MASLOW'S HIERARCHY OF NEEDS FOR LIBERALS

Maslow's original hierarchy of needs:

Self actualization- Morality, creativity, spontaneity, problem
solving, lack of prejudice, acceptance of facts

Esteem- Self-esteem, confidence, achievement, respect of others,
respected by others

Love/Belonging- Friendship, family, sexual intimacy

Safety-Security if body, of employment, of resources, of morality, of
the family, of health, of property

Physiological-Breathing, food, water, sex, sleep, homeostasis, excretion

Maslow's hierarchy of needs for liberals:

Self-actualization- Guilt, graffiti, abortion, dissonance, intolerance

Esteem- Protesting, economic envy, self-esteem, my feelings, hatred of
the military and the country

Love/Belonging- We are the World, hippies, single motherhood, gay
marriage, kumbaya, promiscuity

Safety- Statism, welfare, affirmative action, United Nations, wealth
redistribution, political correctness, gun control

Physiological-Breathing, food, water, sleep, tofu, marijuana, Mother Earth

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

NORWEGIAN ELITISTS ARE STUPID

Below is the narrative of President Obama’s Nobel Prize followed by my translation of what the Norwegian (European) elitists are really saying.

"The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.

"Obama has as president created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama's initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened.

"Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population.

"For 108 years, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has sought to stimulate precisely that international policy and those attitudes for which Obama is now the world's leading spokesman. The Committee endorses Obama's appeal that "Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges."

[TRANSLATION]

The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to level down the strategic and economic power of the United States and foster a spirit of fairness between people. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama’s vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons. We say vision, because he hasn’t really accomplished anything yet.

Obama has as president tried to create a new climate in international politics, and intent is good enough for us liberals. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position as the sole superpower, a country that has done more good for more people throughout history has turned over world leadership to the feckless United Nations and other international institutions. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts because dialogue has had so much success in the Middle East, Africa, and the Korean peninsula. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations even though we are actually no closer at disarming. Thanks to Obama’s initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting by leveling down its economic output. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened much like his successor George Bush accomplished in Iraq. But we don’t give awards to conservatives

Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given his people hope for a better future. This is the next best thing to actually accomplishing anything. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values, attitudes and illusions that are shared by the majority of the world’s liberal European population.

For 108 years, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has sought to stimulate precisely that international policy and those attitudes for which Obama is now the world’s leading spokesman. However it is only in the last 40 years that we have made so many bad decisions that we are now a mere parody of ourselves. The Committee endorses Obama’s appeal that “Now is the time for the United States to take the blame for all of the global challenges.

My favorite quote from all the wire services about the announcement was, “A noticeable gasp was heard…”

What has Obama actually accomplished in his nine months as president? Answer:

(Crickets)

No. Wait a minute; he held a beer summit after he helped inflame racial tensions.

What did he accomplish in his first two weeks to make someone nominate him ahead of the February deadline?

The Nobel Committee is an international embarrassment. They love a weak America and this was a clear message. America has been rewarded for placing a liberal in office after a conservative served for 8 years.

In response to the award, President Obama has promised to double his efforts at doing nothing.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

TED KENNEDY -Not a life well lived given what he was given

May Senator Ted Kennedy rest in peace and may his family start to heal
from their loss.

That is the bottom line up front, but for the life of me I don’t
understand his appeal and I believe he was a very over rated senator
who represented much of what was wrong with Congress. The Congress
that has become a professional class of incumbents who role is to
protect the big government from the people rather than protecting the
people from the big government, which was outlined in our Declaration
of Independence and Constitution/Bill of Rights.

Ted’s life

Ted was from a rich family that made much of its wealth bootlegging
during prohibition. He was a mediocre primary school student who was
accepted to Harvard based on his family’s social position. He was
thrown out of Harvard for cheating during a Spanish exam (not exactly
an intellectually rigorous course) and enlisted in the US Army. His
family used their connections to have him sent to Europe so that he
would not have to fight in Korea. He returned to the states, finished
his undergraduate degree at Harvard and received his law degree at the
University of Virginia. In the late 50s he marries and becomes
involved in his brothers’ various political campaigns. When his
brother John was elected to the presidency in 1960, Teddy was the
family’s obvious choice to assume the open senate seat. But Teddy was
too young and a placeholder was selected to fill the seat until Teddy
became of age. While Teddy waited for the 1962 election to roll
around he became an assistant district attorney in order to earn some
political street cred. When the election came, the 30-year-old easily
won the seat due to his name recognition (How many 30-year-olds have
we elected to the senate?). Teddy remained there for 47 years until
his recent death at the age of 77.

Ted was the champion of many liberal domestic causes of the 60s and
70s which have now grown into government disasters; Medicare,
Medicaid, public education, immigration, OSHA, Title IX, unions,
minimum wage, etc. Most of these laws have had little impact on the
problems of our society and have only managed to help run up our
deficit and open up the cans of unintended consequences.

In 1969 Teddy the husband was leaving a party with a young female
campaign worker named Mary Jo Kopechne. The drunken Kennedy (is that
redundant?) drove his car off a small bridge near Chappaquiddick, MA
and into the water. Kennedy managed to free himself, make his way
back to the party and concoct an alibi while the young girl was
drowning in his car. He later appeared in court with a neck brace and
managed to get the charges reduced to leaving the scene of an accident
and causing injury. Injury?

While Kennedy’s presidential plans for 1972 were drowned by this
incident, his disastrous political lifestyle continued on. In 1980 he
decided to run for president thinking that enough time had elapsed
since Chappaquiddick, and Mary Jo Kopechne was just water under the
bridge. He was running against the Democrat incumbent Jimmy Carter
and managed to lose to Carter who in turn became one of the biggest
incumbent losers in the history of the general election. The most
memorable moment in Teddy’s campaign came when he was asked up front
by a journalist the simple question of, “Why do you want to be
president.” Kennedy was stumped and could not answer. Can you
imagine what he was thinking? “How dare this peon ask a Kennedy why he
wanted to become president?”

During the 1980s Kennedy’s rakish behavior also continued. He
divorced his wife of almost 25 years in 1982 and later managed to have
the Catholic Church annul the marriage so that he could remarry. How
do you annul a marriage that lasted a quarter century? And what is
the status of the children of that marriage? Are they illegitimate?
This annulment was rather odd because Teddy was at odds with Roman
Catholic magisterium throughout his life (specifically regarding
abortion). Only accepting their rulings when it worked in his favor.
Remember folks, there is a separate set of rules for Kennedys.

Kennedy seemed to be opposed to nearly everything President Ronald
Reagan tried to accomplish in the 1980s. Kennedy contacted the
communist dictatorship in the Soviet Union and attempted to become
their ally and marginalize Reagan. The full extent of his treasonous
behavior was revealed when Kremlin documents were search following the
fall of the Evil Empire. Kennedy’s shameless over the top criticism
of Reagan Supreme Court appointee Robert Bork added a new word to our
political lexicon, “borking.”

Over the years Teddy continued to maintain his role as part of the
ruling aristocracy in America. He was always willing to take your
liberty away and make decisions for you. Remember, you have your
place in society. You are incapable of making decisions for yourself
because you are a member of the unwashed and uneducated masses. There
must be limits and consequences placed on your behavior while Teddy’s
band of nobility is free to over indulge in wealth, wine, women and
song.

Teddy never met an income tax hike that he didn’t like. This comes
easy when a majority of your obscene wealth is inherited and not taxed
as regular income. I guess someone who has never lived in the middle
class has no problems raising taxes on the middle class and
redistributing their wealth to the lower class.

Teddy finally started to grow up in the early 90s when he reached his
60s. Copmpare this to most frat boys who manage to grow out of their
rakish behavior by the time they reach 30. I guess the years of
alcohol, painkillers, adultery, and overeating had caught up with him
in his senior years. But Teddy’s political influence was on the wane.
Teddy had failed to get his fellow Massachusettsian Michael Dukakis
elected to the presidency in 1988 and the new American Democrat family
became the Clintons. He did little for the Gore campaign and once
again could not help a Massachusetts Senator, John Kerry, in 2004. In
2008 he couldn’t even pronounce Barack Obama’s name correctly during a
public endorsement.

In 2004 Kennedy did manage to influence his home state politics one
more time. He had the election laws changed so that then Governor
Mitt Romney, a Republican, would not be able to hand pick a
replacement for Democrat Senator John Kerry, if Kerry had won the
presidential election. Instead of a gubernatorial appointment to the
seat, a special election was to be held. In 2008, when Kennedy
realized he was dying, he tried to get this rule changed back to the
old way so that Democrat Governor Duval Patrick would be able to
hand-pick Kennedy’s successor. Until his dying days, Teddy continued
to think that there is a different set of rules for the Kennedys.
There are some things about the left that I will never understand.
Among them is their support for Teddy. Teddy represented much of what
they resent; misogyny, ridiculously inherited wealth, living by a
separate set of rules from the masses, living a global temperature
raising lifestyle, etc. I supposed they loved him because he
supported abortions and unions.

There is now talk of changing the title of “Obamacare,” our healthcare
reform, to “Kennedycare” in honor of the “Liberal Lion of the Senate.”
This is appropriate because government healthcare would not provide
you and me the same amount and quality of care that a wealthy Senator
could access. Do I have to say it again? Remember there is a
separate set of rules for the Kennedys.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Obama Rewrites the Cold War

I am posting early this week because I am remodeling my basement.

This is an excellent article by Liz Cheney (daughter of Dick and Lynn Cheney). She rightly accuses the President of taking the standard liberal position that the end of the Cold War was just a big kumbaya movement when all the world just happened to come together at the right time and agreed to be nice to each other. As an Army veteran who once patrolled the East German border and was in West Germany when the Berlin Wall fell, I have to disagree with the President and the rest of the liberals. It is hard to believe that we still have useful idiots living amongst us.

The Cold War ended due to the efforts of western leaders such as Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher and Pope John Paul II who abandoned the policy of detente, placed pressure upon the Soviet government, and emboldened the citizens of Poland, East Germany, Hungary, etc to act. Here is the article.

Obama Rewrites the Cold War
The President has a duty to stand up to the lies of our enemies.
By LIZ CHENEY

There are two different versions of the story of the end of the Cold War: the Russian version, and the truth. President Barack Obama endorsed the Russian version in Moscow last week.

Speaking to a group of students, our president explained it this way: "The American and Soviet armies were still massed in Europe, trained and ready to fight. The ideological trenches of the last century were roughly in place. Competition in everything from astrophysics to athletics was treated as a zero-sum game. If one person won, then the other person had to lose. And then within a few short years, the world as it was ceased to be. Make no mistake: This change did not come from any one nation. The Cold War reached a conclusion because of the actions of many nations over many years, and because the people of Russia and Eastern Europe stood up and decided that its end would be peaceful."

The truth, of course, is that the Soviets ran a brutal, authoritarian regime. The KGB killed their opponents or dragged them off to the Gulag. There was no free press, no freedom of speech, no freedom of worship, no freedom of any kind. The basis of the Cold War was not "competition in astrophysics and athletics." It was a global battle between tyranny and freedom. The Soviet "sphere of influence" was delineated by walls and barbed wire and tanks and secret police to prevent people from escaping. America was an unmatched force for good in the world during the Cold War. The Soviets were not. The Cold War ended not because the Soviets decided it should but because they were no match for the forces of freedom and the commitment of free nations to defend liberty and defeat Communism.

It is irresponsible for an American president to go to Moscow and tell a room full of young Russians less than the truth about how the Cold War ended. One wonders whether this was just an attempt to push "reset" -- or maybe to curry favor. Perhaps, most concerning of all, Mr. Obama believes what he said.

Mr. Obama's method for pushing reset around the world is becoming clearer with each foreign trip. He proclaims moral equivalence between the U.S. and our adversaries, he readily accepts a false historical narrative, and he refuses to stand up against anti-American lies.

The approach was evident in his speech in Moscow and in his speech in Cairo last month. In Cairo, he asserted there was some sort of equivalence between American support for the 1953 coup in Iran and the evil that the Iranian mullahs have done in the world since 1979. On an earlier trip to Mexico City, the president listened to an extended anti-American screed by Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega and then let the lies stand by responding only with, "I'm grateful that President Ortega did not blame me for the things that occurred when I was 3 months old."

Asked at a NATO meeting in France in April whether he believed in American exceptionalism, the president said, "I believe in American Exceptionalism just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism." In other words, not so much.

The Obama administration does seem to believe in another kind of exceptionalism -- Obama exceptionalism. "We have the best brand on Earth: the Obama brand," one Obama handler has said. What they don't seem to realize is that once you're president, your brand is America, and the American people expect you to defend us against lies, not embrace or ignore them. We also expect you to know your history.

Mr. Obama has become fond of saying, as he did in Russia again last week, that American nuclear disarmament will encourage the North Koreans and the Iranians to give up their nuclear ambitions. Does he really believe that the North Koreans and the Iranians are simply waiting for America to cut funds for missile defense and reduce our strategic nuclear stockpile before they halt their weapons programs?

The White House ought to take a lesson from President Harry Truman. In April, 1950, Truman signed National Security Council report 68 (NSC-68). One of the foundational documents of America's Cold War strategy, NSC-68 explains the danger of disarming America in the hope of appeasing our enemies. "No people in history," it reads, "have preserved their freedom who thought that by not being strong enough to protect themselves they might prove inoffensive to their enemies."

Perhaps Mr. Obama thinks he is making America inoffensive to our enemies. In reality, he is emboldening them and weakening us. America can be disarmed literally -- by cutting our weapons systems and our defensive capabilities -- as Mr. Obama has agreed to do. We can also be disarmed morally by a president who spreads false narratives about our history or who accepts, even if by his silence, our enemies' lies about us.

Ms. Cheney served as deputy assistant secretary of state and principal deputy assistant secretary of state for near eastern affairs from 2002-2004 and 2005-2006.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

PRESS COVERAGE OF OUR NEW PRESIDENT

Have you noticed a difference in the way the mainstream media treat
our new president? Let’s compare his treatment to the treatment of
his predecessor.

George was unqualified to be president, Barack is fully qualified.
Even though George spent a term and a half as governor of Texas and
Barack was a community organizer who spent 2-years in the Senate.

George’s deficit spending was irresponsible. Barack’s deficit
spending (which has tripled George’s) is necessary.

George’s economic plan was risky. Barack’s is bold and ambitious.

George was not an eloquent speaker, but Barack can read from a teleprompter.

George’s main influence on his life was the prophet of love and
harmony, Jesus Christ. That is worrisome. Barack’s main influence on
his life is a racist, hate mongering leader of an Afro-Leninist
church, but that is not a problem. It is just part of growing up
black in America.

George’s visits to Iraq were photo ops. Barack’s were in support of the troops.

George’s attack on terrorists bred more terrorists, but Barack’s
attack on pirates won’t create more pirates.

George’s tax cuts that rewarded wealthy, productive members of our
society, who drive the economy, were a bad idea. Obama’s stimulus
package that gave bonuses to wealthy board members of failed
corporations who hurt our economy was a good idea.

George’s appointment of Elliott Abrams was controversial, but Barack’s
appointment of Timothy Geithner was no big deal.

George broke diplomatic protocol by winking at the queen. Barack
bowed to a king.

George selected Dick Cheney as his running mate in order to give him
gravitas. Barack selected Joe Biden to provide experience.

George’s body count of American Soldiers in Iraq was emphasized daily
to help secure a military defeat for him. Apparently no soldiers have
died since Barack took over.

George’s first 100 days were not very noteworthy. Barack’s first 100
days were historic. It is not noteworthy that George’s transition
period was preoccupied with the Florida voting fiasco.

George was an admitted alcoholic. The media tried to use this along
with an alleged DUI to torpedo his election. Barack is a smoker and a
self-admitted former street drug user. That was just part of his
coming of age

Sarah Palin is too young to write a memoir. Barack has written two.

George gave contractor money to Halliburton which is bad. Barack is
giving money to ACORN and that is good.

George lied and broke his campaign promises. Barack reversed course
and changed his mind

Carrie Prejean and Barack Obama share the same opinion on gay
marriage. Ms Prejean is a conservative Christian homophobic bigot.
Barack is tolerant and gay-friendly.

The wealthy Bush family encourages Americans to excel, make as much
money as possible, and donate to charity. That is greed. The wealthy
Obama family encourages Americans to give back to the community by
foregoing the rat race and working at low paying public sector jobs.
This is considered to be thoughtful and caring, despite the hypocrisy
coming from a family who already got their millions.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

HILLARY AND SARAH: WHO SHOULD BE THE FEMINIST ROLE MODEL?

Let’s compare the careers of Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin

Hillary Rodham Clinton

Hillary graduates from law school and initially declines a wedding proposal from boyfriend Bill Clinton. After working on the Watergate trial she fails the Washington , DC bar exam, but manages to pass the Arkansas bar exam. She moves to Arkansas and just happens to get a job teaching at the University of Arkansas, joining Bill, who was already working there.

She marries Bill and keeps her maiden name of Rodham. After Bill is elected as Attorney General of Arkansas, Hillary just happens to gets a job working for the prestigious Arkansas Rose Law Firm.

After Bill is elected as Governor of Arkansas, Hillary just happens to become a partner at the Rose Law Firm.

When Bill starts running for President, Hillary starts using the name Clinton in order to help her husband appeal to more traditional voters. Her most memorable moments as First Lady include a failed sponsorship of nationalized healthcare and a humiliating victimization during the Monica Lewinsky scandal. Through this scandal we learn that Bill has a history as a serial adulterer, and Hillary is an enabler.

As Bill finishes his two-term presidency, Hillary uses her national name recognition to get elected as a Senator for New York ; a state she had no previous ties to. Following an unsuccessful run for the presidency she is nominated for Secretary of State.

Sarah Heath Palin

Sarah manages to get a college degree after attending various colleges and becomes a sports reporter for a local television channel. She marries Todd Palin, aka Joe Six Pack, and joins the PTA.

She gets elected to the Wasilla City Council then runs successfully for Mayor of Wasilla.

After an unsuccessful run for the lieutenant governor of Alaska , she gets elected as governor. She becomes the first female, and youngest governor in Alaska’s history.

She is brought to national attention after being selected as the Vice-Presidential running mate to Senator John McCain.

Sarah does all of this while raising five children, including one that is handicapped, and later dealing with the teenage pregnancy of her oldest daughter.

Now somehow through all of this Hillary ends up being a hero to the various left wing fanatical feminists. Hillary did start a legal career on her own but appears to have ridden her husband’s coattails to each successful career step. All she did was find a man at college who showed some political potential and hitched her wagon to him. She stayed married to him despite his numerous affairs in order to maintain her career.

This blog is not an indictment of Hillary Clinton. She appears to have been successful at all her career choices once Bill’s coattails boosted her to each step. This blog is an indictment of left wing feminism and who they choose to support. Feminism isn’t about empowering women. If this was true, they would be supporting Sarah Palin, the self-made working mom. Feminism is simply about grabbing left wing political power, despite its obvious inconsistencies.

Using the Hillary model, Sarah needs to do two things if she wants to take the next step in her political career. First, convince her husband to have some affairs and then claim victim status. Second, move to a state she has no previous ties to and run for Senator. I recommend Colorado. Because that is where I live and we need a good Senator.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

THE DEMOCRAT PARTY CONTRACT WITH AMERICA

1. You have a right to a massive government debt that will saddle your subsequent generations with the obligation to pay it back. Remember, we are all about redistributing wealth. Even from people who haven't been born yet.

2. You have the right to a nanny government that will take care of you from the womb to the tomb (unless you are aborted). This will ensure a dependent class of people who will continue to vote to keep the Democrat Party in power.

3. You have the right to have an emotional response to social issues rather than a pragmatic one. When our programs fail just think about the intent, not the result or the unintended consequences. If you need to numb the practical side of your thinking, just remember Obama's soaring rhetoric, Pelosi's shrillness, and Reid's self-righteousness

4. You have the right to become secular humanists and consider the government as your religion. Remember, God makes you wait for your rewards; the government can serve you now.

5. You have the right to racial disharmony. The government needs to divide you into groups and create suspicion. This will give the government an opportunity to bring forth more solutions that actually make the problems worse. Starting an endless cycle of expansive power.

6. You have a right to economic envy. If someone works too hard and gets ahead, that is unfair. If we unionize everybody, we can level down the top achievers and make everybody mediocre. No more income gaps.

7. You have a right to inferior public education. We shall fill our school with underperforming unionized teachers and administrators who will dumb down our children. Our schools shall become Democrat voter factories.

8. You have a right to a diverse education at our colleges and universities. As long as the diversity only applies to the sex, race and religion of our professors. Political thought shall be uniformly left wing in order to support the government. Dissenting conservative thought will be censored.

9. You have a right to have your government tell large corporation how to run their businesses. These businesses, outside of a few lean years, consistently make a great deal of money, drive the economy and provide jobs; the most successful welfare program out there. We really need a bunch of corrupt, incompetent politicians who cannot operate their own budgets telling them how to run our businesses.

10. You have a right to be so overcome with the power of the government and the subsequent impact on your life that you lapse into a mellow apathy and continue to vote in the incumbents, if you vote at all.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

25 THINGS THAT HAVE HAPPENED SINCE THE OBAMA INAUGURATION

1. The earliest Spring in US history has arrived

2. A sculpture of President Obama has magically appeared on Mount Rushmore

3. Obama has started the first real full-time job in his life (He was a part-time state legislator, part-time law professor, and part-time US Senator when he wasn’t running for President-Don’t mention his “community organizing” job-trust me-you don’t want to go there.)

4. There is now nothing above Obama’s pay grade

5. I have decided to support Obama, but not his presidency. (I’m an Iraqi war vet-If the liberals can support me but not my mission, then I can support Obama but not his mission)

6. Michelle Obama is proud of her country for the second time in her adult life

7. Al Sharpton is no longer the spokesman for Black America (this one is for real, fortunately)

8. Obama has devised a clever plan to get Hillary out of the country (this one is for real too)

9. People in wheelchairs who make eye contact with Obama can now walk

10. The US tax code has been simplified enough that Obama’s own appointees can now understand it and pay their taxes

11. The plumbing problem under my sink that I was afraid to call a plumber about and hoping it would fix itself, has fixed itself

12. My chronic shyness has disappeared

13. Governor Blago has become ethical

14. The obnoxious ShamWow guy is off my television set

15. White guilt in America has disappeared. I am free at last to be a typical white person.

16. Chuck Norris has cried for the first time ever

17. New Orleans has finished rebuilding. But they still have a dumb mayor. Obama is working on this.

18. Brett Favre has retired sparing us from another teary-eyed news conferences from a grown man (I can only hope)

19. Never before seen home movie footage of Paris Hilton has been found

20. The magic force fields created by the Gun-Free Zone signs around our schools have started to work

21. Dick Cheney has returned to the 9th level of Hell

22. Left wing protestors have started looking for gainful employment

23. Cigarettes and second-hand smoke no longer cause cancer

24. The Obama’s have found a church that isn’t Afro-Leninist and prejudiced

25. Obama has kicked the Detroit Lions out of the NFL

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

THE BRIGHT SIDE OF THE OBAMA VICTORY

Here is a list of the affects of Obama's Presidential victory:

It is a good thing that we finally got a black president. I just wish it were a conservative. We are no longer a racist country. Though scattered racism exists throughout society and in all races, the highest glass ceiling has been shattered.

Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are no longer the de facto "leaders" of black America. They may even have to get legitimate jobs. I hope Black Americans now understand that they do not need leaders. Just as Bill Clinton ruined the feminist movement by revealing its duplicity (they supported the serial sexual harasser), Obama, through his success, has ruined the race hustler business.
We have probably seen the end of the Clintons as presidents and this is the last nail in the coffin of the Clinton legacy that never existed (Both of Bill Clinton's hand-picked successor, Al Gore, and his wife failed in their election bids.). Bill Clinton will now be remembered for what he actually was. An impeached two-term president who was elected both times with less than 50% of the vote.

Michelle Obama will now be proud of the country for the second time in her adult life, and in the role of the First Lady, will have to pretend she loves the country. May she grow and mature to appreciate the greatness of the United States.

Obama's record shattering money raising efforts have exposed the myth that it is the right wing that has all the money in the country.

Joe the Plumber has shown us what liberals really think about the common man.

Perhaps we have seen the end of the era of having to deal with politicians who came of age during the Vietnam War. Every President since 1992 has gone through the filter that is our country's inability to deal with Vietnam. Those who served honorably in Vietnam (McCain). Those who showed up and checked the block (Al Gore). Those who hid in the National Guard (George Bush). Those who use deferments (Many of our past candidates). And those who "loathed the military" (Bill Clinton).

The election brought Governor Sarah Palin to the national spotlight. I'm not sure what is in her future, but at least we had a real conservative on the ticket that could have a bright future.

The campaign brought to light that Obama's claims of being a new kind of politician were rather spurious. When the going go tough he resorted to the use of the same dirty politics that all of our esteemed statesmen have used. Raising money from slimy sources, negative campaigning, and selecting a running mate who was a member of the tribe "very-safe-career-white guy-politician."

Despite the claims of the liberals, conservatism is far from dead. The election was not a landslide and there wasn't an increase in the number of voters. The outsider Obama should have done better against an entrenched Washington insider who many accurately understand to be part of the problem that is Washington DC.

It appears that the Republicans will realize that they will have to run a real conservative in 2012 (Geaux Bobby Jindal!). Unfortunately the economy should be back on its cyclical upswing by that time and Obama will get the credit, making him hard to beat.

In other balloting news, marriage between one man and one woman survived in California and Florida, two of our most politically important states.

I had trouble finding the results of the governor races, but it appears the Democrats only picked up one governorship, which was in Missouri.

There will be no liberals making empty threats about moving to Canada this time. I would like to see them go, but they are rather amusing to have around.

The homeless problem in our country will be solved. Not really, but the newspapers will not cover the problem since there is a Democrat serving in the White House. This will give the illusion that the problem has been solved.

I hope that Obama has the political courage to normalize relations with Cuba. None of our past presidents have. He will probably wait for his second term so he doesn't lose the "free-Cuban" influenced Florida vote when he runs for reelection. El Jefe is dying and economic sanctions have proven to be ineffective. The politically powerful in Cuba have not been affected. They have just learned to take more of the scarce resources away from their people and it is the general population of Cubans who have suffered over the years.

Sanctions have also made Castro more powerful. He has had a convenient excuse for his own country's problems. Blame the US.

Now the bad news:

We lost few entrenched incumbents in the election. There was little change in the careerists who make up our congress and Senate. Only 4 incumbent members of Congress loss in the primaries and only 17 lost in the general election. Only a few members of the Senate changed as a handful decided not to run for reelection, and only a few more lost in their reelection attempts.

The Democrats are in control of the presidency and the Congress. It is always good to have a split government. Fewer dumb laws get passed. The Democrats first move will probably be an attempt to eliminate the filibuster options the minority Republican Party has.

Obama may have one or two Supreme Court Justices to appoint. Look for the Democrats to go after guns and solidify their abortion beliefs after they appoint liberal judges.

The liberal Democrats will not support the war on terror, surrender and then declare themselves peacemakers. This will embolden our enemies and open us up to a new round of attacks. Americans will die.

Last but not least, a Black American President will give us the country a renewed interest in the celebration of Lincoln's 200th birthday a few months from now. Lincoln mistakenly gets credit for freeing the slaves when he was rather indifferent about the whole slavery issue. His invasion of the Confederacy was an attempt to hold the country together (despite the fact that the individual states did have a right to secede). His Emancipation Proclamation only applied to slaves who were in the Confederacy (and out of his control) while it ignored the plight of the slaves in the north, which were in his control. He also erroneously seems to get credit for the 13th Amendment, which was passed after his death. Lincoln was also a tyrant who suspended habeas corpus, violated the freedom of the press, gave us the first draft, and the first income tax.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

THE LIBERALS AND SARAH PALIN

Why the Liberal Democrats don't like this McCain selection:

(Have you noticed that there are very few pundits congratulating her and the Republicans for breaking through their glass ceiling?):

She is a conservative (This will herd in many of the right wing voters, like myself, who don't like McCain)

She is an outsider from beyond the beltway (McCain had to go all the way to Alaska to find an attractive women who hadn't been groped by Bill Clinton- Seriously, she might bring some dangerous ideas to Washington)

She is religious (We all know that conservatives want to establish a Christian-based caliphate in America)

She is anti-abortion (She believes in human rights for babies and actually carried a handicapped baby to term-That is not good news for the liberal eugenicists)

Her handicapped baby was fathered by John Edwards (Just kidding)

Her 17-year-old daughter is pregnant (Doesn't she support Planned Parenthood? Can you say trailer-trash? She probably smokes Marlboros-no wait, that's Obama)

She is pro-gun (This will further marginalize the anti-gun rights kooks)

She is a hunter (Can you say redneck?)

She is not an animal rights nut (She actually likes human babies more than animals)

She is not a global warmer (She must be blind to the melting glaciers in her own state. This will marginalize the power the enviro-nazis have in Washington)

She is from an oil state and believes in developing domestic oil sources (The liberals really don't want the US to be more energy dependent. They want us to conserve and give the government a chance to grow larger through energy policies)

She is a real feminist (An extremely successful woman; not a victim of evil men and a devotee to the liberal feminists' strict left wing orthodoxy)

She has too many kids (The US is using up too much of the world's resources-That's also a lot of diapers in our landfills)

Her selection shows that Obama's selection (an old rich white guy insider) is not about change

She is patriotic (We are the World. The United States' success must be tempered)

Her son is in the military (Give peace a chance-We are only antagonizing the bad guys)

She may attract some of the anti-Obama Hillaryists (There are many scorned women out there. Plus these voters understand that it might guarantee an all female final with Hillary in 2012 or 2016)

She didn't run for president (The Republicans will be able to capitalize on what Biden said about Obama during the Democrat primaries)

She will probably win the vice-presidential debate (Somebody might actually watch it this time-and Biden won't be able to appear to be a bully against a woman)

She is attractive (An overwhelming majority of Americans who vote are men. Also-If she runs someday against Hillary we know who will win that side-by-side debate when you put them next to each other on television)

She is young (This equalizes the average age on both tickets so Obama won't necessarily corner the youth vote.)

She will have coattails (Her appearances in Congressional races should help the Republicans)

The liberals cannot attack her lack of experience

Worst off all; she probably shops at Wal-Mart

Why the Liberal Democrats like this McCain selection:

McCain can no longer campaign against Obama's inexperience (McCain managed to find somebody in the country with a thinner resume than Obama)

Alaska has few electoral votes (Obama's choice was obviously an attempt to influence the electoral-rich Pennsylvania vote-This is change?)

She is basically an unknown no-name

Up until now the vice-presidential choice rarely influences voters

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

WHY AM I SKEPTICAL ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING?

4 questions must be answered before I am convinced that we are in a global warming crisis

1. Is global warming happening?
The globe does appear to be gradually warming

2. Is it a bad thing?
We can't answer that

3. Is man causing it?
We can't answer that

4. Can we stop it?
We can't answer that

Right now global warming is a political issue, not a scientific issue. I am convinced it is being used by the liberals merely to level down the productivity of the United States. It is one big plan for the redistribution of wealth around the world. Environmentalists are watermelons; green on the outside and red (communist) on the inside.

Also, please remember:

70 years ago the global crisis was that we were running out of oil.

60 years ago the global crisis was that we were all going to die in a nuclear holocaust.

50 years ago the global crisis was that we were destroying the ecosystem with pesticides.

40 years ago the global crisis was that we were destroying the world with pollution.

30 years ago the global crisis was that we were entering a global ICE AGE!!

20 years ago the global crisis was that we were destroying the oceans, rain forests, and ozone layer.

10 years ago the global crisis was that we were destroying the world with toxic waste.

Now we are in a global crisis because of global warming

Ask me why I am skeptical?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

THE WRECK OF WILLIAM J CLINTON

The suspension of Hillary's campaign suspension has inspired me to write (plagiarize) a song about the failed legacy of her husband Bill. Remember in the 90s when he was the wonder boy of the Democrat Party? Wow, have things changed! His successors (Hillary and Al), and the candidate who sought his endoresement (Kerry) have all crashed and burned. This has caused the Democrat Party and mainstream media to unceremoniously jettison the Clintons.

The song is sung to the tune of, "The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald." Apologies to Gordon Lightfoot

The Wreck of the William J Clinton

The legend lives on from Arkansans on down
About the great fake they call Slick Willie
The fake it is said never worries or dreads
When the lies of November turn gloomy

With a Vice-President Gore 75 pounds more
Then the William J Clinton weighed empty
And an intern in blue with a bone to be chewed
When the lies of November came early

The man was the pride of the Democrat side
Coming back from some rumors unfaithful
As the big cheaters go he was bigger than most
With a wife and daughter's self-deception

Concluding two terms with under 50% percent
Of the vote of the American people
And later that year when the Senate bell rang
He moved the wife to Chappaqua

The vote in O-O made a Florida sound
And the chads fell onto the flooring
And every lib knew, as Al Gore did too
Twas the witch of November come stealing

The dawn came late and the decision did wait
When the courts of November came slashing
When afternoon came it was freezing rain
In the loss of the electoral west wind

When Hillary's time came the old bat came on deck
Saying fellows it's my turn to win this
Obama came in and the delegates gave in
She said fellas its been good to know ya

Old Bill wired in he had water coming in
And his reputation was in peril
And late that night with his descendants out of sight
Came the wreck of the William J Clinton

Does anyone know where the love of God goes
When a Clintonite is running for office
The New York Times say as they enter the fray
And CNN joins their complaining

They might have cracked up and gone too far left
They might seem to be too elitist
And all that remains is the sad faces and names
Of Hollywood and left wing bloggers

The fat grey lady sings and the streets all burn
Near the ruins of his new Harlem office
His legacy cries like his white chafing thighs
He's known only for his impeachment

And farther below historians know
Not to believe what the newspapers send them
As the legacy goes and the people all know
With the lies of November remembered

In an old union hall in Detroit they prayed
In the prevaricator's cathedral
The church bell chimed till it rang a couple of times
For each successor of the William J Clinton

The legend lives on from Arkansans on down
About the great fake they call Slick Willie
The fake it is said never worries or dreads
When the lies of November come early.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

TED KENNEDY IS THE SEVEN DEADLY SINS OF AMERICAN POLITICS AND CULTURE

The recent announcement of Ted Kennedy's likely terminal illness and assumed pending Senate resignation has led many to proclaim that it is not a good time to pile on criticism. But since his name is in the news I feel it is as good a time as any to discuss the influence he has had over American politics and society. Though this blog entry will be highly critical of the man, I honestly pray for comfort for him and his family as they deal with his illness.

His almost certain upcoming death will cause his fans on the left to sanctify him, while those on the right will mostly maintain a begrudging and respectful silence. But I don't think what Kennedy represents should be glossed over for sentimental reasons. It is my belief that Kennedy is a representation of much that is wrong with American politics and society. A wrong that reveals to me my own embarrassment as a member of the voting American public. I just don't see any reason to stay silent over his personal and professional shortcomings just because of his unfortunate condition. And I really don't think this is part of today's highly fueled partisan political process. I actually believe that it is due to the information age that we now live in. In the future we will continue to see more and more boundaries crossed as information becomes more accessible to the public, and politicians have less and less control over what is written about them.

Kennedy is an elite part of the ruling class who was handed the vacated senate seat of his brother John, and maintained it for almost 50 years through the use of his family's fortune and name, as well as through the use of an election process that has been manipulated and massaged over the years by our ruling class to promote voter apathy and almost guarantee the reelection of the incumbents. His hubris is so great that he has even mentioned his wife's name as the special appointee to finish his term when he dies. A Kennedy has been in that Senate seat since 1953, and Ted thinks that legacy should continue!

His elitist hubris is legendary and typical of our ruling class. His now almost 50-year tenure in the Senate is not one of public service, but of ego and self-enrichment. He claims to be an advocate of the poor but he is more of a self-proclaimed ruler. H. L. Mencken had a quote for this type of politician. He said, "The urge to save humanity is almost always a false-face for the urge to rule it." From his above-the-law exploits at Chappaquiddick, to his 1980 failed run for the presidency against his own party's incumbent. He is the antithesis of his brother's famous line, "Ask not you're your country can do for you…" (My comment about his challenge to Jimmy Carter is not a contradiction to my anti-incumbent feelings. The position of president is term limited).

His renowned liberal voting record would make a European socialist proud. From his stance on gun control, special right for homosexuals, multiculturalism, affirmative action, minimum wage, special rights for immigrants, support of Orwellian hate crime legislation, pro-abortion "rights" (even though he is Catholic), and opposition to domestic oil drilling in favor of alternative power sources such as wind power. (Unless of course you try to put wind turbines too close to his home on Cape Cod.) Meanwhile, his constituents continue to reelect him because our voting class has been seduced by today's media driven culture of celebrity over character, and style over substance. I am embarrassed to be a member of the voting class that continues to reelect these satraps.

His renowned personal failings do not make his Catholic church very proud; alcoholism, womanizing, divorce and remarriage are a few of his more public excesses (Not that the rest of our august Senate body are saints.). But old Teddy serves to remind us of our own religious shortcomings. We use religion to lean on when we are in trouble, but we rarely even try to live up to its standards in our daily lives. He embarrasses us because he is a very public composite of us all. He is America's seven deadly sins: lust (womanizing), greed (excess), gluttony (overeating), sloth (incumbency), wrath (liberal intolerance), envy (run for presidency), and pride (incumbent hubris).

Oh, and by the way. Look for the Democrats to exploit this horrible illness at their Democrat Convention in Denver. Much like they exploited the untimely death of Minnesota Senator Paul Wellstone 2002 (Their uber-liberal selection, former vice-president Walter Mondale, lost that race to Republican Norm Coleman).

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

IT ISN'T OBAMA WHO NEEDS TO WORRY ABOUT ASSASSINATION.

HISTORY TELLS US IT IS THE CONSERVATIVE CANDIDATE.

I'm no fan of Hillary but the recent flap over her RFK remark and somehow relating it to an attempt on Obama's life was one of the dumbest things I have ever listened to. Even after thinking about it for several days I still can't fathom why anybody would think she was alluding to an assassination.

I started thinking about political assassinations and it dawned on me that, contrary to popular opinion, political assassinations are usually left-wing gunmen targeting right-wing politicians. Now I know the first thing someone might counter with is, "What about the two Kennedys? Weren't they Democrats?" Yes, they were both Democrats. But that was back in the day when you could still be a conservative and belong to the Democrat Party, and both Kennedys were conservative, and both of their assassins were left-wingers.

Liberals like to believe that they are the open-minded peace-lovers, and that conservatives are intolerant, violence-prone, extremists. So if you believe the liberal model, then most assassins should be right-wing extremists. But look at what we discover when we start reviewing the political leanings of some famous assassins.

John Wilkes Booth- President Lincoln's assassin. Definitely a right-winger who harbored anti-Lincoln feelings over centralized federal power.

Charles J Guiteau- President Garfield's assassin. Garfield was a Republican, and Guiteau was a lawyer and sometime member of the Oneida Community, a 19th century free-love commune. I would label him as left-leaning.

John Shrank-Shrank made an attempt on Teddy Roosevelt who was campaigning for a third term as a member of the Bull Moose Party. I could not find much information on Shrank. He was a Bible-toting saloonkeeper who said he did it because he didn't like the idea of a guy running for a third term as president. Probably a right wing anti-government type.

Leon Czolgosz- President McKinley's assassin. A follower of the turn of the century anarchist movement. A definite left-winger.

Guiseppe Zangara - Zangara made an unsuccessful attempt on Franklin Delano Roosevelt. He stated that he sought the assassination of all capitalists, presidents, and kings. A definite left-winger.

Oscar Collazo and Griselio Torresola - Two members of the socialist Puerto Rican Nationalist Party who made an attempt to assassinate President Truman. Collazo was pardoned by leftist President Jimmy Carter in 1979 and was later honored by communist Fidel Castro. Definite left-wingers.

Lee Harvey Oswald- President Kennedy's assassin. The liberals want desperately to believe that Kennedy's death was an X-Files' type conspiracy of a rogue right wing secret government agency, but the truth is out there. Oswald was a lone left-wing gunman. He had spent time in Communist Russia and was disappointed with what he found. He later tried to go to Cuba to find true communism. Kennedy was a strong anti-communist and Oswald wanted him dead.

The Nation of Islam Assassins- The Nation of Islam ordered the killing of Malcolm X over a power struggle, and sent three unknown assassins to do the job. You don't get much further left than the Nation of Islam.

Sirhan Sirhan-Robert Kennedy's killer. This was a political killing for Robert's support of Israel. But Sirhan was also known to be a disaffected immigrant who felt that he was a victim of anti-Arab American bigotry, which robbed him of the chance at the American dream. He was also a fan of Egyptian leader Nasser who was known to some as the "Castro of the Middle East."

James Earl Ray-Martin Luther King, Jr's assassin. Ray's crime appeared to be purely racially motivated. Racist feelings cross both political boundaries equally, but the mainstream media wants you to believe only right-wingers are racists. We will call him right-leaning.

Samuel Byck- Byck made an unsuccessful attempt at assassinating President Nixon. His plan was to hijack a plan and crash it into the White House. He was killed in a police shootout aboard the plane. Byck was a left-winger who was concerned with the plight of the poor and even tried to join the Black Panthers

Sarah Jane Moore- Moore attempted to assassinate President Ford- Moore had stated that Nixon's selection of Ford as his vice-president was part of the government's war on the left. Definite leftist.

Squeaky Fromme- Fromme also made an attempt on President Ford. She was a member of the Manson Family and an environmentalist. Strong leftist leanings.

Mark David Chapman- Killer of leftist John Lennon. Chapman was a complex character. He was reportedly angered over Lennon's old claim that the Beetles were more popular than Jesus (right wing), but also stated that he thought Lennon was a phony (He was a fan of Catcher in the Rye) because of his duplicitous lifestyle of preaching no worldly possessions while at the same time possessing tremendous wealth (left wing).

John Hinckley, Jr - Hinckley attempted to assassinate the right wing President Reagan. He was an unemployed musician and drifter. His political leanings are hard to figure out.

Mehmet Ali Agca- Agca shot Pope John Paul II. He was quoted as saying, "To me [the Pope] was the incarnation of all that is capitalism." Definite leftist.
Ilich Ramirez Sanchez, aka Carlos the Jackal- Sanchez is probably the most famous international assassin, and was a self-proclaimed leftist revolutionary.

Francisco Martin Duran- In 1994 Duran made a bungled effort on President Clinton's life by firing rifle rounds at the White House from the street. He was a delusional right-wing gun nut who was angered over the assault weapons ban.

John Allen Muhammad- Muhammad was the mastermind behind the DC beltway sniper attacks in 2002. Muhammad was a black separatist and former member of the left wing Nation of Islam.

Let's review

Booth-right wing
Guiteau-left leaning
Shrank-right leaing
Czolgosz-left wing
Zangara-left wing
Collazo & Torresola-left wing
Oswald-left wing
Nation of Islam-left wing
Sirhan-left wing
Ray-right leaning
Byck-left wing
Moore-left wing
Fromme-left leaning
Chapman-unknown
Hinckley-unknown
Agca-left wing
Sanchez-left wing
Duran-right wing
Muhammad-left wing

TOTAL- 13 left-wingers or left-leaning, 2 unknowns, and 4 right-wing or right-leaning.

Or, 68% leftist, 21% rightist, and 10% unknown.

So just who is more prone to the violence of an assassination, a right-winger or a left-winger?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

JOHN EDWARDS TO SUE THE UNITED STATES

Former North Carolina Senator, presidential and vice-presidential candidate John Edwards announced in a news conference today that he is suing the United States for reverse discrimination over his recent loss in the Democrat presidential primaries.

Edwards, a former trial lawyer, will represent himself in Edwards vs. the People of the United States in a multi-billion dollar lawsuit. Edwards stated, "The primaries were obviously a case for reverse discrimination. We (Edwards, Clinton and Obama) were all basically the same. One-term senators with similar, very liberal ideas. The only reason I lost was that I was the token white male in that race."

Edwards continued, "I contend that I was the more qualified candidate of the three because I was once a candidate for vice-president. So why was I the first to have to drop out? Is it because I am a white male? That is a slap in the face of my daddy, who was a millworker. Did I ever tell you that my daddy was a millworker?"

When asked what he thought his chances were, Edwards noted, "I've sued the American Red Cross before and won and I will also go all out with this one. I have exploited the tragic death of my own son to win lawsuits for other people before and now I even have my wife's breast cancer to exploit in front of a jury."

When the reporters showed more signs of skepticism, Edwards persisted, "What do you expect me to do? I could run again, but not as a white southern male. I could ask the best doctors to change me from a white male to an Asian, but Asians are not a historically protected group like women and blacks. I have even considered publicly announcing my homosexuality. They're a protected group. I have pondered over this for a couple of months and a lawsuit seems to be the best way to go."

When asked what he would do with all that money, Edwards stated, "I will certainly no longer ever have to be embarrassed by settling for a $400 haircut again. And I definitely won't have to ever stand ashamed in front of the cameras and claim that a third place presidential primary finish in a three-person race in my own birth state is a victory."

In closing, Edwards said, "There are two Americas. This lawsuit will create one America. One America that works for me."

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

THE DIXIE UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST

Pastor Jeremiah Wright, Jr., the former pastor of Barack Obama's home church, the Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ, has been keeping a low profile since the political flap over his "hate America first," and "blame Whitey" sermons. The church reports that he resigned as head pastor and then left on a sabbatical to Africa. But Something Ain't Right has learned something different. We found the pastor in Birmingham, Alabama. He has been sent by his church on a missionary trip to the Confederacy in order to mend the racial divide. Pastor Wright is working hard to mend the racial divide and establish the Dixie United Church of Christ in Birmingham, Alabama. A White church based upon the same values of the Trinity United Christian Church (taken from Trinity's website):

"We are a congregation that is Unashamedly White and Unapologetically Christian... Our roots in the Southern religious experience and tradition are deep, lasting and permanent. We are a Rebel people, and remain "true to our native land," the mother continent, the cradle of the Confederacy. God has superintended our pilgrimage through the days of colonization, the days of the War of Northern Aggression, and the long night of Reconstruction. It is God who gives us the strength and courage to continuously address injustice as a people, and as a congregation. We constantly affirm our trust in God through cultural expression of a White worship service and ministries which address the White Community."

The Pastor< as well as the membership of DIXIE United Church of Christ, will be committed to a 10-point Vision:

1. A congregation committed to ADORATION.
2. A congregation preaching SALVATION.
3. A congregation actively seeking RECONCILIATION.
4. A congregation with a non-negotiable COMMITMENT TO DIXIE.
5. A congregation committed to BIBLICAL EDUCATION.
6. A congregation committed to CULTURAL EDUCATION.
7. A congregation committed to the HISTORICAL EDUCATION OF SOUTHERN PEOPLE IN RECONSTRUCTION.
8. A congregation committed to LIBERATION.
9. A congregation committed to RESTORATION.
10. A congregation working towards ECONOMIC PARITY.

Pastor Wright has also authored some books to help his new church:

· Rebels Who Shaped Our Faith
· From One Bubba to Another: Voices of White American Men,
· Adam! Where Are You?: Why Most White Men Don't Go to Church,
· When White Men Stand Up for God
· Blow the Trumpet in Zion!: Global Vision and Action for the 21st Century White Church

When asked how he will translate his Chicago church's mantra of "Blame Whitey First" to a bunch of White Southerners (or in Barack's words, "typical white people"), Wright Said, "That will be easy, we will just substitute Jews, Browns and Asians as the focus of hatred and blame shifting in our new church."

When asked how a skeptical group of southerners would react to his lack of street cred in the Civil Rights struggle (Pastor Wright was raised in upper middle class Philadelphia), the Pastor replied, " I will just continue what I have been doing for years. Accusing anybody who doubts my being down with the struggle, with counter accusations of racism. That shuts them up every time."

When asked what Gospel message he hoped to bring to the south, Wright said he was starting a "Rebel Liberation Theology" movement, and "…attempting to create another class of angry victims who will look to him as their poverty pimp." He added, "There's a lot of money to be made in the race hustler business, just ask Sharpton and Jackson. My plan is to get the social structure of the white southern family to break down further through the use of liberal Democrat policies such as welfare, food stamps, lowered expectations, bad public schools, alibis for poor performance, and blame shifting. This will result in high unemployment, high school dropouts, high incarceration rates, out of wedlock births, drugs, and gangs. The new congregation can blame the Jews, Browns and Asians, and I can continue making a decent living."

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I don't often post other people's material (it makes mine look bad), but this one was so good I couldn't resist. A black sports columnist takes on the black KKK.

Taylor's Death a Grim Reminder for us all
Jason Whitlock

There's a reason I call them the Black KKK. The pain, the fear and the destruction are all the same.

Someone who loved Sean Taylor is crying right now. The life they knew has been destroyed, an 18-month-old baby lost her father, and, if you're a black man living in America, you've been reminded once again that your life is in constant jeopardy of violent death.

The Black KKK claimed another victim, a high-profile professional football player with a checkered past this time.

No, we don't know for certain the circumstances surrounding Taylor's death. I could very well be proven wrong for engaging in this sort of aggressive speculation. But it's no different than if you saw a fat man fall to the ground clutching his chest. You'd assume a heart attack, and you'd know, no matter the cause, the man needed to lose weight.

Well, when shots are fired and a black man hits the pavement, there's every statistical reason to believe another black man pulled the trigger. That's not some negative, unfair stereotype. It's a reality we've been living with, tolerating and rationalizing for far too long.

When the traditional, white KKK lynched, terrorized and intimidated black folks at a slower rate than its modern-day dark-skinned replacement, at least we had the good sense to be outraged and in no mood to contemplate rationalizations or be fooled by distractions.

Our new millennium strategy is to pray the Black KKK goes away or ignores us. How's that working?

About as well as the attempt to shift attention away from this uniquely African-American crisis by focusing on an "injustice" the white media allegedly perpetrated against Sean Taylor.

Within hours of his death, there was a story circulating that members of the black press were complaining that news outlets were disrespecting Taylor's victimhood by reporting on his troubled past

No disrespect to Taylor, but he controlled the way he would be remembered by the way he lived. His immature, undisciplined behavior with his employer, his run-ins with law enforcement, which included allegedly threatening a man with a loaded gun, and the fact a vehicle he owned was once sprayed with bullets are all pertinent details when you've been murdered.

Marcellus Wiley, a former NFL player, made the radio circuit Wednesday, singing the tune that athletes are targets. That was his explanation for the murders of Taylor and Broncos cornerback Darrent Williams and the armed robberies of NBA players Antoine Walker and Eddy Curry.

Really?

Let's cut through the bull (manure) and deal with reality. Black men are targets of black men. Period. Go check the coroner's office and talk with a police detective. These bullets aren't checking W-2s.

Rather than whine about white folks' insensitivity or reserve a special place of sorrow for rich athletes, we'd be better served mustering the kind of outrage and courage it took in the 1950s and 1960s to stop the white KKK from hanging black men from trees.

But we don't want to deal with ourselves. We take great joy in prescribing medicine to cure the hate in other people's hearts. Meanwhile, our self-hatred, on full display for the world to see, remains untreated, undiagnosed and unrepentant.

Our self-hatred has been set to music and reinforced by a pervasive culture that promotes a crab-in-barrel mentality.

You're damn straight I blame hip hop for playing a role in the genocide of American black men. When your leading causes of death and dysfunction are murder, ignorance and incarceration, there's no reason to give a free pass to a culture that celebrates murder, ignorance and incarceration.

Of course there are other catalysts, but until we recapture the minds of black youth, convince them that it's not OK to "super man dat ho" and end any and every dispute by "cocking on your bitch," nothing will change.
Does a Soulja Boy want an education?

HBO did a fascinating documentary on Little Rock Central High School, the Arkansas school that required the National Guard so that nine black kids could attend in the 1950s. Fifty years later, the school is one of the nation's best in terms of funding and educational opportunities. It's 60 percent black and located in a poor black community.

Watch the documentary and ask yourself why nine poor kids in the '50s risked their lives to get a good education and a thousand poor black kids today ignore the opportunity that is served to them on a platter.

Blame drugs, blame Ronald Reagan, blame George Bush, blame it on the rain or whatever. There's only one group of people who can change the rotten, anti-education, pro-violence culture our kids have adopted. We have to do it.
According to reports, Sean Taylor had difficulty breaking free from the unsavory characters he associated with during his youth.

The "keepin' it real" mantra of hip hop is in direct defiance to evolution. There's always someone ready to tell you you're selling out if you move away from the immature and dangerous activities you used to do, you're selling out if you speak proper English, embrace education, dress like a grown man, do anything mainstream.

The Black KKK is enforcing the same crippling standards as its parent organization. It wants to keep black men in their place - uneducated, outside the mainstream and six feet deep.

In all likelihood, the Black Klan and its mentality buried Sean Taylor, and any black man or boy reading this could be next.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

ETHNIC CLEANSING IN HOLLYWOOD

I'm a little tired of hearing lectures from Hollywood and media elitist liberals about the evils of racial profiling (A highly effective counter terrorism and anti-crime tool.). They themselves have been profiling for years by cleansing their own ethnic-sounding names.

It appears, with some exceptions, that you cannot be successful in Hollywood, other celebrities industries, or in the mainstream media if you have a Jewish, Polish, Italian, Greek, Hispanic, or Asian sounding name. Here is a partial list of some well-known celebrities and their birth names. I don't know the political leanings of each of them; this is just to show what a racist and close-minded industry forces them to do.

Alan Alda - Alphonse d'Abruzzo

Jason Alexander - Jay Scott Greenspan

Woody Allen - Stewart Konigsberg

Jennifer Aniston - Jennifer Linn Anastassakis

Jackie Chan - Kong-Sang Chan

Kirk Douglas - Issur Danielovitch Demsky

Bob Dylan - Robert Zimmerman

Erik Estrada - Henry Enrique Estrada

George Gershwin - Jacob Gershowitz

Kathy Lee Gifford - Kathryn Epstein

Elliott Gould - Elliot Goldstein

Mary Hart - Mary Johanna Harum

Rita Hayworth - Margarita Cansino

Larry King - Larry Zeigler

Michael Landon - Eugene Orowitz

Jerry Lewis - Joseph Levitch

Sophia Loren - Sophia Scicoloni

Penny Marshall -Carole Penny Maschiarelli

Dean Martin - Dino Crocetti

Ricky Martin - Enrique Jose Martin Morales

George Michael - Georgios Kyriacos Panayiotou

Juice Newton - Judy Cohen

Natalie Portman - Natalie Hershlag

Winona Ryder - Winona Laura Horowitz

Charlie Sheen - Carlos Irwin Estevez

Martin Sheen - Ramon Estevez

Gene Simmons - Chaim Witz

Jon Stewart - Jonathan Stuart Leibowitz

Raquel Welch - Jo Raquel Tejada

Gene Wilder - Jerome Silberman

Hollywood has also cleansed itself with regards to religion and politics. A left wing political monoculture exists in the industry where the stars are either expected to be liberal or keep their mouths and wallets (political donations) shut. Open Western religious beliefs (Born again Christians, Catholics), for the most part, are not tolerated. However, any Eastern religion, the latest fashionable cult religious belief (New Age, Scientology, etc), and secular humanism are all accepted.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

AL GORE'S NOBEL PRIZE

Al Gore shared a Nobel Peace Prize with the United Nations Climate Change Panel "for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change."

Up until this year, the peace prize was given, "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses." Over the 100 or so years the award has been given, they had made some good choices, but over the last 40 years it has turned mostly into a political tool used to shape the worldview as the liberal Nobel Committee sees things.

It has gone to such notable peace makers as Yasser Arafat, the mother of all terrorists (in order to embarrass Israel), and to Mikhail Gorbachev, following the collaps of the brutal dictatorship known as the Soviet Union (in order to downplay the role that Presidents Reagan and Bush had in that cause). The United Nations, an agency of the UN, or a person working for the UN have been awarded the Peace Prize 8 times in the last 50 years. This was done because the Nobel Committee believes in the noble intent of the UN, and doesn't let its mostly miserable record of maintaining peace sway their decision.

Now, just for one moment, put your brain asleep about Gore's goofy claims regarding global warming, and try to figure out why he was selected for this prestigious award. Gore's efforts are not leading to the world wide promotion of peace, but rather an attempt to limit human activity (carbon production). That is, limiting the activity of common folk such as you and me (Those who are not in the same tax bracket as he is and can afford to purchase "carbon credits."). The Nobel Committee of elitist European liberals is simply trying once again to make a political statement by poking the eye of the US and other "global warming deniers."

But whatever you do, don't blame Al for the award. He didn't nominate himself. All he has done is fashioned himself into a modern day global warming Cassandra while leading a duplicitous rich and famous lifestyle of carbon spewing private jets and limousines while traveling around the world from his energy hogging mansion to various luxury hotel suites to spread his message, while simultaneously promoting his mostly debunked propaganda movie. And besides, he did not have too much competition this year. Although there were 181 nominees, there wasn't much to choose from.

Before we close, let's review some of the more interesting 2007 nominees:

Taliban- For their record on women's rights

John Edwards- For his efforts to help the indigent by hiring poor people to be servants inside his mansion

Atlantic City Mayor Bob Levy- For avoiding conflicts within his city by running away and hiding for two weeks.

Iran and North Korea- For the peaceful use of nuclear technology

The private security company Blackwater USA- For their efforts at Iraqi crowd control

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

THE DUGGAR FAMILY ON THE "TODAY SHOW"

The Duggar Family (of 19) from Arkansas was interviewed a few weeks ago on the "Today Show" and the family was given the typical liberal inquisition by their elitist host. The Duggar Family handled themselves nicely and politely despite being framed as a bunch of backward, Bible-thumping hicks. Though I expected that type of treatment by the mainstream media, the two main series of questioning they underwent really got me thinking about liberal stupidity and hypocrisy.

The two issues that the host raised were, whether or not a family of that size was using up too many resources (food, housing, laundry, gas, etc), and whether or not each of the children was getting enough individual parenting time.

Let's start with the issue of resources and liberal stupidity. The roots for that topic come from two misguided scientific theories; Global Warming and Malthusian population growth. Though most of you know about the asinine theory on Global Warming and how Al Gore and others probably think that the Duggar family is leaving too large of a carbon footprint, you might not know much about Malthus.

Robert "Thomas" Malthus was a doomsday scientist of the mid-19th century who believed the world was condemned to mass starvation and famine because of limited resources and an exploding prosperity-driven population. History has since disproved this theory. Prosperity tends to lead to a dwindling population, and technology has made us better farmers, preservers of food, and more efficient transporters. There are now about 5 or 6 billion people on this planet who are generally well fed. There are large populations in Asia and Africa that are in endless cycles of famine, but that is due to corrupt governments, the mismanagement of the local resources, and the destruction of local food markets by guilty westerners who send too much food aid and drive local farmers out of business. Despite all the empirical evidence that disproves Malthusian thinking, this theory is always at the backs of the minds of our liberal environmentalists and manifests itself every generation with more goofy theories like global warming.

The second issue revealed the liberal hypocrisy of selfish motives when it comes to raising families of no more than two self-esteem filled kids. Having one or two kids does not give parents more time to spend on their kids. It gives them more time to spend on themselves. They focus on their careers in order to make a lot of money so that they may guiltily spend it on their kids and make up for their absentee parenting. If you asked the kids of these small family units if they would rather have swimming pools, dance lessons and video games or see mom and dad more often, they would pick the latter. These moms and dads want the status of being parents without the hard, boring, and grinding work of raising kids. So they resort to parent substitutes such as daycare and Ritalin. These parents are the descendants of the 'me-generation;' a valueless, narcissistic generation that fears a suffocating large family. Despite the fact that these large families tend to be teeming with love, unselfishness and respect for one another.

An interview such as this is not about questioning the motives of a large family like the Duggars. It is a method of self-questioning the self-interests of the liberal inquisitionist.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

THE "I SUPPORT THE TROOPS" LIBERALS

If you are a liberal who is against the war but "supports the troops," I wish you would learn to be intellectually honest with yourself. Do you really support the troops? If you really do, how are you showing your support?

Can you answer, "yes" to any of these questions?

1. Have you ever sent a soldier a care package?

2. Are you a pen pal to a lonely soldier?

3. Do you wish them well as they leaving on deployment?

4. Do you welcome them home at the airport?

5. Do you comfort their wives and families?

6. Do you thank the wounded when you see them?

7. Do you congratulate the neighborhood kid who just enlisted?

8. Do you give money to various charities that help the soldiers and their families?

9. Do you read their blogs or ask them personally to find out what is really going on in Iraq and Afghanistan?

10. Have you ever complained about the pay our enlisted soldiers receive? You know, just like you do with our teachers?

11. Can you name any heroes from the war? I know you heard about the gang at Abu Graib (Charles Graner, Lindy England, et al), and you could probably name Jessica Lynch who really wasn't a hero. And you could probably remember Pat Tillman's tragedy, but what about the heroes. Do you remember our two Congressional Medal of Honor winners? (SFC Paul Smith and CPL Jason Dunham). How about SGT Leigh Ann Hester, the Kentucky Reservist who was the first female soldier to win the Silver Star since WW II?

Did you fail that test? Here is another chance to find out if you support the troops. Can you answer "no" to all of these questions?

1. Have you ever participated in a war protest march? I know, you claim that this is your free speech way of protesting the war. But how do you think the soldier feels when he sees pictures of these marches in the newspapers and on the internet? Does that help their morale?

2. Have you joined the "war in unwinnable" chorus? What affect do you think that has on the soldier fighting in the streets of Baghdad?

3. Have you ever protested a military recruiting station or college ROTC program? It is a volunteer military, afterall. Don't you believe in the freedom of choice?

4. Have you ever protested at a military funeral? Is that an indelible memory that a grieving father deserves?

5. Are you looking forward to the next combat death milestone (4,000)? I know that you think that this will help prove that your anti-war opinions are correct, but these are people, not statistics.

6. Do you complain about the quality of healthcare for our wounded soldiers just to try to embarrass the current republican administration?

7. Do you think that our citizens and immigrant residents who are enlisting are the dregs of our society who have on other career options? I know, they are so desperate that they believe that the GI Bill is worth the risk of being killed or maimed by an IED.

8. Do you think that the barbaric acts perpetrated by some of our enemies (beheadings, suicide bombings at the marketplace) are morally equivalent to some of our interrogation techniques, or the actions of some rogue soldiers at Abu Graib?

9. When you hear about one of our soldiers killing an Iraqi civilian, is your knee-jerk reaction one of belief that all our soldiers are cold-blooded killers?

10. Are you convinced that the opinions of a few malcontented soldiers that are paraded by left-wing groups are representative of most soldiers?

11. Do you think that supporting the troops does not mean supporting victory, but instead turning the troops into a group of victims from George Bush's war?

You can conduct a political protest in America but just be aware of your audience. The soldiers who are losing morale and the enemy who is becoming emboldened by your "support of the troops."

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

LIBERALS AND GLOBAL WARMING

What are some of the reasons that the American liberals are leading the world's battle against global warming?

1. They love government-Government control is the answer to most of our problems. Government must control business and private decisions because life isn't fair and government is needed to make it fair. Coincidently, theses same liberals would be in charge of this type of government because they are the only ones who care about the environment. Conservatives want to pollute the air and water that their own kids breathe and drink.

2. This issue is a never-ending source of political power-This problem will never be completely fixed so the liberals will get political mileage out of this issue until the end of the world arrives. Politicians (all types, not just liberals) don't look for the issues that will help people. They look for the issues that will give them political power.

3. They are communists-Big government is the gateway to income redistribution. The liberals feel that they must punish the achievers by leveling them down and propping up the failures and underachievers. Liberals use environmentalism to hide their communism. They are watermelons; green on the outside and red on the inside.

4. They believe in the doctrine of fairness (aka envy and covetousness)-It isn't fair that the US is such a big producer. The US should not be so prosperous while there is suffering in this world so we must level down their productivity. Somehow by holding them back, this is supposed to help the low achievers. This is part of their zero-sum economic model. They believe that there is only so much in this world and the US has too much of it. This is absurd. Wealth can be created.

5. It is very profitable for scientists. The government loves to pay scientists for research that proves that we are on an environmental precipice and the only solution is bigger government. If a scientist is given a million dollars a year to find global warming, he is going to find global warming. And speaking of global destruction, remember the whole in the ozone, acid rain, and the coming ice age. Whatever happened to all that?

6. It is very profitable for the politicians and celebrities who have invested in alternative sources of energy such as wind and solar. If you force the government to mandate the use of these sources, their stock portfolios will go up.

7. Environmentalism is their religion-They have stopped worshipping God and started worshipping His creation. Since the liberal doesn't believe in Heaven, the only way they can satisfy that human need to live forever (which we all have) is to live vicariously through nature. If you save that tree it will still be here when I die. The greatest sin you can commit is pollution. If you pollute, you must pay off your sin by decreasing your standard of living and level of production. Think Unabomber. Our technological society is harming mother earth and must be stopped.

8. Liberals don't trust the voters- Political decisions like this one foster an atmosphere of litigation. The liberals want lawyers and judges making follow-on decisions, not voters.

9. Marching against global warming in the US is chic and safe. Try having a street protest in China, another top polluter, and see what happens. They like to call themselves courageous for bringing up this issue, but the US is the safest place to protest anything. Go hold a street protest in Venezuela, Russia or Albania and see what happens.

10. Liberal celebrities live such a vacuous life that they have to attach on to such issues. This gives them a feeling of actually accomplishing something.

Have you noticed that liberals are not very consistent about this issue? Half of the political and celebrity crowd that are on this save the planet bandwagon live in huge mansions, own private jets, travel in limousines and only go to the finest hotel suites. Their war on global warming is producing more global warming.

These limousine liberals create a bigger carbon footprint in one week than an average Joe creates in one year, and then preach to Joe to make changes to his lifestyle. Why the inconsistency? There are two reasons. They are elitists and don't need to follow the same rules as the common man. Let them eat cake. And deep down inside many of them really don't believe in this issue and understand that it is merely an attempt to gain political power.

Here is what needs to be done. First, understand that there is a reason why we burn fossil fuels. It is the cheapest, safest, most convenient fuel we have. Oil and coal are not evil. They are good things. They make our quality of life what it is today. No one is really going to move away from it unless the price goes up sharply. There are those out there who preach that we only have a finite source but they have been saying that for the last 100 years and we continue to make new discoveries. Get used to this fact. Oil is the most logical choice we have.

Mandating cut backs is not going to work. We have never been a self-limiting type of culture. We tend to trust technology to make life better, not rationing. We already have a technological answer to our energy needs and that is nuclear power. But the environmentalist will flip when he hears that. Nuclear power is even more evil that oil.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

LIBERALS ARE BACKWARD THINKERS ON RACE

Since it is Black History Month I guess a blog entry on race would be appropriate. I have always wondered why liberals are considered to be progressives when it comes to race and conservatives are considered backward thinkers.

Consider this:

Liberals support the separate but equal Black History Month.

Liberals support institutional racism with Equal Opportunity programs and quotas.

Liberals support segregation through all-black colleges, black television, black magazines, Congressional Black Caucus, etc.

Liberals use the term African-Americans. Weren't blacks called Africans when they first got here? Then "Coloreds," "Niggers," "Negroes," etc. Let's stop with the name-calling. We are all Americans.

Liberals love to relive our past shame of slavery. Are they fond of that era?

Liberals use the terms Uncle Toms and house niggers to refer to conservative blacks.

Liberals love to stereotype the southerners as racists when the south has been a mixed race community for a long time and the liberals live in gated white communities.

Liberals support political gerrymandering based on race. This helps keep them folks in their own neighborhoods

Liberals do not believe that the black man can be self-reliant.

Liberals support abortion, which is more common in the black community.

Liberals are fond of racism. I honestly think that deep down inside they believe that minorities are inferior. But the biggest reason is that the liberals want racism and need racism to exist in this country and are the biggest perpetuators of racism in this country. If the flames of racism of not stoked in this country, the white liberals will lose their political power and the black liberals will lose their livelihood.

Conservatives are the group that is working to minimize racism in this country. First, because it is wrong, and second, it is a way to eliminate some of the political power of the liberals.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

THE NATIONAL DAY OF RACE RECONCILIATION AND RECOMPENSE

Two weeks ago undercover New York City policemen shot and killed an unarmed black man who was out celebrating his bachelor's party. The five police officers (of mixed races) fired 50 bullets apparently after the suspected had used his car as a weapon against one of the officers, and the officers had been previously, but mistakenly, told about the presence of a gun in his car. The victim, Sean Bell, died after being struck 4 times. Two other men who were with him were also wounded. It is an unspeakable tragedy for the family and friends of Sean Bell and it is not my intent is not to make light of his situation. My goal is to address the ridiculously predictable public reactions to such tragedies.

The Reverend Al Sharpton (America's premiere race hustler) arrived on the scene faster than the ambulances and started his demagogic ranting about racism for the cameras. New York city's mayor, Michael Bloomberg, led the guilt-ridden in the condemnation of the police officers just as the formal investigation was just getting under way (Personally, I find it difficult to question the split-second life and death decisions that police officers and soldiers have to make, but I'm not running for public office.). This is the unfortunate, but all too common reaction whenever there is a tragic incident involving a black victim and white perps (Black perps never shoot white victims). The perps are condemned as guilty racists without the benefit of a trial, and before the investigation discovers the facts of the events. These conclusions are drawn because we have been conditioned to belief that all white people are racists and all blacks are victims.

Meanwhile, the victims and their families are left to pick up the pieces of their shattered lives after the self-proclaimed liberal black leaders have left town. They only stay around long enough to build up enough name recognition to support another year's worth of income from speaking engagements.

If this is going to happen every time we have such an incident, why don't we do something to speed up the process? Let's skip the theatrical indignities of the self-promoting race hustlers, and the vexation the white people face over their collective guilt about slavery.

This is how it will work. Every time a white person has a racist thought in their mind, they can pay their penitence in the form of a cash donation made directly into the bank accounts of the Reverend Sharpton and the Reverend Jesse Jackson. The white people will be forgiven of their race sins and our two national race merchants will no longer have to perform in front of the camera in order to make a living.

Then each year on the 28th of November (the anniversary of the Tawana Brawley incident) we can wipe the slate clean and enjoy one day of innocense. This date will be known as the National Day of Race Reconciliation and Recompense. It can be symbolized on your calendar with a little megaphone.

You might now be saying, "I am not a racist!" But you are. Here are a few indicators of racism:

- Do you ever question affirmative action?
- Do you make moral judgments on the gangsta lifestyle?
- Do you prefer NASCAR over the NBA?
- Do you believe that Republicans have ever won a fair election?
- Does your favorite high school, college, or professional football team have a white head coach?
- Do you make fun of ebonics, blinglish or anything that claims to be Afrocentric
- Did you question the motives of the young black men who pulled Reginald Denny from his truck and beat him within inches of his life with pieces of concrete? (They could not help themselves since they are oppressed.)
- Do you question why some blacks call themselves "African-Americans" instead of just "Americans?"
- Do you question the presence of separate but equal black television, black colleges, black magazines, and black history month?
- Do you watch TV shows that do not have black actors?
- Do you categorize any type of black behavior as self-destructive?

How much will you have to pay? I haven't figured that one out yet, but it will probably be less than a dollar per incident. Even with that small amount, our Reverends of the Most Holy Church of Profiteering will become fabulously wealthy due to the amount of racism in this country. Though I can't tell you how much you will pay, I do know that we will have different rates for different people. Think of it as affirmative action for bigots. Here are the categories. The ones at the top will pay more.

- Jews
- Police officers that engage in profiling. That is, any time they question a black person about anything, including the guy with the smoking gun
- White males
- An uncle Tom (conservative blacks such as Condi Rice, Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Clarence Thomas)
- Republican Congressmen
- The Duke lacrosse team
- Anybody who works in a Cracker Barrel or Denny's Restaurant
- Asian males
- White females
- Bigoted Hollywood comedians
- Asian females
- Anybody who thinks OJ is guilty
- Other minorities

What will the reverends do with the money? I don't know. Even though both of these race merchants claim to be reverends, they don't seem to have a church, or make efforts to help the poor, the widowed, the sick, and the imprisoned. Their titles just seem to serve the purpose of giving them some sort of moral authority. Perhaps they can open a fly-by-night divinity college to credential more charlatan leaders who also need a title to in order to compensate for their personal failures. Or perhaps they will use the money to demonstrate and call out for justice against the overwhelming amount of black on black crime in this country. But I doubt it. They don't make a living solving problems in the black community, only perpetuating them.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

DEMOCRATIC DISEASES

Actor Michael J Fox, a victim of Parkinson's disease, made a series of political commercials supporting a series of Democrats for national office. He shook uncontrollably in front of the camera from the ravages of his disease as he delivered this message. If you vote Republican, you end stem cell research and the hope for a cure for his disease. If you vote Democrat, you give him and other victims hope. This is the second disease or malady that the Democrats have handpicked to politicize. The first was the AIDS virus (more on that later).

In the good old days disease was a bipartisan issue. Maladies such as polio, cancer, or muscular dystrophy were tackled with varying degrees of success with the combined efforts of both Democrats and Republicans. In the mid 1980s this all changed when the democrats started politicizing AIDS. It continues today with their politicization of Parkinson's disease and other neurological disorders such as dementia, Alzheimer's and paralysis (Remember when Democrat vice-presidential candidate Senator John Edwards said that stem cell research would help paralysis victim Christopher Reeves walk again? PRAISE THE LORD!)

Why did the Democratic Party known for its limitless compassion for society's victims start handpicking specific ailments? And if they are interested in helping cure diseases, why don't they choose more common killers such as cancer or cardiovascular disease? The reason is that they are not interested in the ailments or cures. They merely use these dreadful situations as a means to promote veiled agendas. The veiled agenda behind the Parkinson's commercial was abortion rights. The agenda behind their support of AIDS victims was homosexual political support (money and votes).

So why would they use disease as a way to promote certain rights? Diseases produce victims and victims ensure solid propaganda campaigns. How could you dare vote against the message the Michael J Fox is bringing forth? He is handsome, charismatic, apparently likeable, a talented actor, and suffering through a terrible disease. Doesn't he deserve hope? The liberals are using Mr. Fox as a human shield to deflect criticism over their abortion agenda.

The amendment Mr. Fox lends his support to in Missouri for instance, is merely an attempt to protect abortion rights. The proponents of abortion are giving victims such as Mr. Fox false hopes for cures through stem cell research. The stubborn fact is that currently there is no scientific evidence pointing to a cure for neurological ailments through the use of stem cells that are harvested from aborted babies. If this is true, why do some people want to continue the research? Simply as a backdoor attempt to ensure that abortion is protected. How are you going to harvest these stem cells and give hope if abortion is outlawed?

The abortion debate in this country is slowly swinging to the pro-life side and the liberals know this. Even liberals such as the Clintons are placing themselves in the political middle of the debate by stating that abortions should be "safe, legal and rare." (Rare? What other Constitutional right do you have that should be rare? And what about the truly helpless victims of abortion, the babies? -But those are different arguments.) So if you are losing the public argument because your argument does not stand up to intellectual rigor, you must shut down the opposition. What better way than to bring out victims? How dare you doubt the authenticity of Mr. Fox' suffering.

AIDS. Remember when AIDS broke out in the early 80s? It coincided with a huge move toward gay rights in this country. (Now gays should have every human right and constitutional right that you and I have, but they shouldn't have special rights such as gay marriage.) The gays where gaining political power in the early 80s with the help of the Democratic Party and nothing was going to get in their way. Not even a terminal, contagious disease.

Historically, one method to deal with killer diseases was through quarantine. Plague, smallpox, and typhoid were all dealt with varying degrees of success by quarantining the victims so that they would not infect others. Well homosexuals were in the middle of a rights struggle and they viewed quarantine as an attempt to promote further discrimination against them. How many ten of thousands of our young men were given a death sentence in this country because it was politically incorrect to quarantine those who already had the virus? How long did our emergency blood supply lay unscreened while this politically sensitive issue was being wrestled with? Democrats who were anxious for the political support of the gay community made homosexuals a special protected class, and this sentenced many of them to death and imperiled all of us.

This dangerous support of the fight against AIDS in exchange for homosexual votes and money even continues today. How much of our limited disease research monies are being spent on AIDS? This is money that could also be spent on the big killers in this country such as cardiovascular disease and cancer. AIDS was not and never has been one of the biggest killers in the country. It is primarily a homosexual disease that was a result of homosexual life choices and activities.

Beware of liberals who claim to be protecting victims of diseases. They are without conscience of the depths that they will sink to victimizing the victims and pushing forth their political agendas. They give false hope to victims of neurological ailments just so they can protect abortion, and they help spread terminal viruses in exchange for votes and political contributions.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

ABORTION

THE LANGUAGE OF THE ABORTION DEBATE. There is demagoguery on both sides of the issue but the abortion supporters certainly win the battle of euphemisms. The conservatives use the term "pro-life." Are you pro-life? Well who isn't? They should really come up with a better term to describe themselves. The liberals use the terms "pro-choice," "reproductive rights," and "reproductive health." They know that you cannot use the term "pro-abortion" and expect to gain political support. And you certainly can't call it was it is, pro-death. So the liberals started using the innocuous term "pro-choice." The really twisted part about using the term pro-choice is that they are not interested in choices. Have you ever seen a pro-choicer encouraging or supporting women who make the choice to carry their baby to term? If you are only insisting on one choice, then by definition you are not pro-choice. Lately the term pro-choice has been losing political traction so they are switching to the terms "reproductive rights" and "reproductive health." I won't even go into the stupidity of those terms.

As long as we are on the topic of choice, what choice does the male partner have when the woman decides to have an abortion? Oh yeah, remember him? He doesn't get any choice. A mother who doesn't want to support a baby is free to choose an abortion, regardless of what the father wants. A father who doesn't want to support a baby has no choice. If he doesn't, he is jailed as a deadbeat dad. Is that a double standard?

The pro-abortionists will never use the term "baby." They call it a "fetus." A baby is a human that grows inside his mother. A fetus is a mass of tissue that temporarily occupies space inside a women's womb. It is easier to kill a fetus than a baby.

There is more to the language of abortion but I think you see my point. You have been hearing most of these terms and arguments for most of your life and have probably just accepted them without any critical consideration. Listen carefully to how each side frames their discussions.

ABORTIONS FOR MINORS. Giving minors abortion rights (that is, without parental consent) is not protecting them. It is helping to exploit them. When discussing these rights, the pro-abortion side typically uses a romantic example about a desperate pregnant teenager. 15-year-old Mary gets pregnant with her 16-year-old boyfriend Billy. They can't tell their parents because their parents are intolerant, religious right-wingers who will stop Mary from aborting her baby. Mary will be shamed into carrying the baby to term and everybody in the little town will know that she is a little slut. She will have to raise the baby or give it up for adoption. To avoid this shame Mary is forced to either have an illegal abortion, or try to cover up the pregnancy and deliver the baby in a dumpster. Each of these choices, I might add, provides the baby with the same net result from his perspective.

But what is more often the truth in teenage pregnancies is that the boyfriend is an adult male guilty of statutory rape. The quick abortion with no loose ends that the pro-abortionists want for the minor female ends up protecting these predator males. The girl is whisked in and out of the clinic and the incident is forgotten. Meanwhile the predator male who raped her is free to move on to rape other minor females. So for the feminists, supporting abortion rights becomes more important than protecting our teenage girls from predatory males.

ABORTIONS ABROAD. The liberals do not stop there with their support of abortion. They also want to make sure that poor women in other countries are given abortion rights and money for abortion clinics from the UN (That is your tax money.). The fact that many of these countries use abortion solely to kill female babies doesn't worry them. Mainline feminist organizations like the National Organization for Women are silent on female feticide issues. To condemn it would be admitting that the fetuses are actually babies.

ABORTION AND THE FEMINISTS. Why are feminists so ravenously pro-abortion? For many of them, pregnancy is the last hurdle they must overcome in order to make themselves feel equal to men. They can get the government to re-wire society with goofy laws and court decisions to give them an artificial feeling of equality, but they can't force nature to re-wire and change who gets pregnant. They need abortion to equalize the mean, cruel trick nature played on them.

Other feminists are pro-abortion because they don't want children to interrupt their current lifestyle or to permanently change their bodies. And the most ghastly reason for other feminists to support abortion is the fact that abortion is big business. There is a great deal of money to be made in the abortion trade, especially with the abortion factories (abortuaries) run by the non-profit group Planned Parenthood. You hear liberals complain about the unfairness and greed of huge corporations such as Microsoft, Wal-Mart, and "big tobacco." But you never hear them mention the "big abortion" business.

ABORTION AS A POLITICAL ISSUE. I am convinced that some abortionists can only see the world in terms of who approves of abortion and who doesn't. President Bush, who has apparently treated women with dignity and respect throughout his entire life and has helped free millions of women in two countries (Iraq, Afghanistan), is evil simply because he is against abortion. Former President Clinton, who sexually harassed a subordinate, has admitted to at least two cases of adultery against his wife, and has been accused of rape, is adored by feminists because he supports abortion.

It is interesting to note what abortion has done to the Democratic Party. As recently as 1972, democratic presidential candidates were anti-abortion. The Democratic candidate in 1972 was George McGovern. McGovern was so liberal that some of the major labor unions in this country did not even support him. But he was anti-abortion. His second running mate, Sargent Shriver, was also against abortion. In fact he was Catholic and a member of Opus Dei. Once the Supreme Court ruling Roe v Wade was handed down the Democrats started to change. President Carter started the wishy-washy stance of "I'm personally against it, but it is the law of the land" when he was running in 1976 and 1980. But by 1984, you had to be extremely pro-abortion in order to run for national office as a democrat. Former anti-abortion democrats who switched to a pro-abortion stance include Gore, Gephardt, and Kennedy.

THE ABORTION DEBATE. Why is abortion still such a divisive issue in this country 30 years after it was legalized? I can think of two reasons for this. First, the conservatives are angry because there was never a vote on the issue. It was a Supreme Court ruling. We need the legislature to vote on the legality of abortion in order to legitimize it one way or the other. Second, the liberals are always on edge over abortion because they know the decision was based on some very shaky legal ground that could easily be overturned the next time an abortion decision comes before the court. Roe v. Wade was decided stating the "right to privacy," a woman's right to choose. Well there is no right to privacy mentioned in the Constitution. So any attempt to even limit abortions gets the democrats in an uproar because they know it won't take much of a legal breeze to knock over their legalized abortion house of card.

And speaking of constitutional rights, some of the liberal politicians are trying to moderate their pro-abortion stance by saying that abortion should be legal and rare. Rare? What other constitutional rights do you think should be rare? Freedom of speech, freedom of the press, voting?

BIRTH CONTROL. If you explain to the liberals that there are just too many birth control options today to justify abortions they always bring up the issue of a pregnancy caused through rape by a stranger. These cases are extremely rare and unfortunately we cannot base broad public policy on these few events. If it happened to my wife or daughter I would like to think we would do the right thing but I can't tell you what I would do unless it actually happened. But you cannot make the wholesale slaughter of infants socially available to everyone just to protect a few rare cases of pregnancy by rape.

Lastly, a woman always has a choice over what birth control method she uses. There should not be accidental pregnancies in this day and age. There are pills, diaphragms, IUDs, condoms and patches that are well over 90% fool proof. I have been sexually active for 27 years and the only children I have, have been planned. If you are still embarrassed at the thought of purchasing condoms at the drug store then you can go down to the free public health clinic and they will throw them at you. Still worried about a pregnancy? Well don't forget that abstinence is 100% effective. Can't control your urges? Try oral sex or maturbation.

LIBERALS AND VICTIMS. Liberals always claim that they are for the victims. But there is one victim they have no regard for, an aborted baby. The most vulnerable victim on this earth.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

FEMINISM

It is hard to that my website is about 6 months old and this is the first posting I have about feminists. But that is a good thing. It shows that feminism is not a hot topic. It is slowly dying, circling the drain. It started dying in the early 1990s when Rush Limbaugh, the first major media figure unafraid of the feminists, started revealing to America the truth about how ridiculous the movement had become. However, their deathblow was self-inflicted when the feminists showed their true colors (liberalism), lack of principles, and lack of consistency by publicly defending or ignoring the actions of confessed adulterer, serial sexual harasser, and accused rapist Bill Clinton. The feminist movement had become a mere political power grab as they supported a fellow liberal while ignoring his feminine victims.

Feminism started out on the right path. The early feminist movement from the mid 19th century was led by Christian women who were typically fighting for suffrage, and against abortion (as well as slavery and alcohol). Sometime in the late mid 20th Century the feminist moved to the lunatic fringe along with most of the other liberals. They moved away from the principles of equal opportunity and toward the principle of equal outcome. They believed that men and women were the same in every aspect despite the natural differences. If men and women were different it was only due to misogynist and archaic social rules artificially constructed by men. If men were better scientists, that was because our schools mistreated little girls. If women could not meet the same physical standards as men (military, police, fire) then the standards had been set too high to begin with in order to exclude women.

The root problem to the notion that you can legislate "equal opportunity" is that it cannot be measured. You cannot measure the opportunity of two different sexes, or two different races or even two different people. Everybody has different motivations, different levels of energy, different intelligence, desires, levels of risk taking, backgrounds, values, etc. The only thing you can measure is outcome, such as "the number of female bank presidents." And once you start measuring outcome, you start setting quotas. Quotas are simply reverse discrimination. Quotas become real artificial rules we must deal with. I know the term "real artificial" is an oxymoron. But contradictions are what liberalism is all about. Liberalism is the battle between reality and idealism.

Despite the quotas of the 60s and 70s, social change wasn't happening fast enough for the new breed of feminists. So they responded with a vengeance by promoting extreme measures. They became anti-men, anti-marriage, anti-family and anti-children. This left a void in their membership that could only be filled by one group. That group was "flag-waving, man-hating lesbians." (A Rush term)

These angry ladies became the leadership and most of the committed rank and file of the modern feminist movement. Many normal women claim to be feminists because they think it is politically correct to support equality. But these useful idiots aren't paying enough attention to the modern feminist movement and how it has affected them. The male bashing and marriage bashing movement has resulted in higher divorce rates and generations of children living without a positive male role model in their homes. Women end up bouncing from one live-in boyfriend to another who is ambivalent to her children and more likely to be violent to her. The current state of the American family is a disaster. The feminists have achieved one of their goals.

The feminists are also very militant about their lesbianism. They rub your nose into their lifestyle every chance they get and never hesitate to politicize their issues. They claim to be trying to convince you and I that they are mainstream. But what they are really doing is trying to convince those people who have the hardest time believing they are mainstream. Themselves.

Other issues

Income inequality- Feminists claim that women only paid about ¾ of the amount of money that men make for equal work. If that were true, there would be more women in the workplace then men. HR people would be trying to save their companies money by hiring only females and this doesn't appear to be true. Men generally work harder and longer at the tougher, more dangerous and higher paying jobs. That is why they are paid more.

Title IX and college athletics- Due to Title IX, colleges are supposed to grant equal amounts of college scholarship money to men and women. The problem with this is the inconvenient fact that men are generally more interested in sports than women. So their level of interest is held down by Title IX to the women's level of interest and participation. Sounds like a glass ceiling, doesn't it? What is also amusing about college athletics is that feminists are always screaming about equal opportunity. But if they were truly interested in equal opportunity, there would only be one basketball team at each college that both men and women would try out for. We all know that 99.5% of the women trying out would simply not make the team. So what they have settled for is two teams. One male team and one female team. But this isn't equality. This is parity.

Marriage- Lesbian marriage and other types of bizarre living arrangements are acceptable to the feminists and you must respect them all. That is, except polygamy. Polygamy is not an authorized living arrangement for feminists. Ladies, if you want to accept anything outside of the traditional one man - one woman model, than you have to accept them all.

Women as Sex objects- Feminists insist that women are not sex objects. But they should go watch the "Vagina Monologues." And while they are at it they should also watch "Sex in the City," and appear on "Girls Gone Wild." But they are not sex objects. Some women see equality in terms of keeping up with the randy nature of adolescent boys. This is called slut-feminism.

Politics- Women in politics are supported by the feminists, as long as they are liberals. A conservative such as Condi Rice (our first black female Secretary of State) will automatically be marginalized. (Oooh, feel the tolerance.) Another political issue is the war against terrorism. The feminists should embrace this war because one by-product of the war is the freeing of millions of Muslim women. Conditions right now are not ideal for women in Afghanistan and Iraq, but at least they have been led out of the 7th century. But feminist don't support this war because a conservative president is in charge. Their political beliefs (knee-jerk hatred of a conservative president) are dearer to them then the institutionalized abuse of Muslim women. It is all about political power.

Women's Studies programs at colleges-This is pointless. What kind of job do you get with a degree in Women's Studies? You just become another angry professor of Women's Studies. Women are not a science or discipline like history or chemistry. And don't the feminist claim that women are no different than men? If you never see a distinct culture of women away from men, why should you study them separately? Women's Studies needs to be relabeled as Liberal Feminist Studies.

Christianity- Christians have historically treated women better than any other major religion. Though not perfect, the treatment of women in a Christian culture is far better than a Muslim, Hindu, or Buddhist society. So why are feminist so anti-Christian? They should embrace Christianity.

Abortion- I could write forever about abortion, so an abortion argument will be developed at a different time. Two quick points: First, child-bearing is the only distinct part of motherhood that a feminist cannot change through law or self-deception, so that is why they are so ravenous about their abortion rights. Many abortionists can only see the world in terms of who is for abortion and who is against abortion. Second, the reason it is such a debatable issue in this country is that it was never voted on. Citizens or legislators never cast a vote over abortion. It was a court decision (Roe v. Wade). That is why this issue is so contentious. It will not go away until there is a vote. I am confident that it will eventually go away, much like another horrible established law, slavery.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

LIBERAL BULLET STATEMENTS (7 APR)

"America is, essentially, a conservative nation on most issues. Liberalism is an attempt to change the nation's culture more than an attempt to accurately represent it." -Mac Johnson

When you see protesters and activists think unemployed left wing radicals. Right-wingers usually don't protest and march because they have jobs. They are not a steady drain on our resources like the liberals.

Liberals prefer visual concepts such as protests and graffiti, or abstract concepts such as feelings. The heavier thinking conservatives are more into the written word and speechmaking. Stuff that is a little more intellectual.

The liberals live in a perpetual gray area. Anything that is absolute is evil. They are intellectually lazy and don't want to think anything through to a logical conclusion. If a concept does not fit their idealism, it is bigoted or unfair.

"The hate America first crowd." These are liberals who publicly express disdain of everything America does nationally and internationally, especially when a republican is in the White House. They think that it is unfair that America is light years ahead of everybody in every measurable area. Though, far from perfect, America stands as a beacon of light to freedom and a can-do attitude. The liberals hate this fact but lack the courage to move elsewhere.

It continues to defy explanation why liberals, who theoretically love liberty, equality, tolerance and moderation, should find so much to despise in their own country, which represents the fullest expression of those virtues anywhere on the globe." --Mona Charen

Liberalism is the "me, me, me" way of thinking. My happiness, my feelings, my self-esteem is what is important. As long as it is legal, the morality doesn't matter. They have little self-restraint. If it feels good do it.

Political Correctness- "Mandatory dishonesty and obfuscation of factual information when the truth is offensive to liberals. A priori censorship of genuine ideological diversity."- William F. Buckley, Jr.

For the most part, with the exception of the military, Big Government has failed the city of New Orleans. What has worked? Businesses such as Wal-Mart, faith-based charities, and self-reliant Joe Citizen. The liberals can't stand this. These are the three groups they despise the most. Their solution is more Big Government, despite government's poor record.

The liberals continually raise the issue of President Bush's legitimacy because of the 2000 election problems in Florida and the microscopic victory in 2004. Yet they seem to forget about former President Clinton who won both of his elections with less than 50% of the vote (the republican vote was split by Ross Perot), and President Carter who won with a fraction over 50%.

I don't remember where I got this one, but think it through. "Those who are helpful are more dangerous than those who are evil. At least the evil know they are evil. The helpful are more dangerous because they are blinded by their own good intentions." This applies to both liberals and conservatives.

A while back Ann Coulter was on CNN and said something that the left found objectionable (In other words, she spoke the truth.). I watched the reactions pour in to CNN. The liberals wanted her off the air. Isn't that censorship? Intolerance? Concepts that are supposedly foreign to liberals. If you don't like what she says, change the channel. Don't try to prevent other people from hearing it.

When the liberals claim that they are being silenced, what they really mean is that they have lost the intellectual argument and really don't have anything else to bring to the table.

Why do AIDS patients have a special set of rules? If someone else were walking around with a contagious and deadly disease, wouldn't they be quarantined? If the bird flu ever hits us in full force and happens to spread through human to human contact, just watch them quarantine people. I am not calling for quarantine of AIDS patients now. We know much more about the disease and it is too late. But just think of what quarantine might have done 25 years ago. How many lives would have been saved?

Liberals play fast and loose with statistics; Environmental damage, domestic violence, gun crimes, homeless, those without healthcare, the starving, etc. They are allowed to do this because it shows they care. If you deny their statistics they claim that you are insensitive. Nobody likes to see anyone succumb to these social problems, but we can't fix the problem until you approach them with common sense and less emotion.

Many liberals are compassionate about the less fortunate, but the bottom line is that compassion also guarantees them political power

Liberals are usually very thin-skinned because deep down inside they know their logic is usually untenable

Liberals often confuse tolerance with indifference. When they really don't care about an issue they will call themselves tolerant because that sounds morally superior.

Liberals love the psychology of victimhood. They are secular humanists and want to believe in the inherent goodness of everybody. They believe that any evil that the individual commits is merely a response to a larger evil forced on them from society. The victims never have bad morals or make bad choices. They are merely reacting to societal pressures. It is not their fault.

"The Left does not divide the world between good and evil nearly as much as it does between rich and poor, and between strong and weak. Israel is stronger and richer, so Palestinian terror is excused. White America is stronger and richer than black America, so black violence is excused. The West is stronger and richer than the Muslim world, so Muslim violence is explained accordingly... We don't know who will be the next target of Islamic or other murderers from poor or non-Western or non-white groups. All we can know is that liberal and leftist thought will find reasons to hold the targeted group largely responsible." -Dennis Prager

Any time an icon of the right who stands for morality slips publicly; Rush Limbaugh (drug abuse), William Bennet (gambling addiction), etc., the left tries to discredit morality itself. This alibis their deviant behavior.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Second Civil Rights

President Franklin Delano Roosevelt included a so-called "Second Bill of Rights" in his 1944 State of the Union Address. I guess he thought that the original Bill of Rights needed a supplement. This bill did not have any legal grounds. He was just using his bully pulpit to share a socialist dream of governmental guarantees of your "rights" to employment, medical care, education, home ownership, and a "living wage."
This has inspired me to write a "Second Civil Rights" bill, 42 years after the 1964 Civil Rights Bill. I will attempt to correct some of the unintended consequences of that legislation.

The Second Civil Rights

1. You have the right not to be considered as a racial object-You are an individual, not a piece of a big racial group. You are an unhyphenated American. After all, there really is only one race on this planet, human being. There are color wheels, eye wheels, skin wheels, etc., but only one race. Any division is artificial and has only served to empower government (by dividing the population), generate prejudices, or give otherwise untalented and unemployable agitators a source of income.

2. You have the right to live in an America that no longer has government backed institutional racism- Believe it or not, America is a well-assimilated society. Racism is generally socially unacceptable (If you don't consider affirmative action.). The US, though far from perfect, is probably one of the least racist white majority countries in the world.

3. You have the right to new black leadership-The current liberal black leaders are making a living by trying to keep you miserable. They want you to maintain the status quo in your self-created rut. They are playing you, sucka. They identify problems (whether real or perceived), agitate a bunch of people, profit from the notoriety, and then move on to the next problem. They do not solve race problems because if they did, they would no longer have a source of income.

4. You have the right to equal rights, but not special rights-Anytime you give one group special rights, you take something from another group. Separate rights have a bad habit of always morphing into special rights. An equal society cannot have special rights for certain groups.

5. You have the right not to support those who push the doctrine of "separate but equal." From the George Wallace's of the world to the supporters of black history month, black television, black colleges, the Congressional Black Caucus, etc.

6. You have the right to refuse assistance from the government. If you need help start with your family, then friends, then neighbors. Assistance from the government breeds dependency. The aftermath of Hurricane Katrina shows that decades of government assistance produces a group of people who are unwilling to help themselves.

7. You have the right to tell the liberals to mind their own business and stop making your life worse by trying to alleviate their guilt over past sins. They know their solutions don't work but that doesn't matter to them because they have good intentions. The warm feelings they get over their intentions are more important than results or consequences. They hug each other and cry over their humanity while ignoring the outcome: The creation of a permanent underclass of people.

8. You have the right to be free of a society that keeps redefining racism- Racism has diminished in this country. But the liberal stakeholders in the racism business are willing to redefine it on order to continue profiting off of the "disenfranchised." Since these liberals own stock in victimization, they will continue to work hard to find some.

9. You have the right to not be offended. Though government sponsored racism should be against the law, private people and organizations should be allowed to discriminate in a free country. However they shall not be able to commit any other crime at the same time. If the guy behind the counter does not like the color of your skin, the shape of your eyes, or the way you dress and doesn't want to sell you a bag of groceries, take your money elsewhere. Don't get angry with him, you are only showing your own racism. Why would you want to give a bigot your money anyway? The free market will weed out those types of business people before the government can find them. If a private club chooses to exclude people based on appearance, then why would you insist on becoming a member? Start your own club.

10. You have the right to debate criticism of your behavior. If you label all criticism of your behavior as racism and refuse to listen, then you are just harming yourself. Use debate and discussion to improve your own behavior or to educate your critics.

11. You have the right to take personal responsibility for your problems and stop blaming whitey. Whitey does not commit your wrongdoings. Whitey does not provoke you to commit your wrongdoings. Whitey's actions in the past did not provoke you to commit wrongdoings today. Whitey does not make you commit a disproportionate amount of violent crime. Whitey does not make your 16-year-old neighbor pregnant. Whitey doesn't make you drop out of school and sit on the corner and get angry at the world. This is your choice. Stop playing the perpetual victim.

12. You have the right to be self-reliant and realize the American dream even if it involves "acting white." The most successful people in this country are the ones who go mainstream. You can no longer alibi your failure by saying that you do not want to act white. Don't let anyone convince you that you have to think a certain way to be authentic. You are an individual.

13. You have the right to raise a family using the old-school model. Finish high school, get a job, engage in courtship, marry, and then have children. It sounds hard but it isn't. The new model, high school drop out-children-marriage-courtship-get a job, does not work. Illegitimacy is a bigger problem than racism and it is self-inflicted. Illegitimate children end up being raised by the state. Welfare becomes the mother and prison becomes the father. Intact families function better economically and morally.

14. You have the right to get a job and work for eight hours a day. You might start off at minimum wage, but believe it or not, most Americans start that way. If you want to make more money you might have to work harder and take on more responsibilities. If you complain that you can't start a family while working for minimum wage, then don't start a family. Do not spend all of your money on instant gratification. Save your money for more durable items in order to start building your wealth. Seek to own private property. If more Americans owned private property then we would probably have fewer property crimes such as burglary, looting, vandalizing and graffiti. People who have their own private property tend to respect others' property.

15. You have the right to accept violent crime statistics as fact and not as evidence of racism. Then do something about it. If blacks make up 15% of the population and are responsible for greater than 50% of the violent crime, then you have a problem that must be fixed. Much of this violent crime is black on black. You are killing yourselves. You are having more success at killing blacks than the Klan ever did. How can I make that clearer?

16. You have the right to better music-Gospel, Jazz, the Blues. Rap and Hip-hop are the residue of the self-destructive lifestyle. Hip-hop artists, just like liberal black leadership, are profiting off of your anger and want you to stay in your rut. If you stay angry you will buy more of their CDs and make them wealthy. What are they so angry about anyway? They seem to be perpetually surrounded by mansions, bling, hos and Escalades. They are caricatures of themselves, today's minstrels.

17. You have the right to stop asking for reparations-Reparations are part of the handout mentality and will push your further into the whirlpools of dependence and despondence. Let's make a deal. If you can get someone in Africa to give you reparations for selling your ancestors in the first place, then maybe we will consider reparations in the US for buying them. That sounds ridiculous doesn't it? No one from those days is still around in Africa and African countries don't have a lot of money. Well, there is no one around from those days in the US either. But you say the US has a lot of money. Is that what it is all about? Finding someone with a lot of money to shake down? You ought to be ashamed.

18. You have the right to stop claiming everything you want as a Civil Right. Since the Civil Rights Bill was successful in some areas, every social demand today is labeled a civil right: Healthcare, education, a guaranteed job at a living wage, gay marriage, etc. Your rights as a citizen generally run along the lines of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Concepts that are further defined in the Constitution. Nothing more. Stop inventing stuff.

19. Bottom line-You have the right to pick a better country. If things are that bad, then what is keeping you here? If you are here then that means that conditions here are not that bad, or that you cannot find a better country. If you are going to stay, stop whining.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I have updated MARTIN LUTHER KING JR's "I HAVE A DREAM" SPEECH. The italicized portion in the left hand column are the parts that I have added or changed.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

WE NEED NEW BLACK LEADERSHIP IN THIS COUNTRY

The Martin Luther King (MLK) holiday is coming up along with Black History Month. It is time for people to take a more critical look at the state of black leadership in this country.

Let's step back and imagine for five minutes that institutional racism is not the root cause of the problems faced by black Americans. After all, we do have a black upper class and a large black middle class in this country. Some people are getting ahead. So if it isn't racism, then what is it? It is the black leadership. Or more precisely, the black liberal leadership.

The Civil Rights era came and went, it was long overdue. Some black Americans took advantage of their new freedoms. They overcame. But many blacks have missed the opportunity of the Civil Rights movement. They never prepared for the day when whites would start treating them as equals. They are still singing about overcoming. And still some others, the liberal black leadership (with the help of white liberals), have kept those who are not enjoying the fruits of the American dream in a cycle of subordination.

These liberals are the new landlords of the post bellum plantation. They profit off of a crop of anger and victimization. Each year they plant seeds of racism and misery in this country. They fertilize it with demagoguery, and reap money, status, and political power as poor, black sharecroppers gather the harvest. They are the self-proclaimed black leaders such as Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and Louis Farrakhan. They are the NAACP. They are elected leaders such as Charles Rangel, Cynthia McKinney and Sheila Jackson Lee. They are various celebrities and sports figures. Their legitimacy, image and livelihood are based on racial tension. They will put up a fence around their race crop, water it, and make it grow. They will protect this livelihood, even if it keeps others down. Louis Farrakhan is my favorite example. He is a true absentee landlord that comes by every ten years when he needs money and prestige. He gathers up the black men and marches them straight back to the Washington DC victimhood plantation. He promises a million acres of excuses and a mule. He is one of many black leaders who prefer to see poor black children in a decayed inner city school so that their kids can go to a private school. He needs black anger and black misery.

They are holding back the progress of black Americans in several ways.

1. If a black American leaves the plantation and becomes a successful conservative such as Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell, Star Parker or Thomas Sowell, then they are called "Uncle Tom," "House Negro," or worse. You see each black that leaves the plantation of dependence takes a little power, status and money from the landlords. They can't continue to harvest failure if the sharecroppers are leaving and moving on.

2. They have led us back down the path of segregation. We now have a separate but equal "Black History Month." Isn't all American history important to all Americans? We have a black television network, black magazines, a Congressional Black Caucus, black universities, etc. Wasn't it the racist George Wallace who said, "Segregation today; segregation tomorrow; segregation forever!"

3. They are zealots of equal opportunity, equal rights and affirmative action. These programs have failed and everybody knows it. Few dare speak the truth. Equal opportunity failed because opportunity is not measurable. What they had to measure was outcome. You can't have a society of individuals who are guaranteed an equal outcome. You can't excessively enforce equal rights without them becoming special rights. Affirmative action breeds mediocrity. You don't need to excel to meet the standards, you just petition to lower the standards. And how can one believe that discrimination is wrong but reverse discrimination is right? What kind of logic is that? That is a logic that divides us and helps a liberal maintain political power.

4. They call for reparations for slavery. This is an opportunity to plant the seeds of entitlements once again. Reparations will sow another field of dependency right next to the public assistance field. Entitlements are a bankrupt social premise that exists only to allay guilt.

5. They belong to the NAACP. The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. Colored people? What is this 1906? Other liberals want to retreat even further back to 1806 and label some Americans, African-Americans.

6. They are wealthy black entrepreneurs who help peddle a self-destructive hip-hop lifestyle using modern day minstrel performers. This is classic landlord behavior. They sell seeds of rage to young black sharecroppers and then come around at harvest time to reap the profits of hatred. They take the profits and leave just enough for the young sharecropper to scratch out an existence in the projects.

7. They encourage lawlessness. How is a riot going to help make up for an innocent victim lost to a police shooting? How is looting televisions and sneakers going to help feed your family after a hurricane? How is a career selling drugs going to lead to anything other than prison or a gang murder? Why don't they encourage the values and behavior that make people successful? Because they don't want you to be successful. They want you to sit on the street corner, simmer with rage and blame the man.

8. They label all criticism as racism. They would rather protect a "black image" than improve a black lifestyle. They call the very attitudes and values that are critical for anyone of any color or background to succeed in the US "acting white."

What has the black leadership in this country done in the last forty years? If we start looking at some of the biggest problems that affect large parts of the black population we see illegitimacy, drug abuse, chronic unemployment, poverty, low education, health issues, and crime. So what did the black leadership spend the last 4 decades doing? They concentrated their efforts on taking down the Confederate battle flag. It is only fitting that a symbolic leadership would go after a symbol. How did they decide that this was the biggest problem plaguing the black community? What kind of leadership is that?

If the leadership fails should we look to the government for the answer? No, government has created most of these problems. The government legalized slavery while saying that, "All men are created equal." The government called blacks 3/5 of a "real" person. The government created Jim Crow laws. The government created artificial racial distinctions that divide this country. The government kept Rosa Parks in the back of the bus for too long. It wasn't the bus company or the white bus driver. The government planted the seeds of welfare, public assistance and entitlements that grew into ghettos, fields of fatherlessness, and generational unemployment.

In all fairness the government did do one or two things right. Government freed the slaves in the 1860s, and wrote new Civil Rights laws one hundred year later in the 1960s. But other than that they have been stuck in a cycle of stupidity. Do we need to wait until 2060 for the government to make another positive step?

If the government can't help, and leadership is lacking, then the answer lies with the individual. Individuals who consider themselves to be Americans, not part of a separate, victimized group of race objects. Individuals with responsibilities and dignity, who are treated as equal and free, not exploited by landlords on a plantation.

No, I'm not black, but I am offering a solution. What solution has your leadership offered?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

THE LIBERAL LANGUAGE

I'm not sure when the term liberal became a bad word. At one point in world history, the word liberal was associated with a political philosophy that was similar to today's conservatism. Those liberals fought for individual rights, private property and smaller government during the Age of Enlightenment when they were up against the abuses of the growing monarchical nation-states. Today the word liberal is associated with a belief in big government, the redistribution of wealth and group rights. Group rights are important to liberals.

From time to time you will hear the term "classical liberalism." This refers to the original philosophy of liberalism and is used to distinguish from today's ideology of liberalism. Note the difference between the term philosophy and the term ideology. Philosophy is the seeking of truth (this is difficult). Ideology is the seeking of preferred results (this is easy). Today's liberals have chosen the easy way.

The hijacking of the term liberal and the descent into its modern meaning was probably a political move made by the socialists. Socialism became popular throughout the academic world in the late 19th and early 20th century. When the socialists decided it was time to expand out of academia and gain some political power they realized they had a problem. They were too closely related to their extreme brethren, the communists. You won't win elections if you are associated with the communists. (Note today that all communist societies are dictatorships, e.g. China, Cuba, North Korea, and the former USSR). So the socialists figured out that if they wanted to move into the political arena they would need a new label. They probably thought that the term liberalism was a good choice due to its historic association with the fight for the common man. But the bottom line was that they really needed to cloak their close association with communism. Today you may also hear socialists use the term populism or progressivism.

Today the word socialism is slowly beginning to lose its evil reputation and slip into the mainstream. This is due to the death of the world's chief social empire, the USSR, and the short memory span of modern man. We tend to forget all that evil. You can get elected today as a socialist if you are a politician in the old Soviet Republics, old Europe (Germany, France, Sweden), or if you are a Birkenstock Bolshevik from Vermont.

Hijacking the meaning of historic terms is an example of owning the language. Owning the language is necessary when you are promoting an ideology. The use of euphemisms is another method of language control. You use a euphemism when you need to get rid of a disagreeable term and substitute a more palatable one.

We all use euphemisms, but those on the left are masters of the trade. For example, if you are pro-abortion you substitute the term pro-choice. Now I'm not going to argue abortion here, but this is a good example of a euphemism and it is silly. Have you ever seen a pro-choicer supporting a woman who chooses to carry her baby to term? The term pro-choice infers that you consider alternatives. If you are only interested in promoting one of the alternatives (abortion), then by definition you can't be pro-choice. But the pro-choicers cannot call themselves by their real names (pro-death or pro-abortion) so they use a euphemism. Another good example is how the liberals deal with the term homosexual lifestyle. Most people find that term to be objectionable. So they substitute the euphemism "alternate lifestyle."

Euphemisms are also good for your self-esteem. If you are indifferent about a controversial issue you can label yourself with the euphemism "tolerance" and take the moral high ground. Euphemisms works for your favorite radical environmentalist causes too. If you want to make a living out of saving swamps, but the masses won't help you by donating money to save a swamp, you substitute the term "wetland." If the masses won't send you money to save the jungle, rename it "rainforest" and the money will pour in.

Euphemism is an intimidating. I wonder if there is a euphemism for euphemism.

One last note, since liberals are extremely intolerant they have a euphemism for that too. It is called political correctness. If you disagree with them you are dismissed with political correctness and labeled as cold-hearted, selfish and biased. Or you are given an "ism" (racism, sexism, classism), or phobia (homophobia). You are rarely challenged with an intellectual argument. This dismissive attitude is intellectually lazy and extremely short sighted. If the liberals don't listen to criticism they will not develop their ideas and improve upon them.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

FIRST POST

The subtitle for this page came to me rather quickly. I thought of Plato's Allegory of the Cave. His work talks about the filtering of the truth, and that is what liberals do. We all do it to some extent, holding on to the delusions that give us comfort, but some of us (the conservatives) wiggle out of their chains every once in a while and come out of the cave and into the light to see what is really going on. The liberals like the comfort of their chains in their caves. They don't have to think much or be open-minded.

Trying to figure out how to define liberalism and start writing on this page did not come very quickly. I labored over it for several days. What part of liberalism do you first start writing about? What main theme embodies all of liberalism? I narrowed it down to three choices: envy, intellectual laziness, and ingratitude. I should narrow it down to one to start off with, so I think I will stick to envy, or more specifically, how a liberal responds to envy.

We are all guilty of envy. We start experiencing it as a child when we see a sibling or another child with a toy or object that we want. We respond to envy by either trying to take the toy away from our rival, or by crying and shaming mom into buying one for us. It just isn't fair that another child has that toy and we don't. As we grow older, we still experience envy whenever we see somebody with more wealth, a better job, or car, or a house that we want. The adult liberal response to this envy is much like a child. They cry "Unfair!" and try to get their new mom (government) to take from those who have been successful and redistribute to those who have not been successful. The adult conservative response is to handle the envy with maturity. They will try to work hard so he can buy the toy for himself and expect others to do the same. The conservative is also more likely to share (charity). The liberal doesn't like to share so they persuade the government to force us to share so they feel less guilty about their selfishness.

In a macro view you see the same liberal response to wealth (progressive income taxes and public assistance), national power (the US should be subordinated to the UN, multiculturalism), environmentalism (the Kyoto Accord), business (Wal-Mart, big tobacco, pharmaceuticals are all evil and must be regulated), and race and sex (white male Europeans are too successful so women and minorities must get preferential treatment).

Those are only a few examples where the liberal solution to perceived unfairness is the belief that in order to help the weak, we must weaken the strong. That method has never produced any long-term results.

One more thing I should add in today. If you are new to the political process, you may be confused with the use of the terms "left" and "right" in politics. The leftists are liberals. The righties are conservative.