My World View

Liberals' real fears about Conservatives

2010-07-24T23:16:00.000-07:00

          Currently, the liberal left controls the presidency, the Congress and a majority of the state's governorships. Also, with the exception Foxnews, they also control the media. Obviously, Hollywood is pretty much controlled by the liberal left. Everyday, President Barrack Obama blames former President Bush and the republicans for the economic problems faced in our cour country. Currently, he has an unprecedented majority of fellow democrats in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Yet, he still feels compelled to complain about the supposed "obstructionist" republicans who block his legislation which often goes against the wishes of the majority of the American people. Besides this, he has a favorable media excluding Foxnews who often make excuses for his obvious shortcomings and even embellish his successes to make him look better. Again, Obama and his administration still feel the need to complain about the dreaded Foxnews because they do not play this game. Finally, Hollywood is controlled entirely by the liberal left. As a result, conservatives are often portrayed as tyrants or evil bigoted people. The small town people(who often are from red districts) are portrayed as racist, ignorant pricks who are ignorant country bumkins. I watched the movie '2012' the other night for the first time. Like the other movie about disaster concerning globlal warming 'The Day after Tomorrow', this film had an ignorant, bullying conservative played by Oliver Platt. Fortunately, both of these men in the two movies respectively were straightened out somewhat and learned to be more open-minded for the "betterment of man". Obviously, the first year and a half of President Obama's presidency has not gone well. Yes, he has passed major legislation, but it was passed because of the large majorities he his political parties had in the House of Representatives and the Senate. Unfortunately, most of the bills passed went against public sentiment. The overhaul of Health Care was very unpopular and his pushing this legislation through bordered on abuse of power.
          Conservatism in its pure form is successful everytime its tried. It is successful because its focus is on following the rules and respecting other people, but sometimes there is need to criticize. The second part of my definition is where the problem is for promoting criticism. Here is a biblical verse from 2 Timothy 4- "1 In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who will judge the living and the dead, and in view of his appearing and his kingdom, I give you this charge: 2 Preach the word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage—with great patience and careful instruction. 3 For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 4 They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths. 5 But you, keep your head in all situations, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist, discharge all the duties of your ministry." Obviously, this quote being from the Bible will automatically be rejected by the liberal elitist and mainstream media despite its wisdom. If this verse came from the quaran or the buddha book, the liberal elitists and the mainstream media might take this verse more seriously-still unlikely, however. Sometimes conservatives need to take a stand against the everyday thinking that is popular. For example, I understand the plight of the African American and atrocity of slavery. Also, I understand the original thinking about giving African American people help in the form of affirmative action and welfare privileges. However, this help has become an entitlement and needs to be phased out. Unfortunately, the African American neighborhoods are worse off than when these assistance programs based purely on race began. Gains have been made socially, but will never be at an acceptable level either way as long as we have a liberal race baiting media and a leftist Hollywood. The truth is that conservatism will lead the way to a better life everyone especially African Americans. Subsequently, feelings need to be hurt to do this. I call it 'tough love', liberals call it racism. Economically, tax cuts work everytime they are tried. The supposed "horrible" Bush tax cuts will expire at the end of this year, but many democrats are NOW AFRAID to let these tax cuts expire?http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,2005389,00.html If these tax cuts are so bad, why are they so scared to let them expire? The truth is blaming Bush for for the bad economy because of the tax cuts was very effective for the deomocrats in the 2008 surge to victory. However, the reality was the tax cuts helped the economy and play no part whatsoever in the economic downfall. Its this type of TRUTH that really has the democrats panicked. The key to democrat victory is and has always been to distort reality and paint your opponent as evil or off the wall-the truth be damned. The major fears the democrats have is that when the overwhelming of the public realizes that conservatism is clearly better than liberalism by large margins, the democrat party will become extinct at least in the form it is now.

Why is this OK?

2010-06-24T21:44:00.000-07:00

Yesterday Lawrence Taylor was indicted on a rape charge for paying a 16 year old girl $300 to have sex with him. http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory?id=10991126 Now, I never have been much of a fan of Lawrence Taylor especially his personal life. Certainly, he is one of the all-time great linebackers, but his off the field antics are despicable at times. However, this latest alleged crime seems petty compared to the celebrated mainstream media story that came out today. http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=170553. Apparently, having a 10 year old boy as grand marshal of the gay pride parade in Fayetteville, Arkansas is an honorable thing, but Lawrence Taylor is vilified and going to prison for allegedly soliciting a 16 year old. Apparently, there was never any sex that occurred between the two people. Yet, the district attorney in the case feels Taylor was "endangering the welfare of the child." Although I am not justifying Taylor's actions, this girl was 16 and a prostitute. Certainly, she is of age to get an abortion. On the other hand, the organization GLADD is pimping a 10 year old boy as grand marshal of their gay pride parade. I thought NAMBLA no longer was a part of the gay pride parades? Not only, are there not charges brought against GLADD, the boy's parents, and the organizers of this event , but the event celebrating a 10 year old boy promoting gay sex is being celebrated the leftist mainstream media. How is using a 10 year old child as grand marshal promoting homosexual sex OK? If its not OK and a crime for Lawrence Taylor to solicit a 16 year old, then why on earth is it OK for the Fayetteville gay pride parade to have a 10 year old boy promote homosexual sex? Finally, if this boy is so proud about homosexuality, shouldn't the authorities look into the boy's parents and the organizers of the event also? Obviously, there is a strong chance this boy might have been violated by any one of these people. If not, why is he expert spokesman and grand marshal of the parade?

BP worse than Al Quaeda

2010-06-17T22:53:00.000-07:00

               Apparently, I have concluded after watching today's spectacle in Congress over the oil link that British Petroleum is a worse enemy combatant than Al Quaeda or Iran or North Korea. A mistake was made two months ago. We still do not have a cause for this mistake, but it was SPECULATED that there might have been carelessness involved by the company. I have yet to hear anyone in Congress, the media or the White House accuse BP of intentionally causing the leak. Why? They have not done so because this accident was not intentional. It was an accident. I doubt that anyone that has lived in their adulthood has not made a mistake or had an accident of some type. Isn't this why we have insurance? Perhaps this accident is so damaging because of the location of the oil leak and the difficulty in fixing this? Ok-I hear my liberal friends saying "no duh". Yes, this is "no duh", but what group forced BP to drill so far offshore when BP could have drill on land? Can my liberal friends answer this? I think a mirror might help. These were the liberal groups like Green Peace and the Sierra Club who FORCED the drilling to be so far off shore.
               Sadly, the current Congress believes that "grilling" the top guy at British Petroleum will make things better. this reminds me of George Orwell's book "1984" where the people were so supposed to be agitated and stirred up with the "daily hate". The witch hunt today in Congress was an example of this. One Congressman, Joe Barton from Texas was scolded harshly for trying to apologize for this hazing.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/17/congressman-apologizes-bp-white-house-shakedown-million/
He had the nerve to call it a shakedown! Since when has Congress ever shook anyone down before? Acutally, when has anyone in Congress ever gone against these witch hunts? Anyway, Joe Barton did retract his remark gutlessly when he was scolded by fellow weasel moderate Republicans who are on the "hate BP" band wagon. Shouldn't we all be on Help and Work Together with BP to fix the leak and clean the leak up band wagon instead?
              Finally, the sorry spectacle by Congress today shows that we have misguided leadership in Congress and the White House who do NOT have the priorities or the interests of the American people in mind. If we are going to have a "daily hate", it should be aimed at people who want intentionally destroy us like Al Quaeda or Iran or Hugo Chavez in Venezuela. Apparently, our law makers would rather scold clueless executives of companies instead of tyranical leaders of countries or extreme Muslim organizations who are intent on destroying us. Ironically, the Obama administration has been harshest on The United States' two best allies Great Britain and Israel. Guess what? Russia, China, Iran, Venezuela, North Korea, the Muslim terrorists still hate us. Except now-they sense the weakness also.

The Arizona law-unfair-why?

2010-06-08T21:52:00.000-07:00

Recently, President Obama dissed the new Arizona law as unfair. My question is why? The media, the progressive democrats and even some misguided moderates like Michael Medved have painted the "illegal immigrants" as unfortunate victims of US business owners exploitation of them for cheaper wages. Although there might be some truth in part of this, where is the blame for the people who crossed the border illegally? Aren't these defenders of the these people enablers? The fact that the majority of these people are from Mexico is irrelevant. There is a significant number of people from other countries that sneak across the Mexican border as well. This fact is often omitted by the defenders of illegal aliens or to be politically correct-"undocumented workers".
I consider illegal aliens "line cutters who also get in free as well". They are line cutters because they cheat and get in before immigrants or US immigrant wannabes from other more distant countries who sometimes wait for many years before they can get their visas to come to the United States. Often, these people have to pay a high price with forever increasing immigration fees. Yet, the people who cross the border illegally here are not only tolerated, but given an almost "hero type" treatment or at least a "poor victim" status by many people in the media and many of our politicians and government leaders. Why? My theory is to gain political advantage amongst Hispanic or Mexican voters. Lets face it-President Obama and the democrats will need all the help they can in the upcoming election. Finally, I am sure Hollywood will keep showing those heavily slanted one sided movies and documentaries about the evil anti-undocumented bigot who is trying to break-up the happy family of all Mexican-Americans who come here. Unfortunately, we will not see the other side of the issue involving the "LEGAL IMMIGRANTS OR WANNABES" who pay a heavy price to come here. President Obama-where is the fairness for these people?

Obama and the UN's Hutzpa

2010-05-31T13:13:00.000-07:00

http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/barack-obama-netanyahu-israel/2010/05/31/id/360603

The above link is about the Obama response to Israel's soldier defending itself against an ambush by Palestinian attackers posing as humanitarians carrying aid. Obama is calling for the facts of the encounter immediately by Netanahu. Isn't this the man who was hiding the facts in the Joe Sestak job offer? Isn't this the man who distorted the facts about the Arizona immigration law? Several key Obama staff leaders like Attorney General Eric Holder and Homeland Security Janet Napolitano made accusations against the bill without even reading the the law itself. Of course, Obama's handling of the oil leak makes the captain of the Titanic look a genius! Yet, he feels compelled to Demand the Facts from Israel about the encounter they had earlier today with the flotilla. I guess the word hutzpa immediately comes to mind.
On a brighter note, Obama's current scandals and failings will make him and the the democrat Congress weaker. Apparently, Obama has not gotten the memo with his demanding Israel to come out with the facts. Actually, Israel has come out with video and a pretty thorough explanation in near record time. If you compare this fast response as compared to Obama's slow response or explanation with the oil spill or Sestak for that matter, Israel's quick explanation certainly shines much brighter. Also, it took two months to determine that a missile sunk the South Korean ship. Despite the overwhelming evidence, North Korea still denies the attack. Where is the UN condemnation of this act of aggression? Can we say HUTZPA!

My Questions for President Obama-Immigration part 1

2010-05-30T21:17:00.000-07:00

                 On Thursday afternoon May 27, 2010 President Barrack Obama finally had his first press conference in 10 months. The press conference dealt mainly with oil spill, but it did have a few surprising questions that challenged the current President. As usual, he dodged the questions while blaming others. In some cases he turned the question into a different subject totally. Unfortunately, President Obama will continue to be a poor leader and blame others for our country's problems. In the end, the liberal mainstream media will continue to make excuses and blame former President Bush as usual.
                I thought it would be fun to ask some questions of President Obama that we will never see asked by the mainstream media. I will start my first line of questioning based solely on immigration. No, I will not ask for his birth certificate. However, I will ask about President Obama's Aunt Zeituni Onyango.
   1) President Obama-did you sponsor and pay for your Aunt Zeituni to come here? I ask this because how else could she have the money or political pull to come here in the first place?.
                 2) If so, why did you let her Immigration Visa run out? You certainly used her to your advantage when she attended your swearing ceremony in 2004.
http://www.cbc.ca/world/usvotes/story/2008/11/01/obama-aunt.html
3) Speaking of immigration, you mention the word "fairness" when slandering the new Arizona immigration law-correct? You call it unfair to go after people who crossed the border illegally. Why?
               4) You and your supporters often cite the liberal talking point of "those undocumented workers(Mexicans) take the jobs other people will not take and are doing our country a favor"-correct? If so, what about the mile long waiting list of people from other oppressive countries throughout the world who are waiting to do these very same "undesirable jobs here also? How is this fair?
               5) Also, what about the people that followed the Immigration law? These people had to wait many months or even years to come into this country. Not to mention-the many fees these people have had to occur. Are you going to compensate these people for your administration's double standard and favoritism of Mexicans over other ethnic minorities that come into this country?
               6) If you do pass an immigration bill and give illegal Mexican immigrants amnesty, are you going to require organizations like NCLR to pay and compensate in a "fair" manner the tax payers of this country for the untold harm and cost illegal immigrants have weighed upon the American economy? Also, are you going to make NCLR responsible for every fine that is not paid in this bill?
http://www.nclr.org/
               7) Speaking of NCLR (La Raza), are you going to look into their possible assistance of helping "illegal immigrants over the border? If so, how will these law breakers be punished? Will this organization compensate those immigrants who have had a delay coming to this country due to the millions of line cutters that NCLR has helped cross the border?
http://www.nclr.org/Obviously, these questions will never be asked of this President. In fact, these are question that should have been asked back in 2003 or 2004 when this man became a candidate for the Illinois Senate. The mainstream media today is pathetic. My next series of articles will focus on more questions in areas like foriegn affairs the economy and domestic matters. Hopefully, our next President will be looked into a little better than our current inhabitant of the White House!

Why do we care?

2010-05-26T21:51:00.000-07:00

http://www.fancast.com/blogs/2010/tv-news/american-idol-closes-the-book-on-year-nine/?cmpid=FCST_hero

The above link is an article about who won the season finale of American Idol. Also, the article featured the farewell of Simon Cowell and his possible rift with fellow judge Randy Jackson. Unfortunately, it seems people are taking this show way too seriously. I remember when these stories were mainly exhibited in entertainment sections of the paper or entertainment oriented magazines like 'People Magazine'. Now, we see these stories headlining news Internet sites like Yahoo or Comcast or AOL. These stories have gotten much greater play than the North Korea sinking of a South Korea ship or even the Polish Airline plane crash. Do we even remember this plane crash? It killed the the entire Polish ruling class including the President and his staff. Honestly, we still do not know the cause of the crash except that it was stormy and the plane was supposedly not in good condition. I am sure Vladimar Putin will find out-NOT! At least the Polish- Americans in general are in the loop on this monumental tragedy.
Entertainment is fun. It is important to escape from reality. However, our country seems to be too occupied with the entertainment industry too much. Our media seems to be getting worse in this area. The Tiger Woods scandal was handled very poorly. Honestly, I was never a great admirer of Tiger Woods. He is a tremendous golfer, but I found him a bit pompous and arrogant. But, the savage coverage he received for his personal indiscretions was ridiculous. What happened to the old liberal saying "what someone does in their person life was their own business"? At least this was their saying during Bill Clinton. How does a sitting President have a personal life anyway? Isn't he on call 24/7? However, in the case of Tiger Woods he needed to come out and apoligize immediately before he was to be accepted. In the case of the hated Rush Limbaugh, he was called to be put in prison for his addiction to oxycoton due to his lower back pain and subsequent hearing loss. I remember he comitted the supposed heinous crime of DOCTOR SHOPPING! This notorious crime was far more important to the liberal media than a stupid plane crash carrying Polish people or communist countries destroying one of our country's most important ally's ship. Hey, I wonder what Jon Stewart thinks about "Ameican Idol'? Why do we care what he thinks either?

NOTE: I wrote "stupid plane crash" as sarcasm. I have a great deal of respect for the people of Poland and their continued fight for freedom and liberty against their communist oppressors!

Why is Napolitano at spill?

2010-05-25T07:11:00.000-07:00

http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm/0510/on_the_neck_00a867b3-0270-4c71-8497-ae88dd948b93.html

The above link is a video of Janet Napolitano threatening BP to fix the oil spill disaster. The immediate question that comes to mind is why is she there? Isn't she the head of homeland security? This department was created by the much vilified Bush administration as a result of the 9-11 attacks. Ken Salazar, the Interior Secretary, has every right to be there. This catastrophe is under his jurisdiction. But, unless the spill was caused by a hostile or terrorist attack, Napolitano has no business sticking her nose into this. Possibly, she considers BP an enemy combatant now because of their failure to clean up the oil spill mess. After all, this oil spill is beginning to make the administration's handling of this mess look "not so good." George Bush is not around to blame either! Ironically, the Obama administration has had a much tougher tone against BP than they do against Ahmadinejad, Chavez, Putin, Kim, or Castro. Also, they seem to have a tougher talking tone against Benyamin Netanahu and any conservative right-wing talk show host as well. Unfortunately, this tactic of demonizing BP will do nothing for cleaning up the spill any quicker. Obviously, it would have helped if the Obama administration had a plan in place for oil spill disasters in the first place!

The failure of Socialism

2010-05-22T20:25:00.000-07:00

European economic collapse

The above link is an article from the ultra-liberal New York Times earlier today about the collapse of the European economic market. The collapse is attributed to European socialist policies. Apparently, a cradle to grave national health care system, mandatory five week plus authorized against employers, and falling tax revenues due to recessionary forces leading businesses to fail. Consequently, higher unemployment occurs leading the government to lose more revenue due to having to pay more in unemployment benefits. Eventually, these benefits to the unemployed will disappear when the government eventually runs out of money. Can we say Greece anyone?
The biggest tragedy of the current worldwide crisis has been the vilifying of the free market and the capitalist system. The free market creates wealth. Entrepreneurs risk their capital in order to start a business and hope it turns successful. If it does-the business can grow. As a result, capital is created and people are hired. Admittedly, this is a simplistic explanation of capitalism, but it illustrates the obvious benefit to the economy capitalism is compared to socialism. Honestly, this is not rocket science, but the current economic crisis will only be solved with a resurgent in the free market and a decline in socialism. Are there negative points in the free market system? Yes, but unlike socialism, the positives outweigh the negatives by far. No, this is not a far right wing talking point-its a reality! Again, just look at whats happening in Europe. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/23/world/europe/23europe.html?hp

Was this a creation of David Axelrod?

2010-05-18T21:21:00.000-07:00

I found this strategically placed AP Story http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-national/20100518/US.Wright.Obama/ article tonight on the comcast news site tonight. Why is this story coming out now? Supposedly, there is a rift between Reverand Wright and President Obama-NONSENSE! The election midterms are coming soon-so its time for Obama to pretend to be moderate. Reverend Wright claimed in this "supposed" letter that "Obama threw him under the bus". Are we supposed to believe that Reverend Wright really gave a damn about Obama distancing himself from him? Obama sat at this man's church for over a dozen years. Was he not paying attention to the hateful rhetoric this man was uttering? Reverend Wright is smart politically. He understood full well why Obama had to distance himself. I am sure Obama had Rev. Wright's blessing to distance himself. Do you think Reverend Wright voted for Hillary or McCain in the various campaign battles in Illinois? BTW- I am sure Bill Ayres was not offended either by Obama's perceived rejection of him. One principle that has guided Obama's success is "the ends justifies the means".
Anyway, back to my original question-"why is this story coming out tonight"? The answer is David Axelrod wants this story released by the puppets of the mainstream media to make Obama appear as a moderate. Also, this story comes out as Arlen Specter loses the Democratic primary battle with Obama's supposed backing. http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-politics/20100516/US.Pennsylvania.Senate/
As a conservative, I will not fall into the trap that this was a political defeat for Obama. It was not! Specter was a useful idiot for the Obama administration. In fact, Joe Sestak is much more in lock step with the Obama administration goals. Obviously, Spectre, a former Republican, cannot be trusted. But, Obama's phony support of Spectre makes him look more moderate and open-minded which the mainstream media will keep reminding us until November.

Are 9-11 Truthers a threat to National Security?

2010-05-06T18:14:00.000-07:00

Honestly, I have always looked upon the 9-11 truthers as a bunch of left-wing nuts. Ironically, they are the ones always calling into question the US government's role in the 9-11 attacks. Perhaps-I should clarify and say the Bush administration's role in the 9-11 attacks. Conspiracy whackos have always been around, but this particular breed of whackiness seems to be going in a very dangerous direction. The recent Pentagon attack featuring three people getting shot by a 9-11 truther is cause for alarm. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2010/03/05/DI2010030501241.html I must stress it was a 9-11 truther and not a tea party person who did the shooting. The two groups are political opposites. The truthers are led by Jesse Ventura, Rosie Odonnell and Charlie Sheen. Obviously, they are very far to the left end of the political spectrum.
The truther movement consists basically of people who are bored and very unhappy with their own existence. They want to create a new level of excitement aimed at their social and political enemies. As a result, a new quasai religion has developed amongst insecure misfits who really do not belong to any defined religion. There is a common thread or demoniator these people hold-hatred of conservative or Christian individuals. Perhaps the very close election of George Bush over Al Gore has driven some these left wing psychopaths to the brink. Who Knows? The fact is this once laughable movement has turned into a national security threat. Ironically, these people make the most grotesque accusations against their political enemies without any thought to their own credibility. Lets look at the pentagon shooter-John Patrick Beddell. He had many personal issues, but was a devout 9-11 truther. Next, I mentioned the three celebrities. These three celebrities are the last people that should pass judgement upon anyone. Their personal lives are a mess. Drug problems and wife(two wives) beating issues have plagued Charlie Sheen. Jesse Ventura was one of the worst governors in American history. Yet, he still feels he can spout out about political issues and the 9-11 conspiracy featuring Bush and Rumsfeld. I wonder if Mr. Ventura would take a test for steroids even now because his angry Bush hating conspiracy outbursts are not healthy. Finally, Rosie Odonnell has issues herself. She touts the gay marriage movement yet she cannot stay in a solid relationship. Again-she feels compelled to judge others especially Christian conservatives.
Finally, the 9-11 truthers need to quit making allegations that are baseless and have disproven numerous times. Today, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran called the 9-11 attacks a big lie. What is the common thread behind Ahmadinejad and the truthers-they both blame the Jews. This man has been financing Al Quaeda and now he is agreeing with the "truthers". This is a significant and very troublesome link between the truthers and Al Quaeda. Perhaps, the truthers have created a much bigger mess for themselves than they could have imagined. To think this all started as a fun-loving Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld fishing trip. Jesse we love you brother, but treason by a former Navy Seal is disgraceful BROTHER!

The Chicago Bears-Still the best team in the NFL!

2009-11-28T06:18:00.000-08:00

I am tired of the so-called experts and the accompanying irrelevant win-loss record determining who is the best team in the NFL!Some of the most "intelligent" sports minds had the Bears winning the Super Bowl. These minds are much more intelligent than your "Average Joe Fan". Yes-it appears at times that the Bears and Jay Cutler look "less than perfect" at times, but appearances can be deceiving. First, Jay Cutler was recently diagnosed with diabetes-so we must take this into consideration! Any decent open-minded person understands that this is a major factor in the naysayers taking away from Jay's brilliance. Jay is very courageous for playing at all. Interceptions are an overrated statistic as well. Also, the Bears have been without Brian Urlacher which the Bear naysayers have overlooked. Obviously, I am not a football sports writer, but the Bear detracters will bring up their irrelevant win-loss record, their less "than perfect play" at times and their lack of scoring in the dreaded "red zone",yet another overrated statistic. Obviously, we need the guidance of the "true" football experts to explain why the Bears are still clearly the best team in the NFL! The number of Bear fans overall who believe they will win the Super bowl has decined somewhat, but it seems a miracle that there are any Bear believers at all with the unfair media coverage and the constant dwelling the win-loss record. Finally, today's global warming article by Froma Harrop http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_froma_harrop/whom_can_you_trust_on_climate_change inspired me to write this post concerning the Chicago Bears. I want to thank Froma for the "intelligent insight" I needed to write my article today! In fact, I feel proud of myself in one respect-I did not even mention the other factor for the naysayers bigotry against the Bear's brilliance might be the fact the Head Coach Lovie Smith is African American!

Jesse and E2-A Children's book for everyone

2009-10-24T15:58:00.000-07:00

My latest article will be presented in the form of a children's book featuring Jesse Jackson and the E2 nightclub.

The E2 nightclub was a wonderful hangout for young African American youths to meet and party together.

Reverand Jesse Jackson liked to visit this establishment very much. In fact, Jesse and the owners were best of friends.

One day the fire inspector visited this fine establishment and found numerous fire violations. The inspector wanted to close the e2 nightclub because he felt it was unsafe and might cause disaster down the road.

" Aaaarghhh!!!" Jesse Jackson proclaimed! "I demand this club stay open! In fact, if you even attempt to close the E2, I will sue you for racism!" Jesse declared in his authoratative voice.

The Fire Inspector knew full well about Jesse's power and his ability to turn decent people into a public disgrace by declaring the person or the organization racist.

Consequently, The E2 nightclub remained open and everyone was happy-for the time being.

Then, on a cold winter night in early 2003, the unthinkable happened. Twenty one African Americans were trampled to death due to the overcrowded condition of the club. Also, many people were injured as well.http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/Midwest/02/18/btsc.flock/

Jesse was saddened by the tragedy but made it clear that he had nothing to do with this preventable tragedy.

The media and the like minded crime investigators decided to give the Reverand and his E2 owner friends a mulligan so that they could be portrayed as bad racist people either.

In fact, the media needed Jesse to continue to sound the alarm on any agitator, particularly the meany conservative republican who might say or do something that Jesse finds unacceptable.

Besides, Jesse was able to cry and be emotional about the tragedy-wasn't that enough?

The "Special Needs" African American

2009-10-21T18:27:00.000-07:00

One of the questions the liberal left often asked the Bush administration during the Iraq war was-what is the exit strategy? This question was asked only a few months into the war back in 2003. Eventually, this question continued to linger and eventually led to the Dem takeover of Congress in 2006 and the White House victory of the "Messiah" Barrack Obama in 2008. This question was legimate, but unfortunately has not applied to affirmative action or welfare. Affirmative action has been pretty much the law of the land since 1965. http://www.infoplease.com/spot/affirmativetimeline1.html. On the whole, African Americans have benefitted the most by this policy. My question is when will the plug be pulled on a policy that forces businesses to give jobs to people based on the perceived color of skin or ethnic origin? Isn't over forty years of supposedly correcting a social wrong long enough? But, I am considered a "racist" by Alec Baldwin because I am a conservative white guy who believes these affirmative action programs need to be phased out. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqt-uenG1k8.
Ok-Mr. Baldwin why do you call conservatives racist? Is it because we are disgusted with the violence in many inner city African American communities and want a change in the failed liberal policies of the past forty plus years? How could conservative ideaology do any worse that the failed liberal policies that have prevailed? Finally, why is the focus of attention for the horrendous conditions aimed at conservatives like Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage or Sean Hannity in the first place? What does a comment about the media going gaga over Donovan McNabb, a multi millionaire athlete, because he is an African American quarterback have to do with the continued inner city strife that exists and still exists in the African American community? In fact, isn't the liberal left and Alec Baldwin using the conservativism as a scape goat or diverting attention from the REAL problems in the African American community? Obviously, yes, in fact-conservatism ideaology has been a very successful political football for the liberal left and the Dem party for a long time.
For once, lets examine the motives of liberals. First, why do white liberals like Alec Baldwin or Bill Maher believe in continued affirmative action programs mainly focused upon the African Ameican community? Is it because they believe that African Americans need their legislative help to succeed? Does Alec Baldwin believe that African Americans still need Affirmative Action after forty plus years because they have "special needs"? If so, why am I-the conservative considered the racist to believe otherwise? Isn't this liberal white thinking a bit condescending towards their fellow African American constituent? Second, lets be honest-the real reason African Americans vote 90 % Democrat over Republican is because they enjoy the unfair advantage they have obtained because of affirmative action and race-based social programs. Its always nice to have something hanging over one's head to gain an advantage. In the short run, its wonderful to get perks because of your skin color and social situation. However, in the long run, the situation in the African American community has gotten much worse with increased gang violence, increased drug abuse, increased violence and overall degradation of family. Again-what does Rush Limbaugh, myself, or Michael Savage have to do with this continually increasing horrific scenario in the African American community? Finally, I ask again -what is the exit strategy to Affirmative Action and other race based social programs? These programs have existed for over forty plus years and if you even utter a syllable against these programs being eliminated-you are a racist. If you are African American and talk about elimination of these programs-you are an "Uncle Tom". I guess this isn't considered racist at this time. Hopefully, the REAL focus of the argument can shift to the REAL racists like Alec Baldwin and Bill Maher. Until then, the African American community will continue to suffer.

What exactly is mainstream? Why is it considered COOL?

2009-10-07T20:14:00.000-07:00

Who decides what is mainstream? Is it Whoopie Goldberg or Charlie Gibson? Is it David Letterman or Jay Leno? If so, why are they considered mainstream? With the exception of Jay Leno possibly, the other three people are very dysfunctional and appear to be very unhappy with their everyday life. Everyone of these people "hate" the rich and believe they should be punished with at least an 80 percent income tax. This belief proves my point because these celebrities are multi-millionaires many times over. Again-why are people like this considered mainstream? First, they are super rich and famous and have no clue what the average struggling American goes through each day. Second, they base their opinions on what they perceive to be reality. In reality, these people have no clue whatsoever. Honestly, Whoopie looks at life through the acquired liberal stereotypical view that most white people who do not believe in affirmative action or social programs for the poor mainly black and some hispanic people are in fact and must be racist. In reality, its the acquired liberal stereotypical view that is indeed racist. But, I am sure Whoopie will point out to some of her movies that prove me wrong. Unfortunately, a movie is NOT reality! Hopefully, the REAL mainstream of America is beginning to figure this out. Finally, isn't their something wrong with the mainstream thinking when we have looked up to a morally reprehensible human being like David Letterman for the past thirty years as our late night icon? How did he become so popular and looked up to? I guess divulging his affairs with staffers and making jokes about Sarah Palin and her daughters makes him pretty COOL with the mainstream of America-or does it? At least he did not rape a 13 year old like the Hollywood icon Roman Polanski-hey Whoopie already explained that this action was not really rape-so he's cool. At least the very mainstream news anchor Charlie Gibson knows about ACORN now-or does he?
Back to my original question-what exactly is mainstream? Is there even a mainstream? Aren't we all individuals and original thinkers? Don't we all have likes and dislikes? In fact, who or what decides mainstream? Where did this term come from? I was taught to believe "not to care" what other people think about you. So, if you are out of the "mainstream" does this make you a bad person? As a conservative, I often believe I am out the media created term "mainstream". If so, not being in the perceived "mainstream of America" and the world for that matter must be a very good thing indeed!

Under Obama's thumb-the irrelevancy of Hillary Clinton

2009-09-11T18:32:00.001-07:00

It should be pretty obvious now that Barrack Obama selected Hillary Clinton to make her permanently impotent as a political force. Why Hillary accepted the Secretary of State post is beyond me? I thought she was one of the most intelligent women in the world? If so, why did she agree to be Secretary of State under the man who took her "right" to be the next President of the United States. Wasn't she concerned that he appointed her to control her and be her boss. Also, he appointed her to get her out of his way. Hillary had a powerful position as the Senator of New York. At least as senator she could have much more power into Obama policy.
Ok-What exactly is Hillary's job as Secretary of State? What has she accomplished? Actually, her husband and ex-President Bill Clinton has accomplished more in one day than Hillary has during her eight month reign as Secretary of State. Bill Clinton was able to get the release of two reporters in North Korea. Obviously, this annoyed Hillary with her outburst with the Congolese student in Africa when he asked innocently about her husband. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090812/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_clinton_i_m_secretary On the other hand, Hillary's most memorable moment was her reset button gaffe. http://famewatcher.com/2009/03/hillary-clinton-reset-button-gaffe.html. I must admit she gave the Russian leaders a big laugh, but I am not sure that this is what she wants to be "famous" for as Secretary of State. Actually, I wonder sometimes if Obama has dual role as Secretary of State and President. Obama has attended numerous summits with top world leaders in North America, South America, and Europe. Obama's travels have been numerous and record setting. Why has Hillary not Obama been more involved in these meetings? Isn't this her job? Today, Obama announced he cannot attend the visit to Denmark to tout Chicago's bid for the Olympics. So, who does he appoint to represent the US to tout Chicago for the bid? Obviously, we all expected Hillary Clinton to bring the bid to Chicago-after all she did grow up in the Chicago area. But, No-he chose his wife Michelle to bring the bid to Chicago. Again- what is the relevancy of Hillary Clinton as Secreatry of State? Why couldn't Hillary try to get Chicago the Olympic bid? In fact, This was another Obama "screw you" to Hillary to use his wife in a situation the Hillary was better suited for-one would think anyway. Again-if Hillary cannot be used in this situation-what exactly is her duty as Secretary of State? Is she just a figure head? It appears so. Finally, Obama's best revenge against Hillary's audacity to run her vigorous presidential campaign against him is to keep her under his clutches. When will Hillary figure this part out? I think she has already, but is now under Obama's thumb.

Obama School Speech Changed

2009-09-07T19:41:00.000-07:00

It a funny thing-on my last blog-I was expecting an Obama indoctrination, but instead its an Obama pep talk. Hmmm? On Friday-Robert Gibbs was mocking those concerned parents and conservative talkers who were demonizing Obama on this school speech. Honestly, I seem to remember there was going to be more mandatory assignments with the students concerning the importance of the new President and such. Suddenly, it has turned into a school pep talk on attendance and to make sure you the student "wash your hands". The transcript of the speech came out today-the day before the speech. Is it possible it might have changed to make "right wing people" like me look silly? If so, I wish they would try this strategy on the health care plan. On second thought, they might be. Socialists will never surrender. In the case of Obama-he might momentarily retreat, but he and his leftist chorts will always try to indoctrinate us with their socialism. Consequently, the American people need to stay vigilante even if sometimes they appear "silly". Its much better to appear "silly" than be "oppressed"!

My Solution to the School speech controversy

2009-09-05T18:54:00.000-07:00

One of the liberal left's criticism of talk radio is that it needs to be evened out with more liberal talkers. Ofcourse, this criticism ignores the fact that the people in the media vote 90% democratic. Now, the liberal left is astonished by Obama's upcoming speech to the school children is coming under srutiny by those dastardly conservatives and republicans. Do we remember the left's conipsion fits over prayer in school? Better yet, imagine if George Bush decided to make a speech on the importance of tax cuts and less government in our lives? Would these same hippocrites on the left be silent and willing to go ahead with his speech? In fact, why was not this question asked of Robert Gibbs at his recent press conference when he mocked the concerned American parents over there unwillingness to let Obama spew his partisan propoganda around?
Ok-as promised-I have a solution to the Obama speech. We let Obama speak, but we have an equal time rebuttal from Dick Cheney, Rush Limbaugh or whoever the Republicans decide. Obviously, John McCain, Bill Kristol, or Olympia Snowe would be excluded from the rebuttal because they are moderates and are afraid of offending anyone. On the other hand, the school children can see public disagreement in full force. The children can decide who makes the better argument with their parents and teachers attending. Teachers can discuss the issues presented, but should be forbidden from expressing their opinion since they are there to teach and NOT indoctrinate! On the other hand, parents can discuss the issues with their children and use THEIR VALUES to help the student make up their mind-NOT THE SCHOOL'S VALUES!

The Bush moderates betrayal

2009-08-23T10:10:00.000-07:00

I find it interesting the former Bush cabinet members and spokepeople are coming out against former President Bush "well after the fact." Colin Powell, Scott McClellan, and now Tom Ridge have come out against George Bush with their negative experiences. My question is why now? Tom Ridge is the latest dissenter against George W. Bush. Supposedly, he was forced to push these terror alerts. If so, what harm did this action do? At that time, it was understandable since we had been attacked on 9-11-01. Apparently, these disgruntled former Bush people now find it necessary to come out and attack the former President again. Suddenly, the same leftist media and political elite are taking the word of these Bush traitors at 100% face value. But, these same people were often ridiculed and ostracized by the very same liberal leftist naysayers when they were working under Bush. I recall Colin Powell being called an Uncle Tom and Bush's House Negro(G-version). Why the change in tone by both parties? Perhaps-there is money to be made and the libs need to play the Bush card once again to protect against Obama's incompetence. Colin Powell has gained immediate credibility railing against Bush and Rush Limbaugh. Former Press Secretary Scott McClellan wrote a Bush-bashing book which was acclaimed by all in the Bush-hating media. At least, I hope the suddenly "relevant" Tom Ridge can obtain the finances and fame he so desperately needs in these tough economic times. George Soros pays Bush traitors very well I am sure.

Forcing Socialized Medicine!

2009-08-07T20:27:00.000-07:00

Do we remember when we were kids and our Mom forced us to eat our peas or mashed potatoes whether we like the food or not? In my case, my Mom eventually figured out that I did not like peas or mashed potatoes. As a result, I was able to eat substitute food that I enjoyed. The great thing about the USA is that we have the freedom to choose our doctors and get the immediate healthcare when we need it. Personally, I am very happy with my insurance company I have from work. There is a wide range of doctors to choose from with the network of doctors we have to choose from.
As I have watched the past few weeks go by concerning the health care debate-I am horrified. Why is this terrible Obama plan of socialized medicine being forced down our throats? Why are the people protesting being ripped apart instead of listened to. My Mom finally realized I did not like peas or mashed potatoes. So, why is Obama and the democrat party trying force this horrible health care plan down the American public's throat? This plan is not wanted just look at the polls-any poll! In fact, most American are happy with their current health care plans, but yet Obama and Pelosi want to ram this ill-conceived plan down our throats as quickly as possible. Why? This is not the American way. I do not care who controls the presidency or Congress. Obama made the childish statement "I don't want the folks who created the mess to do a lot of talking. I want them to get out of the way so we can clean the mess up." My question is what mess was there in health care since most people are happy with their health care?
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/august_2009/confidence_in_u_s_health_care_system_has_grown_in_recent_months
Hopefully, Obama and the democrats will quit looking at this terrible health care as something they need to force down the American public's throat. The plan needs to be shortened and modified significantly. The plan needs to focus on the uninsured. They need to leave the insured people who are very happy alone! Why is this a difficult concept to understand? If the democrats continue on this path and ignore the will of the American people, our country will be in trouble in more ways than one.

Obama's contradiction in Iran

2009-06-14T09:00:00.000-07:00

http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed1/idUSTRE55B4SG20090612 http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/us_us_iran/2009/06/14/224963.html

Above are two links illustrating the lack of understanding Obama has in Iranian politics. The first link is from Friday June 12, 2009 before the Iranian election. Apparently, President Obama was excited about the prospect of a very close election with the people's vote deciding legimately the outcome of the election. Unfortunately, Obama's naive optimism on the Iran elections was proven 100% false. The second link I have posted above proves this. Actually, the news stories about the riots and accusations of a "rigged" election also proves this. How could Obama and his administration been so wrong on this matter? Do they not follow the history of Iran? Were they being hopeful that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would be defeated by the more moderate Mirhossein Mousavi? If so, they could not have been more wrong! BTW-where is Hillary Clinton on this matter?

Missing link found!

2009-05-19T19:32:00.000-07:00

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090519/ap_on_sc/ancient_primate;_ylt=Aiwvasn2Qo4GTicqdtjEMgUPLBIF

Above is the link to the missing link! Yes, it must be that time for scientists to come up with a finding to get that grant money. They need this to continue to prove evolution is a fact. The obvious question becomes how can evolution be a fact when scientists are still try to find more proof. But, I am an ignorant Christian so who am I to question the motives. Ben Stein tried to question their motives and look at all the threats he received. I am sure if President Obama comes out and calls "evolution" a fact we can all be happy. After all, he is the "messiah".
Honestly, I cannot understand why there is so much angst in the scientific community to prove evolution? Again-if its a fact-why are we still searching for more answers on the subject? The latest finding looks like some type of creature with a tail. How this can be construed as the "missing link" boggles my mind. "Creative thinking" plays a major part in some of these discoveries. Often, an old bone found by an archaeologist is turned into cromagnum man or whoever. How can a scientist can up with this type of image from the finding a bone? Is this science or politics?

Useful idiot-Arlen Specter- Betraying his constituents

2009-05-04T16:03:00.000-07:00

Honestly, I have never been an Arlen Specter fan. His latest move of switching parties reminds me of a spoiled child throwing a temper tantrum because he did not get his way on the stimulous vote. Arlen Specter has been a Pennsylvania senator since 1981. The Republican party has gotten him elected with their financial support and political influence. Needless to say-Arlen Specter could not have been elected dog catcher without the backing of the Republican party. Arlen has prided himself on being an Independent thinker, but in reality the man is hollow and pointless. His latest move of switching parties because he will be trounced in the upcoming Republican primary proves this. In the past, Arlen has gotten away with voting against his party's wishes, but this made him an Independent thinker. Also, the supposed "moderate wing" of the Republican party would usually vote for him. He barely pulled out the primary in the last election, but his voting for the stimulous against the vast majority of republican voter's wishes doomed him for sure this time. So, Arlen, like a little spoiled brat left the "mean" Republican party and joined the democratic party.
Obviously, the democratic party has welcomed Arlen with open arms. President Barrack Obama(wink wink) has offered to campaign for Arlen Specter against the Republican candidate. I have no doubt that Barrack Obama will campaign for Arlen Specter in the general election against the most likely Republican candidate Pat Toomey. What Specter fails to realize is that it is very unlikely he will be the democratic nominee for Senate in 2010. Basically, Specter is just a means to an end for the Democratic party to get their majority to the magic number of 60. This looks likely now with Al Franken stealing the election away from Norm Coleman. Currently, the media "loves" Arlen Specter, but they will not in the spring of 2010 when the Democratic primary comes about. In fact, Arlen might be surprised when he is snubbed by the Democratic party. I bet the Dems will endorse a more youthful and liberal candidate. Obama will stay out of this part.
In the meantime, shouldn't Arlen Specter be required to give all his campaign donations to Republican party that got him elected in 2004? Isn't his defection in the middle of his term similar to LeBron James deciding to switch teams and playing for the Atlanta Hawks in their next playoff series? The only difference is that Hawks would very much like to have LeBron forever unlike the Democrats. In 2010, he will no longer be useful to the Democrats. In the end, he will become a "loser" in more ways than one.

The Swine Flu-Obama's Katrina

2009-04-29T18:29:00.000-07:00

The Obama administration has handled the swine flu situation very poorly. My statement is based on a variety of actions or in the case of the Obama administration inactions that have occurred. Unfortunately, the Obama administration's main focus is not to contain the virus, but to make Obama look good. Obviously, closing the borders to Mexico and stopping the food trade would hurt Obama with his illegal immigration political groups whom he relies upon so heavily for votes. Obama owes these people greatly! So, closing the borders and stopping trade even in a time of a deadly flu outbreak is unheard of. Perhaps, if Obama can act like he cares, this will over overshadow his and his administration's incompetence. Also, it helps that Obama is blessed with a mainstream media that is in Love with him. The press conference tonight was a great example of this. Fox news had the nerve not to pre-empt its regular TV station's primetime program. Obama got even by not asking any Foxnews people any questions at the press conference.
My main reason for believing that the swine flu crisis has been handled poorly is because the administration is completely unprepared. The virus originated in Mexico and at that point the borders should have been closed immediately and travel stopped. Also, the Obama administration should have had a contingency plan in place in case something like this occurred. Obviously, he does not. It seems like the Obama administration is playing this by happenings day to day. I am sure the Bush administration wishes they could have gotten such a pass by the media on Katrina as the Obama administration has gotten so far on their handling of this crisis. Officially, the swine flu crisis was announced to the public by the government on Friday, April 24, but the swine flu was recognized in Mexico on Apri 12. http://www.reuters.com/article/lifestyleMolt/idUSTRE53S92V20090429 Could action by the Obama administration at this time helped minimize or stop the spread of this virus? The USA could have helped Mexico with our superior health care and science. Now, my next question is when did the Obama administration first know about the virus and why did they fail to act? In fact, why did they conceal these findings until April 24? On April 16 Obama made contact with Felipe Solis, a distinquished archaeologist, when he visited Mexico. Mr. Solis died of the flu the next day. How come this occurrence was not reported in the media until over a week later? How could Obama have not been aware of the swine flu at that time? If he did not know, what does this say about the cluelessness of his administration? Unfortunately, Obama cannot use the 'Bush card' on this one.
Speaking of Bush, his presidency sufferred greatly because of his supposed unpreparedness of Katrina. For arguments sake, I will agree with everything the left-wing media criticized Bush for being incompetent and unprepared. However, the same can now be said of the Obama administration for this flu. When it comes to health care, Mexico compared to the United States was ill equipped to handle this crisis. Unfortunately, the Obama administration like the Bush administration with Katrina was not ready to handle this crisis at the critical time. Perhaps the Obama administration could have given Mexico valuable assistance and closed the borders and had travel restrictions to stop the spread. Now, all the Obama administration can do is hope and pray the disease will fizzle out. The saddest part of this fiasco is when asked if the Obama administration is confident it can stop the spread of the disease instead of "yes we can" we have heard "no we can't-its too late to stop the virus". Obama needs to be exoriated by the media and the public if no other reason to make sure we are prepared for the next virus regardless of who the President is!

Hillary-The pot calling the kettle black

2009-04-22T12:31:00.000-07:00

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090422/ts_nm/us_usa_clinton_cheney

The above link is a yahoo article of Hillary Clinton blasted Dick Cheney calling him "not a reliable source." Hmm-I seem to remember Hillary Clinton saying she was named after Sir Edmund Hillary once. The problem here is that when Sir Edmond Hillary climbed Mount Everest for the first time ever-Hillary was five years old. Also, I seem to remember Hillary explaining very unsatisfactorily her making $100,000 on a $1000 investment for the futures market in just 10 months. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1707731/posts. Also, can we remember her involvement in Whitewater or the travel scandal? Yet, now she feels compelled to pretty much call former VP Dick Cheney a liar and an unreliable source. If so, does this mean that Barrack Obama will not release the ENTIRE report? While at the same time try to prosecute Bush people for torture? Actually, one of the already released memos on May 30, 2005 praises the interrogations for stopping terrorist attacks from occurring in 9-11-01. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/20/AR2009042002818.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
If Hillary Clinton believes that the Bush administration is guilty of torture, what does she believe about her husband? I seem to remember the carpet bombing of Bosnia killing many people and yes he bombed Saddam Hussein and Iraq many times too. Yes, many people died too. Also, I seem to remember Timothy McVeigh getting executed in record time. The problem here is that I had thought the Clinton administration was anti-death penalty? Yet, McVeigh was executed in record time with no objections from the usual dem suspects. Believe me, I have no sympathy whatsoever for McVeigh, but I find it interesting that he was put to death so quickly. Was his death torturous or painless? Honestly, I would have been interested to have seen him water boarded because perhaps we might have learned why the Clinton administration FAILED to stop him? Also, why were there three suspects originally? Yet- then he became the only one.
The credibility of Dick Cheney has been questioned at times and understandably so. He was vice-president and suffered setbacks, but he was a major force in keeping the United States SAFE since 9-11. On the other hand, Hillary is no position whatsoever to question Cheney's reliability on national security issues or on torture! Ask the lucky few who survived the Waco fire about this! I do not recall the Bush adminitration attacking his own country men or women either.

Obama risks US safety for trashing Bush

2009-04-20T19:37:00.000-07:00

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090421/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama_cia

Above is the link to the article of Obama's excuse for releasing the Bush-era memos concerning torture of Al Quaeda operatives. Obviously, this plays heavily to the rabid left wing base who continue to hate the ex-President with a fervent passion despite the fact he is no longer President. Lets make no mistake about this-the Obama administration will continue to play the Bush card as long as it can. Amongst the many Bush haters are in the Dem party mainly, but some exist in the Republican party as well-this hatred could last a very long time. Honestly, the Bush hating tactic will always keep the heat off of Obama.
The latest tactic of Obama of releasing top secret classified documents on the torture technique will undoubtedly weaken the United States significantly. However, it plays to the rabid left wing base of the Dem party perfectly. Also, it might play well to the middle of the roaders who are against torture also. Ironically,many of these same people are for abortion. I guess sucking a baby's brains out and pouring saline solution on its vulnerable body is ok if the baby is unborn or almost born as in the case of a partial birth abortion. I digress, but I think my digression illustrates liberal idiocy.
Finally, if we are not allowed to use water boarding or other important interrogation techniques to get important information out of terrorists(yes I still call them terrorists), how are we ever again going to be effective in the war on islamo-facism terrorism? In fact, how are we going to be effective extracting any information on anyone? Former VP-Dick Cheney(stated on Sean Hannity's show) wants Obama to release all of the classified documents now. He wants the documents showing that waterboarding and the other interrogation techniques provided crucial information in capturing other America hating terrorists and in stopping future terrorists attacks that likely would have occurred since 2002. Will Obama put aside his partisan politics and release that part of the CIA report which makes the Bush adminitration look heroic? Honestly, I doubt it because Obama could look bad if these memos show that the Bush administration actually did something positive or effective. In the meantime, screw the national security issue-its much more important to make Obama look good and Bush to look like the evil incompetent buffoon the left needs to feed on. After all, why would we be attacked again? Obama is the Messiah and loved by all or at least by everyone that matters .