Thursday, April 23, 2009


I have no problem with the current administration deciding that the US will not use certain interrogation techniques, including water boarding, when questioning enemy combatants. I don't think it is torture, but they do, so they have a right to redefine the law according to their own perception.
I am somewhat disgusted with the possibility of extending that new definition back into time in order to go after the last administration. It's a witch hunt.
Another reason I am disgusted is because this administration is weak and petty. Within a 24 hour period, the President and his Press Secretary both flip flopped 180 degrees about this subject.
It also makes me wonder where President Obama is getting his marching orders. Why did he flip flop so dramatically in 24 hours? Who spoke to him? Who is it that is so powerful that their thirst for blood has whipped the President of the USA into obedience?

This has never been done before, by any administration. They are telling everyone that advised these techniques were not illegal that they are investigating them, from the president all the way down the slippery slope to the lawyers who advised the CIA and every person in between. They are being investigated for war crimes that were demonstrated to members of the Hill in 2002 without objection. This includes leading Democrats of that time such as Nancy Pelosi. Are you going to prosecute a standing Speaker of the House too? What about Jane Harman or John Rockefeller or Bob Graham, all who had oversight and were briefed during 2002 and 2003, the only time when these techniques were employed? The Daily Kos thought they should all be held accountable. Does President Obama?

Imagine the precedent this will set.

Can you imagine a future administration declaring that current government involvement in the banking industry is illegal and then prosecuting everyone involved, from President Obama down to the lawyers that might have advised it was legal? Will they be able to investigate every congressman that went along with it? Is this the "Change" YOU voted for? Is this the "hope" that YOU voted for?

Do you remember what it was that you were expecting when you pulled the lever for Obama?

On an unrelated subject:

Now is a VERY good time to get out of the stock market if you are still in it. I have the feeling the bear market rally is about to end pretty soon.

Tuesday, April 21, 2009

Lisbon Tea Protest

I don't think the "big business" media understand what is happening under their noses as far as the tea parties that recently took place. Instead of reporting what happened, they are making crude sexual jokes about the participants, calling us names, crying racism, etc.
I recently went to a "small" tea party in Lisbon, Ohio. This is not exactly the hotbed of conservatism. It is a strong union area that religiously re-elects democrats into office election after election. I was expecting maybe 100 people to be there. It was raining, it was chilly, and it was a weekday. Much to my surprise, the village square was filled with 5 times more people than I expected.
500 is not exactly a giant get together in comparison to the near 30,000 that protested in front of the Alamo, and the bigger cities that drew over 10,000 each....but if one keeps it in perspective to population, 500 is huge. Lisbon is a village of approximately 2,800 residents. That's almost 20 percent of the Villages population. I wonder how many more would have come if it had been sunny and warm?
No one there made a racist comment. There were in fact white and black people in attendance. I have been trying to figure out exactly what is racist in these tea parties anyway. If you are for freedom and liberty and a small federal government you are somehow a racist hater?
What twisted logic.

I included this video below that I found on Michelle Malkin's web site because I thought it said what many of us feel.

Thursday, April 16, 2009

LEFTWING HITJOB: an example from the looters at Daily Kos (and CNN)

From the tedshubris's diary
The great thing about owning professional video equipment is that armed with it, you can pass yourself off as being a professional news crew pretty easily.

So tomorrow, [Fake Station Name Redacted] is going to send a cameraman and on air news personality out into the field to cover this "teabagging" phenomenon.

We're going to ask open ended questions that seem to have a slight conservative bent to (hopefully) get them to open up and just start ranting. Then, we take any examples of racism, hatred, ignorance, and stupidity that we catch on camera and make a little movie out of it. Probably a YouTube special.

Here's the list we have so far

* What are you celebrating (The Boston Tea Party), and can you explain its historical relevance? [We're hoping to get some hilarious flubs from this one]
* Is this your first time teabagging? [OK, so, a juvenile one, but worth it] (apparently, we're the only ones who have connected tea parties to teabagging. Or, for that matter, the sociological study "Tearoom trade". Removed for the sake of keeping covert)

* Do you approve of Michael Steele's plan to expand the GOP through a "hip-hop urban-suburban marketing strategy"? [hoping to get some juicy racist stuff from this question]
* (as an intentional misunderstanding/follow up, presuming that someone complains about wasteful government spending) "So you disapprove of your tax dollars going to the Iraq War?" [should elicit some confusion]
* Do you approve of the direction in which this country is headed? [With thanks to Bob Love]
Anyways, it's a start... but I'd love to have some suggestions for questions that sound fine, but should prompt an outpouring of crazy.

FROM CNN. A Totally "real" reporter following the Daily Kos strategy.

Why are you looters liars? Oh wait, that's a really really dumb question. You are looters, why would anyone expect an ounce of decency or honesty?
Can you imagine a whole society based on the ideals of these kinds of people? Why it would resemble Mussolini's Italy.....wouldn't it?

Wednesday, April 15, 2009

Sister Toldjah on the DHS Tactic

Calling it right - way ahead of time

Far lefties are getting a huge thrill out of this, of course, but let’s not forget how they repeatedly foamed at the mouth over a similar Bush-era DHS policy as it related to ultra-left wing groups, except in those instances the DHS was very specific in the types of groups it felt posed significant threats to not just the President, but to the security of the general public (and in fairness they didn’t get it 100% right). Today’s DHS document was quite different in that it seemed deliberate in its vagueness, essentially classifying those who favor more state than federal control as “right wing extremists” and portraying those who are strongly anti-illegal immigration in a similar fashion. It’s one thing for the DHS to write about its concerns about the few on the extreme fringe right who have the potential to be violent and destructive, but its another altogether to characterize legitimate opposition as somehow threatening. The liberals hailing this document don’t seem to get that, and neither, apparently does President Obama’s DHS.......More

Yes, we were warned ahead of time, long before this administration was elected. The problem is that the media has been getting thrills up and down their legs every time our leader steps up to a teleprompter. They have given up all journalistic integrity in order to bring us back in time to the early twentieth century progressivism that laid the groundwork for propaganda via information engineering and silencing the critics of their policies. They invented the Jim Crow Laws that held African Americans in "their place". They are still doing this today! (If you want to see what progressive policies will do for all of America, just look at our inner cities. They have one thing in common there. They always vote for liberals.) They also were instrumental in forming the worthless Utopian League of Nations. Now they are shoving the Utopian U.N. down our throats and admitting that they believe our Constitution is trumped by international law.

And we law abiding respecters of the US Constitution are to be considered Radicals?

Tuesday, April 14, 2009

BIG SISTER IS WATCHING YOU! The right wing extremist quiz.

1 Are you a Christian?
2 Are you pro-life?
3 Are you against ILLEGAL immigration?
4 Are you one of our military heroes, returning from Iraq or Afghanistan?
5 Are you in favor of a smaller Federal Government?
6 Are you concerned that we may be printing too much money?
7 Do you prefer that government spends less of the taxpayers money?
8 Do you feel that public welfare programs do more harm than good?
9 Do you support the constitutional RIGHT to own a firearm?
10 Are you living during a recession?
11 Do you consider yourself a Conservative or a Libertarian?

According to the Department of Homeland Security, if you answered yes to any one of the first 10 in conjunction with a yes to number 11, you may be a right wing extremist and must be watched. 

I could not believe my eyes when I read THIS DOCUMENT produced by the Obama Administration.

Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment

Some key findings in the report?

The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.

Rightwing extremists are harnessing this historical election as a recruitment tool. Many rightwing extremists are antagonistic toward the new presidential administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms ownership and use. Rightwing extremists are increasingly galvanized by these concerns and leverage them as drivers for recruitment. From the 2008 election timeframe to the present, rightwing extremists have capitalized on related racial and political prejudices in expanded propaganda campaigns, thereby reaching out to a wider audience of potential sympathizers.

Over the past five years, various rightwing extremists, including militias and white supremacists, have adopted the immigration issue as a call to action, rallying point, and recruiting tool. Debates over appropriate immigration levels and enforcement policy generally fall within the realm of protected political speech under the First Amendment, but in some cases, anti-immigration or strident pro-enforcement fervor has been directed against specific groups and has the potential to turn violent.

Open source reporting of wartime ammunition shortages has likely spurred rightwing extremists as well as law-abiding Americans to make bulk purchases of ammunition. These shortages have increased the cost of ammunition, further exacerbating rightwing extremist paranoia and leading to further stockpiling activity. Both rightwing extremists and law-abiding citizens share a belief that rising crime rates attributed to a slumping economy make the purchase of legitimate firearms a wise move at this time.

Weapons rights and gun-control legislation are likely to be hotly contested subjects of political debate in light of the 2008 Supreme Court’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller in which the Court reaffirmed an individual’s right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, but left open to debate the precise contours of that right. Because debates over constitutional rights are intense, and parties on all sides have deeply held, sincere, but vastly divergent beliefs, violent extremists may attempt to co-opt the debate and use the controversy as a radicalization tool.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS/I&A) assesses that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to exploit their skills and knowledge derived from military training and combat. These skills and knowledge have the potential to boost the capabilities of extremists including lone wolves or small terrorist cells to carry out violence. The willingness of a small percentage of military personnel to join extremist groups during the 1990s because they were disgruntled, disillusioned, or suffering from the psychological effects of war is being replicated today.

Antigovernment conspiracy theories and “end times” prophecies could motivate extremist individuals and groups to stockpile food, ammunition, and weapons. These teachings also have been linked with the radicalization of domestic extremist individuals and groups in the past, such as violent Christian Identity organizations and extremist members of the militia movement.

DHS/I&A will be working with its state and local partners over the next several months to ascertain with greater regional specificity the rise in rightwing extremist activity in the United States, with a particular emphasis on the political, economic, and social factors that drive rightwing extremist radicalization.

I am a Veteran who participated in conflict with a muslim nation. I am a Christian. I beleive in the right to bear arms (and ammunition) even though I have not owned a gun for decades. I'm not pro abortion. I'm not happy with the course our Government is taking us on at all (nor the LAST administration). You see, I beleive in a smaller government. Shall I go on?

This is the most blatent example of how progressives operate. In one giant brush, they have painted millions upon millions of Americans as potential right wing radicals.

The radicals seem to be on the left. You know...Code Pink, the Weather Underground, Bill Ayers, animal rights terrorists, enviro-terrorists, etc, etc.

I was not actually planning to attend the local Tea Party, but now I have simply had enough. I am going to rearrange my schedule so I can do my bit.

THIS IS WHY WE ARE HAVING TEA PARTIES. It's not all about taxation. It's about a federal government that has become too large and oppressive.  An honest history of the genesis of these tea parties can be found on Michelle, just in case you get all of your news from MSNBC or other leftwing propaganda instruments.  It really is a grass roots phenomenon, not a Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh thing. In fact, it's not even a Republican thing. 

Monday, April 13, 2009

Many big businesses are NOT FOR a free market

Something happens to people after they build a business into a huge corporation. They start to use their money to influence Washington to protect their own dominance of the market. They all have their special little army of lobbyists and deal makers that will hang around the capital building, and attend Wednesday evening parties in the White House ballroom. They are not there to urge that Washington adopts a free market. They are there for one reason. To gain favors for their bosses among the political elites.

This results in a system that protects the interests of big business at the expense of competitors. It ensures that small businesses are less able to compete with these corporate giants who can afford to either evade or absorb the regulatory costs imposed by the elected elite.

Let me give just one small example of a regulation that only the big companies can afford that this administration has recently signed. The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) took effect on February 11th. This act is a feel good law that says that any new products produced for children under the age of 12 must undergo testing by a third party lab to make sure that lead levels are within standards. This sounds warm and cozy. Everyone agrees that almost all of these products will pass with flying colors, so it shouldn't be a problem.
But it is.
These third party labs do not perform the tests for free. It can be very expensive in fact. It's a cost that a large corporation can absorb easily, while a small entrepreneur just getting started with a perfectly safe product can't afford. Big business wins again. The rich get richer, and the poor get poorer.


Wouldn't it be better to allow business to opt out of the regulatory system entirely? I don't mean to end regulation. I mean end forced compliance.
Here is what I mean.
Leave all of the regulation in place and all companies that comply with the regulation can have a little symbol on their product, or after their name that will let every consumer know that these companies comply with all Government regulations and are absorbing the costs and fees associated with these regulations.
Then allow companies to opt out of the regulations completely, with the exception maybe of sensible pollution standards because clearly sensible antipollution laws are in the interest of the public.
Let the consumer decide whether they prefer to deal with a regulated company, or an unregulated company.
Some regulated companies might do better than unregulated companies. Local banks for example will attract more savings customers if they have the FDIC insuring their savings. Some unregulated companies might do better than regulated companies.

The consumer makes the choice.

If an unregulated company produces a product that is harmful, they will still pay the price in liability claims and other such lawsuits.

I wonder what would happen.......

Friday, April 10, 2009

Clueless Progressives

I was just finishing up some work and decided to see what was on TV. I noticed a new show on MSNBC called The Ed Show so curiousity got the best of me and I tuned into the very end of it. I can't tell you if it was good or bad, not having seen it more than 5 minutes. As it ended, I went to get a drink of water and when I walked in, Oberman was on, except it wasn't Oberman. It was that other guy that always has that condescending toothless smirk on his face. I have know idea what his name is, nor do I plan to find out.
The subject of the Tea Parties popping up here and there all around the country was brought up, and I sat there in disbelief how clueless he and his guet were about what these tea parties are about. To paraphrase his "expert" guest, he admitted he had no idea what the motivation for these tea parties is. He said that they seem to be against bailouts for banks...which was started by GW Bush, they seem to be against bailouts for Detroit...which GW Bush started, they seem to be against deficit spending....which President Obama inherited, etc etc.

They really don't get it.
We were against this stuff when President Bush was doing them too!!!
Now I'm not a Republican. I am an independent who leans heavily toward the Libertarian party. But Republicans and and Libertarians share this one thing. We all believe in personal liberty. We believe in individual freedom.
The significance of these tea parties is in the fact that they are happening at all. You see, unlike progressives who follow group think and run in giant herds, many republicans and practically all libertarians are more predisposed to be independent thinkers without that borg mentality. We are not afraid to go it alone, unlike the progressives who think we should all be coddled by a benevolent caretaker government. We are much harder to put on a bus to act as a rent mob in front of AIG Executive homes. As Professor Dawkins uttered about atheists, herding Libertarians ( and many Republicans outside of the Religious right) is like herding cats.
Another thing that astounded me is their confusion about who is organizing the tea parties. They kicked around it being the product of Fox News since they are now promoting their coverage of it. True, some guys like Sean Hannity seem to be trying to take some credit, but the fact is, no one at Fox got the ball rolling. The pundits at Fox were just as surprised as anyone that this was even happening. This is a blogosphere thing. This isn't a Republican thing either. It has no connection to the Republican party other than the fact that many Republicans who feel the Republican party has become the right wing of the Progressive Party are taking part.

These demonstrations are barely getting any media coverage, even though many of them have included thousands of people. It's funny how the media tripped over themselves to follow a bus loaded with less than 50 people around to AIG execs homes. Yet until recently, not a lot of acknowledgement from the "free" press.

The tea parties are about one thing. Liberty. Yes, that awful evil right wing hateful idea of liberty and smaller Government. We are so hateful that we don't want to see government intruding on one single persons personal liberty.

The reason these progressive commentators are so clueless is because they are conditioned to how their own move obediently in herds across the political landscape. Demonstrations are organized by community organizers such as ACORN, or they are the product of organized labor parties such as the Service Workers union armed with an army of paid useful idiots willing to flock to the busses provided. How many times have we seen those busses?
They can't imagine that these tea parties are of a different sort. They can't imagine that they began out of genuine concern with the direction Presidents Bush and Obama are taking this country. They have been going on for months, yet these commentators haven't figured out why they are happening.

Tuesday, April 7, 2009

POWER to the people?

Bankers: Take your TARP money back

NEW YORK (CNN) -- There's a growing sense among some bankers that Troubled Asset Relief Program known as "TARP" has become toxic. As a result, they want to bail out of the bank bailout program.

"It should be called 'TRAP,' not TARP," said Brian Garrett, chief executive of Bank of the Bay in San Francisco, who is trying to return bailout funding. "Giving it back is harder than getting it."

That's the real problem. Banks are being told they can't pay the money back. Even banks that didn't want it to begin with. If you recall, Shifty Paulson gathered the top wall street bankers into a room and made them an offer they COULDN"T refuse. In fact, they were not allowed to leave the room until they signed up for bailout money.

Now they are not allowed to return that money.
Instead, our government is warning them that this administration is all that stands between them and the pitchforks. And the government is telling these same banks what they should pay their employees, from top to bottom.

There can be only one reason. Control.

You MUST take this money. Now that YOU accepted this money, you must follow OUR rules.

This is fascism.

The Government wants to control everything, don't they? Even the color of your car!

I may be wrong, but isn't the purpose of our government supposed to be to protect our liberty? How is any of what our government doing today protecting our liberty and freedom?

I know. I am sounding like one of those conspiracy nut jobs now. I'm not.