Poll from January 2009.
WILL GUANTANAMO BE CLOSED BY FEB 2010?
YES - 83%, NO - 16% (5-1)
Do you think Obama has broken his promises or just grew with the office?
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
One more sign of the dictatorship of Obama and the far left.
Today (see (1) below) Obama acted as a dictator. It is not up to his administration to decide whether the law is constitutional. What would the left have done if Bush decided that Roe vs. Wade was not constitutional and outlawed abortions. Or the Medicare or Social Security was unconstitutional and stop sending out checks?
Other signs include: Despite a court order, the administration refuses to give drilling rights in the Gulf Coast. With a left wing Congress - establish Obama care that required people to buy a private product. Bailed out the unions by giving the value of the bailed out car companies owed to bond holders to the unions.
(1) http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/obama-administration-drops-legal-defense-marriage-act/story?id=12981242
"President Obama has instructed the Justice Department to stop defending the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act, which has since 1996 banned federal recognition of same-sex unions."
Other signs include: Despite a court order, the administration refuses to give drilling rights in the Gulf Coast. With a left wing Congress - establish Obama care that required people to buy a private product. Bailed out the unions by giving the value of the bailed out car companies owed to bond holders to the unions.
(1) http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/obama-administration-drops-legal-defense-marriage-act/story?id=12981242
"President Obama has instructed the Justice Department to stop defending the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act, which has since 1996 banned federal recognition of same-sex unions."
Why change from Global Warming to Climate Change?
On my iPad I have SkyGrid which searches for articles relating to global warming. It amuses me some to see the greens defend trying to defend their religion.
Why the change to "climate change" to global warming? Has global warming ceased? Mabye, but the real reason is they can explain everything on "climate change". Too wet, too dry, too much snow, lack of snow. A while back they said snow would be in memory only, I wish (see below(1)).
Do these greens not understand that the climate changes constantly? The constant movement of the earth crust changes the mountains which change the flow of air. The sun's energy output is not constant, nor is the Earth's orbit around the sun. Man has not been responsible for the ice ages of the past (see below(2)) nor the subsequent warming periods afterwards.
Climate-gate should that the green movement is a religion, not scientist willing to challenge ideas. They hide data, they supported suppressing dissent, hallmarks of a religion- not science. Science challenges assumptions, acknowledges flaws and mistakes. That the "so-called" models cannot predict the weather a year in advance so give pause to people who think they can predict climate 100 years from now.
(1) http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-724017.html
Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past
By Charles Onians
"Britain's winter ends tomorrow with further indications of a striking environmental change: snow is starting to disappear from our lives.
Sledges, snowmen, snowballs and the excitement of waking to find that the stuff has settled outside are all a rapidly diminishing part of Britain's culture, as warmer winters - which scientists are attributing to global climate change - produce not only fewer white Christmases, but fewer white Januaries and Februaries."
(2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_glaciation
Why the change to "climate change" to global warming? Has global warming ceased? Mabye, but the real reason is they can explain everything on "climate change". Too wet, too dry, too much snow, lack of snow. A while back they said snow would be in memory only, I wish (see below(1)).
Do these greens not understand that the climate changes constantly? The constant movement of the earth crust changes the mountains which change the flow of air. The sun's energy output is not constant, nor is the Earth's orbit around the sun. Man has not been responsible for the ice ages of the past (see below(2)) nor the subsequent warming periods afterwards.
Climate-gate should that the green movement is a religion, not scientist willing to challenge ideas. They hide data, they supported suppressing dissent, hallmarks of a religion- not science. Science challenges assumptions, acknowledges flaws and mistakes. That the "so-called" models cannot predict the weather a year in advance so give pause to people who think they can predict climate 100 years from now.
(1) http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-724017.html
Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past
By Charles Onians
"Britain's winter ends tomorrow with further indications of a striking environmental change: snow is starting to disappear from our lives.
Sledges, snowmen, snowballs and the excitement of waking to find that the stuff has settled outside are all a rapidly diminishing part of Britain's culture, as warmer winters - which scientists are attributing to global climate change - produce not only fewer white Christmases, but fewer white Januaries and Februaries."
(2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_glaciation
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
Things to Cut From the Federal Budget
(1) Orphan earmarks - some congressman want to give the money to the states they were originally allocated for, how about we give the money back to to the Treasury to lower to deficit and interest payments!
(2) Planned Parenthood - Caught in an "ACORN" like sting on how to give 14 year old abortions. They earn money giving abortions, the left should fund this operation out of their own pockets.
(3)Charitable deductions over $10,000. If a millionaire wants to give a piece of art to a museum, why should the taxpayers support it?
(4) Tax donations of stocks and liquid assets over $10 million. If Bill Gates gives 3 billion in stock to his foundation, he doesn't pay any tax on it and gets a tax deduction. Eliminate the tax deduction and make sure the government gets their share(about $1 billion).
(5) Eliminate funding for PBS. Let the left fund NPR and Bill Moyer. Let the right fund which ever is the supposedly conservative show their is on PBS. With cable and satellite TV, there is no need to fund PBS. Merchandising rights to Sesame Street characters, etc can fund those programs (along with parents). Or just sell advertising.
(6) Eliminate the subsidy for sugar, allow it to be imported at market rates.
(7) Eliminate the subsidy for ethanol - it is driving up the price of food across the board.
(8) Eliminate all farm/corporate subsidies that are not crucial.
(9) Eliminate all frivolous regulations. Each regulation should be include a reason why implemented, what the expected outcome should be, and a termination date if the expected outcome does not occur. Each regulation should be reviewed every few years to see if it is still needed.
(10) Streamline rules that will allow any person to start a small business.
(2) Planned Parenthood - Caught in an "ACORN" like sting on how to give 14 year old abortions. They earn money giving abortions, the left should fund this operation out of their own pockets.
(3)Charitable deductions over $10,000. If a millionaire wants to give a piece of art to a museum, why should the taxpayers support it?
(4) Tax donations of stocks and liquid assets over $10 million. If Bill Gates gives 3 billion in stock to his foundation, he doesn't pay any tax on it and gets a tax deduction. Eliminate the tax deduction and make sure the government gets their share(about $1 billion).
(5) Eliminate funding for PBS. Let the left fund NPR and Bill Moyer. Let the right fund which ever is the supposedly conservative show their is on PBS. With cable and satellite TV, there is no need to fund PBS. Merchandising rights to Sesame Street characters, etc can fund those programs (along with parents). Or just sell advertising.
(6) Eliminate the subsidy for sugar, allow it to be imported at market rates.
(7) Eliminate the subsidy for ethanol - it is driving up the price of food across the board.
(8) Eliminate all farm/corporate subsidies that are not crucial.
(9) Eliminate all frivolous regulations. Each regulation should be include a reason why implemented, what the expected outcome should be, and a termination date if the expected outcome does not occur. Each regulation should be reviewed every few years to see if it is still needed.
(10) Streamline rules that will allow any person to start a small business.
Monday, January 31, 2011
Obamacare Ruled Unconstitutional
"[The Congress shall have Power] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes;”
The judge made the commonsense ruling that U.S. government did not have the power to force a person to buy a product. The Progressives who passed this law will try to say the commerce clause gives them the power. But do you really think the people who voted for the Constitution believe it was giving that power to the government? A constitution that LIMITS the power of government, especially noted in the Bill of Rights (i.e. the first ten amendments)!
The leftist say you are force to buy auto insurance - but that is true only if your own and drive a car. I once tried to get auto insurance without owning a car and was rejected (I wanted to avoid the high cost of rental car insurance). The leftist argument can be rejected in two ways: (1) it would force everyone to subsidize mass transit, just in case they might board a bus or train. (2) it would force all those who don't own cars to buy auto insurance. I am sure the Amish would be pleased to do that.
The leftist say that those who don't have insurance and can't pay force others to pay in higher premiums and costs. Well then should everyone buy food insurance and rent insurance? Because we are forced to pay for higher food cost to subsided the poor through food stamps and welfare aid.
If the leftist want to lower hospital emergency room costs, let them change to rule that hospitals are required to give emergency aid. There is no need to totally eliminate it - just change the rules to eliminate those that abuse the system.
The judge made the commonsense ruling that U.S. government did not have the power to force a person to buy a product. The Progressives who passed this law will try to say the commerce clause gives them the power. But do you really think the people who voted for the Constitution believe it was giving that power to the government? A constitution that LIMITS the power of government, especially noted in the Bill of Rights (i.e. the first ten amendments)!
The leftist say you are force to buy auto insurance - but that is true only if your own and drive a car. I once tried to get auto insurance without owning a car and was rejected (I wanted to avoid the high cost of rental car insurance). The leftist argument can be rejected in two ways: (1) it would force everyone to subsidize mass transit, just in case they might board a bus or train. (2) it would force all those who don't own cars to buy auto insurance. I am sure the Amish would be pleased to do that.
The leftist say that those who don't have insurance and can't pay force others to pay in higher premiums and costs. Well then should everyone buy food insurance and rent insurance? Because we are forced to pay for higher food cost to subsided the poor through food stamps and welfare aid.
If the leftist want to lower hospital emergency room costs, let them change to rule that hospitals are required to give emergency aid. There is no need to totally eliminate it - just change the rules to eliminate those that abuse the system.
Friday, January 21, 2011
Sarah Palin: America by Heart
Just started reading it, but if you want an understanding of what the Tea Party movement is about then read her first chapter.
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Global Warming Question: Snow Removal
A recent post say the decrease of the Arctic ice will increase global warming due the lack of reflection of light back into space. So my question is: How much is man contributing to global warming by the removal of snow?
I look over my yard and I see the driveway and street may take up 20% of the surface area of our plot. If you include the roof of the house (which accelerates the melting snow) and the planting of trees were once was grass (and thus preventing the light from returning to space), how much more light is absorbed versus return to space? Add in all the extra cities, roads, highways and malls, etc that have been built in the last 200 years, how much has global warming been increased by the removal of snow?
I look over my yard and I see the driveway and street may take up 20% of the surface area of our plot. If you include the roof of the house (which accelerates the melting snow) and the planting of trees were once was grass (and thus preventing the light from returning to space), how much more light is absorbed versus return to space? Add in all the extra cities, roads, highways and malls, etc that have been built in the last 200 years, how much has global warming been increased by the removal of snow?
Saturday, September 18, 2010
A Thought on the housing crisis.
Imagine a builder builds a subdivision of 10 ten houses all alike. He sells them each for $100,000.
Next, a newcomer buys the first house for $110,000. The seller then buys his neighbor house for what he sold his plus $10,0000, i.e. the second house sells for $120,000 and the tenth house sells for $200,000. The tenth seller than buys the first house for $210,000 from the newcomer. So the newcomer has made $100,000. And because each of the houses are the same and worth what the last house was sold for, each homeowner now owns a $210,000 for which they paid $100,000 plus $10,000. Thus they turned a $1,100,000 investment into $2,100,000, or a $1,0000,000 profit.
Then, they try to sell the houses, find their houses are not worth what they paid for it and ask the Obama administration to make up the difference.
Next, a newcomer buys the first house for $110,000. The seller then buys his neighbor house for what he sold his plus $10,0000, i.e. the second house sells for $120,000 and the tenth house sells for $200,000. The tenth seller than buys the first house for $210,000 from the newcomer. So the newcomer has made $100,000. And because each of the houses are the same and worth what the last house was sold for, each homeowner now owns a $210,000 for which they paid $100,000 plus $10,000. Thus they turned a $1,100,000 investment into $2,100,000, or a $1,0000,000 profit.
Then, they try to sell the houses, find their houses are not worth what they paid for it and ask the Obama administration to make up the difference.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Reparations - The unfortunate truth.
I was listening to someone who said the whites need to pay reparations to blacks for slavery. Since no one alive today was a slave, the blacks should perversely thank slavery.
It is an unfortunate truth that anyone who ancestor had to move/or was moved because of a bad situation exists today because of that tragedy. Example: Assume you are a decadent of Irish person who forced to leave Ireland and go to he United States because of the rotten treatment by the English landlords. If that had not happen you would not exist today. It is not a choice of whether you would be living in Ireland or the U.S., it is a choice between existing or never been born.
You can receive reparations for anything that happen before your conception, for without those actions you would not have been born.
It is an unfortunate truth that anyone who ancestor had to move/or was moved because of a bad situation exists today because of that tragedy. Example: Assume you are a decadent of Irish person who forced to leave Ireland and go to he United States because of the rotten treatment by the English landlords. If that had not happen you would not exist today. It is not a choice of whether you would be living in Ireland or the U.S., it is a choice between existing or never been born.
You can receive reparations for anything that happen before your conception, for without those actions you would not have been born.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Is Reuters Anti-Israeli?
Another_Cropped_Reuters_Photo_Deletes_Another_Knife_-_And_a_Pool_of_Blood
"One picture cropped to remove a knife might be explained as incompetence or a simple mistake.
But now we have two pictures from the “peace activists” that were cropped by someone at Reuters to remove knives in the hands of the activists, as they attempted to take soldiers hostage."
Good, Bad, and Ugly
Reader reaction to Reuters news
"Shame on you for editing (cropping) photos depicting wounded Israeli soldiers in a way that hides the cold weapons (knives and metal clubs) in the hands of the “peaceful” voyagers.
Unfortunately, Reuters looses its stature as an unbiased media outlet time and time again."
Blogosphere alleges another Reuters 'fauxtogate'
Additionally, the bloodied hand of another soldier, presumably sprawled out on the deck behind the first soldier, can be seen in the background.
Yet in the shot initially released by Reuters, none of these details are visible, as the photo shows only the first soldier being dragged and a man in an orange life vest standing above him.
"One picture cropped to remove a knife might be explained as incompetence or a simple mistake.
But now we have two pictures from the “peace activists” that were cropped by someone at Reuters to remove knives in the hands of the activists, as they attempted to take soldiers hostage."
Good, Bad, and Ugly
Reader reaction to Reuters news
"Shame on you for editing (cropping) photos depicting wounded Israeli soldiers in a way that hides the cold weapons (knives and metal clubs) in the hands of the “peaceful” voyagers.
Unfortunately, Reuters looses its stature as an unbiased media outlet time and time again."
Blogosphere alleges another Reuters 'fauxtogate'
Additionally, the bloodied hand of another soldier, presumably sprawled out on the deck behind the first soldier, can be seen in the background.
Yet in the shot initially released by Reuters, none of these details are visible, as the photo shows only the first soldier being dragged and a man in an orange life vest standing above him.
Saturday, June 5, 2010
Spot light: Woodrow Willson, Progressive
Are you a progressive?
http://www.academia.org/progressive-segregation/
"Few presidents are as revered as Woodrow Wilson in academia. He was, after all, the last academic elected to America’s highest office. "
“I do approve of the segregation that is being attempted in several of the departments,” President Wilson wrote in his first year in office. “I think if you were here on the ground you would see, as I seem to see, that it is distinctly to the advantage of the colored people themselves that they should be organized, so far as possible and convenient, in district bureaus where they will center their work.”
"Similarly, when U. S. forces entered the “war to end all wars,” President Wilson may have wanted to “make the world safe for democracy” but as commander-in-chief he did so with a segregated military. “World War I brought no improvement in Wilson’s policy towards blacks,” Bartlett writes. “They were put in segregated military units, mostly relegated to support positions, and kept out of combat.” "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodrow_Wilson
Segregation in the federal government
In 1912, "an unprecedented number"[5] of African Americans left the Republican Party to cast their vote for Democrat Wilson. They were encouraged by his promises of support for their issues. The issue of segregation came up early in his presidency when, at an April 1913 cabinet meeting, Albert Burleson, Wilson's Postmaster General, complained about working conditions at the Railway Mail Service. Offices and restrooms became segregated, sometimes by partitions erected between seating for white and African-American employees in Post Office Department offices, lunch rooms, and bathrooms, as well as in the Treasury and the Bureau of Engraving and Printing. It also became accepted policy for "Negro" employees of the Postal Service to be reduced in rank or dismissed. And unlike his predecessors Grover Cleveland and Theodore Roosevelt, Wilson accommodated Southern opposition to the re-appointment of an African American to the position of Register of the Treasury and other positions within the federal government. This set the tone for Wilson's attitude to race throughout his presidency, in which the rights of African Americans were sacrificed, for what he felt would be the more important longer term progress of the common good.[5][76]
http://www.academia.org/progressive-segregation/
"Few presidents are as revered as Woodrow Wilson in academia. He was, after all, the last academic elected to America’s highest office. "
“I do approve of the segregation that is being attempted in several of the departments,” President Wilson wrote in his first year in office. “I think if you were here on the ground you would see, as I seem to see, that it is distinctly to the advantage of the colored people themselves that they should be organized, so far as possible and convenient, in district bureaus where they will center their work.”
"Similarly, when U. S. forces entered the “war to end all wars,” President Wilson may have wanted to “make the world safe for democracy” but as commander-in-chief he did so with a segregated military. “World War I brought no improvement in Wilson’s policy towards blacks,” Bartlett writes. “They were put in segregated military units, mostly relegated to support positions, and kept out of combat.” "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodrow_Wilson
Segregation in the federal government
In 1912, "an unprecedented number"[5] of African Americans left the Republican Party to cast their vote for Democrat Wilson. They were encouraged by his promises of support for their issues. The issue of segregation came up early in his presidency when, at an April 1913 cabinet meeting, Albert Burleson, Wilson's Postmaster General, complained about working conditions at the Railway Mail Service. Offices and restrooms became segregated, sometimes by partitions erected between seating for white and African-American employees in Post Office Department offices, lunch rooms, and bathrooms, as well as in the Treasury and the Bureau of Engraving and Printing. It also became accepted policy for "Negro" employees of the Postal Service to be reduced in rank or dismissed. And unlike his predecessors Grover Cleveland and Theodore Roosevelt, Wilson accommodated Southern opposition to the re-appointment of an African American to the position of Register of the Treasury and other positions within the federal government. This set the tone for Wilson's attitude to race throughout his presidency, in which the rights of African Americans were sacrificed, for what he felt would be the more important longer term progress of the common good.[5][76]
Helen Thomas: Liberal Lady of the Press
Will the Lame Stream Media take note of the Antisemitism of one of their leading ladies?
Will she get the same treatment as Mel Gibson? What would happen if a conservative said "all blacks should go back to Africa"? Will she fired, or denied access to the White House?
"In a written statement issued Friday, Thomas apologized, saying, “I deeply regret my comments I made last week regarding the Israelis and the Palestinians.”
She said the comments “do not reflect” her “heart-felt belief that peace will come to the Middle East only when all parties recognize the need for mutual respect and tolerance.”
“May that day come soon,” she added."
link
Or because she is a member of the left will this be swept all under the rug?
Will she get the same treatment as Mel Gibson? What would happen if a conservative said "all blacks should go back to Africa"? Will she fired, or denied access to the White House?
"In a written statement issued Friday, Thomas apologized, saying, “I deeply regret my comments I made last week regarding the Israelis and the Palestinians.”
She said the comments “do not reflect” her “heart-felt belief that peace will come to the Middle East only when all parties recognize the need for mutual respect and tolerance.”
“May that day come soon,” she added."
link
Or because she is a member of the left will this be swept all under the rug?
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Notes on Capitalism: A Love Story
While M. Moore makes entertaining films, he looks at things from a very bias view. Of course that is his right in this freedom-loving country. He opens up with sad stories of people losing their homes. A telling statement is the difference between "the people who have nothing and the people who have it all." My question, why didn't M. Moore, a very rich person, loan these people money? He says that is "Capitalism", a system of taking of giving. No - it is not "Capitalism". What was shown were people who didn't pay their bills. That could of happen in any economic system. "Free enterprise" is not capitalism. Consumerism is not capitalism.
The story of Judge Ciavarella has nothing to do with "capitalism". It was an abuse of the judicial system that could have happen under any economic system. Moore acts as if prison abuse occurs only in "for-profit" institutions.
The story about pilot salaries is just another example of how people make stupid decisions. If there were less pilots, the salaries would increase. Because people want to fly, they are willing to accept less money. You could set a minimum salary for pilots, but that would just leave more unemployed pilots.
The story of the company taking out insurance on an employee is not an example of capitalism. Would Moore want to prevent companies getting insurance? Is he saying these companies are trying to kill it's employees? If so, than that itself is a crime. Again, nothing do to with capitalism.
Capitalism is not Christianity and has never meant to be. Capitalism is not "fairness" of outcome.
The bailout was not capitalism. At least Moore did not hide the fact the Democrats in Congress were responsible with the Bush administration for the bailout bill.
In the end M. Moore shows the socialist he wants others to be, but how come he doesn't give away all of his money? In the end he is just a hypocrite.
The story of Judge Ciavarella has nothing to do with "capitalism". It was an abuse of the judicial system that could have happen under any economic system. Moore acts as if prison abuse occurs only in "for-profit" institutions.
The story about pilot salaries is just another example of how people make stupid decisions. If there were less pilots, the salaries would increase. Because people want to fly, they are willing to accept less money. You could set a minimum salary for pilots, but that would just leave more unemployed pilots.
The story of the company taking out insurance on an employee is not an example of capitalism. Would Moore want to prevent companies getting insurance? Is he saying these companies are trying to kill it's employees? If so, than that itself is a crime. Again, nothing do to with capitalism.
Capitalism is not Christianity and has never meant to be. Capitalism is not "fairness" of outcome.
The bailout was not capitalism. At least Moore did not hide the fact the Democrats in Congress were responsible with the Bush administration for the bailout bill.
In the end M. Moore shows the socialist he wants others to be, but how come he doesn't give away all of his money? In the end he is just a hypocrite.
Sunday, April 25, 2010
The Echo Chamber of the Chris Mattews Show
The last two weeks have shown how far left the show and panelists are. They accuse Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck of sedition. They try to link the "birth-ers" with Glenn Beck, et. al., though he and O'Reilly, etc., have shown the "birth-ers" to be wrong. They claim the right is calling the Obama government illegitimate, which is untrue, but where we they when the left was calling Bush illegitimate because of the supreme court decision? I've even heard the old argument that Gore had more votes, though that doesn't matter constitutionally. Sarah Palin's comment to "reload" is neither seditious or calling for violence. Get a clue left.
To pretend that Andrew Sullivan represents conservatives is a joke.
To pretend that Andrew Sullivan represents conservatives is a joke.
Sunday, April 4, 2010
Liberal vs Conservative
Found on the web:
If you ever wondered what side of the fence you sit on, this is a great test!
Lot of truth here!
If a conservative doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one.
If a liberal doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.
If a conservative is a vegetarian, he doesn't eat meat..
If a liberal is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.
If a conservative is homosexual, he quietly leads his life.
If a liberal is homosexual, he demands legislated respect.
If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.
A liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.
If a conservative doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.
Liberals demand that those they don't like be shut down.
If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church.
A liberal non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced.
(Unless it's a foreign religion, of course!)
If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.
A liberal demands that the rest of us pay for his.
If a conservative reads this, he'll forward it so his friends can have a good laugh.
A liberal will delete it because he's "offended".
Well, I forwarded it to you.
If you ever wondered what side of the fence you sit on, this is a great test!
Lot of truth here!
If a conservative doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one.
If a liberal doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.
If a conservative is a vegetarian, he doesn't eat meat..
If a liberal is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.
If a conservative is homosexual, he quietly leads his life.
If a liberal is homosexual, he demands legislated respect.
If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.
A liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.
If a conservative doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.
Liberals demand that those they don't like be shut down.
If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church.
A liberal non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced.
(Unless it's a foreign religion, of course!)
If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.
A liberal demands that the rest of us pay for his.
If a conservative reads this, he'll forward it so his friends can have a good laugh.
A liberal will delete it because he's "offended".
Well, I forwarded it to you.
Friday, April 2, 2010
Obama Mocks Republican 'Armageddon' Rhetoric
You may have seen the above video. However, signing the health care bill is more like planting kudzu. Kudzu was once thought beneficial but is now considered a pest weed costing $500 million a year to control.
Congressman doesn't care about Constitution
Congressman: 'I Don’t Worry About the Constitution' on Health Care Overhaul
When the people who take an oath to uphold the Constitution don't care, then this nation is in trouble. If the peaceful people protests, like those of the Tea Parties, are ignored by those in power, then don't be surprised if some people take a more active approach.
There are many groups, both left and right, that will use this discontent to try to fracture this nation. Did the people in the 1840's anticipate the Civil War? By the time the policies of this leftist controlled Congress are fully felt will we be able to step back from the brink? Many people will not allow their liberty to be taken from them.
When the people who take an oath to uphold the Constitution don't care, then this nation is in trouble. If the peaceful people protests, like those of the Tea Parties, are ignored by those in power, then don't be surprised if some people take a more active approach.
There are many groups, both left and right, that will use this discontent to try to fracture this nation. Did the people in the 1840's anticipate the Civil War? By the time the policies of this leftist controlled Congress are fully felt will we be able to step back from the brink? Many people will not allow their liberty to be taken from them.
Thursday, April 1, 2010
Do Not Be Fooled - Obama allows "exploration".
No permits until 2012? This is probably just a way to get his cap-and-trade bill passed. Just like his promise to have the health care negotiations on C-SPAN, this is a promise that can be easily broken.
When actual drilling is able to begin he can change his mind again, probably right after the 2012 elections. Why not drill in the oil rich Pacific and known oil-rich areas in Alaska? Why not ANWR? Could it be that Virginia and the southern east cost vote Republican, and California, Oregon and Washington vote Democratic?
When actual drilling is able to begin he can change his mind again, probably right after the 2012 elections. Why not drill in the oil rich Pacific and known oil-rich areas in Alaska? Why not ANWR? Could it be that Virginia and the southern east cost vote Republican, and California, Oregon and Washington vote Democratic?
Saturday, March 27, 2010
Health Care Bill Notes
I was watching a Democrat governor from a North State stating that the Lobbyists had prevented a lot things he wished would be in the bill (like getting drugs from Canada). I wish the reporter had asked him, "Which of the Democratic legislators who voted yes on the bill are in the pockets of these lobbyists?"
My thoughts: I buy health insurance to protect me from health care bills over $100,000 and to keep the costs of bills when I visit the hospital. Those without insurance are sometimes charged 3 times what those who have an insurance. Just like I don't buy car insurance to pay for car washes, gasoline, and oil changes; I don't buy health insurance to pay for doctor visits, etc.
Good news, in the future (2014?) I will no longer have to buy insurance. If I get a major illness I can buy a policy then, since there will no longer be any denial for pre-existing conditions. And though the law states there will be a fine for those without insurance (up to $325 or 2.8%? of household income), the law also states that the IRS cannot place on liens, interests, etc. So if you aren't bother by the IRS calling you, there is nothing else they can do.
My thoughts: I buy health insurance to protect me from health care bills over $100,000 and to keep the costs of bills when I visit the hospital. Those without insurance are sometimes charged 3 times what those who have an insurance. Just like I don't buy car insurance to pay for car washes, gasoline, and oil changes; I don't buy health insurance to pay for doctor visits, etc.
Good news, in the future (2014?) I will no longer have to buy insurance. If I get a major illness I can buy a policy then, since there will no longer be any denial for pre-existing conditions. And though the law states there will be a fine for those without insurance (up to $325 or 2.8%? of household income), the law also states that the IRS cannot place on liens, interests, etc. So if you aren't bother by the IRS calling you, there is nothing else they can do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)