Monday, May 19, 2008
Boo Hoo Barry!!
This AOL piece presents a video from the Tennessee Repubican Party that Barry calls "low class". He believes that his wife should be off limits for critique. I'd agree if she wasn't front and center speaking on his behalf and saying silly things about never being proud of the USA until now. This is a terrible whine. If Michelle is bold enough to speak publicly, she, and more so Barry, should be accepting that there may be criticism of what is said. Now if she were to have stayed in the background, as some politicians' spouses do, then the complaint would be valid. But then, there'd likely have been no criticisms of her. Grab a hanky, Barry, and calm down.
Sunday, May 18, 2008
This'll Take Some Time
As my challenge has gone unanswered (beyond mockery and lame excuses), I have taken back the gauntlet and instead have decided to take up the challenge laid down by my man Danny Trabue to review the "plan" of one Barry H. Obamanable. I've already visited his website (Barry's, not Dan's) and reviewed the section entitled "Fiscal". I figured it would be the funniest, so I started there.
Dan was right. There's a lot of words there. I didn't compare it to McCain's site since I don't give a rat's patooty about McCain, other than the fact that he is not Clinton or Obama. But there are lots of words. They're the same old words we hear and have heard from the left for, like, ever, and as far as I can tell so far, there's a curious lack of "how". That is, how is he going to make these things happen, how will they fix what he thinks they will fix, and how will he prevent the results that these ideas have been shown to bring about in the past. But hey, it's early and I just started.
One thing I noted: Dan said that there are links for more info about what he plans to do. I don't know yet about the rest of the site, but the one link I came upon in the Fiscal section took me to a page that simply repeated what was said on the page with the link. Well, that's one way to make the site bigger than McCain's. But it doesn't make it more informative. And as to that, McCain has been in politics for a couple of decades. I think we have a pretty good idea whence he comes.
As the title of this post says, this'll take some time trudge through. It'll be painful. In fact, I already feel it in my backside reading his fiscal policies. But I've a good set of waders and a closepin for my nose, so wish me luck. It's a dirty job...
Dan was right. There's a lot of words there. I didn't compare it to McCain's site since I don't give a rat's patooty about McCain, other than the fact that he is not Clinton or Obama. But there are lots of words. They're the same old words we hear and have heard from the left for, like, ever, and as far as I can tell so far, there's a curious lack of "how". That is, how is he going to make these things happen, how will they fix what he thinks they will fix, and how will he prevent the results that these ideas have been shown to bring about in the past. But hey, it's early and I just started.
One thing I noted: Dan said that there are links for more info about what he plans to do. I don't know yet about the rest of the site, but the one link I came upon in the Fiscal section took me to a page that simply repeated what was said on the page with the link. Well, that's one way to make the site bigger than McCain's. But it doesn't make it more informative. And as to that, McCain has been in politics for a couple of decades. I think we have a pretty good idea whence he comes.
As the title of this post says, this'll take some time trudge through. It'll be painful. In fact, I already feel it in my backside reading his fiscal policies. But I've a good set of waders and a closepin for my nose, so wish me luck. It's a dirty job...
Saturday, May 17, 2008
I Was Sure I'd Hear Something!
Well gentle readers, I must say that I am greatly disappointed. I put up the challenge to Obama supporters to visit www.AmericanThinker.com to peruse a few of the many opinion pieces about Barak Obama and then pick one to defend him against the author of the chosen piece. No one picked up the gauntlet. Sure, I know I don't have that many readers. But I was certain that at least one of the lefties who visit had spine enough to step up to the plate. I mean they're all blog readers/hosts, so it's not like they aren't wasting time anyway. The only thing I can take away from this sorry result is that what has been suspected is actually true: Obama is undefensible, and his supporters are afraid to learn who he really is.
This is typical of the left. As we learned during the Bill Clinton campaigns, it's never about character in selecting a president. I mean I get Hashfanatic visiting and using terms like "the Bush crime family" (I always get a chuckle when this guy posts his goofy comments---thanks Hash), but there is never anything to back up such assertions. In the meantime, Barry has numerous questionable alliances, and yet, he gets incredible support from among the left. This tends to support Michael Savage's assertion of liberalism being a mental disease. How could anyone support a guy like Obama with the track record he has? It boggles the mind, and apparently it boggles the minds of the lefties if they can't state why they want to vote for him. Time for a change? (We hear this every election cycle) Change to what? They have no idea. The right has a far better idea of what that change will look like than do Obama supporters.
What Obama is, is any guy off the street, as in, they'll take any guy off the street and make him president. He's got nothing in terms of experience, smarts, ideas or the character to be our next president.
This is typical of the left. As we learned during the Bill Clinton campaigns, it's never about character in selecting a president. I mean I get Hashfanatic visiting and using terms like "the Bush crime family" (I always get a chuckle when this guy posts his goofy comments---thanks Hash), but there is never anything to back up such assertions. In the meantime, Barry has numerous questionable alliances, and yet, he gets incredible support from among the left. This tends to support Michael Savage's assertion of liberalism being a mental disease. How could anyone support a guy like Obama with the track record he has? It boggles the mind, and apparently it boggles the minds of the lefties if they can't state why they want to vote for him. Time for a change? (We hear this every election cycle) Change to what? They have no idea. The right has a far better idea of what that change will look like than do Obama supporters.
What Obama is, is any guy off the street, as in, they'll take any guy off the street and make him president. He's got nothing in terms of experience, smarts, ideas or the character to be our next president.
Friday, May 16, 2008
Just A Few Thoughts
CALIFORNIA SCHEMIN'
I hear today that the California Supreme Court, or whatever they call them there, has rendered a 4-3 decision allowing for homosexual marriage. This, after they the people, had just a few years ago voted overwhelmingly in support of traditional marriage. Dan Trabue must be hacked big time to see "we the people" ignored and overruled by four unelected people. For the next 30 days, California has no definition for marriage. Only an amendment to their constitution will stop this judicial activism. May God have mercy on California and the four judges who abused their power.
PANDERING?
John McCain has unveiled his plan for dealing with global climate change. Between this and his amnesty plans, I'll really have to pinch my nose closed when I punch his number in November. It's a good thing he insists on keeping taxes low and attacking earmarks. The tax dollars that will be flushed on such stupid legislation have to come from somewhere. He speaks of all those scientists concerned with GW, but doesn't speak at all about all those who know that the Gore version of events is crap.
THIS WOULD BE A CRIME
Of all the wacky things Dan likes to actually say he believes in, and I give him props for sticking with it despite its wackiness, there is one thing I had to think about for a few seconds. That would be his belief that we should be spending money on education opportunities for those in prison. He has some research that claims the recidivism rate is lower for those convicts given training or education while incarcerated. Well, here's my problem with this: They already were given a free education in our fantastic public school system. What did they do with it? So this is how I would tweak Dan's idea. I would charge the con for the schooling. They would pay for the education with their income from the job they get as a result of their training. Non-payment would put their asses back in the slammer for theft of services. Personal responsibility requires this alteration.
ONE MORE TIME
Though I defend him often, mostly because he deserves such defense when I do, George Bush has not been the president I thought he would be. Oh, he was far and away the better choice in both 2000 and 2004. Of that there's no doubt. But for all his good points, he has made some bad moves. Harriet Myers, amnesty for illegals, and stuff like that. But against the three left standing (and I don't count the candidates out there who have no chance of winning anything), I would vote for George in a heartbeat. Without question.
I hear today that the California Supreme Court, or whatever they call them there, has rendered a 4-3 decision allowing for homosexual marriage. This, after they the people, had just a few years ago voted overwhelmingly in support of traditional marriage. Dan Trabue must be hacked big time to see "we the people" ignored and overruled by four unelected people. For the next 30 days, California has no definition for marriage. Only an amendment to their constitution will stop this judicial activism. May God have mercy on California and the four judges who abused their power.
PANDERING?
John McCain has unveiled his plan for dealing with global climate change. Between this and his amnesty plans, I'll really have to pinch my nose closed when I punch his number in November. It's a good thing he insists on keeping taxes low and attacking earmarks. The tax dollars that will be flushed on such stupid legislation have to come from somewhere. He speaks of all those scientists concerned with GW, but doesn't speak at all about all those who know that the Gore version of events is crap.
THIS WOULD BE A CRIME
Of all the wacky things Dan likes to actually say he believes in, and I give him props for sticking with it despite its wackiness, there is one thing I had to think about for a few seconds. That would be his belief that we should be spending money on education opportunities for those in prison. He has some research that claims the recidivism rate is lower for those convicts given training or education while incarcerated. Well, here's my problem with this: They already were given a free education in our fantastic public school system. What did they do with it? So this is how I would tweak Dan's idea. I would charge the con for the schooling. They would pay for the education with their income from the job they get as a result of their training. Non-payment would put their asses back in the slammer for theft of services. Personal responsibility requires this alteration.
ONE MORE TIME
Though I defend him often, mostly because he deserves such defense when I do, George Bush has not been the president I thought he would be. Oh, he was far and away the better choice in both 2000 and 2004. Of that there's no doubt. But for all his good points, he has made some bad moves. Harriet Myers, amnesty for illegals, and stuff like that. But against the three left standing (and I don't count the candidates out there who have no chance of winning anything), I would vote for George in a heartbeat. Without question.
Saturday, May 10, 2008
An Illustration
This from
AmericanThinker.com is a fine illustration of the difference between right and left. It also gives a fair look at the lib thought process. Like ER, the author prefers to remain anonymous for career reasons, and that's too bad. But it doesn't diminish the soundness of his perspective.
AmericanThinker.com is a fine illustration of the difference between right and left. It also gives a fair look at the lib thought process. Like ER, the author prefers to remain anonymous for career reasons, and that's too bad. But it doesn't diminish the soundness of his perspective.
Friday, May 09, 2008
Here's A Bit O Fun!
This offering from Real Clear Politics addresses a silly statement, make that a "stupid" statement, made by Barry O. recently. The statement...
"I trust the American people to understand that it is not weakness, but wisdom to talk not just to our friends, but to our enemies, like Roosevelt did, and Kennedy did, and Truman did."
...gave me pause. About what was he talking? To which despot did any of these guys speak before war? Turns out, as I believed, there were none. So the question becomes, did he knowingly say something that wasn't true, or is he simply that stupid to speak of what he doesn't know and do so as if no one at all is paying attention? I hope he didn't get too jacked over Hillary's "sniper fire" comments.
AmericanThinker.com is a routine stop for me, as I find their contributors to be astute observers of what's going on politically. It was through this site that I came across the above RCP piece. Naturally, as a conservative site, there are a lot of columns regarding Obama and what a profound chucklehead he really is. I could link to a lot of articles and create posts around them as I've done now and then, but there are just so many for that to be practical. What I'd like to encourage, however, is for anyone interested, particularly my left-leaning readers, to visit there and peruse a handful of Obama related articles and then come here and defend Obama against the author. Right-wingers can expound on why they agree if they so choose. Provide either a link to the article, or the title and date when it was published. I'll assume that should no lefty take me up on the challenge, that AmericanThinker's contributors have opined on what is indefensible regarding Barry O. The more I read, the more I feel he is the most terrible choice for any really thinking individual to support. Some conservatives have said something to the effect that, "I'm sure he's a nice guy, but..." I don't think that's the case at all.
"I trust the American people to understand that it is not weakness, but wisdom to talk not just to our friends, but to our enemies, like Roosevelt did, and Kennedy did, and Truman did."
...gave me pause. About what was he talking? To which despot did any of these guys speak before war? Turns out, as I believed, there were none. So the question becomes, did he knowingly say something that wasn't true, or is he simply that stupid to speak of what he doesn't know and do so as if no one at all is paying attention? I hope he didn't get too jacked over Hillary's "sniper fire" comments.
AmericanThinker.com is a routine stop for me, as I find their contributors to be astute observers of what's going on politically. It was through this site that I came across the above RCP piece. Naturally, as a conservative site, there are a lot of columns regarding Obama and what a profound chucklehead he really is. I could link to a lot of articles and create posts around them as I've done now and then, but there are just so many for that to be practical. What I'd like to encourage, however, is for anyone interested, particularly my left-leaning readers, to visit there and peruse a handful of Obama related articles and then come here and defend Obama against the author. Right-wingers can expound on why they agree if they so choose. Provide either a link to the article, or the title and date when it was published. I'll assume that should no lefty take me up on the challenge, that AmericanThinker's contributors have opined on what is indefensible regarding Barry O. The more I read, the more I feel he is the most terrible choice for any really thinking individual to support. Some conservatives have said something to the effect that, "I'm sure he's a nice guy, but..." I don't think that's the case at all.
Monday, May 05, 2008
Another "No Duh!" Commentary
This opinion piece re-iterates what should be a slam dunk for everyone with a mind. I particularly like the faux sign posted along with it. It speaks volumes on the stupidity of gun control and gun-free zones. I think that if any school or business wants to consider their property a gun-free zone, they should require that all who must be there must wear a tee shirt with targets on the front and back.
There are so many stupid, and I mean REALLY stupid, arguments against concealed carry. A couple of favorites include: "It'll turn into the wild west!" and "So if someone wants to carry a bazooka, you think it's OK?" I usually laugh when I hear people say stupid things like these, but it's really not funny any more. For the first lame quote, a simple examination of all states allowing concealed carry would show just how stupid the comment is. It just hasn't happened. The second quote, far more stupid than the first, doesn't need a response. It's that stupid.
The whole notion that there is no way to decipher the 2nd Amendment properly in order to allow for self-defense is probably the most stupid suggestion of all. The founders were prolific writers and speakers. We know for certain that the amendment meant self-defense, period. I commit to searching through my dusty and cobwebbed archives of stuff saved over the years for a gun magazine that spent about a half dozen pages supporting this very point. Wish me luck. If I'm not out in two weeks, send for help.
There are so many stupid, and I mean REALLY stupid, arguments against concealed carry. A couple of favorites include: "It'll turn into the wild west!" and "So if someone wants to carry a bazooka, you think it's OK?" I usually laugh when I hear people say stupid things like these, but it's really not funny any more. For the first lame quote, a simple examination of all states allowing concealed carry would show just how stupid the comment is. It just hasn't happened. The second quote, far more stupid than the first, doesn't need a response. It's that stupid.
The whole notion that there is no way to decipher the 2nd Amendment properly in order to allow for self-defense is probably the most stupid suggestion of all. The founders were prolific writers and speakers. We know for certain that the amendment meant self-defense, period. I commit to searching through my dusty and cobwebbed archives of stuff saved over the years for a gun magazine that spent about a half dozen pages supporting this very point. Wish me luck. If I'm not out in two weeks, send for help.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)