Taxes, Stupidity, and Death

The New Blog Home

2009-06-30T18:50:00.000-07:00

www.threesurethingsoflife.wordpress.com

Moving Day

2009-04-15T00:39:00.000-07:00

This was a good start. Really. I liked it here a lot. However, since I became part of the key club over at The Hostages, I have gotten more comfortable with WordPress, and frankly, one sign-in there can connect me with all my blogs, so I staked out a new corner there. Its a little rough right now, but I think I can make it all mine soon enough. I'll still come back here from time to time, but most of my politcal posting will be done at the new place. See ya there:

On Pirates and Pretenders

2009-04-09T22:39:00.000-07:00

The Obama Administration is doing what it can to make us less safe in the world. Oh yes, I know Joe Biden doesn't think so, but he is the same guy who got caught plagiarizing someone else's work and asked a guy in a wheelchair to stand up so people could see him. His opinion is a little light on credibility, if you know what I'm saying...

Anyway, my reason for saying this is his administration's swift and decisive response to the seizing of a U.S. flagged cargo ship near Cape Horn by Somali pirates. These pirates boarded the Maersk Alabama, which was bound for Kenya. The crew fought back, and reclaimed the ship. Thankfully, there are still some Americans who are willing to take a stand against terrorists and push them back. The drawback is that the terrorists still have a hostage, the ship's captain, who is being held by the pirates in a lifeboat. The U.S. Navy dispatched a destroyer, USS Bainbridge, which has been in sight of the lifeboat for many hours now. The Obama administration has decided to use FBI negotiators to seek the safe return of the captain. From the AP:

A ragtag band of pirates has put President Barack Obama in a bind: He commands overwhelming firepower in the form of a growing flotilla of U.S. warships, but he doesn't want to use it.

Thursday's decision to turn to FBI hostage negotiators showed Obama reaching for all of his limited options in the high-seas hostage drama. Negotiators in the United States were communicating with the pirates through a Navy destroyer that shadowed the small lifeboat where four pirates held American cargo ship captain Richard Phillips.

I guess the "we don't negotiate with terrorists" policy is officially dead. But the more important question is why doesn't Obama act like a world leader and dispatch these terrorists, and their land-bound compatriots with extreme prejudice? There is nothing to be gained in such a silly standoff. Each passing minute that these vermin draw breath makes us look that much weaker in the eyes of other nations and assorted bad actors who smell our blood in the water and would like nothing better than to swim by and take a bite from us. Lord Zero's intense need to be liked and perceived as a chin-stroking intellectual has now officially put us in a place where I, and others who have had to deal with bullies at any time in our lives, can realize that we really are less safe tonight as a nation then we were last night. Good Job, Barry! When the alligators come, I want to feed them your family first.

A Conclusion

2009-04-01T21:51:00.000-07:00

I was driving home from working late at the office when I heard that yet another Obama nominee has...tax trouble! I placed this on the great mental bulletin board of ongoing outrages perpetrated against the American people by this administration, and it occurred to me that back a little while ago, we were boldly informed by the Vice President and Smartest Person in the Room (just ask him) that paying taxes is patriotic.

Now the Democrats were the same people who were getting their upturned noses out of joint by the insinuation that their overt and latent "Hate America First" activities somehow allowed those of us who don't prescribe to that toxic viewpoint to question their patriotism. Well, finally, I think that even by their quixotic standards, they are damned by the mouth of one of their spokespersons, and the fact that so very many of them do not feel that is necessary to pay their taxes, but that is only one of many reasons.

I question their patriotism when they run on a platform that has the government redistribution wealth, assaulting the concept of private property that is fundamental to the success of the American Experience.

I question their patriotism when they advocate for the concept of mandatory voluntary service, making the government the chief endorser of involuntary servitude.

I question their patriotism when they determine that people who are hostile to every idea we hold dear, and are prone to violence, mayhem and murder as expression of their beliefs should not be held on foreign shores, but here on our soil instead.

I question their patriotism when they push through a grossly obscene 'stimulus package' that has very little immediate spending, that funds political activist groups sympathetic to those who do not respect the law of the land, and that many of them never even bothered to read.

I question their patriotism when they appoint a tax cheat as the head of the cabinet agency that oversee the tax system and enforcement.

I question their patriotism when they propose a federal budget that will destroy the economy and enslave many future generations to the serve of government debt that may never be repaid.

I question their patriotism when they move beyond the role of regulator in our economy, a role plagued by uneven application and selective prosecution on its best days, to being an active participant by deciding who wins and loses by 'bailing out' some companies in financial difficulty, and letting others fail.

I question their patriotism when they bypass the Board of Directors of corporations accepting bailout money and demanding the resignations of CEO of said companies.

I question their patriotism when they seek the 'regulatory' power to seize any business that they deem to be a threat to the economy.

I question their patriotism when they introduce legislation that, if passed, would limit my choices for health care, food, or the programs I want to listen to or watch.

I question their patriotism when they actively undermine the dollar by monetizing our debt.

I question their patriotism when they propose ex post facto laws and bills of attainder to seize bonuses that were lawfully contracted for and allowed in their own legislation with regard to a corporation that accepted bailout money, and using the faux and misplaced outrage to suggest that they have a right to regulate the compensation for executives in all businesses.

I question their patriotism when they state their goal to increase taxation on American corporations with the idiotic but popular justification that the corporations do not "pay their fair share".

I question their patriotism when they foment class envy, and encourage the belief that those who did not work to earn are somehow entitled to the fruits of the labor of those that did.

I question their patriotism when they continually vilify those industries and individuals who produce innovation and bring cutting edge technology, services, and treatments on line, and are willing to risk their futures to do so.

I question their patriotism when they rule with an underlying philosophy that the government, an entity that does not produce anything, and does very little in an efficient manner, has a duty to provide health care, rescue the fiscally irresponsible, and impose mediocrity upon us all.

I question their patriotism when they appoint as 'czars' that are not part of the chains of command of cabinet agencies in roles where they will probably have oversight over the areas governed by those agencies, largely because they would not make it through the appointment process.

I question their patriotism when they stubbornly adhere to environmental policies that ARE NOT supported by the science, even though they will be ruinous to US business.

I question their patriotism when they appoint transnationalist attorneys to high ranking positions where they will be able to actively advocate for their foreign law-over-the Constitution preferences.

I question their patriotism when the overall effect of their stated goals and proposed legislation is to consolidate power, including powers reserved to the states and individuals in the hands of the federal government.

I question their patriotism when they establish automotive company advisory boards populated by people who do not own American cars, have no experience in the auto business, or any business, for that matter.

I question their patriotism when they so hamstring an industry with regulations that it simply cannot succeed, and then have the nerve to vilify the executives of those industries when they finally do fail.

But hey, what do we expect from people who aren't patriotic enough to pay their taxes?

Feel free to add your own. I know there are more reasons to question their patriotism.

Too Much

2009-03-25T23:00:00.000-07:00

To the three regular readers of this blog, I'm sorry.

I have been very busy with work, and watching the clownshoes in Congress and the White House heap insult upon injury in an attempt to out-incompetent each other. There comes a point where it just doesn't help anymore to point out the folly that occurs on a daily basis in the nation's capitol. It has descended into madness, and the fact that the elected "officials" have not been forced to flee for their lives only demonstrates how effectively the media-liberal cabal has subverted the national awareness. I don't think I have any outrage left. Only weariness, and a morbid curiousity about what will be the final insult, what act by this power-mad, and wrecklesly irresponsible government will be the one that makes the 48 percenters rise up in an effort to restore reason and a health fear of the governed in the halls of power once again.

Don't call it a hiatus as much as a breath. I'll post again when I find a reason.

Accountability? The Hell You Say!

2009-03-12T19:55:00.000-07:00

Youtube vid of the always entertaining leftard dingleberry Charles "Chuckles" Wrangle. Keep smilin', Chuckles. We see how hard you laugh when people decide that scumbags like you don't have a place in government anymore.

Why Government-Controlled Health Care Makes As Much Sense As Punching Yourself In The Face

2009-02-25T21:37:00.000-08:00

A Cautionary tale from LC Azygos, who is on the front lines every day.

The Best 55 Seconds on Race In America That You Never Heard

2009-02-19T12:25:00.001-08:00

H/T Spats

The Wrong Direction

2009-02-18T19:04:00.000-08:00

I admit it. I have not posted a lot lately. Work is one of the reasons. When the economy is down, people are more willing to fight over money that in better times, they are more likely to let go. But the bigger part of it is the day-to-day stupidity that is the hallmark of elected officals all over the country these days. Whether it is the outstanding bipartisan spirit increasingly demonstrated by the left (We won, you didn't, so you'll do it our way and like it!), or the constant assaults on the dignity of logic and reason that translate into daily outrages that pile up like cordwood. If I attempted to catelog them all, this blog would become a full-time job. However, the worst part is the conumdrum at the heart of our current predicament. As more comes to light to inspire mistrust and disgust with government, the kind that robs it of any pretense of legitimacy, the nation as a whole seems to be nonplussed. Those of you who are regular readers know that this is not the whole story, as the mainstream media completely abandoned any appearance of impartiality in the last election cycle and publically embraced the left, finally ceasing to pretend that they didn't have a bias. And they did their jobs well. The 52% of the voters in the last election decided to believe the hype, ignore the lack of substance in the current President, and the complete lack of any serious criticism or investigation of Barry H. Obama. Hope and Change were enough. And even now, when the man who champions the cause of transparency in government hires a tax cheat for the Secretary of the Treasury, and uses the economic downturn, which was orchestrated by 'community organizers' who bullied and threatened banks into makeing bad loans, and facilitated by Democrats in Congress who turned a blind eye the mushrooming of the debt bomb, and actively dissuaded any attempt at regulation and oversight which would have put a stop to the stupid lending practices that have created the current "crisis". As a result, the Congress and the President spent more on one piece of legislation than they typically spend in one year, under the guise of 'economic stimulus', although it contains so very much more. Billions for ACORN (hey, the attorneys necessary to fight the fraud charges are expensive), money for birth control, for green power, which, when the math is done is extraordinarily expensive for the resulting power achieved, computerizing every American's health records, so that government can second guess decisions about your care made by you an your physician, and so very much more. All passed by a Congress that could not have possibly reviewed the entire bill before voting on it. State governments that expanded into so many realms in which they had no business when times were good that now face such deficits that they look to taxpayers for even more money that the government itself did not earn, and to the federal government, which means you and me. These state governments are issuing IOUs to taxpayers who are due returns for last year. An IOU? Try giving one to government, and see what happens to you. But best part is this: If the Feds give some of our bailout money to states like California, then we, you and I, get to pay for all of the things Calfornia officials did that we did not agree with. Sanctuary cities? Yup? Health care, welfare, and the cost to the state legal system and state agencies for dealing with illegals? Yup. We will get to pay for that too! And what is the reaction to all of this by the 52%ers? Yawns. They don't see any downside to any of this. "Debt so large that my grandchildren will be paying it? Whatever. When is Obama going to fix my mortgage so I can stay in this home? Paying all my McDonald's wages to do it right now is a real bummer. I want to get a plasma screen. I hope he hurries up."

The rumblings are there. Words like "disinfranchisement", "crooks", "unconstitutional", and "illegitimate" are cropping up more than I feel comfortable thinking about. The last time so many people in this country were so completely fed up with the direction of government, it lead to years of the saddest bloodshed this nation has ever known. I don't want to see it happen again in my lifetime, but I also wonder how much longer I can fullfill my duties as an officer of the court, which adjudicates the laws of a government that I increasingly feel is abdicating its duty to its people in favor of ruling over them, and the paradox grows more obvious with each passing day. Perhaps the Fresh Prez of Bill Ayers would be well served by contemplating a quote by the man whose legacy he is so eager to claim, yet he fails so tragically short of: "A house divided against itself cannot stand".

L.A. College Professor Demonstrates Fascism While Crying It

2009-02-16T19:35:00.000-08:00

***********************UPDATED********************************

Another case of a 'speech code' on campus defending the right not to be offended. Beautiful. The best part? I'm betting that the professor simply cannot grok the irony in his actions.

LOS ANGELES - A college student has filed a lawsuit saying a public speaking professor berated him in class for making a speech opposing same-sex marriage.

Yeah, how dare that student express an opinion on a topic that VOTERS in the state recently expressed opinions on with their votes. Straying from the path of unicorns who poop rainbows out their rears when speaking in the once-hallowed halls of acedemia is a poor choice. Danger Will Robinson! Danger! Danger!

In the federal court suit filed last week, student Jonathan Lopez said that midway through his speech, when he quoted a dictionary definition of marriage and recited a pair of Bible verses, professor John Matteson cut him off and would not allow him to finish. He said Matteson also called him a "fascist bastard."

I can almost see this professor now...wild eyes, spittle flying from frenzied lips screaming "You're done! Done! No more! I don't care that you are citing the source material from one of the most influential tomes in Western Civilization! I don't care that you are citing the dictionary!!! I don't like what you are saying and that makes it untrue, inappropriate, and hate speech!!"

A student evaluation form included with the lawsuit lacks a score for Lopez's speech, and reads "ask God what your grade is."

Not acceptable. It won't be enough to cost this bully his job. He needs to be given a homework assignment in which he must research the history of American Higher Education and the purposes and results of its implementation. He sullies the heritage of the American higher educational system with his actions and hostility to religion.

In a letter, Dean Allison Jones wrote that she had met with Lopez, considered his complaint "extremely serious in nature," and had begun a disciplinary investigation. Jones said in the letter she could not elaborate because of concerns for Matteson's privacy.

The careful answer, but I suspect that nothing will come of it. Call it a hunch.

But Jones also wrote that two students were "deeply offended" by the speech, and quoted one as saying "this student should have to pay some price for preaching hate in the classroom."

And this is why. Truly, the Dean misunderstands. As a community college, I'll wager that the school accepts taxpayer dollars, and I'll also bet that the school probably is chartered through the state government. That would make it a government entity. That means that ANY restriction on the speech of a citizen SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED, no matter who gets offended. You don't like it if a student points out that a "marriage" between Neal and Bob doesn't meet the definition of marriage? Tough. You don't like it that the Bible has specific proscriptions against homosexuality? Too bad. Despite the popular opinion, this nation was founded on primarily Christian principals. Yeah, I said that out loud, and I have been doing the research to back it up.

Matteson did not immediately respond to calls and e-mails seeking comment early Monday. Offices of the Los Angeles Community College District were closed for the Presidents Day holiday.

No Surprise there.

Lopez made the speech at Los Angeles City College in November, days after the passage of Proposition 8, which banned same-sex marriage in California.

Topical and well-sourced? He'll never get anywhere in academia that way. What was he thinking?

"Basically, colleges and universities should give Christian students the same rights to free expression as other students," David J. Hacker, an attorney for the Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian legal organization that is representing Lopez, told the Los Angeles Times.

And considering that colleges and universities were once founded by Christians to provide an educated and knowledgable clergy to preserve and foster a free and just society, that really isn't too much to expect.

Lopez and his attorneys are seeking financial damages and want the court to strike down a code at Los Angeles City College forbidding students from making statements deemed offensive.

And I hope they take it as far as they have to get that result.

************************************************************************
Apparently I was wrong. The Dean does get it, and has sided against the First Amendment. Maybe she is counting on the courts to get it wrong.

From Mike S. Adams at Townhall.com

Following the inaction of Dean Jones, Mr. Lopez sent, via counsel, a second letter demanding action in his case. Dean Jones responded by saying that the situation had been appropriately addressed. She then brazenly stated that any service of process or tort claims could be served on the District’s General Counsel.

Methinks some personal liability under a section 1983 civil rights suit might get this worm's attention.

More from Byron Sunderland

2009-02-13T19:28:00.000-08:00

“Meanwhile, from the hearts of multitudes the dignity of honest labor and the dictates of a sober and modest economy have died out, on the one hand increasing pauperism and crime and lending to misfortune the aggrivation of human improvidence, and on the other hand, fostering habits of false show, and thus increasing the temptation to deception, fraud, peculation, and all the dishonesties of the most high-pampered extravagance and excess. Moreover, the wanton neglect or abuse of our providential blessings, and the unconscious apostasy from every sentiment of purity and virtue, have served greatly to defile and degrade the mind of a large portion of the community and ill the centers of population with a low and vulgar herd, who throng at the open temples of obscenity and infamy. Thus the materials are prepared for human guilt and wretchedness, whose catalog of crimes and woes exhausts the power of language to express them. Beyond all this, political controversy and partisan strife for the reins and spoils of power, conducted without principal, and reeking with abuse, have taken so fierce a form as often to have driven the best men from the arena and left the worst upon the field. The selfish and prolifigate stand forward to control the nominations and elections to office, and afterwords gamble with its duties and obligations without shame and without remorse.”

I love this book, but I fear the wisdom it imparts.

More Protest From the Victim Class

2009-02-13T09:22:00.000-08:00

NY's blind governor: 'SNL' insensitive to disabled

With a headline like that, you know what is coming...yet another cry from a "victim".

MORRISVILLE, N.Y. (AP) -- The legally blind governor of New York says a second parody of him on the television show "Saturday Night Live" promotes insensitivity against the disabled.

You'll note that there is no discussion of the fact that it was a parody of a public figure, more specifically, someone who put himself in the spotlight when he sought office. In fact, I'll wager that he exploited his condition to get elected in the first place.

Democratic Gov. David Paterson said Thursday that the show's continued parodies hurt disabled people not in a position to fight back.

Nonsense! The parody pricked his over-developed ego...the same ego that likely inspired him to run for office in the first place. After all, if one is a democrat and blind, where else can they seek lucrative employment? The executive branch of a state government is a perfect place for such a person to work!

A segment on Paterson aired last week featured "SNL" cast member Fred Armisen — with one eye closed most of the time, the other focused on his own nose — unable to see fellow cast member Seth Meyers or a prop. Armisen portrayed the governor as a clueless blind man with a past of youthful drug use and womanizing.

And this hurt disabled persons not in a position to fight back. Seems the governor has done a wonderful job using his position to fight back. And he does so using the Democratic playbook, too: Don't address the substance, swing at the emotional component. If he were my governor, I'd send him a box of hankies to cry into. He knows politics is a full-contact sport, but he has no compunction about exploiting his condition to get the result he wants. And people say I'm cynical.

NBC spokeswoman Sharon Pannozzo says neither the network nor the show would comment on Paterson's remarks.

Of course not. The Democratic Party's media arm has been properly chastised for turning its satire in the direction of one of their own. I'm sure they will perform the appropriate mea culpa and have a Sarah Palin skit or three this weekend.

For Those Of You Who Have Being Paying Attention...

2009-02-08T17:45:00.000-08:00

Last week was very, very busy, and the weekend hasn't been much better.

Sig, the point is it is my motto, and I was pointed to that site which can be used to create such seals.

To those who participated in the headline contest, the answer is having government getting any deeper in to mortgages is wrong wrong WRONG!

I got my new book this week. It is "The Christian Life and Character of the Civil Institutions of the United States", by Benjamin F. Morris. I have been so busy, I have not had a chance to really start reading it, but in reading the introduction, which was written April 14, 1863, by Byron Sunderland, it have found it remarkably prescient. An example?

"Our unparalled liberty has degenerated into dissolute indulgence; we have been so long without the burdens of government as to have almost forgotten the price of our birthright and to have cast away the only safeguards for its continuance; we have proved ourselves unworthy of our inheritance, in our contempt of the virtue which alone provides protection to our society, in our blind disregard of the Christian foundations on which alone the great interests of a nation can permanently rest."

I think I am going to really enjoy this book.

What's wrong with this headline?

2009-02-02T18:33:00.000-08:00

GOP circulates plan to cut the cost of mortgages (AP)

AP - Senate Republicans circulated a sweeping plan to drive down the cost of mortgages by expanding the federal government's role in the industry, officials said Monday night as debate opened on an economic stimulus bill at the top of President Barack Obama's agenda.

Everyone post your answers in the comments. I'll grade them Friday.

sealmt8.gif hosted at ImageShack.us

2009-02-01T18:28:00.001-08:00

Quickpost this image to Myspace, Digg, Facebook, and others!

That whole "equal rights" thing? Its just a feint.

2009-01-31T09:33:00.000-08:00

But we all knew that, didn't we? Last year, my home state, The Peeples' Republik of Washingtonistan passed a law allowing same-sex couples to register their 'relationship' with the state, and they could have all the rights that the more militant among them keep bitching that they are denied. So now they have all the rights, except to call it marriage, because their relationship doesn't meet that definition. (and yes, I was thrilled to see all the family law/dissolution forms amended to include 'domestic partnership'...brave new world, indeed)

So it wasn't so much of a surprised to see that the state legislature is now quietly working behind the scenes to destroy any distinction detween the two. The purpose? Other than to call something marriage when it is not, forcing society's approval of a lifestyle that many do not agree with? My money is on a challenge to federal full-faith and credit.

The language, from SB 5688:

For the purposes of this chapter, the terms spouse, marriage,
marital, husband, wife, widow, widower, next of kin, and family shall
be interpreted as applying equally to state registered domestic partnerships or individuals in state registered domestic partnerships
as well as to marital relationships and married persons, and references
to dissolution of marriage shall apply equally to state registered
domestic partnerships that have been terminated, dissolved, or
invalidated, to the extent that such interpretation does not conflict
with federal law. Where necessary to implement this act, gender-
specific terms such as husband and wife used in any statute, rule, or
other law shall be construed to be gender neutral, and applicable to
individuals in state registered domestic partnerships.

I've Figured Out Their Strategy...

2009-01-28T21:26:00.000-08:00

First, the Democrats want to force silly spending bills down our throats, you know, triple the Earned Income Tax Credit, so that people who don't pay taxes now get an even BIGGER refund on the taxes that they don't pay, and payoffs for various political organizations that aided Teh One in his quest for the Oval Office, and call it a "Stimulus Plan" that stimulates nothing but bureaucrats looking for new and exciting ways to spend our money on things that we would never spend it on ourselves, and then pass an immigration bill that is nothing but an amnesty bill that makes citizenship less than worthless, because we will get to fund it too. To sum it up, the Dhims want us to be so burdened with taxes and strip citizenship of all benefits so that we will just be BEGGING for the death of the Republic. Again, a new vid. Same warnings apply. Put away the breakables, take the blood pressure meds.

Arrogance, Thy Name Is Democrat...

2009-01-25T14:01:00.000-08:00

The naked emperor news put together this tantalizing exchange between Ex-Labor Secretary Robert Reich, and Congressman Charles Wrangle, yes the I have serious tax trouble Charles Wrangle, discussing the latest 'infrastructure stimulus package', and the vital importance of making sure that the contracts do not go to "white construction workers", that the states have no input into what the projects are, and that the middle class is working too hard just trying to feed and clothe their families to take notice of what they are doing to raise any objections to their blatant racism. If you ever gave a damn about how the knuckleheads inside the beltway come to decisions, then you should watch this. Put away all breakables first, and take any appropriate blood pressure meds.

These people need to run out of town on a rail. The Sooner, the Better.

Obama's Undetected Racism

2009-01-23T19:43:00.000-08:00

Sure, you read the title, and you thought, "How could that be? Of course we knew he is a racist. All those years listening to Reverend Wright and company, playing the card in the campaign when he was the only one to even begin to invoke racism, and of course, that travesty of a Benediction at his Inauguration. We knew it, you knew it, so you must have slipped a cog in the brainbox, BiW."

Not so fast. Yeah, those issues were evident before, but I'm talking about his racism against black, brown, and yellow people.

"What???" you wonder. 'Tis true, I say. My proof? Today President Obama lifted the ban on overseas abortion funding. The ban, known as the Mexico City Policy requires any non-governmental organization to agree before receiving U.S. funds that they will "neither perform nor actively promote abortion as a method of family planning in other nations." It is also known as the "global gag rule," because it prohibits taxpayer funding for groups that even talk about abortion if there is an unplanned pregnancy.

Now putting aside perfectly legitimate questions that will unfortunately never be asked, like "What in the name of Chuhuthulu are we doing funding abortions overseas when working Americans will have to dig deeper into their pockets than ever before to support the most socialist Agenda foisted upon this nation since the New Deal?", stop and think a minute. Where are in the world are our tax dollars most likely to be used to pay to murder unborn children? Even money says places with high poverty and dense populations. That means places like Mexico, Central America, Africa, and Asia. All areas that the last I looked, were populated by brown, black, and yellow people. Hardly seems like an enlightened policy from someone constantly preaching hope and change, but then how many Democrats will ever give up the opportunity to ensure a good ol' American taxpayer funded abortion, even if it is being done to someone who isn't a citizen. Brought to you by the group in government constantly ascribing its abridgment of rights and stupid laws as being "FOR THE CHILDRENNNNNNNNNN!!!" They constantly whine about things like the Iraq War, which helped to bring the Iraqi children the first chance at real freedom that they have ever had, but see no contradiction in exporting death by funding abortions. I don't know if it is a blessing or a curse to be that obtuse, but I do know that I am very tired of these people representing me.

Move along. Nothing to see here.

Love In A Time of Blindness

2009-01-21T21:31:00.000-08:00

I did my best not to pay attention to the doings in the nation's capital yesterday. What little I did not escape only reinforced my belief that I did the right thing. A press, intent on giving the new President a disgusting tongue bath in full view of everyone, complete and utter disrespect of the outgoing President by THE ONE'S faithful acolytes, presumably with the tacit consent of the new President, since it took place in front of him, and he did not raise his divine voice to his ardent admirers in admonishment for their shameful behavior. A tepid inaugural address, met with the screaming adulation of the teeming masses eager to dine on the inanition patronizingly served by the new occupant of the Oval Office, and a racist prayer from a preacher who likely has memorized every major speech Dr. King ever uttered, but who obviously failed to sufficiently grok the meaning of the words.

And today, the work continued. Senate confirmation hearings for a Nominee for Treasury Secretary who deliberately did not pay taxes he owed for years until after he knew he was a nominee. One of several nominees who demonstrate an astonishing brazenness or complete inability to understand and relate to the people they would govern. And the President decided that people so dangerous that their own governments do not want them back have rights under our laws and should be tried in our courts and held on our nation's soil, so that he can keep a dangerously silly promise to close Gitmo.

No position seems to ridiculous for the incoming administration, whether it is a nominee for 'Regulatory Czar' who has gone on record as saying that animals should have the right to sue humans and that hunting should be outlawed, or the financial whiz kid who claimed that it was a mistake that he didn't pay his payroll taxes while he worked for the IMF, despite the fact that they gave him statements of what he owed and he applied for and got the money to pay such taxes. An appointee to the President's vacated seat in the Senate selected by a governor caught red-handed trying to sell the seat. A Presidential Agenda that includes mandatory altruism in the form of compulsive voluntary service, and a civilian defense agency to rival the military. The belief that government, the same people who brought you the IRS and the DMV, should be in the business of providing 'free' health care to everyone, and my personal favorite, a desire to pump billions of taxpayer dollars into the economy to 'stimulate' it, despite the fact that NO ONE will tell us, the folks paying the damn bill, where the billions already spent have actually gone. Instead, we are treated with brusque indignation for having the temerity to ask the question. And everywhere, the ever present theme that only the brilliant minds that THE ONE has tapped to help him lead us can see us through.

I cannot speak for everyone. If I could, then frankly, we would not be facing the absurdity, the corruption, the inefficiency, the arrogance, and the glittering deception that are the hallmarks of the current government of this nation. I can, however, speak for myself. And for myself I say:

The final legitimacy of government is wholly reliant upon the consent of the governed. When you are openly corrupt, when there is a clear double standard, one for those in power and one for the rest of us, when you hold forth as intelligent, and waste beautiful words to say nothing, when you show contempt for those you would presume to lead, when you forget who pays the freight, when you believe government should enter every aspect of our lives, to such a degree that in time we will have to serve it and not the other way around, you set a dangerous standard. Few things are as unhealthy to the continuation of such a government as a complete disrespecting of the body politic and the trust that is a vital component of the social contract underlying the Republic. Such abuse is reprehensible, and the willful indenturing of the individual to the state can only have one ultimate end.
If this President is really as intelligent as he and his supporters would have us believe, then I can only conclude that these provocations are willful; he intends to transform the conflict of beliefs, ideals, and philosophies in to a sad and divisive clash that will separate Americans from each other like they have been no other time since the 1860s. At the same time, I am patient. I will wait. The conflict, if it comes, will be terrible, and the damage it will cause will be like nothing the average person can begin to fathom. Because no God-fearing American relishes the thought of such a butcher's bill, we will wait. We will wait for the final provocation, all the while praying that it will never come.

Oh No He Dinit!

2009-01-18T20:51:00.000-08:00

The Obamessiah grows bold as his coronation approaches, as both Misha and Nice Deb have noted. The closer he gets to power, the more the mask is drawn back, and the real agenda comes forth. I questioned whether he is trying to provoke conflict before. I now have little doubt, and still the population slumbers, completely oblivious to what the Dear Leader says. In his own words:

And just in case it slipped past you:

“It was these ideals that led us to declare independence, and craft our constitution, producing documents that were imperfect but had within them, like our nation itself, the capacity to be made more perfect.

We are here today not simply to pay tribute to our first patriots but to take up the work that they began.

And yet while our problems may be new, what is required to overcome them is not. What is required is the same perseverance and idealism that our founders displayed. What is required is a new declaration of independence not just in our nation, but in our own lives..independence from ideology…"

Simply unfettered arrogance and a willingness to set the nation aflame.

With Mental Deficients Like These In Government, Who Needs Foreign Enemies?

2009-01-16T19:10:00.000-08:00

As I was driving home today, the commentator on the radio was talking about the nominee for Obama's 'Regulatory Czar', Professor Cass Sunstein. Now the phrase "Regulatory Czar" was enough to chill my blood when spoken in the context of Obama and his leftie crowd, since their idea of regulation seems to be "take private property away from those who earned it give it to those who did not." I think that perception was added by the inclusion of the word "czar". But the best part was listening to the commentator describe the professor's bona fides. For that he read an article describing the professor's recent comments. That is when it dawned on me. These people really are trying to start a war by destroying this country. Honestly. When a law school professor, most recently at Harvard Law, which only reduces my perception of the school further publicly states:

“[A]nimals should be permitted to bring suit, with human beings as their representatives, to prevent violations of current law … Any animals that are entitled to bring suit would be represented by (human) counsel, who would owe guardian like obligations and make decisions, subject to those obligations, on their clients’ behalf.”

What? I'm Sorry. I don't think I heard you correctly. Did you say "Animals should be entitled to sue with human counsel? You want to give Morris the freaking cat the RIGHT to sue someone??? This is what happens when you spend too damn long in academia and not enough time in the real world. A law school professor just proposed allowing animals to engage in lawsuits. The court system rarely works the way it is supposed to right now, with overloaded dockets and judges who go out of their way to keep from hearing cases. I'm betting the esteemed professor who is so willing to give these rights to our food, pets, and threats is thoroughly against allowing similar rights to unborn humans. That's just a hunch. If you are offended by that statement, go ahead and prove me wrong. But the flip side is the part about representation by human counsel, who would owe guardian like obligations and make decisions on their client's behalf. How convenient. Human counsel gets to determine that Elsie really isn't contented and gets to sue Farmer Brown on her behalf...for a fee, I'm sure. And the best part? No one can ever challenge the attorney's interpretation of his 'client's' intent. I can see a whole new legal specialty cropping up around this. I'm sure all the big name law schools will pioneer these courses. Of course, if there is wisdom in allowing animals to sue, why stop there? Why not allow other living beings to sue? After all, I am quite sure your cactus doesn't like where you have it placed right now. What about those bacteria that you are damaging with the antibiotics you are taking? Come to think of it, you really are heartless for even existing. You are competing with those animals for the air you breathe. Consuming food takes nutrients they could otherwise benefit from. There are all sorts of plant species that could be living in the space your home currently occupies.

Of course, this 'regulator-to-be' wasn't content with his first deployment of weapons-grade stupidity. No, he had to go after another American tradition and human birthright:

“We ought to ban hunting, I suggest, if there isn’t a purpose other than sport and fun. That should be against the law. It’s time now.”

Sunstein also argued in favor of “eliminating current practices such as greyhound racing, cosmetic testing, and meat eating, most controversially.”

Remember, the smug intellectuals who don't like us having the right to keep and bear arms grudgingly allow that hunting is perhaps the only use that we illiterate peasants could legitimately have for a firearm, and therefore anything that they deem inappropriate for hunting is something we should not be allowed to own. Take away hunting as a justification, most likely with a...regulation, and "Voila!" "You don't have any right to own a gun, peasant! Hand it over, and oh, by the way, we are going to act as if your purpose in life is to serve us and not the other way around. Get used to it, or maybe we'll send you to a reeducation camp."

And banning meat-eating. I'm sure that fits in with the justification for the government telling us all what we can eat, and how much, after Universal Healthcare is forced on us all, at the cost of all we make. For our own good, I'm sure.

I just don't understand what happens to people to make them think that such things have any business being uttered seriously in public. I think on somethings that I have read in my life, The Bible, This Present Darkness, and I wonder...demonic possession? But then I could just as easily place my money on insanity. The insanity of the person who believes such things, and the insanity of the person who actively considers putting him in a place where he just might be able to transform it into law.

I really don't believe we can afford four years of such lunacy.

The Return of Jack Bauer

2009-01-12T18:25:00.000-08:00

I have a confession to make. '24' is among my guilty pleasures.

I don't mean 'guilty' as I want to distance myself from taking pleasure at terrorists and would-be terrorists meeting a violent and bloody end. Hell no! That's the best part. I don't mean 'guilty' because the show frequently features government officials as villains, although they usually splash the ones of the wrong persuasion with that paint. No, its a 'guilty' pleasure because as satisfying as it is to see an American showing backbone, I realize that the writers and producers still pull the punches and try to have all the threats and troubles somehow be rooted in America and Americans. Well, that and the fact that they jumped the shark a few seasons ago. In spite of these things, I still watch it and enjoy it tremendously. Why? Because Jack has given me some of the most satisfying moments I have ever witnessed on television, whether it was finally getting some quality "alone time" with his wife's assassin, or the summary execution of a Presidential assassin, Jack has given me more "YESSSS!!!" moments than any television viewer had any right to expect. And last night was no exception, offering up the cool and measured appraisal of a professional to a smarmy, self-serving politician whose idea of sacrifice is probably giving up pricey meals out with well-heeled lobbyists. But its much, much better in his own words. From the man himself, the first of hopefully many morsels of Bauery goodness this season:

SENATOR: Will the witness please state his name.

BAUER: Jack Bauer.

SENATOR: Mr. Bauer, I don't see your counsel present. Or is he or she not aware we're about to start?

BAUER: I've chosen not to retain counsel.

SENATOR: Mr. Bauer, I have to advise you that many of the questions we're about to pose to you are of a legal nature and might result in answers that could incriminate you.

BAUER: I understand that, Senator.

SENATOR: We can postpone your testimony until this afternoon if you'd like to bring in representation, something that I would strongly advise.

BAUER: What is the first question, sir?

SENATOR: All right then.

SENATOR: And isn't it true that you detained Mr. Haddad without due process and that you used extreme interrogation methods on him until he answered your request he is?

BAUER: Yes, sir.

SENATOR: Would you say that you broke procedure with this interrogation?

BAUER: Probably.

SENATOR: Probably? Well, that's a very cavalier answer. You don't seem to care about the implications here. Well, Mr. Bauer?

BAUER: I'm sorry, Senator. I didn't hear a question.

SENATOR: All right then. Did you torture Mr. Haddad?

BAUER: According to the definitions set forth by the Geneva Convention, yes, I did. Senator, why don't I save you some time. It's obvious that your agenda is to discredit and generate a series of --

SENATOR: My only agenda is to get to the truth.

BAUER: I don't think it is, sir.

SENATOR: Excuse me.

BAUER: Abraham Haddad had targeted a bus train of 45 people, 10 of which were children. The truth, Senator, is I stopped that attack from happening.

SENATOR: By torturing Mr. Haddad.

BAUER: By doing what I deemed necessary to protect innocent lives.

SENATOR: So basically what you're saying, Mr. Bauer, is that the ends justify the means and that you are above the law.

BAUER: When I am activated, when I am brought into a situation, there is a reason and that reason is to complete the objectives of my mission at all costs.

SENATOR: Even if it means breaking the law?

BAUER: For a combat soldier the difference between success and failure is your ability to adapt to your enemy. The people that I deal with, they don't care about your rules. All they care about is a result. My job is to stop them from accomplishing their objectives. I simply adapt it. In answer to your question, am I above the law? No, sir. I am more than willing to be judged by the people you claim to represent. I will let them decide what price I should pay. Now please do not sit there with that smug look on your face and expect me to regret the decisions that I have made because, sir, the truth is I don't.

Simple, elegant, and to the point. The writers nailed this moment better than they probably realized, as the mask of arrogance worn by the Senator clearly prevented him from indicating that he even understood how directly he had been judged and found not worthy.

Today's Required Reading

2009-01-08T12:37:00.000-08:00

Go read this. Go! Shoo!

Things I'm Not Looking Forward to in 2009

2009-01-04T16:45:00.001-08:00

So I was thinking this morning about the things that I am not looking forward to in 2009, and its a pretty grim list.

1. Changes in our employer provided health care. Don't get me wrong, it still beats a poke in the eye with a sharp stick, but it is quite a step down from what we have had the last three years.

2. Additional changes to the rules regarding ex parte proceedings in the local courts. Everyone is cash-strapped these days, and the courts are no exception. However, as of Jan. 1, 2009, we can no longer present ex parte matters directly ourselves. Now, if we have orders for ex parte signature, we present them to the Clerk's Office, with an additional fee, and they present the orders for signature. If we are willing to pay an additional fee to expedite the orders, which means we can cool our heels in the Clerk's Office for 20 minutes or so and leave with our signed documents. Why is this bad? First, the clients already pay more for the non-participation of our court system in seeking settlements to their disputes. Second, once more, we are removing attorneys from the process. I usually enjoy taking documents to ex parte, because I learn new things, from the judges, commissioners, and other attorneys gathered there. Third, many times judges and commissioners have additional questions, which they used to be able to ask about face-to-face. Not any more, so in addition to making sure that the documents are legally sufficient, we also now have to anticipate questions and have the answers incorporated into the documents. More delays, complications, costs and fees. It becomes easier with each passing day to understand the growing disillusionment that non-lawyers have with the system.

3. Increased gas prices. I'm fairly certain they're coming. The Dems seem to think that they should dictate the price of gas instead of the market, and that raising the tax on gas will help force us all in to alternative fuels, and other technologies that still do not exist, or are still so expensive that most of us peasants, who will already be straining under the extraordinary taxation necessary to support the coming nanny state, will not be able to afford them. That isn't even taking into account the coming THUMP that will be administered to Iran by us or Israelis very shortly. That will probably cause prices to double overnight.

4. Democratic Leadership in the House, Senate, and White House. Touchy-feely leadership, concerned with "world opinion", "climate change", and "corporate excesses", and all the legislation necessary to address these "pressing concerns", which will sufficiently intrude upon all personal choices, large and small until we reach the point where we really don't have any choices. I moved away from home for a reason. How do I resist my government when it has made up its mind to be mother and father for me? Funny how we'll all be expected to work for our government. "Birthright? What birthright? Get back to work, slave. There are a whole bunch of 10 year olds who want abortions and they aren't going to pay for themselves, you know."

5. The Fairness Doctrine. Liberal Fascism at its finest. Squelch any remaining avenue of media that they do not control...for the good of the people, and all in the name of fairness, of course. Musn't have the little peasants exposed to any information other than the official party line, because we know that they simply are not capable of properly discerning the truth in any given matter, which of course is what ever we tell them the truth is. Kinda funny when you read some of the original cases on the subject before it was done away with. More avenues of media available to the public than any time in human history, and when given the choice, the old guard, which sold its soul to liberal agenda, is being abandoned in record numbers, and yet the answer isn't perceived to be a return to the appearance of impartial reporting with the obvious bias confined to the editorial pages. Instead, the idea is to restrict the speech and freedom of association of the newly successful mediums by imposing the requirement that they tie themselves to voices discredited and rejected by many consumers of information.

6. More bailouts. Somewhere, in the deepest, hottest circles of Hell, between each penetration suffered at the hands of the demons assigned to his torment, V.I. Lenin is laughing. The idea that government HAS to interfere in the market to save businesses victimized by their own stunning lack of foresight, inability to adapt, and piss-pour management is as about as communist as they come. Especially in light of the slavery that makes such an intervention possible. The only way the government can raise the capitol necessary is to raise taxes. A lot of them. Then the government takes our tax money, and invests it in these failing businesses. So, for the money I didn't want to spend, I am a silent investor in a company I didn't want to own, and now the government has an incentive in seeing these businesses succeed, probably at the expense of others. By even going down this road, government has now started to decide who wins and who loses. And how can it efficiently prosecute anti-trust laws when it has a stake in some of the players in the market place? Yeah, that's what I thought. Let me know when it will be time for the adults to take over and restore the Republic.

New Year's Thoughts

2009-01-02T18:18:00.001-08:00

I normally eschew planning and making resolutions because I find that Life usually has plans for me that have nothing to do with the plans I make for myself. Having said that, I decided to make a few this year...just because.

1. Laugh More. This last political season left me ragged out. The idea that the country could be so eager elect a blank canvas on which each BDS-suffering mentally deficient malcontent projected their most fevered fantasy was tough enough, but then when they returned to power the party that worked so hard to screw us all on the Freddie and Fannie deal, and crash the economy, costing taxpayer's TRILLIONS in bailouts of companies caught short by their own greed and poor business planning, I found myself depressed by so many Americans so willing to give up not only their birthright, but mine too. Now, sadly, geniuses like this one will be loudly proclaiming their breathtaking ignorance as loudly as they possibly can, and stamping their feet when reality lands on the shoulders of their hollow messiah and he has to actually, you know, lead.

2. Work Out Regularly. Not only does it do an exceptional job handling stress, I could stand to lose some weight and get my doctor off my back. Not to mention, experience has taught me that the masses would be more likely to be swayed by a slightly greying blond, green-grey eyed adonis than a slightly greying blond, green-grey eyed middle-aged guy who needs to lose weight. Just all part of doing my part to advance the VRWC doncha know.

3. Do More With Heir No. One's Scout Group. I have some really great memories of my time in scouts. I think he can too, but the organization here needs more help and more planning if the boys are going get everything out of it that they possibly can.

4. Work on Getting More Clients. The Boss doesn't want me to do it, but the fact is, I'm tired of us not making money when I know we can do better. That is going to mean dragging the firm into the 21st century with an actual website and professional email addresses.

5. Work on the Novel More Regularly. The thing isn't going to just write itself, after all.

More of the Snowmageddon of 2008...

2009-01-01T17:01:00.000-08:00

And Heir No. 1 and His Lego Star Destroyer.

The Snow Won't Stop!

2008-12-21T22:27:00.000-08:00

10 pm and the snow is still coming. We are over a foot now. We walked out of Safeway right before their power went out. Tomorrow is gonna suck.

The Great December Storm 2008

2008-12-21T15:54:00.000-08:00

Well, we got 4.5 new inches of snow over the 3 inches already on the ground, and then some freezing rain to make it all slick and crunchy for the drive to church for Heair No. One's Christmas Play. Its all very pretty, but the freezing rain is making it all as slick as snailsnot right now, and I am not looking forward to the 25 mile trek to work tomorrow.

The Kids Did Well With The Christmas Play...Once They All Made In. Other Churches On The Street Had Suspiciously Empty Lots This Morning.

And Of Course, They Had the Opportunity to Stuff Their Faces After.

Al Gore Can Kiss My A$$

2008-12-18T17:13:00.000-08:00

One of the reasons I moved here from Michigan was to get away from winter weather. Snow fall in Western Washington is not unheard of, but it does happen. This was the view out my back deck 20 minutes ago.

I understand. In Michigan, this is nothing. In Western Washington? This is a disaster, lots of steep inclines and declines, and no salt + lots of idiots who don't have a clue how to drive in it = something sane people do not want to drive in.

Wisdom of Solomon It Ain't

2008-12-09T12:17:00.000-08:00

Lefties are so cute when they declare themselves knowledgeable about things they do not understand. For example, this article in Newsweek, which purports to show that the Bible does not contain any prohibition of gay marriage, the implication being of course that all of we evil Christofacist thugs are all so stupid that we cannot even interpret our scripture correctly, and once again, it is up to the more refined lefties among us to spend 10 minutes reading the Bible, finding passages that appear to justify their agenda, and hold forth for us rubes to drink deep of their intellectual prowess and wisdom. Kind of like when the Algore tells us "The debate is over" in reference to his ~~lucrative business selling modern-day indulgences for sins against Mother Gaia~~ Global Warming. It wouldn't be quite so frustrating if these idiots didn't have the bully pulpit all to themselves as a way to ensnare the sheeple in their particular brand of bias that I like to think of as "Through a cracked lens, darkly." It reminds me of something one of my unofficial scoutmasters used to say: "The Devil can quote you scripture all day long." How true he was. I can almost hear this particular author reciting this prayer before penning this lovely piece of propaganda:

"Oh dear Lord, whom I do not believe in, please let me find the words that I can interpret the way that I want, so that I can tell those evil Christofacist thugs that their precious book doesn't say what they say it says, and so I can be absolved of any sin or shame for my chapped lips and anal fissures, and my cheating on my partner with that guy from the bar the other night, and go on with the belief that God is love only, and that there is nothing expected of me to hold up my end of the bargain of salvation, which I do not believe in anyway. Amen."

Newsweek has finally dropped to the level of birdcage lining for me.

Have Another Helping of Idiotic With That Turkey?

2008-11-26T12:38:00.001-08:00

In the latest of our dispatches from tree-hugger land, we have this inspired piece of work from the Redmond Reporter, demonstrating further why the dead tree media is on the decline.

Be thankful, but true to our past

Nov 26 2008, 12:00 AM · NEW

On the fourth Thursday of every November, Americans pig out to the fullest extent while ignoring the sins of the past.

I guess I missed the part where I might somehow need to feel responsibility for things that occurred before I was born. I guess more time in the soon-to-be erected "re-education" camps will teach me where I went so tragically wrong.

Teachers have long since squashed the myth that Christopher Columbus sailed to America to prove the world was round, but some still perpetuate the myth that he was the peaceful discoverer of the American continent.

You found a school where Columbus was still part of the curriculum? That in itself is a miracle in these days of revisionist hate America first pap that you spoon feed to our children at every opportunity.

Columbus, in fact, was the precursor to a mass genocide.

gen-o-cide [jen-uh-sahyd]

–noun the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.

Origin:
1940–45; < Gk géno(s) race + -cide
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc.

Considering that a 'precursor" is something that comes before, does that mean all of the revised histories will again have to be re-written? You know, the ones that call Columbus a murderer? Really, it is starting to get like we need a scorecard to keep track of these things any more. And Genocide? When was there ever a concerted effort on behalf of all Europeans here in the New World to systematically exterminate all living peoples? I'm fairly well versed in history, and I really don't remember coming across anything resembling a stated policy or governmental mandate to eradicate all indigenous peoples from North America. Can you say "flawed premise"? I knew you could.

More than 100 years later, the Pilgrims arrived peacefully to participate in the first Thanksgiving dinner. But, instead they opened the door to more death and destruction of the Native Americans.

Except that if it wasn't the Pilgrims, it would have been someone else. Mankind tends to stretch out in many different directions, but it really was a very skillful attempt to paint those evil Christofascist Pilgrims as murdering monsters, set on building their homes on the bones of unfortunate Indian children. Well, except for the part where I pointed out that the facts don't support the impression created. Sorry about that.

Eventually, they became the minority, captives in their own land. You can bet, they were never thankful for the famine, war, death, and plagues brought on by the Europeans.

Yeah, because they never had famine, war, death, or plagues before the Europeans came. Everybody knows that those were strictly inventions of the evil Europeans used to subjugate lands that they were not born to. All those tribes that warred with and killed each other, some times enslaving, but more frequently seeking extinction? How do you explain them? Famine? The phrase "hunger moon" did not arrive with the Europeans. Plagues? Disease does not exist in a vacuum. Simple reading in the field of epidemiology should be sufficient to convince you of this. And, since you are so blindingly ignorant of history, you might want to read up on the origins of swine flu...the native people's gift to Europeans, and the effects that it had.

Thanksgiving was a holiday created by President Abraham Lincoln to give Americans something to be thankful for during the Civil War. People can be thankful for a lot of things, but genocide should not be one of them.

Actually, the origins appear to reach back to St. Augustine in Florida, and then the Virgina and Massachusetts Colony. The Internet is a wonderful research tool. I suggest you use it to educate yourself on the true meaning of a holiday before you project your unreasonable self-loathing on the celebration of an entire nation. Yes, I know. You are not willing to let facts interfere with a serious bit of navel-gazing self-righteousness.

How can something so devastating as genocide become so overshadowed by a national holiday? Even if it happened centuries ago, a subject like genocide is something that should not be ignored no matter when it happened.

I'm not sure that such a thing can occur. I certainly have not witnessed where the Germans have a day where they load their tables with sausages and sauerkraut to celebrate the Holocaust. But then, that would be because the Holocaust was an actual, you know, genocide.

So this Thanksgiving you can be thankful for the money in your pocket or the freedom you have, but just remember the indigenous “Americans” who yearned for that freedom first.

Ok, now I'm confused. First you use the word "genocide" like a bludgeon, arguing passionately for the requirement that I feel guilt for a "genocide" that never happened, and I certainly had nothing to do with, and now you imply that our nation denied these people their 'freedoms'. They do not teach coherency in journalism course anymore, do they?

This Thanksgiving, we should be careful of what we’re grateful for.

Why this Thanksgiving? Why not last Thanksgiving? Why not next Thanksgiving? I refuse to let the triumph of form over substance that occurred in our recent Presidential election make me ashamed of being an American, or of the history of our nation, and being dictated to by sanctimonious dimwits such as yourself tends to reinforce the feeling. Somewhere, Zig Zigler is laughing hysterically at your flawed sales technique.

America, taken brutally from the natives already happily settled, built on the backs of slaves, and made powerful through numerous wars, has a bloody history.

Taken brutally from natives happily settled? You need to brush up on your native american histories. Tribes wiping entire tribes out. Enslaving others? Brutally attacking settlers who's only crime was moving into land that did not appear to be occupied. And bloody? Read some of the accounts of the French and Indian War. The tomahawk is not known for making a 'clean' wound. Built on the backs of slaves? If there was even a scintilla of truth to this assertion, then how is it that the north, with its noted absence of slaves, managed to win the Civil War? Anybody? Anybody? Bueller? Compare the numbers of Americans killed in the Civil War compared to any other conflict our nation has been in, and then try to make your case for bloody.

Nearly everything Americans have to be thankful for has hurt someone else along the way.

You're right. We hurt the Axis Powers...the ones who declared war on us, when we defeated them in WWII. We hurt the North Korean communists when they attempted to brutally repress their countrymen in South Korea. Ditto for the North Vietnamese. We hurt the man in the moon with the moon landings. We hurt the eastern bloc countries when we won the Cold War and they won their freedom. We hurt Sadam Hussein when we pushed him out of Kuwait and back into his own country. We hurt him again when we removed him from power so he could no longer arbitrarily and capriciously kill Iraquis who displeased him. We hurt the whole world with velcro, microwave ovens, incandescent light, the automobile, the zipper, refrigeration, the airplane, manned spaceflight, steel, and the various advances to existing technologies and processes that the Americans are responsible for bringing to the world. We hurt other people when we put our unique take on liberty and freedom and put it into writing. We hurt other people when we breathed life into those words with the sacrifices of our brave citizens as they fell time and again on foreign shores bringing those freedoms to lands that had previously only know tyranny.

The thought behind Thanksgiving is a pure and good one – set a day apart when we gather with family and friends and remember all the many things we have to be thankful for.

And to remember other times...some good, some bad, but always to be thankful for the providence that God has blessed this nation with, and the family and friends that we are fortunate enough to spend time with, regardless of all other circumstances, past, present, and future.

And we Americans have a lot to be thankful for.

Amen. Something we can both agree on. How did that happen?

The problem isn’t what we remember; rather, the problem is what we forget.

No, the problem is that you assume that because I don't engage in a lot of silly handwringing about things that I had nothing to do with, I need the benefit of your preachy admonition.

Americans simply don’t think about the people they have to step on to get where they are. This Thanksgiving, don’t make that mistake.

Insulting and stupid. If we are indelibly stained by any misdeeds that may have been committed by our fathers and grandfathers, then I submit to you that the rest of the world has as much or more to answer for than this great nation, yet I don't see you on your soapbox wagging your finger at any other country. Why is that?

Freedom is wonderful. By all means, be grateful for it. Enjoy that turkey dinner and be thankful for our freedom, friends and family.

Thank you. I intend to.

Just don’t forget about all the people who don’t get to be grateful for American freedom.

I'm confused. Did we change the subject of your outrage screed again? Because if they live here, they get the same freedoms you and I do. If they don't, then maybe they can aspire to it where they are, and that would be a good thing.

I'm thankful that your wretched 'opinion piece' was mercifully short. I would have been more thankful if you could have checked your "Hate America First" attitude before writing it and instead penned a thoughtful, factually based piece that would have treated thanks and pride as the centerpiece, rather than a half-hearted afterthought, tossed out to deflect any deserved criticism of your page of bile.

Adrift on a Sea of Stupid

2008-11-22T09:29:00.000-08:00

Have you ever been in the grip of the belief that it just didn't matter? Rightly or wrongly, this is how I have felt in the last few weeks. And every day, I get a little bit more to make me think that way. The video of the Obama voters who couldn't identify the speaker of astonishingly stupid Obamaisms. Glenn Beck's random calls to people, asking them pointed questions about government, politics,and the economy. We are adrift on a sea of stupid. More and more, I am convinced that we have brought about C.M. Kornbluth's Marching Morons, and the shrinking numbers of intelligent people will soon be tasked (unofficially, of course) with the burden of making the world work so the rest of the world doesn't just start dying off wholesale from their stupidity and making the rest of us choke on the odor of their own decay.

Right now it is very cold comfort to know exactly where the blame for this all lies. The left, in its insatiable quest for power in exchange for the individual's self-sufficiency appears poised to get exactly what they have plotted and schemed and worked for over the course of decades. Of course, being fixated on the goal for so long, it is clear that they have given very little thought to what it actually means. I'd pity them for their tunnel vision and the coming brainduster to be administered by our old friend, The Law Of Unintended Consequences™, but since they have destroyed a once great nation by cutting all ties with its moral roots and catering to the fickle and shortsighted nature of human emotion, I believe I'll just stoke a low fire of contempt for them instead. They will soon be able to declare that the reward of individuality that has been the great genius of this country have given way to the primacy of the lowest common denominator. Rather than aspiring to greatness, we can be enslaved to the service of the least of us. And when the left's intelligentsia comes to the inevitable conclusion that there is nothing to be gained from blaming the ultimate result of their policies on conservatism, they will finally be fully aware of what responsibilities come with the leadership of a nanny state that is hostile to innovation, freedom, and excellence.

I think about this a lot these days as I watch the Hopey-Changey One fill his cabinet with Clinton retreads. No change, no hope. Only the inevitable march toward mediocrity and national malaise that it will bring. But I guess after surveying the collective awareness of the country, maybe we did get the government we deserve. Maybe others will be considering more in the coming days.

The Right To See Things Your Way...Even If You Force It Down My Throat.

2008-11-18T12:28:00.000-08:00

Watching the fallout from the Prop 8 vote in California has been disturbing. For anyone who has been living under a rock, the voters of California got to vote on whether to keep or get rid of their court-mandate right for gays to marry. And by a very surprising margin, the voters elected to get rid of it. The result? The rainbow and pink swastika brigades have taken it upon themselves to riot, vandalize, assault, and intimidate those who do not share their "tolerant" and "enlightened" views. This has included venom-laced invective directed against the Mormon church, which was a major contributor to the "No" campaign, leaving burning Books of Mormon at the entry ways to Mormon temples, marching and assaulting those who express different viewpoints, and "outing" and harassing various donors to the "No" campaign. I suspect that this behavior is influencing people, but not in the way that the "activists" would like. The sad thing is that in addition to sabotaging their interests, they will eventually endanger themselves by deciding to assault someone who won't be as forgiving as most of the Christians they have made a point of bullying up to this point. Unfortunately, this outbreak of asshattery is not confined to the gay and lesbian community. It is part of a larger trend of "thugocracy" which is casting its shadow across the country in the names of "Change" and "Enlightenment".

We saw this during the Presidential campaign. Joe the Plumber asks a question, and in two days, every detail of his life is laid bare, when we still knew so little about the candidate that he dared to question. When critics of Obama were scheduled to be interviewed, supporters rallied and swamped radio/TV stations with calls, threatening the stations and repeating any lie or smear to discredit the speaker. Like it or not, this was leading by example, and is an unsettling herald of the age of Obama. Now there are rumblings about a return of the Fairness Doctrine. I was and remain skeptical. I have read the court cases. There is even less justification, in the age of cable TV and satellite radio for such an overbearing imposition of federal authority. Especially when the other side has begun to grow bold enough to abandon spin in favor of fiction. However, since the left is now so emboldened, and feeling the power gained from the skillful employment of fiction, I can concede that they may well try it. After all, the acolytes of Algore and the fable of global warming have been thuggishly enforcing their rigid dogma on the scientific community and lately by extension, national governments for sometime now, regardless of the size or weight of inconvenient facts to the contrary of their new religion. But they have of course, felt justified. They are, afterall, saving us from ourselves, right. And pay no attention to the enormous profits to be reaped from the practice of selling carbon credit ~~indulgences~~ offsets.

The point I'm coming to is this: There is a growing movement among the left that says that the rest of us are not smart enough to decide for ourselves what is right. We aren't 'tolerant' enough. We aren't 'diverse' enough. We don't do enough for the planet, and therefore it is up to them, those who see themselves as both smarter and morally superior to us, to save us from ourselves, and they see nothing wrong with forcing us to see it their way. The lump on the back of my head is ok if Steve and Bob can get 'married'. It is ok to question authority, as long as it doesn't come with a (D) after its name. The job I used to have and the standard of living I once knew and wanted to pass to my children is an acceptable sacrifice, as long as it slows the rate of global warming that isn't really occurring...and its OK for Algore himself to have a carbon footprint the size of Godzilla on steroids because he buys those ~~indulgences~~ offsets himself as he is trying to save the planet from the evviiillll humans. All the behaviors the left has accused the right of committing for the last four years are those the left currently engages in now. I have been talking for a while about the Great Pushback™. It seems to me that there is a growing restlessness on the right and it won't take too much more to trigger the pushback. And on that terrible day, I don't think I'd want to be standing on the left, because I don't believe the left will be standing for long.

The ONE Will Be Deprived of Divine Communication.

2008-11-16T13:45:00.000-08:00

An amusing story from the NYTimes...Apparently they haven't shut the doors yet...

WASHINGTON — Sorry, Mr. President. Please surrender your BlackBerry.

BLACKberry???? THAT'S JUST RACIST!!!!!!11!!

Those are seven words President-elect Barack Obama is dreading but expecting to hear, friends and advisers say, when he takes office in 65 days.

Peasants! He is THE ONE!!! He dreads nothing!!!

For years, like legions of other professionals, Mr. Obama has been all but addicted to his BlackBerry. The device has rarely been far from his side — on most days, it was fastened to his belt — to provide a singular conduit to the outside world as the bubble around him grew tighter and tighter throughout his campaign.

It must have annoyed his campaign gurus to no end...a source of info that wasn't filtered through them. Maybe it was one of his Ayers-educated friends who talked to him about the 57 states?

“How about that?” Mr. Obama replied to a friend’s congratulatory e-mail message on the night of his victory.

"There really are that many foolish people voting in this country. We didn't even need the votes we had ACORN stealing for us."

But before he arrives at the White House, he will probably be forced to sign off. In addition to concerns about e-mail security, he faces the Presidential Records Act, which puts his correspondence in the official record and ultimately up for public review, and the threat of subpoenas. A decision has not been made on whether he could become the first e-mailing president, but aides said that seemed doubtful.

Oh snap! Now we are going to have a newly recovering addict in the oval office...a guy just jonesin' for his daily fix of IM'ing on yahoo, or the BBF at The Hostages. And he'll have access to the nuclear codes. Just sayin', s'all.

For all the perquisites and power afforded the president, the chief executive of the United States is essentially deprived by law and by culture of some of the very tools that other chief executives depend on to survive and to thrive. Mr. Obama, however, seems intent on pulling the office at least partly into the 21st century on that score; aides said he hopes to have a laptop computer on his desk in the Oval Office, making him the first American president to do so.

And I'm sure that there are several laptop makers vying for the privilege of saying that it is their hardware which is preferred by the ONE.

Mr. Obama has not sent a farewell dispatch from the personal e-mail account he uses — he has not changed his address in years — but friends say the frequency of correspondence has diminished. In recent days, though, he has been seen typing his thoughts on transition matters and other items on his BlackBerry, bypassing, at least temporarily, the bureaucracy that is quickly encircling him.

"Now that we made him the President, he never writes, he never calls..." But at least he is typing his thoughts on it still. How wonderful for all involved!

A year ago, when many Democratic contributors and other observers were worried about his prospects against Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, they reached out to him directly. Mr. Obama had changed his cellphone number, so e-mail remained the most reliable way of communicating directly with him.

Thus demonstrating something that the rest of us on the web learned a long time ago. It pays to have the "public" email address, and the "private" email address.

“His BlackBerry was constantly crackling with e-mails,” said David Axelrod, the campaign’s chief strategist. “People were generous with their advice — much of it conflicting.”

"Crackling"? Now I just have a lowly Motorola, and IM/Text will only a few choice persons, but if my electronic communication device "Crackled", I would change the chime, or GET A NEW ONE. No wonder he and Michelle are always shouting at us. They have no nerves left after hearing the damn thing crackle all the time.

Mr. Obama is the second president to grapple with the idea of this self-imposed isolation. Three days before his first inauguration, George W. Bush sent a message to 42 friends and relatives that explained his predicament.

Maybe he can use the cleaning staff to smuggle messages back and forth between himself and Bombing Billy Ayers.

“Since I do not want my private conversations looked at by those out to embarrass, the only course of action is not to correspond in cyberspace,” Mr. Bush wrote from his old address, G94B@aol.com. “This saddens me. I have enjoyed conversing with each of you.”

Thus ruling out the Clinton Precedent of having people meet with accidents when they become inconvenient.

But in the interceding eight years, as BlackBerrys have become ubiquitous — and often less intrusive than a telephone, the volume of e-mail has multiplied and the role of technology has matured. Mr. Obama used e-mail to stay in constant touch with friends from the lonely confines of the road, often sending messages like “Sox!” when the Chicago White Sox won a game. He also relied on e-mail to keep abreast of the rapid whirl of events on a given campaign day.

But now that he has ascended to office, he can feel free to communicate through his mental telepathy, when he isn't using to root out those who resist his onerous brand of "Hope" and "Change".

Mr. Obama’s memorandums and briefing books were seldom printed out and delivered to his house or hotel room, aides said. They were simply sent to his BlackBerry for his review. If a document was too long, he would read and respond from his laptop computer, often putting his editing changes in red type.

In otherwords, he acted like a "newstyle" attorney. Less to shred, but God help you if you get hacked.

His messages to advisers and friends, they say, are generally crisp, properly spelled and free of symbols or emoticons. The time stamps provided a window into how much he was sleeping on a given night, with messages often being sent to staff members at 1 a.m. or as late as 3 a.m. if he was working on an important speech.

I tend to think that if he can email all the time without an emoticon, then he probably isn't a very complex person...not that I find that very surprising. The singular drawback of email is that there is no facial expression or body language to be read. That rules out humor, sarcasm, and irony, which any "executive" worth the title will have in their quiver of arrows.

He received a scaled-down list of news clippings, with his advisers wanting to keep him from reading blogs and news updates all day long, yet aides said he still seemed to hear about nearly everything in real time. A network of friends — some from college, others from Chicago and various chapters in his life — promised to keep him plugged in.

I understand. When I do not get to read my normal daily blogroll, I get a little testy myself.

Not having such a ready line to that network, staff members who spent countless hours with him say, is likely to be a challenge.

Kind of like a heroin addict needing a fix kind of challenge. Good luck to them.

“Given how important it is for him to get unfiltered information from as many sources as possible, I can imagine he will miss that freedom,” said Linda Douglass, a senior adviser who traveled with the campaign.

Again, I'm not surprised. I'm not so foolish as to believe that there is any source of information that doesn't come with a bias; I just want to be able to select the bias. He's losing that choice.

Mr. Obama has, for at least brief moments, been forced offline. As he sat down with a small circle of advisers to prepare for debates with Senator John McCain, one rule was quickly established: No BlackBerrys. Mr. Axelrod ordered everyone to put their devices in the center of a table during work sessions. Mr. Obama, who was known to sneak a peek at his, was no exception.

A big difference between a meeting and years.

In the closing stages of the campaign, as exhaustion set in and the workload increased, aides said Mr. Obama spent more time reading than responding to messages. As his team prepares a final judgment on whether he can keep using e-mail, perhaps even in a read-only fashion, several authorities in presidential communication said they believed it was highly unlikely that he would be able to do so.

Duh!!! His time is no longer his own.

Diana Owen, who leads the American Studies program at Georgetown University, said presidents were not advised to use e-mail because of security risks and fear that messages could be intercepted.

Besides, its always better to have his surrogates communicating with Hamas. That way he can continue to toss the bodies under the bus when convenient.

“They could come up with some bulletproof way of protecting his e-mail and digital correspondence, but anything can be hacked,” said Ms. Owen, who has studied how presidents communicate in the Internet era. “The nature of the president’s job is that others can use e-mail for him.”

And as long as someone else is talking to Hamas, it isn't his problem.

She added: “It’s a time burner. It might be easier for him to say, ‘I can’t be on e-mail.’ ”

Should Mr. Obama want to break ground and become the first president to fire off e-mail messages from the West Wing and wherever he travels, he could turn to Al Gore as a model. In the later years of his vice presidency, Democrats said, Mr. Gore used a government e-mail address and a campaign address in his race against Mr. Bush.

Yeah, copy from Algore...that's inspired!!!

The president, though, faces far greater public scrutiny. And even if he does not wear a BlackBerry on his belt or carry a cellphone in his pocket, he almost certainly will not lack from a variety of new communication.

Even better! Hook him on something new, so you can take that away from him, too in a few years. Cruel Bastages!

On Saturday, as Mr. Obama broadcast the weekly Democratic radio address, it came with a twist. For the first time, it was also videotaped and will be archived on YouTube.

Not exactly the Sermon on the Mount, but wow! They will get the word out.

And From The Lastest CD in the Car...

2008-11-16T13:17:00.000-08:00

I love this band, although in reading up on them, I think it is fair to say it is all about her, since she is the constant and the rest of the line up continues to change. Best heard through the car stereo. Turned up so the bass is rattling the mirrors, of course.

A Song For A Sunday Afternoon

2008-11-16T13:01:00.000-08:00

The thing I love about youtube is sooner or later, everything ends up on it. Like this little ditty. I stumbled on this song when I was 35 and I find that it speaks volumes to me. You might consider it my theme song.

Jars of Clay singing their reflection on the human condition, Trouble Is:

Reports of My Demise Have Been Greatly Exaggerated...

2008-11-14T18:07:00.000-08:00

...so put my stuff down, dammit. You can't have it yet.

Seriously, I was just kind of on chill mode in the aftermath of the election. While some things never change (politicians lie and do things that they shouldn't or are suspicious), sometimes I have to step back for a bit and reset my focus. The problem with doing that is that I then start asking all sorts of uncomfortable questions. I can direct the first one to my fellow conservatives. Hey! You guys! WTF??? I mean, WTF??? Have you listened to yourselves? Zero hasn't taken office yet, and still, any utterance is treated as a done deal. Yeah, I read about his plan for compulsory voluntary service, and his civilian army that he wants to have better funded than the real Army. But right now, its just that. A plan. Yes, I know that his party will have a majority in Congress, and yeah, I know party leaders are so far left that they bleed hammers and sickles, but not everyone in Congress is an idiot. These people will remind the others of the little problems they have with their plans, like the 13th Amendment. Then there was the howling over the memory-holing of the detailed agenda on his website. Duh. What do you think would happen if he actually tried to rule from the left, where that agenda sat,instead of from the center? Yeah. That's what I thought. As for the analysis of every single word, and every announcement? I see us sounding like THEM. I'm not saying that we do not need to be vigilant. I'm not saying we need to trust him. I'm not saying that he isn't out to revoke the 2nd Amendment and change our government. I'm not an idiot. I am saying the pointing and howling at every little thing is not really worthwhile. Having solid plans to react to certain activities? That is worthwhile. Speaking out when he is clearly wrong? That is worthwhile. Ridiculing every moronic move made? Worthwhile and satisfying. I'm not saying that criticism is bad. You should know me better than that. What I am saying is that it won't hurt to wait until he and the Keystone Kommunists in Kongress actually DO SOMETHING.

On a lighter note, I spent the day getting Continuing Legal Education credits in Tacoma. It was an unusual CLE. They actually fed us real a breakfast and lunch. I also learned more about issues to address when your client inherits real estate that may be polluted.

All better now? Good, 'cause you were all starting to sound like KosKids.

Veterans Day

2008-11-11T08:43:00.000-08:00

To all who served:
Thank You.

As counterpoints to the chin-stroking pseudo-intellectual just elected...

2008-11-08T18:58:00.000-08:00

...bring you the Five most badassed Presidents ever elected, courtesy of a fellow Captive of the Hostages, TatooedIntellectual.

*****SPEW ALERT****

Moving Forward

2008-11-07T18:52:00.000-08:00

I have to say that I am a bit surprised.

Many of my internet friends have expressed that they are going to proceed to vilify and condemn the new President just because of the crap that left has spewed 24/7 for the last eight years. This exhibition of Obama Derangement Syndrome is disturbing, not because I think he is going to be a great President. If you have been reading my page for very long, you know that isn't true. No, I find it disturbing because people that I respect, people I like, people I consider very rational and logical have apparently lost their minds and have expressed a willingness to attack purely for the sake of attack. I have seen a threat of the banhammer leveled at a commenter who I think fails to get it consistently, but is worthwhile because he will actually debate and defend what he says, simply because he expressed an opinion, that while apparently idiotic, was not worthy of such an attack, especially in a forum where the one true sin is making threats against another. I watched as person after person pledged to exhibit symptoms of ODS starting now simply because all we have heard is BDS for the last 8 years. And this was coming from people who generally had feelings for Bush the vacillated between outrage at his positions on spending and border security/illegal immigration and indifference on nearly everything else. Now, I like a good dogpile as much as the next right-wing deathbeast, but I am disturbed by this willingness to spend so much time in wasted effort. 8 years of these loons spouting endless stupidity and venom about Bush did nothing to change our minds; there is no reason to think doing the same about Obama for the next four will achieve a different result. That is not to say that I will not generously apply ridicule and criticism in liberal doses when Barry the Blessed™ screws it up. That is my right as an American, and he seems to have gotten there already with his plans for mandatory "volunteer" service and taking a swipe at Nancy Reagan at a press conference. Congratulations there, speedy, way to demonstrate that brilliant intellect that we keep hearing so much about.

Having said that, I think we are further ahead doing the following:

1. Get behind young conservative politicians. Do what it takes to get them elected, support them if they have already been elected. We have to stop putting up candidates who are getting the nomination as a lifetime achievement award. (I wish I remembered where I heard that. I would love to give the attribution.)

2. Continue to support conservative principals.

3. Criticize the foibles of the left's leadership, but stay on message, and keep it so simple that even an Obama supporter like Peggy Joseph can understand it.

4. Educate, educate, educate.

5. Make the mainstream media irrelevant. They are on the ropes already, but we can put them under by continuing to report the news that they won't.

I started some of this already. Today, I dropped a three-page handwritten letter in the mail to Governor Palin. I thanked her for her decision to run, I thanked her for shattering the Left's carefully cultivated perception that we need to have a ruling class, and I thanked her and her family for dealing with some truly uncalled for and inexcusable attacks leveled at her and her family. Then I asked her to run again, because I truly believe that she is an excellent leader and is well qualified to run the country.

What's it gonna be guys and gals? Our own change we can believe in, or the same song only us singing it?

I Love This Guy.

2008-11-06T21:32:00.000-08:00

Diversity Rears Its Ugly Head Again

2008-11-06T20:03:00.000-08:00

I was flipping through the local legal journal this week, and came across a charming little tidbit on our State Supreme Court supporting a new initiative in the legal community of our state. It seems that someone got looking around and determined that the legal community did not represent the diverse make up the state's population, and since our bar is always quick to embrace notions of diversity and political correctness, it was decided that SOMETHING MUST BE DONE! That something was the spontaneous formation of a consensus that we must diversify the legal community to reflect the population of the state, or PEOPLE WOULD LOSE CONFIDENCE IN THE PROFESSION. Therefore, the state supreme court, and prominent members of the bar set up a group to help make this a reality, and even established guidelines to help smaller law firms meet this perceived need for diversity.

Fortunately, the measures are voluntary, for the time being, but I fully expect that we have them mandated to us sooner than I'd like. Why does this bother me? Because if diversity is forced upon us, we lose our freedom of association...I don't get to chose who I do business with, and the diversity will become a moral imperative to override such factors as, say....merit?

I am very tired of an organization that compells my membership requiring me at every turn to accept doctrines and beliefs that I find personally, professionally, and yes, morally repugnant.

For You Eyeores Out There

2008-11-05T09:08:00.001-08:00

Thanks to Dirty Harry.

NSFW

...

2008-11-04T20:54:00.000-08:00

I'm going to get this part of it out of the way first:

To the Obama supporters, do not come crying on my shoulders when the Government's sticky fingers, emboldened by your Dear Leader, and lengthened by Pelosi, Reid, and a Democratically controlled Congress unleash a confiscatory process the likes of which has not been seen in decades upon your wallets, your 401(k)s, your IRAs, and your wages.

Do not come crying into my presence when you realize you traded your potential for what your government decides to let you have.

Do not weep in my hearing when you realize the "fairness" of the HOPE! and CHANGE! you sought places us all in the tyranny of mediocrity, an equality not of opportunity but of condition, which will lower more than it raises.

Do not sniffle in my arm's reach when you discover that some are more equal than others.

We warned you. We told you at every opportunity, and you refused to see.

I went into a Cub Scout meeting this evening, and came out to find that Americans had rejected their birthright. No longer content to be the pioneers and cowboys that changed the world, we have chosen to serve a government, rather than choosing a government that serves us.

To those who supported Obama, congratulations. We get the government we deserve. You don't realize yet what that means, but you will. To those of us who see the man for what he is, rather than what he wants us to see, take heart. Without Jimmy Carter, we could not have had a Ronald Reagan. The eagle took a beating tonight, but our symbol is not a chicken, or lemming.

The eagle will soar again.

I Can See That The Press Still Wants To Be Irresponsible

2008-11-04T09:27:00.000-08:00

Thanks to my brother Alex, I got to read the NY Times Article about the press still calling the election before the voting is done. The RCOB moment:

Similarly, the editor of the Web site Slate, David Plotz, said in an e-mail message that “if Obama is winning heavily,” he could see calling the race “sometime between 8 and 9.”

“Our readers are not stupid, and we shouldn’t engage in a weird Kabuki drama that pretends McCain could win California and thus the presidency,” Mr. Plotz wrote. “We will call it when a sensible person — not a TV news anchor who has to engage in a silly pretense about West Coast voters — would call it.”

This would be the same Slate that jumped on the bandwagon of anyone not voting for Obama being "RACIST!!!1!!", so we no how authoritative and impartial they are.

As one of those West Coast voters, suggest that Mr. Plotz go play in traffic. Blindfolded.

I Earned My Right To Continue Speaking Out

2008-11-04T09:02:00.000-08:00

After getting the boys out the door and fixing my hair, I got in the car and drove to my polling place. I stood in line, and before long, an elderly black gentleman in an "Obama for President" shirt and a Purple Heart baseball cap came up and stood next to the front door, so everyone could see his shirt. An older gentleman in line in front of me looked at the RCW section posted on the door, and said to the other man standing by the door "You're standing too close."
The elderly black gentleman pretended not to hear. The gentleman repeated himself. This time the elderly black gentleman said "I paid my dues, sir."
The gentleman said "I never said you didn't, but the law says you have to stand 300 feet away from the polls." A poll worker saw what was going on and told the elderly black gentleman that he was violating the law and standing too close to the door. They needed more voters from the back half of the alphabet, so I went in. He wasn't there when I came out. If I see him on the 11 o'clock news bitching about "being intimidated at the polls", I just might scream.

The Long View

2008-11-03T18:51:00.000-08:00

I realize that it is probably early for this, but the featured quote below struck me more than I was ready to admit. Dirty Harry has a post on the Breitbart article on Bush's legacy. DH's wife added this insight:

In defending Bush, Breitbart hits the main points, but there’s something my wife frequently reminds me of: Between world events, the monstrous behavior of the opposition and an unrelenting biased media, no president since Lincoln has ever been so personally vilified. Eight years of sustained poison and venom hurled at a man never allowed to do anything right even when he does something right.

I had never thought of it that way before, but I can see the wisdom in the comparison.

Celebrating Barbarity

2008-11-03T15:57:00.000-08:00

The AP still refuses to pay bloggers who direct traffic to their stories, but once again, the story is worth noting, so I guess I'll just put this on their tab. The Iranians are celebrating their take over of our embassy in 1979, by letting kids out of school to chant, and burn U.S. and Isreali flags.

They continue to justify this act of war by declaring the act the end of U.S. hegemony in the world and an act of defiance. The money quotes:

Today, some of Iran's leaders see Barack Obama as a harbinger of much-wanted change in U.S. policy toward their government. Iranian state radio broadcast a commentary Monday in a positive spin toward the Democrat.

"Obama entered the race under the slogan of change," it said. "The American people expect their government to put aside neo-conservative policy of unilateralism and return to dialogue in their dealings with the international community."

Game. Set. And Match.

The Press Tells Diogenes, "Baby, Put Out That Lamp, and Come To Bed. I Got What You Need."

2008-11-03T15:54:00.000-08:00

Free sex toys — and much more — for voting
Businesses across nation ready to reward citizens for casting their ballots
By Mike Stuckey
Senior news editor
msnbc.com

Just when you thought it was safe to focus on the issues in this historic election season, a chain of sex toy shops has joined retailers, restaurateurs and other businesses across the nation in the time-honored tradition of rewarding Americans who go to the polls.

Because nothing makes me think of sex like politics.

Babeland, with stores in New York, Los Angeles and Seattle, is offering a pair of self-gratifying incentives for voters who present their registration cards, ballot stubs or “word of honor” that they voted next Tuesday.

How will they deal with multiple stubs from the ACORN-registered voters?

The rewards are no-so-subtle reminders of this year’s campaign rhetoric. For men, it’s the “Maverick,” a "sleeve" for self-pleasuring. According to a press release, “He’s always there to lend a hand, he works for every man, and he bucks the status quo.” Women can choose the “Silver Bullet” mini-vibrator, which is “a magical solution to difficult problems” and “a great stress-reliever during these troubled economic times!” The promotion lasts through Nov. 11.

The idea for an Obama-related toy was abandoned. No one has yet found a way to successfully sell being slipped a mickey, and waking up alone and sticky in a hotel room with an empty wallet. They can always consult David Axelrod after the campaign. He seems to have found a way to successfully sell something similar.

Babeland spokeswoman Pamela Doan told msnbc.com in an interview that the promotion is a first for the company, which she describes as “a sex-positive, women-friendly retailer for sex toys and accessories.”

I don't think anyone is truly "sex-adverse", although more than a few of us would prefer not having it occur within sight of our children, especially when its guy-guy- or girl-girl.

Although the company is relying on press releases and bloggers to get the word out, “We’re expecting a good response,” Doan said. “Both of these toys are very popular. The Maverick retails for $20 and the Silver Bullet retails for $15. It’s a good reward.”

I think there is a message here somewhere...something about getting screwed by an important act and still having to do all the work.

'Sex crosses party lines'
As to whether Babeland expects voters who take them up on the offer to lean one way or the other politically, Doan said, “Sex crosses party lines. … We’ve tried to make this into a nonpartisan reward because we welcome everyone. That’s our philosophy and our mission. We didn’t want to reward only Obama supporters. We have a lot of Republicans who shop at Babeland too.”

Actually a smart thing. They cater to a universal market. I wonder how much they'll dig an Obama tax scheme.

If the sex toys don’t float your vote, there are plenty of other less racy rewards to choose from in the afterglow of casting your ballot.

"Afterglow?" Voting conjures many different concepts in my mind, but it has never made me orgasmic. I think the author is going to choke on his own purple prose.

How about a free cup of Joe? Starbucks stores across the nation and Eat’n Park outlets in Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia are among many U.S. restaurants offering complimentary coffee to anyone who presents a ballot stub or “I Voted” sticker.

I like the whole "incentive for voting" thing, but I do it 'cause its important, not because Starbucks will give me a bitter cup of coffee for my trouble.

Voters can get a beer on the house at Todd Conner’s pub in Baltimore’s historic Fells Point neighborhood.

I predict he'll have a busy night.

FRED! has a few things to say about this election and the guy running for Socialist-In-Chief

2008-11-02T09:18:00.000-08:00

Part Two

H/T to NiceDeb

I Wish I Could Say I Am Shocked...

2008-11-02T08:45:00.000-08:00

She'll be among those crying the hardest when the nasty surprises flow forth when Barry The Blessed™'s mask slips.

H/T to Pajamma Momma at The Hostages.

An Object Lesson...For Both Sides

2008-11-02T08:28:00.000-08:00

From the evil AP, who still refuses to pay bloggers for directing traffic to their pathetic excuse for a news organization comes a story of a Grosse Pointe Woods resident who refused to give Halloween treats to "Obama supporters, liars, tricksters or kids of supporters."

Naturally, this story is so newsworthy that the AP had to report on it. It was after all a lesson for such people in choices. You make a choice that will take away from me, I can do the same. But my absolute favorite part?

"When asked about children who were turned away empty-handed and crying,"

That damn sense of entitlement rears its ugly head again. Turned away crying? Seems like a bit much to me. Last time I looked, we still had a choice about who we share our bounty with. Another reason to look forward to Obama's HOPE! and CHANGE!, I guess. Mandatory Halloween Candy for all!

Visions From My Pensieve

2008-11-01T18:32:00.000-07:00

The post from Wednesday has taken some interesting turns. I had a client in my office yesterday, and of course, the conversation turned to politics. I told him "Hold on, I wrote and posted on my internet site the other day something that I think you might like." and I printed off a copy of Wednesday's post. I handed it to him, he scanned it for two seconds, and he said "I have this. Somebody emailed it to me." I looked at him with shock, and said "Really?"
He said "Yeah. I know this guy up in Arlington, and he's emailing it to people."
To that I say "Guy in Arlington: Its important stuff, so emailing it? Ok, but I ask that you either give a link or attribution. It is an original work, and that particular post actually took a little time to write. A nod to the author, at the least, is in order, and if you have already paid me this courtesy, then Thank You. It's nice to know you thought it was worthy of sharing."

Another part of this conversation? This client sees a whole lot more people in a day than I do. He says he cannot believe how many people he talks to about the election who seem very invested in one issue, but then know nothing about the others. Nothing at all. I thought about that a lot last night and today. The idea bothers me quite a bit. How the Hell did we get to the point where people would be so ignorant about something so important? I realize that it is a combination of factors, but it still irritates me. There is enough ignorance involved with this election, from the people who say "What's wrong with social and economic justice? Then things will finally be fair!!1!" to the geniuses who think that the Constitutional requirement that a person be a "natural born citizen" is either an archaic concept that doesn't fit with modern day standards, or that it is a "nebulous term" that has never been defined in any applicable way, or both. Leave it to members of my tribe to create the perception of ambiguity where none actually exists. If we are to survive as a republic, we cannot allow this standard of ignorance and narrow focus to continue. However, if we are going to turn this course back to a thinking and informed body politic, then we will have to put conservatives back in to the classrooms and newsrooms of this country. We cannot allow these professions to remain as the last resort for those among us who were capable of little else or those determined to execute the leftist strategies of taking our children and corrupting them early with concepts corrosive to our unity as a nation and our tradition of excellence. Concepts like "Diversity" which celebrates the attributes of the individual and teaches that the whole is lessened without each of us retaining and demanding recognition for our respective racial and national identity, rather than adopting the identity of the nation that is our home. Or "Moral Equivalence" which teaches that every philosophy, religion, and culture is no better or no worse than any other, ignoring the fact that this simply isn't true, and there is a wealth of empirical evidence demonstrating the hollowness of this belief. Better yet, we have the cornerstone of newspeak which the left needs to destroy us: "Political Correctness". Political Correctness is the idea that certain people should be forbidden from saying certain things, because someone might get their feelings hurt. This is the wellspring for idiotic notions that everyone should be a winner, or that everything must be fair. It also hampers any real discourse on any matter of consequence because serious people will never be able to make their points. Serious people call things what they are. The acolytes of PC will demand that ephemisms be substituted, and if they still hit too close to home in any conversation, then the person trying to make a point or engage in a serious discussion must further circumvent conversation in an effort not to hurt someone else's feelings. This ignores the fact that sometimes, feelings should be hurt, and feelings should take a backseat to truth. The acolytes believe that this makes them more enlightened; I believe that it makes many of them marginal intellects at best, as they have surrendered the ability to do something in the pursuit of good feelings. As for the rest, they sleep at night secure in the knowledge that they have spawned a whole new shibboleth for serious people to contend with on a daily basis, and have shaped and warped an entire generation of young minds into a de facto police force to monitor and denounce the thought crimes of the rest of us. Think I'm wrong? How many times have Obama supporters or the Press (but I repeat myself) called us "Racist!" because we have expressed the idea that we will not vote for Barack Hussein Obama. Better yet "You CAN'T say HIS middle name!!!11!!! That's racist!!!11!!" or "You're implying that he is a Muslim!!!11!!" You and I both know that no matter how many President's middle names we can name, or how many perfectly good reasons that have nothing to do with Obama's race we give for not voting for him, or the fact that no matter how many years he sat in the pews at Reverend Wright's "Hate Whitey" church, even he can't seem to recall for moment to moment if he is a muslim or not. Their politically correct analysis demands that you be declared guilty of the crimes they accuse you of, because if they ever had to move beyond feelings, then they might just have to consider the idea, even for a microsecond, that they might be wrong in their enthusiastic support for him, and in their presumption of your guilt.

This is the real reason why we need to all become educators. Sure, I'm as guilty as the next conservative of simply lowering the boom on the lefties where ever they sprout up and mouth their talking points, but really, our best offense is also our best defense. Educate them. Innundate them with facts, with logic, with reason. Sooner or later, all but the hardest of the hardcore true believers will no longer be able to ignore the elephant in the room, especially when you introduced them and told them its name. And teach your children well, because no one wants to retire to a socialist workers paradise.

A Story Of A Man Applying For A Job

2008-10-31T12:41:00.001-07:00

SoHoS has a post that casts this all in a very easy to understand light. Go read it. Shoo.

An Open Letter to Barack Hussein Obama Supporters

2008-10-29T20:27:00.000-07:00

Regrettably, we have met. Your barely contained enthusiasm for THE ONE™ is as undeniable as it is unexplainable. Emotion and a belief in vague and hollow promises for things like CHANGE! and HOPE! have propelled a man who believes that he is a messianic figure to the top of the Democratic Party's ticket and reveal just how much you failed to learn in your civics/government classes in high school. Most of you have been sold a bill of goods, and cannot or will not see the mistake you have made. I fear that revelation will not come until you have gotten us all into a fine mess.

I know. You have your reasons, all of which are important to you and motivated you to cast your support to a man who wants to radically alter this country into a nation that our founding fathers would be incapable of recognizing. You see him as the fulcrum to affect those things which have elicited your pledge. You might be right, but if he's elected, you might get what you hoped for, and that will bring results that you neither want nor expect.

For some of you, the war is your issue, and THE ONE™'s statements assure you that the "unwinnable" war will be brought to a close. If you are easily offended, stop reading now, because I'm going to tell you things you are not going to like reading.

To the aging hippies seeking that one last "Hurrah!": You didn't change the world. You wrapped yourself in cowardice, and pushed for a change in policy to prevent you from paying for the liberty that kept you safe and brought you through your adolescence. Your actions brought the change that got numerous people on the other side of the world killed because they took us at our word and trusted us, but you couldn't see past the ends of your own noses long enough to understand that the world isn't about you, and that being right, and standing up for what is good and right requires real sacrifice. You reveled in your "accomplishments" and spit on those who answered when their country called, denying them the honor they earned and so richly deserved. You aren't heroes and the blood of too many people who sought their freedom with our assistance stains your hands. Sleep well. I have it on good authority that cowards serve an eternal watch without respite in the outlands of Hell.

To the dreamers who believe that violence never solves anything: You get to cling to this childish belief because of violent men doing violence to protect this country and its people from those who want us dead simply because of who we are. Your beliefs are yours to hold because of the freedom that these brave realists shed their blood to preserve.

To those who believe that we have engaged in an illegal/unjust war: War is diplomacy by other means. The UN itself passed numerous resolutions in the wake of Desert Storm, all of which were ignored by Iraq, which was paying a bounty to the families of suicide bombers and providing a safe haven for some of the most villainous terrorists on the planet. You can scream about Bush! Cheney! Haliburton! all you want at the top of your lungs. When the rest of the world talks about doing something, it falls on us to actually DO something. The UN was never actually going authorize real action. The kleptocrats of that august body were making too much money from the Oil for Food scam to actually stop Sadam's gravy train. The fact is, we have done yeoman's work in Iraq, the country enjoys a level of freedom today that it has never enjoyed before, and their people are willing to do their own fighting to keep it that way. Another inconvenient fact is that by fighting terrorists there, we have not had to fight them here. Whine all you want. There has not been another attack since 9/11, and taking the fight to the terrorists has had EVERYTHING to do with that.

To those who want to adorn themselves in sackcloth and ashes because of Bush and the war: Get over it, and get over yourselves. Fighting terrorists is not like fighting a conventional army, because although they may receive support from states, they are essentially stateless. Such a battle takes a long time, even under confined conditions. Your childish whining and stomping your feet over the actions of a man who has labored to keep this nation, and you, safe, doesn't make you brave or intelligent. It merely makes you appear to be the worst kind of ingrate, and it makes me embarrassed to call you my fellow countrymen. If you cannot bring yourselves to say the appropriate thank-yous, then at least do the rest of us the courtesy of shutting up, because we're tired of the childish derangement you continually exhibit.

For some of you, race is the issue. While I do not agree, I can at least understand. However, voting for race in this campaign may set race relations back a great deal, rather than achieving a pinnacle in the Black Experience in America. For white people who have this feeling that they are somehow responsible for slavery and subsequent injustices, I assure you, you are not. The last 40 years brought an end to Jim Crow, segregation, and inequality of opportunity. Good people, black and white, sacrificed, and in some cases, died to bring these promises to fruition. Not only was opportunity opened to all, remediation was imposed in education, admission to colleges and universities, and the job market in the form of lowered standards, quotas, and affirmative action, and today's trendy belief, diversity. Add these to the blood shed in the Civil War, and the debt is paid. Guilt is not a good reason to make a decision, because you end up making the decision for the sole reason to assuage that guilt, oblivious to other facts or information that would inform you that choosing that person would be a bad choice. If your guilt prevents you from being honest with yourself when you ask "If everything about him was the same except he was white, would I still vote for him?", then you are not thinking clearly.

To those who would vote for him because they too, are black:
Time for some hard truths here. The years since the Civil Rights Movement have not seen all the promise that everyone might have hoped. The good news is that this can be fixed. The bad news is that you have to decide to step up and claim your birthright as an AMERICAN, and reject your victim rights as African-Americans. The doors were opened to you, but by and large, you decided to continue to select leaders who put their best interests first, and their lip service to your needs as the bones they will toss to you. Many of you chose the slavery of the attitude that the government owes this or that, and when members of your own community step outside of that mindset and build success, and then tell you that you can do the same, you berate them and belittle them as sellouts, or call them "Uncle Tom's". The real pioneers of the civil rights movement, the ones who shed blood to give you the chance would be horrified at how you rejected the hand up for the hand out, and chose on your own to re-segregate yourselves at various levels of society. Voting for him because primarily he is one of you spits in the eye of Dr. King's dream of men being judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin. Why do I attack his character? Because he has demonstrated time and again that he does not have any. He has friends of dubious character. Because he has a preacher who has preached racial hatred for more than 20 years. Because he has been the candidate talking about race, and using it to make himself out as the victim in this campaign. Do you want a leader, someone who represents you, to be someone who claims to be a victim, or someone who decided to overcome history and succeed in spite of it? What does that choice say about you? If doing it because he is black is your standard, then you validate the racist aspect of the nation's past, and it will never be washed from Liberty's Garments. You will have failed those who fought for the promises of this nation to be extended for all citizens, and more importantly, and sadly, you will have failed yourselves. History has been made by this election, and I have every confidence that we will someday elect an African-American President. I think we all deserve to have one that we can all be proud of and look to as a great leader. This first-term Senator who's greatest accomplishments are writing two memoirs is not that man.

To the ones who believe that Obama and a Democratic Congress will fix the economy:
The evidence is there for the finding. You just have to look carefully. Fannie Mae? Freddie Mac? These two entities mushroomed because the Democrats under Clinton thought that it would be a wonderful thing if people who could not afford homes got to buy them anyway, because Fannie and Freddie would be there to back the loans. Only thing is, WE THE PEOPLE backed Fannie and Freddie. While companies like Countrywide got to originate these loans and pocket the exorbitant fees that went with them, the taxpayers were left holding the bag when the music stopped. For the last eight years, Bush and McCain both made multiple attempts to call this impending disaster to the attention of Congress so that the bomb could be defused before it went off. Democrats, like Senator Obama, blocked any attempts at reform. Why? Because there was still money to be made. The former head of one of those agencies, Franklin Raines, walked away with tens of millions of dollars...for sticking US with the bill. This same man is one of Obama's campaign advisers.

Other prominent Democrats also bailed out of these entities before the crash, but not before they received compensation packages in the Millions of dollars. And the Senator himself? He was the second largest beneficiary of Fannie/Freddie campaign dollars in the Senate...in his first term. This man has proposed a ruinous tax plan that will punish success, discourage small businesses from hiring more employees, and will cost this country jobs and opportunities. He has proposed that by mandating certain technologies, he will create jobs, but this is an unsuccessful strategy whenever it has been tried. He proposes measures that will strengthen unions and impose tariffs. These measures succeed in stripping working Americans of more of their pay and opportunities, while robbing workers and businesses of the incentives to be innovative and productive. He has advocated for redistribution of wealth, under the guise of social and economic justice. This will simply remove any incentive for producers to produce if they cannot be the beneficiaries of their labor. Equality as enforced by the state kills merit and ambition, and robs us all of the benefits that they bring.

To those of you who are seeking something to believe in, or a government to give you things: Grow up. Really. I mean that. If your life is so empty that you need to have a politician to believe in, then you need to work on yourself, because something is sorely lacking in you. Politicians, and especially Obama are not to be trusted. They will whisper pretty words in your ear, and tell you all the things they will do for you, in order to get your vote. They will make you slaves for that all-important vote. If you think that the government's purpose is to provide you with things, then you too, have a problem, because you get what you pay for.
You want guaranteed employment? Move to Europe. See how that works for them. You want government health care? Be ready for rationing and poor quality of care. Don't listen to what the man with the teleprompter tells you. It will be rationed. It will have to be, because if a cost benefit analysis is not applied, then there simply will not be enough to go around.

What it comes down to is this. Obama believes that you can't. You can't be successful without his help. You can't overcome bad things in your life without his help. You can't provide for your families without his help. You can't be trusted to make your own decisions without his help. This is not what America is about. If everything is handed to you, then you value nothing, and only want more to be given to you. America is about the freedom to decide what you will do, about how you will do it, about who you choose to help out with your money and your time, about how you will live. America is about choosing how to live your life without state interference. Obama believes you can't be trusted to make your own choices, and that government can spend your money better than you can.

Stand up next Tuesday and cast a vote for your own choices. You can choose to continue to choose, or you can choose to surrender all rights and responsibilities and settle for what the government chooses to give to you. It really shouldn't be a difficult decision.

The Wednesday Morning Mix

2008-10-29T08:30:00.000-07:00

More transcript from that 2001 interview with Barack Hussein Obama:

The court’s just not very good at it and politically it’s very hard to legitimize opinions from the court in that regard. So I think that although you can craft theoretical justifications for it legally. Any three of us sitting here could come up with a rational for bringing about economic change through the courts.

He can think of a rationale for bringing about economic change through the courts???

Still think he isn't a Socialist? There is nothing in the Constitution, its Amendments, or interpretive caselaw that would justify a ruling encompassing "economic change" as BHO envisions in this interview.

As I pondered this on the drive in, along with his slip in front of Joe The Plumber, his past association with radicals, and his wanton interference with the last elections in Kenya, which contributed to many deaths there as a result of tribal violence, a thought occurred to me. Zimbabwe.

In 2000, Robert Mugabe, the country's only leader since independence embarked on a program to redistribute the wealth of his nation, that wealth being the farm land that helped Zimbabwe actually produce enough food to feed its people and contributed to a functioning economy. However, it was seen as necessary to promote "social and economic justice" to redistribute this once productive farmland from the largely white land owners to black citizens who lacked the requisite knowledge, equipment, and resources to maintain the farms as successful going concerns, especially since many of them were more interested in furthering their own social justice programs, which included rape and murder of many former white land owners. Criticism of Mugabe's administration has adverse consequences for those who dare oppose him, especially after the 2002 elections which he rigged in his favor. Opposition voices are silenced, and violence against those who do not favor his rule is widely sanctioned. His policies have been ruinous for a nation that was once considered one of Africa's successes, and strangely enough, it appears that some parallels could be drawn with the vision for this nation that Obama has shared, and his past activities in African politics. I'd like to think that I'm wrong, but frankly, anyone who thinks that he can justify court mandated wealth redistribution under the Constitution as written, and has been caught lying as many times as he has, and continues to arrogantly refuse to acknowledge that he has done so, and to "punish" any journalist who even dares to ask a "difficult" question is capable of many unthinkable things, and we have people in this nation who are willing to empower him to do more. I see some scary things ahead.

The Obamessiah Demonstrates Understanding America FAIL!

2008-10-27T08:45:00.001-07:00

From a radio interview with the 'community organizer':

“If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court. I think where it succeeded was to invest formal rights in previously dispossessed people, so that now I would have the right to vote. I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order as long as I could pay for it I’d be o.k. But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as its been interpreted and Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf, and that hasn’t shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was, um, because the civil rights movement became so court focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that.

Team Obama is, predictably, using the "it has been taken out of context" canard. The problem with this lame justification is that I can think of no context where such words would be appropriate for someone running for President of the United States of America. If you can think of one, please feel free to let me know.

The Secret™

2008-10-26T13:46:00.000-07:00

The media has kicked fully into spin cycle., doing their level best for their candidate, Barack Hussein Obama. The days till the election are almost gone. The pollsters are calling two and three times a day with their obviously slanted questions. And they all hope that the American People have forgotten The Secret™. What's that, you ask? Wow, you must be a journalist. I guess I'll have to tell you. No amount of pictures drawn in crayon will help you get it otherwise. The Secret™? Character and judgment matter.

"So what?" you ask. "Americans know this" is my answer. When properly informed, everyone in this country can make a smart choice. And despite the best efforts of the press in this particular election, people still have more than enough evidence of both candidates' character and judgment before them to come to the conclusion that Barack Obama sufficiently lacks both to be a reasonable choice for President.

In the article fisked below, Jonathan Alter makes the accusation that the Republican party has become "the party of cynicism." In so doing, he adopts the first part of the Democratic playbook for this election: Projection. Their chosen candidate sat in the same church with a "Hate Whitey" pastor preaching this message for twenty years, doing his part to retain victimhood and the bondage that goes with it instead of rising above it. When exposed, we got an idiotic rationalization and a trusted figure in his life for over 20 years got flung under the bus. The message: You know that associations matter, but I think you're stupid enough to believe a silly excuse and the sacrifice of someone who had been an important figure in my life for over 20 years. The real meaning: I think you're stupid enough to believe my outlandish reassurances, and I do not have the courage to openly be who I actually am in public. And the press, seeing that Obama's pastor was a problem, decided to play moral equivalence and attack prominent pastors who had endorsed John McCain. It wasn't the same, but the press has never been above implying what it could not prove, as long as the message was served.

The lack of the two necessary traits became painfully obvious again when the question of William Ayers came up. Ayers, a member of the Weather Underground, participated in a series of bombing across the country with the intent of bringing down the US government and replacing it with a marxist-hippiocracy that would stick it to "the Man", and imprison and kill those who did not conform to their "new" way of thinking about America. Ayers escaped prosecution, has admitted to his guilt, and has publicly regretted not doing more. Obama's spin on this association would be entertaining if it was not so telling. As the inconvenient facts keeps sprouting up like daisies, Obama continued to change his story on the campaign trail while brazenly lying about it in the last debate with McCain. Ayers was a guy in his neighborhood. Then, they served on a board together. But they also shared an office...for three years. They served on two boards together. Obama, his protests to the contrary in the last debate, kicked off his political career in Ayers' living room. Obama wrote a blurb for Ayers' book. We know these things. They have been proven. And yet, he refuses to own up to these things, preferring the lie, spoken reassuringly but firmly, in his ordering an arugula and lobster voice. This demonstrates bad judgment in choosing his friends, regardless of what he wants to call them, and it demonstrates an appalling lack of character to get caught in a lie, repeatedly, and only alter the lie to accommodate the finding, rather than the whole story.

But perhaps the most callous lies are those Obama has uttered with regard to his record on abortion. As an Illinois state senator, Obama did not just stake out a pro-life position, he actively advocated denying any health care to babies who survived their mothers' attempts to abort them. Think about that for a minute. He didn't just want women to be able to kill their kids as a method of birth control. He wanted make sure the ones who survived still died. This from the man who doesn't want his kids "punished with a baby if they make a mistake". These are people. These are citizens who are unable to speak for themselves, and if they somehow survive the attempt to kill them, he still wanted them dead. Is this the person you want making decisions that could influence your life? When he finally could not deny his position on the matter any longer, he elected to lie again, stating that he would not support a measure requiring that such children receive health care because "there was already a law requiring it". Except there wasn't, and even if there were, he elected to go on record as declining to vote for a law giving these children any such lifesaving treatment. No character at all.

On the campaign trail, candidates have so few opportunities to do anything that demonstrates their judgement. Perhaps the most illustrative event is when the candidate chooses their running mate. For Obama, it was a career politician with a history of saying mildly racist things and a track record of being wrong on very nearly every foreign policy matter he has offered an opinion on. A selection who had made remarks endorsing his opponent earlier in the campaign and who had referred to Obama himself as "Clean" and "articulate." A candidate who continues to say things on the trail that do not help his boss, and embarrasses anyone who is listening.

In contrast, John McCain chose a fresh young face, one with real executive experience, and a track record of conservatism, and challenging corruption,even when it was in her own party. The left and the press decided that they had to attack her on the issue of experience, despite the fact that Obama has none, other than the dubious "running for office" experience that they tried to transmute into serious credentials.

On McCain's credentials, they decided to imply that he was a disaster in the cockpit as a Navy pilot. An implication that did not find an audience. They tried to diminish his POW experience, one that left him crippled and broken to this day into a liability by saying that he aided the enemy with a bamboo confession, despite the fact that he turned down an early release, knowing others had been in captivity longer than he. They tried to turn his divorce upon his return from Vietnam into a character issue. This particular issue demonstrates they did get one thing right, but still fail to identify redemption of the same sort that they so desperately want to confer on William Ayers with their "It was 40 years ago" comments. McCain has remained married to the same woman since that time, and has expressed regret. Ayers has emphatically denied regret for his actions, instead regretting that he had not done more. As for the moral failing that the act symbolized, it was somewhat disconcerting to hear it from the same quarters defending Bill Clinton for getting blowjobs in the Oval Office from an intern while he was married. And then there is the allegation of racism. Obama himself raised this spectre himself, telling us that if we don't vote for him, the only possible explanation is racism. He is the one who trots out this straw man and makes him dance whenever anyone wants to have a discussion about facts. He can't do this with world leaders. They will not give him a pass, and they are delighted at the prospect of an America headed by someone with his bad judgement and poor character. Let's not give them the chance to roll him, and us, in the process.

Reporting the World as They Wish It Was

2008-10-26T09:58:00.000-07:00

BETWEEN THE LINES
Why McCain Won
Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory: how that scenario could (but likely won't) play out.
By Jonathan Alter | NEWSWEEK
Published Oct 25, 2008
From the magazine issue dated Nov 3, 2008
The conventional wisdom, which I share, is that Barack Obama will win this election, perhaps by a healthy margin. But Democrats are nervous wrecks; they're having nightmares that defeat will be snatched from the jaws of victory. To add to their misery (and guard against complacency), here's how that horror film could play out:

Of course, having done everything you could to get us to this result, including joining with campaign in a cabal dedicated NOT to report or to minimize any accidental reporting of stories that might not go away, including the candidate's scary and crazy friends, and all the votes that they paid ACORN work long and hard to register for them.

In the end, the problem was the LIVs. That's short for "low-information voters,"

And yet again, it is time to insult the voters for not "seeing the light" and voting Obama.

the three fifths of the electorate that shows up once every four years to vote for president but mostly hates politics. These are the 75 million folks who didn't vote in the primaries. They don't read newsmagazines or newspapers, don't watch any cable news and don't cast their ballots early. Their allegiance to a candidate is as easily shed as a T shirt. Several million moved to Obama through September and October; they'd heard he handled himself well in the debates. Then, in the last week, the LIVs swung back to the default choice: John McCain. Some had good reasons other than the color of Obama's skin to desert him; many more did not. In October, a study by the Associated Press estimated that Obama's race would cost him 6 percent. The percentage was smaller, but still enough to give the presidency to McCain.

I don't suppose that you might consider that all of Obama's wrapping himself in the cloak of racist victimhood could have been something of a self-fulfilling prophecy? Oh, yeah. I forgot, he is divine, but his failure is our fault. We dumb voters who have managed to elect persons of color who have character, and were pleased when the current President appointed other persona of color to his cabinet.

Obama's field organization was superb, so it was no surprise that most of the 18 million Hillary Clinton voters came home to the Democrats; the person-to-person voter contact (and significant resentment about the selection of Sarah Palin) made a big difference. But the huge swath of more than 30 million independents broke heavily for McCain. By piling up overwhelming margins in big blue states like California, New York and Illinois, Obama carried the popular vote, but he ended up like Al Gore in 2000—denied admission to the Electoral College.

More hating on Sarah. Listen Johnny, we know why you and the Democrats hate her so. She destroys the carefully cultivated perception that we have to have a "ruling class" which has trained their entire life to lead us. She is beautiful, has a family, and is pro-life. If the ruling class isn't a necessity, then maybe the Fourth Estate is no longer a necessity either, and with that responsibility goes great power. We get it. She threatens you and your friends. We like her anyway, and when she finds others like herself, you are really going to be upset. As for the Independents, I'm hoping that they can see through the fog of bullshit surrounding Obama and vote the way you fear.

The first ominous sign was largely missed amid the Democratic euphoria after Obama outclassed McCain on the financial crisis. While most of the country moved toward the Democratic nominee in early October, Ohio did not. Obama could never close the sale there. In a repeat of the Democratic primary, his big totals coming out of Cuyahoga County (Cleveland) weren't enough to offset larger-than-expected losses in the suburbs around Cincinnati and Columbus.

Obama "outclassed" McCain on the financial crisis? How does "Call me if you need me" turn into outclassing anyone? As for Ohio, its funny you should mention it, with all the Democratic voting chicanery, and ACORN issues there, and all.

Florida had looked promising for Obama for a time, but his weakness among seniors caught up with him. One national poll from early October should have been a warning: it showed him up by 7 overall, but down 14 among those older than 65. And Sarah Silverman's "Great Schlep" fell short. Obama easily carried the Jewish vote, but not with the 75 percent won by Gore and John Kerry. As it turned out, the real problem wasn't south Florida, where Hispanics came in surprisingly well for Obama. It was erosion in the critical I-4 corridor near Tampa and in the Panhandle, where the astonishing Republican margins among whites could be attributed only to race.

I would be astonished at such a turnout among Florida Hispanics, since they are largely of Cuban extraction, and they hate Communists. That Joe the Plumber slip? Yeah, they saw it too, I'm sure. As for all of those whites voting for McCain because they're racists? I'm not buying it. There are lots of reasons not to vote for Obama, and lots of reasons to vote for McCain. The fact that they voted for the white candidate doesn't confer a racist motive on them.

Obama shifted New Mexico, Iowa and Nevada from red to blue. But there was a reason Virginia hadn't gone Democratic since 1964. The transformation of the northern part of the state couldn't overcome a huge McCain margin among whites farther south. They weren't the racists of their parents' generation, but they weren't quite ready to vote for the unthinkable, either.

Paging American Voters! Paging American Voters! An Obama surrogate has once again called you racist in order to get your vote!

As McCain closed the gap in the last week with his message on taxes and fear of another terrorist attack, the race came down to New Hampshire (which went for Kerry in 2004) and Colorado (which went for President Bush). Obama needed one of them to get to 270 electoral votes. New Hampshire's fabled independents had long had a soft spot for McCain in GOP primaries, and they delivered for him again. Colorado, after flirting with Obama, simply reverted to form, with Palin's frontier image helping a bit.

Yes, and it certainly is not legitimate to remind the American voters that they have absolutely no reason at all to trust Obama on either of these very important points. Perhaps you can stamp your feet and cry for us, too.

Obama had wired every college campus in the country, and he enjoyed great enthusiasm among politically engaged young people. But less-engaged students told reporters the day after the election that they had meant to vote for Obama but were "too busy." History held: young people once again voted in lower percentages than their elders. Waiting for them turned out to be like waiting for Godot.

You call them "politically engaged". I call them "politically naive". They are kind of like the new girls at the first frat party of the year...yes, you can seduce them easily, but if you don't stick with them, they will slide out of your bed.

The Obama margin among young voters was underestimated a little in some polls because so many 18- to 24-year-olds use only cell phones. But the deeper failure of the polling came from methodology that could not properly account for the nine in 10 voters who won't answer a polltaker's questions. With ceaseless robo-calls and as many as 15 live calls from campaigns to each household in a swing state, even fewer people than normal took time in the last two weeks to respond. Who were the voters slamming down the phone? Disproportionately for McCain. In rebuffing pollsters, they skewed the sample toward Obama, inflating his "support."

Of course, polling disproportionately larger numbers of "likely" Democratic voters in your polls to attempt to suppress Republican votes by making it seem that there was a huge public demand for THE ONE didn't help your cause, either.

At the start of the campaign season NEWSWEEK asked, "Is America Ready" for a black president? The answer: only if Obama proved close to a flawless candidate, and even then, we won't know for sure until Election Day. That doesn't mean Obama lost because all, or even most, McCain voters allowed race to be a factor. But enough did to change the outcome.

Complete and utter bullshit. Conservatives have, at their core of beliefs, the belief in merit. We seek excellence, believing, as did our founding fathers, that the political climate should foster excellence wherever it is found, and if we do that, then the entire nation is enriched. The only people that race truly is an issue for is the left, who are determined to place Obama in the Oval Office as some sort of atonement for the nation's past, ignoring the price paid in blood for that past in the Civil War. Race has been on the lips of the left and the press throughout this entire campaign. The gender equality so often trumpeted by the left was tossed out the window by the left when Sarah Palin was selected as McCain's running mate, and America knows that the campaign was far from perfect, for either side, despite the obvious and irritating bias for Obama that the Press has suffered throughout the campaign.

Democrats are despairing over the results, fearing they might never view their country in the same light again. Even many Republicans are subdued at the news of McCain's victory. Having expected him to lose, they know the GOP has now completed a sorry transition from the party of Lincoln to the party of cynicism. McCain, they're reasoning, might prove a fine president, but it shouldn't have happened like this.

The best thing about this paragraph? It demonstrates how easily you write about a party "afflicted with cynicism" over a "racist" victory over Barack the Devine, without having a single source to support you erroneous conclusion. Many conservatives were voting against Obama before the conventions, not because they are all a bunch of RACISTS!!!! like you so cleverly allege, but because they don't like his Friends, and his stated policies are contrary to everything that they believe is correct for this country. However, Sarah's selection changed that. Many conservatives are now voting FOR the old guy because we believe in her and what she stands for. There's no cynicism there. Its enthusiasm. And if your scenario comes true, it will be elation, knowing that you, ACORN, and Obama did your level best to subvert the process and you failed.

It probably won't. Millions of people in the rest of the world assume that Barack Obama cannot be elected because he is black. They assume that the original sin of American history—enshrined in our Constitution—cannot be transcended. I go into next week's election with a different assumption—that the common sense and decency of the American people will prove the skeptics wrong.

Johnny, when "the rest of the world" gets our tax burden, then they get a say in who leads us. Until then, I really do not care what they say. You might also want to consider all of those other nations that have shown their enlightenment by electing black leaders themselves. I myself remember the celebrations when Great Britain, France, Germany, Canada, Russia, Japan, and the other countries of the civilized world elected their first leaders who were "persons of color". No wait....I can't, because they haven't. You see, that's where this ridiculous train of thought will carry you if you care too much about what others think, and don't do enough thinking for yourself. But then, I can't expect much from you. You're only a journalist, after all.

Berg v. Obama Was Dismissed

2008-10-25T18:22:00.000-07:00

Judge Surrick stated that Berg had no standing to challenge Obama's eligibility to run for President. Berg will be appealing to the United States Supreme Court.

Berg Has Filed For Summary Judgment And An Expedited Ruling

2008-10-24T15:02:00.000-07:00

Keeping with his full court press (no pun intended), Berg has filed requesting Summary Judgment on the basis that Team Obama and the DNC did not timely respond to the Requests for Admission, so they are deemed admitted, and also requesting an expedited ruling.

Unfortunately, this is where I become somewhat less than admiring of Mr. Berg;s legal prowess, because, in this attorney's opinion, he "jumped the shark" in counts 20 and 21 of his Motion Requesting An Expedited Ruling On Plaintiff's Motion For Summary Judgment. Specifically:

20. If the Motion is not heard and decided immediately, there will not be any time left in order to replace Obama on the Presidential ballot with an eligible Democratic Presidential Candidate.

Why do I have a problem with this? Because many states have deadlines for placing candidates on ballots, and I'm fairly certain that this has already passed. I'd also wager that most states have already printed the ballots. While he makes a point, that ship has sailed.

21. If Obama is elected as President of the United States and allowed to serve as the United States President, we will have a Constitutional Crisis. If this is allowed, it will change the United States Constitution without proper due process of law. Plaintiff and all citizens of the United States will no longer be afforded the protections guaranteed by the United States Constitution.

Wow. Take a breath, Phil. This sounds like something St. Andi of the Hand Wringers at the Atlantic Monthly would write if he were not a true believer in the Hopey Changeyness One himself. I usually reserve panic words like "crisis" for scenarios where there is no clear method of dealing with what lies before us. As I discussed a few posts ago, it is largely a matter of timing. If Obama is elected, but not yet sworn in and the judge rules him to be ineligible, then the 20th Amendment comes into play, Biden is a temporary President until an eligible candidate can be elected. The details of the election? We don't have clear guidance, but the Supreme Court can likely establish reasonable guidelines for a new election. If he is found ineligible after being sworn in, then I believe the 25th Amendment outlines the process. I wouldn't call it a "Crisis", but then I'm not a centrist Democrat denied the opportunity to vote for Hillary. I guess context really is everything. Either way, there is no change to the Constitution, and the protections of the Constitution remain unmolested and unrestrained.

Again, I keep wondering why Judge Surrick has not issued a ruling on any of this, but a pleading containing the above-highlighted allegations damage his credibility in my eyes, and since there are some substantive motions before the Court, I do not think I would have taken it that far.

Yep, They Really ARE Stuck On Stupid

2008-10-22T21:02:00.000-07:00

******UPDATED******

I can see that this is gonna be fun. Kevin cannot help himself.
*sigh* I already have to wear the counselor hat all day long, but I just can't help myself. Kevin, if you keep letting stupid leak out through your fingertips, I'm going to keep pointing and laughing.

Your arrogance assumes I would waste the time to read a years worth of your posts. Get over yourself, and while you're at it ...try to get over me. I seemed to have really gotten to you.Me doth thinks ye protesteth too much. Must have hit you dead on. lmao at your silly ass. What's the matter, Bill O'Reilly wannabe, you can dish it out but ya can't take it... pussy.
You started the assumption game, now I'm going to finish it. You are divorced, lonely , frustrated, own an expensive car to make up for your lack of penis size, and you cry when you masturbate.

Kevin, you're the one who assumed when you could have educated yourself. Yes, I undestand that would mean taking the intitiative and actually doing something for yourself, something that your Dear Leader would frown on, but really, as I said, I can only judge you on what you say. You, on the other hand could actually say something serious, reasoned, logical, and if you feel the need to talk about me, informed. Instead, you avoid the substantive allegations made against your Dear Leader and your fanatical devotion to him and his tactics, and instead feel the need to make silly assertions about me to detract from the fact that your Emperor has no clothes. Its predictable, and it is pointless, since I deal daily with people who are actually capable of creative and relevant insults. Your schtick? Its tired. I could write your comments more convincingly than you do. The reason for my smacking you around? It amuses me. The fact that you get dismissed for a meritless 15 minutes of fame here, and you return, talking smack like the snot nosed punk in high school who never knew when to shut up tells me that you have an almost pathological need for attention. I'm laughing and wondering if you got dropped on your head one time too many as a child.

I can dish it out but I can't take it? Uhhh, moron? It is published here in your second very own post. Uncensored and unedited. I think that is called playing above board, which is more than a conservative voice gets at a liberal website most of the time.

As for your assertions, let me set your mind at ease: Married fourteen years; two children, both of whom are still very young but who daily demostrate better judgment than you have shown thus far; not frustrated, just tired of malcontents who keep screaming at the top of their lungs, but are unwilling or unable to make an argument that will persuade anyone who requires more than a naked assertion or slouching talking point that is not substantiated by material facts, I'm a family man, and still paying off law school loans, so no, I don't have a small penis death machine. Being secure in who I am and having a loving family, I have no need to fill a gap in my life with a shiny piece of metal. I have never had a complaint about my penis being too small, and masterbation really isn't necessary when you have a good sex life as I do.

Your arrogance assumes I would waste the time to read a years worth of your posts.

Oh, BTW, Sitemeter tracks all sorts of data, like who is on, what they look at, etc. I understand reading 15 posts of something so contrary to the leftist pap the Obama campaign spoon-feeds to people probably was very tough for you, but 15 posts? I think you are the one who needs to get over me. Gameface, Sparky. Gameface.

What's it gonna be, Sparky? Are we gonna have a discussion about politics, the kind supported by facts, logic and reason, or are you going to stick by your surrender of that particular battlefield and just come back for another beating. Ball's in your court. I suggest you choose wisely.

*************************************************************************************Apparently, "Kevin" didn't have much of a substantive argument to make:

You are calling a man with a 161 IQ stupid. That just proves how goddamn dumb YOU are. Listen moron, I unsubscribed from this B.S. site so you would stop sending me notices about you lame replies, so I would appreciate you honoring that.

Kevin, I know lots of high I.Q. people. Grew up with them, went to school with them, have to work with them on a daily basis. None of them I know come to a website, start making ridiculous assertions that they cannot cite a basis for, and degenerate into personal attacks that have nothing to do with topic at hand when they are called on it, and then scurry off like a cockroach with the light turned on when they are challenged to defend their positions. Yes, Kevin, I am challenging you to make your case. Convince me how Barack is going to save us all. It really shouldn't be too difficult if you are so brilliant. Or run away, and show the world that you really cannot or will not defend what you say. The former would be refreshing coming from an Obama supporter. The latter would be predictable.

Occaisionally , You Get A Visit From That "Special" Kind Of Stupid.

2008-10-22T19:33:00.000-07:00

I haven't had a visit from an honest-to-goodness, second-round kind of troll in a very long time. Imagine my delight when "Kevin" came by to leave his droppings on the carpet of the "Mr. Berg in His Own Words" post. He really is too, too precious. The kind of true believer/idiot that deserves his own post.

In this day and age, isn't the law that you have to be a natural born citizen kind of leaning backwards towards RACISM? I don't care if he was born in Iran!! He was raised in the U.S. formed his opinions and matured to adulthood here. I didn't see anyone raise too much hell about Arnold "Musclehugger". Get over your racist selves and move on. Obama's vision of where this country needs to be heading is the RIGHT vision. I am a white male, 47 yrs. old, and an Independent voter. So, don't go "there"!

Kevin | 10.22.08 - 4:52 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh, and By the way... Wasn't G.Dubya a natural born citizen? A lot of damn good that did us.

Kevin | 10.22.08 - 4:57 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My response to such effective campaigning skills?:

Well, "Kevin", thank you for faithfully demonstrating the Obama talking points :

Don't like what is said, so it is therefore "Racist"-check,

Messianic Obama reference-check

Point to something never advocated for as a means to rationalize a result you want-check

Confusing the purpose for the law with discrimnation, when the subject is nationality, not race-check

Gratuitous "W" is a poo-poo head-check

Predictable astroturfing credentialism..."I am a ..."-check

I'd give you a box of Rice-A-Roni as a parting gift, but frankly I don't think the Obamabots are self-sufficient enough to prepare a meal for themselves without botching it, and I don't need to be sued because you set your tiny loft apartment on fire. So instead, I'll just send you with my thanks.

Blackiswhite, Imperial Agent P | Homepage | 10.22.08 - 6:15 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
His witty response? He didn't have one, but he did leave this:

Well, "old school", thank you for faithfully domonstrating your unwillingness to change-check.

You don't like my response so you TRY to put it down by trying to make it sound irrational.-check.

Point out that something has never been advocated.. as perhaps it should be ( if you are forward thinking )- check.

Getting steamed if someone puts down G-Dubya. ( which is approx. 80% of the population) - check.

And trying to call me a liar when you have no proof, just the power of controlling this site. - check.

I'd give you a box of Rice-A-Roni as a parting gift, but you probably have never eaten the stuff because you are one of those "fat cat" elitists that doesn't want anyone controlling whether or not you help create new jobs with your unregulated profits, but rather stick it in your pockets so that 10 generations from now your family will still be millionaires. ( without earning it) HEY! This is fun, anyone can make generalizations and assumptions and TRY to make the other person look like a fool. Now go check your stocks, and transfer the funds to your bank in the Caymans.

Kevin | 10.22.08 - 8:44 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now the Primary Directive of stamping out stupid wherever it is found before it can take root kicked in:

"Kevin"-
Your response to a law you don't like is "RACISM", which seems to be the theme whenever an Obamabot is confronted with a fact, circumstance, or statement that confounds them. I didn't write it, but as a lawyer with a degree in Political Science, I understand the reasoning for it. You think that it is silly? Then quit your kvetching and go to your state legislature and get them started on the amendment process.

My remark about deflecting by avocation? I was referring to your implication that I was somehow in favor of tossing out the clause that so offends you by wanting AAHHHNNOLD to be eligible for the office himself. I can assure you, such a think would was very far from my mind as he is about as conservative as Bill Clinton. You assuming, without a basis, that I was in favor at an earlier time of what you propose demonstrates the pitfalls that can occur when you assume.

Steamed by you taking a shot at W? No, just tired. After nearly 8 years of geniuses such as yourself failing to get your script straight (which is it? is he an evil genius or a tool of the evil Karl Rove and Dick Cheney who are running the country from the basement of Wal-Mart?) Listen, I'm not thrilled with W's term in office. He's done his level best to piss Conservatives like myself off at every opportunity. Listening to people like you continue to take generic and unoriginal shots, unaccompanied by anything resembling a rational supporting thought or concept has been almost equally as annoying. Almost.

TRY to make you sound irrational??? You're doing too good a job on your own. I don't care if he was born in IRAN? RACISM because a law concerning nationality and not race just might keep the closet socialist out of the Oval Office? Newsflash genius: He was raised in lots of places, including Indonesia. Don't take my word for it. Read his self-aggrandizing memoirs. He'll tell you himself. No, your own statements paint you with the brush of irrationality. There isn't much I could do to improve upon them.

I'm a "fat cat" who has never eaten Rice -A- Roni? You accuse me of making statements based on assumptions? When you come here, all I have to judge you on are your statements. You, however, have over a year's worth of posts to draw on to get to know me, so your assumptions are far less excusable. I suggest on your next visit, you scroll up and read my response to "JD", a special kind of moron who thought that he could attack the messenger when he had nothing to attack the message regarding your Dear Leader's Idiotic Tax Shift Policy, which will certainly create unemployment, inflation, and misery for the very people he claims to be helping with a tax "cut". And for the record, I am a small businessman, who at least for the time being, falls under the his arbitrary $250,000.00 number.

Finally, I am calling you liar, because you're employing a variation of the astroturfing method that I have seen far too often in the last two months. However, if you prefer, I can call you an idiot, because your apparent willingness to shill for a man with several America-hating friends, for a man who has already been caught telling us bald-faced lies, for a man who has told us that he is going to redistribute the wealth, for a man who wants to hold hands with adversaries and sing Kumbaya, for a man who wants to "heal the holes in our souls" by implying RACISM!!!11!! on the part of anyone who can see through the fog of bullshit that surrounds him and is willing to say so, and is more than willing to employ tactics of class warfare to advance his agenda, a man who will cripple the economy with a tax plan that can only result in greater unemployment and inflation, and higher prices for the very people he claims to want to help. No, Kevin, such a belief stains you with the indelible mark of potent idiotarianism, and the best that you can HOPE for is that your Dear Leader's tax plan might leave you with some CHANGE and maybe a job.

Blackiswhite, Imperial Agent P | Homepage | 10.22.08 - 10:31 pm |

Well, This Could Be New...

2008-10-21T19:32:00.000-07:00

I have had a few people ask me what would happen in Berg v. Obama if Obama was declared ineligible to run for the office because he is not a natural born citizen.

I have to confess, it was a good question, and I had to go back and look at the Constitution and puzzle through it for a while. My conclusions? It is a matter of timing.

I started with Article 2, Section 1, specifically:

No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

(In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office, the same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.) (This clause in parentheses has been modified by the 20th and 25th Amendments.)

Not being a natural born citizen is not a Disability that can be removed.

On to the 20th Amendment:

Amendment 20 - Presidential, Congressional Terms. Ratified 1/23/1933. History

1. The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.

2. The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 3d day of January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.

3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.

4. The Congress may by law provide for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the House of Representatives may choose a President whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them, and for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the Senate may choose a Vice President whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them.

5. Sections 1 and 2 shall take effect on the 15th day of October following the ratification of this article.

6. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission.

Yeah, Section 3 jumped out at me, too. This phrase lead me to a real "Devil in the Details" way of thinking:

If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified;

My first impression? If Obama is declared ineligible prior to being sworn in but after the election, then Biden presides over a caretaker government. But is there an election? I would think that there would have to be in order to find a qualified candidate. Does the Democratic party appoint a candidate, or do they reset? When is the election then held? And who decides? I foresee a nightmare.

And if he is declared ineligible after being sworn in? The 25 Amendment comes into play, and we have been there before:

Amendment 25 - Presidential Disability and Succession. Ratified 2/10/1967. Note History

1. In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President.

2. Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.

3. Whenever the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice President as Acting President.

4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.

Section 1 is very clear.

Other nagging questions? If Biden heads a caretaker government under the 20th Amendment, does he get to appoint a Vice President pursuant to the 25th Amendment? I can think of reasons to say yes and reasons to say no. Still, kind of a mess either way around.

Why am I discussing this, I mean despite having been asked a few times? Because as an attorney and a political science major, it really bugs me that Obama and the DNC have chosen to fight Berg with Motions to Dismiss, rather than rendering the case moot by simply delivering the necessary documents. I know they have buckets of money, much of it from foreign nationals and governments, but nobody likes to pay members of my tribe when they don't have to. Additionally, if Mr. Hope and Change is all about "Changing politics and inspiring confidence" then why not play the trump card, show everyone who is watching that he IS qualified, and render the case moot, thus ending it, and effectively discrediting yet another naysayer. Really, Barry. If you are reading, what's the game? You aren't inspiring me, and frankly, if you could win me over, it would be a significant achievement for you. Instead, you are giving the appearance of a man who has something to hide. Why?

Saw This At Dirty Harry's Place and Had To Filch It

2008-10-21T13:00:00.000-07:00

William Shatner committs multiple acts of gun control:

Berg's Press Release: Obama and the DNC Have Admitted All Allegations

2008-10-21T08:48:00.000-07:00

Tripped over it this morning. Honestly, I don't know the timeframe in which the Obama/DNC legal team have to respond to the Requests For Admission under the Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, nor am I aware if their Motion For Dismissal stays the required time for response.

I just view it as interesting, and I still would like to hear how Judge Surrick rules on this.

Jeff Schreiber at America's Right is more familiar with the Federal rules than I, and has also Published Berg's Motion for an Order Deeming the Requests Admitted.

More on Berg v. Obama

2008-10-20T19:08:00.000-07:00

The defense has filed a new Motion to Dismiss in the case. This addresses the issue of Berg's Amended Complaint, which named additional defendants, but according to Obama's/the DNC's legal team, did not allege anything new to establish standing, and therefore, should still be dismissed, since they have maintained from the start that Mr. Berg did not have standing.

Judge Surrick still has not ruled on any of the Motions before the court.

Still the same question. Why spend the money on yet another Motion when it can be quashed with the production of the necessary documents?

Thanks, Moop. Hadn't gotten quite that far yet this evening.

Once Again, the Religion of Peace Is Outraged.

2008-10-19T19:30:00.000-07:00

I saw this story about an upcoming video game. LittleBigPlanet, a new game from Sony has apparently outraged some muslims, because a song in the soundtrack contains two verses from the Koran,and muslims are deeply offended by the mixing of music and scripture. It might be easier, if we are going to submit to the ululating wielders of the rusty scimitars, to just be given a list of the things they are not offended by. That way their can be no doubt that I MEANT to offend them when I committed one of the acts on the list, and they would not waste anyone's time registering their outrage, because they can be on warning that I will not surrender my way of life, my culture, my will, or my God to these savages who moved to my country and demand that I change to accommodate them.

I wonder how many people the rock worshippers would see fit to kill if Sony refused to capitulate to their OUTRAGE!!!11!!! on this?

Something That Has Been On My Mind A Lot Lately

2008-10-19T19:26:00.000-07:00

Isaiah 5:20, KJV

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

Read and discuss amongst yourselves, you bitter clingers!

True Believers, Willful Blindness, Attacking the Questioner Instead of the Answer, and the Wonders Of Sitemeter

2008-10-19T11:46:00.000-07:00

Sitemeter is a wonderful tool. I do appreciate the idea that my credentials would invalidate the opinion I render which actually has a basis in experience, and yes, knowledge. What a wonderful world that Barry the Blessed™ is ushering in. Dissent is good unless it reveals that The Dear Leader's "Tax Policy" has no clothes. Which brings me to the point of this post.

J.D., at the Meadville Tribune blog, seems to think that it is ok to attack the messenger.

quote:
Originally posted by Josey:
good blog from a tax attorney. He has a Masters in Tax Law.

http://www.taxes-stupidity-and-death.blogspot.com/

What is the attorney's name? Where does it say he has an LL.M. in taxation?

Regardless, he is not discussing tax law, he is discussing tax policy. But since you try to qualify him as an expert, I would like to know if he has the degree, what school it came from, and his name so I can tell if he has had any disciplinary action taken against him as an attorney.

J.D., if you're reading, here it is:

B.A.,Political Science, University of Michigan,
J.D., cum laude, Thomas M. Cooley School of Law,
LL.M., taxation, University of Washington School of Law,

Shareholder, small law firm, Puget Sound Area of Washington, practice focusing on small business, tax, estate planning and probate, and real estate.

Since the Left and the media (but I repeat myself) believe that it is OK to attack the messenger since they can't win on substance, you do not get my name. I can tell you as an officer of the Court that I have not ever had action taken against me as an attorney, but I can assure you that even if I had, it has no bearing on the validity of my fitness to render an informed, and somewhat caustic opinion, regarding all things Barry the Blessed™.

And if you have any other questions, bring 'em to the source instead of publishing sly innuendo meant to impugn my character simply because I call Obama the America Hating fraud that he is.

An Open Letter To Barack Hussein Obama

2008-10-18T12:55:00.000-07:00

Dear Barry,

(You don't mind if I call you Barry, do you? Yes, I know its somewhat disrespectful, but then you haven't shown me, or the rest of the American electorate much respect during this campaign season either, so you can consider it "what comes around". You served, and I have no doubt you will return this volley.)

I have watched your campaign, and observed you continuing to say the most outrageous things, as if you had every right to say it, and as if I was obligated to believe it. From campaign speeches promising a conversion experience-like epiphany, where I the voter will see the light, and cast my vote for you, then look back to the date of your election as the date when the oceans stopped rising and the earth started to heal itself. From stump speeches where your always shouting wife is quick to inform us that you will never let us live our lives the same way again, or that she has never been proud of this country until you decided to run for POTUS. I've watched when as you have denied knowing friends and associates, many of whom hate everything this country stands for, and feel entitled to change it to their liking, whether or not the rest of us want them to, and I have watched your surrogates act like thugs, following your lead with silly attempts to restrict campaign speech with clumsy attempts to get the DOJ to intimidate those who dare to question the veracity of the treasures issuing from your lips. I have watched you lie. Lie about who your friends are. Lie about fighting to deny basic medical care to children who survive their mother's attempts to have them killed (And yes, that record is one you have not been able to flush down the memory hole.) I have watched you reveal your true agenda when answering a question from a man you asked for a vote, and I watched you and your surrogates turn on this same man, a private citizen. A private citizen representative of so many whom you have asked for a vote. And all because you cannot be honest about the truth of your tax plan. This has not gone unnoticed.

Like you, I am lawyer by trade. Unlike you, I actually practice law and represent real people, including small business people. These people, like me, see right through your tax plan. They know that small businesses can and do make $250,000.00 annually. They know that increased taxes will reduce their ability and, more importantly their incentive to hire more people, so that those people can earn money of their own and support their own families. Mocking these people, the ones that actually make America work is not the smartest campaign strategy. And the more people realize that these taxes are going to hurt employers, the more people will realize that these tax increases will affect them in many ways, perhaps the most insidious being that these costs will be passed on to the consumer, who unlike you, Senator Government, cannot just print more whenever they need it.

We, the John Galts of America, see you for what you are. You know exactly what you are doing, and what effect it will have. Yet you continue to lie to us. What name is the Arabic version of "Janus"? Perhaps it is the name you should have chosen for your middle name. We will fight, until the bitter end, to expose you as the manure merchant you are, and as the clear and present danger you represent. We are more than you think, and too numerous for you to silence or intimidate. You arrogantly underestimate us, and our dedication to this country and way of life that rewards hard work and the advantageous use of the opportunities this country provides. You insult us, and expect us to stand by like the sheeple you spellbind with your confident and glittering generalities, while you scheme and plot to rob our children of their legacy and birthright. Keep lying, Barry. Keep going. You are going to a have a tough time giving away money when no one works to pay your taxes. But I think you know that. We John Galts do not question your patriotism. We know you do not have any. When given the opportunity to explain yourself, you have handily demonstrated that you have no understanding of this country or its heritage, and that is why you can barely keep your contempt for it concealed. Here's a news flash, Barry: We don't like you either. You are an arugula and brie munching ivory tower intellectual, who cynically trains the masses how to be aggressive and vocal professional malcontents, then retire to your posh home in the tony Chicago suburbs to meet in the living room of your unrepentant terrorist neighbors, who realized that they had to subvert the youth and the culture before you could install yourselves as the enlightened betters of the grubby masses, with all the power and perks that come along with the position. First you had to dumb down entire generations, change the dialogue by making people's feelings more important that the subjects discussed. Words were made taboo. Everyone had to be given a distinct individual and group identity that made their own interests less than that of the overarching national identity. Diversity had to trump merit and excellence. Mediocrity in a vertical mosaic supplanted excellence in a melting pot.

Yes, Barry. We know you for who you are. We recognize the seeds of division which have been carefully sewn for a few generations now, and we know that you still underestimate the determination of the real America, and not the ersatz, 70's era socialistic America you seem determined to foist upon us. And we are certain that you will not enjoy the crop you are positioning yourself to harvest. Enjoy the adoration that the media lavishes you with right now. They are a fickle lot, and not all of them will be silent when they realize what you have sold them. But then, that really will be the least of your worries.

Sincerely,

Blackiswhite, Imperial Agent Provocateur

Yea. I've Arrived.

2008-10-18T11:47:00.000-07:00

I went to court yesterday on a simple matter, and of course, was waiting for the Judge's Clerk to open the court room. During this time, I had three people come up to me and ask me if I was an attorney. As I waited at Judicial Administration, I had another person ask me. On my way to the Court Clerk's Office, another asked me. After six years of practicing, I guess I finally look like an attorney, whatever that means. What did these people want from me? Free legal advice, of course. I guess I better get used to it. Barry the Blessed™ wants me to give it away anyway.

Scratch a "Community Organizing Group" and Find An Unrepentant Terrorist.

2008-10-16T21:01:00.000-07:00

My favorite movie blogger, Dirty Harry, has an alarming post on the potential AYERS?ACORN connection, and is quick to point out that we, the American Taxpayers, have been paying ACORN to go and steal this election for Barry the Blessed™.

The Audacity of Arrogance, Part 347

2008-10-16T19:49:00.000-07:00

Senator Government and his handlers must be feeling pretty confident in all the extra votes they paid ACORN to procure for them. I can't remember the last time a brie and arugula munching communistic America Hating candidate for President felt cocky enough to punish a member of the electorate, someone he was seeking a vote from, because he had the audacity to ask a very pertinent question, which was later used to in a debate to show that when it comes to tax policy, the ~~Emperor~~ ONE has no clothes.

Courtesy Cuffy Meigs:

In truth, the full text was:

“He’s trying to suggest that a plumber is the guy he’s fighting for,” Obama said. “How many plumbers you know that are making a quarter-million dollars a year?”

Of course, as you can see in the video, Joe was concerned about the business making that much. Now, depending on his tax election for the business, the income for the business could be attributed to him, thus making him "rich" by Barry the Blessed™'s arbitrary and capricious standard. However, it really doesn't change the fact that the media has now investigated Joe the Plumber far more thoroughly than any of The ONE's associates. In fact,I'm willing to bet that Joe feels very much like he has been given a prostate exam...with a full sized hand and without the benefit of any lube. The media has been too happy to report on his status as a plumber. Then they wanted to report the same about his boss. It doesn't appear that the media and their eleventy seven fact checkers researched these things very well before reporting their conclusions far and wide. Why would they? This...this...this PLUMBER! had the gall to ask their anointed choice a question that caused his mask to slip and reveal the communist underneath. After the reports far and wide about his licensure and tax lien, I might be worried about a defamation suit. Last I looked, he was a private citizen, and asking a question when the cameras were rolling hardly qualifies as injecting himself into the controversy. Could get kinda expensive for the "news" outlets, methinks.

The ONE could barely contain his contempt in this video. He can't believe that any candidate would be looking out for a lowly plumber. He doesn't spend private foundation money to help unrepentant terrorists to teach youth to be professional rabble-rousing malcontents. He doesn't preach "God damn America" and "Hate Whitey" from the pulpit of his church. He doesn't do shady deals. He doesn't register dead and non-existent people to vote. Instead, he wants to be one of those American success stories, and the ONE can't wait to tax the eyes out of him. For any other candidate, this would be political suicide. I'm starting to think that he could be caught with both a live girl and dead boy, and the media would simply shrug and say he was simply helping to "improve another generation of forward-thinking Americans". But what do I know? I'm sure that because I dare speak of Barry the Blessed™ in a way that clearly indicates that I don't buy into the Hope that he will leave me with some Change, I'm sure one of his followers has a special cell in the Hopey Changey gulag all picked out for me.

Apparently, the campaign for the candidate running with Palin saw an opportunity in this crass insult of the middle class voters Barry the Blessed™ claims to be all for in his excremental tax policy:

“It's an outrage that the Obama campaign and the media are attacking Joe the Plumber for asking a legitimate question of a presidential candidate. This is why voters still have so many questions about Barack Obama. Instead of answering tough questions, his campaign attacks average Americans for daring to look at the reality behind his words, said Tucker Bounds, spokesman the McCain-Palin campaign. “John McCain will continue to fight on behalf of all hardworking Americans like Joe for policies geared toward increasing prosperity and reducing the burden on taxpayers -- not 'spreading the wealth around' for Senator Government to distribute as he sees fit.”

Never a choice so clear. Obama just can't conceal his contempt for real Americans and what America is. But then, by having a job, I have demonstrated that I just don't "fit in" in Barack Hussein Obama's America.

H/T The Rott, Stop the ACLU, Hot Air, and Cuffy Meigs.

What I Needed To See In The Debate

2008-10-15T19:57:00.000-07:00

I waited for McCain to look in the camera and say “America, the choice is simple, you can vote for me and decide for yourself how to spend your money, or you can vote for my opponent and hope that he lets you keep the change.”

The best moment for my money? When McCain called Obama "Senator Government". Kinda sad when the best line was unintentional and so far, unrecognized by the media.

Honestly, McCain had a great point with across the board spending freezes and cutting spending. Obama just about yelped. He wants to get rid of the programs that don't work and get more money to the ones that do. It really has never occured to either of these guys that we have too many "programs" now. It really is about finding reasons to spend our money. I honestly cannot understand how this is good policy or is in any way intelligent.

***Update: I just heard Hannity recognize the "Senator Government" line.

A Few Questions for those who tilt to the left...

2008-10-15T19:37:00.000-07:00

I have obviously picked up an enormous amount of traffic in the last few days, and judging from the comments that I have received, I think its safe to say that some of this traffic is from the left side of the political spectrum. To you, I pose what really are the questions at the heart of the current political divide in this country today.

Do you really think government can spend your money (or mine) better than you can?

Do you really think government should decide how your money (or mine) should be spent?

If you answered yes to either of those questions, why?

These are very simple questions. If you cannot give direct answers, please do not waste your time or mine. I just want to understand why you believe this.

I love email.

2008-10-15T13:16:00.000-07:00

This was in my work email this morning:

Our Social Security
> >
> > Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social
> >
> > Security (FICA) Program. He promised:
> >
> > 1.) That participation in the Program would be
> > completely voluntary.
> >
> > 2.) That the participants would only have to pay
> > 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual
> > incomes into the Program,
> >
> > 3.) That the money the participants elected to put
> > into the Program would be deductible from
> > their income for tax purposes each year,
> >
> > 4.) That the money the participants put into the
> > Independent 'Trust Fund' rather than into the
> >
> > General Operating Fund, and therefore, would
> > only be used to fund the Social Security
> > Retirement Program, and no other
> > government program, and,
> >
> > 5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees
> > would never be taxed as income.
> >
> > Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and
> > are
> > now receiving a Social Security check every month --
> > and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of
> > the money we paid to the federal government to
> > 'put
> > away', you may be interested in the following:
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Q: Which political party took Social Security from
> > the
> > Independent 'Trust Fund' and put it in to the
> >
> > General Fund so that Congress could spend it?
> >
> > A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the Democratically-
> > controlled House and Senate.
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Q: Which political party eliminated the income tax
> > deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?
> >
> > A: The Democratic Party.
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Q: Which political party started taxing Social
> > Security annuities?
> >
> > A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the
> > 'tie-breaking' deciding vote as President of
> > the
> > Senate, while he was Vice President of the U.S.
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Q: Which political party decided to start giving
> > annuity payments to immigrants?
> >
> > AND MY FAVORITE:
> >
> > A: That's right!
> >
> > Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party.
> > Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65,
> > they began to receive Social Security payments! The
> > Democratic Party gave these payments to them
> > even though they never paid a dime into it!
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Then, after violating the original contract (FICA),
> >
> > the Democrats turn around and tell you that the
> >
> > Republicans want to take your Social Security away!
> >
> > And the worst part about it is, uninformed citizens
> > believe it!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > If enough people receive this, maybe a seed of
> > awareness will be planted and maybe changes will
> > evolve. Maybe not, some Democrats are awfully
> > sure of what isn't so.
> >
> > But it's worth a try. How many people can
> > YOU send this to?
> >
> > Actions speak louder than bumper stickers.
> >
> > AND CONGRESS GIVES THEMSELVES 100% RETIREMENT
> >
> > FOR ONLY SERVING ONE TERM!!!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 'A government big enough to give you everything
> > you want,
> >
> > is strong enough to take everything you have.'
> > -Thomas Jefferson

Still Want To Give Them A Break?

2008-10-14T08:28:00.001-07:00

Yea. I not only get to question their patriotism, I now get to question their class.

I don't recall us making movies about Clinton and the Intern...Oh that's right, anything about the Clintons that contained facts that would diminish their "legacy" was blocked and buried. Silly me. And Barry the Blessed™ already tries to intimidate people who tell the truth about him with law enforcement personnel. But this is perfectly acceptable. After all, if Oliver Stone has a shrieking, hysterical, almost psychotic dislike of a sitting President, then it MUST be true.

Another Moment of Truth Gone Ignored

2008-10-14T08:14:00.000-07:00

This campaign event moment brought to you by Barack Hussein Obama.

*During handshaking*

Obama to Plumber: "I can count on your vote, right?"

Plumber to Obama: “Your new tax plan is going to tax me more. Isn’t it?”

Obama: “It’s not that I want to punish your success, I just want to make sure that everybody that is behind you, that they have a chance for success too. I think that when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”

Taking money to give to another rather than letting them earn it, maybe by working for the other person? Since when did that become America?

I see very dark times ahead.

Intellectual Dishonesty and the Left

2008-10-13T11:30:00.000-07:00

I was watching TV last night and saw an ad for "W". The announcer said "Based on the Incredible True Story."

This drew a silent Hurmpf from me. From the fiction in the clips playing out before my eyes, I could tell that once again, I was expected to be a good little liberal sheeple and believe that the "world as the libs wish it was" was the world that actually is. For nearly eight years, I have watched a breakdown in civility that I never thought I would witness in my lifetime. It has become acceptable and commonplace to refer to our president as both a criminal and buffoon, seemingly in the same sentence. The left, guided by the generation that protested Vietnam, desperately desires to cast the current conflict in the same light, and still to this day wants to paint every administration official as a "War Criminal" and "War Monger" of some type or shadow, despite the news from Iraq, and the fact that we have not been attacked since 9/11. They just can't seem to make up their collective mind about the current administration, and apparently, that's ok, so long as they keep shouting. The uglier and baser the shout, the happier they are.

Truth that doesn't fit this world view is about as welcome as a Blood and Garlic cocktail among vampires, which makes for an interesting daily dichotomy among any cognizant of it. Despite the fact that there is no shortage of facts that refute and dispel the Left's "truth", a visitor to this country might never know it. The mainstream press, inspite of falling ratings and readers, continues to studiously ignore facts that do not mirror the approved version of reality. Acolytes of the left no longer have to respond with any meaningful answer when questioned, ad hominems and screeching name-calling is considered to be perfectly acceptable.

How did we get here? I'm certain that there are several factors but the one that stands out is that the radical left of the Sixties, the same generation that could never figure out that there is much more to this country than how it did or did not affect them never became unradicalized, it just went underground. Academia provided fertile ground to these burrowing insects, determined to subvert the country at its core. People like that "Respected Educator", and unrepentant terrorist, William Ayers, realized that they could poison entire generations with their warped world view, and merrily set about on their task to make Socialism mainstream in this country. We are now reaping the benefits of their hard work and determination, and there now exists a schism the likes of which has not occupied the political life in this country for a very long time. Unreason is on the rise. It has become trendy to reject and ignore fact because it doesn't subscribe to the "truth", and those charged with informing the public have determined to indoctrinate it instead.

I am not yet willing to give up on this country, but I do believe that we are in for some interesting times. We are now at a point where the Left's Paranoia ("Diebold! Diebold!") and the ACORN's blatant and widespread voter registration fraud virtually guarantees that no matter who wins, there will be allegations of fraud, and demands for recount, which sadly, will cast doubt on the outcome, no matter who is left standing when the dust settles. The only good news is that once the old media completes its death spiral, that will leave the New Media, the ones who actually report the facts that no other outlet will acknowledge as the source of the news.

Damned by His Own Words.

2008-10-11T17:44:00.000-07:00

H/T to John Locke, commenter at Dirty Harry's Place. This was his work.

Mr. Berg In His Own Words

2008-10-11T16:53:00.000-07:00

Copy this video and send it to everyone you know before it goes down the memory hole.

*subsequent posts on this subject posted above*

Berg v. Obama Update

2008-10-11T13:28:00.000-07:00

This case just keeps getting more and more intriguing. Obama's attorneys have moved for a Protective Order preventing them from complying with the discovery request while their motion to dismiss is pending.

Berg's response? A brief in which he cites several cases that he alleges clearly outlines why such a requset is improper and should be denied. Oh, and some "In your Face" requests for admission. Sucks to be Jugears' legal team right now, because if they admit, then they lose the case. If they deny, then they are on record denying things that might yet be proven false, and Barry the Blessed™ will toss them under the bus.

I cannot understand why the defenders of the natural born citizen Barry Dunham would find it advantageous to continue to fight this instead of actually producing the necessary proof.

*when you click on the link, select entry 18 and read it in PDF*

I really want to see how the Judge rules on this.

Some Things to Consider

2008-10-11T10:53:00.000-07:00

A lot of very smart people I know are talking about the spectre of a Second Civil War as the result of this upcoming election. While the prospect gives me no joy at all, there should be no doubt as to with which side I will stand. Having said that, anyone who thinks about this for longer than five minutes probably realizes that if such a terrible day should come, we won't just be fighting fellow Americans, we will be fighting foreigners as well. This isn't the 1860s and the odds of the world stepping back and letting us settle the matter for ourselves are slim and none, with slim slipping out the door.

There is now an established international precedent for intervening in internal conflicts, and with a whole host of weapons that the rest of the world will want to ensure are secure (Translation: see the opportunity to steal), foreign involvement is inevitable. I actually have less of a problem with the idea of battling with these people. They will be uninvited interlopers who made the tragic mistake of stepping on American soil without asking permission first. The bad part is that I see an awful lot of bloodshed in the future, here, barring some fairly incredible events.

Flashpoint

2008-10-10T19:27:00.000-07:00

I'm surveying the political landscape and I don't like what I see.

I grew up in the 'burbs of Flint, Michigan...birthplace of the UAW. Adolph Hitler and Mickey Mouse could run for office there and as long as they had that magic (D) after their names on the ballot, they would be elected. I was a product of my environment, and was a self-professed Democrat even when working on my B.A. in Political Science at the University of Michigan Flint, although the further I got, the more doubts began to arise. Just the same, I was a leftist elitist swine. I, like many good enlightened leftists believed that the average person wasn't smart enough to make important political decisions, and that it was going to be up to people like me to make sure that people were taken care of, and that we relieved them of the burdens of any potential failure. Along with that arrogant nanny-statist belief, I also believed that the U.S. was doing nearly everything wrong in its relations with other countries. William Appleman Williams' "The Tragedy of American Diplomacy" was extraordinarily persuasive. I stopped short of concluding that our actions were willfully malevolent and believed that we were simply misguided. (Sorry. I wasn't a bomb-thrower.) I also snidely dismissed the Conservative beliefs that things could be simply defined as right and wrong, and black and white, clinging to the leftist belief that the world was immersed in shades of grey, and that things were not that simple.

However, I got older. I continued my schooling after a few years. I started to look a bit more critically at what government was doing. I was also learning the law. At this point, politically, I was starting to drift a bit more to the right, and started to find myself more and more annoyed at the abdication of personal responsibility and the apparent belief that government had to save us from ourselves. I also started to meet more people, many of them from other countries or first generation American. This was the beginning of my understanding that many of the people in the world who don't like us feel that way for reasons that exist independent of our interactions with other nations and that these dealings merely provide a pretext for this hatred. I also started to realize that personal responsibility, and yes *gasp* religion was at the very heart of the American Ideal. The more I looked at the things that government was doing, the more I was left with the feeling that something was wrong. Careful study showed me what was wrong. I was starting to realize that government was doing things it had no business doing, and it was horribly inefficient, also. I'm not sure exactly when I realized that I was a conservative, but by the time I was earning my Masters in Tax Law, I knew that I was now a conservative.

Now I see many things that I could not see before. Leftists love the "shades of grey" and "nothing is simple" world views for several reasons. First, because complexity makes it easier to obtain and retain power. It virtually cries out for a ruling class to run things and take the burden from the common folk who are too busy (and too simple minded) to understand how to effectively deal with the day-to-day functions of government. This is the reason for the hysterical and vitriolic attacks against Sarah Palin. Her success as an executive undermines the carefully groomed perception that the average person simply is not equipped to govern.

Secondly, these beliefs foster and nurture an atmosphere of ambiguity that allows their way of thinking to slowly but inexorably gain a foothold and continue to advance until society has accepted so much of the necessary leftist dogma that it accepts poisonous concepts as truth. Concepts such as "political correctness", "diversity", and new definitions for old concepts that are so far astray from original connotations that any person with an understanding of history and etymology would think that they have stepped into the Twilight Zone. These words and concepts also serve the dual purpose of indoctrination into the "new" way of thinking, and equipping the new masters with tools to condemn and ostracize those who do not go along with the program and recognize it for what it is. Hence the cries of "racism" when someone dares question the substance or reason of policies promulgated by the left. It also explains the allegations of intolerance when someone questions the wholesale acceptance and societal sanction of any aspect of the homosexual agenda.

Creating this brave new world would have been far more difficult without an aggressive and intellectually dishonest campaign to marginalize the dominant religion. As I have discussed before, our law, and the reasoning underlying it is tremendously influenced by Judeo-Christian belief and philosophy. Much in this belief and philosophy is hostile to the agenda and beliefs of the left. Thus, we had to be subject to lawsuits based on a frightfully misguided belief that the Union must be governed by a policy of "separation of church and state" that did not just ban God from places he had not dwelled in our society and government, but also deliberately and specifically drove him from places where he had historically occupied.

Why have I engaged in this exercise of personal confession and political analysis? So you understand that I understand the breadth and depth of the more advanced thinking on the left, and to lay a foundation for my authority to say that our current political predicament is at a flashpoint. On the one side, I see kerosene. On the other, I see gasoline. The various issues in play right now are a lit match.

On the left, we have a candidate who has tried very hard not to have his past on display for people to view. However, even those who try not to have a record will occasionally leave enough of one to alarm reasonable people who are paying attention. While we really don't know where he was born, he has responded to a lawsuit to discover it not with production of a birth certificate, which would render the lawsuit moot, and dispel the rumor that he is not a natural born U.S. Citizen, but by filing motions to dismiss instead. As an Illinois State Senator, he when on record not only to be against any restriction on abortions, but clearly stated that he was not in favor of babies who survived their mother's attempts to murder them receiving life-saving medical care once they were born. The pastor of his church, the man who performed the marriage ceremony, and presided for 20 years while he sat in the pews nodding, was discovered to be a raving, anti-semitic, Whitey-hating black liberation theology preacher. He has been a close associate of a convicted felon who was involved in many shady real estate and money deals. He has known and associated with two unrepentant terrorists for the past 20 years...people who said as briefly as 10 years ago that they did not regret their bombings and lament that they had not done more. In two years in the U.S. Senate, he collected more money from Fannie and Freddie than any other Congresscritter other than Chris Dodd. He has a long association with ACORN, which is now being investigated in 11 states for large scale voter fraud. The group has also received $800,000 from this candidate to get out the vote in the upcoming elections. Whenever he comes under scrutiny or criticism, he points to the other party and cries "Racism". He actively implies "Racism" by the other side when nothing justifies such an assertion. He has gone on record in saying he will cut the military and talk to threats like Amahdinnerjacket without preconditions. He claims "dirty campaigning" when his opponent brings up facts that he'd rather you not hear. He has said things on the trail that legitimately raise concerns on how he would act to curtail the Second Amendment, and makes no bones about the fact that he would appoint judges who believe that the Constitution is a living breathing document that must be interpreted in the context of the times we live.

On the other side, we have a man who was shot down in Vietnam and beaten so badly that he remains crippled to this day. A person who has demonstrated an annoying propensity to cooperate with the other side of the Aisle when conducting what he believed to be the people's business. His past is an open book when compared to that of his opponent, and although he is not nearly conservative enough for my liking, I also have no reason to question his patriotism. While I think he does not understand that border security is essential to national security, I also know that he will not capitulate to our enemies, or deliberately take steps to weaken us, because he understands that the world is a dangerous place, and if we put the rock down before we extend a hand, we will get the bums rush. He has caused the left to collapse in seizures of Tourettes and foaming at the mouth over his choice in a running mate, because she so effectively destroys a perception they have labored long and hard to impose upon the American people, and yet he helped enable an ill-conceived bail-out plan that helps extend the reach of government further into capitalism to "Fix" a problem created by the intrusion of government into capitalism.

More and more, the average person, and by average, I mean those who haven't bought into the "New" society that the left continues to try to mainstream on the rest of us have been watching the government ignore us about drilling for oil when the price of crude started spiking, and refused to listen to us when we told them not to do the bailout. Now the economy appears to be in a freefall, and the mainstream press still ignores the stories on the leftist candidate and tries to pin everything on the other party.

The left, convinced of its superiority and the need to save us from ourselves by making government mother and father, has given up on dialogue and stridently marches forth, insisting that they have the answers and they must be empowered. The average person is feeling less and less like the government is serving us, and the candidate we are left with still holds opinions that we do not, and is arrogant enough to act on them. The fraud continues to climb, and we are continually confronted with Obamatrons who continue to allege whatever is convenient for their candidate, and completely ignore any attempts at reason, and worship (WORSHIP!!!) their candidate, who, at least with a teleprompter, dazzles with glittering generalities and nebulous promises of hope and change. And the press seems oblivious to the realities of what is occurring. A climate of general panic and fear is gripping the country. I am now convinced that if Obama loses, there will be riots and unrest. I am equally convinced that there will be unrest if Obama wins, because his associates seem to have created the perception that there is widespread fraud and corruption, and the government no longer serves our interests anyway.

I fear that we have the ingredients for a civil war, with the stakes no less than the determination of America's future as a nation united and guided by the principals that have made us an example to the rest of the world, or an America that is a hovel, buried under the weight and tyranny of mediocrity.

Any Length To Destroy the Country

2008-10-10T13:15:00.000-07:00

Barry, ACORN, and election stealing.

Real Racism in the Name of Diversity.

2008-10-09T18:47:00.000-07:00

Folly sent me this link today. I am sick to death of this "diversity trumps merit" nonsense.

I know, I know. It can't be racism unless it is practiced against someone who is other than white. The truth is that "diversity" is a weak excuse to lower admissions standards. However, I am curious about the follow through. I myself attended a law school that was considered a lower tier school because it would let nearly anyone in, but unlike some of the other schools with a very high bar for admittance, you had to deliver once you were in, or you would be out quickly. No BS classes that you might find at the other schools, like "TV and the Law" or similar courses. Practical courses, with a clinical requirement, taught by people who either had been or still were "practicing" attorneys. The attrition rate was shocking. No grade inflation. An "A" meant that you truly did excell. Rarely more than one for any given course. "C" really was the average. The biggest shock? I had freinds who transferred after year one to some of the "name" schools in the southeast, and found that their grades were typically rounded up one grade upon transfer. Yeah. It was that tough. If this school runs a similar program, it could almost be forgivable. Almost, because merit is being sacrificed on the altar of diversity, and it institutionalizes double standards, which do no service to either black or white students in the long run, because it tells the black students "You don't have to be as good as everyone else." No incentive, no effort. And it tells the white students that they are held to a higher standard, and still might have to give way to someone who cannot begin to measure up, thus robbing incentive from them. If we keep sacrificing merit, we doom ourselves to the tyranny of mediocrity.

Interesting Reading

2008-10-08T12:54:00.000-07:00

I read a post at the Rott that had this link to the pleadings in Berg v. Obama. I had written off the whole birth certificate controversy a long time ago, but as I read the pleadings, and the fact that the court had told Obama he needs to cough this up, I have to admit, it has me wondering about a few things. You should go read it yourself, and then tell me what you think.

****UPDATE*****

My mistake. On closer reading, it appears that the court hasn't yet ruled on either the motion to resist or the motion to compel. Still interesting.

Line 'Em Up, Side By Side, and Put the Scripture to Their Professed Beliefs

2008-10-01T20:46:00.000-07:00

Yeah, I guess I was a little surprised at the reaction to the white paper in the post below, but at the same time, there is a historical precedent for the churches being involved in the politics of this country:

Many modern clerics would probably be surprised to learn of the active role colonial preachers had in America's fight for independence. It is no exaggeration to say that had it not been for the activism of America's pulpits, our independence would never have been won and this nation would not even exist.
Until at least the Twentieth Century, it was well known that the “Black Regiment” was an intricate, even crucial, part of America's successful break with the Crown. They were called the black regiment, because of the black robes they wore when preaching.
The Black Regiment was composed of men of various Christian denominations who courageously championed the cause of liberty and independence and who preached fervently and faithfully the message of redemption and Biblical authority.
In the thinking and preaching of the Black Regiment, freedom and independence were precious gifts of God not to be trampled under foot by men, human authority was limited and particular and subject to proper divine parameters, and the soul and mind of man were never to be enslaved by any master save Christ Himself
Preachers of the black robes were found among Baptists, Presbyterians, Episcopalians, German Reformed, Lutherans, Congregationalists, and others. They were young and old, loud and soft-spoken, rough and gentle, and urban and rural.
John Adams, second president of the United States, once remarked, "It is the duty of the clergy to accommodate their discourses to the times, to preach against such sins as are most prevalent, and recommend such virtues as are most wanted.

Of course, it was those different flavors of Christianity that the founding fathers had in mind when they penned these words:

Amendment 1 December 15, 1791

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Politics touches several points in every citizen's life. Where best to begin with an analysis other than with the party's platform?

On the issue of human life, the Dems say:

The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to choose a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.”

The Republicans say:

"Faithful to the first guarantee of the Declaration of Independence, we assert the inherent dignity and sanctity of all human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amend to the Constitution.”

And the Bible says:

Behold, children are a gift of the Lord; the fruit of the womb is a reward – Psalm 127:3
My frame was not hidden from Thee, when I was made in secret – Psalm 139:15
Thus says the Lord who made you and formed you in the womb – Isaiah 44:2
There are six things which the Lord hates, Yes, seven which are an abomination to Him… hands that shed innocent blood – Proverbs 6:16 &17a

On Marriage, the Dems say:

“We support the full inclusion of all families, including same-sex couples, in the life of our nation, and support equal responsibility, benefits, and protections. We will enact a comprehensive bipartisan employment non-discrimination act. We oppose the Defense of Marriage Act and all attempts to use this to divide us.”

And the Republicans say:

“Because our children’s future is best preserved within the traditional understanding of marriage, we call for a constitutional amendment that fully protects marriage as a union of a man and a woman, so that judges cannot make other arrangements equivalent to it.”

And the Bible says:

If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act – Lev 20:13
God gave them up unto vile affections… their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature… the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men – Romans 1:26-27
know, that no whoremonger (male prostitute)… hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience – Ephesians 5:5,6

On finances and taxes, the Dems say:

“America cannot afford to continue to run up huge deficits… The key is to make tough choices, in particular enforcing pay-as-you-go budgeting rules.”

And the Republicans say:

“We favor adoption of the Balanced Budget Amendment to require a balanced federal budget except in time of war. Earmarking must stop. To eliminate wasteful projects and pay-offs to special interests, we will impose an immediate moratorium on the earmarking system and reform the appropriations process through full transparency.”

And the Bible says:

Owe no man anything – Romans 13:8
The borrower is servant to the lender – Proverbs 22:7b
He that hateth gifts shall live – Proverbs 15:27
Many will entreat the favour of the prince: and every man is a friend to him that giveth gifts – Proverbs 19:6

Finally, on the subject of religious freedom, the Dems say:

“Democrats will fight to end discrimination based on race, sex, ethnicity, national origin, language, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, age and disability in every corner of our country, because that’s the American we believe in.”

The Republicans say:

“Our Constitution guarantees the free exercise of religion and forbids any religious test for public office, and it likewise prohibits the establishment ofa state-sponsored creed. The balance between those two ideals has been distorted by judicial rulings which attempt to drive faith out of the public arena. The public display of the Ten Commandments does not violate the U.S. Constitution and accurately reflects the Judeo-Christian heritage of our country.”

And the Bible says:

“Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; who substitute darkness for light, and light for darkness...”

Now, it seems to me that there is a lot of potential for conflict on the Dems plank, and if it came to respecting "sexual orientation" or religion, I think I can safely guess which one takes a backseat.

Not telling anyone how to vote. Just wanted an informed decision for believers. Take it as you please.

H/T to Pastor Bruce for all of his research.

Food for Thought

2008-09-28T18:45:00.001-07:00

This white paper from the Alliance Defense Fund makes very interesting reading. Maybe it is time for Christians to stop "turning the other cheek on this issue". If the government can't get it right on this subject, then its one more point where it has ceeded its legitimacy and authority, and if we accept it, then we deserve to have a country the founding fathers would fail to recognize.

Next time you hear Obama talk about failed economic policies...

2008-09-26T19:24:00.000-07:00

...be prepared with a few "inconvenient facts" to present to him and his followers:

Worth every minute spent.

Another Reason Why Obama Is a Clownshoe.

2008-09-25T21:08:00.000-07:00

Yeah, like we needed another reason, like the ones we have aren't good enough already. Apparently, he is once again sending the cease and desist letters to TV stations that are playing the current NRA ad that uses Obama's words against him. I know he has a truth problem, that being that the truth troubles him, but when he sends the letters, there is only one purpose in mind: itimidation. Now everyone knows that you an only be intimidated if you give someone the right to do so, and you are a fool to withhold that right from your betters, but Barry Obama isn't better than anyone. This is the guy who wants to be President, so he holds a press conference to say about the financial crisis "Call me if you need me." Yeah Barry, way to exhibit that "leading from behind" leadership.

And speaking of the financial crisis, I'm a little leary of letting the largest insurer in the nation fail, but I think they could do more with less of our money by taking the cap gains rate to zero for the next ten years and capping the corporate income tax rate at 10%, with serious requirements for corporations to conduct most if not all of their operations (manufacturing, accounting, distributing, etc.) here in the U.S. for the most favorable tax treatment. It'll never happen, of course. Spending our money is much more fun.

Wheeww.

2008-09-24T18:55:00.000-07:00

Trial's done. We got it done in one day. Yea!
I liked the fact that the judge was paying attention. He actually had to stop testimony halfway through and get another note pad. I like it when they pay attention. Non jury trial, so he also asked a fair amount of questions himself. The best part? He complimented counsel (both) on doing an excellent job in presenting their respective cases, and stated that he thought every witness presented themselves well and were credible. He also noted that fact that our witnesses admitted when they could not remember, as the pertinent events took place four years ago.

No ruling today, but he confirmed at the end the points that he heard made clearly. While my client recognizes that we could still lose, they cannot say that they did not have their day in court.

Tired

2008-09-23T13:28:00.000-07:00

Election crapola, and willfully blind leftists,
Financial Bailouts and Democrats with their hands out,
Mounting debts, and troubles on the wing,
These aren't a few of my favorite things.

I have a trial tomorrow and clients who need things,
I am just tired and the fat lady sings (at least until Rostta pushes her down),
These are a few of my least favorite things.

And Now, Its Time for the Carnival of "WRONG!"

2008-09-18T20:48:00.000-07:00

Such an exciting week. We lead off with the Whatsisface Palin ticket making gains still, and in fact, making a strong showing the polls everywhere, including, of all places, New Jersey! The official Obama spin on this was, predicatbly, racism, specifically, white flight from the state. No explaination was given for why, exactly, this hurts Obama. Of course, this doesn't stop there. In addition to the usual "Shout 'em down because we can't fight 'em on substance" moves being made by the Obamabots, I was shown this, courtesy of the Rott:

The "your attitude provokes attacks" line was especially infuriating. Don't tell me that the sun is shining when the rain is running off my nose. It only pisses me off.

Then the Huff Poo printed a column by new-age charlatan Deepak Chopra about how Palin is all wrong for us, or some such crap. It was pretty difficult to read, and if I really wanted to read through nearly incomprehensible, self-righteous, hit pieces filled with flowery prose intended to disguise the odor of rotting pretzel logic which are utterly devoid of any semblance of reason and logic, I would simply read opposing counsel's trial briefs. However, whether or not the new age sage realized it, he exposed the fact that he simply doesn't get it with this gem:

Look at what she stands for:
--Small town values -- a denial of America's global role, a return to petty, small-minded parochialism.
--Ignorance of world affairs -- a repudiation of the need to repair America's image abroad.
--Family values -- a code for walling out anybody who makes a claim for social justice. Such strangers, being outside the family, don't need to be heeded.
--Rigid stands on guns and abortion -- a scornful repudiation that these issues can be negotiated with those who disagree.
--Patriotism -- the usual fallback in a failed war.
--"Reform" -- an italicized term, since in addition to cleaning out corruption and excessive spending, one also throws out anyone who doesn't fit your ideology.

Keep in mind that he finds the characteristics to be wrong for the country, he also fundamentally misunderstands what these traits say about us.

Small Town Values means that you look to your family first...you care about each other, you look out for each other, and again, you are an individual, but you are still part of something larger than yourself, and how you participate effects how things go for everyone.

Ignorance of world affairs is provably wrong, but since he is an "intellectual", he need not be bothered by such trivial matters as inconvenient facts that monkey up a carefully crafted assessment of how he would like things to be. (See Gore, Al, and "Global Warming")

Family Values, meaning you believe in the family as the primary source of values and as a resource for assistance, knowledge, personal growth, and a way to ensure that the lessons learned by older generations are not simply lost before they are imparted to the younger ones. Families are to be cherished and protected, not torn asunder and supplanted by ersatz simulacrums seeking to usurp the family's legitimacy by insisting that they be recognized as the same them when they clearly are not.

Rigid stands on guns and abortion? Well, the Second Amendment means what it says, regardless of the most fevered wet dreams of Obama and the left, and that is a good thing, because it is truly what stands between keeping the nation I was born into and the one the Left would love to replace it with. As for abortion, a sane and civil populace does not slaughter its unborn children for any reason, let alone selfish desires that focus on the "ME", when the "ME" took a back seat to charge and responsibility of a life the "ME" helped to create.

Patriotism? You mean the belief that this country really is better than the rest, and a public recognition of the fact that this is true, because so many people from everywhere else in the world are trying so hard to get here. As for the "failed" war, NotSoDeep? Your guy was negotiating with the Iraqis to keep them from coming up with a withdrawal plan until after the election. If they are ready to talk about a withdrawal, that means that things are significantly better than they were a year, or two, or three ago. That isn't a "failed" war.

Reform. Yes that means roting out corruption in your own party. It also means naming the names of the esteemed members of government who have forgotten that government serves us, not the other way around, but in light of the deepening financial crisis, and the more information that comes out daily it, I can see where the Junior Senator from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae would be concerned. With all the democrats making millions of dollars in mad money running the institutions into the ground, causing real pain in bailouts from the government, I'd be scared of the public knowing my name and role in it too.

Such a cockeyed world view can only seem normal to a "citizen of the world", who doesn't understand that our greatness didn't come from what we did for the world, in an attempt to make the world love us, but what we did for ourselves, and showing the world that freedom and prosperity go hand in hand. For some reason, the left, and the media (but I repeat myself) think that there is freedom in slavery and will try everything they can to enslave us. But enough of the Huffington Poo. Which brings me to the "So disgusting, I really would beat this person within an inch of his miserable life" moment.

Unfunny comedian Doug Stanhope and his truly revolting internet screed and offer. Using "Arrogant" when referring to the Left is truly redundant, but this letter to Bristol Palin offering her money to abort her child, because he is convinced that she really wants to do it, but her evil Christofascist Mother is preventing her from exercising her "Constitutional right" to do so. Breath taking? Absolutely. Utterly wrong? Absolutely. Do you want to see a face to face meeting between Todd Palin and Doug Stanhope over this? Absolutely. An excerpt:

Never in history has a woman been under more pressure to keep an unwanted pregnancy than Bristol Palin. She is the teenage daughter of Alaska Governor & Vice-Presidential hopeful Sarah Palin - a conservative, Creationist Christian power-vampire and pro-life huckster who has put Bristol and her un-welcomed fetus at the center of a politico-religious crusade to stop her exercising her constitutional right to terminate the pregnancy.

I prescribe a good beating, followed by a good beating.

Today's Pearl of Wisdom

2008-09-16T21:08:00.001-07:00

On my way to Cub Scouts with Heir No. One, we were discussing the planets. He was pontificating about life on other planets. He thought we might find life on the moon. I said "Not much chance of that sport, unless we took it there." Undaunted, he kept going through the list. "What about Mars, or Saturn, or Jupiter?" I told him "I don't think Jupiter, buddy. Once you got to a part you could stand on, the gravity would probably kill anything that lives."

It got really quiet in the back seat for a minute. Then he said "Do you know what, Dad? You're not the Boss of my imagination."

He's right about that.

A Revealing Question

2008-09-13T12:47:00.000-07:00

I have been thinking about the Charlie Gibson interview with Sarah Palin this last Thursday, and the question he asked her about the "hubris" in accepting John McCain's invitation to become his running mate. Many people have registered objections regarding the question, especially since it was coupled with questions that implied that she didn't have the experience necessary to do the job, and it was asked in a somewhat condescending manner. I would be remiss if I failed to acknowledge the fact that Gibson also asked the question of Obama several months ago. It wasn't asked with the same tone at all, nor did Gibson question the "community organizer's" experience when he asked the question. Don't take my word for it. Nice Deb has already helpfully compiled both clips here.

Like many conservatives, I was less than pleased by the question. However, the obvious bias is not really the reason for my displeasure. I have simply come to accept that the major media outlets and many in the 'entertainment' industry are in the tank for Obama, and the Democrats, even though I still cannot fully grasp why. No, the reason for my displeasure with the question, around which the rest of the interview was framed didn't immediately come to me, and yet it irritated, much like a grain of sand stuck in my shorts after a trip to the beach. This morning,while ironing my shirts, it came to me. The very question itself said more about the person asking it than the answer ever could. A person not just willing to ignore the other governors who had been elected President, but to ignore the lack of experience in the leader of the opposing ticket, who is actually running for the job.

Charlie Gibson, according to Wikipedia, was born in the midwest, in the town of Evanston, Illinois. His family later moved to Washington. D.C., where he attended a private college prep school, Sidwell Freinds, and then went on to Princeton. Because his grades weren't good enough to get him into a top-tier law school, he decided to go into journalism instead. As a practicing attorney myself, I found this to be a curious turn. It isn't necessary to go to a top tier law school to become an attorney, or even a good attorney. What going to a top tier law school can accomplish for you is landing you a high-paying job at a prestigious law firm, and can frequently be a stepping stone to other careers noted for their wealth and power. However, if you have friends who by virtue of their upbringing, may have become wealthy and powerful on their own, knowing them can aid your career as a journalist, and you may find your own star starting to rise. If you were part of that world to begin with, you might start to think that others from it have the very same right to live and work in it. With his Columbia and Harvard pedigrees, Barack Obama is part of "the Club". With the favorable treatment in the media, that skirted any real investigation into who Barack Obama really is, and why its ok for a Presidential candidate to chum around with unrepentant terrorists, it was looking like the cypher with the fresh young face and unparalleled speech-delivery ability was going to sail into the White House on a tide of media adulation buttressed by enthusiastic idealists delighting at the prospect of finally being absolved of "white guilt" that was never theirs to bear, or those seeking to congratulate themselves for their state of enlightenment in voting for the first black President of the United States, people like Charlie thought it was all sewn up. And then the apple cart was upset. The war hero selected the hockey mom, and the backs of the elite were raised up.

Sarah Palin, not Barack Obama, symbolizes the American promise come to life. Her past is a story of her own making, not a path charted for her by others. She did not train herself in order to one day walk the corridors of power. She grew up, like so many, being told that she could one day become President, but unlike many whom she so discombobulates, she did not grow up believing that the Presidency was her own best destiny, either. Nor will she wear it, like a heavy and prestigious cloak, when she walks away from office, either. She will go back to charting the course of a life that is not scripted, accepting the bad with the good, and doing so as herself, not former governor/VP/President.

Charlie's worldview has been shaped by his experiences. He can't help seeking the result that he does. He sees the upper echelons of power filled with people like him. The best families, and the best schools. And when a woman who is only temporarily a politician, but always a mother, a wife, and a person of faith placed in close proximity to the White House, he, like so many others, had to act. Such a person simply could not be worthy without the training, and all it entails. Charlie's question about hubris was his way of asking her why she felt it was ok to tread on sacred ground...proximity to the Presidency...without first paying her dues. Charlie's question about hubris was a display of hubris. A moment when his job took a backseat to his role as one of the chosen. Charlie doesn't believe in the equality of opportunity. Charlie confuses ability with pedigree and credentials. Charlie doesn't believe in the average American, because the message he has been bathing in since his youth is that he is something more than them. in another era, we might have called Charlie a royalist, since he seems to believe only a certain select group is capable and has the right to lead. His question showed a frustration with a group in this country who recognize a leader when they hear one, a group that understands that understands that a new perspective isn't a bad thing, and refuse to be lead to someone else's choice and be told that it is the only reasonable one.

I don't begrudge Charlie his 8 million dollars a year. Ideally, I'd like to make that kind of money myself. That is what America is about. Doing the best you can for yourself and your family. I hope he'll understand when I don't buy into the world they way he wants it to be, as I vote for the candidates I believe in, largely because they believe in America.

Void On Delivery From Void Between the Ears

2008-09-12T17:59:00.001-07:00

It has been entertaining and disheartening to watch the "entertainment" community melt down in the wake Sarah Palin being named to the ticket with John McCain. I know that there is no reason to expect that many of these people are overly bright. I mean, let's face it. We would be hard-pressed to see many of them in jobs requiring great technical skill, like surgeons, and no one is likely to confuse them with rocket scientists, nor are any of them being recruited for jobs that require a keen intellect and an ability to use reason and logic. Nope. No, in the scheme of things, these mental giants we keep enriching with our money are most akin to liberal academia: convinced in the superiority of their own intellect because of their time to "consider" matters, yet completely lacking in the necessary real world experience to know that their brilliant plans are nothing but complete and utter crap. No, these people are attention whores, and if they were even reasonably intelligent attention whores, then they'd have a different gig altogether. Its called Congress. What do we expect from our "entertainers"? We want them to entertain us.

That means, if you are a musician or singer, play the music or sing. If you are a good actor, than act. If you are a mediocre actor, then be a model who talks, and if you are a bad actor, make us laugh. If you are a comedian, then stick to the jokes. But for the sake of all that is holy, quit climbing up on your soapboxes and and talking down America, and displaying your stunning ignorance to all who hear. Really. Think about this. You have reached a point of stupid that is beyond your means to convincingly sell any longer. It will have career ramifications for you. Don't believe me? How's airplay on your new songs, Dixie Chicks? What, for many attempts, you just can't seem to come up with an anti-Iraq war movie that sells tickets, Hollywood? And the announcement of Palin really brought them out of the woodwork. Not only have "Hip Ones" been proclaiming their ignorance, the has-beens have been cashing in any modicum of credibility they might otherwise retain in keeping their mouths shut, or at least thinking before speaking by guest authoring at the odious left-wing excrement wiping cloth known as the Huffington Post.

A running sample of entertainers determined to Bring The Stupid in just the last two weeks:

Annette Benning: “But the idea that people, who voted for Hillary, who tend to be Democrats, would change and vote for McCain because of Sarah Palin seems to me bizarre.”

Ummm, prolly because the dems threw all semblance of belief in feminism and equality when they started attacking Palin?

The world-renown brain surgeon and philosopher, Shirley MacLaine: “I think the idea of nominating her to commandeer some of the disenfranchised Hillary voters just because she wears a skirt is ridiculous,” MacLaine said, adding that critics who say she should stay at home with her infant son, who has Down syndrome, and her teenage daughter, who is pregnant, might be right."

Uuhhh, Shirley? Do you know who you're defending?

The washed-up Wilson sisters, f/k/a Heart: Sarah Palin’s views and values in NO WAY represent us as American women. We ask that our song ‘Barracuda’ no longer be used to promote her image. The song ‘Barracuda’ was written in the late 70s as a scathing rant against the soulless, corporate nature of the music business, particularly for women. While Heart did not and would not authorize the use of their song at the RNC, there’s irony in Republican strategists’ choice to make use of it there.

US Weekly, model of good journalistic practices: Us Weekly, which unlike People and OK!, chose a rather caustic cover line (“Babies, Lies and Scandal”) is said to have lost thousands of subscribers in just the first 24 hours following the printing of the issue.

Whoopi "Discerner of Truth" Goldberg: This girl is dangerous to me. This is a very dangerous woman, because I believe for her intents and purposes, she’s OK if everybody lives a certain way, that is to say, the way God ordained men and women to be. Well, already she’s breaking that because she’s the daddy. She’s going to run the country and the husband is going to take care of the kids. I just found the whole thing sad and very musty and very much like a Bund rally, but maybe that was just me.

Wow. A breathtaking "I feel" analysis, and invoking Godwin's Law. I marvel at her superior intellect.

Alec "Listen to me you thoughtless pig" Balwin decided to join the ranks of also rans posting for the Huffington Poo: I thought McCain was the next Bush. I said so, like countless others, on this blog. … But McCain is not Bush. No matter what you think of McCain, you can’t pin that on him. Now Palin? Palin is Bush.

No, Alec. You fail politician identification. Bush is Bush. Palin is your worst nightmare. Carry on.

Albert "I haven't been funny in years" Brooks refused to be outdone at the HuffPoo: "I like Sarah Palin’s public speaking ability. I think she is fun to look at, certainly the hottest vice presidential candidate in history. But I looked up some facts. The United States has 10,000 nuclear weapons, 100 aircraft carriers, 3,000,000 people in the armed forces, and ten trillion dollars of debt.

I am now hearing from the Karl Roves of the world that having a 17-year-old daughter pregnant out of wedlock will make Palin sympathetic to millions of Americans who know the pain of that situation. But my question is WHERE WAS THE ADVICE? Do we want a president who cannot communicate to their own child that possibly having a baby a year after you get your driver’s license is not the smartest thing to do? Is this the new way for women to break the glass ceiling? To have their daughters throw their babies at it? I want my president to control their children, then they can tell the Navy what to do."

Unknown "comic", Russell Brand came from England to host the MTV VMAs, displaying the kind of attitude that made us kick the Brits in the ass. Twice.: “Some people, I think they’re called racists, say America is not ready for a black president.

“But I know America to be a forward thinking country because otherwise why would you have let that retard and cowboy fella be president for eight years?

“We were very impressed. We thought it was nice of you to let him have a go, because, in England, he wouldn’t be trusted with a pair of scissors.”

Then back to the HuffPo, for a new serving of incisive condescension from Jamie Lee Curtis: "I couldn't hold my own for one minute in a debate on any issue with someone like a Barack Obama or Joseph Biden and neither can Sarah Palin. When the call comes at 3AM I want a mind who was at the top of their class, who has gravitas and a real intellect. I want a leader who is a scholar who can hold the history of civilization in his head and will read and learn from the past as he charts the future."

And yet, you're in the tank for Obama. I guess you're not too terribly bright, Jamie.

Unfunny comedian Bill Maher: “She snarls.” “It was like, wow, I will send (Obama) whatever I have to to keep this snarling bitch out of the White House.”

Project much, Billy?

Matt "I know Ben Affleck" Damon: "I think there is a very good chance that Sarah Palin could be President. I don't know anything about her. And that's scary. And I don't think we are going to learn anything about her in 8 weeks."

Matt? Do you read? Watch television? Idiot.

Roger "I'm a freaking film critic" Ebert: "I trust the American people will see through Palin’s facade, and save the Republic in November. The most damning indictment against her is that she considered herself a good choice to be a heartbeat away. That shows bad judgment."

So what does that say about Obama? I mean, I know we aren't supposed to talk about him or he will look at us sternly, but he has been the freaking poster-child for bad judgement since his entry into the race.

Lynda Carter, trying to resurrect a long dead career in the HuffPoo: I like John McCain. But this woman — it’s anathema to me what she stands for. I think America should be very afraid. Very afraid. Separation of church and state is the one thing the creators of the Constitution did agree on — that it wasn’t to be a religious government. People should feel free to speak their minds about religion but not dictate it or put it into law.

Uhh, Lynda? No one has dictated anything to you. As for that whole separation of church and state thing? You might consider digging a little deeper into the history of that.

Speaking of dead careers, Paul Reiser felt the need to weigh in on political matters above his pay grade: Am I just losing my friggin’ mind? Seriously. I keep looking around the room to see if I’m living in some suddenly altered state where everything we know is now called the opposite, and nobody notices. Or can stop it.

“I wish I didn’t have to take your lunch money, but you should’nt of hadda brung it.”

We’re in the 3rd grade again. The skinny, smart kid who just moved in to the neighborhood is getting roughed-up by the asshole bully.

Call the Waaaaaaambulance. Clearly, another 'star' has been mugged by reality.

And again, Whoopi "No Behavior Too Boorish" Goldberg weighs in on "The View", with John McCain, and when the discussion turns to McCain's desire for strict constitutionalist judges, she interrupted with a statement/question "Do I need to worry about becoming a slave again? Because a lot of that document called for me to be a slave."

McCain, to his credit, did not reach over and punch her in her mouth. I doubt I could have shown the same restraint.

Charlie "I'm a reporter. No, really." Gibson, and his half quote designed to make Sarah Palin look as if she was making the war out to be a holy crusade. When she started to question the question, he replied "exact words". Only they weren't, and the question went down the memory hole on the west coast broadcast.

I'm sure that there are many, many more examples. My thanks to Dirty Harry's Place for dutifully documenting the celebrity dumbdown. But my point is that Hollywood's desire to lecture to us poor dumb rubes as they talk down a country that they didn't build and do not maintain is going to bite them in the ass. We know who we are. We are the people who build things that the country needs. We are the ones who grow the food. We are the ones who get the water and electricity to the homes. We are the ones who take the garbage away. We are the ones who treat the sick. We are the ones who make the law, keep people safe, and rescue them from bad situations. We are the ones who make scientific breakthroughs. We know what this country is capable of. We know what it can do. We know that we aren't just good people, but given our capacity for charitable giving, volunteering, and helping those who have just been laid low by disaster...anywhere in the world, and even if people hate us, we really are the best people in the world. And if you are going to continue to talk this country down, in ways that demonstrate how little you understand about the world, and about us, then we just might stop providing you with a lucrative career that enables such dangerous and insulting naivety. We make you, and we can break you. Keep that in mind when you keep trying to get my attention because you believe you have something to say. Because I am tired of being talked down to by someone either too lazy or too incapable of getting a real job.

I Couldn't Write It Better Myself

2008-09-09T18:20:00.000-07:00

I got in the car and heard the news on the Mighty Hugh Hewitt. It would be an understatement to say the Dems had a bad day. Having been outmanuvered with the appointment of Sarah Palin, they have determined to offend and alienate every other group that they have not already honked off. And on the heels of Olberdouche's interview with The Anointed One Himself™.

This morning, Joe Biden told us that any one who does not support stem cell research cannot care about special needs children. As a parent of a young man with Aspberger's Syndrome and one who is speech delayed due to hearing impairment, I have every right to tell Joe Biden the following:

Hey Joe, take a long walk on a short pier. You have no f'ing clue what you are saying, and you are pissing me off. You didn't impress me before, but now you are making me mad. I think it is time for you to go back to your long, fruitless career in the Senate.

Not to be outdone in sheer stupidity by his running mate, the Little Messiah said the following at a rally this afternoon, where, in between the stops, starts, and stutters, he babbled about change when talked about anyone who isn't him isn't really change, and that we can put lipstick on a pig, but he isn't really a pig. Within this same rhetorical tour de force, he also made reference to people talking about the "same old thing" as change, but it was really an old fish wrapped up in fish wrap. This was coming off a weekend of crying racism when not one word was uttered regarding his skin color, and making a 3 am call to Hillary to beg her to campaign for him. And then last night, he told the nuanced K.O. that the American people were smart and they know what is going on. It makes it difficult to try to spin these remarks as any thing other than a slam against Sarah Palin, saying that she is ugly, and, oh yeah, she's a girl,and of course, the slam against the age of a man who is his better in every sense of the word. It almost makes me wonder if they are trying to lose the election. Maybe they are. He's not been afrad of the race card so far. Losing will empower him to cry racism for the next four years. Legitimacy in making the charge hasn't stopped him so far. Don't underestimate his willingness to whine against what he is clearly incapable of fighting. Substance be damned. It is good to be a conservative right now.

I think we learned Sarah's shade of lipstick today: Nobama.