Before we dive into the hypocrisies and lies from the left during the last seven months, let me just say that the right is just as guilty as these as the left is. Don't think that I'm not aware of that.
Let's talk about some of the lies from the left:
-The man who carried an AR-15 to a town hall in Arizona was made out to be a white man by MSNBC due to their cropping of the video and then saying "these white men are out there with guns." In fact, that man was a black man exercising is 2nd Amendment right.
- The man attacked during a health care protest was made by MSNBC to be a liberal being attacked by a conservative because they didn't give the whole story. In fact, the man was a black man attacked by members of SEIU. He ended up in the hospital due to injuries to his shoulder.
- The man who created the "Obama joker" painting was not a right wing nut job. He in fact, painted that picture because he felt President Obama is not left ENOUGH.
- The man who vandalized the Denver Democrat Party office was not a right wing crazy or a left wing crazy. He was in fact a member of a Denver transgender anarchist group taking money from the democrats to further his cause of anarchy.
Now, let's take a look at some of the hypocrisies from the left:
- Some how it was okay for President George W. Bush and Vice-Presidential nominee Sarah Palin to be hung in effigy but it was not okay when someone hung a congressman in effigy who happened to be a democrat. Fact of the matter is, it wasn't okay EITHER way.
- Some how it was okay for President George W. Bush to be compared to Hitler but not okay for President Obama to be compared to Hitler. Fact of the matter is, neither is like Hitler and it's not okay EITHER way.
- Some how it was okay for protesters of the Iraq war to speak their minds and exercise their 1st Amendment right but it's not okay for protesters of the current health care reform proposal or big government with out being labeled as racists. Fact of the matter is, it is okay EITHER way to protest and speak your mind.
- Some how when protester of the Iraq war spoke their minds, they were grass roots but then opponents of President Obama's policies speak their minds the are labeled "astroturf", "racist", "evil-mongers", "fear-mongers" and "rednecks". Fact of the matter is, people can exercise their 1st Amendment right EITHER way.
- Some how when a senator used the term "Great white hope" (which she didn't know was "racist") and apologizes and actually said "If I offended anyone, of course, I apologize" that apology isn't good enough. But when David Letterman smears Sarah Palin's family (family is ALWAYS off limits) and never actually says "I apologize" the left says nothing about it. Fact of the matter is, people need to be held accountable for their words, EITHER way.
- Some how when a Republican congressman says he will vote against HR 3200 (current health care reform proposal) without even reading it, the left is upset about him not reading it when people on BOTH sides of the aisle aren't reading these bills. Fact of the matter is, these senators and representatives have to read the bills, EITHER way.
- Some how when Glenn Beck calls President Obama a racist (which I thought was an inappropriate statement to make) he is labeled a terrible person but when Jeanine Garafalo calls American citizens who are in opposition to the president racists, that is okay. Fact of the matter is, calling someone a racist EITHER way is inappropriate.
The point of all this? We ALL (conservatives, liberals, progressives, libertarians, democrats and republicans) need to LISTEN to each other, talk, ask questions, learn, respect and not act like we're in high school by calling people names. The government belongs to the people, the American citizens.
Friday, August 28, 2009
A Case for Glenn Beck - Don't roll your eyes, just read!
As I worry so much about where our great country is headed in times of larger government, more power and threats to our very liberties, I turn to Glenn Beck to see what is going on other than what the main stream media is reporting.
Now, I know many of you believe Glenn is a bat crazy whack-a-doo, but what he really is, is passionate. Very passionate. He will tell you things that no one else reports on, not even others on Fox News. He will show you sides to stories that will leave you speechless.
The thing about Beck is this: he's not mean, disrespectful or disingenuous (see disclaimer at the end of my note).
-He's not like Olberman who is condescending and rude and has a segment that names people the worst in the world.
-He's not like Maddow who mocks Americans who disagree with liberals.
-He's not like O'Reilly who is arrogant and won't let anyone get an opposing opinion in before interrupting them.
-He's not like Hannity who has a "liberal translation" segment (which I don't even understand) or who is full of talking points.
Beck says what he means and means what he says
Here are some links to sites with information about what is going on in our current government and who POTUS is surrounding himself with. This information is not made up and is out there for anyone to research!
http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/29631/
This article has questions that nobody seems to be answering and that probably we all should be asking.
http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/29391/?ck=1
This article is a list of Obama's Czars (which equal nearly three times as many as Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton and Bush 2 had PUT TOGETHER), how much they make, what their duties are, what department could have covered their duties, etc. And yes, the Green Jobs Czar IS in fact a self-avowed communist.
I issue every one a challenge. No matter what your political standing, liberal, conservative, moderate, lean a little bit left, whatever, watch Glenn Beck's television program for one week. Listen, hear and don't go in with a preconceived notion of what Keith Olbermann has told you about Beck on his "Worst persons in the world" segment. Just watch for one week and you may gain perspective as to why so many Americans are upset right now.
After you've done this, please, let's talk! Open discussion is the key to conquering all kinds of disrespect and misunderstandings of the views of others. I get very tired of people being afraid to talk about politics. Why be afraid? Just talk, it may surprise you!
**Disclaimers: The disgust with our government did NOT start w/ Obama, he just happens to be the straw that broke the camel's back. Also, Beck called POTUS a racist on national television and while I'm not sure if I agree with that statement or not, I do think that it was inappropriate and should not have been said.
Now, I know many of you believe Glenn is a bat crazy whack-a-doo, but what he really is, is passionate. Very passionate. He will tell you things that no one else reports on, not even others on Fox News. He will show you sides to stories that will leave you speechless.
The thing about Beck is this: he's not mean, disrespectful or disingenuous (see disclaimer at the end of my note).
-He's not like Olberman who is condescending and rude and has a segment that names people the worst in the world.
-He's not like Maddow who mocks Americans who disagree with liberals.
-He's not like O'Reilly who is arrogant and won't let anyone get an opposing opinion in before interrupting them.
-He's not like Hannity who has a "liberal translation" segment (which I don't even understand) or who is full of talking points.
Beck says what he means and means what he says
Here are some links to sites with information about what is going on in our current government and who POTUS is surrounding himself with. This information is not made up and is out there for anyone to research!
http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/29631/
This article has questions that nobody seems to be answering and that probably we all should be asking.
http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/29391/?ck=1
This article is a list of Obama's Czars (which equal nearly three times as many as Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton and Bush 2 had PUT TOGETHER), how much they make, what their duties are, what department could have covered their duties, etc. And yes, the Green Jobs Czar IS in fact a self-avowed communist.
I issue every one a challenge. No matter what your political standing, liberal, conservative, moderate, lean a little bit left, whatever, watch Glenn Beck's television program for one week. Listen, hear and don't go in with a preconceived notion of what Keith Olbermann has told you about Beck on his "Worst persons in the world" segment. Just watch for one week and you may gain perspective as to why so many Americans are upset right now.
After you've done this, please, let's talk! Open discussion is the key to conquering all kinds of disrespect and misunderstandings of the views of others. I get very tired of people being afraid to talk about politics. Why be afraid? Just talk, it may surprise you!
**Disclaimers: The disgust with our government did NOT start w/ Obama, he just happens to be the straw that broke the camel's back. Also, Beck called POTUS a racist on national television and while I'm not sure if I agree with that statement or not, I do think that it was inappropriate and should not have been said.
Monday, August 3, 2009
The good, the bad and the Cash for Clunkers
"Cash for Clunkers" sounds like a wonderful idea, right? In some aspects, yes and in some aspects, no.
Cash for Clunkers is a government program that will allow $3,500 to $4,500 allowance when a consumer trades in his clunker for a newer, more fuel efficient automobile. The program was set to begin July 1, 2009 but didn't start until July 24, 2009. $1 billion was allocated for this program which quickly ran out as over 22,000 new cars were purchased within the first week of the program. Cash for Clunkers is already broke but Congress is said to be allocating another $2 billion for the program, due to end in November, this year.
In some aspects this program has been stimulative as its raised sales for car companies like Ford. And that isn't a bad thing. With that being said, there are some major issues with this program that aren't being advertised by the main stream media.
1. As previously discussed, the program went broke with in one week as the estimated allocations were not enough. The government must put more money into the program, which means more tax payer dollars.
2. We won't know for sure for a while who the people are that are actually purchasing these more fuel efficient cars but the assumption is that they're either people who were going to buy a car in the next year anyway or they're people who won't be able to afford their payments later on down the road (remember the housing bust?).
3. The cars that are eligible for the program that are considered "clunkers" CAN NOT be older than 25 years. So, those who have a clunker from before 1984 are NOT eligible for the program.
4. Consumers must purchase a new vehicle, not a "new-used" vehicle.
5. The cars that are traded in are shredded or crushed and then will be put into a landfill (very green).
6. The government run program in which dealers register in order to be able to participate has already been backlogged and is behind on paperwork in getting vouchers to the dealers. However, if the dealer doesn't provide the necessary paperwork for the program it will be fined.
7. The website that dealers must use to participate in the program, states in its terms of use agreement, that once you click "I agree", the government now owns your computer and any authorized officials can have access to it.
8. There is only a limited amount of funds that are to be used for certain categories of trucks and once that runs out, people won't be able to purchase that type of truck.
9. The difference in mileage required from clunker to new auto ranges from 2-10 mpg (2 for certain types of trucks and 10 for certain types of cars).
10. Cars turned traded in can not be used for spare parts which could significantly affect used parts dealers.
11. Those who tell you that Cash for Clunkers has been the best part of the stimulus program are lying. This program was not even in the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act. Originally, it was to be included in a defense spending bill, but later became a bill of it's own. It was never a part of the original stimulus; this money is NOT part of the $787 billion stimulus package.
12. No where in the rules does it stipulate that the new cars purchased must be American.
So, with all that being said, the actual "stimulus" portion of this program is not necessarily a bad thing but it is not sustainable and there is the possibility that there are people participating in the program who should not be purchasing cars as they can't afford them. This program could ultimately hurt Americans who are in the used parts business, thus costing jobs. The program is already technically a failure as it's run out of money and the system has already been overloaded and doesn't work.
The point of all this? These people who instituted this program that will have ramifications beyond just tax payer dollars going towards other people purchasing cars are THE SAME PEOPLE WHO WANT TO OVERHAUL THE ENTIRE HEALTHCARE SYSTEM!!!!
Cash for Clunkers is a government program that will allow $3,500 to $4,500 allowance when a consumer trades in his clunker for a newer, more fuel efficient automobile. The program was set to begin July 1, 2009 but didn't start until July 24, 2009. $1 billion was allocated for this program which quickly ran out as over 22,000 new cars were purchased within the first week of the program. Cash for Clunkers is already broke but Congress is said to be allocating another $2 billion for the program, due to end in November, this year.
In some aspects this program has been stimulative as its raised sales for car companies like Ford. And that isn't a bad thing. With that being said, there are some major issues with this program that aren't being advertised by the main stream media.
1. As previously discussed, the program went broke with in one week as the estimated allocations were not enough. The government must put more money into the program, which means more tax payer dollars.
2. We won't know for sure for a while who the people are that are actually purchasing these more fuel efficient cars but the assumption is that they're either people who were going to buy a car in the next year anyway or they're people who won't be able to afford their payments later on down the road (remember the housing bust?).
3. The cars that are eligible for the program that are considered "clunkers" CAN NOT be older than 25 years. So, those who have a clunker from before 1984 are NOT eligible for the program.
4. Consumers must purchase a new vehicle, not a "new-used" vehicle.
5. The cars that are traded in are shredded or crushed and then will be put into a landfill (very green).
6. The government run program in which dealers register in order to be able to participate has already been backlogged and is behind on paperwork in getting vouchers to the dealers. However, if the dealer doesn't provide the necessary paperwork for the program it will be fined.
7. The website that dealers must use to participate in the program, states in its terms of use agreement, that once you click "I agree", the government now owns your computer and any authorized officials can have access to it.
8. There is only a limited amount of funds that are to be used for certain categories of trucks and once that runs out, people won't be able to purchase that type of truck.
9. The difference in mileage required from clunker to new auto ranges from 2-10 mpg (2 for certain types of trucks and 10 for certain types of cars).
10. Cars turned traded in can not be used for spare parts which could significantly affect used parts dealers.
11. Those who tell you that Cash for Clunkers has been the best part of the stimulus program are lying. This program was not even in the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act. Originally, it was to be included in a defense spending bill, but later became a bill of it's own. It was never a part of the original stimulus; this money is NOT part of the $787 billion stimulus package.
12. No where in the rules does it stipulate that the new cars purchased must be American.
So, with all that being said, the actual "stimulus" portion of this program is not necessarily a bad thing but it is not sustainable and there is the possibility that there are people participating in the program who should not be purchasing cars as they can't afford them. This program could ultimately hurt Americans who are in the used parts business, thus costing jobs. The program is already technically a failure as it's run out of money and the system has already been overloaded and doesn't work.
The point of all this? These people who instituted this program that will have ramifications beyond just tax payer dollars going towards other people purchasing cars are THE SAME PEOPLE WHO WANT TO OVERHAUL THE ENTIRE HEALTHCARE SYSTEM!!!!
Thursday, July 16, 2009
My latest letter to POTUS
Mr. President,
SLOW DOWN!! Give the American people a chance to understand this health care plan that congress is proposing. You are dismissive of critics and are telling congress not to listen to the critics. I've got news for you: THE CRITICS ARE THE AMERICAN CITIZENS and your job is to listen to us. Give us a chance to understand what may or may not happen to OUR health care since it will have an impact on all of us.
We need to be able to have a say, ask questions and be treated with RESPECT if we happen to disagree with the proposal. You do NOT know what is best for me and my family and I have every right, as a voting American to question something so huge as health care reform. I have a right to be heard, respected and understood.
Should you continue to disrespect those who are questioning the proposal, you will lose votes. You are the President, as you so often remind us, and you are the one who needs to make sure that we, the American people, are heard!
Sincerely,
Jennifer Bradley
SLOW DOWN!! Give the American people a chance to understand this health care plan that congress is proposing. You are dismissive of critics and are telling congress not to listen to the critics. I've got news for you: THE CRITICS ARE THE AMERICAN CITIZENS and your job is to listen to us. Give us a chance to understand what may or may not happen to OUR health care since it will have an impact on all of us.
We need to be able to have a say, ask questions and be treated with RESPECT if we happen to disagree with the proposal. You do NOT know what is best for me and my family and I have every right, as a voting American to question something so huge as health care reform. I have a right to be heard, respected and understood.
Should you continue to disrespect those who are questioning the proposal, you will lose votes. You are the President, as you so often remind us, and you are the one who needs to make sure that we, the American people, are heard!
Sincerely,
Jennifer Bradley
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Prayer, faith and government
The father of modern liberalism is, for most, FDR and it may surprise some that he had very strong convictions in faith. A prayer he gave during a radio address after the allies took Normandy was very important and I think can still be applied to modern times.
---
Almighty God, our sons, pride of our nation, this day have set upon a mighty endeavor, a struggle to preserve our republic, our religion and our civilizations and to set free a suffering humanity.
Many people have urged that I call the nation into a single day of special prayer. But because the road is long and the desire is great, I ask that our people devote themselves in a continuance of prayer. As we rise to each new day, and again when each day is spent, let words of prayer be on our lips, invoking Thy help to our efforts.
And, O Lord, give us faith. Give us faith in Thee; faith in our sons; faith in each other; faith in our united crusade. Let not the keenness of our spirit ever be dulled. Let not the impacts of temporary events, of temporal matters of but a fleeting moment, let not these deter us in our unconquerable purpose. Thy will be done, Almighty God. Amen
----
This was a beautiful prayer and everyone should remember that prayer every day is essential in keeping our faith alive in our Lord, country, brethren and our selves. Let us know forget that religion and faith are two separate entities and should never, ever be confused as one in the same. Organized religion is NOT the same as faith. Faith in Our Lord will guide us as individuals and as a country.
We should also not forget the history of our forefathers and faith and it should NOT be ignored by the secular left and SHOULD be taught in history because it IS history. During the Constitutional Convention of 1787, Benjamin Franklin (yes, Franklin) proposed that each day of the convention begin with a prayer. George Washington was the one who added "So help me God" when being sworn into office as President.
Anyone who thinks that faith has no place in government, I would high suggest reading the book "Rediscovering God in America" by Newt Gingrich. One may be surprised to find out how large a role faith played in the founding of our country and how many landmarks, buildings and memorials in Washington, D.C. have references to Our Lord.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Another liberal buries a story...
This is from www.catholicnewsagency.com. These are not my words, just an article I thought was important.
Oprah’s website buries Dr. Oz's ‘stem cell debate is dead’
Dr. Mehment Oz / Oprah Winfrey
Chicago, Ill., Apr 8, 2009 / 01:08 pm (CNA).- Yesterday, Dr. Mehment Oz appeared on the Oprah Winfrey Show to voice his support for adult stem cell research and to argue that “the stem cell debate is dead,” but instead of giving his statement a fair hearing, Oprah’s website buried and edited Oz’s comments.
Actor Michael J. Fox, who suffers from Parkinson’s disease, was invited on the show to talk about his struggle with Parkinson’s and his foundation’s endorsement of embryonic stem cell research (ESCR).
Fox told Oprah that he believes President Obama’s decision lifting President Bush's restrictions on ESCR was a “step in the right direction” and that “we had eight years where there was no forward progress.” The United States has to make up for a lot of lost time, Fox added.
He also empathized with ethical concerns over ESCR, but said, “I just have faith in our scientists and the research community that they’ll do this ethically and to good purpose.”
After a commercial break, Oprah introduced Dr. Oz, who is the vice-chair and professor of surgery at Columbia University, to explain how stem cells could be used to treat or cure the effects of many diseases.
To demonstrate how stem cells could be used, Oz brought out a human brain. Both Oprah and Fox laughed and joked with Oz as he discussed how stem cells would work in the brain. But Dr. Oz became more serious as he spoke about the future of embryonic stem cell research.
“Now, I’m going to say something that’s going to be a bit provocative. I think, Oprah, the stem cell debate is dead, and I’ll tell you why,” said Oz.
“The problem with embryonic stem cells is that embryonic stem cells come from embryos, like all of us were made from embryos. And those cells can become any cell in the body. But it’s very hard to control them, and so they can become cancer.”
Oprah and Fox then became visibly uncomfortable, shifting around in their chairs, as Oz explained that, contrary to Fox’s earlier testimony, incredible medical advances are being made using adult stem cells and not embryonic stem cells. He claimed that, “in the last year, we’ve made a 10 year advancement.”
Oprah responded in disbelief by saying, “In the last year we’ve advanced 10 years?” Oz explained, “we went places we never thought we would go.”
He then boldly stated that within “single digit years” the medical community could find cures for people with “Parkinson’s disease, but also diabetics and heart attack victims” by using adult stem cells.
Oprah’s website summarized Oz’s argument for adult stem cells with two short paragraphs, hidden 11 pages deep in a 13 page summary of the show:
“Thanks to recent scientific discoveries, Dr. Oz says stem cells aren’t the only solution. ‘We went to a place we never thought we would go. I can take a little bit of your skin, take those cells and get them to go back in time so they’re like they were when you were first made.’”
“Dr. Oz says these skin cells, which contain your genes and are less prone to cancer, will be the ones that are ultimately used to cure Parkinson’s. ‘I think we’re single digit years away from making a big impact in the lives of [people with] Parkinson’s disease, but also diabetics and heart attack victims,’” the website summarized.
Oprah.com not only avoided quoting Oz as saying “the stem cell debate is dead,” but carefully avoided the words “stem cell” and “embryonic’ when quoting or summarizing his remarks.
Oz did in fact say stem cells were the solution, but instead of backing ESCR, he advocated adult stem cells as the future of medical breakthroughs.
Oprah’s website buries Dr. Oz's ‘stem cell debate is dead’
Dr. Mehment Oz / Oprah Winfrey
Chicago, Ill., Apr 8, 2009 / 01:08 pm (CNA).- Yesterday, Dr. Mehment Oz appeared on the Oprah Winfrey Show to voice his support for adult stem cell research and to argue that “the stem cell debate is dead,” but instead of giving his statement a fair hearing, Oprah’s website buried and edited Oz’s comments.
Actor Michael J. Fox, who suffers from Parkinson’s disease, was invited on the show to talk about his struggle with Parkinson’s and his foundation’s endorsement of embryonic stem cell research (ESCR).
Fox told Oprah that he believes President Obama’s decision lifting President Bush's restrictions on ESCR was a “step in the right direction” and that “we had eight years where there was no forward progress.” The United States has to make up for a lot of lost time, Fox added.
He also empathized with ethical concerns over ESCR, but said, “I just have faith in our scientists and the research community that they’ll do this ethically and to good purpose.”
After a commercial break, Oprah introduced Dr. Oz, who is the vice-chair and professor of surgery at Columbia University, to explain how stem cells could be used to treat or cure the effects of many diseases.
To demonstrate how stem cells could be used, Oz brought out a human brain. Both Oprah and Fox laughed and joked with Oz as he discussed how stem cells would work in the brain. But Dr. Oz became more serious as he spoke about the future of embryonic stem cell research.
“Now, I’m going to say something that’s going to be a bit provocative. I think, Oprah, the stem cell debate is dead, and I’ll tell you why,” said Oz.
“The problem with embryonic stem cells is that embryonic stem cells come from embryos, like all of us were made from embryos. And those cells can become any cell in the body. But it’s very hard to control them, and so they can become cancer.”
Oprah and Fox then became visibly uncomfortable, shifting around in their chairs, as Oz explained that, contrary to Fox’s earlier testimony, incredible medical advances are being made using adult stem cells and not embryonic stem cells. He claimed that, “in the last year, we’ve made a 10 year advancement.”
Oprah responded in disbelief by saying, “In the last year we’ve advanced 10 years?” Oz explained, “we went places we never thought we would go.”
He then boldly stated that within “single digit years” the medical community could find cures for people with “Parkinson’s disease, but also diabetics and heart attack victims” by using adult stem cells.
Oprah’s website summarized Oz’s argument for adult stem cells with two short paragraphs, hidden 11 pages deep in a 13 page summary of the show:
“Thanks to recent scientific discoveries, Dr. Oz says stem cells aren’t the only solution. ‘We went to a place we never thought we would go. I can take a little bit of your skin, take those cells and get them to go back in time so they’re like they were when you were first made.’”
“Dr. Oz says these skin cells, which contain your genes and are less prone to cancer, will be the ones that are ultimately used to cure Parkinson’s. ‘I think we’re single digit years away from making a big impact in the lives of [people with] Parkinson’s disease, but also diabetics and heart attack victims,’” the website summarized.
Oprah.com not only avoided quoting Oz as saying “the stem cell debate is dead,” but carefully avoided the words “stem cell” and “embryonic’ when quoting or summarizing his remarks.
Oz did in fact say stem cells were the solution, but instead of backing ESCR, he advocated adult stem cells as the future of medical breakthroughs.
Saturday, April 18, 2009
POTUS + apology
The POTUS owes the Americans who attended tea parties across the nation an apology. He needs to recognize the concerns of Americans who have different ideas than he does and he needs to recognize them as valid.
He needs to apologize for Nancy Pelosi, MSM (main stream media) and other congress people who downplayed the tea parties as "astroturf" organizations, despicable, invalid and crazy. We have valid concerns and I respect them; Mr. Obama is supposed to be a President of the people yet he's brushed off concerns of millions of Americans because they don't agree with him. What he should do is issue a statement that would go something like this: "I recognize the validity of the concerns of those who attended the tea parties on tax day and I am listening with an open mind. I apologize for the response of some in congress and the lack of respect show to fellow Americans by the main stream media. Americans are encouraged to exercise their 1st right and the government should not be so quick as to brush them off." Doubtful that something like that would happen but I am forwarding this paragraph on to the White House.
How dare they brush off our concerns! How dare they. Nancy Pelosi and the likes should be absolutely ashamed of themselves for downplaying concerns of the very people the represent. Shame on them!
The other thing POTUS needs to apologize for is because he's apologizing for us Americans on foreign soil. He apologized for the actions of Americans when he was in Europe and he's doing the same thing at the Summit of the Americas. When is he going to start acting like the President of the UNITED STATES and stand up for us and not act like the Apologizer of the United States. If only I could get my hands on TOTUS and write a speech the was pro-American instead of anti-American. Chances are he wouldn't even know what he was reading until the speech was done...sort of like when he thanked himself for inviting people to the White House.
He's not holding Americans accountable for how they are treating other Americans but he is holding Americans accountable for how we've treated foreign countries (in his mind). What's wrong with this picture?
He needs to apologize for Nancy Pelosi, MSM (main stream media) and other congress people who downplayed the tea parties as "astroturf" organizations, despicable, invalid and crazy. We have valid concerns and I respect them; Mr. Obama is supposed to be a President of the people yet he's brushed off concerns of millions of Americans because they don't agree with him. What he should do is issue a statement that would go something like this: "I recognize the validity of the concerns of those who attended the tea parties on tax day and I am listening with an open mind. I apologize for the response of some in congress and the lack of respect show to fellow Americans by the main stream media. Americans are encouraged to exercise their 1st right and the government should not be so quick as to brush them off." Doubtful that something like that would happen but I am forwarding this paragraph on to the White House.
How dare they brush off our concerns! How dare they. Nancy Pelosi and the likes should be absolutely ashamed of themselves for downplaying concerns of the very people the represent. Shame on them!
The other thing POTUS needs to apologize for is because he's apologizing for us Americans on foreign soil. He apologized for the actions of Americans when he was in Europe and he's doing the same thing at the Summit of the Americas. When is he going to start acting like the President of the UNITED STATES and stand up for us and not act like the Apologizer of the United States. If only I could get my hands on TOTUS and write a speech the was pro-American instead of anti-American. Chances are he wouldn't even know what he was reading until the speech was done...sort of like when he thanked himself for inviting people to the White House.
He's not holding Americans accountable for how they are treating other Americans but he is holding Americans accountable for how we've treated foreign countries (in his mind). What's wrong with this picture?
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Fighting the rise of privacy, er, uh piracy
I am writing to give President Obama props on a couple items. First, it's clear the POTUS has a great sense of humor as demonstrated by his spontaneousness when trying to find a microphone in the rabbit's ear at the White House Easter egg hunt. Second, he displayed quite the human side while playing with the children during the hunt and even helping a young boy slam dunk a basketball. It's always nice to see the President, no matter who he is, being relaxed and in a different environment than what we're used to. It was enjoyable to watch; they seemed to be having a wonderful time.
I was going to give Obama props for giving the directives to save the Captain held by pirates and thank goodness he was saved but turns out, what Obama did was actually the law. He had too. But still, the Captain was saved and that really is all that is important.
On to the second topic, the tea parties. All the lefties are calling them "tea bagging" parties which if you don't know what that mean, look it up on google! It's highly sexual and extremely offensive. The fact that many on the left really have absolutely no idea what the tea parties are about is quite sad. There are tens of thousands of Americans using their rights to speak their minds and assemble protests on April 15th. Now, this happens to be taking place on tax day but these protests aren't only about taxes. In fact, that's just a small part. The protests are about big spending, big government, bail outs, congress not reading bills, Obama moving the country to the left AND taxes. The other thing the lefties don't get is that Obama is simply the straw that broke the camel's back; these people were just as upset when Bush started bigger government by bailing out banks and it's all come to a culmination. It just happens to be that Obama has pushed people over the edge; this didn't start with him but he didn't make it any better.
I also find it interesting that it was perfectly okay for the liberals to protest Bush during his presidency but it's foolish, kooky and crazy for people to protest what the government is doing during the Obama term. It's complete hypocrisy.
The left also is in utter denial that these tea parties are a grass roots efforts; they are believing everything they hear on MSNBC. These protests started months ago and have been organized by people just like you and me. They may be covered by Fox News but they are not paid for or organized by Fox News. Plain and simple.
I was going to give Obama props for giving the directives to save the Captain held by pirates and thank goodness he was saved but turns out, what Obama did was actually the law. He had too. But still, the Captain was saved and that really is all that is important.
On to the second topic, the tea parties. All the lefties are calling them "tea bagging" parties which if you don't know what that mean, look it up on google! It's highly sexual and extremely offensive. The fact that many on the left really have absolutely no idea what the tea parties are about is quite sad. There are tens of thousands of Americans using their rights to speak their minds and assemble protests on April 15th. Now, this happens to be taking place on tax day but these protests aren't only about taxes. In fact, that's just a small part. The protests are about big spending, big government, bail outs, congress not reading bills, Obama moving the country to the left AND taxes. The other thing the lefties don't get is that Obama is simply the straw that broke the camel's back; these people were just as upset when Bush started bigger government by bailing out banks and it's all come to a culmination. It just happens to be that Obama has pushed people over the edge; this didn't start with him but he didn't make it any better.
I also find it interesting that it was perfectly okay for the liberals to protest Bush during his presidency but it's foolish, kooky and crazy for people to protest what the government is doing during the Obama term. It's complete hypocrisy.
The left also is in utter denial that these tea parties are a grass roots efforts; they are believing everything they hear on MSNBC. These protests started months ago and have been organized by people just like you and me. They may be covered by Fox News but they are not paid for or organized by Fox News. Plain and simple.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Global Warming mumbo jumbo
Global warming is one of those convtroversies wrapped up in a giant politcal mess.
Conservatives don't buy into it and liberals believe to be true. It's one of those issues on which you chose your side based on the facts you deem to be worthy of truthfulness. Conservatives are constantly told by liberals that Global Warming is a scientific fact and they have all the facts to back it up but when the facts to disprove Global Warming are presented, they are discounted as gibberish and meaningless.
Now, I believe we should most definitely take care of our planet for pollutionary reasons but I absolutely don't buy into the Global Warming scheme. I've provided various links below to back up why conservatives and myself don't buy it and believe the earth goes through natural warming and cooling trends and have throughout history.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=11383
http://inhofe.senate.gov/pressreleases/climate.htm
http://globalwarminghoax.wordpress.com/
http://www.oism.org/pproject/
http://www.discovery.org/v/30
Conservatives don't buy into it and liberals believe to be true. It's one of those issues on which you chose your side based on the facts you deem to be worthy of truthfulness. Conservatives are constantly told by liberals that Global Warming is a scientific fact and they have all the facts to back it up but when the facts to disprove Global Warming are presented, they are discounted as gibberish and meaningless.
Now, I believe we should most definitely take care of our planet for pollutionary reasons but I absolutely don't buy into the Global Warming scheme. I've provided various links below to back up why conservatives and myself don't buy it and believe the earth goes through natural warming and cooling trends and have throughout history.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=11383
http://inhofe.senate.gov/pressreleases/climate.htm
http://globalwarminghoax.wordpress.com/
http://www.oism.org/pproject/
http://www.discovery.org/v/30
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
And the oblviousness prevails....
I'm not even sure where to start on this one so we'll start with this post....read the threads by the leftists on this blog...
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/04/07/obama-islam-right-wing/#comments
Now, do some research to find out if we really are at war with Islam or if it's all just in our imagination. While, I firmly believe that there are extremists in every religion, Islam seems to take the cake in this category. Communities around the world are succumbing to Islam and it's a slow process so as not to alarm anyone.
Our President said "America is not and never will be at war with Islam", while that may be true, he neglected to include "but Islam is at war with us", "we are at war with extremists" (and bear in mind that the extremists in Islam aren't really all that extreme when the Q'uran and Shari'a law is examined. POTUS should have also said "America will continue to defend it's freedoms, it's citizens and it's land while working to continue to develop healthy, trusting relationships with (insert country name here)".
This is what I know; not all Muslims are bad but if asked which law prevails, Shari'a or Federal law, chances are Shari'a will prevail. I know that Christians, Jews, Hindus as well as other religions and Muslims can peacefully cohabitate. We need to remember to maintain our mutual respect for each other and our religions. I know that many Americans lump all Muslims into a fundamentalist category and that is wrong as well as disrespectful.
This is what I know of the Q'uran and Mohammad. I know that Mohammad originally preached peace while he was in Mecca. People of Mecca didn't like him but he was protected by a rich uncle's connections. Once that uncle passed, Mohammad lost his protection and was forced out of Mecca. He migrated north to Medina where he began preaching Islam as a religion of violence. This is the part of his life that fundamentalists cling to, not the beginning, peaceful years. This violent preaching is why we should worry. This part of the Q'uran tells Muslims, followers of Allah to kill all infidels, Jews and Christians. Either convert or die. I believe that it is quite possible for the Islamic faith to completely dissolve into the latter teachings of Mohammad.
The liberal left is completely unaware of or unwilling to accept this as a reality. There are no "moderate members of the Taliban", we cannot "maintain diplomacy with Iran", we will not ever be viewed by the Muslim world as equals, deserving of respect or as anything other than infidels. To think so, I believe would be foolish.
I suggest you plug into YouTube and search for FITNA and get just a glimpse of what goes on in the fundamentalist Muslim world. What FITNA shows is nothing new and can be found many places. It's frightening.
I will never not speak to, socialize with, listen to or befriend a Muslim, just like any other religion. That would go against MY faith to do so. I will continue to try to broaden my horizons and expand my understanding and knowledge, but I will also do so with caution only to remind myself that I need to understand both sides.
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/04/07/obama-islam-right-wing/#comments
Now, do some research to find out if we really are at war with Islam or if it's all just in our imagination. While, I firmly believe that there are extremists in every religion, Islam seems to take the cake in this category. Communities around the world are succumbing to Islam and it's a slow process so as not to alarm anyone.
Our President said "America is not and never will be at war with Islam", while that may be true, he neglected to include "but Islam is at war with us", "we are at war with extremists" (and bear in mind that the extremists in Islam aren't really all that extreme when the Q'uran and Shari'a law is examined. POTUS should have also said "America will continue to defend it's freedoms, it's citizens and it's land while working to continue to develop healthy, trusting relationships with (insert country name here)".
This is what I know; not all Muslims are bad but if asked which law prevails, Shari'a or Federal law, chances are Shari'a will prevail. I know that Christians, Jews, Hindus as well as other religions and Muslims can peacefully cohabitate. We need to remember to maintain our mutual respect for each other and our religions. I know that many Americans lump all Muslims into a fundamentalist category and that is wrong as well as disrespectful.
This is what I know of the Q'uran and Mohammad. I know that Mohammad originally preached peace while he was in Mecca. People of Mecca didn't like him but he was protected by a rich uncle's connections. Once that uncle passed, Mohammad lost his protection and was forced out of Mecca. He migrated north to Medina where he began preaching Islam as a religion of violence. This is the part of his life that fundamentalists cling to, not the beginning, peaceful years. This violent preaching is why we should worry. This part of the Q'uran tells Muslims, followers of Allah to kill all infidels, Jews and Christians. Either convert or die. I believe that it is quite possible for the Islamic faith to completely dissolve into the latter teachings of Mohammad.
The liberal left is completely unaware of or unwilling to accept this as a reality. There are no "moderate members of the Taliban", we cannot "maintain diplomacy with Iran", we will not ever be viewed by the Muslim world as equals, deserving of respect or as anything other than infidels. To think so, I believe would be foolish.
I suggest you plug into YouTube and search for FITNA and get just a glimpse of what goes on in the fundamentalist Muslim world. What FITNA shows is nothing new and can be found many places. It's frightening.
I will never not speak to, socialize with, listen to or befriend a Muslim, just like any other religion. That would go against MY faith to do so. I will continue to try to broaden my horizons and expand my understanding and knowledge, but I will also do so with caution only to remind myself that I need to understand both sides.
What? The libs are confused again? Never.
Once again, the leftist liberals are blaming the tragic shootings which have occurred over the past few weeks on "nutjob" right-winger gun activists. They are taking these shootings and using them as political opportunism to advance the gun control agenda. They have been saying that us conservatives who are worried about Obama taking our guns are fools because that's not on his agenda. Really? Let's take a look at why us right-winger gun activists may believe gun control is a priority on Obama's radar.
#1. Obama was voted the most liberal senator in the senate and for some reason, there were still people out there who foolishly thought he would govern from the center or maybe left of center. He's clearly shown his colors as a true leftist and, I believe, he never planned on governing from the center but he's such a slippery snake, he made people believe he would.
#2. He surrounding himself by gun control activists by filling his cabinet with people who won't support the 2nd Amendment. Let's take a look at some of these people:
A. Eric Holder, Attorney General, has been one of the most staunch gun control supporters for decades
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/holder_gun_control/2008/11/21/153808.html
B. Arne Duncan, Secretary of Education, won an award from the gun control lobby.
http://www.nrapublications.org/a1f/Duncan.html
C. Cass Sunstein, Regulatory Czar (whatever the hell that is), thinks that animals should be able to sue, yes I did write "SUE" humans.
http://www.nrapublications.org/a1f/Cass.html
D. Rahm Emmauel, White House Chief of Staff and former senior advisor to President Clinton, was a part of the gun ban lobbies and a supporter of the Brady Bill.
http://nugun.wordpress.com/2009/02/09/rahm-emmanuel-scariest-man-in-washington/
See, libs? See why we are concerned? People surround themselves with like minded individuals when and President Obama is doing just that. Now, let's get to the idea that the recent shootings are #1 because of conservative gun activists and #2 actually performed by legal gun owners. Neither of which are true.
The recent shootings that have been taking place are saddening. What the gun control activists really need to understand is that the people who committed these crimes either #1 possessed their weapons illegally or #2 were mentally unstable and if they didn't have access to guns, they would have found another way to carry out their missions (ie. the man who built a "tank" and wrecked the town of Granby, Colorado).
#1. Obama was voted the most liberal senator in the senate and for some reason, there were still people out there who foolishly thought he would govern from the center or maybe left of center. He's clearly shown his colors as a true leftist and, I believe, he never planned on governing from the center but he's such a slippery snake, he made people believe he would.
#2. He surrounding himself by gun control activists by filling his cabinet with people who won't support the 2nd Amendment. Let's take a look at some of these people:
A. Eric Holder, Attorney General, has been one of the most staunch gun control supporters for decades
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/holder_gun_control/2008/11/21/153808.html
B. Arne Duncan, Secretary of Education, won an award from the gun control lobby.
http://www.nrapublications.org/a1f/Duncan.html
C. Cass Sunstein, Regulatory Czar (whatever the hell that is), thinks that animals should be able to sue, yes I did write "SUE" humans.
http://www.nrapublications.org/a1f/Cass.html
D. Rahm Emmauel, White House Chief of Staff and former senior advisor to President Clinton, was a part of the gun ban lobbies and a supporter of the Brady Bill.
http://nugun.wordpress.com/2009/02/09/rahm-emmanuel-scariest-man-in-washington/
See, libs? See why we are concerned? People surround themselves with like minded individuals when and President Obama is doing just that. Now, let's get to the idea that the recent shootings are #1 because of conservative gun activists and #2 actually performed by legal gun owners. Neither of which are true.
The recent shootings that have been taking place are saddening. What the gun control activists really need to understand is that the people who committed these crimes either #1 possessed their weapons illegally or #2 were mentally unstable and if they didn't have access to guns, they would have found another way to carry out their missions (ie. the man who built a "tank" and wrecked the town of Granby, Colorado).
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Another one bites the dust.....or does she?
Another POTUS nominee is a tax cheat, oops...I'm sorry, I meant to say another POTUS nominee made an honest mistake on her taxes.
Kathleen Sebelius, governor of Kansas and second choice nominee for HHS secretary has revealed that she paid over $7k in back taxes because of "mistakes" on her returns. I am pretty sure that our dear President has no clue how upset many Americans are over this happening over and over again with his nominees.
In an interview with CNN after the Daschle debacle, Obama said this: "And I take responsibility for it and we're going to make sure we fix it so it doesn't happen again." He also said this: "Ultimately, I campaigned on changing Washington and bottom-up politics," Obama said. "And I don't want to send a message to the American people that there are two sets of standards -- one for powerful people and one for ordinary folks who are working every day and paying their taxes."
I tell you now, if this bonehead gets confirmed and Obama does nothing, he will be viewed by so many as a typical Washington politician and a complete and total hypocrite. It seems to me that the best thing for him to do, is apologize to the American people once again because the vetting process screwed up again and pick yet a third choice for HHS secretary. He's already got Rahmbo on his staff and Geithner in his administration and both of them have tax issues of some sort.
Understandably, the President won't deal with this until he returns from the G20 summit and I'm okay with that. I find it so aggravating that the elitists on MSNBC mentioned Sebelius' tax issues in a round table discussion. The question was asked "do we care?" and everyone on the panel said "No, we don't care". That is so far out of touch with the view of so many Americans and they have no clue how high and mighty they sound for saying this!
I do know that if Sebelius is allowed in as HHS secretary, there will be an outrage and uproar from the public and THEN Obama will know how people really feel!!
Kathleen Sebelius, governor of Kansas and second choice nominee for HHS secretary has revealed that she paid over $7k in back taxes because of "mistakes" on her returns. I am pretty sure that our dear President has no clue how upset many Americans are over this happening over and over again with his nominees.
In an interview with CNN after the Daschle debacle, Obama said this: "And I take responsibility for it and we're going to make sure we fix it so it doesn't happen again." He also said this: "Ultimately, I campaigned on changing Washington and bottom-up politics," Obama said. "And I don't want to send a message to the American people that there are two sets of standards -- one for powerful people and one for ordinary folks who are working every day and paying their taxes."
I tell you now, if this bonehead gets confirmed and Obama does nothing, he will be viewed by so many as a typical Washington politician and a complete and total hypocrite. It seems to me that the best thing for him to do, is apologize to the American people once again because the vetting process screwed up again and pick yet a third choice for HHS secretary. He's already got Rahmbo on his staff and Geithner in his administration and both of them have tax issues of some sort.
Understandably, the President won't deal with this until he returns from the G20 summit and I'm okay with that. I find it so aggravating that the elitists on MSNBC mentioned Sebelius' tax issues in a round table discussion. The question was asked "do we care?" and everyone on the panel said "No, we don't care". That is so far out of touch with the view of so many Americans and they have no clue how high and mighty they sound for saying this!
I do know that if Sebelius is allowed in as HHS secretary, there will be an outrage and uproar from the public and THEN Obama will know how people really feel!!
Friday, March 27, 2009
How can we ever agree?
I don't know what I was thinking; I visited the far-left blogsite, thinkprogress.org. I do know what I was thinking actually, I wanted to see what the other side was saying and how they were feeling about issues. I truly believe that in order to continue to expand my ideas and values, I need to understand where someone else is coming from.
The issues they were addressing had to do with how much the abhor Bill O'Reilly, Bill Kristol, John McCain, Joe the Plumber and Glenn Beck but no real issues (ie. the budget, the stimulus, the military, abortion, etc.). There didn't seem to be too much of substance in the articles presented and the comments posted.
So, I started to comment and was trying to be nice and open minded and I immediately was attacked and demeaned. I was called idiotic, a moron, self-loathing, stupid troll, and an array of other not-so-nice terms. I was repeatedly flagged for "spewing nonsense" and "drivel". I was asked to leave because thinkprogress.org was a place for liberals to talk amongst themselves and outsiders weren't welcome. I was under the impression that the liberals were supposed to be about tolerance and acceptance. Apparently, not.
I politely asked why they hated Glenn Beck. I was told that he was clearly mentally ill, spoke nonsense, must still be an alcoholic and was a blubbering idiot because he cried all the time. I didn't quite understand how any of that made someone mentally ill and I never really got a solid answer to my question of "why do you think he's mentally ill?" They said because he called President Obama the Manchurian Candidate, he was clearly mentally ill.
It was quite interesting to me that anytime I used facts about conservatives/Bush, whatever, I was told I was just spinning and using talking points but whenever they used "facts" they were facts and not talking points yet the "facts" they used were simply things heard on MSNBC or read in the NYT. It seems a bit hypocritical to me and quite self-serving.
We were talking about what a big deal the conservatives are making of President Obama using the teleprompter so much. I find it entertaining and funny but not a real issue. They asked me why the conservatives would make it an issue and I replied with "for the same reason the liberals made an issue out of the money spent on Sarah Palin's wardrobe during the campaign". Well, that did it...they called me an idiot for making that comparison and told me there was clearly a difference. Is there? Really? When they complained about Amanda Terkel being "stalked" by O'Reilly's producer I asked "how is that any different that a network news show sending people to Alaska to bombard Levi Johnston with questions about his relationship with Bristol Palin and about his child?" Again, I was called a moron and told I didn't have any facts and these were not the same things.
I began to wonder, how are we ever going to come together as a country when there is this much hatred. I visited a popular blog site, that of Michelle Malkin who is really despised by the left. I wanted to see if the treatment of liberals on a conservative website was the same as the treatment I received as a conservative on a liberal website. Turns out, it is quite similar. Now, I am biased but the conservatives weren't quite as mean to the liberals as I was treated on thinkprogress.org. But, the conservatives did tell liberals to go away and that they were being flagged on the site.
We talk so much about bipartisanship but is there really such a thing? I'm not sure we can get past our own philosophies and ideals to really work together. I did learn one thing though, I won't treat anyone the same way I was treated by the people on thinkprogress.org...it was unbelievably disrespectful, hateful, mean and foolish.
The issues they were addressing had to do with how much the abhor Bill O'Reilly, Bill Kristol, John McCain, Joe the Plumber and Glenn Beck but no real issues (ie. the budget, the stimulus, the military, abortion, etc.). There didn't seem to be too much of substance in the articles presented and the comments posted.
So, I started to comment and was trying to be nice and open minded and I immediately was attacked and demeaned. I was called idiotic, a moron, self-loathing, stupid troll, and an array of other not-so-nice terms. I was repeatedly flagged for "spewing nonsense" and "drivel". I was asked to leave because thinkprogress.org was a place for liberals to talk amongst themselves and outsiders weren't welcome. I was under the impression that the liberals were supposed to be about tolerance and acceptance. Apparently, not.
I politely asked why they hated Glenn Beck. I was told that he was clearly mentally ill, spoke nonsense, must still be an alcoholic and was a blubbering idiot because he cried all the time. I didn't quite understand how any of that made someone mentally ill and I never really got a solid answer to my question of "why do you think he's mentally ill?" They said because he called President Obama the Manchurian Candidate, he was clearly mentally ill.
It was quite interesting to me that anytime I used facts about conservatives/Bush, whatever, I was told I was just spinning and using talking points but whenever they used "facts" they were facts and not talking points yet the "facts" they used were simply things heard on MSNBC or read in the NYT. It seems a bit hypocritical to me and quite self-serving.
We were talking about what a big deal the conservatives are making of President Obama using the teleprompter so much. I find it entertaining and funny but not a real issue. They asked me why the conservatives would make it an issue and I replied with "for the same reason the liberals made an issue out of the money spent on Sarah Palin's wardrobe during the campaign". Well, that did it...they called me an idiot for making that comparison and told me there was clearly a difference. Is there? Really? When they complained about Amanda Terkel being "stalked" by O'Reilly's producer I asked "how is that any different that a network news show sending people to Alaska to bombard Levi Johnston with questions about his relationship with Bristol Palin and about his child?" Again, I was called a moron and told I didn't have any facts and these were not the same things.
I began to wonder, how are we ever going to come together as a country when there is this much hatred. I visited a popular blog site, that of Michelle Malkin who is really despised by the left. I wanted to see if the treatment of liberals on a conservative website was the same as the treatment I received as a conservative on a liberal website. Turns out, it is quite similar. Now, I am biased but the conservatives weren't quite as mean to the liberals as I was treated on thinkprogress.org. But, the conservatives did tell liberals to go away and that they were being flagged on the site.
We talk so much about bipartisanship but is there really such a thing? I'm not sure we can get past our own philosophies and ideals to really work together. I did learn one thing though, I won't treat anyone the same way I was treated by the people on thinkprogress.org...it was unbelievably disrespectful, hateful, mean and foolish.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
How long did it take him....
I was just waiting to see how long it would take the President to once again say "I inherited this mess" during last night's press conference. It wasn't long into the questioning when he whipped out the ol' "it isn't my fault" crap. Did he forget that he voted for the TARP? Selective memory? This blame has curdled and like I said in my last post, he now owns this mess after making it crystal clear that he didn't read the recovery bill.
I wasn't surprised when Ed Henry from CNN (?) asked a question about why it took weeks for the President and his staff to express their outrage over the AIG bonuses. Originally, President Obama didn't answer the question, just like so many answers he gave last night...didn't actually answer the question at hand but then when Ed Henry asked again about the delay in outrage, the President became irritated and short and snapped out the answer of "I like to know what I'm talking about before I say anything." What a joke! What a crappy, disrespectful, childish answer for the POTUS to give. It was obvious to me, that by that answer, he really wasn't outraged about the bonuses at all and it was just delayed until the American people became aware of the situation. I just shook my head and laughed at his response.
I understand that last night, his purpose was to drive home the "only way out of this mess is through health care and energy reform" agenda. I understand it, I don't agree with it but I understand it. It just became more clear that the economy disaster is just a smoke screen for him to get his agenda passed while the people aren't looking. He's betting on the stupidity of Americans which is a pretty good risk to take.
Poor TOTUS, last night his cousin, the big screen teleprompter was utilized and apparently TOTUS had the night off.
I wasn't surprised when Ed Henry from CNN (?) asked a question about why it took weeks for the President and his staff to express their outrage over the AIG bonuses. Originally, President Obama didn't answer the question, just like so many answers he gave last night...didn't actually answer the question at hand but then when Ed Henry asked again about the delay in outrage, the President became irritated and short and snapped out the answer of "I like to know what I'm talking about before I say anything." What a joke! What a crappy, disrespectful, childish answer for the POTUS to give. It was obvious to me, that by that answer, he really wasn't outraged about the bonuses at all and it was just delayed until the American people became aware of the situation. I just shook my head and laughed at his response.
I understand that last night, his purpose was to drive home the "only way out of this mess is through health care and energy reform" agenda. I understand it, I don't agree with it but I understand it. It just became more clear that the economy disaster is just a smoke screen for him to get his agenda passed while the people aren't looking. He's betting on the stupidity of Americans which is a pretty good risk to take.
Poor TOTUS, last night his cousin, the big screen teleprompter was utilized and apparently TOTUS had the night off.
Friday, March 20, 2009
You did it! No, you did it! Nuh-uh...you did it!
Here we go again with politics as usual in Washington. Our fool political representatives didn't read the damn stimulus bill, shocker.
The following is taken directly from the stimulus bill (of which I've actually read about 700 pages...more than our politicians can say):
"The prohibition required under clause (i) shall not be construed to prohibit any bonus payment required to be paid pursuant to a written employment contract executed on or before February 11, 2009, as such valid employment contracts are determined by the Secretary or the designee of the Secretary. "
Now...was this provision inserted by Dodd? Yes, apparently so. But, he says that Geithner and the White House told him to include it. Stop blaming the other person...take some responsibility, SOMEONE, PLEASE!! Okay, so no matter who said this provision should be put in the bill, why are they (senators, representatives, Geithner and the President) all acting all "stunned" that these bonuses were paid out? Didn't they read the fucking bill? It's right there...it's in the bill. Whatever happened to the accountability that the President has been preaching about? It doesn't apply here? For Pete's sake! This is absurd and everyone...democrat, libertarian, republican, independent, everyone should be pissed off about this!
It's not about the bonus money itself, it's about the principle. There's supposed to be a new found accountability in Washington...when and where does it start? Shouldn't it start with the President? Did he not read the bill? Because, if he had, he wouldn't be so shocked that these bonuses were paid out. Geithner knew about this and he's feigning surprise, too.
AND, now they want to tax those bonuses by 90%! They're totally changing the rules to the game that they set up! They said it was okay to pay the bonuses and now they say it's not and you're going to pay! Lord have mercy!
This is totally President Obama's baby now...he screwed up by not reading or not fully reading this bill as did our politicians. This, to me, is the end point of "I inherited this mess" line. He can't use that with any validity any more.
Wonder what his teleprompter would tell him to do about this?
The following is taken directly from the stimulus bill (of which I've actually read about 700 pages...more than our politicians can say):
"The prohibition required under clause (i) shall not be construed to prohibit any bonus payment required to be paid pursuant to a written employment contract executed on or before February 11, 2009, as such valid employment contracts are determined by the Secretary or the designee of the Secretary. "
Now...was this provision inserted by Dodd? Yes, apparently so. But, he says that Geithner and the White House told him to include it. Stop blaming the other person...take some responsibility, SOMEONE, PLEASE!! Okay, so no matter who said this provision should be put in the bill, why are they (senators, representatives, Geithner and the President) all acting all "stunned" that these bonuses were paid out? Didn't they read the fucking bill? It's right there...it's in the bill. Whatever happened to the accountability that the President has been preaching about? It doesn't apply here? For Pete's sake! This is absurd and everyone...democrat, libertarian, republican, independent, everyone should be pissed off about this!
It's not about the bonus money itself, it's about the principle. There's supposed to be a new found accountability in Washington...when and where does it start? Shouldn't it start with the President? Did he not read the bill? Because, if he had, he wouldn't be so shocked that these bonuses were paid out. Geithner knew about this and he's feigning surprise, too.
AND, now they want to tax those bonuses by 90%! They're totally changing the rules to the game that they set up! They said it was okay to pay the bonuses and now they say it's not and you're going to pay! Lord have mercy!
This is totally President Obama's baby now...he screwed up by not reading or not fully reading this bill as did our politicians. This, to me, is the end point of "I inherited this mess" line. He can't use that with any validity any more.
Wonder what his teleprompter would tell him to do about this?
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Do I offend? Tough!
We live in a very sensitive, politically correct society. I personally, believe that political correctness is a crock of crap and it's just a way to ensure we don't have open, honest discussions. Because of political correctness, we generally can't openly talk about race, religion, sexual preference and now terrorism without the worry of upsetting someone.
Eric Holder, not to long ago said, "we need to talk more about race" and in the same breath, said "we are a nation of cowards". Now, I get the point of what he was saying, at least I think I do. What he was saying is that we are cowards because we won't talk about race. Here's the thing: people ARE AFRAID to talk about race for fear of being called a racist by the ACLU or NAACP. We can't talk openly about race because of the ramifications we may face. I, luckily, have friends who are black and friends who are gay who I feel comfortable talking to about sensitive subjects. But, in general, people will get reamed, especially people in the public eye.
For instance, Jackie Mason recently referred to President Obama as a "schwartza" which, in German, means black person. Some find this term offensive, others do not. TMZ (who I think is a joke and don't understand why FoxNews even associates with them) followed Mr Mason asking him why he said that. Mr Mason laid into the "reporter" asking when did we ever come down on Chris Rock for calling Bush a retard? Mr Mason did a great job at calling out the double standard.
Another example of double standards is when O'Reilly referred to lil'ol' Helen Thomas as the wicked witch of the west. A woman's group was all over him about that and he called them on not being all over SNL or editorial writers when they called Sarah Palin a pig or said she wasn't a woman. Total double standard.
Now, we find out that our homeland security secretary, Janet Napalitano (spelling?) won't refer to terrorists as terrorists. She'll only refer to acts of terror as "man-made disasters". What the hell? Now, we're worried about being politically correct when it comes to murderous individuals? Please! This is absurd and will tell the rest of the world, including the Islamist extremists, that we aren't even strong enough to be tough in our labeling.
People really need to lighten up and not worry so much about being offended or who is going to be offended and worry more about having an open, honest conversation about actual issues. Worrying about "proper labeling" is such a waste of time and really quite embarrassing.
Eric Holder, not to long ago said, "we need to talk more about race" and in the same breath, said "we are a nation of cowards". Now, I get the point of what he was saying, at least I think I do. What he was saying is that we are cowards because we won't talk about race. Here's the thing: people ARE AFRAID to talk about race for fear of being called a racist by the ACLU or NAACP. We can't talk openly about race because of the ramifications we may face. I, luckily, have friends who are black and friends who are gay who I feel comfortable talking to about sensitive subjects. But, in general, people will get reamed, especially people in the public eye.
For instance, Jackie Mason recently referred to President Obama as a "schwartza" which, in German, means black person. Some find this term offensive, others do not. TMZ (who I think is a joke and don't understand why FoxNews even associates with them) followed Mr Mason asking him why he said that. Mr Mason laid into the "reporter" asking when did we ever come down on Chris Rock for calling Bush a retard? Mr Mason did a great job at calling out the double standard.
Another example of double standards is when O'Reilly referred to lil'ol' Helen Thomas as the wicked witch of the west. A woman's group was all over him about that and he called them on not being all over SNL or editorial writers when they called Sarah Palin a pig or said she wasn't a woman. Total double standard.
Now, we find out that our homeland security secretary, Janet Napalitano (spelling?) won't refer to terrorists as terrorists. She'll only refer to acts of terror as "man-made disasters". What the hell? Now, we're worried about being politically correct when it comes to murderous individuals? Please! This is absurd and will tell the rest of the world, including the Islamist extremists, that we aren't even strong enough to be tough in our labeling.
People really need to lighten up and not worry so much about being offended or who is going to be offended and worry more about having an open, honest conversation about actual issues. Worrying about "proper labeling" is such a waste of time and really quite embarrassing.
Friday, March 13, 2009
Mortgage, anyone?
This is an article found on 9news.com on 3/13/09:
DENVER - The Colorado Housing and Finance Authority (CHFA) is responding to the economic downturn by launching two new mortgage programs aimed at helping low and moderate-income Coloradans buy homes.
Friday, CHFA announced the programs, which provide competitive low-interest financing options and the option for down payment and closing cost assistance to both first time home buyers, and those who have owned before. The new "HomeOpener Program" is available to household earning less than 130 percent of their area's median income. In Denver that's a little more than $94,000 for a family of three. "HomeOpener Plus" is also available for homebuyers who need help coming up with a down payment or covering closing costs. CHFA says they're excited to offer this, since many lenders can't right now. "We are one of the very few entities that can provide down payment assistance, particularly since the federal government is now prohibiting quite a few programs that they deem to be not suitable for certain borrowers," explained Roy Alexander, the executive director and CEO of CHFA. Homebuyers must also meet several requirements to qualify, including a minimum credit score of 580 and maximum debt-to-income ration of 45 percent on manually underwritten loans. They must also take a financial education class. "We pride ourselves on making sure that educated borrowers are making the right decisions about their long term assets they they're purchasing," he added. CHFA says all of these new requirements are to ensure the agency keeps pace with current lending standards, so that the program doesn't inadvertently attract subprime lenders or borrowers.
CHFA HomeOpener and HomeOpener Plus are available through CHFA's statewide network of lenders, CLICK HERE for a complete list or call CHFA at 800-877-2432.
(Copyright KUSA*TV, All Rights Reserved)
-----
I found this interesting....pulled it from a website:
Understanding your debt-to-income ratio
36% or less: This is the ideal amount of debt for most people to carry.
37%-42%: This is okay, but start cutting your spending now before you get into deeper debt. 43%-49%: Financial distress is right around the corner unless you act quickly to prevent it.
50% or more: You need professional assistance to severely reduce your debt.
----
Now...does anyone see anything wrong here? This company, HomeOpener Plus is doing EXACTLY what got us into this housing mess in the first place.
1. Lending to someone with credit score of 580? You shouldn't be able to finance a bottle of water with a score like that.
2. Financing down payments? Isn't that a bit odd? Shouldn't we be avoiding mortgages for people that don't have a down payment and NOT give them financing for the mortgage AND for the down payment?
3. Financing someone who has a DTI of 45%??? That's completely nuts!
This is all just asking for the same trouble we're in already with the housing mess.
DENVER - The Colorado Housing and Finance Authority (CHFA) is responding to the economic downturn by launching two new mortgage programs aimed at helping low and moderate-income Coloradans buy homes.
Friday, CHFA announced the programs, which provide competitive low-interest financing options and the option for down payment and closing cost assistance to both first time home buyers, and those who have owned before. The new "HomeOpener Program" is available to household earning less than 130 percent of their area's median income. In Denver that's a little more than $94,000 for a family of three. "HomeOpener Plus" is also available for homebuyers who need help coming up with a down payment or covering closing costs. CHFA says they're excited to offer this, since many lenders can't right now. "We are one of the very few entities that can provide down payment assistance, particularly since the federal government is now prohibiting quite a few programs that they deem to be not suitable for certain borrowers," explained Roy Alexander, the executive director and CEO of CHFA. Homebuyers must also meet several requirements to qualify, including a minimum credit score of 580 and maximum debt-to-income ration of 45 percent on manually underwritten loans. They must also take a financial education class. "We pride ourselves on making sure that educated borrowers are making the right decisions about their long term assets they they're purchasing," he added. CHFA says all of these new requirements are to ensure the agency keeps pace with current lending standards, so that the program doesn't inadvertently attract subprime lenders or borrowers.
CHFA HomeOpener and HomeOpener Plus are available through CHFA's statewide network of lenders, CLICK HERE for a complete list or call CHFA at 800-877-2432.
(Copyright KUSA*TV, All Rights Reserved)
-----
I found this interesting....pulled it from a website:
Understanding your debt-to-income ratio
36% or less: This is the ideal amount of debt for most people to carry.
37%-42%: This is okay, but start cutting your spending now before you get into deeper debt. 43%-49%: Financial distress is right around the corner unless you act quickly to prevent it.
50% or more: You need professional assistance to severely reduce your debt.
----
Now...does anyone see anything wrong here? This company, HomeOpener Plus is doing EXACTLY what got us into this housing mess in the first place.
1. Lending to someone with credit score of 580? You shouldn't be able to finance a bottle of water with a score like that.
2. Financing down payments? Isn't that a bit odd? Shouldn't we be avoiding mortgages for people that don't have a down payment and NOT give them financing for the mortgage AND for the down payment?
3. Financing someone who has a DTI of 45%??? That's completely nuts!
This is all just asking for the same trouble we're in already with the housing mess.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Taliban? Moderate? Huh?
I'm thinking this post may be a bit short because it's a bit stupid. It's stupid, okay, maybe stupid, isn't the right word...it's arrogant to President Obama to think that #1, there is such a thing as "moderate Taliban" and #2 that we can somehow create diplomacy with them.Am I the only one who thinks this is foolish? Well, no, I'm not...the Taliban thinks it's foolish. They themselves said that there is no such thing as "moderate Taliban". This is one area where the President's inexperience and arrogance is shinning. To his credit though, he did point out that the situation in Afganistan is more complex than in Iraq. Ya think?
When it comes down to it, the actual members of The Taliban are on a mission and that mission will not be faltered by the President of the United States wanting to have "talks". There are people in Afghanistan and Pakistan that are so scared of the Taliban that they will never do anything to go against them. The same goes for Al-Qaeda.
The Taliban and Al-Qaeda are directly connected and the thought that our president thinks he can reason or have discussions to come to a agreement with this group is really quite frightening. I don't know if he or Clinton or anyone in his foreign policy department really have any clue how nervous this makes Americans; a lot of Americans (not all, I know) are very nervous about these types of moves from the administration.
I guess that wasn't really short, but you know me...I can never get off a soap box quickly.
Monday, March 9, 2009
Republicans need to get their acts straight
These silly Republicans...they are not setting a good image right now and it's a bit embarassing. John McCain is the ONLY senate republican, along with a couple senate democrats that have NO earmark spending in thie omnibus bill. I thought the republicans were the ones touting reponsible, fiscal spending and they turn around and completely go back on their word, except McCain.
Obama is expected to sign this bill without getting rid of any earmarks; this one time will be an exception. He is quickly becoming the President of exceptions and not President of substance.
I'm just saying, while I am a republican, I'm disappointed in my party, right now. I'm disappointed that they had a perfect opportunity to become the party of real change, because Obama is just going on with politics as usual, and all they did is squander the opportunity to show fiscal responsibility for once in Washington.
Time will tell whether Obama is really about change, although his changes are not something I support and if the republicans can reclaim their party.
Obama is expected to sign this bill without getting rid of any earmarks; this one time will be an exception. He is quickly becoming the President of exceptions and not President of substance.
I'm just saying, while I am a republican, I'm disappointed in my party, right now. I'm disappointed that they had a perfect opportunity to become the party of real change, because Obama is just going on with politics as usual, and all they did is squander the opportunity to show fiscal responsibility for once in Washington.
Time will tell whether Obama is really about change, although his changes are not something I support and if the republicans can reclaim their party.
Friday, March 6, 2009
Political hypocrisies in Washington
Well, we now know that politics are continuing as usual, in Washington, D.C. On both sides of the aisle, the hypocrisies continue and it's maddening!
1. Obama promised "no more pork barrel spending" yet the new $410 billion dollar spending bill is laden with earmarks. Now, I will give him the benefit of the doubt because he hasn't signed it yet (hell, it failed in the Senate already!). However, for someone, who is the leader of the Democratic party and the leader of our nation, you'd think that the democrats would follow him, and not include earmarks. I'm sickened by the amount of pork in this bill during a time when the country is in dire need of leadership and fiscal responsibility.
2. Now, we can't lay blame for the 8500+ earmarks in the bill solely on the democrats...about 40% or so, of those earmarks are from the republicans! The republicans in the House are the ones who ALL voted against the stimulus bill but apparently they have absolutely no qualms about putting their own pieces of pork in this new bill. That just doesn't make any sense other than it's "politics as usual".
3. Once Tom Daschle dropped his nomination for HHS secretary, Obama went on television saying that we can't have a different set of standards for one group of people than another group of people, yet Tim Geithner, the tax cheat, is still our Treasury Secretary. I don't trust a damn thing Mr. Geithner says; I don't believe he's telling the truth.
4. When John McCain suspended his campaign to go fight against the stimulus bill last year, I thought that was a huge mistake. THEN, he turned around and voted FOR it!
5. Obama touted an era of bi-partisanship in Washington. That, of course, is not enforced by him; the Democrats in the Senate and House are just as, if not more, partisan as ever. I think, possibly, his bi-partisan heart is in the right place, but it's not being executed very well. Don't forget the mockery he made of the republicans during the democrat retreat prior to the stimulus bill being signed. That's really a new era of bi-partisanship.
6. Obama said "lobbyists will have no place in my administration" and how many are there now? At least 12 nominees for the Obama administration have been registered lobbyists.
Well, I could go on about the hypocrisies in Washington and how there is nothing new going on there, but I won't. This isn't a new era, this is just the Obama era.
1. Obama promised "no more pork barrel spending" yet the new $410 billion dollar spending bill is laden with earmarks. Now, I will give him the benefit of the doubt because he hasn't signed it yet (hell, it failed in the Senate already!). However, for someone, who is the leader of the Democratic party and the leader of our nation, you'd think that the democrats would follow him, and not include earmarks. I'm sickened by the amount of pork in this bill during a time when the country is in dire need of leadership and fiscal responsibility.
2. Now, we can't lay blame for the 8500+ earmarks in the bill solely on the democrats...about 40% or so, of those earmarks are from the republicans! The republicans in the House are the ones who ALL voted against the stimulus bill but apparently they have absolutely no qualms about putting their own pieces of pork in this new bill. That just doesn't make any sense other than it's "politics as usual".
3. Once Tom Daschle dropped his nomination for HHS secretary, Obama went on television saying that we can't have a different set of standards for one group of people than another group of people, yet Tim Geithner, the tax cheat, is still our Treasury Secretary. I don't trust a damn thing Mr. Geithner says; I don't believe he's telling the truth.
4. When John McCain suspended his campaign to go fight against the stimulus bill last year, I thought that was a huge mistake. THEN, he turned around and voted FOR it!
5. Obama touted an era of bi-partisanship in Washington. That, of course, is not enforced by him; the Democrats in the Senate and House are just as, if not more, partisan as ever. I think, possibly, his bi-partisan heart is in the right place, but it's not being executed very well. Don't forget the mockery he made of the republicans during the democrat retreat prior to the stimulus bill being signed. That's really a new era of bi-partisanship.
6. Obama said "lobbyists will have no place in my administration" and how many are there now? At least 12 nominees for the Obama administration have been registered lobbyists.
Well, I could go on about the hypocrisies in Washington and how there is nothing new going on there, but I won't. This isn't a new era, this is just the Obama era.
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Question...
So far, there are two banks (Northern Trust and one other who's name I can't remember) who are giving TARP funds back to the feds. Northern Trust was forced to take the funds and the other bank took the funds but since decided they didn't need the money. So, the cash is going back to the feds. My question is...where does it go? Does it go back to China to pay them back a little tiny bit? Does it get paid to the taxpayers (ha..yeah, right), does it just go to the government to pay for something else? Will we ever know?
Also...there's all this complaining about parties being thrown by banks and now a union. Northern Trust threw a part a few weeks ago in California and used it's marketing funds to pay for it and a union threw a big bash in south Florida recently as well. Isn't this stimulating the economy? Why is everyone griping about it? They're not going to Mexico or the Caribbean...they're celebrating here...in the US and spending money here. I mean...we keep being told that consumers need to spend more but then when a corporation does just that, they're vilified.
If there is a logical explaination to either of these, please, let me know!
Also...there's all this complaining about parties being thrown by banks and now a union. Northern Trust threw a part a few weeks ago in California and used it's marketing funds to pay for it and a union threw a big bash in south Florida recently as well. Isn't this stimulating the economy? Why is everyone griping about it? They're not going to Mexico or the Caribbean...they're celebrating here...in the US and spending money here. I mean...we keep being told that consumers need to spend more but then when a corporation does just that, they're vilified.
If there is a logical explaination to either of these, please, let me know!
Get your facts straight!
Before you assume that Rush Limbaugh said he wants President Obama and the country to fail, get your facts straight!1st....Rush is NOT the face of the Republican party. He is the face of the conservative movement...there is a difference.2nd...Rush does NOT form opinions for conservatives...meaning...we don't just base our opinions off what he has to say. I, in fact, don't care for him and don't listen to him.3rd...WATCH THE INTERVIEW with Hannity to see how all this crap about Rush wanting the country and the President to fail. GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT!! Don't fall into the typical political diversionary tactics trap. Take what Rush said in context and you might be suprised that what he is saying, actually makes sense!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8eT_eLzdVA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8eT_eLzdVA
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)