When the truth is attacked because it is pointed at a black candidate or woman candidate, what does that say about the media? When a candidate calls it a slur to use their legitimate middle name, what does that say about him? When lies are allowed to float as the truth because we fear it will be seen as an attack on the candidate, what does that say about her? When we are more concerned about personality over where a candidate stands on issues, what does that say about us?
What does this entire presidential process tell us about the future of our country?
William F Buckley would know what it all means. Condolences to his family, and may God rest his soul. He deserves it…
True knowledge of American history is necessary to insure the future of the America we love… This is an important time in our country's history. We must be wise and measured as we choose our leaders going forward.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Obama, Oscars, and Turbans; a losing political strategy…
Obama is soaring in the Democratic Party because he offers an “easy” fix to everything that ails us. Elect Obama and the Iraq war ends, terrorists will love us (or at least stop trying to kill us), poverty and inequality will suddenly disappear, we’ll finally get those greedy corporations and rich people to pay their “fair” share of the taxes, and healthcare will be free and available to all, including illegal’s. The day he is elected the sun will shine again and global warming will be a thing of the past. Change will come and the change will be good. The world will bow at his feet.
Obama has yet to tell us exactly how he will do this. Will it be his charismatic personality? Will it be a sudden realization by all Americans that the government is the new savior? The government will suddenly become efficient and compassionate? No need to work hard because there will be a government program for all, and we will finally reach Marx’s utopia of free time to do what we enjoy, rather than toiling in the factory. How we will pay for all these “goodies” is still a question, but let’s not spoil the vision with irrelevant details. Obama will fix it all. You just vote and see…
Most of Hollywood supports democrats, and many support Obama. The Oscars had the lowest viewership ever and they wonder why? It is simple, nominate a movie that celebrates America, not despises it. Who wants to watch a bunch of ignorant but talented actors spew hatred toward America, and undermine our troops around the world? Most of the films nominated were European creations. Here’s a thought, have the Oscars in Europe, Americans won’t miss them.
A picture was released to the media by the Clinton campaign showing Obama in a Turban. Why the firestorm? If there is no significance to Obama being brought up as a Muslim, why is the Obama camp outraged? Why did Hillary think that tying Obama to his Islamic roots would hurt his campaign? I thought the Democrats celebrated diversity? I thought Islam was a religion of peace? I thought democrats were beyond divisive politics? I thought Obama was going to “embrace” all of the despots of the world and turn around their hatred of America? Won’t we see more of Obama in a turban as he travels around the world preaching a “new new World Order”? Shouldn’t we get used to this?
The problem with Obama, the Oscars, and Turbans, is they are all anti American. The turban is a symbol worn by our enemies that swear to wipe us off the face of the earth. Americans are rightfully suspicious of a religion that is known for so much of the oppression in the world. The Oscars are anti-American; period. And Obama wants to force America to “understand” the evil in the world by negotiating our founding principles so maybe someday we can be “accepting” of an entire political party of people that wear turbans.
There is going to be a “new world order” but not the one the Obama and the left are hoping for. It will be one that the founding fathers would be proud of. One based on the constitution, individual liberty, and a clear understanding of the enemy we face. The Oscars, the turban, and Obama, will all be defeated at the ballot box, in a landslide; I will bet the farm on it. When America starts tuning into the real message of Obama, they will see the danger, and vote for a return to American traditions, not Hollywood “traditions” or the traditions of our enemies … Just a thought…
Obama has yet to tell us exactly how he will do this. Will it be his charismatic personality? Will it be a sudden realization by all Americans that the government is the new savior? The government will suddenly become efficient and compassionate? No need to work hard because there will be a government program for all, and we will finally reach Marx’s utopia of free time to do what we enjoy, rather than toiling in the factory. How we will pay for all these “goodies” is still a question, but let’s not spoil the vision with irrelevant details. Obama will fix it all. You just vote and see…
Most of Hollywood supports democrats, and many support Obama. The Oscars had the lowest viewership ever and they wonder why? It is simple, nominate a movie that celebrates America, not despises it. Who wants to watch a bunch of ignorant but talented actors spew hatred toward America, and undermine our troops around the world? Most of the films nominated were European creations. Here’s a thought, have the Oscars in Europe, Americans won’t miss them.
A picture was released to the media by the Clinton campaign showing Obama in a Turban. Why the firestorm? If there is no significance to Obama being brought up as a Muslim, why is the Obama camp outraged? Why did Hillary think that tying Obama to his Islamic roots would hurt his campaign? I thought the Democrats celebrated diversity? I thought Islam was a religion of peace? I thought democrats were beyond divisive politics? I thought Obama was going to “embrace” all of the despots of the world and turn around their hatred of America? Won’t we see more of Obama in a turban as he travels around the world preaching a “new new World Order”? Shouldn’t we get used to this?
The problem with Obama, the Oscars, and Turbans, is they are all anti American. The turban is a symbol worn by our enemies that swear to wipe us off the face of the earth. Americans are rightfully suspicious of a religion that is known for so much of the oppression in the world. The Oscars are anti-American; period. And Obama wants to force America to “understand” the evil in the world by negotiating our founding principles so maybe someday we can be “accepting” of an entire political party of people that wear turbans.
There is going to be a “new world order” but not the one the Obama and the left are hoping for. It will be one that the founding fathers would be proud of. One based on the constitution, individual liberty, and a clear understanding of the enemy we face. The Oscars, the turban, and Obama, will all be defeated at the ballot box, in a landslide; I will bet the farm on it. When America starts tuning into the real message of Obama, they will see the danger, and vote for a return to American traditions, not Hollywood “traditions” or the traditions of our enemies … Just a thought…
Friday, February 22, 2008
False Hope; Democratic Party Style…
There is a very unhealthy movement happening in America, it’s called the Obama campaign.
His “sermons” promote and promise the “religion” of government:
It does not surprise me that youngsters are being drawn to the “movement” but adults should know better. If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. History tells us that what Obama is promising has been tried and has failed; miserably.
We are seeing a blind trust in someone that is making promises worthy of all of the dictators, kings, and totalitarian leaders of the past. He talks about the future, but his message is one from the past; a very ugly past I might add. Start listening closely and you too will see, we don’t need promises of more from government, we need the government to move aside and let individuals drive hope toward a brighter future for each and every individual American. Just a thought…
His “sermons” promote and promise the “religion” of government:
- He promises hope is found in the government not the individual.
- He promises a bright future by renewing faith in the government.
- He promises to end poverty, ignorance, and divisiveness which requires empowering the government and giving up individual rights.
- He promises to crush greedy corporations by increasing government regulation and control.
- He promises if we are willing to sacrifice our individual freedom we can realize a collective utopia.
- He promises things that sound like paradise but will result in hell.
- He promises a better future to those willing to believe.
It does not surprise me that youngsters are being drawn to the “movement” but adults should know better. If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. History tells us that what Obama is promising has been tried and has failed; miserably.
We are seeing a blind trust in someone that is making promises worthy of all of the dictators, kings, and totalitarian leaders of the past. He talks about the future, but his message is one from the past; a very ugly past I might add. Start listening closely and you too will see, we don’t need promises of more from government, we need the government to move aside and let individuals drive hope toward a brighter future for each and every individual American. Just a thought…
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
It’s Not the Color of His Skin; It Is the Content of His Campaign…
America is ready for a Black candidate for president. America is ready for a Woman candidate for president. What America is not ready for is a candidate that believes socialism is a new idea, and good for America.
There isn’t a hill of beans between Hillary and Obama when it comes to their vision for America. They both believe that the government is best suited to manage the markets, healthcare, and the family. Actually they believe that the government is the dominant force for good in our society. Better than you or me at deciding what is right for our family, career, retirement, healthcare, food choices, drink choices, car choices, and any other choice we believe we should be in charge of… Basically eliminating the need for freedom.
Markets: They both want to punish productivity by limiting profits and pay scales for executives. They want to pick the winners, protect the losers, and eliminate the risk that is inherent in the market. They are both ignorant in economics, and both of their visions will destroy the engine of capitalism that is the foundation of our ability to lead, feed, and free the world around us.
Healthcare: They want to mandate how much you pay for healthcare and prescriptions, who you can see, how much doctors and insurance companies can make, what doctors can do and say with their patients, and control every aspect of healthcare through a “one payer” system. Market rules apply in healthcare, just like they do in any marketplace. Both of their plans to socialize healthcare will result in destroying the greatest medical system in the world.
The Family: They both believe in “planned” families. They both believe that the baby in a woman’s body is hers to do with what they want including aborting it through term, but that control ends once a baby is born. They want government to control daycare, early child learning, school curriculums, and both support the rights of kids to sue their parents. They both believe children and their future is the “responsibility” of the states. They both talk about the importance of the family, but not the autonomy of the family unit. They want to decide what parents choose for their kids from schools, to television, to their choice of college.
So when you here that people are “uncomfortable” with a Black man or woman for president, especially those pesky conservatives, it’s a bunch of bull. It is the content of the campaign that is the problem for most people on the right. Martin Luther King had a dream, as do most Americans for a prosperous and color blind society. I believe we have come close to achieving that dream, but Obama’s candidacy is not going to be rejected for the color of his skin; but the content of his campaign. I think Martin Luther King would consider that a true achievement toward his vision and dream. Just a thought…
There isn’t a hill of beans between Hillary and Obama when it comes to their vision for America. They both believe that the government is best suited to manage the markets, healthcare, and the family. Actually they believe that the government is the dominant force for good in our society. Better than you or me at deciding what is right for our family, career, retirement, healthcare, food choices, drink choices, car choices, and any other choice we believe we should be in charge of… Basically eliminating the need for freedom.
Markets: They both want to punish productivity by limiting profits and pay scales for executives. They want to pick the winners, protect the losers, and eliminate the risk that is inherent in the market. They are both ignorant in economics, and both of their visions will destroy the engine of capitalism that is the foundation of our ability to lead, feed, and free the world around us.
Healthcare: They want to mandate how much you pay for healthcare and prescriptions, who you can see, how much doctors and insurance companies can make, what doctors can do and say with their patients, and control every aspect of healthcare through a “one payer” system. Market rules apply in healthcare, just like they do in any marketplace. Both of their plans to socialize healthcare will result in destroying the greatest medical system in the world.
The Family: They both believe in “planned” families. They both believe that the baby in a woman’s body is hers to do with what they want including aborting it through term, but that control ends once a baby is born. They want government to control daycare, early child learning, school curriculums, and both support the rights of kids to sue their parents. They both believe children and their future is the “responsibility” of the states. They both talk about the importance of the family, but not the autonomy of the family unit. They want to decide what parents choose for their kids from schools, to television, to their choice of college.
So when you here that people are “uncomfortable” with a Black man or woman for president, especially those pesky conservatives, it’s a bunch of bull. It is the content of the campaign that is the problem for most people on the right. Martin Luther King had a dream, as do most Americans for a prosperous and color blind society. I believe we have come close to achieving that dream, but Obama’s candidacy is not going to be rejected for the color of his skin; but the content of his campaign. I think Martin Luther King would consider that a true achievement toward his vision and dream. Just a thought…
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Our freedom and experiment in self rule has already failed…
If by some miracle, the founding fathers of our great nation were to rise from the dead, how would they rate our stewardship of the freedom from government oppression, and individual liberty they bestowed upon us some 230 years ago? I’m afraid we would get an F. A big fat F!
I believe they would be heartbroken that many of the protections they thought they outlined in the constitution have been ignored.
They would look at how big the Federal budget is and wonder how the states allowed the 10th amendment to be completely breached. They would wonder how the states went from fighting so hard against a central control, to a complete submission of federal mandates without a revolution.
They would affirm the 2nd amendment did include an individual right to bear arms, and wonder why we didn’t utilize it to stop the federal takeover of power.
They would wonder; where did God go?
They would affirm that Christian principles were intended as the foundation of the first amendment, and that the separation of church and state was only intended to stop the implementation of a National religion. Not to be used to exorcise our religious foundation out of the public square.
They would wonder why the Federal government would have any business in the tobacco we smoke, the healthcare we choose, the retirement we seek, the food we eat, the cars we drive, the schools we seek, and the happiness we pursue.
They would wonder; why don’t the congressmen leave government? You pay them for what and how much? Then they would understand it!
They would wonder why the federal and state governments were mandating curriculum at our schools - but mostly they would be scratching their heads about a mandated curriculum of Global Warming, but no reference to mandating the teaching of our constitution.
They would be puzzled, dismayed, and defeated by what they would continue to uncover. They would wonder where the next revolution would spawn from. They would have to believe there must be a movement afoot to change this oppressive use of government control. For what they would find would be disturbingly similar to what they revolted against.
How could the foundation they laid just 230 years ago be so different from what they died for? How could a nation bestow on a government what is best left up to individuals? How could a nation founded on the spirit of limited government accept unlimited government meddling?
We would receive an F for stewardship of personal freedom and liberty. They would see that compared to other nations in the world, we still speak about the value of freedom. But what we say and what we do are two completely different things.
In their eyes we would have failed simply because we lost the vision of what is truly valuable; our ability to live our lives with limited government interference.
If you don’t believe we would receive a failing grade for our stewardship, you do not understand the principle’s we were founded on. And for that you would get an F. Just a thought…
I believe they would be heartbroken that many of the protections they thought they outlined in the constitution have been ignored.
They would look at how big the Federal budget is and wonder how the states allowed the 10th amendment to be completely breached. They would wonder how the states went from fighting so hard against a central control, to a complete submission of federal mandates without a revolution.
They would affirm the 2nd amendment did include an individual right to bear arms, and wonder why we didn’t utilize it to stop the federal takeover of power.
They would wonder; where did God go?
They would affirm that Christian principles were intended as the foundation of the first amendment, and that the separation of church and state was only intended to stop the implementation of a National religion. Not to be used to exorcise our religious foundation out of the public square.
They would wonder why the Federal government would have any business in the tobacco we smoke, the healthcare we choose, the retirement we seek, the food we eat, the cars we drive, the schools we seek, and the happiness we pursue.
They would wonder; why don’t the congressmen leave government? You pay them for what and how much? Then they would understand it!
They would wonder why the federal and state governments were mandating curriculum at our schools - but mostly they would be scratching their heads about a mandated curriculum of Global Warming, but no reference to mandating the teaching of our constitution.
They would be puzzled, dismayed, and defeated by what they would continue to uncover. They would wonder where the next revolution would spawn from. They would have to believe there must be a movement afoot to change this oppressive use of government control. For what they would find would be disturbingly similar to what they revolted against.
How could the foundation they laid just 230 years ago be so different from what they died for? How could a nation bestow on a government what is best left up to individuals? How could a nation founded on the spirit of limited government accept unlimited government meddling?
We would receive an F for stewardship of personal freedom and liberty. They would see that compared to other nations in the world, we still speak about the value of freedom. But what we say and what we do are two completely different things.
In their eyes we would have failed simply because we lost the vision of what is truly valuable; our ability to live our lives with limited government interference.
If you don’t believe we would receive a failing grade for our stewardship, you do not understand the principle’s we were founded on. And for that you would get an F. Just a thought…
Thursday, February 14, 2008
And we want more of this from the government?
“The cost of benefits to seniors soared to a record $27,289 per senior in 2007” according to a USA Today analysis.
“Economist Dean Baker calls it "granny bashing" to focus on the cost of senior benefits. The elderly paid a designated tax for Social Security and Medicare taxes during their decades of working to support these programs when they retired, says Baker, co-director of the liberal Center for Economic Policy and Research.”
I have news for Dean, and I guess he would know this, if you add up all of the benefits paid into Social Security and Medicare for the current senior recipients, their total contribution is less than the $27,000 they are getting paid per year now. That is not “granny bashing”, that is a fact we must come to terms with.
It shows the inherent problem with the system; no sustaining mechanism to keep it from going broke without saddling the upcoming generations with exorbitant taxes, which they will eventually refuse to pay. Continuing on the current path will turn generations against each other at some point. It is not about people getting something back from Social Security and Medicare, it is how much?
We need to create real accounts for Social Security and Medicare for starters. Get the slimy politicians hands out of our “cookie jar” and put it in our own “personal accounts”. Accounts we can’t touch until we are 62. Give people the choice to invest like we do with current 401K and IRA accounts. Heck, I would be happy at this point if they just got simple interest. Anything is better than the “IOU” ponsy scheme we currently have.
Anyone younger than 50 should know that in retirement, the benefit received from Social Security will not exceed $1000 dollars a month, so start saving. The $1000.00 will be there only to supplement people’s retirement (like it was intended) not to be the only source of retirement.
The current seniors have been sold a bill of goods by our politicians and we must not penalize them for this injustice. What we need to do going forward though is to communicate to everyone, this system is broken and we are going to fix it. It is the moral thing to do. No one should have to retire on what the government decides is an acceptable amount of income. It will never be enough. When people know what to expect they can plan for it. Then each generation will not be bitter about handing over their hard earned money to people that didn’t save for their own retirement. Just a thought…
“Economist Dean Baker calls it "granny bashing" to focus on the cost of senior benefits. The elderly paid a designated tax for Social Security and Medicare taxes during their decades of working to support these programs when they retired, says Baker, co-director of the liberal Center for Economic Policy and Research.”
I have news for Dean, and I guess he would know this, if you add up all of the benefits paid into Social Security and Medicare for the current senior recipients, their total contribution is less than the $27,000 they are getting paid per year now. That is not “granny bashing”, that is a fact we must come to terms with.
It shows the inherent problem with the system; no sustaining mechanism to keep it from going broke without saddling the upcoming generations with exorbitant taxes, which they will eventually refuse to pay. Continuing on the current path will turn generations against each other at some point. It is not about people getting something back from Social Security and Medicare, it is how much?
We need to create real accounts for Social Security and Medicare for starters. Get the slimy politicians hands out of our “cookie jar” and put it in our own “personal accounts”. Accounts we can’t touch until we are 62. Give people the choice to invest like we do with current 401K and IRA accounts. Heck, I would be happy at this point if they just got simple interest. Anything is better than the “IOU” ponsy scheme we currently have.
Anyone younger than 50 should know that in retirement, the benefit received from Social Security will not exceed $1000 dollars a month, so start saving. The $1000.00 will be there only to supplement people’s retirement (like it was intended) not to be the only source of retirement.
The current seniors have been sold a bill of goods by our politicians and we must not penalize them for this injustice. What we need to do going forward though is to communicate to everyone, this system is broken and we are going to fix it. It is the moral thing to do. No one should have to retire on what the government decides is an acceptable amount of income. It will never be enough. When people know what to expect they can plan for it. Then each generation will not be bitter about handing over their hard earned money to people that didn’t save for their own retirement. Just a thought…
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
No you can’t eat here…
Walter Williams, one of my favorite Professors, has written about the willingness of people to allow government tyranny to thrive. It started with the tobacco zealots, and as he predicted, they're coming after you. Legislation has been introduced in Mississippi to force restaurants there to determine if a person is obese, and if they are, it will be illegal to serve them. In the name of fighting obesity we have lost a freedom.
· In the name of fighting cancer, we have outlawed smoking for adults.
· In the name of fighting ADD, we have outlawed soda in the school machines.
· In the name of fighting hatred, we have outlawed free speech.
· In the name of cleaning up elections, we have outlawed free speech.
· In the name of what next, will we outlaw all of our freedoms?
When are you going to say enough? When they tell you you can’t watch American Idol? When you can no longer purchase an SUV? When you can no longer question your school about the curriculum their teaching your kids? What will be your tipping point?
They’re coming after you; God bless Walter Williams. I’m sorry, have they outlawed the mention of God yet?
· In the name of fighting cancer, we have outlawed smoking for adults.
· In the name of fighting ADD, we have outlawed soda in the school machines.
· In the name of fighting hatred, we have outlawed free speech.
· In the name of cleaning up elections, we have outlawed free speech.
· In the name of what next, will we outlaw all of our freedoms?
When are you going to say enough? When they tell you you can’t watch American Idol? When you can no longer purchase an SUV? When you can no longer question your school about the curriculum their teaching your kids? What will be your tipping point?
They’re coming after you; God bless Walter Williams. I’m sorry, have they outlawed the mention of God yet?
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
The Government will now buy homes for the "poor"…
It was announced today that the government will pay for new homes for the poor. If you make less than $35,000 a year are a family of 4 or more, you will be able to choose a home with a value up to $650,000. The government will deduct an additional $600 a month from everyone’s paycheck making over $35,000 to pay for the program.
Hillary Clinton was asked about the program, and she said she liked it on the surface but was concerned that the $650,000 limit may not be high enough for some areas of the country. She proposed a $1,000,000 limit for California and some parts of the East Coast.
In the same announcement the government is requiring all employers to pay a minimum wage of $27.00 per hour to help increase the amount of taxes they can collect for the new programs being introduced. The increase in the minimum wage is expected to eliminate all Americans from poverty.
When the franchise owner of McDonalds was asked how this was going to impact the price of a Big Mac, he was quoted as saying; “it will go from $2.49 to $8.49 but will include an apple pie for desert.”
This is what liberal politicians would love to do, but why can’t they? Why can’t Hillary and Obama just pass a law that healthcare will be free to all Americans? Why can’t the government just raise wages and expect everything to get better? It’s called the market.
Anyone that has ever spent ten seconds in an Economics class knows the law of supply and demand. When the price goes down, demand goes up but what about supply? Supply is driven by demand but also the ability to make profit. If you limit profit with price controls, no one will produce the product. So even though you raised the wages of workers, increasing the supply of money, you will have to increase the cost of goods to pay the wages or their will be no profit for making Big Macs. The supply will go away and the job will follow if you limit the price a producer of Big Macs can charge.
There are many principles at work but if you were given a house with a value up to $1,000,000, if you made less than $35,000 and had 2 children, is your incentive to make more than 35K or less than 35K? Is your incentive to have no children or 2 children? Controlling the market has consequences.
So why is it different with healthcare? It isn’t. If you make healthcare available to everyone through tax payer subsidies, demand will increase. If you force providers to treat everyone, at a mandated price, providers will limit supply. If you force them to increase supply you will harm quality. In the end no one will become a doctor or nurse unless of course you are forced to do it. Is that freedom?
Hillary has never held a job in the private sector beyond a short unsuccessful stint as a lawyer. She believes she knows better because she believes she has good intentions. We all have good intentions but the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Just ask the Russians, Chinese, and Cubans. Let’s ask the government to get out of our lives, not become further entrenched in our lives. I know Hillary is not very intelligent, but are you? Do you trust the market or Hillary?
Hillary Clinton was asked about the program, and she said she liked it on the surface but was concerned that the $650,000 limit may not be high enough for some areas of the country. She proposed a $1,000,000 limit for California and some parts of the East Coast.
In the same announcement the government is requiring all employers to pay a minimum wage of $27.00 per hour to help increase the amount of taxes they can collect for the new programs being introduced. The increase in the minimum wage is expected to eliminate all Americans from poverty.
When the franchise owner of McDonalds was asked how this was going to impact the price of a Big Mac, he was quoted as saying; “it will go from $2.49 to $8.49 but will include an apple pie for desert.”
This is what liberal politicians would love to do, but why can’t they? Why can’t Hillary and Obama just pass a law that healthcare will be free to all Americans? Why can’t the government just raise wages and expect everything to get better? It’s called the market.
Anyone that has ever spent ten seconds in an Economics class knows the law of supply and demand. When the price goes down, demand goes up but what about supply? Supply is driven by demand but also the ability to make profit. If you limit profit with price controls, no one will produce the product. So even though you raised the wages of workers, increasing the supply of money, you will have to increase the cost of goods to pay the wages or their will be no profit for making Big Macs. The supply will go away and the job will follow if you limit the price a producer of Big Macs can charge.
There are many principles at work but if you were given a house with a value up to $1,000,000, if you made less than $35,000 and had 2 children, is your incentive to make more than 35K or less than 35K? Is your incentive to have no children or 2 children? Controlling the market has consequences.
So why is it different with healthcare? It isn’t. If you make healthcare available to everyone through tax payer subsidies, demand will increase. If you force providers to treat everyone, at a mandated price, providers will limit supply. If you force them to increase supply you will harm quality. In the end no one will become a doctor or nurse unless of course you are forced to do it. Is that freedom?
Hillary has never held a job in the private sector beyond a short unsuccessful stint as a lawyer. She believes she knows better because she believes she has good intentions. We all have good intentions but the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Just ask the Russians, Chinese, and Cubans. Let’s ask the government to get out of our lives, not become further entrenched in our lives. I know Hillary is not very intelligent, but are you? Do you trust the market or Hillary?
Friday, February 8, 2008
I wasn’t the only one; thank God…
Today’s story of outrage over the Bishop of Canterbury’s remarks yesterday, regarding Sharia law, has renewed my faith in free speech and common sense. My hope is that people will see the danger in allowing religious doctrine to dictate or trump civil law. The good thing about this conflict is that it exposes how Islam is not compatible with western values. Those that want to live under Islam cannot accept the fact that in a civil society, civil law must be adhered too. With Islam the belief is that church has no separation from state. The most lethal combination known to the history of man; church as state.
That said, Christian judeo principles have been the guiding principles for the success of western civilization, and that must be respected. The principles followed by Christians and Jews are ones that honor woman, respect individuals, and value freedom. Christians believe in the “Prince of Peace”. A much different leader than the one followed in Islam.
Facts are a stubborn thing. Don’t believe what people say about something, watch how they act. If you do, you will come to the conclusion that the doctrine of Islam, cannot be allowed to be carried through if western civilization wants to survive. It is nice to see the argument brought to the surface in Britain. It is not too late to stop this movement…
That said, Christian judeo principles have been the guiding principles for the success of western civilization, and that must be respected. The principles followed by Christians and Jews are ones that honor woman, respect individuals, and value freedom. Christians believe in the “Prince of Peace”. A much different leader than the one followed in Islam.
Facts are a stubborn thing. Don’t believe what people say about something, watch how they act. If you do, you will come to the conclusion that the doctrine of Islam, cannot be allowed to be carried through if western civilization wants to survive. It is nice to see the argument brought to the surface in Britain. It is not too late to stop this movement…
Thursday, February 7, 2008
Britain adopting Sharia Law; God help the UK and US…
The Archbishop of Canterbury has gone insane! Women of the world beware. Stay away from the UK! This article is so disturbing that I am shaking as I write this. There is no fundamentally greater threat than the Islamic religion and particularly Sharia law to the world as we know it!
Islam is not a “religion of peace” for so many reasons. Please visit Conservative Beach Girl’s website to review the many documented cases of Islamic abuse of the western system as well as woman’s rights around the world, including right here in the US. Everyone needs to get their heads out of the sand here, and do your homework about Islam.
If you think I’m irrational about this, you have not dug deep enough into Islam. Please visit the Beach Girl’s website often, and you too will know how dangerous the political movement of Islam is to the future of woman, western civilization, and your freedom…
Islam is not a “religion of peace” for so many reasons. Please visit Conservative Beach Girl’s website to review the many documented cases of Islamic abuse of the western system as well as woman’s rights around the world, including right here in the US. Everyone needs to get their heads out of the sand here, and do your homework about Islam.
If you think I’m irrational about this, you have not dug deep enough into Islam. Please visit the Beach Girl’s website often, and you too will know how dangerous the political movement of Islam is to the future of woman, western civilization, and your freedom…
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Old Ideas Vs. Just Plain Old
The Hillary and Barrack campaigns both tout the message of change. Change to what, I’m not sure, but when you look at their platforms they are actually trying to change the direction of our country in the backward direction toward the failed policy of socialism. They are socialist, big government, anti capitalists at heart, and all we have to do is look at old Europe to see the results of these policies.
I know they think socialism has not been implemented properly, and has not had strong leadership behind the message, but it will fail here just like everywhere. It is fundamentally, and morally bad policy, to ask some to produce while others sit on their arses, and reap the rewards of the people doing the hard work. The system always falls under a malaise, productivity tumbles, and people become selfish asking for more, more, more. Old ideas.
McCain is a “maverick” in one way; he thinks he knows best, even when the majority of people are dead set against what he’s pitching. Take the immigration debate, his assault on the first amendment, and his gang of 14 to name a few examples. Not only is he stubborn, he’s a cranky old man. He is old in age, ideas, and temperament. Do we really want a man at the helm of our country that really should be in retirement, enjoying his kids, grand kids, and life time successes? I know Reagan was old in age, but he had a vision for the future, and an understanding of the policies of freedom. McCain is no Reagan; period. His military experience is a plus but we have a ton of generals that will provide excellent guidance to our next Commander in Chief. Lately he has been lying through his teeth about his past votes, policies, and the statements being made by other candidates. He is either lying or forgetful. So he is either deceitful or just old.
Unless things change, we are in for a painful four years of social security recipients screaming for more benefits, Medicare and Medicaid recipients screaming for more, college kids and parents of students screaming for more and the people that make this country strong through their productivity will be asked to provide more of their bounty. I for one have started the conversation with my wife to be prepared for early retirement because I will not be working for the old ideas of socialism. We don’t need to rise up with revolution or violence, as producers all we have to do is stay home and sit on our arses. I feel better now… I think…
I know they think socialism has not been implemented properly, and has not had strong leadership behind the message, but it will fail here just like everywhere. It is fundamentally, and morally bad policy, to ask some to produce while others sit on their arses, and reap the rewards of the people doing the hard work. The system always falls under a malaise, productivity tumbles, and people become selfish asking for more, more, more. Old ideas.
McCain is a “maverick” in one way; he thinks he knows best, even when the majority of people are dead set against what he’s pitching. Take the immigration debate, his assault on the first amendment, and his gang of 14 to name a few examples. Not only is he stubborn, he’s a cranky old man. He is old in age, ideas, and temperament. Do we really want a man at the helm of our country that really should be in retirement, enjoying his kids, grand kids, and life time successes? I know Reagan was old in age, but he had a vision for the future, and an understanding of the policies of freedom. McCain is no Reagan; period. His military experience is a plus but we have a ton of generals that will provide excellent guidance to our next Commander in Chief. Lately he has been lying through his teeth about his past votes, policies, and the statements being made by other candidates. He is either lying or forgetful. So he is either deceitful or just old.
Unless things change, we are in for a painful four years of social security recipients screaming for more benefits, Medicare and Medicaid recipients screaming for more, college kids and parents of students screaming for more and the people that make this country strong through their productivity will be asked to provide more of their bounty. I for one have started the conversation with my wife to be prepared for early retirement because I will not be working for the old ideas of socialism. We don’t need to rise up with revolution or violence, as producers all we have to do is stay home and sit on our arses. I feel better now… I think…
Monday, February 4, 2008
3.1 Trillion and it’s not enough…
If 3.1 trillion is not enough, what amount of our tax dollars will be sufficient to “run” our government? If you think I’m kidding read this…? Come on folks; what other proof do we need to throw all these bums out?
Giants defense was the key to the super bowl win. They were awesome! Congrats NY. A great night for my family in NY, but not so much for my friends in NE. Great 4th quarter finish…
Giants defense was the key to the super bowl win. They were awesome! Congrats NY. A great night for my family in NY, but not so much for my friends in NE. Great 4th quarter finish…
It’s not health insurance; stupid…
It’s healthCARE! And we need to do a few fundamental things as consumers of healthcare to change it for the better:
• Learn how the AMA controls the number of potential doctors by artificially limiting student internships. It is shocking the control they have to keep the market inflated. Do they try to make sure doctors provide quality care as well? You bet, but there are things they do that hinder the market place. We need to demand more access for those that want to become a doctor.
• The AMA limits what nurses can do for patients. Nurses make a fraction of what doctors make, and let me tell you being married to one, they know as much, if not more than doctors. If they were not limited to the care they could provide, the price of services would be reduced (bad for doctor’s pay). We need to demand more access to care by nurses and alternative medical professionals.
• Trial lawyers like John Edwards, are like vultures circling over doctor’s heads, waiting for any mistake, or questionable diagnosis, to pounce and file a lawsuit, whether or not there was negligence. We need to decide as consumers whether or not we want to allow this to continue. The threat of lawsuits is hindering care, encouraging useless CYA (cover your anatomy) tests, and increasing the cost of care by astronomical proportions. We must put limits on this insanity.
• We need to reject health insurance for basic care. We should create a “healthcare pool” for anyone that is willing to pay for basic care like doctor’s visits and blood tests, limiting the cost people in this pool would pay, if something catastrophic happened like cancer or a heart attack. Anyone in this pool would have “insurance” against losing their home, business, or life savings. A small monthly payment for catastrophic care would be required to get into this pool, but it would guarantee a protection against their assets. Doctors would be protected against lawsuits if they provided care to anyone in this pool. With protection against the individuals in this pool from losing their lifetime savings and assets, people would more likely be willing to join. Creating a huge pool of consumers demanding market place reforms, and doctors willing to provide competitive care. This is just a rough plan but it is mine and one I will continue to develop.
These suggestions directly attack the “status quo” of healthcare; insurance companies, doctors, and patient “security” will be impacted, but if we want a better, less expensive system, we have to look at everything that is wrong with the current system.
I ask; do you really want politicians, the government, and insurance companies deciding the care you receive and pay for? Or do you want to decide your care? The choice is simple; the road will be hard. But think about the founders of this nation, and the road they had to choose. Was that an easy choice? Was it the right one? Just a thought…
• Learn how the AMA controls the number of potential doctors by artificially limiting student internships. It is shocking the control they have to keep the market inflated. Do they try to make sure doctors provide quality care as well? You bet, but there are things they do that hinder the market place. We need to demand more access for those that want to become a doctor.
• The AMA limits what nurses can do for patients. Nurses make a fraction of what doctors make, and let me tell you being married to one, they know as much, if not more than doctors. If they were not limited to the care they could provide, the price of services would be reduced (bad for doctor’s pay). We need to demand more access to care by nurses and alternative medical professionals.
• Trial lawyers like John Edwards, are like vultures circling over doctor’s heads, waiting for any mistake, or questionable diagnosis, to pounce and file a lawsuit, whether or not there was negligence. We need to decide as consumers whether or not we want to allow this to continue. The threat of lawsuits is hindering care, encouraging useless CYA (cover your anatomy) tests, and increasing the cost of care by astronomical proportions. We must put limits on this insanity.
• We need to reject health insurance for basic care. We should create a “healthcare pool” for anyone that is willing to pay for basic care like doctor’s visits and blood tests, limiting the cost people in this pool would pay, if something catastrophic happened like cancer or a heart attack. Anyone in this pool would have “insurance” against losing their home, business, or life savings. A small monthly payment for catastrophic care would be required to get into this pool, but it would guarantee a protection against their assets. Doctors would be protected against lawsuits if they provided care to anyone in this pool. With protection against the individuals in this pool from losing their lifetime savings and assets, people would more likely be willing to join. Creating a huge pool of consumers demanding market place reforms, and doctors willing to provide competitive care. This is just a rough plan but it is mine and one I will continue to develop.
These suggestions directly attack the “status quo” of healthcare; insurance companies, doctors, and patient “security” will be impacted, but if we want a better, less expensive system, we have to look at everything that is wrong with the current system.
I ask; do you really want politicians, the government, and insurance companies deciding the care you receive and pay for? Or do you want to decide your care? The choice is simple; the road will be hard. But think about the founders of this nation, and the road they had to choose. Was that an easy choice? Was it the right one? Just a thought…
Friday, February 1, 2008
Clinton politics; do we want more of this?
This NY Times story received very little play but it is indicative of the corrupt dealings of the Clinton’s. It is a story about power, influence, and money, the only place the Clinton’s have experience and thrive. They are dirty, corrupt, and will do anything to build personal power.
If Hillary is elected we can expect her to support dictator thugs and corrupt business partners around the world. They are two of the most dangerous people in this country, and that is an understatement. All of this corruption to help build a library that will gloss over the most dishonest politician in America.
Why was this story not discussed? Why is Barrack not asking about it? Why are none of the GOP candidates highlighting this corruption? Probably because there have been so many of these stories that people tune them out. When people start disappearing like they do in China and Russia, maybe people will wake up. A bit over the top, maybe. But if you let this kind of corruption go on; what does it say about us as a people? What does it tell our children about our values? When will we get some people in office that actually share our values? I am afraid; never…
If Hillary is elected we can expect her to support dictator thugs and corrupt business partners around the world. They are two of the most dangerous people in this country, and that is an understatement. All of this corruption to help build a library that will gloss over the most dishonest politician in America.
Why was this story not discussed? Why is Barrack not asking about it? Why are none of the GOP candidates highlighting this corruption? Probably because there have been so many of these stories that people tune them out. When people start disappearing like they do in China and Russia, maybe people will wake up. A bit over the top, maybe. But if you let this kind of corruption go on; what does it say about us as a people? What does it tell our children about our values? When will we get some people in office that actually share our values? I am afraid; never…
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)