From a CNN story today - apparently 40 - 55 representatives will vote AGAINST the Obama health care bill if federal funding for abortion is removed from the bill. In other words, this entire overhaul of our healthcare system is meaningless to these Democrats. It's all a front just to get taxpayer funded infanticide.
Once again, liberal hypocrisy on stage for the world to see. For a liberal Democrat, socializing medicine is a life long dream.....as long as women can have the government pay to dismember their unborn babies. If that's not part of the deal, well, let's just forget that part about insuring 30,000,000 uninsured.
Story here:
Washington (CNN) -- The divisive issue of abortion is once again causing problems for House Democrats as they plan to move forward with the health care bill.
Anti-abortion Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Michigan, is asking for a vote on his language restricting taxpayer funding for abortion, and a group of female abortion-rights Democrats came out of an emergency meeting in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office Friday evening visibly angry about the request.
Rep. Diana Degette, D-Colorado, told reporters a vote on Stupak's measure was a "nonstarter," saying, "somewhere between 40 and 55" abortion-rights Democrats would bolt from the bill.
Friday, March 19, 2010
Monday, October 05, 2009
Olympic Sized Disappointment
To all the conservatives rejoicing that the Olympics are not coming to Chicago in 2016: Get a clue. Those of you laughing at Obama for his failure to close the deal in Copenhagan are just as guilty as the idiots who wanted to see us fail in Iraq purely because of their hatred of George Bush.
Bottom line - let's put America first. Party and ideological affiliation comes in a distant second. Bringing the Olympics to Chicago would have been a great chance to show the world a first class American city with a spectacular waterfront skyline, world class universities, an industrious populace, as well as the gateway to America's midwest breadbasket.
Here's hoping that the pundits and hacks celebrating Obama's "failure" come to the sober recognition that what's bad for Obama politically is not necessarily good for America.
Bottom line - let's put America first. Party and ideological affiliation comes in a distant second. Bringing the Olympics to Chicago would have been a great chance to show the world a first class American city with a spectacular waterfront skyline, world class universities, an industrious populace, as well as the gateway to America's midwest breadbasket.
Here's hoping that the pundits and hacks celebrating Obama's "failure" come to the sober recognition that what's bad for Obama politically is not necessarily good for America.
Thursday, July 16, 2009
No Silver Linings on the Obama Cloud
I was glad to see Barack Obama at the All Star game recently, although the media coverage was a little over the top. I was impressed that Michelle Obama did her best to honor Catholic customs by covering her head in old school Catholic tradition. Seriously, I'm looking for any silver lining with this guy. But today's speech at the NAACP took me back to square one with this guy.
Said Obama to the crowd: "the pain of discrimination is still felt in America" among blacks, hispanics, and Muslims. Seriously, people are still held back by discrimination? Is this going to be the message for the next 500 years? "Sure, progress has been made, and all of our laws are structured to transfer opportunity from whites to other races.......but the pains of discrimination remain!!"
We have a progress tax code that transfers $ from the wealthy to the "disadvantaged". We have minority scholarships and race based admissions policies which push minorities to the front of the line in front of whites. We have race based government contracts which transfer wealth from the tax base to minorities. Is this the "pain" to which Obama referred?
Well, apparently that's not enough. Now we need to "make housing more affordable; and give ex-offenders a second chance." Furthermore, we need to "makes quality health coverage affordable for all." So basically, we'll tax the hell out of whitey so regardless of effort and achievement, everybody will enjoy the same standard of living.
So now we're living a perfect storm - using race baiting tactics in order to push Obama's socialist agenda. So much for any silver lining with this administration.
, Obama is perpetuating the myth of systemic racial discrimination in America in order to push through socialism.
Said Obama to the crowd: "the pain of discrimination is still felt in America" among blacks, hispanics, and Muslims. Seriously, people are still held back by discrimination? Is this going to be the message for the next 500 years? "Sure, progress has been made, and all of our laws are structured to transfer opportunity from whites to other races.......but the pains of discrimination remain!!"
We have a progress tax code that transfers $ from the wealthy to the "disadvantaged". We have minority scholarships and race based admissions policies which push minorities to the front of the line in front of whites. We have race based government contracts which transfer wealth from the tax base to minorities. Is this the "pain" to which Obama referred?
Well, apparently that's not enough. Now we need to "make housing more affordable; and give ex-offenders a second chance." Furthermore, we need to "makes quality health coverage affordable for all." So basically, we'll tax the hell out of whitey so regardless of effort and achievement, everybody will enjoy the same standard of living.
So now we're living a perfect storm - using race baiting tactics in order to push Obama's socialist agenda. So much for any silver lining with this administration.
, Obama is perpetuating the myth of systemic racial discrimination in America in order to push through socialism.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Why I Hate Obama: Reason 2
Barack Obama spoke at Georgetown this week. He told the university that all references to Jesus Christ had to be covered. Odd behavior for a man who claims to be a Christian.
Barack Obama ==> Liar
Barack Obama ==> closest thing to Lenin the United States has ever seen.
Barack Obama ==> Liar
Barack Obama ==> closest thing to Lenin the United States has ever seen.
Why I hate Obama: Reason 1
Obama claimed he was unaware of the racist sermons preached at Jeremiah Wright's church in Chicago. As it turns out, he donated more than $26,000 to the church in 2007.
That's a lot of money to be giving to a church where you don't even listen to the sermons.
Barack Obama ==> Liar
That's a lot of money to be giving to a church where you don't even listen to the sermons.
Barack Obama ==> Liar
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Race.Baiting.Fool
I'm just stunned, almost at a loss for words. The ignorance of race card incarnate, Melissa Lacewell-Harris, knows no bounds.
Irrational claim of "racism" #1:
"A recent report from the Chicago Urban League found that African-American children in the city are almost exclusively educated in schools that are more than 85 percent black."
Wow, you mean blacks live near each other? Wow, in a city that's majority black, blacks go to school where the average population is > 85% black! Oh the horror, blacks have to go to school with......blacks! Damn whitey!
Irrational claim of "racism" #2:
"Holder's perspective that black and white workers get along easily in the workplace reflects a shocking disregard for contemporary employment realities. African-Americans continue to suffer from extraordinary employment discrimination at every stage of hiring and promotion and in every sector of the job market."
Wow, so the dimwit Lacewell knows that blacks and whites don't get along in the workplace? How? All she does is teach and write lame brained editorials? And if she's going to make half-baked claims of "discrimination", maybe at least one statistic should be provided. Whoops, I forgot, it's always open season on whites by blacktivists to cry wolf about racism.
Irrational claim of "racism" #3:
"We can't talk our way out of employers who refuse to interview a job candidate if the name on the résumé "sounds black."
Ahh, the old standby complaint - whites won't interview candidates with black sounding names. Again, no statistics, just groundless complaints. As for the science behind this, I'd love to see the statistics of black hiring manager tendencies. "Hmmm, should I interview Tamika or Billy Bob?" I'm pretty sure Billy Bob wouldn't get a call back. Of course, we'll never see that study because just suggesting that blacks seek to hire other blacks would be.....racist!
Irrational claim of "racism" #4:
"Some real estate agents steer black families away from predominantly white neighborhoods. Some property owners refuse to rent to black families. Both of these acts are illegal. In fact, the National Fair Housing Alliance documents hundred of thousands of acts of housing discrimination each year and has repeatedly criticized the Department of Justice for failing to adequately pursue and prosecute the vast majority of these cases. We can't talk our way out of residential segregation."
Really, the NFHA documents "hundreds of thousands" of discrimination acts every year, and the DOJ just ignores them? Riiiiight. And I just love the "some property owners" line. This sounds like an editorial in an 8th grade student newspaper as opposed to an opinion article from a professor at Princeton. "Some blacks really hate whites!" "Some blacktivists keep trying to make discrimination a story because they want to keep their jobs as blacktivists".
I'm finished even further contemplating the ignorance and hatred spouted by this woman. She personally sets race relations back a decade every time she puts pen to paper.
Article from CNN.
Irrational claim of "racism" #1:
"A recent report from the Chicago Urban League found that African-American children in the city are almost exclusively educated in schools that are more than 85 percent black."
Wow, you mean blacks live near each other? Wow, in a city that's majority black, blacks go to school where the average population is > 85% black! Oh the horror, blacks have to go to school with......blacks! Damn whitey!
Irrational claim of "racism" #2:
"Holder's perspective that black and white workers get along easily in the workplace reflects a shocking disregard for contemporary employment realities. African-Americans continue to suffer from extraordinary employment discrimination at every stage of hiring and promotion and in every sector of the job market."
Wow, so the dimwit Lacewell knows that blacks and whites don't get along in the workplace? How? All she does is teach and write lame brained editorials? And if she's going to make half-baked claims of "discrimination", maybe at least one statistic should be provided. Whoops, I forgot, it's always open season on whites by blacktivists to cry wolf about racism.
Irrational claim of "racism" #3:
"We can't talk our way out of employers who refuse to interview a job candidate if the name on the résumé "sounds black."
Ahh, the old standby complaint - whites won't interview candidates with black sounding names. Again, no statistics, just groundless complaints. As for the science behind this, I'd love to see the statistics of black hiring manager tendencies. "Hmmm, should I interview Tamika or Billy Bob?" I'm pretty sure Billy Bob wouldn't get a call back. Of course, we'll never see that study because just suggesting that blacks seek to hire other blacks would be.....racist!
Irrational claim of "racism" #4:
"Some real estate agents steer black families away from predominantly white neighborhoods. Some property owners refuse to rent to black families. Both of these acts are illegal. In fact, the National Fair Housing Alliance documents hundred of thousands of acts of housing discrimination each year and has repeatedly criticized the Department of Justice for failing to adequately pursue and prosecute the vast majority of these cases. We can't talk our way out of residential segregation."
Really, the NFHA documents "hundreds of thousands" of discrimination acts every year, and the DOJ just ignores them? Riiiiight. And I just love the "some property owners" line. This sounds like an editorial in an 8th grade student newspaper as opposed to an opinion article from a professor at Princeton. "Some blacks really hate whites!" "Some blacktivists keep trying to make discrimination a story because they want to keep their jobs as blacktivists".
I'm finished even further contemplating the ignorance and hatred spouted by this woman. She personally sets race relations back a decade every time she puts pen to paper.
Article from CNN.
Monday, January 26, 2009
Black First, American Second
Is anybody else tired of ridiculuous claims of racism tossed around in politics? How many times do we have to hear of Cynthia McKinney claiming she's the victim of racism after punching a cop, or Obama's team claiming racism because his pre-election poll numbers weren't strong enough?
So after crying wolf a million times, one would think that black activists would be a little more reluctant to make claims of racism. And even more importantly, one would think they would never engage in behaviors that, if conducted by a white person, would be considered racist.
But I guess the term "double standard" has no meaning to some people. I think it's clear it would be racist for a white person to expect a white politician to only wear clothes designed by whites. This should be obvious even to the likes of David Duke. But I guess it's OK for the Black Artists Association to be upset because Michelle Obama's inaugural gown was designed by, God forbid, a white guy!
As reported by Drudge from Politico.
Do these idiots ONLY see color? And do all the blacks with common sense get annoyed with their divisive antics?
So after crying wolf a million times, one would think that black activists would be a little more reluctant to make claims of racism. And even more importantly, one would think they would never engage in behaviors that, if conducted by a white person, would be considered racist.
But I guess the term "double standard" has no meaning to some people. I think it's clear it would be racist for a white person to expect a white politician to only wear clothes designed by whites. This should be obvious even to the likes of David Duke. But I guess it's OK for the Black Artists Association to be upset because Michelle Obama's inaugural gown was designed by, God forbid, a white guy!
As reported by Drudge from Politico.
Do these idiots ONLY see color? And do all the blacks with common sense get annoyed with their divisive antics?
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
More Racial Divisiveness from Diuguid
Lewis Diuguid is a piece of work, a veritable race card just waiting to be played. First this mental midget equates "socialism" with a racial code word. As Fezzik said in Princess Bride, "I don't think that word means what you think it means".
After a little more research, I uncovered this gem. As you'll see, Diuguid discusses the grades of the American electorate based on how they vote.
Vote for a woman? Pass.
Vote for a black? Pass.
Vote for a Hispanic? Pass.
Vote for a white Mormon male? Pass....only on religous grounds.
Apparently in the eyes of this racist author, the only failing grade would be a vote for a white male Protestant. As a Catholic, I'm left to wonder if I'm sufficiently "oppressed" in Giuduin's eyes to justify a passing grade if I'm elected.
After a little more research, I uncovered this gem. As you'll see, Diuguid discusses the grades of the American electorate based on how they vote.
Vote for a woman? Pass.
Vote for a black? Pass.
Vote for a Hispanic? Pass.
Vote for a white Mormon male? Pass....only on religous grounds.
Apparently in the eyes of this racist author, the only failing grade would be a vote for a white male Protestant. As a Catholic, I'm left to wonder if I'm sufficiently "oppressed" in Giuduin's eyes to justify a passing grade if I'm elected.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Big Shocker....He's Black!
I recently read perhaps the most ignorant editorial of all time. Mr. Lewis Diuguid of the Kansas City Star claims John McCain and Sarah Palin are using an "old code word" for black to label Barack Obama. Story here.
Believe it or not, they called him SOCIALIST! Wow, the nerve, to bring up America's sordid racial past by calling Obama a socialist! What a complete buffoon Lewis Diuguid must be. Apparently he has never heard of the socialist nor communist economic models. Apparently the fact that Obama wants to socialize healthcare has completely gone over the head of Mr. Diuguid. One wonders if he's even familiar with capitalism, other than of course it being one of those evil passions of Republicans?
Anyway, I was so shocked to see a member of the Kansas City Star's editorial board make such a ridiculuous claim that I did a search, and big shocker: Lewis Diuguid is black. In another example of a fool making his race look bad, Mr. Diuguid plays the race card.....in a game of craps.
You can love Obama because he rabidly pro infanticide. You can love him he wants to spread all our wealth around, because he spent 20 years learning why whites are evil and America be damned, or because he views babies as "punishment". Seriously, there are so many reasons for a bleeding heart race baiter to love Barack Obama. With so much to love, there's really no need to jump in over your head and make ludicrous accusations against John McCain.
So Mr. Diuguid, perhaps you should limit your future writings to things about which you can speak intelligently....which apparently doesn't include economics.
Believe it or not, they called him SOCIALIST! Wow, the nerve, to bring up America's sordid racial past by calling Obama a socialist! What a complete buffoon Lewis Diuguid must be. Apparently he has never heard of the socialist nor communist economic models. Apparently the fact that Obama wants to socialize healthcare has completely gone over the head of Mr. Diuguid. One wonders if he's even familiar with capitalism, other than of course it being one of those evil passions of Republicans?
Anyway, I was so shocked to see a member of the Kansas City Star's editorial board make such a ridiculuous claim that I did a search, and big shocker: Lewis Diuguid is black. In another example of a fool making his race look bad, Mr. Diuguid plays the race card.....in a game of craps.
You can love Obama because he rabidly pro infanticide. You can love him he wants to spread all our wealth around, because he spent 20 years learning why whites are evil and America be damned, or because he views babies as "punishment". Seriously, there are so many reasons for a bleeding heart race baiter to love Barack Obama. With so much to love, there's really no need to jump in over your head and make ludicrous accusations against John McCain.
So Mr. Diuguid, perhaps you should limit your future writings to things about which you can speak intelligently....which apparently doesn't include economics.
Tuesday, October 07, 2008
Thank You, Boneheads
Life was very good until this recent financial crisis. Personally, my retirement accounts are down nearly 30%. My children's college accounts are down 25%. I have to listen to a Republican candidate for president talk about nationalizing our country's mortgage portfolio. Why?
Because a bunch of idiots took out mortgages they couldn't afford.
Because a bunch of fools took out interest only mortgages.
Because a bunch of nitwits took out home equity loans to buy boats and take vacations.
Because a bunch of irresponsible, self centered, short sighted airheads assumed the value of their house would rise 10% annually in perpetuity.
Because a bunch of morons took out negative amortization loans.
Because a bunch of bleeding hearts insisted America is racist, so they forced the financial institutions to change lending standards so otherwise unqualified borrowers could qualify for a CRA mortgage loan under a different set of standards.
Because a bunch of jerks issued loans that they knew would never be repaid.
Because a bunch of arrogant pricks assumed they could package away risks by bundling bad mortgages into a worse CMO.
Because a bunch of tools on Wall Street squeezed their fellow institutions in the midst of the crisis, all but ensuring the failure of several major banks.
So who's left to pay the bill? Me. And every other borrower who has been living within his or her means over the past decade. We pay our mortages on time, we pay our taxes, we work hard at our jobs for a 3% annual raise, we teach our children about responsibility, commitment, and honor. What do we get in return? A nation in a major hangover because of the drunken excess of irresponsible borrowers, greedy lenders, and Wall Street financiers who aren't quite as smart as they think they are.
And just to be crystal clear - this isn't about Democrat or Republican, liberal or conservative, black or white, or Catholic or Protestant. This is about responsibility vs. irresponsibility, and if you are in the former category, thank you for your role in causing this crisis.
Because a bunch of idiots took out mortgages they couldn't afford.
Because a bunch of fools took out interest only mortgages.
Because a bunch of nitwits took out home equity loans to buy boats and take vacations.
Because a bunch of irresponsible, self centered, short sighted airheads assumed the value of their house would rise 10% annually in perpetuity.
Because a bunch of morons took out negative amortization loans.
Because a bunch of bleeding hearts insisted America is racist, so they forced the financial institutions to change lending standards so otherwise unqualified borrowers could qualify for a CRA mortgage loan under a different set of standards.
Because a bunch of jerks issued loans that they knew would never be repaid.
Because a bunch of arrogant pricks assumed they could package away risks by bundling bad mortgages into a worse CMO.
Because a bunch of tools on Wall Street squeezed their fellow institutions in the midst of the crisis, all but ensuring the failure of several major banks.
So who's left to pay the bill? Me. And every other borrower who has been living within his or her means over the past decade. We pay our mortages on time, we pay our taxes, we work hard at our jobs for a 3% annual raise, we teach our children about responsibility, commitment, and honor. What do we get in return? A nation in a major hangover because of the drunken excess of irresponsible borrowers, greedy lenders, and Wall Street financiers who aren't quite as smart as they think they are.
And just to be crystal clear - this isn't about Democrat or Republican, liberal or conservative, black or white, or Catholic or Protestant. This is about responsibility vs. irresponsibility, and if you are in the former category, thank you for your role in causing this crisis.
Another Free Pass for Obama
When is Barack Obama going to get asked a difficult question? How much longer will the media pretend that Obama's ultra left wing ideology is irrelevant to this campaign?
Questions that should have been asked tonight:
Senator Obama, are you in favor of aborting babies in the 8th month of their development? As a follow up, why do you believe that abortion victims who manage to survive deserve no protection under our laws? What do you think future generations will say regarding the fact that over 1,500,000 unborn babies are destroyed in our nation every year?
Senator Obama, why do you believe black people should jump to the head of the line in front of white people for college admissions and government contracts? What is it specifically about white people which makes you think our government should institutionally send whites to the back of the line?
Senator Obama, your pastor of 20 years, the man who married you and Michelle and baptized your children, claims that white America is racist. He claims that September 11th was, in effect, punishment of whites for their racism. Why did you remain in his church long after he made such comments?
Senator Obama, name one Republican sponsored piece of legislation for which you've voted in favor.
Questions that should have been asked tonight:
Wednesday, October 01, 2008
Fools at CNN Mock Palin, Give Biden a Pass
If you bother to view CNN's website on a daily basis as I do, you'll have noticed an average of 3 negative reports on Sarah Palin every day.
If you happen to check into their news network once or twice a day as I do, you're bound to view a negative story on Sarah Palin. Most recently, the idiots at CNN spent thousands of dollars to go to Alaska, to the remote village where Russia is viewable.
They then ask villagers many of whom don't even know Palin is the Republican VP candidate if they have interactions with Russia. They ask if they ever have any encounters with Russians. Clearly the entire story was a pathetic attempt to discredit Palin for her comments that her proximity to Russia as governor provided some measure of foreign policy experience.
More recently, Joe Biden stated that President Roosevelt went on television and calmed the nation in 1929 when the market crashed. As we all know, Roosevelt wasn't president in 1929 and television did not exist.
So to be fair, shouldn't CNN make a journey to the Smithsonian Institute to view the television sets circa 1929 of which Biden spoke? They could interview a curator and state "Joe Biden mentioned televisions were in use in 1929. Can you show us such a television?" They could then travel to Roosevelt's presidential library and ask for presidential papers from 1929 to really bring home the point that Biden didn't know what he was talking about.
I'm confident such an idea was never considered to the idiots at CNN - they're too busy dreaming up the next way to discredit Sarah Palin.
If you happen to check into their news network once or twice a day as I do, you're bound to view a negative story on Sarah Palin. Most recently, the idiots at CNN spent thousands of dollars to go to Alaska, to the remote village where Russia is viewable.
They then ask villagers many of whom don't even know Palin is the Republican VP candidate if they have interactions with Russia. They ask if they ever have any encounters with Russians. Clearly the entire story was a pathetic attempt to discredit Palin for her comments that her proximity to Russia as governor provided some measure of foreign policy experience.
More recently, Joe Biden stated that President Roosevelt went on television and calmed the nation in 1929 when the market crashed. As we all know, Roosevelt wasn't president in 1929 and television did not exist.
So to be fair, shouldn't CNN make a journey to the Smithsonian Institute to view the television sets circa 1929 of which Biden spoke? They could interview a curator and state "Joe Biden mentioned televisions were in use in 1929. Can you show us such a television?" They could then travel to Roosevelt's presidential library and ask for presidential papers from 1929 to really bring home the point that Biden didn't know what he was talking about.
I'm confident such an idea was never considered to the idiots at CNN - they're too busy dreaming up the next way to discredit Sarah Palin.
Saturday, September 20, 2008
Moron Alert! Jacob Weisberg
This is old news, but worth addressing.
Jacob Weisberg claims racism is the only reason Obama might lose. This moron must have been comatose during 2000 and 2004 when white Democrats lost elections to George Bush. I'm a Republican, and I still crack up that the Democrat platform is such a bad formula for America that they can't find anybody to beat Bush.
So now comes Obama, with the same baby killing, wealth redistribution, socialist healthcare, big government agenda. To set the record straight, Obama is leading in the major polls, but Jacob Weisberg whines about racism because the lead isn't big enough. As if some Chicago hack activist turned editor has an infallilble perspective on what the poll numbers should be.
If you can stomach the race baiting rant about Obama's "missing 10 point lead", here's the story.
Jacob Weisberg claims racism is the only reason Obama might lose. This moron must have been comatose during 2000 and 2004 when white Democrats lost elections to George Bush. I'm a Republican, and I still crack up that the Democrat platform is such a bad formula for America that they can't find anybody to beat Bush.
So now comes Obama, with the same baby killing, wealth redistribution, socialist healthcare, big government agenda. To set the record straight, Obama is leading in the major polls, but Jacob Weisberg whines about racism because the lead isn't big enough. As if some Chicago hack activist turned editor has an infallilble perspective on what the poll numbers should be.
If you can stomach the race baiting rant about Obama's "missing 10 point lead", here's the story.
Thursday, July 31, 2008
The Audacity of The Audacity of Hope
From Merriam-Websters:
Audicity: 1 a: intrepidly daring : adventurous b: recklessly bold : rash
2: contemptuous of law, religion, or decorum : insolent
3: marked by originality and verve
Who in their right mind would ever consider hope to be audacious? Presumably every person on earth recognizes the right and the natural tendency of others to hope. But Barack Obama propelled himself into the public's eye in part on his book The Audacity of Hope. So I'm left to wonder; Who exactly is Barack talking about when he claims that hope is considered audacious?
Is he contending that hope within the black community is considered by others to be audacious, or is he claiming that blacks consider their own hope to be audacious? As I haven't read the book perhaps I'm wrong in my hypothesis that the answer is the former.
Given his political history and his close association with the likes of Reverand Wright, it seems clear that the title gives us some insight into Barack Obama's view of the white community. And that view is an ugly vision of a white man so intent on keeping the black man down that he considers a glimmer of hope to be "audacious". I guess this should come as little surprise given the man from whom the book title was borrowed.
Audicity: 1 a: intrepidly daring : adventurous
2: contemptuous of law, religion, or decorum : insolent
3: marked by originality and verve
Who in their right mind would ever consider hope to be audacious? Presumably every person on earth recognizes the right and the natural tendency of others to hope. But Barack Obama propelled himself into the public's eye in part on his book The Audacity of Hope. So I'm left to wonder; Who exactly is Barack talking about when he claims that hope is considered audacious?
Is he contending that hope within the black community is considered by others to be audacious, or is he claiming that blacks consider their own hope to be audacious? As I haven't read the book perhaps I'm wrong in my hypothesis that the answer is the former.
Given his political history and his close association with the likes of Reverand Wright, it seems clear that the title gives us some insight into Barack Obama's view of the white community. And that view is an ugly vision of a white man so intent on keeping the black man down that he considers a glimmer of hope to be "audacious". I guess this should come as little surprise given the man from whom the book title was borrowed.
Sunday, July 13, 2008
Bad Joke, or Barack's Nightmare
The Green party announced their presidential candidate today. In a story that leaves me scratching my head about the qualifications of the other two candiates, Cynthia McKinney was nominated from a field of 3.
So how does a race-baiting, police-slapping, ex-congresswoman get nominated to be a candidate for President of the USA? And will the nation laugh her off, or will she take a bite out of Barack's 90%+ support from the black community?
Who knows, maybe Cynthia McKinney is just what Jesse Jackson had in mind when he said he'd cut Barack's nuts off.
Story from CNN here.
So how does a race-baiting, police-slapping, ex-congresswoman get nominated to be a candidate for President of the USA? And will the nation laugh her off, or will she take a bite out of Barack's 90%+ support from the black community?
Who knows, maybe Cynthia McKinney is just what Jesse Jackson had in mind when he said he'd cut Barack's nuts off.
Story from CNN here.
Friday, March 07, 2008
Suddenly "RobinHood" is Unfair
For 15 years the state of Texas has followed a "Robin Hood" model of school funding whereby the wealthier districts hand over a portion of their tax receipts to poorer districts. This plan was put in place to achieve the state's mandated policy of equal funding across Texas schools.
Unfortunately the current plan goes much further than the state goal of funding equality, and results in a system where wealthier and whiter districts (yes, whiter) end up with less funding than poor districts with higher concentration of minority students. The existing plan is a liberal wealth redistributor's dream, a utopian state where suburban elementary schools in districts such as Clear Creek ISD are opened with no playground equipment, no perimeter fencing, and very limited technology resources.
But this dream has become a nightmare for many in the Houston ISD when it was recently discovered the district would actually have to pay into the state this year, as opposed to receiving Robin Hood funds. In other words, HISD now qualifies as a wealthy district due to recent property value increases combined with a dropping enrollment.
So how do the wealth redistribution advocates at HISD respond? Do they happily write their check in support of poor districts? Unfortunately, no. Not only is HISD upset that they'll be writing a $3.7 million check this year, they're actually advocating changing the rules! After 15 years of receiving funds from wealthier districts, suddenly the plan doesn't make sense. Now, HISD is advocating that districts benefit from increasing property values in their own district.
For 15 years, HISD happily cashed their Robin Hood check with no regard for suburban kids, who realized no benefit from increasing property values in their own districts. Now that their beloved funding model results in no receipts from other districts, suddenly the model is deemed broken.
Unfortunately the current plan goes much further than the state goal of funding equality, and results in a system where wealthier and whiter districts (yes, whiter) end up with less funding than poor districts with higher concentration of minority students. The existing plan is a liberal wealth redistributor's dream, a utopian state where suburban elementary schools in districts such as Clear Creek ISD are opened with no playground equipment, no perimeter fencing, and very limited technology resources.
But this dream has become a nightmare for many in the Houston ISD when it was recently discovered the district would actually have to pay into the state this year, as opposed to receiving Robin Hood funds. In other words, HISD now qualifies as a wealthy district due to recent property value increases combined with a dropping enrollment.
So how do the wealth redistribution advocates at HISD respond? Do they happily write their check in support of poor districts? Unfortunately, no. Not only is HISD upset that they'll be writing a $3.7 million check this year, they're actually advocating changing the rules! After 15 years of receiving funds from wealthier districts, suddenly the plan doesn't make sense. Now, HISD is advocating that districts benefit from increasing property values in their own district.
For 15 years, HISD happily cashed their Robin Hood check with no regard for suburban kids, who realized no benefit from increasing property values in their own districts. Now that their beloved funding model results in no receipts from other districts, suddenly the model is deemed broken.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
22 Years of American Self Loathing: Michelle Obama
Michelle Obama turned 21 in 1985. She recently stated that "for the first time" in her adult life, she was proud of America.
Apparently she wasn't proud when America kicked Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait.
Apparently she wasn't proud when America stopped the Balkan genocide in the 90's.
Apparently she wasn't proud when Americans stood strong after September 11, 2001, nor when we defeated the Taliban.
I'm left to wonder what the heck happened this past week to finally cause her to actually be proud of her country?
Story here.
Apparently she wasn't proud when America kicked Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait.
Apparently she wasn't proud when America stopped the Balkan genocide in the 90's.
Apparently she wasn't proud when Americans stood strong after September 11, 2001, nor when we defeated the Taliban.
I'm left to wonder what the heck happened this past week to finally cause her to actually be proud of her country?
Story here.
Monday, February 18, 2008
Letter To Robert Reich
Read this "economists" proposal for the future of our nation here.
You'll notice Reich's primary response to our current economic problems is to increase taxes on the wealthy, and to give the money to the "bottom two thirds" of wage earners. Gee Robert, do you really have to be an economist at Berkeley to come up with the classic liberal solution to every economic problem?
Interest rates are too high? Tax the Rich!
Trade deficit too high? Tax the Rich!
Federal deficit too high? Tax the Rich!
But Reich breaks new ground with this analysis. The problem is this:
Middle class and lower middle class families have spent far more than they've been able to afford for 35 years. They've sent mothers to work, they've worked longer hours, and finally they've tapped out all their home equity. All in the name of a Lexus, a bass boat, a bigger house, etc.
Common sense says: Stop spending so much money and living above your means!
Robert Reich says: Tax the rich and give it to the economically irresponsible!
Of course, Reich goes on to give some lip service to improving schools in lower income areas, but that's like giving a starving child an apple seed. Sure it's nice and will produce long term benefits, but we need solutions today. Rewarding economic irresponsibility is not the answer.
You'll notice Reich's primary response to our current economic problems is to increase taxes on the wealthy, and to give the money to the "bottom two thirds" of wage earners. Gee Robert, do you really have to be an economist at Berkeley to come up with the classic liberal solution to every economic problem?
Interest rates are too high? Tax the Rich!
Trade deficit too high? Tax the Rich!
Federal deficit too high? Tax the Rich!
But Reich breaks new ground with this analysis. The problem is this:
Middle class and lower middle class families have spent far more than they've been able to afford for 35 years. They've sent mothers to work, they've worked longer hours, and finally they've tapped out all their home equity. All in the name of a Lexus, a bass boat, a bigger house, etc.
Common sense says: Stop spending so much money and living above your means!
Robert Reich says: Tax the rich and give it to the economically irresponsible!
Of course, Reich goes on to give some lip service to improving schools in lower income areas, but that's like giving a starving child an apple seed. Sure it's nice and will produce long term benefits, but we need solutions today. Rewarding economic irresponsibility is not the answer.
Read Your Bible, Charles
Charles Barkley has once again exposed himself as a mental midget, this time in front of a larger audience than his typical TBS NBA spots.
Barkley, attempting to substantiate his desire and qualifications to become governor of Alabama, stated to Wolf Blitzer that conservatives are "fake Christians". Barkley went on to blabber on about how ardently he supports gay marriage and abortion, and that conservatives are "fake Christians" because they judge others and they don't understand the Bible, which says we aren't to judge others.
Gee Chuck, who's doing the judging now? Furthermore, does the pinhead Barkley actually think Christians should keep their mouths shut about every moral evil and every criminal act? So Barkley wants us to keep silent about incest, rape, prostitution, and murder......because after all, if we state that those things are wrong, we'd be judging others, right Charles?
I'm thinking Barkley should actually open his Bible once or twice before he opens his big ugly mouth again. The Old Testament clearly states that murder is wrong, and Jesus Christ stated we are to do onto others as we would have them do onto us. So unless Charles thinks abortionists really want to be dismembered, perhaps he's mis-identified the "fake Christians" among us.
Barkley, attempting to substantiate his desire and qualifications to become governor of Alabama, stated to Wolf Blitzer that conservatives are "fake Christians". Barkley went on to blabber on about how ardently he supports gay marriage and abortion, and that conservatives are "fake Christians" because they judge others and they don't understand the Bible, which says we aren't to judge others.
Gee Chuck, who's doing the judging now? Furthermore, does the pinhead Barkley actually think Christians should keep their mouths shut about every moral evil and every criminal act? So Barkley wants us to keep silent about incest, rape, prostitution, and murder......because after all, if we state that those things are wrong, we'd be judging others, right Charles?
I'm thinking Barkley should actually open his Bible once or twice before he opens his big ugly mouth again. The Old Testament clearly states that murder is wrong, and Jesus Christ stated we are to do onto others as we would have them do onto us. So unless Charles thinks abortionists really want to be dismembered, perhaps he's mis-identified the "fake Christians" among us.
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
MSNBC: Making News......
where none exists.
Read this article.
Notice the headline, which states that minorities aged 13-24 still challenged by racism. Then go back and notice the 2nd to the last paragraph, which states that the most of the minority respondents felt that their race would not result in problems later in life.
Not sure if this is the AP or MSNBC, but why is it that our nation's media consistently looks for racism when the facts prove otherwise? More importantly, why didn't they surveyors go one step further, and gather economic and educational data? It is a fact that whites are wealthier and more educated than blacks and Hispanics, and as the story reported, 25% of minorities stated that removing financial worries was a key to happiness.
So perhaps the story should have focused on improving educational opportunities in minority communities as opposed to a few anectdotal comments on racism.
Read this article.
Notice the headline, which states that minorities aged 13-24 still challenged by racism. Then go back and notice the 2nd to the last paragraph, which states that the most of the minority respondents felt that their race would not result in problems later in life.
Not sure if this is the AP or MSNBC, but why is it that our nation's media consistently looks for racism when the facts prove otherwise? More importantly, why didn't they surveyors go one step further, and gather economic and educational data? It is a fact that whites are wealthier and more educated than blacks and Hispanics, and as the story reported, 25% of minorities stated that removing financial worries was a key to happiness.
So perhaps the story should have focused on improving educational opportunities in minority communities as opposed to a few anectdotal comments on racism.
Tuesday, June 05, 2007
Getting Sloppy with the Race Card
You may remember last year when Louisiana Representative William Jefferson was caught with $90,000 in his freezer. At the time, it was widely suspected that Jefferson was involved in multiple bribery schemes, and that the cash was received as payment for Jefferson's lobbying work in Africa. In fact, an FBI informant testified to Jefferson's acceptance of a $100,000 bribe.
In response to the scandal, Nancy Pelosi admirably moved to strip Jefferson of his role on the House Ways and Means Committee. What's a black man to do when he's caught red-handed in a crime? Most black men own up to their failure and endure the consequences. Some, like Jefferson, play the race card. Said Jefferson about whether his race was a factor in Pelosi's efforts to remove him from Ways and Means: "It's not happened before. The first time it's happening, it's happening to an African-American." That's right, William, you were busted by an FBI informant, you were caught with $90,000 in cash in your freezer, and the Speaker of the House punishes you.....because you're black. According to Jefferson, the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) gave him a standing ovation after he publicly claimed that race was a factor in Pelosi's move.
And I thought the race card was only played against Republicans, but I guess desperate times called for desperate measures. Amazingly, Jefferson was re-elected last year after the allegations surfaced and after 2 of Jefferson's aides plead guilty to their role in the crimes. Apparently the race/victim card still plays well in New Orleans.
I wonder what Jefferson, his fellow CBC members, and New Orleans residents think now that a 16 count indictment has been handed down for bribery, racketeering, money laundering, and obstruction of justice? Does the 94 page indictment have anything to do with Jefferson's skin color? If convicted on all counts, Jefferson faces a maximum sentence of 235 years in prison. Are those sentencing guidelines racially motivated as well?
Congratulations to Speaker Pelosi for taking the high road last year. Shame on Jefferson for not only abusing the power of his office for personal gain, but for stooping so low as to accuse Pelosi of racism.
In response to the scandal, Nancy Pelosi admirably moved to strip Jefferson of his role on the House Ways and Means Committee. What's a black man to do when he's caught red-handed in a crime? Most black men own up to their failure and endure the consequences. Some, like Jefferson, play the race card. Said Jefferson about whether his race was a factor in Pelosi's efforts to remove him from Ways and Means: "It's not happened before. The first time it's happening, it's happening to an African-American." That's right, William, you were busted by an FBI informant, you were caught with $90,000 in cash in your freezer, and the Speaker of the House punishes you.....because you're black. According to Jefferson, the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) gave him a standing ovation after he publicly claimed that race was a factor in Pelosi's move.
And I thought the race card was only played against Republicans, but I guess desperate times called for desperate measures. Amazingly, Jefferson was re-elected last year after the allegations surfaced and after 2 of Jefferson's aides plead guilty to their role in the crimes. Apparently the race/victim card still plays well in New Orleans.
I wonder what Jefferson, his fellow CBC members, and New Orleans residents think now that a 16 count indictment has been handed down for bribery, racketeering, money laundering, and obstruction of justice? Does the 94 page indictment have anything to do with Jefferson's skin color? If convicted on all counts, Jefferson faces a maximum sentence of 235 years in prison. Are those sentencing guidelines racially motivated as well?
Congratulations to Speaker Pelosi for taking the high road last year. Shame on Jefferson for not only abusing the power of his office for personal gain, but for stooping so low as to accuse Pelosi of racism.
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
"Friends" from South of the Border
Have you ever watched a beauty pageant on TV? Have you noticed the crowds are typically well dressed, a little boisterous, and always polite? Have you ever seen a contestant jeered and heckled? Me neither.
Let's assume Miss Iran (if there was such a thing) came to New York City to participate in a Miss Universe competition. Can you imagine any scenario in which the crowd would boo her? Of course not. Heck, Miss al-Qaeda could probably make a peaceful appearance because Americans are generally polite and smart enough to treat individuals with respect regardless of political differences.
Apparently, our "friends" from Mexico live by different standards. Miss USA, Rachel Smith, was loudly booed by the Mexican crowd during the Q&A session. Recall this is the same nation who chants "Osama" during soccer matches with the USA, and is of course the same nation who encourages millions of their poorest to illegally cross our borders.
Why Mexicans have such a disdain for Americans is anybody's guess. But prior waves of immigrants consisted of communities who loved the USA, and who sincerely wanted to start new lives in our great melting pot. Can we say the same of this current tidal wave of immigrants?
See video here.
Let's assume Miss Iran (if there was such a thing) came to New York City to participate in a Miss Universe competition. Can you imagine any scenario in which the crowd would boo her? Of course not. Heck, Miss al-Qaeda could probably make a peaceful appearance because Americans are generally polite and smart enough to treat individuals with respect regardless of political differences.
Apparently, our "friends" from Mexico live by different standards. Miss USA, Rachel Smith, was loudly booed by the Mexican crowd during the Q&A session. Recall this is the same nation who chants "Osama" during soccer matches with the USA, and is of course the same nation who encourages millions of their poorest to illegally cross our borders.
Why Mexicans have such a disdain for Americans is anybody's guess. But prior waves of immigrants consisted of communities who loved the USA, and who sincerely wanted to start new lives in our great melting pot. Can we say the same of this current tidal wave of immigrants?
See video here.
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Challenge to John Edwards!!!!!
In response to the Supreme Court's decision to uphold the national ban on partial birth abortion, all the Democrat candidates for president have issued statements condemning the decision. Apparently they are quite saddened by the fact that there will be no children enduring an "intact dilation and extraction" tomorrow. I mean, think about these idiots - abortion is already legal. This ruling only relates to the most barbaric of all abortion procedures, and these vermin protest.
In any event, John Edwards says this on his website: "I could not disagree more strongly with today's Supreme Court decision" Really, John? You could not disagree more strongly? So there is nothing in the entire world with which you disagree more? Let's try these 5 statements, John, and tell me if you agree with these statements more than you do the Supreme Court's decision.
1. Citizens over the age of 60 should receive no medical treatment to save on health care costs. After all, caring for them is inconvenient.
2. It should be legal to sell babies up to 2 years of age for medical research. Seriously, mother's should be allowed to make this "choice".
3. All citizens with net worths in excess of $100,000 should have all their money confiscated by the government to be allocated to the rest of the country.
4. We should eliminate our borders, and make no distinction between citizens and foreigners.
5. Islam should become the national religion, and we should submit to rule by caliphate.
So just we are all clear: John Edwards would rather agree to these 5 items than outlaw the practice of sucking the brain out of a partially born infant. It's inconceivable that anybody could even consider voting for this man for President of the United States.
In any event, John Edwards says this on his website: "I could not disagree more strongly with today's Supreme Court decision" Really, John? You could not disagree more strongly? So there is nothing in the entire world with which you disagree more? Let's try these 5 statements, John, and tell me if you agree with these statements more than you do the Supreme Court's decision.
1. Citizens over the age of 60 should receive no medical treatment to save on health care costs. After all, caring for them is inconvenient.
2. It should be legal to sell babies up to 2 years of age for medical research. Seriously, mother's should be allowed to make this "choice".
3. All citizens with net worths in excess of $100,000 should have all their money confiscated by the government to be allocated to the rest of the country.
4. We should eliminate our borders, and make no distinction between citizens and foreigners.
5. Islam should become the national religion, and we should submit to rule by caliphate.
So just we are all clear: John Edwards would rather agree to these 5 items than outlaw the practice of sucking the brain out of a partially born infant. It's inconceivable that anybody could even consider voting for this man for President of the United States.
Supreme Court Victory! Hillary Weeps for Women's "Rights"
In a major victory for those of us who believe unborn human beings should not be dismembered while quietly resting in the comfort of their mother's wombs, the Supreme Court upheld a national ban on partial birth abortion. Although 1,000,000+ children will still suffer brutal deaths at the hands of abortion doctors and short sighted parents every year, this is still a victory for the pro life crowd.
Most humans who aren't possessed by Satan welcome this ruling. We are now taking one step closer to exiting a very dark time, a time when it was legal to pull a baby 1/2 way out of his mother's womb only to kill it by sucking its brains out. "Intact dilation and extraction", as pro-infanticide advocates call it, will likely be looked back upon by future generations as the most violent act of a violent generation.
So what does Hillary Clinton say about the ruling? "the rights and lives of women must be taken into account. It is precisely this erosion of our constitutional rights that I warned against when I opposed the nominations of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito."
I'm literally at a loss for words to describe my contempt for this woman. She wraps herself in the cloak of the "health of the mother" exception, all the while selling her soul to appease her feminist constituents. Read her pathetic, disgusting, satanic defense of partial birth abortion here.
Of course, members of the Democrat party are nothing if not predictable. John Edwards and Barack Hussein Obama bin Illinois also wailed and gnashed their teeth in response to the Supreme Court ruling.
Most humans who aren't possessed by Satan welcome this ruling. We are now taking one step closer to exiting a very dark time, a time when it was legal to pull a baby 1/2 way out of his mother's womb only to kill it by sucking its brains out. "Intact dilation and extraction", as pro-infanticide advocates call it, will likely be looked back upon by future generations as the most violent act of a violent generation.
So what does Hillary Clinton say about the ruling? "the rights and lives of women must be taken into account. It is precisely this erosion of our constitutional rights that I warned against when I opposed the nominations of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito."
I'm literally at a loss for words to describe my contempt for this woman. She wraps herself in the cloak of the "health of the mother" exception, all the while selling her soul to appease her feminist constituents. Read her pathetic, disgusting, satanic defense of partial birth abortion here.
Of course, members of the Democrat party are nothing if not predictable. John Edwards and Barack Hussein Obama bin Illinois also wailed and gnashed their teeth in response to the Supreme Court ruling.
Tuesday, April 03, 2007
Queen of the Hypocrites - Nancy Pelosi
Nancy Pelosi is busy trying to frame US foreign policy in Syria this week. Working against the wishes of the Whitehouse, Pelosi is looking to make friends with Syrian president Bashar Assad. I guess Nancy's forgotton that Assad's government killed former Lebanese president Rafik Hariri, that Assad's government supports Hamas, that Assad's government supports Hezbullah, and that Assad's government is turning a blind eye towards (if not actively supporting) the support of the Iraqi insurgency.
So what's the first thing Nancy does as she tries to befriend state sponsors of terror? Put on a hijab, of course.
Nancy Pelosi in Syria
How tolerant! How politically correct! Here's a woman who ignores one of the most sacred aspects of her Roman Catholic religion by supporting abortion, yet the first thing she does when she lands in a Muslim nation is strap on a hijab. She spits on the most important teachings of Catholicism, yet blindly adheres to the most insignificant aspects of Islam. Does the fool realize that a large majority of the women in the world who wear such head garb aren't even allowed to vote?
So what's the first thing Nancy does as she tries to befriend state sponsors of terror? Put on a hijab, of course.
Nancy Pelosi in Syria
How tolerant! How politically correct! Here's a woman who ignores one of the most sacred aspects of her Roman Catholic religion by supporting abortion, yet the first thing she does when she lands in a Muslim nation is strap on a hijab. She spits on the most important teachings of Catholicism, yet blindly adheres to the most insignificant aspects of Islam. Does the fool realize that a large majority of the women in the world who wear such head garb aren't even allowed to vote?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)