As you may recall, I predicted the stock market would tank big time even after the election, if Senator Obama were to be elected.
As you can see, it has been tanking almost constantly, having lost more than 16% of the market's entire value just since the election.
To put this in perspective, this is the first time ever in the history of the stock market (about 200 years) that it went down after a presidential election. An election - regardless of who wins - usually creates an upsurge, as investors determine and can guess the likely future, now that they know who will lead.
Apparently, that is not the case this time. No one - particularly investors - know, or can predict what Obama and a Democrat congress might do. The people are worried about that. And investors do not invest when they have no way of predicting the possible future. They are investors, not mindless gamblers.
And so the economy follows suit, and continues to tank.
Just remember - you heard it here first - as far back as last summer, when this blog predicted this.
We also predicted Obama would fill positions with left-wing partisans and Washington Insiders, instead of the "change" he promised. To date, 75% of his appointments are Clintonites, Washington insiders and Chicago politicians. So much for "change". The only change seems to be back to old worn-out retreads of the 90's.
Now for the bad news - we predicted a McCain win would result in a hard, but not-so-long recession, but an Obama win would predicate a destructive depression.
This is one time I hope I am wrong...but don't bank on it!
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Saturday, November 15, 2008
The REAL Reason McCain Lost
Many wonder how a war hero with a sound record of "working across the aisle" lost so handily and completely to an unknown with no record, and very suspicious radical ties.
Some say it was because of the economy. Some, because he belonged to the same party as Bush. And some say it was because America has taken an abrupt left turn.
All of them are wrong.
Of course, the economy and the Bush legacy damaged McCain, and would have damaged any Republican to some degree. But McCain allowed those things to hurt him far more than was necessary. And America, by all polls, is still right of center. So, just why DID McCain lose so badly?
He lost because he betrayed the conservative base that is the strength of the GOP. He tried so hard to encompass moderates, and the so-called "Reagan Democrats" that he lost the support of many Republicans.
I have heard from thousands of Republicans who chose not to vote for McCain because they were still angry that he tried so hard - and sneakily - to betray conservative values concerning immigration. And throughout the campaign, they waited with baited breath to hear him say, "I was wrong - that was not the answer." But he never did recant his position.
And they waited, and hoped he would finally admit that his "McCain-Feingold" bill was a huge mistake. But in spite of being handicapped because of it, he stood by it.
And they waited for McCain to get angry about the debacle in the financial sector. They waited to hear him say he would find the responsible parties and hold them accountable - jail, not bail. But he remained silent, and even contributed to passing the hated bail-out bill.
Well, Senator McCain, if you kick your supporters often enough just to try and win a few "moderate" votes that there is little chance of winning, you will lose. And you did lose. You lost the country for the same reason you lost Pennsylvania - you invested too much into trying to win votes that you just could not win. By courting moderate Democrats, you lost Republicans - and still did not get the Democrats. You tried to win 50,000 Pennsylvania Democrats - and it cost you 50,000 Republicans, and you still did not get those Democrats. So, you lost.
And so did many other so-called Republicans who also lost their way. And the GOP will continue to lose until they wake up, and return to their roots, because that is where their stength is.
The GOP has to remember one simple tenet of business - you trade nickles for dimes, not vice versa. If you are going to dump 50,000 Republican votes, you had damned well better be certain you are getting more than that from the other side. And in politics, that simply is not possible.
As of now, there are precious few Republicans capable of rebuilding the party - Palin, Steele, Gingrich, Jundal, DeMint. That's about it.
And as of now, the "elitist" members of the GOP who have ruined the party these last 10 years are fighting hard to hold on, and working to destroy the very Republicans who can save the party.
Unless the PEOPLE of the GOP stand up and demand change, the liberal socialists will continue to rule.
/
Some say it was because of the economy. Some, because he belonged to the same party as Bush. And some say it was because America has taken an abrupt left turn.
All of them are wrong.
Of course, the economy and the Bush legacy damaged McCain, and would have damaged any Republican to some degree. But McCain allowed those things to hurt him far more than was necessary. And America, by all polls, is still right of center. So, just why DID McCain lose so badly?
He lost because he betrayed the conservative base that is the strength of the GOP. He tried so hard to encompass moderates, and the so-called "Reagan Democrats" that he lost the support of many Republicans.
I have heard from thousands of Republicans who chose not to vote for McCain because they were still angry that he tried so hard - and sneakily - to betray conservative values concerning immigration. And throughout the campaign, they waited with baited breath to hear him say, "I was wrong - that was not the answer." But he never did recant his position.
And they waited, and hoped he would finally admit that his "McCain-Feingold" bill was a huge mistake. But in spite of being handicapped because of it, he stood by it.
And they waited for McCain to get angry about the debacle in the financial sector. They waited to hear him say he would find the responsible parties and hold them accountable - jail, not bail. But he remained silent, and even contributed to passing the hated bail-out bill.
Well, Senator McCain, if you kick your supporters often enough just to try and win a few "moderate" votes that there is little chance of winning, you will lose. And you did lose. You lost the country for the same reason you lost Pennsylvania - you invested too much into trying to win votes that you just could not win. By courting moderate Democrats, you lost Republicans - and still did not get the Democrats. You tried to win 50,000 Pennsylvania Democrats - and it cost you 50,000 Republicans, and you still did not get those Democrats. So, you lost.
And so did many other so-called Republicans who also lost their way. And the GOP will continue to lose until they wake up, and return to their roots, because that is where their stength is.
The GOP has to remember one simple tenet of business - you trade nickles for dimes, not vice versa. If you are going to dump 50,000 Republican votes, you had damned well better be certain you are getting more than that from the other side. And in politics, that simply is not possible.
As of now, there are precious few Republicans capable of rebuilding the party - Palin, Steele, Gingrich, Jundal, DeMint. That's about it.
And as of now, the "elitist" members of the GOP who have ruined the party these last 10 years are fighting hard to hold on, and working to destroy the very Republicans who can save the party.
Unless the PEOPLE of the GOP stand up and demand change, the liberal socialists will continue to rule.
/
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Say That Again?
Associated Press - "A thick brown cloud of soot, particles and chemicals stretching from the Persian Gulf to Asia threatens health and food supplies in the world, the U.N. reported Thursday, citing what it called the newest threat from global warming."
Well, now, if that don't take the cake. The UN, in its preponderance of stupidity claims that a cloud of soot and chemicals, obviously caused by human activity, is "a threat from global warming." Wow! The cloud is caused "from global warming", instead of vice versa.
So, according to the bright folks at the UN, if we stop global warming, that will prevent any further countries from polluting the atmosphere.
I think they have it backward. As usual!
Here's a thought for that prestigious bunch of international jokers - the cloud is obviously originating from the same countries that, according to the Kyoto treaty they want us to sign onto, would be exempt. So, even with Kyoto, those countries will still be creating those clouds, and global warming. So, what's the point of Kyoto?
The point, for those of you who may have missed the fine print, is not to fight global warming. Rather, it is to punish countries that are already industrialized, and have already taken vast measures to have clean air, while the polluters are left to go on polluting. America, the cleanest of the industrial nations, would be forced to shut down much manufacturing in order to comply. The manufacturing, which must still occur somewhere, will be done in these uinrestricted countries, resulting in even greater pollution.
America would lose jobs. America would be forced to spend billions. And China and India can take over as the industrial leaders of the world, polluting as they go, and raking in all the money.
If just a few short years, it will be China and India who will be the world leaders, and America would be reduced to third world status. America will have been hog-tied.
With Obama as president, and a democrat congress, you can count on them signing onto the Kyoto treaty, which will - I repeat, WILL be the downfall of America.
Well, now, if that don't take the cake. The UN, in its preponderance of stupidity claims that a cloud of soot and chemicals, obviously caused by human activity, is "a threat from global warming." Wow! The cloud is caused "from global warming", instead of vice versa.
So, according to the bright folks at the UN, if we stop global warming, that will prevent any further countries from polluting the atmosphere.
I think they have it backward. As usual!
Here's a thought for that prestigious bunch of international jokers - the cloud is obviously originating from the same countries that, according to the Kyoto treaty they want us to sign onto, would be exempt. So, even with Kyoto, those countries will still be creating those clouds, and global warming. So, what's the point of Kyoto?
The point, for those of you who may have missed the fine print, is not to fight global warming. Rather, it is to punish countries that are already industrialized, and have already taken vast measures to have clean air, while the polluters are left to go on polluting. America, the cleanest of the industrial nations, would be forced to shut down much manufacturing in order to comply. The manufacturing, which must still occur somewhere, will be done in these uinrestricted countries, resulting in even greater pollution.
America would lose jobs. America would be forced to spend billions. And China and India can take over as the industrial leaders of the world, polluting as they go, and raking in all the money.
If just a few short years, it will be China and India who will be the world leaders, and America would be reduced to third world status. America will have been hog-tied.
With Obama as president, and a democrat congress, you can count on them signing onto the Kyoto treaty, which will - I repeat, WILL be the downfall of America.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
"Winning" The Hard Way
Well, here we go again!
In the Senate race in Minnesota, the Republican, Coleman, beat Democrat challenger Al Franken. However, because it was close, there must be an automatic recount.
Suddenly, hundreds of "new" ballots are popping up out of thin air - all favoring Franken. One ballot counter (a Democrat, by the way), suddenly found a bunch of absentee ballots in the trunk of her car - all were mysteriously for Franken. And what, pray tell, were they even doing in her trunk? And the town of Mountain Iron suddenly recorded an extra 100 votes, all for Franken, AFTER the election. Since these are taped in that municipality, they were asked to produce the tape for verification. And guess what? The tape was dated November 2nd - so it was created even before election day, though the 100 new votes appeared on Nov. 6th.
So far, there have been numerous instances of ballots mysteriously coming to light, all favoring Franken. How can that be? Frankly, it CANNOT be.
And now it comes to light that the guy in charge of the recount - another Democrat - is affiliated with the group ACORN, which has already been shown to be involved in voter fraud.
It is high time that we, the people stood up and demand that voting be cleaned up, once and for all. Get ACORN out of this entirely. Prohibit anything that even so much as provides an opportunity for fraud. Force each municipality, county and state to be accountable for accuracy in voter regfistration, and control of ballots. If the chain of evidence is broken, as in the case of those ballots found in a trunk, the ballot does not get counted. Period.
As for the "motor voter" law the Democrats and ACORN pushed through in many states, it should be outlawed for several reasons. First, it encourages fraud when a person can register and vote at the same time, so the registration cannot be verified as legitimate. And it does not allow for new information coming to light in the late stages of the campaign - if a person votes in September, and it comes to light in October that the candidate is a criminal, it is too late. The ballot cannot be changed.
I believe we should all have one week in which to vote (except legitimate absentees, who may vote earlier), and registration must be at least 3 months prior to an election. In this manner, illegal registrations can be ferreted out before fraud can be committed. Voter fraud cannot occur without voter registration fraud.
ACORN says such measures would keep the poor from voting. I fail to see how. If the poor can show up to register in September, they can show up to register in July. If they can show up to vote in September, they can show up to vote in November. The ONLY reason ACORN and the DNC wants the motor-voter laws to stand is so they can intimidate poor people into registering AND voting all at once, to insure that they do, indeed, vote. And to provide a fertile ground for fraud - a registration filled out today cannot possibly be verified today. So allowing registration and voting simultaneously does nothing except promote fraud.
The point is clear, and this joke of an election in Minnesota proves it out - we need to take strong measures to insure honesty, integrity and legitimacy of the voting process, or we will no longer have a democracy.
I do not doubt Franken can, and probably will "win" in Minnesota, since ballots in his favor are popping up everywhere. I may even have some in my glove compartment. But if he does "win", understand that Franken, originally a comic on Saturday Night Live, will be a part of making a comedy of the entire Senate, and of our election process. How can there be any respect for anything the Senate does if it is done by people who were not democratically elected?
And the entire nation should be thoroughly ashamed of Minnesota - first, for giving a convicted tax cheat and liar more than a half dozen votes, and second for allowing the democrats to so blatantly steal the election. I do not know of a single person who believes that all of those "sudden" and "mysterious" ballots for Franken that are showing up only after the election are actually legitimate.
Franken is an un-funny comic. But the comedy of the Minnesota election process is even less funny!
/
In the Senate race in Minnesota, the Republican, Coleman, beat Democrat challenger Al Franken. However, because it was close, there must be an automatic recount.
Suddenly, hundreds of "new" ballots are popping up out of thin air - all favoring Franken. One ballot counter (a Democrat, by the way), suddenly found a bunch of absentee ballots in the trunk of her car - all were mysteriously for Franken. And what, pray tell, were they even doing in her trunk? And the town of Mountain Iron suddenly recorded an extra 100 votes, all for Franken, AFTER the election. Since these are taped in that municipality, they were asked to produce the tape for verification. And guess what? The tape was dated November 2nd - so it was created even before election day, though the 100 new votes appeared on Nov. 6th.
So far, there have been numerous instances of ballots mysteriously coming to light, all favoring Franken. How can that be? Frankly, it CANNOT be.
And now it comes to light that the guy in charge of the recount - another Democrat - is affiliated with the group ACORN, which has already been shown to be involved in voter fraud.
It is high time that we, the people stood up and demand that voting be cleaned up, once and for all. Get ACORN out of this entirely. Prohibit anything that even so much as provides an opportunity for fraud. Force each municipality, county and state to be accountable for accuracy in voter regfistration, and control of ballots. If the chain of evidence is broken, as in the case of those ballots found in a trunk, the ballot does not get counted. Period.
As for the "motor voter" law the Democrats and ACORN pushed through in many states, it should be outlawed for several reasons. First, it encourages fraud when a person can register and vote at the same time, so the registration cannot be verified as legitimate. And it does not allow for new information coming to light in the late stages of the campaign - if a person votes in September, and it comes to light in October that the candidate is a criminal, it is too late. The ballot cannot be changed.
I believe we should all have one week in which to vote (except legitimate absentees, who may vote earlier), and registration must be at least 3 months prior to an election. In this manner, illegal registrations can be ferreted out before fraud can be committed. Voter fraud cannot occur without voter registration fraud.
ACORN says such measures would keep the poor from voting. I fail to see how. If the poor can show up to register in September, they can show up to register in July. If they can show up to vote in September, they can show up to vote in November. The ONLY reason ACORN and the DNC wants the motor-voter laws to stand is so they can intimidate poor people into registering AND voting all at once, to insure that they do, indeed, vote. And to provide a fertile ground for fraud - a registration filled out today cannot possibly be verified today. So allowing registration and voting simultaneously does nothing except promote fraud.
The point is clear, and this joke of an election in Minnesota proves it out - we need to take strong measures to insure honesty, integrity and legitimacy of the voting process, or we will no longer have a democracy.
I do not doubt Franken can, and probably will "win" in Minnesota, since ballots in his favor are popping up everywhere. I may even have some in my glove compartment. But if he does "win", understand that Franken, originally a comic on Saturday Night Live, will be a part of making a comedy of the entire Senate, and of our election process. How can there be any respect for anything the Senate does if it is done by people who were not democratically elected?
And the entire nation should be thoroughly ashamed of Minnesota - first, for giving a convicted tax cheat and liar more than a half dozen votes, and second for allowing the democrats to so blatantly steal the election. I do not know of a single person who believes that all of those "sudden" and "mysterious" ballots for Franken that are showing up only after the election are actually legitimate.
Franken is an un-funny comic. But the comedy of the Minnesota election process is even less funny!
/
Absurdity?
In Washington DC a "humanist" group (atheists) have spent $40,000 placing ads on metro buses and elsewhere that simply say, "Why Believe In A God". They purposely chose to do this in the Christmas season, in a blatant attempt to attack Christianity once again. And the onslaught continues...
Let me start by saying I really do not care if someone chooses to be an atheist. I see that as being their problem, not mine. They are free to choose their own direction, which, as you may recall, is also the same position I have on the gay lifestyle. To each his own, and more power to them. We will all answer for our choices someday.
But I do object when anyone - gays, atheists, agnostics, democrats, liberals - anyone - chooses to belittle, insult, denigrate or otherwise complain about MY choice of direction. They need to give me the same courtesy and respect that I give them.
To reply to that humanist group's question, I would simply say this: if I were an atheist, and it turns out there is a God, I would lose BIG time! And if there is NO god, I would not gain a thing. So, as an atheist, I simply could not win, and I would have zero chance at a bright eternity. On the other hand, if I believe in God, and it turns out there IS a God, I WIN - big time. And if there is no God, I have not lost a thing. So, as a believer, I simply cannot lose.
It occurs to me that it is much smarter to choose a position in which I cannot lose, as opposed to a position in which I cannot win. Not being a complete dunce, my choice is rather apparent.
No, that is not WHY I believe in God. But it does answer the question those humanist clowns posed - it simply makes more sense to believe than to not believe. As the story about that ad wore on, some folks supported their position of non-belief with the tired expanation that religion damages society, and religion has caused many atrocities. They simply do not understand that religion can "do" nothing. PEOPLE do things. Religions are not "bad" just because some people use and abuse them to serve their own agendas. That is not the fault of religion - it is the failing of Man.
They also fail to realize that, without religion, we are no better than animals. It is religion, alone, that provides society with boundaries of right and wrong, good and evil. It is those boundaries that determine the laws we live by. Without those boundaries, and devoid of laws, we would live as animals. There would be no knowledge of "right and wrong". That is what the Garden of Eden was all about. That was the point at which Man stopped being "just another animal" and "bit of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of Good and Evil". That is where we came to understand the difference between right and wrong. And that occured because - and only because - "Adam" and "Eve" knew God. Personally, it would appear. Note that they "talked" with God long before they ate the proverbial "apple". Religion already existed, and societal rules began.
Christmas time is upon us. And in a way, those humanists make a point, albeit in a backward fashion. Rather than asking ourselves "Why believe", we should ask ourselves, "Why Not?" And amid all the festivities and commercialism, we would do well to take some time to remember the reason for the season. And we should carry that reason with us throughout the year. If you celebrate Christmas only one day a year, you are missing a lot - and you are missing the whole point.
I feel sorry for those who do not believe in a greater power. After all, there are insects. And there is a greater power than them - the birds, animals etc. And there is a greater power than the birds and animals - Mankind. So it seems only reasonable that there is something even greater than ourselves. Remember the old adage, "No matter how big you are, there's always someone bigger?" For gunslingers, there was always "someone faster." I think the same is true with ourselves - there is something greater. Why wouldn't there be? The universe is incredibly vast, with wonders we cannot even comprehend. How can any person think that something as miniscule and imperfect as a human being is the greatest power in the universe? We can't even SEE the end of the universe, or understand it. So how can we possibly be the greatest power, or the most formidable intellect?
If you ask me, believing in Man's omnipotence in this universe is far more absurd than believing in a greater power. So, when an atheist says to me, "Believing in an invisible, all-powerful being is absurd", I point out the absurdity of believing there is not something far greater than we can imagine.
One such non-theist even threw that old riddle at me, to prove there was no God. "Can God create a stone that is too heavy for Him to lift?" He went on with, "No matter what you answer, there is something your all-powerful God cannot do."
I smiled. And then I explained that he lived in a very small world where things are black and white. And I went on to say, "Yes, God can create a stone He cannot lift, because he can create anything. And THEN, after He creates such a stone, He can give himself the strength to lift it, anyway. Because He can do anything."
If the person reading this is an atheist, please understand that I am not trying to belittle your beliefs, nor am I disrespecting your choice. I am simply presenting my side of the debate, and I can only hope that you will not simply dismiss it summarily. Instead, give it some intelligent thought. Consider possibilities that reach beyond that which can be analyzed. There is far, far more to this thing we call "life" that cannot be seen by the eye (air, conscience), nor touched (happiness, or grief), nor even understood (black holes, the human brain).
If you can accept that, then you have already accepted the possibility of a greater power.
Happy Holidays, folks!
/
Let me start by saying I really do not care if someone chooses to be an atheist. I see that as being their problem, not mine. They are free to choose their own direction, which, as you may recall, is also the same position I have on the gay lifestyle. To each his own, and more power to them. We will all answer for our choices someday.
But I do object when anyone - gays, atheists, agnostics, democrats, liberals - anyone - chooses to belittle, insult, denigrate or otherwise complain about MY choice of direction. They need to give me the same courtesy and respect that I give them.
To reply to that humanist group's question, I would simply say this: if I were an atheist, and it turns out there is a God, I would lose BIG time! And if there is NO god, I would not gain a thing. So, as an atheist, I simply could not win, and I would have zero chance at a bright eternity. On the other hand, if I believe in God, and it turns out there IS a God, I WIN - big time. And if there is no God, I have not lost a thing. So, as a believer, I simply cannot lose.
It occurs to me that it is much smarter to choose a position in which I cannot lose, as opposed to a position in which I cannot win. Not being a complete dunce, my choice is rather apparent.
No, that is not WHY I believe in God. But it does answer the question those humanist clowns posed - it simply makes more sense to believe than to not believe. As the story about that ad wore on, some folks supported their position of non-belief with the tired expanation that religion damages society, and religion has caused many atrocities. They simply do not understand that religion can "do" nothing. PEOPLE do things. Religions are not "bad" just because some people use and abuse them to serve their own agendas. That is not the fault of religion - it is the failing of Man.
They also fail to realize that, without religion, we are no better than animals. It is religion, alone, that provides society with boundaries of right and wrong, good and evil. It is those boundaries that determine the laws we live by. Without those boundaries, and devoid of laws, we would live as animals. There would be no knowledge of "right and wrong". That is what the Garden of Eden was all about. That was the point at which Man stopped being "just another animal" and "bit of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of Good and Evil". That is where we came to understand the difference between right and wrong. And that occured because - and only because - "Adam" and "Eve" knew God. Personally, it would appear. Note that they "talked" with God long before they ate the proverbial "apple". Religion already existed, and societal rules began.
Christmas time is upon us. And in a way, those humanists make a point, albeit in a backward fashion. Rather than asking ourselves "Why believe", we should ask ourselves, "Why Not?" And amid all the festivities and commercialism, we would do well to take some time to remember the reason for the season. And we should carry that reason with us throughout the year. If you celebrate Christmas only one day a year, you are missing a lot - and you are missing the whole point.
I feel sorry for those who do not believe in a greater power. After all, there are insects. And there is a greater power than them - the birds, animals etc. And there is a greater power than the birds and animals - Mankind. So it seems only reasonable that there is something even greater than ourselves. Remember the old adage, "No matter how big you are, there's always someone bigger?" For gunslingers, there was always "someone faster." I think the same is true with ourselves - there is something greater. Why wouldn't there be? The universe is incredibly vast, with wonders we cannot even comprehend. How can any person think that something as miniscule and imperfect as a human being is the greatest power in the universe? We can't even SEE the end of the universe, or understand it. So how can we possibly be the greatest power, or the most formidable intellect?
If you ask me, believing in Man's omnipotence in this universe is far more absurd than believing in a greater power. So, when an atheist says to me, "Believing in an invisible, all-powerful being is absurd", I point out the absurdity of believing there is not something far greater than we can imagine.
One such non-theist even threw that old riddle at me, to prove there was no God. "Can God create a stone that is too heavy for Him to lift?" He went on with, "No matter what you answer, there is something your all-powerful God cannot do."
I smiled. And then I explained that he lived in a very small world where things are black and white. And I went on to say, "Yes, God can create a stone He cannot lift, because he can create anything. And THEN, after He creates such a stone, He can give himself the strength to lift it, anyway. Because He can do anything."
If the person reading this is an atheist, please understand that I am not trying to belittle your beliefs, nor am I disrespecting your choice. I am simply presenting my side of the debate, and I can only hope that you will not simply dismiss it summarily. Instead, give it some intelligent thought. Consider possibilities that reach beyond that which can be analyzed. There is far, far more to this thing we call "life" that cannot be seen by the eye (air, conscience), nor touched (happiness, or grief), nor even understood (black holes, the human brain).
If you can accept that, then you have already accepted the possibility of a greater power.
Happy Holidays, folks!
/
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
National Civilian Security Force
By BEN EVANS, AP
WASHINGTON (Nov. 11) - A congressman from Georgia said Monday he fears that President-elect Obama will establish a Gestapo-like security force to impose a Marxist dictatorship.
"It may sound a bit crazy and off base, but the thing is, he's the one who proposed this national security force," Rep. Paul Broun said of Obama in an interview Monday with The Associated Press. "I'm just trying to bring attention to the fact that we may — may not, I hope not — but we may have a problem with that type of philosophy of radical socialism or Marxism."
Broun cited a July speech by Obama that has circulated on the Internet in which the then-Democratic presidential candidate called for a civilian force to take some of the national security burden off the military.
"That's exactly what Hitler did in Nazi Germany and it's exactly what the Soviet Union did," Broun said. "When he's proposing to have a national security force that's answering to him, that is as strong as the U.S. military, he's showing me signs of being Marxist."
Obama's comments about a national security force came during a speech in Colorado in which he called for expanding the nation's foreign service.
"We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set," Obama said in July. "We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded (as the military. Ed.)."
Broun said he believes Obama would move to ban gun ownership if he does build a national security force. (Ed. Such a ban would be necessary if such a national security force is to be effective).
As an Illinois state lawmaker, Obama supported a ban on semiautomatic weapons and tighter restrictions on firearms generally.
"We can't be lulled into complacency," Broun said. "You have to remember that Adolf Hitler was elected in a democratic Germany. I'm not comparing him to Adolf Hitler. What I'm saying is there is the potential of going down that road."
Ed. A poll was conducted among 40,000 Americans. 55% said Broun has a valid point.
WASHINGTON (Nov. 11) - A congressman from Georgia said Monday he fears that President-elect Obama will establish a Gestapo-like security force to impose a Marxist dictatorship.
"It may sound a bit crazy and off base, but the thing is, he's the one who proposed this national security force," Rep. Paul Broun said of Obama in an interview Monday with The Associated Press. "I'm just trying to bring attention to the fact that we may — may not, I hope not — but we may have a problem with that type of philosophy of radical socialism or Marxism."
Broun cited a July speech by Obama that has circulated on the Internet in which the then-Democratic presidential candidate called for a civilian force to take some of the national security burden off the military.
"That's exactly what Hitler did in Nazi Germany and it's exactly what the Soviet Union did," Broun said. "When he's proposing to have a national security force that's answering to him, that is as strong as the U.S. military, he's showing me signs of being Marxist."
Obama's comments about a national security force came during a speech in Colorado in which he called for expanding the nation's foreign service.
"We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set," Obama said in July. "We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded (as the military. Ed.)."
Broun said he believes Obama would move to ban gun ownership if he does build a national security force. (Ed. Such a ban would be necessary if such a national security force is to be effective).
As an Illinois state lawmaker, Obama supported a ban on semiautomatic weapons and tighter restrictions on firearms generally.
"We can't be lulled into complacency," Broun said. "You have to remember that Adolf Hitler was elected in a democratic Germany. I'm not comparing him to Adolf Hitler. What I'm saying is there is the potential of going down that road."
Ed. A poll was conducted among 40,000 Americans. 55% said Broun has a valid point.
The Piss 'n Moan Club
The secularists are once again trying to gain traction by "spinning" the truth into something deceitful and dishonest. By whining and moaning every time someone even mentions God, they hope to create an issue, knowing there will always be some people who can be led like sheep - just like the clowns who propagate all those conspiracy theories.
These atheists go on to complain that America is a secular nation, not a nation under God. They make this bogus claim because they twist the purpose of the founders who decided to leave God out of the Constitution. What they so dishonestly "forget" to tell people is that the founders left God out of the Constitution for the purpose of making the Constitution a concrete foundation based on law.
They knew full well that if they were to inject God into Man's Law, it would reduce God to Man's level, and weaken both the nation and its religious foundation. To insure that the Constitution could never be usurped on the basis of religious change, they kept religion out of it. The Constitution had to be pure law, to eliminate the need to rewrite the Constitution every time the religious foundation of the nation changed. The Constitution had to be timeless, and unaffected by ANY outside influences.
But the other documents of the time proves that the founders knew and accepted that America was a nation under God. Of that there is no doubt.
The Piss 'n Moan club will always be with us, trying to destroy the nation that the founders crafted, and Americans fought and died for, over the last 230 years. They are fully aware that if they can remove religion from the public square, religion will become weak and die. This is their goal because it is religion, and only religion, that sets limits on behavior.
Secularists want no limits. They want abortion on demand - even at birth. They want to be able to euthanize the elderly. They want to legalize drugs, and some have even expressed that they want sex between adults and children to be legalized. Secularists want NO boundaries. They want to be able to pursue their personal Sodom & Gomorrah without repercussions. They do not want to have to account for their actions. In fact, that is the very reason they choose not to believe in God. If there is no God, then there is no punishment for sins. Which means, in effect, that there can be no sin. Anything goes in a Godless society.
Certainly, I will defend the rights of the P&M Club to hold to their beliefs. I will defend their right to express those beliefs. But no one should defend their intentional use of deception and lies to promote those beliefs. And we certainly should not humor them - that only encourages them to do more of the same.
In the letters of each of the founding fathers, they made it perfectly clear that they were well aware that the only thing that could keep a nation together was religion. They carefully expressed that it is religion that sets the limits on moral behavior, which would help America grow and become strong. A nation requires a steady moral compass, which only religion can provide. That is still true today. It will remain true tomorrow.
It matters not if you, personally, believe in God or not. What does matter is that America remains a strong, moral nation. And for that purpose, we all need to stand, and recognize the need for the moral direction provided by religion. Because if we do not preserve the strength that comes from morality, America cannot stand. And if we lose that, we also lose our rights - including the right to be either religious or secular.
Religious or secular, we all need to keep America strong, independent, free and morally straight. And that means religion needs to play a very major role.
As a side note, all those secularists and atheists are not really atheists at all. In fact, they believe in God even more than the rest of us. Think about it. If they truly believed there is no God, then they would not care one iota if the rest of us practice our religion wherever and whenever we please. It simply would not matter to them, because they would "know" that we are performing rituals that have neither meaning nor effect.
To illustrate, ask yourself if you would complain vehemently if you were to see aborigines worshipping the Volcano God. No - you might be amused, but you would not consider their rituals any threat to you.
But atheists do complain. They do consider religion a threat to them. Why? It is because they do, indeed, believe in God, but because they want to live in sin, they hate God. The only way they can "justify" their choices is to refute God. But how do you refute something if it does not exist?
Atheists believe in God. But they would prefer it if there were no God. So, they hate God, which is why they fight religion so strongly. They hope that if they can "kill" religion, that will "kill" God, and without God, they would be spared having to pay for their sins.
Again - if a person truly does not believe in God, then they simply would give no thought to those of us who do. The very fact that religion bothers them so much only goes to prove that they consider it a threat - they fear it. And since there is no point in fearing that which does not exist, their actions prove they do, indeed, believe in God. They just want to kill Him, so they can live in sin without penalty.
It is a shame that they do not understand what "immortal" means. You cannot kill a God. And He does not stop existing simply because you refuse to acknowledge Him. He will still be there when it's your turn to cross the Great Divide. Not believing in it will not prevent it.
As a side note, it is strange that secularists, known for putting their faith in science, appear to overlook the latest scientific studies on the probability of the existence of God. A number of SECULAR, ATHEIST scientists and researchers, studying all available documentation and recorded facts, came to the conclusion that there is a 67% probability that God does exist. And some of those same scientists went on to join the ranks of believers.
These atheists go on to complain that America is a secular nation, not a nation under God. They make this bogus claim because they twist the purpose of the founders who decided to leave God out of the Constitution. What they so dishonestly "forget" to tell people is that the founders left God out of the Constitution for the purpose of making the Constitution a concrete foundation based on law.
They knew full well that if they were to inject God into Man's Law, it would reduce God to Man's level, and weaken both the nation and its religious foundation. To insure that the Constitution could never be usurped on the basis of religious change, they kept religion out of it. The Constitution had to be pure law, to eliminate the need to rewrite the Constitution every time the religious foundation of the nation changed. The Constitution had to be timeless, and unaffected by ANY outside influences.
But the other documents of the time proves that the founders knew and accepted that America was a nation under God. Of that there is no doubt.
The Piss 'n Moan club will always be with us, trying to destroy the nation that the founders crafted, and Americans fought and died for, over the last 230 years. They are fully aware that if they can remove religion from the public square, religion will become weak and die. This is their goal because it is religion, and only religion, that sets limits on behavior.
Secularists want no limits. They want abortion on demand - even at birth. They want to be able to euthanize the elderly. They want to legalize drugs, and some have even expressed that they want sex between adults and children to be legalized. Secularists want NO boundaries. They want to be able to pursue their personal Sodom & Gomorrah without repercussions. They do not want to have to account for their actions. In fact, that is the very reason they choose not to believe in God. If there is no God, then there is no punishment for sins. Which means, in effect, that there can be no sin. Anything goes in a Godless society.
Certainly, I will defend the rights of the P&M Club to hold to their beliefs. I will defend their right to express those beliefs. But no one should defend their intentional use of deception and lies to promote those beliefs. And we certainly should not humor them - that only encourages them to do more of the same.
In the letters of each of the founding fathers, they made it perfectly clear that they were well aware that the only thing that could keep a nation together was religion. They carefully expressed that it is religion that sets the limits on moral behavior, which would help America grow and become strong. A nation requires a steady moral compass, which only religion can provide. That is still true today. It will remain true tomorrow.
It matters not if you, personally, believe in God or not. What does matter is that America remains a strong, moral nation. And for that purpose, we all need to stand, and recognize the need for the moral direction provided by religion. Because if we do not preserve the strength that comes from morality, America cannot stand. And if we lose that, we also lose our rights - including the right to be either religious or secular.
Religious or secular, we all need to keep America strong, independent, free and morally straight. And that means religion needs to play a very major role.
As a side note, all those secularists and atheists are not really atheists at all. In fact, they believe in God even more than the rest of us. Think about it. If they truly believed there is no God, then they would not care one iota if the rest of us practice our religion wherever and whenever we please. It simply would not matter to them, because they would "know" that we are performing rituals that have neither meaning nor effect.
To illustrate, ask yourself if you would complain vehemently if you were to see aborigines worshipping the Volcano God. No - you might be amused, but you would not consider their rituals any threat to you.
But atheists do complain. They do consider religion a threat to them. Why? It is because they do, indeed, believe in God, but because they want to live in sin, they hate God. The only way they can "justify" their choices is to refute God. But how do you refute something if it does not exist?
Atheists believe in God. But they would prefer it if there were no God. So, they hate God, which is why they fight religion so strongly. They hope that if they can "kill" religion, that will "kill" God, and without God, they would be spared having to pay for their sins.
Again - if a person truly does not believe in God, then they simply would give no thought to those of us who do. The very fact that religion bothers them so much only goes to prove that they consider it a threat - they fear it. And since there is no point in fearing that which does not exist, their actions prove they do, indeed, believe in God. They just want to kill Him, so they can live in sin without penalty.
It is a shame that they do not understand what "immortal" means. You cannot kill a God. And He does not stop existing simply because you refuse to acknowledge Him. He will still be there when it's your turn to cross the Great Divide. Not believing in it will not prevent it.
As a side note, it is strange that secularists, known for putting their faith in science, appear to overlook the latest scientific studies on the probability of the existence of God. A number of SECULAR, ATHEIST scientists and researchers, studying all available documentation and recorded facts, came to the conclusion that there is a 67% probability that God does exist. And some of those same scientists went on to join the ranks of believers.
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Am I Surprised?
NO! If you are a regular reader of this blog, you already know that I made certain predictions, all of which have proved accurate so far.
Prediction #1: The stock market would continue to have losses through the election, due to the economic threat of an Obama presidency
Prediction #2: After the election, if Obama wins, the market would take additional serious hits immediately, before smoothing out
Prediction #3: Obama would lead from a very far left position, not from the center as his supporters believe
The first has already come to pass. The second has also come to pass, with nearly a 500 point drop yesterday, and today it is already hovering at a near 400 point drop.
As for the third prediction, it may be too early to be certain, but considering Obama's very first appointment - Rahm Emmanuel as Chief of Staff - bodes badly for any hope of a centrist government. Rahm is famous for being the farthest left of any known politician today, and is another Chicago politician. Making him #3 in the White House indicates Obama has no intention of being a centrist.
Obama owes a lot to the very far left. That is where most of his funding and base support came from. He cannot afford to turn on them, and govern from the center. Yet, if he governs from the far left, he will very quickly lose favor among the folks, the majority of whom still tend to be just right of center.
This is why I believe that my next prediction will also ring true: Obama will only serve one term. In 2012, if the republicans have finally managed to cobble together a conservative center-right platform, they will sweep everything. If they do not, then I think 2012 will be a mixed bag that will not serve anyone very well, but in either case, Obama will be going home in four years - not because he is a "bad" president, but because no matter what he does, he is going to anger and alienate a very large portion of those who swept him in earlier this week.
And another prediction: Governor Palin will run for Presidsent in 2012, and IF the Republican party actually gets around to cobbling together a real platform, she will win handily. The only real faults anyone could make stick on her is her lack of experience in national or international affairs (though she had more than Obama). So my final prediction for today: Palin will spend the next 2-3 years building that weakness into a strength. She is a quick study, and she WILL be ready in 2012. With a vengeance!
As a side note, mostly for AOL users, AOL has been incredibly deceptive lately. Just two examples of blatant, harmful deception:
1) Just two days before the election they posted a "news story" about Nostradamus predicting a "McCain win", stating that Quatrain 78 of Century X called McCain the "feeble kept one", and calling Palin the "imbecile Queen". As AOL already knew, there is no such quatrain with such statements. AOL knew it was a bogus story because the real quatrain is published on hundreds of internet sites, and has nothing to do with anything even remotely similar to what AOL was posting as a "news story". Their only purpose, of course, was to discredit McCain and Palin in the eyes of those who believe in prophecy.
2) Even though the board of inquiry ultimately exhonerated Palin of any wrongdoing just one day before the election, AOL and other liberal media WITHHELD the news until the election was nearly over. Again, the only purpose for withholding such a story would be to prevent voters from learning the truth about Troopergate before the election. The only news media to report it on the day she was exhonerated was, to their credit, Fox News' own Greta Susteren.
Anyone who pays AOL for any services would do well to consider taking their business elsewhere. It is not a good thing to subsidize dishonesty.
By the way, a recent poll produced the following about Fox News:
21% said Fox treated McCain better
21% said Fox treated Obama better
58% said it was just about equal
It just doesn't get more "fair and balanced" than that. Since success is directly proportionate to having accurate, timely information, I'll be getting my news from Fox from now on. None of the other media fared well. For example, MSNBC was rated by 78% as being pro Obama, 9% pro McCain and 13% thought they were treated equally.
/
Prediction #1: The stock market would continue to have losses through the election, due to the economic threat of an Obama presidency
Prediction #2: After the election, if Obama wins, the market would take additional serious hits immediately, before smoothing out
Prediction #3: Obama would lead from a very far left position, not from the center as his supporters believe
The first has already come to pass. The second has also come to pass, with nearly a 500 point drop yesterday, and today it is already hovering at a near 400 point drop.
As for the third prediction, it may be too early to be certain, but considering Obama's very first appointment - Rahm Emmanuel as Chief of Staff - bodes badly for any hope of a centrist government. Rahm is famous for being the farthest left of any known politician today, and is another Chicago politician. Making him #3 in the White House indicates Obama has no intention of being a centrist.
Obama owes a lot to the very far left. That is where most of his funding and base support came from. He cannot afford to turn on them, and govern from the center. Yet, if he governs from the far left, he will very quickly lose favor among the folks, the majority of whom still tend to be just right of center.
This is why I believe that my next prediction will also ring true: Obama will only serve one term. In 2012, if the republicans have finally managed to cobble together a conservative center-right platform, they will sweep everything. If they do not, then I think 2012 will be a mixed bag that will not serve anyone very well, but in either case, Obama will be going home in four years - not because he is a "bad" president, but because no matter what he does, he is going to anger and alienate a very large portion of those who swept him in earlier this week.
And another prediction: Governor Palin will run for Presidsent in 2012, and IF the Republican party actually gets around to cobbling together a real platform, she will win handily. The only real faults anyone could make stick on her is her lack of experience in national or international affairs (though she had more than Obama). So my final prediction for today: Palin will spend the next 2-3 years building that weakness into a strength. She is a quick study, and she WILL be ready in 2012. With a vengeance!
As a side note, mostly for AOL users, AOL has been incredibly deceptive lately. Just two examples of blatant, harmful deception:
1) Just two days before the election they posted a "news story" about Nostradamus predicting a "McCain win", stating that Quatrain 78 of Century X called McCain the "feeble kept one", and calling Palin the "imbecile Queen". As AOL already knew, there is no such quatrain with such statements. AOL knew it was a bogus story because the real quatrain is published on hundreds of internet sites, and has nothing to do with anything even remotely similar to what AOL was posting as a "news story". Their only purpose, of course, was to discredit McCain and Palin in the eyes of those who believe in prophecy.
2) Even though the board of inquiry ultimately exhonerated Palin of any wrongdoing just one day before the election, AOL and other liberal media WITHHELD the news until the election was nearly over. Again, the only purpose for withholding such a story would be to prevent voters from learning the truth about Troopergate before the election. The only news media to report it on the day she was exhonerated was, to their credit, Fox News' own Greta Susteren.
Anyone who pays AOL for any services would do well to consider taking their business elsewhere. It is not a good thing to subsidize dishonesty.
By the way, a recent poll produced the following about Fox News:
21% said Fox treated McCain better
21% said Fox treated Obama better
58% said it was just about equal
It just doesn't get more "fair and balanced" than that. Since success is directly proportionate to having accurate, timely information, I'll be getting my news from Fox from now on. None of the other media fared well. For example, MSNBC was rated by 78% as being pro Obama, 9% pro McCain and 13% thought they were treated equally.
/
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Ain't It The Truth
Joe Smith started the day early having set his alarm clock (MADE IN JAPAN) for 6am. While his coffeepot (MADE IN CHINA) was perking, he shaved with his electric razor (MADE IN HONG KONG).
He put on a dress shirt (MADE IN SRI LANKA), designer jeans (MADE IN SINGAPORE) and tennis shoes (MADE IN KOREA). After cooking his breakfast in his new electric skillet (MADE IN INDIA) he sat down with his calculator (MADE IN MEXICO) to see how much he could spend today.
After setting his watch (MADE IN TAIWAN) to the radio (MADE IN INDIA) he got in his car (MADE IN GERMANY) filled it with GAS from Saudi Arabia and continued his search for a good paying JOB . At the end of yet another discouraging and fruitless day checking his Computer (Made In Malaysia), Joe decided to relax for a while. He put on his sandals (MADE IN BRAZIL) poured himself a glass of wine (MADE IN FRANCE ) and turned on his TV (MADE IN INDONESIA), and then wondered why he can't find a good paying job in AMERICA......
/
He put on a dress shirt (MADE IN SRI LANKA), designer jeans (MADE IN SINGAPORE) and tennis shoes (MADE IN KOREA). After cooking his breakfast in his new electric skillet (MADE IN INDIA) he sat down with his calculator (MADE IN MEXICO) to see how much he could spend today.
After setting his watch (MADE IN TAIWAN) to the radio (MADE IN INDIA) he got in his car (MADE IN GERMANY) filled it with GAS from Saudi Arabia and continued his search for a good paying JOB . At the end of yet another discouraging and fruitless day checking his Computer (Made In Malaysia), Joe decided to relax for a while. He put on his sandals (MADE IN BRAZIL) poured himself a glass of wine (MADE IN FRANCE ) and turned on his TV (MADE IN INDONESIA), and then wondered why he can't find a good paying job in AMERICA......
/
Disappointed
To say the election results were disappointing is something I believe to be true. But something is happening that I find far more disappointing.
As I read blogs, I see some Republicans acting the same way the Democrats acted against Bush. I find that troubling. Historically, Republicans have tended to be the more civil, and willing to give people a chance to either step up to the plate, or fail, all on their own. And I find it disgusting that Republicans say that they will never support Obama.
That is wrong. Every President should have the full support of All Americans, at least until he has proven himself unfit and unworthy.
To all fellow Republicans, I urge you to give a better shake to Obama than the Democrats ever gave to Bush. We are supposed to be better than that. If you are going to lower yourself to their standards, then you become the people you hate. We have had 8 years of "I hate the Bush Administration". Let's not have 4 years of "I hate the Obama Administration." Don't do that. Let him sink or swim. But give him the opportunity.
Support the President, whoever he or she may be. If he screws up, call him to account. But until then, he deserves the support of every American.
As I read blogs, I see some Republicans acting the same way the Democrats acted against Bush. I find that troubling. Historically, Republicans have tended to be the more civil, and willing to give people a chance to either step up to the plate, or fail, all on their own. And I find it disgusting that Republicans say that they will never support Obama.
That is wrong. Every President should have the full support of All Americans, at least until he has proven himself unfit and unworthy.
To all fellow Republicans, I urge you to give a better shake to Obama than the Democrats ever gave to Bush. We are supposed to be better than that. If you are going to lower yourself to their standards, then you become the people you hate. We have had 8 years of "I hate the Bush Administration". Let's not have 4 years of "I hate the Obama Administration." Don't do that. Let him sink or swim. But give him the opportunity.
Support the President, whoever he or she may be. If he screws up, call him to account. But until then, he deserves the support of every American.
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
On The Bright Side
As of this writing, it appears the Democrats will hold all three parts of the Executive Branch - President, Senate and House. And one thing that stands out is Pennsylvania. It is difficult to understand their mentality - first, they are a big "coal mining" state, and they voted for Obama in spite of the fact that he has said he is determined to bankrupt coal-fired energy plants. And in spite of Obama's remark about PA foilks "clinging to their guns and bibles" out of anger. And they are re-electing John Murtha in spite of the fact he called his own constituents "racists and rednecks". This tells me that there are a tremendous number of people who are either uninformed, or simply do not care if people insult them. So, they will get what they deserve - leaders who do not respect them.
There are many, many folks who predict dire consequences and erosion of rights because of the liberal agenda of Pelosi, Reid and Obama. For example, we can kiss voting privacy goodbye when it comes to union voting. Unions will once again be able to intimidate both workers and businesses. And don't be surprised if they pass laws that will increase the ease of voter fraud, like their previous "motor voter" law.
And many believe that the Democratic response to the recession will likely cause a depression if they follow through on their agenda of heavier taxes on the very people responsible for creating jobs and income, and producr the GNP that determines economic health.
That said....
There is a silver lining of sorts. For eight years, the Democrats blamed "the Bush administration" for everything, including natural disasters. But from here on in, for the next four years, whatever goes wrong can and will be laid at the door of Obama, Pelosi and Reid.
Of course, the Democrats will still try to blame the Republicans for anything that goes wrong, but MOST of the people are not so naive and gullible as to believe it. So, in 2012, a political revolution like the ones that swept the nation after every other "full Democratic control" will occur, and Palin will be swept into the White House, and the House and Senate will again fall to Republicans.
Why? Right now, the country is angry at Republicans, not because Republicans are worse than Democrats, but because George W Bush earned their ire. Their anger at a few maladjusted Republicans has caused an anger at the party, in general. But as they come to
realize over the next four years that the Democrats are just as bad, or even worse, the American people will look in retrospect (hindsight is always clearer) at the GOP and realize their anger at the entire party was misplaced. They will choose solid, fiscally responsible conservative Republicans to fill the offices that will be vacated when the people dump the current batch of n'er-do-wells in office.
So, the short take: the Democrats can no longer "dodge the bullet" or shift the blame onto Republicans - at least, not successfully. They are in control. They will be held accountable. And because of their liberal agenda, they won't be able to contain or control themselves. And that will result in a Reaganesque landslide for Republicans in 2012.
The key, of course, is for the GOP to get rid of the idiots in charge of the RNC and replace them with competent Republicans that are actually Republicans, and to seek out, and put up for election, only those conservatives that have good moral values, strong family values and have a record of fiscal responsibility. Lately, way too many "Republicans" have been acting like liberal Democrats. This has separated them from their base, and that is why they are losing.
If the GOP has an ounce of common sense, they will heed Gingrich and adopt the platform his organization has provided at http://www.americansolutions.com/. If they do that, they will sweep in 2012. If they do NOT do that, they will likely lose again.
EVERY conservative reading this should first visit American Solutions, check out the platform, and if you agree with the majority of it, you must contact the RNC and tell them, point blank that they need to choose, and adhere to that platform, and to start RIGHT NOW seeking out good prospects for the next House and Senate races. And those prospects must sign on to that platform, or the RNC will not support them. Period.
If enough folks bombard the RNC, they will be forced to return to the principles that made the GOP the Grand Old Party in the first place.
I will make a prediction right here, today. You can hold me to it. Over the next four years, the Democrats will anger the folks. They will make the Bush Administration look acceptable in comparison. And if the GOP puts forth the right candidates, they will sweep in 2012. Gingrich did it in '94. With his help, the GOP can do it again.
If you are a conservative, and you do not stand to be counted, then you will have no one but yourself to blame when America loses the values it was built upon. More Socialism and a Big Brother "nanny state" will be your reward if you fail to do your part.
There are many, many folks who predict dire consequences and erosion of rights because of the liberal agenda of Pelosi, Reid and Obama. For example, we can kiss voting privacy goodbye when it comes to union voting. Unions will once again be able to intimidate both workers and businesses. And don't be surprised if they pass laws that will increase the ease of voter fraud, like their previous "motor voter" law.
And many believe that the Democratic response to the recession will likely cause a depression if they follow through on their agenda of heavier taxes on the very people responsible for creating jobs and income, and producr the GNP that determines economic health.
That said....
There is a silver lining of sorts. For eight years, the Democrats blamed "the Bush administration" for everything, including natural disasters. But from here on in, for the next four years, whatever goes wrong can and will be laid at the door of Obama, Pelosi and Reid.
Of course, the Democrats will still try to blame the Republicans for anything that goes wrong, but MOST of the people are not so naive and gullible as to believe it. So, in 2012, a political revolution like the ones that swept the nation after every other "full Democratic control" will occur, and Palin will be swept into the White House, and the House and Senate will again fall to Republicans.
Why? Right now, the country is angry at Republicans, not because Republicans are worse than Democrats, but because George W Bush earned their ire. Their anger at a few maladjusted Republicans has caused an anger at the party, in general. But as they come to
realize over the next four years that the Democrats are just as bad, or even worse, the American people will look in retrospect (hindsight is always clearer) at the GOP and realize their anger at the entire party was misplaced. They will choose solid, fiscally responsible conservative Republicans to fill the offices that will be vacated when the people dump the current batch of n'er-do-wells in office.
So, the short take: the Democrats can no longer "dodge the bullet" or shift the blame onto Republicans - at least, not successfully. They are in control. They will be held accountable. And because of their liberal agenda, they won't be able to contain or control themselves. And that will result in a Reaganesque landslide for Republicans in 2012.
The key, of course, is for the GOP to get rid of the idiots in charge of the RNC and replace them with competent Republicans that are actually Republicans, and to seek out, and put up for election, only those conservatives that have good moral values, strong family values and have a record of fiscal responsibility. Lately, way too many "Republicans" have been acting like liberal Democrats. This has separated them from their base, and that is why they are losing.
If the GOP has an ounce of common sense, they will heed Gingrich and adopt the platform his organization has provided at http://www.americansolutions.com/. If they do that, they will sweep in 2012. If they do NOT do that, they will likely lose again.
EVERY conservative reading this should first visit American Solutions, check out the platform, and if you agree with the majority of it, you must contact the RNC and tell them, point blank that they need to choose, and adhere to that platform, and to start RIGHT NOW seeking out good prospects for the next House and Senate races. And those prospects must sign on to that platform, or the RNC will not support them. Period.
If enough folks bombard the RNC, they will be forced to return to the principles that made the GOP the Grand Old Party in the first place.
I will make a prediction right here, today. You can hold me to it. Over the next four years, the Democrats will anger the folks. They will make the Bush Administration look acceptable in comparison. And if the GOP puts forth the right candidates, they will sweep in 2012. Gingrich did it in '94. With his help, the GOP can do it again.
If you are a conservative, and you do not stand to be counted, then you will have no one but yourself to blame when America loses the values it was built upon. More Socialism and a Big Brother "nanny state" will be your reward if you fail to do your part.
Monday, November 3, 2008
They will stop at nothing...
Even at this late stage, the far-left loonies are STILL using smear tactics against McCain and Palin - and this one takes the cake!
The following "news" story was run by AOL: "Nostradamus Predicts McCain Win". The story goes on to say that Quatrain 78 of Century X goes like this:
"At the war’s end:
The Feeble Kept One will strike down the Night
And his Imbecile Queen will rise from the snow
Bedecked in finery and the pelt of a wolf."
According to them, The Feeble one is McCain, the "night" is Obama, and the "imbecile Queen" is Palin.
This is such utterly moronic. Even if it weren’t a stretch to interpret it that way, that isn’t even the REAL text of Quatrain 78, Century X. That real text reads:
"Sudden joy to sudden sadness
It will occur at Rome for the graces embraced
Grief, cries, tears, weeping, blood, excellent mirth
Contrary bands surprised & trussed up. "
I don't think there is a single word that is correct in the AOL "quatrain". It is completely bogus, and proves the left-wing slant of AOL and the media. And their only purpose for pushing this "story" is a last-minute smear attack.
By stooping to this level, the last thing liberals should ever have is control of this nation. Surely, the right has also thrown out some crap on Obama, but not this level of smearing. This is right there at the bottom with those on the left who claimed Palin's baby was actually her daughter's, and claims that McCain was a communist sympathizer in Viet Nam. It just doesn't get any more vile.
As bad as the Republicans sometimes are, I am glad that I am not associated with a party that gets THIS low.
The following "news" story was run by AOL: "Nostradamus Predicts McCain Win". The story goes on to say that Quatrain 78 of Century X goes like this:
"At the war’s end:
The Feeble Kept One will strike down the Night
And his Imbecile Queen will rise from the snow
Bedecked in finery and the pelt of a wolf."
According to them, The Feeble one is McCain, the "night" is Obama, and the "imbecile Queen" is Palin.
This is such utterly moronic. Even if it weren’t a stretch to interpret it that way, that isn’t even the REAL text of Quatrain 78, Century X. That real text reads:
"Sudden joy to sudden sadness
It will occur at Rome for the graces embraced
Grief, cries, tears, weeping, blood, excellent mirth
Contrary bands surprised & trussed up. "
I don't think there is a single word that is correct in the AOL "quatrain". It is completely bogus, and proves the left-wing slant of AOL and the media. And their only purpose for pushing this "story" is a last-minute smear attack.
By stooping to this level, the last thing liberals should ever have is control of this nation. Surely, the right has also thrown out some crap on Obama, but not this level of smearing. This is right there at the bottom with those on the left who claimed Palin's baby was actually her daughter's, and claims that McCain was a communist sympathizer in Viet Nam. It just doesn't get any more vile.
As bad as the Republicans sometimes are, I am glad that I am not associated with a party that gets THIS low.
And They Say It Ain't So...
Conservatives say that liberals around the world have chosen Obama as the next Messiah. The Democrats say that is ridiculous.
I guess the Democrats have not seen what is going on. For example, Louis Farrakahn, speaking in front of his Nation of Islam group did, indeed, refer to Obama as "The Messiah". And in Spain (the country that chose to desert us in the War on Terror), a portrait of Obama has appeared. But it is not an ordinary portrait - the Democratic presidential candidate is shown in a sand sculpture on a beach in Barcelona, Spain. The portrait is 140 yards long by 80 yards wide. and can be seen from the space station. It was created with 500 tons of sand, gravel and white, brown and black pebbles. It cost more than $13,000.
This sort of idolization is not unusual in Europe, Africa and the Middle East.
Has anyone read Revelations lately?
I guess the Democrats have not seen what is going on. For example, Louis Farrakahn, speaking in front of his Nation of Islam group did, indeed, refer to Obama as "The Messiah". And in Spain (the country that chose to desert us in the War on Terror), a portrait of Obama has appeared. But it is not an ordinary portrait - the Democratic presidential candidate is shown in a sand sculpture on a beach in Barcelona, Spain. The portrait is 140 yards long by 80 yards wide. and can be seen from the space station. It was created with 500 tons of sand, gravel and white, brown and black pebbles. It cost more than $13,000.
This sort of idolization is not unusual in Europe, Africa and the Middle East.
Has anyone read Revelations lately?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)