what she has been taught as a kid, probably in her church or by her parents.

There are Domestic enemies in the black theology movement - Reverend Wright is the best known, probably because of Shawn Hannity, but is very widespread. Many of these so-called thinkers are actually Marxist masking their agenda behind religion, and if the FBI was doing their job, most would be shut down and prosecuted as enemies of the state. Louis Farrakhan has had ties with Libyan leader Qaddafi, that in itself should bring suspicion, but goes unchecked. The amount of hate taught by these people is staggering, and goes unchecked. Conservatives need to get to work, we are way behind.

Federal Government corrupted by liberalism

2011-10-22T21:28:00.002-04:00

Liberalism has corrupted our government. Why do I say this? Look at all our government does now, that it was never meant to do. In fact, liberalism has changed our government from the best system in the world, into one big social experiment. They have taken our schools, military and compromised everything that each was intended to do, in favor of social justice. It has been a disease the government has had since it's inception, and the politicians have neglected their duties and continued to allow more and more liberalism to creep into our government. Liberalism never takes a step back, it just keeps growing, until the end result is a government that has total control over it's citizens. We are at a turning point, and liberalism has to be stopped now, or there will be no turning back. We need radical change, and not the kind Obama was talking about. We need a flat tax, along with drastic cuts at the federal level, which include eliminating most federal agencies such as the EPA, NEA, and the IRS. All federal social programs need to be ended in the next few years, and the power for them returned to the states, never to be given to the federal government again. The liberals will scream, protest, and probably riot but this has to be done in order to preserve this country and set an example for the rest of the world to follow. The states need to take over all social programs, and the citizens of each state need to decide if any given program is worth the taxation it causes. Let's take an example, let's say abortion. The federal government should totally back out of abortion and give it back to the states. Let the state decide where they stand on this issue. If you do not like what your state does regarding abortion, then move to a state that you agree with. It's that simple. Many people look at this as a bad thing but it is one of the best thing that could happen for america, the hippies could all go to California for example, live green, tax themselves to oblivion with all their social programs, and the producers could go to other states and produce goods to sell to California, the producrs states would be happy living the way they do, and the consumption states would be happy living like they do, if you dont like your state - move.

The federal government needs to do only what it is mandated to do under the constitution, such as national defense, guarding our borders, infrastructure that it is responsible for, and foreign policy, among other things that I can't think of this second, but there is plenty enough. Again, the liberals are going to scream, because they will lose power. They will complain that we have 50 different laws for this or that issue, and the feds need to take over policy to make things uniform, but in my mind this is the way it should be. It keeps things from getting too much in control of the government. After all, what is good for Arizona, may not be good for Maine, let each state decide. Look at what we have now, the fed says do as we say or pay the consequences, this is tyranny. Don't get me wrong, we need the federal government to keep everything held together, but we do not need a patriot act forced down our throats, nor a national ID system, health care, or any of the other grandiose socialist utopia plans they have already written in some Washington bureaucrats desk waiting for the right moment, or crises to be jammed down our throats. We deserve better than what we have been forced to take the past few years, and we need to vote accordingly next election. If we do not take this seriously, it will be bad. In fact, future generations will look back at our time and wonder what we were thinking.

Government and the sledgehammer approach

2011-10-21T22:58:00.002-04:00

We all know how the government uses the old sledgehammer to drive a thumbtack approach on everything. What bothers me about this Occupy Wall Street thing is how the left wants to equate this movement with the Tea Party. I think I know why. We all know that this type of protesting winds up being violent in the end, and it looks like violence is inevitable. Like a genie out of the bottle, the type of crowd at these protests are ready to go. They have a element of the left that is prone to violence, and they are waiting for the right time. So how does this affect the Tea Party? We all know how when something happens the government loves to put all kinds of rules in place to keep it from happening again. I predict that when violence happens, it will be the excuse to shut down any of the Tea Party's voices at town halls. They have been looking for a way to make us look as bad as they possibly can, and when a tea party member starts talking loud or protesting in any way at a town hall, look out, you will be equal to a wall street protester and you will be dealt with accordingly.

Romney the liberal.

2011-10-21T22:48:00.001-04:00

I'm sorry Romney fans, he is a liberal. Part of the republican elite, he is just another version of a Democrat, just not as wacky. Here is some of his history, all easily pulled from the internet, and I will keep adding to this to try to let as many republicans know as possible that this guy is a democrat that calls himself a republican.

When running for the US Senate in 1994, Romney supported abortion on demand, gay marriage and gun control. That same year he attacked President Ronald Reagan and Vice President George Bush saying "I don't want to take us back to that, to Reagan-Bush."

His private sector stint at Bain Capital was consolidating companies and firing workers who didn't fit into his downsizing plans. They were known back then as Corporate Raiders. Mr. Romney made millions as the majority stock owner of Bain Capital. When you have lots of money, you can get a position in a company thru your well connected friends, especially when your career has to look good for a later political run.

Romney used his line-item veto authority to strike eight sections of his Romneycare bill that he found objectionable, including the expansion of dental benefits to Medicaid recipients. Yet, he did not strike Planned Parenthood's guaranteed Board representation and he did nothing to prohibit taxpayer-funded abortions as part of his plan. ("Romney's Health Care Vetoes," Associated Press, 4/12/06)

At a debate with Kennedy in Boston, Romney “was more outspoken than Kennedy in arguing that the Boy Scouts should not exclude homosexual youths.” Romney once bragged that he voted for a Democrat, Paul Tsongas, in the 1992 presidential primaries, though he later tried to change his story and his rationale.

1994: Romney supported the Brady Bill and Assault Weapons Ban, bragging his stance was "not going to make me the hero of the NRA." "[Romney] said he will take stands that put him at odds with some traditional ultra-conservative groups, and cited his support for the assault rifle ban and the Brady gun control law. 'That's not going to make me the hero of the NRA,' he said. 'I don't line up with a lot of special interest groups.'" (Andrew Miga, "Mitt Rejects Right-Wing Aid," Boston Herald, 9/23/94)

Speaking at a town hall meeting at Morningside College in Sioux City, Iowa yesterday, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney backed a national ID system and government pre-approval of all new hires in the country. It’s a stunning amount of power he wants the federal government to have.

So basically, he wants everyone in the USA (first immigrants then everyone) to have a national ID# and we all know what this will lead to. HELL NO!

He’s describing an expanded E-Verify system, and the biometric national identity system that has been proposed for it. That system would not only be used for controlling employment, of course. Like the Social Security number did when it caught mission creep, the national ID Romney talks about would come to be used to control access to housing, to financial services and credit, gun ownership, health care and medicine, the list goes on and on. E-Verify requires a national identity system, and Mitt Romney wants that national identity system.
Here is a link to the Cato Institute Article.
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/romney-supports-national-id-government-pre-approval-of-working/

All of this was pulled from the internet, like red state and other blogs and sources. If I can do this anyone can, so please read and research before you vote.

Cain and the Abortion fiasco

2011-10-21T22:32:00.000-04:00

Again we have the media playing gotcha trying to trip up anyone who dare opposes Romney. I really wonder what their problem is. First, look at Cain's record.

Herman Cain has probably done more for the pro life movement than any of the other politicians. At one time he donated $1 Million of his OWN money to encourage black voters to vote pro-life. His 2004 senate bid made pro-life a central issue. Look in the past and because of these stances, many leftist organizations have targeted him.

Most folks don't know his history before a few months ago, and this is sad. I think that Herman does not realize this. Part of being a politician means repeating over and over where you stand. I listened to his statements on abortion and I do not have any problems with what he said. The way I heard it, he was talking about two different circumstances but did not distinguish between the two. He said he is pro life, period. Can't get any clearer than that. He said that Abortion SHOULD be illegal. Can't get any clearer than that. He said that in special cases, the ultimate choice is with the family. Can't get any clearer on that. I mean, abortion is LEGAL now, whether you like it or not, and whatever a family decides is up to them, not the president, state or federal government, or anyone else besides the family. God will judge them, it is not up to us to judge them, after all it is LEGAL. If a law is passed and it is illegal, then it is a whole different situation. Anyway, I really believe that the news media thinks that they have got him, and we will see if the people are dumb enough to listen to the media, and not use their own judgement. At this point, he has convinced me that he is a good man, and I trust him with this issue. If I decide to vote for Herman Cain, I believe he is pro life and he will stand for that issue.

I wish he was a little better at being a politician, but then again, I like him like he is. I remember thinking the same thing about Reagan and how the media blew everything he said out of proportion, and it all does not seem so bad after all.

You have to figure, so far the media has been on a mission to get Gingrich, Bachman, Cain, and Perry. Any little mistake they make gets blown out of proportion. Other than Perry (liberal in my mind), I would trust the country to any of these three. They are better than Obama any day.

Romney and his tax plan and the state of the Republican Party.

2011-10-20T00:18:00.001-04:00

After looking at Romney's tax plan, I just have to say, "Nice Try". Don't get me wrong, if it is all the choice we have it's better than nothing. The other candidates are starting to make noise about flat tax, thanks to Herman Cain and his 9-9-9 plan. Maybe there is hope. The thing that bothers me about Romney's tax plan is that it is just more of the same old Washington liberal think. Washington uses the tax code to redistribute wealth and to further the liberal "social equality" disguise, while the real purpose is buying votes. When I hear Romney say that if you make under $200K his plan does not affect you, I can't help but think about Obama saying that if you make under $250K his plan doesn't affect you. They are both liberals picking who gets taxed and who don't, and they are both liberals that are using class warfare. Just in varying degrees. This really bothers me. And I think that it bothers a lot of people, it's why Romney can't get above 25%. I just don't understand why the Republican Party keeps running liberals like Romney. Look at what the elites have done to the party. They have turned us into a less liberal wing of the democratic party. Then they wonder why they lose elections. They have left their base out in the cold! They still do not know why McCain lost. Why do I say this? Why in the hell would they be pushing Romney if they really understood why they lost the last election? They do not understand why the Tea Party formed. They really think that people were fed up with Obama so they formed a Tea Party. If the Tea Party had a choice within the Republican party, there would not be a Tea Party. I contend that the Republican elites have MORE to do with the Tea Party forming than Obama does!

Things are bad. The country is going to hell and the Republican elites are playing fiddle. Look at what choices we have. Obama with his foot on the gas as hard as he can push trying to turn us into Europe, so his successor can turn us into Antonio Gramsci's utopia, and the elite Republicans with one foot on the gas and the other on the brake, pushing as hard as they can on both pedals. It looks more to me like this coming election is going to be a mess. We are probably going to have Romney pushing his semi-liberal views on the Republican side, Obama pushing his Gramsci / Marxist views, and probably a third party or a bunch of people staying home pissed off like last time. Maybe the Republicans will win by some chance. Maybe the Republicans have to lose again in order to get it, I really don't know, but then again, they will probably run Christie next time regardless. He is next in line. Oh Boy!

God, please prove me wrong!

CNN Debate.

2011-10-19T23:22:00.001-04:00

Since everyone else is weighing in on last night's debate, I guess I will also. There was lots of bickering last night, and to me it shows several things. First of all, with the state our country is in, and with the daily assaults of liberty we have to take every day from this administration, it is ridiculous that it was brought up that Romney's lawn service employed illegals. Sorry, not important. Santorum brought up Romney's advisers being part of the basis for Obamacare. Pretty important. But Santorum has this smart attitude that has got to go, telling Romney he was out of time did him in. His smart mouth took all the wind out of what he was saying, he should know better than this, this type of thing turns people off and nullifies what he said in many people's minds. He may as well quit and throw his support behind someone else, maybe then the other candidates will have more time to answer questions. Just not presidential. Romney looks like a president, acts like a president, and has some great positions. But he is a liberal and I for one will not vote for a liberal. Newt is brilliant as always, and I will support him no problem, Michelle Bachman makes great points but is kinda rough around the edges. I like her, she is my third choice (so far). Cain is right on but needs some polishing up on many issues. I really like the tax changes he proposes, and instead of everyone attacking him, like Newt said, he is offering fundamental change in the tax system, and we need that. So let's discuss it in a positive way. I think folks were looking for too much from Cain explaining his tax plan. I mean really now, think about this. Question: "Mr Cain, you want to overhaul the tax code and replace it with your plan, tell us how you are going to do this, you have 30 seconds to answer." Yea, right. What is Cain supposed to say in 30 seconds? The good thing is that now Perry is talking about a flat tax. Thanks Herman, you have the ball rolling now, keep it up. I think that all the candidates need to look at what happened during this debate and learn from it. Like Rush said, CNN wanted this to look like the Star Wars bar scene. They came close to their goal. CNN set this debate up to make the candidates look bad as possible, and Anderson Cooper did a very poor job of moderating, which let things get into a free for all. This was the sloppiest debate yet. I could have done better, and I have no business running a debate. The good thing is that not many folks are paying attention now, and I think that by the time that they do start, this will not be allowed to happen. So, who was the winner? As far as the candidates go, I think, Cain, Newt, Bachman. In that order. Who was the overall winner? The democratic party. This debate provided more ammunition in the form of campaign commercials and sound bytes for Obama, and don't think for a minute that they will let this slip by. Republican's need to stick together, lay off of the attacks, and instead of talking about the other guy's shortcomings, talk about what positives they have to offer, and contrast themselves with the liberals. Also, quit playing gotcha! And don't forget to not let Obama hide his record! People forget! Liberals know this. Now don't think that all this negativity is all bad. People will say that they hate negative, they hate fighting, they hate conflict. But look at brings all the ratings. Fighting, hate, conflict. I learned this in my days of NASCAR. Two drivers would get in a feud and the next week the stands were packed, all the time NASCAR was condemning their actions and penalizing them, but loving every second of it because it keeps the interest level up. So don't fret, a little infighting is good, but make sure the villain goes home and that we have a hero at the end of the day.

Second Hand Dealer law

2011-10-19T11:01:00.000-04:00

What is happening in the United States? There is a new law in Louisiana called house bill 195 that states you cannot use cash to pay for second hand merchandise. It is hard to believe that Bobby Jindel signed this. So let me get this straight. If you go to a flea market, and you see something that you like that is second hand, you will be breaking the law if you pay for it with cash. The bill was a knee jerk reaction to people selling stolen merchandise, such as someone stealing copper and selling it to a scrap dealer, that way the police would have a paper trail and would not have to do any work to find out who the culprit is. Let the police run the show and everyone will be fingerprinted and kept on a list, and everything they do will be tracked because they will have a special number if they want to buy anything. Using this logic you can justify any assault on our liberty. It is hard to believe that Americans would stand for this, but then again, there has been so many assaults on freedom and liberty that the liberals have bestowed on us, it may stand. Our great nanny state has taken the old drive a thumbtack with a sledgehammer approach again, and is meddling with our freedoms. Why not just eliminate cash? That way everything is tracked. Even better, just tattoo a number on your wrist or forehead, and not allow any purchases without that number. Think of the possibilities! What is wrong with these legislators? Are they American's? To me, this is the worst form of government intrusion and goes against everything this country stands for. Where is the american spirit of our forefathers? Is it just gone, or forgotten? Do we have to learn the lessons of history all over again? Apparently so.

Media trying to pick our candidate again

2011-10-18T20:47:00.001-04:00

Now that the media sabotaged Michelle Bachman because she was getting too close to Romney, they are now after Cain because he is now starting to threaten their choice of republican candidate. What really bothers me is the fact that Fox news is on board also. Watching Britt Hume on Greta last night they were talking about Cain's joke about an electric fence on the border with mexico. They conveniently play the first part of his statement, then start commenting. Here is what they play / comment about.

"When I'm in charge of the fence, we going to have a fence. It's going to be 20 feet high. It's going to have barbed wire on the top. It's going to be electrocuted, electrified. And there's going to be a sign on the other side that says it will kill you."

Now this is the text of what he said. (I had to search for over an hour to find this it is now so buried)

I just got back from China. Ever heard of the Great Wall of China? It looks pretty sturdy. And that sucker is real high. I think we can build one if we want to! We have put a man on the moon, we can build a fence! Now, my fence might be part Great Wall and part electrical technology…It will be a twenty foot wall, barbed wire, electrified on the top, and on this side of the fence, I’ll have that moat that President Obama talked about. And I would put those alligators in that moat!

Now by reading this, he clearly is making fun of Obama's statement about republicans wanting an electric fence and having a moat with alligators in it. Remember that? He has been saying this for months now at many campaign stops, so it seems like they waited for him to say it a certain way, or maybe they were just writing him off as a side show at the time. I also heard that the end of this, he said that if an illegal made it through all this he would give them a job! I could not find it though. Now when you hear it this way it is clearly a joke. Makes me wonder why comments are being changed like this and opportunities are being taken to play "gotcha" as Sara Palin puts it.

Wow. Talk about sabotage. What is behind this? It reminds me of Michelle Bachman's statement about a woman who approached her after the debate and said the vaccine caused mental retardation for her daughter. I heard this comment right on TV and this is exactly what she said. It quickly turned into Michelle Bachman said the vaccine causes mental retardation by all the news outlets the next day.Now Michelle Bachman needs to be more careful, but with the country in the state it is in, is this really important? Even Fox news is on this bandwagon.

Makes you wonder what is going on.

Media helping occupy wall street with demands

2011-10-17T19:28:00.000-04:00

Here is a article of big media helping occupy wall street with their demands, while at the same time supposedly reporting the story "Objectively"

http://bigjournalism.com/dloesch/2011/10/16/journolist-2-0-occupydc-emails-show-msm-dylan-ratigan-working-with-protesters-to-craft-message/

Here is a link to the list of media help.

http://owsmail.dc406.com/

We are up against a big movement. It will be a lot of work.

The rumbling of mistakes in history

2011-10-17T17:22:00.001-04:00

Every time I hear this type of news a red flag goes off. Maybe because of my high school history classes. It makes you wonder what is being taught to our kids now, maybe the occupy wall street crowd missed some key days in history class.

I will keep updating this as things get more outrageous from the liberals.

Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski thinks that their should be lists of the wealthy and how they spend their money. Here is the link.http://www.mediaite.com/tv/dr-zbigniew-brzezinski-there-should-be-a-list-of-very-wealthy-who-do-not-give-to-charity/

What has happened in the past when the government started keeping lists of its citizens? Hell, let's just make them wear armbands or tattoo a number on their arm. Worked last time! Scary.

Gov. Bev. Perdue wants to suspend elections.
Here's the link http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/27/nc-governor-recommends-suspending-democracy-to-focus-on-jobs/

When has this ever been done in the USA? If they ever pull this off it will never end. STUPID IDEA BEV!!! Please Retire! North Carolina, What were you thinking?

Elizabeth Warren thinks like any good communist. Let her talk for herself. Here is the link.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20110042-503544.html

Where would this country be without socialism?

Here is the anti capitalist movement spreading worldwide. Here is the link

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/16/occupy-protests-europe-london-assange?newsfeed=true

For the first time in history we have a president (and his party) supporting anti capitalism. Now if they are anti capitalist, then what are they? Pro-communist? Pro - socialist? Pro - UH, out of choices. Hmmmmmmm.

Even more Occupy Wall Street Lunacy

2011-10-17T16:28:00.003-04:00

Now that the occupy wall street lunatics have had some time to settle in, we are now getting a list of some of the folks that support them.

Barack Obama says the wall street protesters "make a lot of sense"
(First time a president has endorsed a group that wants to overthrow capitalism)
China says that the protesters have valid points.
The communist party USA has thrown their full support to the protesters.
The Nazi party has added their endorsement.
Nanci Pelosi has expressed her sympathies for the movement.
Geraldo Hervara keeps going down there and supporting them - even after getting thrown out by the crowd.
Howard Dean's group democracy for america, is now raising money for them.
Update: Barney Frank paid a "visit" to them 10/19 to show his support.

And the list grows.......We will keep adding as time goes on.

Don't forget that this whole thing was organized close to a year in advance. If you listen to Glenn Beck he announced this movement and the starting date in June or July.

More Liberal Hypocracy again

2011-10-13T22:59:00.001-04:00

Here is a very interesting post. Now this is really not a huge surprise, but it would be nice if ABC or MSNBC would pick this up.

Guess which President has raked in the most Wall Street bucks in a generation? « Hot Air:

'via Blog this'

Follow this link - it is great.

I love all of these people saying democrats are for the poor people, when they have $32K per plate dinners to raise funds. Let's all get together and have a $32K per plate dinner on Friday at the local pizza joint, give me $32K and I will even buy you a beer!

More liberal hipocracy

2011-10-13T22:40:00.000-04:00

Gotta love the liberals. Was just watching Bill Maher and he was talking about how great it would be if the occupy wall street crowd got violent and threw a brick through Rupert Murdoch's window. Them liberal's are such non-violent peace lover's now ain't they! They just say anything they want, and never have to answer for it. Like Whoopi Goldberg and her rant's, they get away with saying anything! Maybe it's because people consider the source. They all hate the rich, but to me, they are all rich. But it is OK for them to be rich I guess. They make fun of other people, but they are never held under any spotlight. They love to make fun of Sarah Palin's family, but what would they do if people started investigating their families, or their backgrounds? It is clearly a double standard. The problem with liberals is that they think they are better, smarter, and more entitled than us peasants. In fact, they think they are royalty. Back in the old day's, we had to obey their rules as they were part of the monarchy, which they want to re-institute through liberalism. What is really sad is there are liberals in the democrat and republican parties, just in varying degrees. Thank god us peasants have a vote in this country. Now let's hope the elites don't rig the republican primary so we don't have a choice, like last election.

Liberals and foreign policy (Iran)

2011-10-13T22:23:00.001-04:00

Since Iran is back in the news for a assassination plot in the US, we need to look back at what problems liberals cause short and long term for the US. We have enough problems keeping friends and allies in the world without the liberals undermining our cause. What do I mean? Look at Iran as an example. They used to be our friend. The country used to be run by a shah that was friendly to the US. There was an uprising (much like in Egypt recently) and Jimmie Carter would not back the shah, so a religious nut took over the country when the shah had to leave or be executed. Sound familiar? Now look at Iran. They have become a problem not only for us, but for the world. All because of a liberal with no backbone and misplaced priorities. Sure the shah was a dictator, but we could have worked with him and eventually installed democracy. And don't forget Obama had a chance to back democracy in Iran in 2009. He backed down and now look at what we have to deal with. If he would have backed democracy (if he really believes in it) in Iran, maybe they would be our friends now. It is not like he did not have plenty of folks pleading him to back democracy both in Iran itself and here in the US, he chose not to to do it though, much like he did not back Mubarak in Egypt (which was clearly in our best interest, we had spent billions over the years to keep our interests safe, now all that may be lost). The bad part is people forget. Every time Iran is mentioned in the news, it should be prefaced with the phrase - Iran which Carter lost to democracy through his stupidity and lack of resolve, ETC. ETC. Maybe then people will not forget how liberals destroy democracy throughout the world. In another 20 years or so, I may write - Egypt, which Obama lost to democracy, ETC. ETC. Liberals are dangerous. Don't forget it - unless you believe in communism, then they are your best buddies.

Republican Establishment

2011-10-11T22:25:00.001-04:00

The republican establishment is at it again. After making sure that we lost the last election in 2008, they are working hard to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory in 2012. They are pushing hard to hurry up and get the primaries over with, all at the same time pushing Romney into the front as hard as they can. Many conservatives like myself were disappointed that Christie backed Romney today. This is way too early for endorsements, and it points to Christie selling out for favors in the future. Good 'ol boy politics at its best. The republican establishment is playing a dangerous game. First of all, they look down on the Tea Party, in fact, they are ashamed of us. Then at the same time they have to humor us to get our votes. What they don't realize is that they are in danger of having a full scale revolt and a third party forming, because of their arrogance. A lot of folks blame Obama for the formation of the Tea Party, but I say that the Republican party and their elite views have just as much to do with the frustration the Tea Party represents. Just look at what is happening in the republican primary, the media has been working hard to make the race a 2 man one. But when the voter is asked, Herman Cain comes out on top every time. Then we have the straw polls, Cain comes out on top and you should see the looks on the faces of the media elite. They are shocked. So what is happening? The average man is engaged in the debates and is following very closely what is going on, and the elite don't like it. They are doing everything they can to get this race over with before their choice loses. It still say it, the republicans are very happy being in the minority, it is comfortable for them as they do not have to lead. Romney fits their needs very nicely.

Let's get this straight right now.

2011-10-10T20:24:00.000-04:00

There is NO comparison between the wall street protesters and the Tea Party. I can't believe that even Fox news has picked up this narrative from the liberals. This is nothing but the liberals trying to use this situation to marginalize the Tea Party by using the losers on wall street. This is just another example of not letting any crisis go to waste.

More on the protestors

2011-10-10T18:18:00.001-04:00

Now that the protesters have become a laughing stock of us normal people, it's time to get serious about what is going on. Isn't it ironic that the democrats have come out claiming that this is a left wing tea party movement? What are they up to? All I can think of is that they are trying to make the so called independents hate the tea party. They are hoping against hope that independents don't notice what a bunch of losers this bunch of protesters really are and make the tea party connection, which is ludicrous. Now there are rumors that many of the protestors are being paid. Here is a link to that.http://www.businessinsider.com/wall-street-protester-getting-paid-to-protest-2011-10 There are many stories on this - just do a google search.

I say let's follow the money trail. It is awful interesting that Obama and Pelosi have both come out in support of these losers. I will bet the trail leads to the white house, and if so, there should be a repercussions. It's bad enough that Obama and Pelosi are encouraging this behavior. That in itself really irks me, especially the way they have painted the Tea Party, but if their money or taxpayer money is involved in this lunacy, it should be grounds for impeachment. Of course, I can't prove this as I am just someone writing a blog, but many of my suspicions have come true regarding this bunch. Besides, since when does a president encourage this type of unrest? As far as I am concerned, Obama and Pelosi condoning this behavior makes them no better than the protesters, so what kind of people does that make them? This goes right along with the Watergate break-in. Too much power by one party leads to these abuses.

The sooner the election comes the better.

More protesting in other places

2011-10-06T20:16:00.001-04:00

Now the wall street protesters are setting an example for the rest of the losers in life, and has given them something to do. They can now protest and give their miserable lives meaning. This is going to spread to the rest of the cities in the U.S., and if a city does not have a wall street, then it will be in a big business or a bank. The sad part is they just don't realize how they are being used. The move-on crowd is involved now, along with the labor unions, and other liberal organizers. If you notice the first couple weeks of protesting was pretty boring, but all of a sudden they are very organized. They are targeting certain places, taking on the police, and causing disruptions. Now what do you think has happened all of a sudden? We all know. The professional agitators have gotten involved. Like I said in another post, the poor old protester has been used. They will go home one day, maybe with pepper spray stories, or stories about being beaten by police, being cold and in the rain, etc, and the professional agitators will go back to their ivory towers and wait for the next opportunity to take advantage of some poor idealistic loser.

Wall Street Sit In

2011-10-05T17:34:00.001-04:00

Well, Glenn Beck predicted this way back in June or July. I caught one of his episodes before he went off of Fox and he was talking about Sept. 17th and the sit in protest of wall street. What gets me is the amount of folks that this was a surprise to. I have talked to some people that think this movement is spontaneous, and do not believe that anyone as nutty as Glenn Beck ever could ever predict this. This whole thing was planned months in advance, and shows the organization the liberals possess. Listening to the interviews of the protesters is really entertaining, as they are literally all over the place in their views of why they are there. Their ignorance of the american system, or even current events is staggering. These people are really a joke. The left knows that all they have to do is organize something, and there will be plenty of fringe nuts that don't have a life willing to protest or party or whatever they are doing. The media will supply the narrative, all the protesters have to do is be there. That is already happening. The liberal media has already started turning the protesters ramblings into attacks on capitalism, along with the labor unions and the Move-On.org crowd. Liberalism is huge and the movement is everywhere. One small group organizes a protest, if it catches on, then the organizers pull everything together, work with the media, and attack conservatives and capitalism. Of course the poor stupid protester who is actually at the sit-in gets rained on, freezes, beat up by police, or whatever, and the liberals all get to co-opt their cause. So at the end of the day what is really accomplished? That remains to be seen. But when this is all done, I can bet the liberals all go back to their offices, drink a starbucks, and plan their next scheme to attack capitalism, while the poor o'l beat up protester still has to go out and get a life. I guess the 60's didn't teach too many lessons.

What are the Palestinians up to at the UN?

2011-09-28T21:28:00.000-04:00

The Palestinians want a state. They want the world to decide that they are ready to have their own country and govern themselves. If you were to ask the average Palestinian on the street I am sure that this is what they will say. The problems with this are many and very complex. I think that if any people in the world in this time tried to do this anywhere, it would be a mess as most of the world is divided up at this point, and a new state is bound to offend many people. Then we have a problem with terrorism. Israel has rockets launched into its territory from Palestine on a daily basis. Now it seems that if Palestine wanted a state, they would have to negotiate with Israel. But this is just not happening. So, what would happen if somehow Palestine received statehood from the UN, and Israel went along? I would bet that sooner or later rockets would be launched into Israel, and when Israel responded, Palestine would run to the UN and plead the case that the world needs to retaliate and punish Israel for picking on poor defenseless Palestine, possibly invading Israel and overthrowing its leaders like has just been done in Libya. This has been in the works for years, and hopefully the US will recognize it for what it is, another way to defeat Israel and wipe them off of the map.

Lesson not learned with Solyndra

2011-09-28T20:26:00.000-04:00

The news today is the federal government has approved more loans of almost $1 Billion dollars combined to 2 more solar energy firms. This is wrong in so many ways. The argument is that america needs more energy and this is an "investment" in our future. This is socialism. It cannot help america because it is against our system and in the long run, will be harmful. Why? Previously I wrote about the government being in competition with charities. This is the same thing. Government is in competition with venture capital / private sector development. Traditionally, the big boys in energy, let's take BP or Exxon for example, would be approached by a solar energy firm. The big energy company would look at their proposal, and based on it's merit, would decide if it was viable. If there was money in solar panels, we would have BP or EXXON solar panel kits in WalMart for 79.99 each. If they were turned down, the company would seek other avenues to raise the capital (which there is plenty of other avenues, with more clout than the Us Government). Now look at what is happening. The government is taking our Tax dollars and investing it into a company that may or may not be viable. Now in the private sector, if money is invested, it is invested much more cautiously, because it is being invested to grow. The government just does not have the expertise to be doing this, much like they do not have the expertise to tell GM or Chrysler how or what to build. Let's not even mention banking which we all know the government now considers itself to be experts in. How did this start? My dad made the prediction in the late 1970's. When Chrysler successfully lobbied and landed a government backed loan to bail them out, the cat calls were that it set a precedence for the government to insert itself into the private sector. Of course, those folks back then were made out to be fringe loonies. Just like now those of us who believe in the private sector, limited government, and capitalism are fringe loonies. So what is the result of this? Another lesson not learned. Fringe loonies right again. But then again, as I keep saying, do a google search on Davy Crockett and spending taxpayers money. The argument is as old as our country.

Republican socialism

2011-09-28T18:50:00.002-04:00

This is one of the things that bothers me the most about the republican party. Over the past 20 or so years, (after Reagan) the democrat party has been socialist. They don't bother to hide it anymore like they did in the past. The republicans on the other hand, have been leaning more towards socialism every year, while claiming to be capitalist, all the time calling the democrats socialist. One of the biggest things that bothered me about the Bush administration was the amount of power the government grabbed after 9/11. My argument was, if we create the homeland security department and pass the patriot act, we may trust George Bush with this power short term, but what about presidents after him? We never know what the future will bring, so who is to say that the new powers will not be abused? Remember the patriot act was only supposed to be for 2 years? This is a good example of the government grabbing power and not letting go. This brings me to republican socialism. If you have been following the debates, there has been an awful lot of socialism discussed during the debates, disguised as capitalism. Look at Mitt Romney going unchallenged when discussing his plan that if you make under $200K per year under his plan than you will not have any new taxes. Now how is that different than Obama? It's still class warfare. Then we had Newt Gingrich talking about the Paul Ryan plan. He said " What is the difference between right wing social engineering and left wing social engineering?" This one almost sunk Gingrich with a lot of republicans. But he is right. What is the difference? It still is social engineering no matter who is doing it. And we all know social engineering is one of the favorite tools of the socialists. Then we have Perry and paying off Merke for campaign contributions, dictating policy from the governor's seat, and his softness on illegal aliens, another favorite tool the socialists use to derail capitalism. In fact, with the exception of Santorum, Bachman, Gingrich and Cain, everyone else looks like lightweight socialists. Then we have Chris Christie making a speech where everyone was holding their breath for his announcement to run. I think that most folks were not listening to what he was saying as he sounded like another semi socialist. Thank god for the tea party. It may be what saves the republican party from itself. The republican party has been leaving american's behind for some time, and you would think that after the loss John McCain suffered, that they would take a long look at themselves and regroup. But instead they sat bewildered, and the Tea party has come along to represent the average american. America does not want socialism at all, not democrat or republican. The democrats are too far gone to realize it, and time will tell if the republican party can be saved from it. There may be a day when there is a Tea Party, and a Democrat Party. What will be interesting is which side the republicans will go to.

Government competing with Charities

2011-09-27T21:11:00.001-04:00

One of the things that bothers me most about our ever expanding government is the fact that charities are suffering less revenue every year. There are a number of reasons for this, mainly when the economy is bad charity contributions go down, but what really bothers me is the fact that government is doing a quadruple whammy on charity's. Government is a money grabbing monster that can never be fed enough to satisfy its growing appetite. There is always the threat from government that tax exempt status of charities and churches will be taken away, it has been tossed around more frequently every year. Then there is the threat of charitable contributions not being tax deductible for contributors, and this has been whittled away steadily in almost every tax bill submitted every year. Then we have the problem of the government steadily eating away at disposable income through taxes and fees, thus there is less to give to charity. Last but not least, the government is getting into the charity business from every angle, from food stamps to family help, to cheap loans for just about everything. Government is plain out of control, they are trying to be everything to everyone, and this is dangerous. Look at Europe. After years of social programs, the government has grown to the point that taxes cannot be collected in enough quantities to pay out all of the things it has promised. So they borrow money. Then they can't borrow anymore. So instead of approaching the problem of government spending, they immediately start raising taxes, then they realize that the spreadsheet comes out in the red, so the last resort is to start cutting back on benefits to the social programs. Notice that government never looks at reducing it's size. Government never sacrifices. So get ready, it's coming to america, and it is sad. We should have never let government get into the social charity business, everyone suffers in the end, the charity, the citizen, and the person who needs help. Ronald Reagan said it best when he started cutting government, churches and charities have always been the backbone of america, if the government gets out, charities and churches will step up and fill the void, they will do a better job, the citizen gives to the charity of his or her choice, and the government paperwork load will probably save billions every year, saving the poor old taxpayer even more.

Elizabeth Warren - A lesson from an Elite academic commie.

2011-09-25T21:28:00.003-04:00

This is unbelievable. What is worse about this is she is one of Obama's (and the left) key thinkers. Every once in a while they let out what they really think of this country, just listen to the hate -

I hear all this, "You know, well, this is class warfare. This is whatever." No! There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody! You built a factory out there? Good for you! But I want to be clear: You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate. You, uh, were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn't have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory and hire someone to protect against this because of the work the rest of us did.

This is enough to leave any American speechless, but she goes on-

Now, look: You built a factory and it turned into something terrific or a great idea, God bless! Keep a big hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along.

Social contract? This is enough to make anyone curse. Just a few years ago she would be up for charges of un-american activity. This is either ignorance of what makes this country great, or hatred of our country, or both, there is no other way to look at it. The bad part of this is that this form of elite communism is being taught to our high school and college students by so called academic thinkers like her. If this is not communist, nothing is, I can pull this out from any number of Marx or Lenin books, or for that manner the communist manifesto. We have to defeat these people this next election, if not, they will take over this country and we are all going to be boat people trying to flee to freedom in another land. This is no joke, it is real. Get involved if you are a conservative, and involve your friends, if your friends are liberal, discourage them from voting, we don't need anymore of this warped thinking, it leads to gas chambers and concentration camps if they get their way.

Media trying to pick republican candidate

2011-09-24T22:53:00.000-04:00

The results are in tonight on the straw poll in Florida and Herman Cain surprised everyone and won by a large margin. For the last several debates the media has been counting him out of the race, making him look like a Kooky also ran. The bad part is that they are already discounting him and the results of the straw poll. They also are also counting Michelle Bachman out of the race, even though she has a lot of support from voters. I think that Rick Perry and Mitt Romney both looked bad during the debate, as neither one is a true conservative, and I think that the voters of Florida also felt the same way and voted for who they thought was the most trustworthy conservative. Who knows what the future will bring in this contest, but it seems to me that the media is to eager to pick a winner and send all the others home. Fox news included. Maybe this is the people pushing back, letting the media know who is really in charge. If you have been reading my posts, you will remember how I have commented on so many people jumping on the Rick Perry bandwagon before finding out what he is all about. Now it looks like Perry is a liberal in conservative clothing, and we all know what Romney is. I have a feeling that the winner of the republican party will not be Perry or Romney. Now there is talk of Christie getting into the race. I will hold out on him until he shows that he is a conservative who can win, but I can tell you this - I think we need a president with class, that talks well, and has conservative values. Christie seems very abrasive, and may not have the skills needed to be president. An example is when he told the woman that it was none of her business where he sends his kids to school. It was not only what he said but how he said it that bothers me, his tone was awful, and the way he talks down to people will not fly with the american public, sorry Ann Coulter, but he is not ready for prime time until he learns some manners as it does not matter how conservative you are, you have to be able to handle the public also. Look how far it has gotten Obama.

More Incremental-ism

2011-09-20T19:37:00.002-04:00

I don't normally post too much from other sites, but this is just too good to be true. From the Washington Examiner Here's the link. Washington Examiner

Former Democratic National Committee Chairman, and doctor, Howard Dean backed a McKinsey & Co. survey today that found that almost a third of private-sector employers will drop their employee health insurance coverage when Obamacare's government-managed insurance exchanges come online.

Dean told Morning Joe, "The fact is it is very good for small business. There was a McKinsey study, which the Democrats don't like, but I do, and I think its true. Most small businesses are not going to be in the health insurance business anymore after this thing goes into effect."

The reason Democrats fought so hard to dismiss the McKinsey survey when it was released is because its conclusion undermines two major claims Obama made during health care debate: "If you like your health plan, you can keep it" and "It will not add one penny to the deficit."

Fellow Morning Joe guest former New York Gov. George Pataki immediately hit the first point: "The only way its a help is if they drop coverage and their employees would all of a sudden have to go on the exchange, which is what of course the president promised wouldn't happen."

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) premised their Obamacare score on the assumption that only 7 percent of employers would drop their employee health plans. If the percentage is closer to the 30 percent, as the McKinsey survey results predict,Obamacare's price tag would rise by almost $1 trillion.

Now how come the liberals just keep calling us conservatives crazy when we predict the future of their policies correctly 99% of the time? Because they know we are right, so they just make fun of us and think that the rest of Americans don't notice. The problem is that American's are not stupid - just sleeping, and the left has underestimated them this time.

Perfect Example of incremental-ism

2011-09-20T19:19:00.002-04:00

One of my parents biggest fears was the incremental-ism of communism. The theory was that the communists would take what they could get at the time, as long as it would allow them to reach their common goal eventually. Today, we have witnessed the incremental-ism of the liberals. I remember when Bill Clinton was sworn in as president, one of the first things that he did was to present to the country the cause of gay's in the military. I remember making the statement that of all the things that the country was faced with at the time, he put the gay issue on the top of his list. I remember that folks were so upset about this, many were talking of never voting for Clinton again, and wished they had never voted for him. After the outcry from the public, he was forced to submit don't ask don't tell because the policy was so controversial. He knew well that this was the foot in the door for getting what he wanted done. We need to learn a lesson from this. The left will patiently wait, no matter how long it takes, to get their way.

I really like what Debbie Wasserman Shultz said today though because another lesson is here to be learned - "Today my heart rejoices not only for the gay and lesbian Americans already serving in our armed forces, but also for every young man and woman who dreams about becoming a service member dedicated to keeping America safe from harm," and, “For too long, `don't ask, don't tell’ has forced Americans to deny who they are in order to serve their country,” said Wasserman Schultz of Weston, chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee. “At long last, that will no longer be the case.”

Alcee Hastings said "I share this profound moment with the more than 14,000 service members discharged under this misguided and unjust policy," Hastings said on Tuesday. "Truth has vindicated their honor, and we will see to it that their records and benefits reflect the full measure of their service."

Now there is talk of some kind of reparations for those discharged under that horrible, old, oppressive law that comrade Clinton gave us.

So the new revolutionaries of the left are upset at what the old revolutionary Bill Clinton gave them, even though it has led to them getting what they wanted. Remember the new communists of China and Russia hating the old communists? Seems like they were not communist enough and were shot or "re-educated". This is history repeating itself. The left never are happy until they get their end result, communism, incrementally if need be.

Still don't believe in incremental-ism? Look for more proof in an upcoming post on health care. It's real. Just open your eyes.

I have to get this off my chest

2011-09-14T19:09:00.000-04:00

It seems like the biggest news story of the past few days has been the Solendra scandal. I am going to make a prediction, this thing is going to continue to grow and Obama is going to suffer the consequences, and rightfully so. This is wrong in so many ways. First of all, this administration has been pushing solar energy hard. Sorry to say this but the government has no business pushing this. Let the private sector develop solar energy and decide if it is indeed viable. This is a perfect example of government meddling and what happens almost every time. Disaster. Just like ethanol. Another disaster. They need to save OUR money and just get the hell out of this. Believe me, if Exxon, BP, GE, or whoever thought that solar energy was going to be the next big thing, they would be in that business. Not to say that solar energy is bad, in fact, one day I believe it will be a source of energy. Another part of this is probably what makes Americans more angry than anything else, and that is politicians paying off their campaign donors. This is huge and will make Obama look very bad, especially since he has had many questionable dealings in the past, from skirting around the edges of his seat in congress being sold to all of the healthcare shady deals. This brings me to this question, and will probably make some conservatives mad, but here we go: What is the difference between Perry paying off Merke with taxpayers money, and Obama paying off Solendra with taxpayer money? Just some food for thought.

Perry and in-state tuition.

2011-09-13T19:24:00.001-04:00

Seems like the more I find out about Perry the less conservative he really is. This in-state tuition thing for illegals really bothers me. Why are we giving illegal people who are in our country ANY benefits? Are they not here illegally? What about our citizens that work hard and pay taxes? Should they not be given any benefits? How about refunding the taxes that were collected from TAXPAYERS instead of giving it to illegals? I hate to sound like a broken drum but - seems like Perry needs to read the story of Davy Crockett and giving tax money away. Like Newt said, "What is the difference between left wing social engineering and right wing social engineering?" Brilliant question. So what is the difference between Obama redistributing wealth and Perry redistributing wealth? Just asking.