There is a story out there in NY about how a republican headquarters got vandalized by someone (stupid young angry liberals) with spray paint and stolen signs. On the door were the words "Republican means slavery." I would like to contest that whole argument for these fine young democrats that Michael Moore says will bring the country a President Obama.
In the recent words of Rush Limbaugh, "When do we get to riot? When do those of us who pay our taxes and go to our jobs and make our mortgages, get to riot?"
http://www.heraldonline.com/109/story/877049.html
It is an outright fact that the republican party was founded on the opposition to slavery in the 1850's. The first republican President was Abraham Lincoln, one of the greatest leaders this country has ever seen. He rose to fame by debating his democrat opponent for Senate in 1958, Stephen A. Douglas who argued in favor of the 1850's status quo......
Dragging the conversation into the 20th century, the republicans are the ones that have the record on civil rights. LBJ would not have been able to pass the landmark Civil Rights Act in 1964 if it were not for the republicans in the Congress who had a much better recording for such legislation.
The Democrat party is full of self serving, inner city politicians that keep their poor people poor. Rich people vote republican and poor people vote democrat so democrats would lose power if their poor climbed the ladder of success. As my bumper sticker reads - "liberals love poor people, they spend so much time making more and more and more of them." Liberal governments essentially have had monopolies on every poor city for far longer than I have walked this earth. There is one exception that stands out in my mind though. Mayor Rudy Giuliani of NYC. George Will said that he "ran one of the most conservative government in the United States in the last 50 or 60 years." Wonder what ever happened to that city?
It does not surprise me that rioters and vandals hate my party. After all, the democrats want to give felons the right to vote because it is estimated that they would vote democrat roughly 90% of the time.
The Republican party has stood for everything "freedom" ever since its founding over 150 years ago. If any party stands for oppression of its people, it would have to default to my "opponents."
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Friday, October 10, 2008
The Conservative Case for Regulation
The left (whom are entirely responsible for this housing crisis to begin with) have been giddily taking a long field day making a pathetic attempt to pin conservative de-regulators at fault.
It often ends with me shouting at the television "tell me what fine piece of regulation would have prevented all this you brain dead mime!"
Then it hit me that I may not be such a Tommy De-Rager.
I, as a conservative libertarian strongly support viciously regulating all who wish to give home loans to those who can't afford it.
Hows that for some "common sense regulation?"
It often ends with me shouting at the television "tell me what fine piece of regulation would have prevented all this you brain dead mime!"
Then it hit me that I may not be such a Tommy De-Rager.
I, as a conservative libertarian strongly support viciously regulating all who wish to give home loans to those who can't afford it.
Hows that for some "common sense regulation?"
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
McCain Falls off Cliff on Housing
Senator McCain made a grave mistake in the debate tonight as he talked about the housing crisis and how to move forward from here. He basically said that the government needs to buy up the bad mortgages and work to re-negotiate them.
That is not a solution Senator McCain. That is what got us into this problem with corrupt democrats forcing lenders to give homes to those who can't afford them. I guess you could say the noble liberal experiment of homes for those who cannot afford them has failed just like "great society" to alleviate poverty. This is how the housing crisis evolved. Fannie May and Freddie Mac were essentially government agencies that bought up a bunch of these worthless mortgages and lo and behold collapsed.
Funneling them into the already bloated Treasury Department will not serve the country well. That will continue to force responsible Americans to pay for the actions of the un-responsible.
Where is the "personal responsibility" concept that brought me into the republican party to begin with!?
That is not a solution Senator McCain. That is what got us into this problem with corrupt democrats forcing lenders to give homes to those who can't afford them. I guess you could say the noble liberal experiment of homes for those who cannot afford them has failed just like "great society" to alleviate poverty. This is how the housing crisis evolved. Fannie May and Freddie Mac were essentially government agencies that bought up a bunch of these worthless mortgages and lo and behold collapsed.
Funneling them into the already bloated Treasury Department will not serve the country well. That will continue to force responsible Americans to pay for the actions of the un-responsible.
Where is the "personal responsibility" concept that brought me into the republican party to begin with!?
Saturday, October 4, 2008
NY Times "Journalistic" Advocacy
The NY Times wrote an op-ed piece titled "President and justices".
It makes a brief case for Obama and against McCain on the issue of the Judiciary.
"The results could be particularly dramatic under Mr. McCain, who is likely to complete President Bush's campaign to make the court an aggressive right-wing force." Funny how these hacks don't mention that McCain was basically the leader of the "Gang of 14". Seven moderate Senators of both parties to stop the elimination of the filibuster for lower court nominees the democrats refused to allow a vote on. And may I add, how is this court which is as dead on 50-50 as a 9 member court could ever be - "an aggressive right-wing force".
They go on to say "Mr. Obama seems likely to pick moderate justices." Are you kidding me! This is the guy that supported infanticide and loves going along with overreaching activists courts spewing out toxic pools of dictatorial liberalism. He doesn't want the American people to vote on controversial issues. It is much more safe for his ideology to have judges strike down the will of the people he disagrees with. Liberal's with law degrees have made a mockery of the 14th Amendment in the last 50 years. There is no doubt in my mind that Obama would nominate life long, rock-ribbed justices like President Clinton's appointees (Breyer and Ginsberg).
The ailing newspaper was either brain dead or gutsy when they called Anthony Kennedy a "moderate conservative". Come on, he is a down the middle moderate. The Times view of what is the norm is warped if you can't see that eight of the nine justices have a Judicial philosophy they tend to stick to while the remaining justice (Kennedy) is moderate.
It makes a brief case for Obama and against McCain on the issue of the Judiciary.
"The results could be particularly dramatic under Mr. McCain, who is likely to complete President Bush's campaign to make the court an aggressive right-wing force." Funny how these hacks don't mention that McCain was basically the leader of the "Gang of 14". Seven moderate Senators of both parties to stop the elimination of the filibuster for lower court nominees the democrats refused to allow a vote on. And may I add, how is this court which is as dead on 50-50 as a 9 member court could ever be - "an aggressive right-wing force".
They go on to say "Mr. Obama seems likely to pick moderate justices." Are you kidding me! This is the guy that supported infanticide and loves going along with overreaching activists courts spewing out toxic pools of dictatorial liberalism. He doesn't want the American people to vote on controversial issues. It is much more safe for his ideology to have judges strike down the will of the people he disagrees with. Liberal's with law degrees have made a mockery of the 14th Amendment in the last 50 years. There is no doubt in my mind that Obama would nominate life long, rock-ribbed justices like President Clinton's appointees (Breyer and Ginsberg).
The ailing newspaper was either brain dead or gutsy when they called Anthony Kennedy a "moderate conservative". Come on, he is a down the middle moderate. The Times view of what is the norm is warped if you can't see that eight of the nine justices have a Judicial philosophy they tend to stick to while the remaining justice (Kennedy) is moderate.
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
The Fairness Doctrine
The Fairness Doctrine is a perfect example of what is at the heart of liberalism.
SEN. DURBIN:
“It’s time to re-institute the Fairness Doctrine,” said Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.). “I have this old-fashioned attitude that when Americans hear both sides of the story, they’re in a better position to make a decision.”
June 27, 2007 The Hill
Oh coarse, it is never their fault. When a liberal fails, it can never be their fault. As my former Senator implies, Americans are clearly too dumb to hear both sides without being forced to. They turn on Rush Limbaugh and are immediately a victim, but they read the NY Times and are well informed citizens in a democracy. This is one of the great tragedies throughout that ideology. They refuse to question their own premise. LBJ tries to eradicate poverty through his "Great Society" of big government programs and look where the poor neighborhoods are today. Their not blind, they see those results. They just pass them off to the tone of not having enough funding. It is like hunger in Africa. Money is great, but it can only feed so many for a period of time. Jesus said if you teach a man to fish he will be feed for a lifetime.
Remember in 2004 when John Kerry clearly lost? They didn't blame themselves. They went to Ohio and declared voter fraud. Bush won by about 130,000 votes. Meanwhile in Wisconsin (where my cousin worked for the Bush campaign), Kerry won by a slim 10,000 votes. Wonder where voter fraud should be investigated? After they lost that pathetic challenge, they went on to just attack Rove and Bush. It was the Swift Boating and smear tactics. John Kerry was clearly in touch with your average American. After all he did go hunting and said "Is this where I can get me a huntin' licence."
Their logic allows the average American to be too stupid for personal responsibility. The government needs to take care of that. So that ideology also allows individual Americans to be deceived and stupid when they reject a liberal (as has been done frequently since McGovern). Because of the tragedy that occurs when a premise is never questioned, their opposition to free speech in the "Fairness Doctrine" is right there along side them.
Support Congressman Mike Pence of Indiana in his bid to effectivly kill the Fairness Doctrine once and for all.
SEN. DURBIN:
“It’s time to re-institute the Fairness Doctrine,” said Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.). “I have this old-fashioned attitude that when Americans hear both sides of the story, they’re in a better position to make a decision.”
June 27, 2007 The Hill
Oh coarse, it is never their fault. When a liberal fails, it can never be their fault. As my former Senator implies, Americans are clearly too dumb to hear both sides without being forced to. They turn on Rush Limbaugh and are immediately a victim, but they read the NY Times and are well informed citizens in a democracy. This is one of the great tragedies throughout that ideology. They refuse to question their own premise. LBJ tries to eradicate poverty through his "Great Society" of big government programs and look where the poor neighborhoods are today. Their not blind, they see those results. They just pass them off to the tone of not having enough funding. It is like hunger in Africa. Money is great, but it can only feed so many for a period of time. Jesus said if you teach a man to fish he will be feed for a lifetime.
Remember in 2004 when John Kerry clearly lost? They didn't blame themselves. They went to Ohio and declared voter fraud. Bush won by about 130,000 votes. Meanwhile in Wisconsin (where my cousin worked for the Bush campaign), Kerry won by a slim 10,000 votes. Wonder where voter fraud should be investigated? After they lost that pathetic challenge, they went on to just attack Rove and Bush. It was the Swift Boating and smear tactics. John Kerry was clearly in touch with your average American. After all he did go hunting and said "Is this where I can get me a huntin' licence."
Their logic allows the average American to be too stupid for personal responsibility. The government needs to take care of that. So that ideology also allows individual Americans to be deceived and stupid when they reject a liberal (as has been done frequently since McGovern). Because of the tragedy that occurs when a premise is never questioned, their opposition to free speech in the "Fairness Doctrine" is right there along side them.
Support Congressman Mike Pence of Indiana in his bid to effectivly kill the Fairness Doctrine once and for all.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)