New Orleans

The recent Hurricaine Irene reminds me of Hurricaine Katrina and how people react to pending natural disasters.  Do they evacuate?  Do they rebuild?  What happens to the people?

In New Orleans' Lower 9th Ward, the grasses grow taller than people and street after street is scarred by empty decaying houses, Most buildings are shuttered, "For Sale" signs stuck on their sides. There aren't many buyers. And the businesses that are open are mostly corner stores where folks buy pricey cigarettes, liquor and packaged food.   This is the face of liberalism and generational welfare.  The Left likes to point fingers at greedy Republicans for this misery.  The real villain is the insidious entitlement mentality fostered by 50 years of big government misguided generosity.  If logic and reason were to prevail, no attempts nor money would be spent to rebuild this below-sea-level city where the next big hurricane will flood it yet again.  Better to bulldoze it, fire all Democrat politicians and relocate New Orleans to higher ground.  And instead of welcoming back all the former residents, scatter them around to conservative areas where they just might, as the result of osmosis, absorb better values.   When thousands of children of welfare see no proper role models, they adopt the culture they see.   It is a vicious circle.

Tale of Two Busses

Washington Monument

The recent earthquake near Washington D.C. resulted in some damage to the iconic landmark, the Washington Monument.  Several cracks in the exterior masonry are visible and debris fell to the floor of the observation platform at the top.  I could not help but ponder the symbolism.   Our nation is cracking up too.  The monument can and will be repaired.  The damage to our nation is far more serious and unlike the monument, is getting worse by the hour.   We are experiencing a 24 hour per day earthquake.  Hold on and pray the shaking stops soon.

Un-freakin’-believable: Obama puts Israel on list of countries that support terrorism

June 30, 2011

Can someone please explain to us why there is a single Jew left in America who supports Obama and the Democrats? No, seriously. Someone explain, because It is a complete mystery to us.
Especially now that the Obama administration has used the most twisted logic imaginable to justify listing Israel as a nation that supports terrorism.

So says the Obama administration

CNS News has the bizarre details:

In an implicit admission that Israel is so threatened by terrorism that it is not only surrounded by countries and territories that produce terrorists but also unwillingly harbors terrorists within its own territory in a way the most other nations in the world do not, the Obama administration is currently listing Israel among 36 “specially designated countries” it believes “have shown a tendency to promote, produce, or protect terrorist organizations or their members.”

To review, Israel is threatened by terrorism. Israel unwillingly harbors terrorists. Therefore, Israel promotes terrorism.
It’s going to take someone much smarter than us to figure out the serpentine logic in that statement.
Source: CNS News

Elmer Fudd

I am not impressed with any Republican candidate (Huntsmann) who attempts to marginalize the Tea Party.   Our nation does not need, nor can the Republican Party survive, another RINO (Republican-In-Name-Only).   Whenever you hear liberals moan and groan about the Tea Party, you can be sure that the reason is they are scared of them.  The Tea Party is not just Republicans, but includes Independents and moderate Democrats who have finally realized that the USA simply cannot survive with the current level of government spending resulting in an unsustainable debt load.  Just think what we could do if we did not have to spend so much just to service the interest on the debt?  The social issues advocated by conservatives are also important as the cultural rot the US has experienced in the past 50 years is a huge factor in our nation's decline.   I like Perry.  I like Mitt Romney.   I like Michelle Bachman.   I just want the most conservative candidate that has the best chance of actually winning the election.   But I would vote for Elmer Fudd over Obama. 

Lybia and Syria

I don't get too excited about the unrest in Arab nations that result in the overthrow of entrenched despots.   I see no evidence that the replacement governments will be any more democratic or peaceful than the orginal ones.   I suspect they will hate Israel and the USA just as much.  Women still will be second-class citizens with few, if any, rights.  They will continue to practice Sharia Law and Islam will continue to be incompatible with Western civilization.    Not much will change.  

In a nutshell.....

 The problems we face today exist because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.

Finally...

FINALLY!!    OBAMA HAS A JOBS PLAN....
(for illegals)

London on Fire

The recent riots in Great Britain are an ominous preview of what we may expect here.  The generational welfare state there has a population dependent on government.  When, due to budgetary problems certain entitlements have to be cut back, the result is ugly and predictable.  

Let Them Eat Cake

Remember when the Left used to criticize GW Bush for going to his ranch in Texas to chop wood?   What a waste of taxpayer's money, we were told. But I don't hear anything about the present administration.
First Lady Michelle (My Belle) Obama slipped out of Washington unnoticed Monday for a secret trip to visit her brother, Oregon State University men’s basketball coach Craig Robinson, at his home on Corvallis, Ore.
Mrs. Obama jetted into the Eugene Airport, landing at about 11 am PDT. She and family members then headed out in a 11 vehicle motorcade (so much for 'secrecy')  for the ride to Corvallis.
Mrs. Obama and family members flew on a Boeing C-40B, the military version of a 737 that serves as Air Force 2.
Mrs. Obama has in the past indulged herself for an early departure for her most recent Hawaiian vacation and a luxurous 2010 trip to Spain.  Most of the costs of her travel are borne by taxpayers.  (But of course!)
The C-40B included a flight crew of eight to 10 people.  Mrs. Obama is traveling with one of her daughters and her mother.  Maybe this is one reason Barack stayed home this time.    Wouldn't it be easier and cheaper to fly her brother to Washington for a visit? 

What's a trillion?

Our national debt is over 14 Trillion dollars.   Few have any idea just how big a number that is... otherwise they might be more concerned. 
So, do YOU have any idea how much one trillion is?  Suppose you live about 89 years, a nice long life span.  You would have lived about 2.8 billion seconds.  If you were approaching your one trillionth second of life, you would have been born in 29,000 B.C.

Our national debt is now over 100% of our gross national product.  We are not taxed too little, we spend too much.  It is so obvious.

Why Not?

All the fuss over raising the national debt limit is silly and unnecessary.  We ALL know that eventually the new debt limit will be reached.  At that point, there will be the usual hand-wringing and gnashing of teeth among politicians until the very last minute.... then a new, higher debt limit will be agreed upon.  After all, without the higher debt limit, the government will default, creditors will not be paid, the stock market will crash, and the sky will fall.   We have heard all this before.
The solution is simple.  Instead of "mere" billions or even trillions of a new debt limit, why not just skip all the intermediary theater and raise the debt limit by $999 Quadrillion.   That way we won't have to have this debate for about 3 or 4 years.

Birds of a Feather, Flock Together

It may be early in the campaign season, but the Communist Party USA already has seen fit to endorse Barack Obama for the 2012 election.

Sam Webb, chairman of the Communist Party USA, threw his support behind Obama's re-election bid.

In an article last week at People's Weekly World, the official newspaper of the Communist Party USA, Webb discussed the need for a third party consisting of the so-called working class and labor as well as "racially and nationally oppressed people, women, youth, immigrants, seniors, gay and straight."

You can tell much about a man from the company he keeps... and from who supports him.

Occasionally, I come across an essay that expresses exactly what I have been saying for years.   This is such an essay.   I had to pinch myself to make sure my name was not on the byline.  Enjoy....

August 2, 2011

7 Examples Of Liberal Unfairness

By John Hawkins

8/2/2011

If one child complains that he didn't get as much food as his brother because his frankfurter was cut into four pieces, while his brother's hot dog was cut into five pieces, we laugh. What we often don't realize is that the definitions of "fairness" that adults use are often every bit as arbitrary as those of children. This is why politicians are so in love with the word "fairness." Using that word justifies their attempt to swoop in, ignore merit, overrule the market, and take something from one group of people to give it to another group of people who are more likely to vote for them. So next time someone starts talking about "fairness," put your hand over your wallet, put on your thinking cap, and consider that what liberals define as "fairness" could look extremely "unfair" if you're open minded enough to take a look at it from another perspective.
1) Affirmative Action's only "fair?" The idea here is that we're going to discriminate against white Americans who have not done anything wrong in order to help black Americans who may not have been discriminated against so that we can make up for past discrimination against black Americans. That begs the question: Do we flip this around at some point and start deliberately discriminating against black Americans again to make up for the government's discrimination against white Americans? It may sound outrageous, but that ridiculous idea would be every bit as "fair" as Affirmative Action.
2) Making losers pay for legal costs would be "unfair" to the little guy! Because liberals get a lot of money from trial lawyers, they oppose a "loser pays" rule for lawsuits. They justify this by saying that system would be "unfair" to the people suing. Why, what if they couldn't afford to sue because their opponents’ legal fees would be too high? Of course, that's a really backward way to look at it. After all, how fair is it for someone to have to spend countless hours of their time and tens of thousands of dollars defending themselves from a meritless lawsuit without compensation? Surely, if it's "fair" for the plaintiffs to get money if they win, then it should be "fair" for the defendants to at least have their expenses covered if they triumph.
3) The rich aren't paying their "fair" share. It's easy to take shots at rich people. There usually aren't enough of them to swing an election with their votes, nobody really feels sorry for people who have a lot of money, and as often as not, they give contributions to both parties as "protection money." But here's a thought: How can the rich not be paying their "fair share" when the top 10% of Americans pay 69.9% of the money we take in from the income tax while 47 percent of Americans don't even pay a single dollar a year? Arguing that people -- who probably pay for all the services they'll get from the government in an entire lifetime over any given month -- aren't paying their "fair share" while so many people pay nothing at all, seems more than a bit....."unfair."
4) Cutting spending would be "unfair!" Any time you try to cut something from the budget, there are aliens in other galaxies who can undoubtedly hear the screams from space. We get rants about cruelty, Tea Party "terrorists," pushing old people off cliffs, balancing the budget on the backs of the less fortunate -- it goes on and on. However, there's no such thing as "free" government money. So, what we're actually doing is selling our children into debt slavery so that liberal politicians can borrow more money to buy votes today. What could be crueler or more "unfair" than a child who's born starting his life more than $176,000 in debt before he's ever opened his eyes for the first time?
5) Minimum wage laws make sure people get a "fair" wage. If you're making the minimum wage right now, it's entirely possible that the law benefits you by insuring that you get paid a higher wage than you otherwise would. Liberals would call this "fairness." But, how about all the people with low skills who either aren't worth the minimum wage or who could be hired for jobs that don't merit the minimum wage? It's all well and good to say that a job's not worth someone's time if it doesn't pay the minimum wage, but there are probably a lot of unemployed Americans who'd be grateful to make $7 an hour while they look for a better job. What's "fair" to those people about putting a law in place that prevents willing businesses from hiring willing workers who desperately need the money?
6) Not allowing illegal aliens to become American citizens is "unfair!" If we allow people who sneak across the border or overstay their VISA to become American citizens, then doesn't that make legal immigrants look like complete idiots? There are people who spent years in their home countries, paying thousands of dollars, and filling out endless paperwork while liberals want to give people who broke the law the gift of American citizenship? What's the message to people who became citizens the right way supposed to be other than, "You are a moron for following the rules?" How can it be anything other than grossly "unfair" to legal immigrants to give illegals a break? Additionally, how about all the American workers, including legal immigrants, who have less money to bring home in their paychecks each week or no jobs at all because illegal aliens who pay no car insurance, health insurance, or taxes can afford to do the job at a cheaper price and drive down wages? How "fair" is it to hurt American citizens to help people who didn't even come to this country legally?
7) Wal-Mart isn't "fair" to its employees. Liberals generally don't like big corporations and they especially don't like Wal-Mart because it's an enormous company that has successfully fought off unionization. This leads to cries that Wal-Mart's "unfair" because it doesn’t pay its employees enough or allow its employees to buy fancy health care plans. Of course, if Wal-Mart could be perfectly honest, its response would probably be, “We don't force our employees to work for us and if they decide they’re unhappy, they can always go somewhere else.” That being said, there's another group of people who aren't being "fairly" treated by the liberal push to unionize Wal-Mart – Wal-Mart customers. Wal-Mart employs more than 2.1 million people in America, but roughly 82% of American households shop at Wal-Mart each year. If Wal-Mart is forced to pay its employees more, then you're taking money out of the pockets of everyone who shops there to pay for it. Why should a dirt-poor widow with four kids who buys her groceries at Wal-Mart be forced to pay more money than she would otherwise to subsidize union salaries? That seems more than a little "unfair."

John Hawkins

John Hawkins is a professional blogger who runs Right Wing News, Linkiest, and Viral Footage.

Washington-Speak "How to cut the budget"

They say, "beauty is in the eye of the beholder."   And a "budget cut" means different things to different people.   If someone takes a cut in pay, we generally believe that he now earns $25,000 instead of $30,000.   That's a real cut.
But in the hallowed halls of Congress, "cut" means something else when referring to the budget.   Instead of spending $10 Trillion in the next 10 years, we agree to spend "only" $7 Trillion, a "cut" of $3 Trillion.  We don't cut spending by $3 Trillion.... no, we continue to spend more every year than the year before but just less of an increase than we planned to spend.  The debt continues to grow larger every year and the interest on the debt grows larger every year.  Instead of sprinting to bankruptcy, we merely are jogging to bankruptcy.

A wife proudly tells her husband that she found a real bargain and she bought a new coat for $500 that had been marked down from $700.  "Gee, honey, I saved you $200 today.  Isn't that great?"

The argument over the budget is not about freezing spending at a certain level and then reducing it from there.  No, it is reducing the rate of increase of the spending.  We call that little slight of hand 'baseline budgeting.'   For instance, a 10% annual increase would be budgeted for a 5% increase if the full 10% had not been spent the year before.  So, a 5% increase becomes a 50% cut.  Nice.

Definition of a deal:
A deal is an agreement where each party thinks he has outwitted the other.