By now we’ve all heard what a hoot the White House Correspondents Dinner was the other night. The jokes flowed fast and loose. The funniest line of the night came from the President himself, “Government without a tough and vibrant media is not an option for the United States of America.”
Tough and vibrant media. Heh. Those ninnies who said the President doesn’t have a sense of humor are eating their words now….On the other hand, if what he meant was the he needs a tough and vibrant press to act as his personal attack dogs against anyone who opposes him? That wouldn’t be funny.
Looking back over the last several months I am inclined towards the latter rather than the former. We’ve long kept free by a strong, impartial press. No more. The main stream press is now the propaganda wing of the government and it happened without our media being over-thrown, “nationalized” by the administration. They simply sold out.
h/t Cold Fury
Monday, May 11, 2009
Equality Of Opportunity?
William Jacobsen ran a post titled, Which Seat Would Cass Sunstein Fill? It seems like Sunstein’s name has come up quite a bit lately so I decided to check the man out. The following is not an in depth analysis, rather, my thoughts on tidbits gleaned from the web in between participating in those activities that my employer would prefer I engage in while being paid. Here goes:
Sunstein advocates FDR’s Second Bill of Rights, which includes the right to an education, home and healthcare. Couple this with the fact that he co-wrote Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness which basically says people make really bad choices so they need organizations (government?) to nudge them in the right direction. I come away with the feeling that this is a man who is much too comfy with government intervention in private lives.
On the plus side, Sunstein favors judicial minimalism, arguing that judges should focus primarily on deciding the case at hand, and avoid making sweeping changes to the law or decisions that have broad-reaching effects. Can I get an Amen!
The biggest thing I came away with is that Cass Sunstein is a well educated, highly accomplished legal scholar, who is absolutely qualified to take Ruth Bader Ginsberg’s place on the Supreme Court. This brings us back to Professor Jacobsen’s post.
Apparently, Ginsberg’s seat on the court has been designated a “woman’s seat” which Sunstein, by virtue of his sex is not qualified. Where is the justice and equality in that? If equality means anything it can’t be predicated on the worn out notion of affirmative action. Affirmative action should be repugnant to feminist, but its not. It is time for feminists to rethink whether they really believe in equality.
h/t Legal Insurrection
Sunstein advocates FDR’s Second Bill of Rights, which includes the right to an education, home and healthcare. Couple this with the fact that he co-wrote Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness which basically says people make really bad choices so they need organizations (government?) to nudge them in the right direction. I come away with the feeling that this is a man who is much too comfy with government intervention in private lives.
On the plus side, Sunstein favors judicial minimalism, arguing that judges should focus primarily on deciding the case at hand, and avoid making sweeping changes to the law or decisions that have broad-reaching effects. Can I get an Amen!
The biggest thing I came away with is that Cass Sunstein is a well educated, highly accomplished legal scholar, who is absolutely qualified to take Ruth Bader Ginsberg’s place on the Supreme Court. This brings us back to Professor Jacobsen’s post.
Apparently, Ginsberg’s seat on the court has been designated a “woman’s seat” which Sunstein, by virtue of his sex is not qualified. Where is the justice and equality in that? If equality means anything it can’t be predicated on the worn out notion of affirmative action. Affirmative action should be repugnant to feminist, but its not. It is time for feminists to rethink whether they really believe in equality.
h/t Legal Insurrection
Rubio Announces His Senate Candidacy
Conservative Floridians who were dismayed at the prospect of Gov. Charlie Crist running for the senate seat being vacated by Mel Martinez can breath a sigh of relief. Marco Rubio has announced his candidacy, giving Floridians a clear choice in the primary between an Arlen Specteresque RINO in the form of Crist or a candidate who supports true conservative values.
Rubio, who has served in the Florida House since 2000, is a fiscal conservative who has championed lower taxes and smaller government. While Crist welcomed the stimulus money, and the federal government strings attached, with open arms, Rubio spoke out against the waste of taxpayer money.
As the race kicks in I will look forward to highlighting the differences between Charlie Crist and conservative Marco Rubio.
Rubio, who has served in the Florida House since 2000, is a fiscal conservative who has championed lower taxes and smaller government. While Crist welcomed the stimulus money, and the federal government strings attached, with open arms, Rubio spoke out against the waste of taxpayer money.
As the race kicks in I will look forward to highlighting the differences between Charlie Crist and conservative Marco Rubio.
Sunday, May 10, 2009
Surprise!
A top Obama fundraiser and hedge fund manager said: “I’m appalled at the anti-Wall Street rhetoric. It was OK on the campaign but now it’s the real world. I’m surprised that Obama is turning out to be so left-wing. He’s a real class warrior.”
So who, did those wealthy Wall Street types think Obama was talking about back then on the stump? Did they think he was talking about spreading somebody else’s wealth around or did they just chalk the rhetoric up to Obama’s wacky sense of humor? Were they okay with other people being screwed?
Forgive me if I am having a hard time sympathizing. I’m more than a little turned off by people who helped a socialist get elected while believing that they would be exempt from his socialist policies. In the real world, when you lie down there are consequences. Apparently, the Wall Street boys thought they could leave a couple of bucks on the dresser and walk out.
h/t Moe Lane at RedState
So who, did those wealthy Wall Street types think Obama was talking about back then on the stump? Did they think he was talking about spreading somebody else’s wealth around or did they just chalk the rhetoric up to Obama’s wacky sense of humor? Were they okay with other people being screwed?
Forgive me if I am having a hard time sympathizing. I’m more than a little turned off by people who helped a socialist get elected while believing that they would be exempt from his socialist policies. In the real world, when you lie down there are consequences. Apparently, the Wall Street boys thought they could leave a couple of bucks on the dresser and walk out.
h/t Moe Lane at RedState
He Not Only Can't Take A Joke
He can't tell one either.
Racist remark of the day
President Obama: “In the next 100 days, our bipartisan outreach will be so successful that even John Boehner will consider becoming a Democrat. After all, we have a lot in common. He is a person of color. Although not a color that appears in the natural world.”
Proof again that the Democratic Party’s symbol is a jackass.
Can you imagine the reaction had President Bush had said something like this? What a total tin eared ninny we've got in charge now. Mind. Blowingly. Stupid.
ht/ Don Surber
Racist remark of the day
President Obama: “In the next 100 days, our bipartisan outreach will be so successful that even John Boehner will consider becoming a Democrat. After all, we have a lot in common. He is a person of color. Although not a color that appears in the natural world.”
Proof again that the Democratic Party’s symbol is a jackass.
Can you imagine the reaction had President Bush had said something like this? What a total tin eared ninny we've got in charge now. Mind. Blowingly. Stupid.
ht/ Don Surber
Birthrates and Paying For a Leftist Agenda
Yesterday, RS McCain compared the birth rates in states that have sanctioned gay marriage to five states who favor traditional marriage. In my post, I began making the case that while the Left can’t be bothered having their own children, they certainly have plans for ours.
Margaret Thatcher pointed out socialism’s fatal flaw, “sooner or later you run out of other people’s money.” In other words, the Left needs taxes, on an ever growing scale, to fund their agenda. They have only three means of raising taxes; soak the “rich”, open the boarders or birth more babies.
Our closest global cousin is the United Kingdom. Auntie Elizabeth’s children enjoy the kind of birth to cradle socialism that our own Lefties want to bring to the United States. I think, therefore, it is fair to take a look at how it is working out for the Brits.
According to Wikipedia, the United Kingdom’s birthrate as of 2008 was 1.66, far below the replacement rate. Strike one.
However, Wiki also tells us “The birth rate is higher amongst foreign-born women than UK-born women, although it is only the latter which is rising.[97]” So, the United Kingdom, like much of Europe, has decided to import their taxpayers. The problem is, when the fastest growing segment of the population uses more services relative to the native population and has higher rates of unemployment, they really aren’t contributing to the bottom line. Strike two.
Faced with increased demand for services from a population that no longer knows how to care for itself, the UK raised its top tax rate to 61 percent. One quote sums it up:
“The Government has taken tax up to 50 per cent, and if it goes to 51 I will be back in America," he said at the weekend. "We've got 3.5 million layabouts on benefits, and I'm 76, getting up at 6am to go to work to keep them. Let's get everybody back to work so we can save a couple of billion and cut tax, not keep sticking it up."
Sir Michael Caine
Strike three.
When something sounds too good to be true, it is, and the Leftist Social Utopia is no exception. Don’t forget, once upon a time Social Security seemed like a good idea. But Social Security was predicated on people working until they died and never even collecting it. Birthrates were higher then and people worked longer. Now the system is broken but too many people have grown dependent on the state to scrap it. Why would we trust anymore of our personal welfare to a government that can’t deliver on its promises?
h/t The Other McCain
Margaret Thatcher pointed out socialism’s fatal flaw, “sooner or later you run out of other people’s money.” In other words, the Left needs taxes, on an ever growing scale, to fund their agenda. They have only three means of raising taxes; soak the “rich”, open the boarders or birth more babies.
Our closest global cousin is the United Kingdom. Auntie Elizabeth’s children enjoy the kind of birth to cradle socialism that our own Lefties want to bring to the United States. I think, therefore, it is fair to take a look at how it is working out for the Brits.
According to Wikipedia, the United Kingdom’s birthrate as of 2008 was 1.66, far below the replacement rate. Strike one.
However, Wiki also tells us “The birth rate is higher amongst foreign-born women than UK-born women, although it is only the latter which is rising.[97]” So, the United Kingdom, like much of Europe, has decided to import their taxpayers. The problem is, when the fastest growing segment of the population uses more services relative to the native population and has higher rates of unemployment, they really aren’t contributing to the bottom line. Strike two.
Faced with increased demand for services from a population that no longer knows how to care for itself, the UK raised its top tax rate to 61 percent. One quote sums it up:
“The Government has taken tax up to 50 per cent, and if it goes to 51 I will be back in America," he said at the weekend. "We've got 3.5 million layabouts on benefits, and I'm 76, getting up at 6am to go to work to keep them. Let's get everybody back to work so we can save a couple of billion and cut tax, not keep sticking it up."
Sir Michael Caine
Strike three.
When something sounds too good to be true, it is, and the Leftist Social Utopia is no exception. Don’t forget, once upon a time Social Security seemed like a good idea. But Social Security was predicated on people working until they died and never even collecting it. Birthrates were higher then and people worked longer. Now the system is broken but too many people have grown dependent on the state to scrap it. Why would we trust anymore of our personal welfare to a government that can’t deliver on its promises?
h/t The Other McCain
Good Grief!
If you need any further proof that the Left has had it's funny bone surgically removed look no further than DijonGate. For those of you unfamiliar, William Jacobsen wrote satirically about the President's choice of mustard at his blog, Legal Insurrection. Judging from the reaction of the left, you would the think that the Professor had published drawings of the President wearing a bomb shaped turban.
Let's be clear, Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart owe their careers to President Bush. Neither one of them is particularly funny except in a juvenile, PeeWee Hermann kind of way, but Presidents are funny, and Obama is no exception.
Obama's attempts to play himself off as "just a regular Joe" have repeatedly come off lame to the point of being side-splitting. Is there anyone who doesn't laugh at the mere mention of "arugula"? Every time Obama shows up at a bowling alley, bar or burger joint the results are humorous.
Until the President gets over his "I'm not a real mortal, I just play one on TV" thing, he's going to continue to be comical. A sense of humor will make the next four years a lot more bearable, for all of us.
h/t The Other McCain and Legal Insurrection
Let's be clear, Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart owe their careers to President Bush. Neither one of them is particularly funny except in a juvenile, PeeWee Hermann kind of way, but Presidents are funny, and Obama is no exception.
Obama's attempts to play himself off as "just a regular Joe" have repeatedly come off lame to the point of being side-splitting. Is there anyone who doesn't laugh at the mere mention of "arugula"? Every time Obama shows up at a bowling alley, bar or burger joint the results are humorous.
Until the President gets over his "I'm not a real mortal, I just play one on TV" thing, he's going to continue to be comical. A sense of humor will make the next four years a lot more bearable, for all of us.
h/t The Other McCain and Legal Insurrection
Meghan McCain
Everyone’s least favorite dumb blond, Meghan McCain, has a piece out in The Daily Beast titled My Beef With Ann Coulter. Apparently more than anything, Meghan craves attention and her only means of attracting it is by being stupid. Taking on Ann Coulter is not for the weak kneed or the weak brained and in doing so, Meghan has taken herself to all new heights of stupid.
Where to start? We can presume that Meghan, who states that she has been a Republican for less than a year, learned about the party from her father, and thus, can be forgiven for some of her kookier ideas. After all, the nut doesn’t fall far from the tree.
Meghan’s biggest complaint seems to be that Republicans aren’t “hip enough” and sites the example of Katy “I Kissed a Girl” Perry wearing a dress with The One’s face on it to some award show as the kind of hippness the party is lacking. Perhaps if we all walked around in tee shirts emblazoned with his Holiness’ visage ala Che Guevara on the front we could up our hip quotient. Unfortunately, Meghan, high school is over. Grownups, like Ann Coulter, engage in thought, not popularity contests.
Meghan, centrists, read: opportunists, are too intellectually lazy to stand up on principal so they fall back on adolescent pandering in the hope of being named the political equivalent of “prom queen.” Meghan, it is obvious that you are clueless about the ideals Republicans stand for but are you aware of what those “hip” lefties stand for?
“The left's anti-Americanism is intrinsic to their entireworldview. Liberals promote the rights of Islamic fanatics for the samereason they promote the rights of adulterers, pornographers, abortionists,criminals, and Communists. They instinctively root for anarchy and againstcivilization. The inevitable logic of the liberal position is to be for treason."
Ann Coulter-Treason
Put some in to that, Meghan. Is that really the direction you think the Republican Party should follow?
Where to start? We can presume that Meghan, who states that she has been a Republican for less than a year, learned about the party from her father, and thus, can be forgiven for some of her kookier ideas. After all, the nut doesn’t fall far from the tree.
Meghan’s biggest complaint seems to be that Republicans aren’t “hip enough” and sites the example of Katy “I Kissed a Girl” Perry wearing a dress with The One’s face on it to some award show as the kind of hippness the party is lacking. Perhaps if we all walked around in tee shirts emblazoned with his Holiness’ visage ala Che Guevara on the front we could up our hip quotient. Unfortunately, Meghan, high school is over. Grownups, like Ann Coulter, engage in thought, not popularity contests.
Meghan, centrists, read: opportunists, are too intellectually lazy to stand up on principal so they fall back on adolescent pandering in the hope of being named the political equivalent of “prom queen.” Meghan, it is obvious that you are clueless about the ideals Republicans stand for but are you aware of what those “hip” lefties stand for?
“The left's anti-Americanism is intrinsic to their entireworldview. Liberals promote the rights of Islamic fanatics for the samereason they promote the rights of adulterers, pornographers, abortionists,criminals, and Communists. They instinctively root for anarchy and againstcivilization. The inevitable logic of the liberal position is to be for treason."
Ann Coulter-Treason
Put some in to that, Meghan. Is that really the direction you think the Republican Party should follow?
Happy Mother's Day
The first entry in the "baby book" read in part, "...they put her in Don's arms. His eyes filled up with tears as he held her close and said, "this is my daughter."
The scene took place at The Methodist Children's Home ten days after my birth.
If my life were a movie my Mom would be the director and my Dad the leading man. My Mom worked behind the scenes setting up every shot, making sure everything went smoothly and that everyone knew their part.
Diagnosed with MS in her late teens, Mom's life could have been so much different. But instead of feeling sorry for herself she viewed her illness as a challenge. In her mind, MS had been given to her not to weaken her, but to make her stronger. It worked.
The greatest gift my Mom gave me was the ability to face challenges. I've passed the gift on to my own daughter. She and my Mom are so much alike.
Happy Mother's Day.
The scene took place at The Methodist Children's Home ten days after my birth.
If my life were a movie my Mom would be the director and my Dad the leading man. My Mom worked behind the scenes setting up every shot, making sure everything went smoothly and that everyone knew their part.
Diagnosed with MS in her late teens, Mom's life could have been so much different. But instead of feeling sorry for herself she viewed her illness as a challenge. In her mind, MS had been given to her not to weaken her, but to make her stronger. It worked.
The greatest gift my Mom gave me was the ability to face challenges. I've passed the gift on to my own daughter. She and my Mom are so much alike.
Happy Mother's Day.
Saturday, May 9, 2009
Obama and the UAW, BFF
I’ve said from the beginning that the current administration doesn’t give a rat’s ass about GM or Chrysler. Obama and friends used our tax dollars to bailout the UAW. Cold Fury follows the money. My suggestion, don’t pay for the same car twice; first with your paycheck and then with your taxes. If you decide to buy American, go with Ford. And don’t forget, its the Chicago way.
Sometimes a Joke is Just a Joke
Details of the latest manufactured controversy are brought to us by Jules Crittenden.
CBS Sports commentator David Feherty wrote:
“From my own experience visiting the troops in the Middle East, I can tell you this, though: despite how the conflict has been portrayed by our glorious media, if you gave any U.S. soldier a gun with two bullets in it, and he found himself in an elevator with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Osama bin Laden, there’s a good chance that Nancy Pelosi would get shot twice, and Harry Reid and bin Laden would be strangled to death,”
Upon reading the above I promptly shot beer out of my nose holes. No, I am not a violent extremist, unless appreciating over the top humor makes me one. However, not everyone shares my sense of humor. Enter, stage far left, the purveyors of acceptable comment, Media Matters:
“Mr. Feherty’s violent comments about Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid are disgusting,” said Media Matters President Eric Burns. “Suggesting that our troops would attack the leaders of the very democracy they’ve sworn to sacrifice their lives for is an insult to their integrity, honor, and professionalism. CBS Sports should demand its golf analyst apologize to our soldiers.”
Our troops are owed apologies from many sources. A short list would include the names Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Murtha, Napolitano and Media Matters, but not Feherty. I don’t pretend to speak for Mr. Feherty, but there is a reason he lumps Pelosi, Reid and Osama Bin Laden together. A good reason.
h/t Jules Crittenden via Don Surber
CBS Sports commentator David Feherty wrote:
“From my own experience visiting the troops in the Middle East, I can tell you this, though: despite how the conflict has been portrayed by our glorious media, if you gave any U.S. soldier a gun with two bullets in it, and he found himself in an elevator with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Osama bin Laden, there’s a good chance that Nancy Pelosi would get shot twice, and Harry Reid and bin Laden would be strangled to death,”
Upon reading the above I promptly shot beer out of my nose holes. No, I am not a violent extremist, unless appreciating over the top humor makes me one. However, not everyone shares my sense of humor. Enter, stage far left, the purveyors of acceptable comment, Media Matters:
“Mr. Feherty’s violent comments about Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid are disgusting,” said Media Matters President Eric Burns. “Suggesting that our troops would attack the leaders of the very democracy they’ve sworn to sacrifice their lives for is an insult to their integrity, honor, and professionalism. CBS Sports should demand its golf analyst apologize to our soldiers.”
Our troops are owed apologies from many sources. A short list would include the names Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Murtha, Napolitano and Media Matters, but not Feherty. I don’t pretend to speak for Mr. Feherty, but there is a reason he lumps Pelosi, Reid and Osama Bin Laden together. A good reason.
h/t Jules Crittenden via Don Surber
The Unbearable Nothingness of Meghan McCain
For reasons that escape me, Meghan McCain’s fifteen minutes of fame have now stretched out to what feels like a decade. Meghan violates the basic tenet of “Truth in Advertising” by calling herself a Republican. Like father, like daughter.
The thing is, does she have to be so damned tedious?
"Bristol Palin's new abstinence campaign shines a light on the Republican Party's unhealthy attitude about sex and desire."
What the hell does that mean? What unhealthy attitudes? Most conservatives I know believe that sex is an incredible physical and emotional act that should be enjoyed. Often. Where we differ from our rutting dog liberal brethren is that progressives limit their conversation to the physical side of the equation. Liberals remove all context from “The Act.” There is no emotion aside from a the perfunctory “oh, baby” and certainly no consequences. Sex is a series of solitary stand alone acts. Pathetic.
Meghan is obviously ill equipped to deal with sex, or any other important subject matter, in any detailed, thoughtful manner. Perhaps when she grows up we’ll see some glimmer of thoughtfulness. In the mean time, the Left should be ashamed of their cheap child exploitation.
h/t The Other McCain and Gateway Pundit
The thing is, does she have to be so damned tedious?
"Bristol Palin's new abstinence campaign shines a light on the Republican Party's unhealthy attitude about sex and desire."
What the hell does that mean? What unhealthy attitudes? Most conservatives I know believe that sex is an incredible physical and emotional act that should be enjoyed. Often. Where we differ from our rutting dog liberal brethren is that progressives limit their conversation to the physical side of the equation. Liberals remove all context from “The Act.” There is no emotion aside from a the perfunctory “oh, baby” and certainly no consequences. Sex is a series of solitary stand alone acts. Pathetic.
Meghan is obviously ill equipped to deal with sex, or any other important subject matter, in any detailed, thoughtful manner. Perhaps when she grows up we’ll see some glimmer of thoughtfulness. In the mean time, the Left should be ashamed of their cheap child exploitation.
h/t The Other McCain and Gateway Pundit
Who Does The Future Belong To?
Stacey McCain did a comparison between states that have legalized gay marriage and states who favor traditional marriage and found that the “gay” states have significantly lower birth rates. Well,duh. Central to “traditional values” is optimism. Optimistic people honor the past, value the present and look forward to the future. Couples who enter into marriage with an optimistic vision of the future want to share that future with children.
The good news is, the future belongs to breeders. Progressives, with their negative world view, don’t assign any value to having children. This is apparent in feminist who eviscerate women who have chosen to raise children and rabid environmentalists who seek a one-child, or worse, no-child solution to “saving the environment” (which begs the question-who are they saving it for?). By their own choices, progressives will dwindle and eventually cease to exist.
Let’s not celebrate just yet. Eventually will take a few generations and there is much mischief progressives can cause in the mean time.
While the left may not have any plans for their own children, they have plenty for ours. Their two biggest tools are our schools and the media. Our children, as a whole, are barely proficient reading, writing, math or science even when compared to children in countries whose standard of living is far inferior to our own. Rather than giving our children the skills they need to succeed the classroom is used to foster ideology. Our children can regurgitate talking points but their ability to apply logic has been systematically and intentionally atrophied.
The media picks up where our schools leave off. Everything our children are exposed to, books, magazines, music, movies, and television are progressive agenda driven. Our children are bombarded with images and messages designed to erect a wall between them and traditional values and short of chaining our children in a closet there is little means of protection.
What can parents do? Take the Tea Party to your child’s PTA. Take the Tea Party to the school board meeting. Be informed. Be aggressive. Let the administration and teachers know that as a taxpayer you pay their salaries, they work for you and as their boss you demand accountability. Know the materials the school is using and whether the materials are being used to educate or indoctrinate.
Don’t give the media a pass but whenever possible, or as much as you can stomach, resist the urge to ban. Instead, have frank discussions with your children about your values and how media distorts and impugns those values. Draw your children’s feelings out and help them to think about the words and images they are exposed to.
These are difficult times for traditionalists. Mainly, because we’ve sat back and played nice while allowing not so nice people to set the agenda. I am an optimist. I am seeing more and more people willing to stand up for their values. Quite frankly, if progressives have decided to stop breeding it just makes our job easier.
h/t The Other McCain
For those of you who doubt that that our schools are staffed by agenda driven quarter-wits. I give you this:
Question: Why can’t Johnny do math?
Answer: Because in a public school, the Pacific Justice Institute reported: “A lesbian minister was invited to guest lecture for math and science classes. At that time, she shared her personal views on homosexuality, including a discussion of her lesbian wedding, the homosexual prom, and other such events and things that many parents were very concerned about once they heard this had taken place."
I rest my case. Thank you, Don.
The good news is, the future belongs to breeders. Progressives, with their negative world view, don’t assign any value to having children. This is apparent in feminist who eviscerate women who have chosen to raise children and rabid environmentalists who seek a one-child, or worse, no-child solution to “saving the environment” (which begs the question-who are they saving it for?). By their own choices, progressives will dwindle and eventually cease to exist.
Let’s not celebrate just yet. Eventually will take a few generations and there is much mischief progressives can cause in the mean time.
While the left may not have any plans for their own children, they have plenty for ours. Their two biggest tools are our schools and the media. Our children, as a whole, are barely proficient reading, writing, math or science even when compared to children in countries whose standard of living is far inferior to our own. Rather than giving our children the skills they need to succeed the classroom is used to foster ideology. Our children can regurgitate talking points but their ability to apply logic has been systematically and intentionally atrophied.
The media picks up where our schools leave off. Everything our children are exposed to, books, magazines, music, movies, and television are progressive agenda driven. Our children are bombarded with images and messages designed to erect a wall between them and traditional values and short of chaining our children in a closet there is little means of protection.
What can parents do? Take the Tea Party to your child’s PTA. Take the Tea Party to the school board meeting. Be informed. Be aggressive. Let the administration and teachers know that as a taxpayer you pay their salaries, they work for you and as their boss you demand accountability. Know the materials the school is using and whether the materials are being used to educate or indoctrinate.
Don’t give the media a pass but whenever possible, or as much as you can stomach, resist the urge to ban. Instead, have frank discussions with your children about your values and how media distorts and impugns those values. Draw your children’s feelings out and help them to think about the words and images they are exposed to.
These are difficult times for traditionalists. Mainly, because we’ve sat back and played nice while allowing not so nice people to set the agenda. I am an optimist. I am seeing more and more people willing to stand up for their values. Quite frankly, if progressives have decided to stop breeding it just makes our job easier.
h/t The Other McCain
For those of you who doubt that that our schools are staffed by agenda driven quarter-wits. I give you this:
Question: Why can’t Johnny do math?
Answer: Because in a public school, the Pacific Justice Institute reported: “A lesbian minister was invited to guest lecture for math and science classes. At that time, she shared her personal views on homosexuality, including a discussion of her lesbian wedding, the homosexual prom, and other such events and things that many parents were very concerned about once they heard this had taken place."
I rest my case. Thank you, Don.
Friday, May 8, 2009
Nancy, Stop Digging-You've Hit Bottom
Oath of Office for the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives:
The text of the Constitutional Oath is not written in the Constitution, but the current oath was enacted by Congress in 1862. "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."
This is the oath that Nancy Pelosi took and this is the oath that Nancy Pelosi broke. Nancy Pelosi has not faithfully discharged the duties of her office. She has repeatedly lied to the American people rregarding her knowledge about the use of enhanced interrogation techniques, including water boarding. We now know the following:
As ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, Nancy Pelosi was briefed on the use of enhanced interrogation techniques in 2002. She was told, in detail, what methods had been used, were being used and would be used in the future. Pelosi raised no objections.
Now, for cheap political points, the Speaker is playing dumb. Obviously, playing dumb isn’t a stretch for Pelosi, but this isn’t a George Clooney film. In real life, when politicians undermine our country for the entertainment of the left, America suffers real harm.
Nancy Pelosi took an oath to defend the Constitution not Code Pink. It is time for her to go.
For a great take on Pelosi, read the smack down at Cold Fury. If you enjoy informed commentary without having smoke blown up your tail pipe, this is the go to site.
Also check out the story over at Don Surber's place. Bonus, if you are considering Botox, take a long, hard look at the Speaker’s picture.
Update: From Gateway Pundit:
"As I said in my statement of December 9, 2007: 'I was briefed on interrogation techniques the (Bush) administration was considering using in the future. The administration advised that legal counsel for both the CIA and the Department of Justice had concluded that the techniques were legal,'" she said.But even that statement is at odds with the official record of the briefings recorded in the CIA memo dated to Sept. 4, 2002. That memo says Pelosi received a "briefing on EITs (enhanced interrogation techniques), including use of EITs on Abu Zubaydah, background on authorities and a description of particular EITs that had been employed."
Unreal. She's still lying.Now she's saying that she knew EIT's were going to be used but not that they had been used.Pelosi was told the EIT's had already been used during her 2002 briefing.
Nancy Pelosi is evil. Keep shining the light on her.
The text of the Constitutional Oath is not written in the Constitution, but the current oath was enacted by Congress in 1862. "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."
This is the oath that Nancy Pelosi took and this is the oath that Nancy Pelosi broke. Nancy Pelosi has not faithfully discharged the duties of her office. She has repeatedly lied to the American people rregarding her knowledge about the use of enhanced interrogation techniques, including water boarding. We now know the following:
As ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, Nancy Pelosi was briefed on the use of enhanced interrogation techniques in 2002. She was told, in detail, what methods had been used, were being used and would be used in the future. Pelosi raised no objections.
Now, for cheap political points, the Speaker is playing dumb. Obviously, playing dumb isn’t a stretch for Pelosi, but this isn’t a George Clooney film. In real life, when politicians undermine our country for the entertainment of the left, America suffers real harm.
Nancy Pelosi took an oath to defend the Constitution not Code Pink. It is time for her to go.
For a great take on Pelosi, read the smack down at Cold Fury. If you enjoy informed commentary without having smoke blown up your tail pipe, this is the go to site.
Also check out the story over at Don Surber's place. Bonus, if you are considering Botox, take a long, hard look at the Speaker’s picture.
Update: From Gateway Pundit:
"As I said in my statement of December 9, 2007: 'I was briefed on interrogation techniques the (Bush) administration was considering using in the future. The administration advised that legal counsel for both the CIA and the Department of Justice had concluded that the techniques were legal,'" she said.But even that statement is at odds with the official record of the briefings recorded in the CIA memo dated to Sept. 4, 2002. That memo says Pelosi received a "briefing on EITs (enhanced interrogation techniques), including use of EITs on Abu Zubaydah, background on authorities and a description of particular EITs that had been employed."
Unreal. She's still lying.Now she's saying that she knew EIT's were going to be used but not that they had been used.Pelosi was told the EIT's had already been used during her 2002 briefing.
Nancy Pelosi is evil. Keep shining the light on her.
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Andy Is So Dissappointed
Don Surber brings us the following:
Andrew Sullivan: President Obama just fired a guy for being gay.
The Democratic Party’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy in the military just bit them in the seat. Again. The flamethrowers on the left are upset because Dan Choi, a West Point graduate, violated the policy and announced on national TV that he is gay.
Choi is an officer in the National Guard who an Iraqi veteran and is said to be fluent in Arabic. Speaking Arabic is supposed to give gay people magic immunity from the Democratic Party’s law.
“Obama is firing him because he’s openly gay. And he has no plans to change that policy, despite a clear campaign commitment,” Andrew Sullivan wrote.
If course, some Obamaphiles are still so starry-eyed that they believe that their president is above the law.
Aaron Belkin at Huffington Post wrote: “President Obama does, in fact, have stroke-of-the-pen authority to suspend gay discharges. The ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ law requires the military to fire anyone found to be gay or lesbian. But there is nothing requiring the military to make such a finding. The president can simply order the military to stop investigating service members’ sexuality.”
Liberals are so cute when they get angry.
************************************************************************
The President bit Andy on the backside. I thought that’s what he wanted.
In other news, there’s no word yet how Obama’s support of “Don’t ask, don’t tell” will affect Marie Osmond's lesbian daughter’s application to the Air Force Academy.
h/t Don Surber, The Other McCain and, oh yeah, Jules Crittenden
Andrew Sullivan: President Obama just fired a guy for being gay.
The Democratic Party’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy in the military just bit them in the seat. Again. The flamethrowers on the left are upset because Dan Choi, a West Point graduate, violated the policy and announced on national TV that he is gay.
Choi is an officer in the National Guard who an Iraqi veteran and is said to be fluent in Arabic. Speaking Arabic is supposed to give gay people magic immunity from the Democratic Party’s law.
“Obama is firing him because he’s openly gay. And he has no plans to change that policy, despite a clear campaign commitment,” Andrew Sullivan wrote.
If course, some Obamaphiles are still so starry-eyed that they believe that their president is above the law.
Aaron Belkin at Huffington Post wrote: “President Obama does, in fact, have stroke-of-the-pen authority to suspend gay discharges. The ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ law requires the military to fire anyone found to be gay or lesbian. But there is nothing requiring the military to make such a finding. The president can simply order the military to stop investigating service members’ sexuality.”
Liberals are so cute when they get angry.
************************************************************************
The President bit Andy on the backside. I thought that’s what he wanted.
In other news, there’s no word yet how Obama’s support of “Don’t ask, don’t tell” will affect Marie Osmond's lesbian daughter’s application to the Air Force Academy.
h/t Don Surber, The Other McCain and, oh yeah, Jules Crittenden
Centrist Need Not Apply
Sooner or later you have to stand up for something or you’ll end up falling for anything. Colin Powell says the Republican Party needs to be more centrist. We have been centrists for too long now and the only thing it has gotten us is a one way ticket to socialism. Enough.
Are the Democrats centrist? Has their theme been “let’s play along to get along”? Not so I’ve noticed. If we are going to lose let’s at least lose honorably. We have a message. We need to put it out there. We need to have faith in our way of life.
“You can't make a two-party system work with one-and-a-half parties." -- Mark Steyn
Right now we are half a party. But if the Tea Parties have shown us anything, Americans want a return to conservative values. RS McCain has a post today titled Joe the Plumber: Ordinary American. Everyone I know is an ordinary American; my friends, my family, my neighbors, my co-workers. None of us are alone. Let’s stand up. Together.
h/t The Other McCain
Update: Dear Meghan, no offense, you're young and maybe you'll outgrow it, but right now, you're, ookey. Perhaps you should consider pulling a "Specter." Ideologically and genetically, that might be a better use of your talents. By the way, have you met Marie Osmond's lesbian daughter?
Are the Democrats centrist? Has their theme been “let’s play along to get along”? Not so I’ve noticed. If we are going to lose let’s at least lose honorably. We have a message. We need to put it out there. We need to have faith in our way of life.
“You can't make a two-party system work with one-and-a-half parties." -- Mark Steyn
Right now we are half a party. But if the Tea Parties have shown us anything, Americans want a return to conservative values. RS McCain has a post today titled Joe the Plumber: Ordinary American. Everyone I know is an ordinary American; my friends, my family, my neighbors, my co-workers. None of us are alone. Let’s stand up. Together.
h/t The Other McCain
Update: Dear Meghan, no offense, you're young and maybe you'll outgrow it, but right now, you're, ookey. Perhaps you should consider pulling a "Specter." Ideologically and genetically, that might be a better use of your talents. By the way, have you met Marie Osmond's lesbian daughter?
And Now For Something Totally Uninteresting...
Can someone please explain to me why Levi Johnston is still in the news? BREAKING NEWS! Teenagers have SEX! Um, I’m fifty-one years old and teenagers were having sex way back in my day. A lot. Yeah, but he got a vice presidential candidate’s daughter pregnant! Oh, well, in that case…SHEESH!
Look, I raised a son. I could tell you stories that would curl your incisors, and J was a Momma’s boy. Two things are a given-teenage boys live for sex; teenage boys live to talk about having sex. That doesn't make them interesting.
Enough of the Levi interviews. We get it. A conservative, family values woman’s teenage daughter got pregnant. The truth is, all the people who are hell bent on keeping this in news are talking to themselves. We don’t care.
By the way, Levi’s next appearance is on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. He will be joined by Marie Osmond's lesbian daughter.
h/t The Other McCain
Look, I raised a son. I could tell you stories that would curl your incisors, and J was a Momma’s boy. Two things are a given-teenage boys live for sex; teenage boys live to talk about having sex. That doesn't make them interesting.
Enough of the Levi interviews. We get it. A conservative, family values woman’s teenage daughter got pregnant. The truth is, all the people who are hell bent on keeping this in news are talking to themselves. We don’t care.
By the way, Levi’s next appearance is on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. He will be joined by Marie Osmond's lesbian daughter.
h/t The Other McCain
The Difference Between "Love" and "Support"
Celebrity controversies are as common as dirt, but who would have expected that the latest dust up would concern Marie Osmond's lesbian daughter. Ms. Osmond, described as a devout Mormon, has expressed support for her daughter and for gay marriage. Ms. Osmond can either be devoted to the teachings of her church or she can favor same sex marriage, but she can’t do both.
Osmond, who turned down the role of Sandy in Grease because she did not approve of the character’s morals, seems to be confused between showing her daughter love and giving her daughter support. As parents we should love our children unconditionally, but we should also withhold our support when they behave in a manner that is inconsistent with our religious or moral beliefs.
It is not unusual for parents to have conflicting emotions when addressing their children’s behavior and Osmond certainly sounds garbled in hers:
“You know, I think each of us has the right to choose who makes that medical decision for us, I think everybody should have the right to share homes and finances with somebody that they care about. You know on those types of things I'm very supportive. When it comes to marriage ... I think that civil rights need to be for all. When you start mixing religion into that and beliefs, you know, I do believe in the Bible. My daughter understands my beliefs. And, and, uh, you know, God said to be married and be productive with your children and, and, you know, replenish the earth or whatever. She understands those things. My daughter is sharp. And we have a great relationship and I think she would tell you that.”
There are already several legal remedies in place that individuals can utilize to insure that their medical and financial wishes are honored. All couples, straight or gay, in committed relationships should have medical power of attorneys and should name of medical surrogate. From a financial prospective, assets can be protected through proper titling and executing wills and trusts. I honestly can’t make heads or tails of the rest of Osmond’s statement, particularly, “When you start mixing religion into that and beliefs, you know, I do believe in the Bible.” Are her religious beliefs central to who she is or not?
Perhaps, before, giving any more statements, Marie should sit down and honestly figure out what she believes and where she stands.
h/t The Other McCain
Osmond, who turned down the role of Sandy in Grease because she did not approve of the character’s morals, seems to be confused between showing her daughter love and giving her daughter support. As parents we should love our children unconditionally, but we should also withhold our support when they behave in a manner that is inconsistent with our religious or moral beliefs.
It is not unusual for parents to have conflicting emotions when addressing their children’s behavior and Osmond certainly sounds garbled in hers:
“You know, I think each of us has the right to choose who makes that medical decision for us, I think everybody should have the right to share homes and finances with somebody that they care about. You know on those types of things I'm very supportive. When it comes to marriage ... I think that civil rights need to be for all. When you start mixing religion into that and beliefs, you know, I do believe in the Bible. My daughter understands my beliefs. And, and, uh, you know, God said to be married and be productive with your children and, and, you know, replenish the earth or whatever. She understands those things. My daughter is sharp. And we have a great relationship and I think she would tell you that.”
There are already several legal remedies in place that individuals can utilize to insure that their medical and financial wishes are honored. All couples, straight or gay, in committed relationships should have medical power of attorneys and should name of medical surrogate. From a financial prospective, assets can be protected through proper titling and executing wills and trusts. I honestly can’t make heads or tails of the rest of Osmond’s statement, particularly, “When you start mixing religion into that and beliefs, you know, I do believe in the Bible.” Are her religious beliefs central to who she is or not?
Perhaps, before, giving any more statements, Marie should sit down and honestly figure out what she believes and where she stands.
h/t The Other McCain
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
You May Be A Racist
If you are opposed to voter fraud, you must be a racist. If you are from the South, like I am, you are obviously a racist.
Here are the rules:
White = Racist
Southern = Racist
Christian = Racist
Conservative = Racist
If any of the above describes you, please see your doctor immediately. There is medicine available that will end your obsessive-compulsive to stereotype people. There are some nasty side effects but on the bright side, it tastes just like grape kool aide.
h/t The Other McCain
Here are the rules:
White = Racist
Southern = Racist
Christian = Racist
Conservative = Racist
If any of the above describes you, please see your doctor immediately. There is medicine available that will end your obsessive-compulsive to stereotype people. There are some nasty side effects but on the bright side, it tastes just like grape kool aide.
h/t The Other McCain
Pulling The Welcome Mat
The good news is that Great Britain supports free speech. Unfortunately, that freedom is restricted to people who call for the slaughter of those who disagree with them. Seems like an odd stand for a country who believes itself so intellectually superior to their spin-offs on this side of the pond. Jolly ol' England has come up with a list of people that they consider too dangerous to step on their shores. Well, maybe not violent per se, but people who aren't nice. One name stood out on the list for me, and it wasn't Michel Savage, who I wouldn't know him if he walked up and turned me over his knee. Fred Phelps caught my eye. Phelps is a morally repugnant douche bag who would greatly benefit from an enema. However, if Phelps and his fellow flying monkeys decided to have a parade on the streets of my town I would feel perfectly happy to not show up. That is how you handle the Phelps of the world. You ignore them. They aren't dangerous. England is ignoring dangerous people and banning those they should ignore.
I don't understand their reasoning. I'm just grateful I live in a country that is less civilized and much more free.
h/t Allahpundit
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)