Rockin Rod's Rants

Reality Check

2005-10-16T06:19:00.000-07:00

I often wonder how the liberals can keep up their skewed world view in spite of so many facts that counter their beliefs. Why all of the conspiracy theories? If you visit some of the liberal links I have on this site, and on my other site, you'll see some pretty far out theories from time to time. I don't want to itemize them all here, but I will be discussing a few below. I do think that conspiracy theories pop up in the absence of information, but there is plenty of information out there, so why all the persistent tongue wagging over things that are just plain incorrect? That is one reason why I created the SOS Award, or Sossy. To acknowledge the hard work put into maitaining a level of fiction in ones mind. Some of the items in this post below may be candidates for the next award presentation. I offer the following for your entertainment:

1) Despite all of the progress we are making in Iraq, there are those who still believe that it is a quagmire with no hope of success. But the good news and the facts present the opposite. Sure it isn't as safe as walking down the street in Redmond, Wa. But would guess it is safer than some big American cities after dark.

2) And when it comes to labeling people, or groups, the liberals are all for separating people through their hate speech than they are in bringing people together. And they accuse the Republicans of being the hate-mongers! They accuse good guys (the border watchers) of being 'racist and violent',when that is the opposite of what they are. And all the while they can't even find the accurate description of our all-to-real enemies! The true reality is those of us on the right are the true advocates for liberty and freedom, not the left.

3) Getting the facts straight is even hard for them to do in a seemingly simple thing as reporting events as they happen. All of the sensational stories in the first few days of the New Orleans flooding were either wrong or over-hyped. They can't keep their hatred for America out of anything they report on!

4) And finally the ability to remember historical facts seems to challenge them the most. No matter what the subject, they seem to think history started in the 1960's. But even if that were true, there has been a lot of history from then till now. Presidential poll numbers go up and down during the life of an administration. But the media love to present snapshots instead of an overview, especially bad ones. Unfortunately, reporters think of themselves as the writers of history, it's a pity none of them remember it. Thats why we, as individuals, need to be educated...yes educated. In history, civics and economics. Otherwise we'll have to continually listen to these boors who cannot get it right.

Day after day there are stories of the left's uncompromising twisting of false perceptions into realities. I list some on my running news archive over at www.Rhyme-and-Reason.us, and it gets dizzying at times. With all of their many intellectually challenged views, how can they sell their candidates to the American people? And a bigger questions is: Who's side are they really on?

Those on the left are the true naive simpletons...or they are treasonous traiters. You choose.

Proper Incentives attain desired goals

2005-10-14T04:35:00.000-07:00

If free market capitalism is actually practiced, then society's problems will take care of themselves, I believe. Although there might be an 'appearance' of hardship or 'pain' of adjustment, the free market model works much better than the mangaged model of socialism. As a case in point: the Little Rock school system.

In Little Rock Arkansas, they decided to by-pass the teachers union and give direct cash bonuses to teachers who had students who increased a certain test result by 4% or more. The amount of the bonuses went up as the students results went up. And the bonuses were for each individual student. So if you had 100 students improve, your bonus was multiplied by a factor of 100. Well, teachers are not stupid, despite what they say through their unions. They voted 100% to continue this program. And so far, the test results look promising. The kids are doing well, the teachers are happy about it, and the parents must be happy too. How blissful, everyone is happy. Sounds like a socialist dream right? - wrong. It is a capitalist dream. All of this was possible because of the financial incentive to improve. A goal without an incentive is just wishful thinking, but a goal with a proper incentive will always attain the desired results.

The incentive principle works like this: If you say 'son, mow this yard and I'll pay you $5'. You might get the lawn mowed at some point, as long as you put in additional effort to get a teenage body in motion. But if you say 'son, mow this yard and I'll pay you $5 - And if you finish within 1 hour, I'll quadruple your payment to $20'. Well then you would probably get your lawn mowed in less than an hour, without any extra effort on your part, because the boy now has a financial incentive. Your goal all along was to get the lawn mowed quickly, but your goal may not have been met without the additional incentive in place. This type of completion incentive is used in the construction industry all the time, and it works. There is also the opposite incentive in place as well...finish late and you'll have your contract reduced by $1,000 a day. So the contractor will aim to finish early to protect is job as well as his company. You could then say to your son 'if you finish late you have to buy me dinner'...which brings up another point - the incentives must be practical and attractive to the individual doing the work in order for them to work. If it's not practical for your son to buy you dinner with what money he has, then he'll develop a defeatist attitude, especially if the 'goal' is set too high for him to attain.

I have to wonder what the reaction of the teachers union in Little Rock was when they saw the 100% approval vote by their members. After all, they voted FOR a capitalist idea instead of the typical socialist ideas they've promoted in the past. But the proof is always in the pudding, and history will always give us examples of sound principles working. And most of the time we have examples right in front of our faces, if we just choose to notice instead of listening to the socialist advocates scream 'oppression'.

Capitalism always works everytime it's tried, and socialism is nothing but a drag...literally.

The Nuclear Option

2005-10-12T04:45:00.000-07:00

At some point, people are forced to stop and accept the realities of life. We may be in such a situation now. For years the envinronmentalists have been telling us all about the woes of each and every type of energy production. Coal burning requires mining and then when you burn it, produces a heavy dark smoke. Hydro-electric power, genertated by river dams, causes the fish population to dwindle. Natural gas generated electricity, generated from a fossil fuel, requires the ever-resisted drilling and refining. And nuclear power is just another atomic disaster waiting to happen, not to mention the waste disposal issue. So whether it is environmental damage, pollution or risk to humans, some reason could be given to argue against each and every one.

Well, something has to be done. With the constant advances in solar and hydrogen research our future is starting to look better. But there is another option that is ready right now and very practical. That would be the Nuclear option. The biggest problem about nuclear power seems to be public opinion rather than any scientific reason. And we all know how fickle public opinion is, and how easily it can be manipulated by a focused public media.

I think nuclear power should be a major consideration in our energy discussions. Consider the fact that the U.S. right now produces 20% of its energy via nuclear power. Also the military uses smaller reactors in its naval vessels without many problems. France now produces 75% of it's electrical power from nuclear energy and is the leading exporter of electricity! The U.S. can do the same thing we just get past our 'opinion' that nuclear power is dangerous.

The storied examples of 3-Mile Island, and Chernobyl should never be forgotten, but they are definately the exception rather than the norm. How many French disasters have their been? How many military, of all nationalities, have their been? How many Chinese problems too? And the Chinese present another problem of a different subject...they are having an industrial revolution right now and we need to stay on par with them. Thus ever the pressure on a reliable power supply. But there are very few large scale nuclear problems. Of course, you have the many small leaks and radiation exposures, but those are called 'accidents' - not disasters. And every industry has accidents so it is futile to go down that road of debate.

The bottom line is that we need to put aside our pre-conceived opinons about everything these days, and re-evaluate each issue while considering the modern advances in technology. And NOT keep our heads in the sand like the looney left always seems to be encouraging.

SOS Award Inauguration

2005-10-09T07:24:00.000-07:00

Welcome to the inauguration of the SOS award! Each week I'll take a look back at the week in the news and determine the one person, above all the rest, who demonstrated the most dire need for a life saving infusion of intelligence! I know it'll be tough as there will be plenty of candidates to choose from!! The Idea came from the now famous quotes of General Honore: "you're stuck on stupid!....you're STILL stuck on stupid!" SOS means just that - stuck on stupid. An alternate interpretation is 'save ourselves', as in 'save ourselves from ourselves...before we are stupid again!". So without further ado, the inaugural SOS award - or 'Sossy' - goes to: Nancy Pelosi

That's right - Miss America - as Rush Limbaugh calls her. The Honorable Nancy Pelosi (Democrat) represents the 8th district in California, the San Fransisco area...definately a blue district. She has risen to the top leadership position of the House Democrats, so you'd think she was a pretty smart gal. But as you'll see, Ms. Pelosi demonstrates she is all Sossed because of what she said after the House of Representatives passed the 'Gasoline for America's security Act of 2005 - H.R. 3893' (enter "HR3893" in search window).

This particular bill was passed in response to the fuel supply crisis we find ourselves in after two devastating hurricanes. The reports I've read have estimated that 23% of our refining capacity was off-line as of late sept. Therefore, alot of people think some measures are in order. But it seems also that there are those more concerned with posturing, rather than governing. Ms. Pelosi is one of those politicians. And the closeness of the vote (212-210) indicates how common her views are in the Democratic party. But Ms. Pelosi has such a genuine confidence that her pronouncements are true it is astonishing!

If you read the bill linked above, you'll see it has many good provisions and even some a good liberal should love. There are provisions for the construction of new refineries, transportation and prices. There are also specific provisions for minority hiring and price gouging, both things liberals should be happy about. And, to my happy suprise, there is a provision creating a 'Commission For The Deployment Of The Hydrogen Economy'! This is the kind of thing the environmentalists should be happy about too! This is in no doubt reference to the new hydrogen technologies coming on-line. So with all this as background, after the vote, Ms. Pelosi is quoted in The New York Times as saying the following:

"It took that long for the indicted leader of the House of Representatives to twist the arms necessary to get a vote against the American people, against the consumer, against the taxpayer and against the environment - in favor of the energy companies"

She is practicing demogoguery perfectly!! She simply appeals to the emotional sensibilities of her radical left supporters by taking the same anti-Republican stance they do! She then offers an analysis of the bill that is the exact opposite of the truth! And what Mr. DeLay's legal problems have to do with this legislation is beyond me. The American people will yell if Congress does NOT do anything. (I'm sure polling will be done that supports that.) Anything that increases the supply in this market is going to lower the consumers cost and those same benefits, along with an improving economy and increasing tax revenues will help everyone. The hydrogen study is the promising note on the environmental front that she is totally ignoring. Hydrogen is one of the fuels of the future and a nail in the coffin of OPEC's influence. As far as the charge of being beneficial for the oil companies goes, it is the very success of those businesses that provide all the jobs the politicians say they want. Everything she said is completely backwards from reality. And unfortunately, she has plenty of company.

So congratulations Nancy Pelosi!!
You are the winner of the inaugural SOS "Sossy" award!!
You've been 'Sossed'!

The Third Way - Move to the Right

2005-10-08T06:18:00.000-07:00

In a previous post, I commented on how the Democrats have drifted left since WWII and how far left they are at the present time. I predicted that they would continue their fall from grace if they continued down that path unless they realized their mistake in time. This week there have been a few articles written regarding this issue, from both the left and the right.

The Washington Post has reported on a Democratic group called The Third Way. They are a group of people who worked in the Clinton administration and other liberal advocacy groups. The term 'third way' is a Clinton era term meaning 'triangulation' as taught by Dick Morris. Relying on heavy polling, the 'third way' is a way of bisecting two polarized views on any issue, in an attempt to demonstrate original thinking and leadership.

The Third Way report gives a surprisingly honest critique of the Democratic Party. Most of the issues actually address the party's worst socialistic views, and one issue dealing with presentation. They have a big reason to advise against the socialist trends since liberals only make up about 20% of the electorate, it is politically unfeasable to promote that viewpoint too much. Also, it isn't good enough to reframe the language, or finding a new narrative, they must actually follow through with the changes and get behind positions they are not ashamed of.

What it all means is the Democratic Party must move to the right in order to be credible to the great moderate bulk of American voters. That also would mean they would have to start taking into consideration ALL the facts of an issue rather than just the ones that support their position. Both of those things will make the loud left even louder. The press corps are the loudest on the left, being the communications dept of the Democratic Party, and they would have to return to honest journalism.

At the same time the Democrats are trying to find their way, the Republican Party is having an open debate about their direction. But, as I've commented before, their base is always pulling them back to the right. Conservatives are not afraid to discuss all the issues openly as they have no postions they are ashamed of. I will continue to post the results of the ongoing 'investigations' into some Republicans alledged misdeeds. And the rule of law will be obeyed without complaint. That is something the Democrats have had difficulty doing.

President Clinton said he would have the most ethical administration in the history of the republic, and yet there has not been fair or open reporting on Democratic legal problems since he was elected. Spin was the rule of the day. While Republicans in trouble have always been like blood in the water to a great white shark. Here (registration may be required) is a story on how the Democrats continually try to cover up anything they are ashamed of. Because there might be some news that impacts Hillary's re-election efforts they have to delay this news as long as possible. Or until it is so old people don't care. Open journalism, true non-bias reporting will treat all politicians the same.

Whether or not the press, the Democrats and the loud left actually adopt any of these measures time will tell. My guess is they will try to, but will fail to build enough of a consesus to make it a true shift. It will take courageous individuals to start wrestling the party back. We will know soon enough when we see the discussion the follows in the wake of the Third Way report.

But as this trend in the Democrats took a generation to reach this point, it may take a generation for them to come back around.

New(som) Rights

2005-10-06T20:09:00.000-07:00

To get a good idea of just how far we have come as a society, is to compare the luxuries we have now with those of our ancestors. For the most part we have things much better. We have electricity, automobiles, telephones and the most important...toilet paper. Some of these things we call luxuries - like cell phones or cars, and others are very necessary - like electricity.

The Honorable Mayor of San Fransisco, Gavin Newsom, thinks that you have a new right. And that would be wireless internet. Thats right. Along with life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is free Wi-Fi for all.

"This is inevitable - Wi-Fi. It is long overdue...It is to me a
fundamental right to have access universally to information."

Well isn't just great! We've progressed so far as a society that we now have the right to Wi-Fi. But if it's a right, do I have to pay for it? Heck no! Mayor Newsom doesn't think you should have to pay hardly anything at all for it, after all - it's a civil rights issue!"

"My intent is to have the taxpayers pay little or nothing...
This is a civil rights issue as much as anything else."

What a great country! You too can get special treatment! Imagine the possibilites! And your rights cannot be denied or you can sue for damages! You could take as many net-surfing breaks at work as the smokers do, prisoners, bums and illegal aliens will also need theirs. And, of course, there will be advocacy groups clammering for those who don't have access to a computer. So free computers will be next. After all, you can't 'technically' be on-line if you don't have a computer!

How blissful it must be to be a good-intentioned socialist! The cost of such coverage will be too cost-prohibitive to maintain for the long haul. The anticipated advertising revenue wont cover all the expenses. And if the city tries to step in and finance the coverage, then look for huge budget increases to follow.

Either way, the old saying - "there is no such thing as a free lunch" - will be proven true, no matter how well intentioned or hopeful everyone is. And socialism, once again, will have shown itself to be unsupportable.

Finally!!!

2005-10-06T05:46:00.000-07:00

I believe the future of oil dependency is over. Check out this news article from a Danish University on the advances in hydrogen fuel.

They claim to have invented a safe way to store, transport and refuel hydrogen 'tablet' fuel cells. Could the end of the Arab terrorist funding source (oil) be near?

I believe this is huge news!

Dumb, Deranged and Dangerous

2005-10-05T04:32:00.000-07:00

Here are some recent news items that have provoked some small reaction from me.

Sen. Schumer is Nixon redux: Top aids of Sen. Schumer being investigated for Nixon-esque activities. Hear any clammer in the news? Of course not. Democrats are pure as the wind driven snow...NOT!

Democrat free speech hipocrisy: You'd think that the party that promotes free speech as much as the Democrats do would be somewhat tolerant of objectional speech. Oh wait, thats only anti-American speech that they protect.

Tom DeLay punching bag: Ok, so the first indictment wasn't valid because the law DeLay is accused of violating wasn't passed until a year after he supposedly did what he is alledged to have done. So new charges are filed in a hurry to cover the D.A.'s ass and they somehow echo the 'money laundering' talking point the Democrats came up with the previous day...nice. Oh, and this isn't political...right.

Activist reporting: Ok, so what is it? Is Judith Miller a Bush lacky, or is she trying to protect someone else? After the bashing she got from her collegues about Iraq, I'm guessing she is not trying to protect her 'source' of Mr. Libby, rather it is someone else. And for the New York Times to stand behind her, they must know who and why. Time for some reporters to do what they want politicians to do - reveal what they know and when did they know it!

PETA pathetic: This one takes the cake, literally. I mean, c'mon folks...those little goldfish are labled as 'feeders' in the pet store. They are bred to be eaten! Does it really matter WHO eats it? What a waste that group is.

May I please arrest him sir?: For crying out loud! It takes a special order from the Governor to authorize the state troopers to arrest illegal aliens?? And only 3 states now are allowed to do so? This is why political correctness, and those who profess it, are treasonous!

Democrats are dumb, deranged and dangerous.

Whose Country Is It Anyway?

2005-10-04T05:20:00.000-07:00

With all the attention on illegal immigration, lax security at the borders, and the constant threat of terrorist violence looming over us...surely you'd think that most people would be doing their best to tighten up measures to protect us. You'd think.

Here's a story from a New Haven, Connecticut, and they are practically giving away citizenships to illegals. Notice how they care so much for these people that they want to make them feel welcome and safe. Here is a quote:

That illegals are here and the way to deal with them is by helping them become part of society.

I think this is an outrage!! Helping them become a part of society??? Hello folks, but they are ...how do you say it... ILLEGALS!!!

This is also the same state that provoked the completely stupid Supreme Court ruling called Kelo vs New London. This is the case where emminent domain was granted to a private party in apparent violation to the Constitution.

Stupid is as stupid does. The more we make it comfortable for people to engage in illegal activities and even legalize stealing your home, the more us normal folks are going to get outraged. And it always seems like it is a Democrat promoting these ideas. Any wonder why I'm so against liberal Democrats now?

The Base Pushes Back

2005-10-02T09:48:00.000-07:00

Whenever there is a discussion as to why a politician said something, or voted a certain way, there is always some reference to a sentiment that arose from their 'base', as in their core supporters. The 'grass roots' is another term that is used in similar ways refering to some action taking place in the 'base'. Both the Republicans and the Democrats have their 'base'. The Republican base is the conservative right wing and the Democrat base is the activist community. Each party responds to their base, and it is interesting to see just what direction the bases push their parties.

The Democrats have been controlled by the left-wing activist base since the ascendency of Howard Dean during the 2004 election cycle. And continually that base has been pressuring them, through blogs and fund raising, further and further to the left. They call themselves 'progressives' and so they keep pushing a progressive agenda which progresses more and more towards socialism. That is their desired place to be, similar to the socialistic governments of Europe. But is getting hard to tell the difference from the modern democrat and the old communist. They literally have transformed the proud party of Democrats into a psuedo-socialist/communist party. You can see that in studying the names and organizations behind such 'grass roots' protest marches. Also, if you read the official Democrat views and the Communist views, there isn't much difference between the two. It is unsettling to see just how far left they have moved.

The Republicans are controlled through the same means, opinion writers and fund raising, by their conservative base who believe in traditional values. They are constantly trying to bring the party back to their conservative ways whenever the party drifts to far to the left. You see that now in the uprising of the conservatives over such things as the huge spending bills that have been passed lately. One of the reasons that the first Pres. Bush (1992) and Sen. Dole (1996) lost presidential elections was because their conservative base did not throw all of their support behind them.

So as the Democrats 'progress' further and further left, and the Republicans are trying to return to true liberty in the economy and return to traditional values, a stark contrast is revealing itself. Another contrast is how the Democrats focus on an alledged charge of misconduct to 'bring down' a politician as opposed to winning in the marketplace of ideas and winning at the ballot box. They cannot capitalize on any problems the Republicans have because the Democrats have problems of their own.

The days of the past, of the two parties finding some common ground, are gone. We now seem to have only a choice between strident hard core socialists, or free market capitalism. History has already determined which choice is best. The Democrats will seal their own demise the more they become unhinged as they move further to the left. Despite any percieved, or real, problems on the right.

The Saga Continues...

2005-10-01T06:53:00.000-07:00

The election mess that King County (Washington State) had last year is still not resolved. Stephan Sharkansky over at Sound Politics has been noting many discrepancies. Here is a link to their archives page showing two posts regarding double voting and mistaken identities (scroll down to see the posts). He has had many other posts with very detailed information. He is the most accurate source when it comes to Washington State election oversight.

All of the errors that have occured deal with either mail-in ballots or provisional ballots. Federal law mandates provisional ballots and the popular trend is towards mail-in ballots. Both are hard to change, Federal law and public preferences. But something must be done to eliminate the errors. If the elections officials cannot even follow their own rules, then we must consider eliminating all mail-in and provisional ballots and institute a 100% in-person voting system.

What ticks me off is - How long has this all been happening? And how else would we have found out about these problems if it weren't for a blogger? Shame on the news media and shame on King Co. for electing 'Democrats' who don't live up to their name.

Economics In Action

2005-09-30T04:48:00.000-07:00

Economics. Most people do not understand it. Most people are never taught it. Most people would prefer never to think about it. But there is no more important academic discipline that we need to understand than economics. The whole reason that we argue, and that socialist ideas are attractive to people is because most people don't understand how the economy really works, and how socialism screws up the economy. And now today, we have an excellent opportunity to see just how economics is happening right before our eyes with the problem of oil and gas prices.

First of all, what is economics?

Economics is the study of the use of scarce resources which have alternative uses.

It is a very simple and predictable science. And it is devoid of any emotional component. The problem with most discussions of economic issues is people want to inject emotional qualifiers and anectdotes. That is like confusing the need for surgery with the physical impact of the scalpel. One must actually cut the patient to remove the tumor. It's a necessary uncomfortable thing to acheive a beneficial thing. Therefore prices (the cutting - especially when high), are absolutely necessary for the surgery (the economy) to have a sucessful result. And, more importantly, it is prices that determine how we ration items that are scarce. Instead of having a central planner determine which products go where, when and for how much, individuals determine all of that by deciding what they can or can't afford. And when there are many people in competition for the same item, someone needs to decide who gets it. Prices do that.

Now, when you sell something, you want to get reimbursed for what you paid for the item, plus any other investments you put into the endevour, like transportation costs, capital repairs, supplies, employee benefits, taxes etc. The sum total of all those costs is your selling price. If it is too high, and nobody buys it, you will go broke. If it is too low, you won't be able to replenish your supply or support your family, and you will go broke. So prices are not arrived at carelessly or with greed as the motivation. It is a constant struggle to find the 'right' price for your product. Notice how peoples behaviour change when a 'sale' sign goes up in a store window. Prices affect behaviour.

We now have today the evil spector of 'price gouging' appearing in the news. When actually, price gouging is quite limited in real life. Most of what is perceived as price gouging is really the free market economy happening right before our eyes. Lets put aside any emotional element and only talk about the science for a moment.

Suppose I own a fuel supply company in Arkansas, and I have 1,000 gallons of refined gasoline on hand. One day a hurricane wipes out my neighboring state to the south - Louisiana. Now they are going to need gas. And I have some. If I get a call from Louisiana asking to buy my gas, I'm going to want a fair price for my product. That's reasonable isn't it? But what is a fair price?

One individual cost, that is part of the total cost of the gas, is the replacement cost. Consider that I have this 1,000 gallons of gas, and a customer in Louisiana wants to buy all of it. First of all I have all my normal costs that make up my normal price for my local customers, but now I also have to consider extra shipping costs, extra employee costs, and any extra costs to replace my stock. And since this hurricane shut down 26% of the refining capacity of the country, chances are my re-stocking cost is going to experience a slight bit of inflation. How much I wont know at first, but I need to charge enough money now so I will be able to afford to keep the gasoline flowing to all my customers. Thus an increase in prices. In the short term it will look like I'm making windfall profits, when in fact those 'profits' will dissappear when I buy more gas. If I raise my prices too high in this situation, I will attract negative attention and will lose more than money. In fact there is a chance I wont have raised my prices enough and will still be caught short. If my prices go up, only those most in need of the scarce resource will be able to get it because the rest of the people will be priced out of the market. Incentives affect our behaviour.

And that is the heart of the emotional issue for people. It is economics that force us to change our behaviours. And most people hate change. I have taken to riding the bus to work. That is a change in my behaviour based on economics. And based on the fewer available seats lately, I'm not the only one modifying his behaviour. Socialism, through central planning, tries to minimize the impact on people that economics forces, and tries to minimize how much we, as individuals, must modify our behaviours. But what ends up happening is the opposite of their intended goals. Controlling the gas price means no gas availability, remember the 1970's? Price controls went into affect and then we had no gas. But if the price was allowed to rise, there would have been no shortage. Prices affect availability.

You might ask, why does the poorer person find himself forced to modify his behaviour sooner than the rich man? That is because economics, being a system of incentives, also provides opportunity for the poor man to gain wealth. Your neighbors nice car should be an incentive for you to try and work harder, or smarter, in order to attain one also if you desire. It is counter-productive to society to be envious of your neighbor. Socialism allows for people to stay poor by removing the incentives, removing the rewards, and thus de facto encouraging mediocrity and a certain level of poverty for all. Notice all the entrenched poor who don't even try because they get a nice check from the government. Socialism subsidizes laziness.

So you see how prices left on their own are important at regulating the economy in ways that central managers cannot. Although it is unpleasant at times because we must always adapt and be flexible with our lifestyles. We are, after all, humans. And one trait of our humanity is our ability to adapt. The goal of Socialism is to create an environment where we never have to adapt, challenge ourselves or grow.

Therefore Socialism is in denial of reality, and tricks people into thinking normal behaviour is a crime. When, in fact, Socialism is the real crime.

This is art?

2005-09-29T05:02:00.000-07:00

In my enlightened city, Seattle, there is a storm brewing. Apparently some wacko wants to bribe the city to display a controversial work of art in a public park. Normally this wouldn't be a problem as Seattle has a few controversial pieces of art already. The problem with this one is the pornographic and pedophile nature of it. Go here to read about it and see a sketch of the proposed sculpture.

As you can see, the arrangement and graphic detail communicate a completely different message than what the creater intends. Although he'd like us to believe it means something different, the graphic nature only allows one interpretation - an uncomfortably positive view of pedophilia.

If the city really wants the million dollars, then they should think about putting this 'art' someplace less shocking, like in the courtyard of a gay club in the First Hill area, and not a park where families with kids go. But being responsible isn't what he is interested in, it is only about shock value.

Any Doubt now?

2005-09-28T05:00:00.000-07:00

Those poor Democrats. Everything they cherish is being exposed as a fraud lately. Whether it is their treasured art of journalism, or the failure of bureaucratic socialism they've championed for so many years.

As far as journalism goes, it is in a sorry state these days. When bloggers do a better job than the traditional news media at actually getting to the bottom of a story, then something is definately wrong in Metropolis. We have had a constant stream of false, or fictional, news stories almost on a weekly basis for months, if not years now. If it wasn't for the blogs and the multiple news sources provided on the internet, we'd never know just how much crap they have been trying to feed us.

The latest is in regards to hurricane Katrina. Here is an detailed report of the extent of such false rumor-mill type of reporting that happened. And have you heard any corrections by the very reporters responsible, or their editors and publishers? And look at the anger that was created by their irresponsibility.

Combine that with other stories, such as this one, where 700 fireman were put through sensitivity training before they could hand out pamphlets, when they where there to help with the rescue efforts! That is an outrage! That is what Socialism breeds, a unreasonable approach to life. And how many people died because of it?

Then, we have all the left-wing hysteria that passes for intelligent thought. It must truly suck to be a level-headed Democrat when everyone on your side is going nuts.

And yet, despite all of this damning evidence, the left-wing nuts still try to paint the Republicans and conservatives as the village idiots. Is there any doubt now who the real nuts are?

Miscellaneous musings

2005-09-27T05:09:00.000-07:00

There have been so many interesting stories in the news lately that I can't spend the time on all of them that I'd like to. So here is a short list of good stories and my brief comments:

1) I was shocked when I read this one. The author is close, but oh so far away! He is confusing 'democracy' with 'socialism'. I mean, is anyone home? He is saying that just because the socialism was voted for, that is de facto democracy. No dear sir, democracy was the process, but socialism was the operational result. He needs a dictionary.

2) On the same note, this guy gets it oh so right! He points out how it was the private sector that was more reliable. That fact will never change, ever. History proves it. I was outraged when I read that John Podesta said that Bush's conservatism (read free market capitalism) ..."as fundamentally flawed and hostile to society's collective responsibility to help citizens." Of course a socialist is going to say that!

3) E.J. Dionne wonders where the Democrats are during the recent catastrophies. Sir, the Democrats are hiding. They cower in the face of true leadership demonstrated by one President George W. Bush. He does go on to say that the party must move towards the center, which is really a tricky way of saying they have to move right in order to win over voters. I'm waiting for a legitimate wing of their party to start doing exactly that.

4) And then there is this story on how liberal universities have become. I was once offered a teaching job at a local community college to teach a technical class on my field of work. But I declined the offer. I believe that "those who can - do...and those that can't - teach". Is it any wonder that the last bastion of the communists is on college campuses...or is that campi?

Monday Madness

2005-09-26T05:38:00.000-07:00

I get up about 4am to start my daily news search to consider what to blog on each day. As I sit here at 5:30am I am undecided on which story to vent. There are several in the news that get my blood boiling. Check out the daily postings of new articles I have posted on Rhyme&Reason. Give them all a good read and see if you notice what I notice.

From the misconceptions of the capitalism vs socialism debate, to the true nature of those on the left side of politics, there is a lot to comment on. I'll be posting on one or two of them later.

Until then, have a nice day...work hard, study hard and try to have fun! If the liberals don't piss you off too much that is!

Simple Relief

2005-09-25T07:20:00.000-07:00

"Live simply, so that others may simply live", and "simple ways of the past" are a couple of lines that most people would not object to. The most popular songs tend to be the ones with the simplest melodies. The most successfull politicians are the ones with the simplest message. And we all love simplicity in our lives. When things get too complex, we start to freak out! One has to wonder when, as a collective society, we will begin to freak out over the complexity of our tax system?

Making it's way through congress right now is something called the "Hurricane Katrina Tax Relief Act of 2005". And typical D.C. fashion, it is very complex and comprehensive. Here is a plain english version of the highlights of the legislation. The whole thing is filled with targeted incentives and relaxed rules. They are attempting to make life easier for those who have managed to survive the storm. Well, that sure is nice of Congress to want to do that. And all of the items in the relief act seem to make sense to some extent. But wouldn't it be better if the whole complex tax system of targeted rules and incentives was scrapped for a much simpler tax system that already had all the proper incentives built right in to it?

In the past presidential election cycles, talk of getting rid of the IRS and replacing it with a simple flat tax has gotten some media air time. And the sluggish European economies are taking a second look at that proposal. But my favorite plan is known as the FairTax.

With either proposal, two things are abudandtly clear. One thing is that there would be no need for the government to ease any rules or grant any extensions, as there would be no requirements to follow any rules or deadlines in the first place (especially w/ the FairTax plan)! The whole role of the IRS in our lives would completely disappear! The second thing made clear is that the economy would take off like a rocket all on its own, with no credit going to any politician. My suspicious mind thinks that is a major hurdle right there, no politician will be able to continually make political hay out of manipulating the tax code.

But those two things are very revealing about the opponents to such reforms. Those opponents are almost always left-wing socialists who neither like unfettered economic growth or an un-controlled society. Somehow they think if society is not controlled, it will do something dumb - from their perspective. So naturally they will fight tooth and nail to prevent any measure from passing. But what they also do is clearly identify themselves as opposed to every thing we as individuals really want. Namely better business and job opportunities and zero tax problems. (It will interesting to listen to them make a case for an oppressive tax agency as these ideas gain popularity.)

Both the FairTax or a flat tax plan would accomplish those goals...in spades! The statistical data is now starting to be compiled to prove that capitalistic ideas such as these are far superior to collectivist policies of the left. I will continue to post here items I find regarding this subject.

As citizens I believe it is our duty to provoke our politicians to get their heads out of the sand and reform our tax system even to the point of abolishing the IRS. Something must be done and soon. The FairTax is in congress now too, it needs our support!

Liberal Economic Myths

2005-09-24T07:04:00.000-07:00

As the estimated costs of rebuilding after Katrina and Rita (those two gals are trouble - I tell ya!), continue to escalate. It's important to have a clear grasp of economic realities. This isn't always easy to do since there are so many people with microphones spreading falsehoods about the economy. The rhetoric comes fast and furious at times, but the truth does come out at some point.

The total cost for just Katrina has been estimated at around $200 Billion. Not withstanding the petition to the Federal Government by the Louisiana Senetors asking for $250 billion, as that probably will be pared back by congress. Nevertheless, it will take a huge amount of money, especially if we add in the cost of hurricane Rita. But that really isn't a lot of money relative to our economy.

The fact of the matter is that we are going to be able to pay for all of it, plus a whole lot more. Thanks to the tax cuts of the Bush Administration, the Federal tax revenues are way up. And it is no surprise. It is an economic true-ism that if you ease the tax burden on society, individuals will make decisions to use their money and thereby allowing it to be taxed. If the tax burden is too high, then those same individuals will protect their money so as to avoid any exposure to taxes. And now we see the net result in increased revenue.

Socialism constricts the economy with too many rules which equals a sluggish economy, low tax revenues and higher unemployment. Capitalism, on the other hand, is the only reason there is an economy in the first place, and the only reason their is employment, and the only reason there are any tax revenues at all. So it appears to the logical mind, that capitalism should be encouraged, and socialism should be feared.

There is not one socialist country, in the history of the world, that has achieved the economic statistics of the great capitalistic democracies in the world.

Typical reporters questions

2005-09-23T05:26:00.000-07:00

This cartoon from NewsBusters, plus the post below, help point out what passes for in depth reporting these days.

'Many' attempts to 'seem' informative

2005-09-23T05:08:00.000-07:00

"It's as clear as mud" my mom used to say. That sums up the nature of reporting these days. To me it appears that reporters are more interested in taking a position rather than explaning fully the issue. A case in point is this article in Slate, a moderate left-wing news site.

Sadly, that is what passes for reporting these days. I feel guilty on this site if I don't link to enough sources to cover my bases. Most news reporting, like the article linked above, don't mention any facts or they skew the facts to change their meaning. After all the plagiarism cases at prominent newspapers, and forged memos at prominent tv news depts, it's no wonder more and more people are turning to alternative sources for their news.

On Rhyme&Reason today, I posted a link to a story taking another reporter to task. I will bring up stories like this from time to time as I believe it reflects a trend in society of sloppy, and lazy, intellect. Or no intellect at all. And mostly I see it on the left side of the political spectrum.

Stories like these make my point in my header of this page - "...The American left who have opened their minds so much that their brains have fallen out."

This Man Rocks!

2005-09-22T21:42:00.000-07:00

Hear! hear! Gen. Honore!! You rock! I heard this exchange on the radio yesterday and couldn't believe my ears! I loved it! Here is a link and an excerpt:

Male reporter: General Honore, we were told that Berman Stadium on the west bank would be another staging area…
Honore: Not to my knowledge. Again, the current place, I just told you one time, is the convention center. Once we complete the plan with the mayor, and is approved by the governor, then we’ll start that in the next 12-24 hours. And we understand that there’s a problem in getting communications out. That’s where we need your help. But let’s not confuse the questions with the answers. Buses at the convention center will move our citizens, for whom we have sworn that we will support and defend…and we’ll move them on. Let’s not get stuck on the last storm. You’re asking last storm questions for people who are concerned about the future storm. Don’t get stuck on stupid, reporters. We are moving forward. And don’t confuse the people please. You are part of the public message. So help us get the message straight. And if you don’t understand, maybe you’ll confuse it to the people. That’s why we like follow-up questions. But right now, it’s the convention center, and move on.

Male reporter: General, a little bit more about why that’s happening this time, though, and did not have that last time…

Honore: You are stuck on stupid. I’m not going to answer that question. We are going to deal with Rita. This is public information that people are depending on the government to put out. This is the way we’ve got to do it. So please. I apologize to you, but let’s talk about the future. Rita is happening. And right now, we need to get good, clean information out to the people that they can use. And we can have a conversation on the side about the past, in a couple of months.

I always love hearing Generals give press conferences! It's something about their noticing the 'bovine scatology' of the reporters silly questions. The other funny thing is the reporter seemed totally paralized by his outburst. It appeared to render him speechless.

And that is good news!

Economic Realities

2005-09-22T04:55:00.000-07:00

In my constant struggle to combat socialism, I am struck by the fact that statistics all add up in favor of capitalism. Yet why are socialists still hell bent on trying to make their dreams a reality? I have no answer other than they truely believe in their utopian dreams. But aside from that, there are statistics. I will bring them out from time to time to support my claims. And you can also do some research. Socialism loses by every count.

Now we have an election in Germany with all the associated hoopla. What does it mean etc etc etc.... It will mean nothing if they don't wake their economic heads up. Consider this statistic:

India's growth rate over the past 12 months was 7%, while Germany's was 0.6%.

That was from an article in the Guardian, definately not a right-wing paper, quite the contrary. And here's another poignant point:

The EU's always vainglorious claim that it will become the world's most competitive economy by 2010 will look ever more absurd.

So while the advocates of socialism keep talking about their virtuous goals, they conveniently leave out the realities that socialism constricts economic vitality and ingenuity. That must be why they want to win in the U.S., to make the Europeans feel better for being so dumb.

We can't be making the rest of the world look bad I guess...

Are they catching on?

2005-09-21T20:00:00.000-07:00

During the previous Presidential election, many people made fun of the 'family values' platform of the Republican party. Now a reporter from a big (liberal) city newspaper is stating that the socialistic state and the collapse of the family are big problems.

hmmm...maybe next someone on the left will say that self-reliance really is a good thing.

oops! There I go again, thinking that THEY actually think!

Rhyme & Reason

2005-09-19T05:53:00.000-07:00

It's finally ready!! The new portal over at Rhyme & Reason!! It's got news stories, commentary and a growing links page to reseach anything on your mind! And once you've researched your position, give me your two-cents worth in the forums!

The best of these blogs will find themselves over there in one of the forums, but it is not solely devoted to politics.

Stop by daily, as the news listings change, and pop into the forums and say hi!
-Rod

It's more than just words you guys, Ideas are required too.

2005-09-19T04:50:00.000-07:00

I've been noticing a trend lately. The Democrats don't know what to say. Everytime they are in a tight spot, it seems the first thing they try to come up with is a catch-prase or slogan. They seem to think that is powerful. Like having "Seattle-WTO" emblazened across their ratted t-shirts. A badge of honor. Before, during and after Kerry lost the Presidential election, they all talked about a 'story', or a 'narrative' that they so desperately needed, and that they thought the Republicans had. That is why the Republicans won the election, if you ask them, because the Republicans simply had a clear 'story'. Well they have not changed that view yet. In Sunday's Boston Globe, there was a story that talks about how they are looking for a narrative again, this time on the abortion issue.

Why do they always have to have a slogan, instead of an actual good idea? Why do they think we are stupid enough not to notice the lack of ideas on their side? And why are they so stuck in the past?

Change or die is the motto of corporate America; it applies to liberal advocacy groups, too.

Abortion rights supporters need a new, nonhysterical campaign that taps effectively into the country's continued backing for legalized abortion. These advocacy groups need to shed their shrewish image and find a way to connect with people who may not appreciate the right they have until it begins to be stripped away.
Otherwise, these advocacy groups bemoan themselves into irrelevancy.

But on the other hand, it's kind of fun watching them scramble for bits on the floor...

It's Not My Dad's Party Anymore

2005-09-17T18:31:00.000-07:00

Back in 1980, when I was 19, I voted in my first Presidential election. I voted for one Gov. Jimmy Carter - Democrat of Georgia. You might find that surprising when reading my blogs posted on this site. But I was just following in the footsteps of my father, who was a teamster union Democrat. And he even admitted to me his affection for socialism. When President Reagan won that election in 1980, I decided to look into what he campaigned on since I had paid little to no attention to the campaign. That was just the beginning of my life as a conservative. I probably really was a conservative all along, but never knew it. Reading Reagans speeches I found myself rueing my vote for Carter, and thus voted for President Reagans re-election.

Over the last 25 years I've watched the Democrat party drift ever further to the left (And even the Republican party has drifted to the left in many areas), while the number of conservative leaning Democrats has dwindled. What has happened to some Democrats can be explained as the "Reagan Democrats". Those were the middle class working Democrats that voted for Ronald Reagan. And a lot of them have stayed with the Republican party. I guess I would qualify for that catagory even though I was didn't vote for him until the 1984 election as a 23 yr old. Those that have stayed with the Democrat party, and have moved left along with it.

The purpose of this blog, and in every post, is to point out how the Democrat party has increasingly adopted socialism while increasingly rejecting capitalism since the Roosevelt administration's New Deal in the '30's. And how Socialism is actually bad for society on every level even while claiming to be the mark of a civilized society. It has come to a point where the differences between the Republicans and the Democrats can be seen very clearly in the context of Capitalism vs Socialism. And, I dare say, one can see the very striking difference in the Democrats themselves between those of the 1960's vs those of 2005. Indeed, it was the '60's that saw socialism really make advances in the mind-set of the culture. Some aspects actually became acceptable such as communes and rent control.

Today we have a major American political party whose platform for the 2004 presidential election, although vague, was similar in message to the platforms of the Socialist Party USA and the Communist Party USA. And if you read the hard left blogs on the internet, it is hard to tell the difference between them and a real Communist anymore. The reason why I am writing about this is because of the recent shift in the power base of the Democrats. The socialist/communist influence on the Democrats was mainly on the fringe for many years. But the blogosphere, where the hard left socialists now live, is becoming the mainstream of the Democratic party. Ever since Gov. Deans presidential campaign and internet fundraising success, the party has been in the midst of a civil war.

Even though there is some proof that FDR had communist agents in his administration, and his policies resembled collectivist policies, nobody in society would say above a whisper anything positive about communism. Now, with different names, the same old tried and true theories are presented as creative solutions by American lawmakers without blushing, even though there is plenty of historical evidence of their futility. Why do these theories still survive? I believe it is because most people do not fully understand economics,civics or how socialism affects both those topics, coupled with an naive admiration of the intended goals of socialism and communism...and a blind eye to the many examples in history.

The shift in the power base of the Democrats is away from the moderate/conservative establishment Democrats and towards the activist/vocal/hard left conspiracy theorist. And that is reflected in some of the things they say, and positions they take. It would be comparable if the Republicans were taken over by the hard right militia crowd...It wouldn't go over well. Every time one of the more responsible Democrats tries to make sense, the hard left majority crucifies him/her. In the future the Democrats are going to try to find some way to speak to both factions without alienating one of them. It will be a difficult balancing act. And that is why they are having such a hard time coming up with a 'narrative'...basically a nice catch phrase thats truthful. That's the problem, they want to be honest but it's hard to be a cheerleader for higher taxes. In the future I'll be focusing on the economic aspects of what they are for, so the comparisons will be clear...despite their attempts at spin.

The Democrats will continue to sink from the socialist weight around their collective neck. The unknown question is: Will they realize it and change course, or will another party emerge in their ashes?

Way to go Donna!

2005-09-17T13:45:00.000-07:00

Ms. Brazile (Gore campaign manager), you are a great American! I never thought I'd say that. After reading this piece she wrote following President Bush's speech, I wanted to stand up and cheer and give her a hug!
I am not going to nit-pick President Bush's speech in scope, or Ms. Brazile's response (although there is room for both). I think that in times like this, it is the overall demeanor you set that convey's your true feelings. Ms. Brazile's column was curteous and complimentary despite her acknowledged differences. This is the kind of discourse we should have in American politics. Kudos to you Ms. Brazile for your courage in complimenting the President! Alot of Democratic activists are going to be very upset at you!

She starts with:

On Thursday night President Bush spoke to the nation from my city. I am not a Republican. I did not vote for George W. Bush -- in fact, I worked pretty hard against him in 2000 and 2004. But on Thursday night, after watching him speak from the heart, I could not have been prouder of the president and the plan he outlined to empower those who lost everything and to rebuild the Gulf Coast

And closes with:

Mr. President, I am ready for duty. I am ready to stir those old pots again. Let's roll up our sleeves and get to work.

Well said Ms. Brazile! We are behind you and look forward to Mardi Gras this year!

Oops! They didn't plan on that!

2005-09-17T07:36:00.000-07:00

It didn't really help the media's cause. But when a group of evacuee's were interviewed on Ted Koppels Nightline, the answers they gave provided some clue as to how hard the media tries to create news and influence rather than inform.

Here is the transcript from that show, along with a brief commentary.

And now they are caught red handed. And still the reporter responded with "Very little skepticism here Ted" hmmm thats funny...I didn't see any skepticism. So despite a complete lack of skepticism, zero, none, nada...the reporter Dean Reynolds, had to intentionally insert the word skepticism into his response. So that means he made it up right in front of our eyes. And we have the entire thing documented, so he cant weasel out of it. My mom used to call that a lie.

What most people don't realize, is that the news industry does this type of stuff all the time. Usually its a 'he said - she said' type of affair. Very seldom do they get caught on live t.v. doing it. They remind me of the old communist news agencies that would only issue propaganda with very little news. Any wonder why the blogs and internet news sources are so popular now?

Disasters, leadership and taxes

2005-09-16T19:27:00.000-07:00

"Stupid is, as stupid does" said Forrest Gump. And I agree. I have been guilty of both. But as I've grown older, I have taken a broader, more historical view on things. The theme of this blog is Capitalism vs. Socialism, and there really hasn't been a lack of examples to prove my point. In the wake of hurricane Katrina, politicians have offered different ideas to navigate our to pay for the recovery.

President Bush has said that spending cuts are in order, instead of extracting more money out of the already tapped population. Since we have to tighten out belts, the President believes the government must do the same. Yet Sen. Hillary Clinton, the presumed Democratic Presidential nominee, has said herself that higher taxes are what America needs. So which is it? Higher taxes or lessening of taxes and red tape? Lets see...I have a flooded building and people who want to work for me, but the permit office and my own office are both swamped and ruined. Why should I be prevented from helping my community just because of paper work problems?

France is what I would consider a socialistic leaning country. And thus, their economy is stunted. Whereas the economy of the United States of America, not quite a socialistic haven, is as robust as ever. France has a 0.1% growth and the U.S has a 3.3% growth...which country would you rather live in???

More Truth

2005-09-16T04:59:00.000-07:00

Patience is a virtue. Lovers of the truth just need some of it. The truth always finds it's way to the top. But still some don't believe it, even when there is proof.

Remember this story about how the fed's were saying it was the Louisiana state government that prevented any help from reaching New Orleans. Well now we have a contrite politician rueing that decision. Their local media appears to have picked up on the story. I'm still looking for a good link, but where is the national media?

And what about the Federal response? Here is some more documentation pointing out some of the things that happened, as opposed to fanciful theories that didn't happen. Once again, where is the national media?

On the Iraqi front, there is this report talking about the improved conditions in Iraq. Now I know there is no national media on this one. So I will excerpt a section of it here:

Since the prewar period, there has been a 250 percent growth in the use of telephones. Electric power generation has grown above prewar levels, even in the midst of insurgent attacks, and after 40 years of complete neglect by Saddam. Every day schools are renovated (3,100 in the past year), and greater numbers of Iraqis receive medical treatment (healthcare spending is 30 times higher than in the prewar period).

You'll never hear it because news like this gets in the way of their 'party line'.

It's 'Stupidism', not Racism!

2005-09-16T04:33:00.000-07:00

I'm so tired of the racism charge that so easily rolls off the tongues of liberals when they see any black person in a difficult situation. The thing that ticks me off is that those same liberals never talk about personal responsibility. They only make excuses for them. Talk about being a co-dependent! And most of these liberals are upper to middle class whites! Like they would know about racism! While some racism does occur, the majority of cases are just perception...or seeing what you'd like to see.

Here is an article that points out just how creative they have to get. And also just how far out of a theory they'll consider truthful. To believe that a levee was intentionally breached is a conspiracy theory more fantastic than Darwins. There are a couple problems with their theory though.

1) Wasn't this the breach that had a huge barge sitting just on the other side of it. Now I'm probably going out on a limb here, but wouldn't it be more plausible to think that it was the barge that made the breach when the tidal surge pushed it through the levee?? I know, it makes too much sense.

2) Just how would someone see a 25 foot crater under the levee...when it was having flood waters pour through?

This story just does not pass the logical smell test. Another story was that a witness heard a 'boom' and 'thought' it was an explosion. Just a whole lot of imaginatin' goin' on here.

Will the last remaining intelligent Democrat please stand up?

Economies of incentives

2005-09-15T12:18:00.000-07:00

After the Katrina mess was over, I was going to write a piece on the types of responses both by the private sector and the public sector (gov't). Well I got upstaged by Thomas Sowell. Now, if I'm going to get upstaged by anybody, it is Mr. Sowell I would happily submit to. I must admit to some bias, I am presently reading Basic Economics to be followed by Applied Economics both by Mr. Sowell...but I digress.

As he writes in his piece (linked above) there are vastly different incentives - or motivations, at work in both sectors. The private sector is motivated by one thing, and one thing only. Can you guess what it is? Nope, not profits. Give up? It's a satisfied customer. Think about it. If a merchant does not satisfy his customer and loses him to another merchant, there goes any chance of income for paying bills, salaries or taxes...before any profit is even considered. Whereas the government, or the people occupying the office or agency, only cares about his/her own agenda or how people view them. To be fair, it should be assumed that all government employees, of all stripes, care about this country. But assuming that doesn't mean I can't point out exceptions. For the most part, government responds to situations, whereas private entities gear up for situations. So ultimately, there will be a profound difference between the service one gets from both. All driven by the incentives.

As I have mentioned in previous posts, the federal government did gear up for Katrina despite the nature of government to wait. But it should not be missed that the job of our federal government is not to do things for us. But to allow us the freedom to do things for ourselves.

Socialism teaches us that government is our benefactor. Conservatism teaches that your life is up to you. When someone whines to me about their plight in life, I always respond with..."What are you going to do about it?"

Everyday we feast on the harvest of past decisions. Some will feast till they are full, others have only a morsel. What you do today, will impact your tomorrows. That is something the welfare community fails to teach the dependants of the socialist society.

Truth trumps spin

2005-09-15T04:36:00.000-07:00

I'm sure you have seen some of the results of the ABC/Wash. Post poll that have been plastered across the news lately. Bush's poll numbers are at an all time low the headlines all read. But once again, they do a great job of pointing out some news, but a horrendous job of telling all the news. Keeping in mind that polls don't filter out stupid and ignorant citizens before tallying their results, lets consider some of the other results of the above linked poll. If you read deep into it you'll learn:

1) 57% (net) say the local (state/city) government officials were to blame for a poor job of hurricane responsivness, whereas only 45% (net) thought that Bush should have significant blame. And 61% think the local gov't as a whole were to blame. Have you heard about that in the news? If the people blame local government more than the federal government, why does the news media only focus on news that is negative for Bush, yet avoid the negative news when it deals with Democrats (the local gov't)???

2) 60% say that the Democrats are simply trying to Blame any problems on Bush for political gain. Only 36% of the people think that the Democrats are sincere in their criticism. I think that is hitting at the core of the Democrats problems in not winning elections, but do you remember hearing any mention of this on the news???

3) On a similar note, although a huge majority of people think there shoule be an investigation (76%), an outstanding amont of people (71%) think that the investigation hearings conducted by congress would get bogged down in politics similar to the 9/11 commission. That statistic also points to a lack of confidence in Democrats, have you heard any of that on the news???

4) Katrina clean up will cost a ton, to pay for it most people (39%) thought we should cut existing programs, whereas only 4% thought we should pull out of Iraq. And of that 39% for cutting programs, most preplies (29%) were for "other" programs instead of the war (20%). Read those again. I know you haven't heard THEM on the news!!!

5) On race issues: 60% & 64% (2 questions) said race and poverty did NOT affect preparedness. 67% think Katrina does NOT indicate racial inequality in America. And 59% believe Bush DOES care about black people.

Even though I believe most people are ignorant about civics and economics, their opinions still matter. And I write off some results because of that ignorance. But despite that, lets tell the whole story. If there is equally bad poll results that the Democrats don't like, why are they withheld from the news? Why does the 6 O'clock news anchor start his show with dire news about Bush's latest numbers? Why don't they ever point out the true nature of the discord going on in the Democratic party, and why they can't win elections anymore?

I think it's always easier to blame someone else than it is to look in the mirror. The news media is a wing of the liberal establishment and they obviously have preferences. But to find fault in FOX news, or right-wing blogs for that matter, as having biased news - wouldn't that criticism be more fairly placed at the feet of the liberal news agencies?

It may be fun to harp on Bush, the commie-libs in my town love it, and it does make good satire from time to time. Here is an English article pointing out that fact, plus the fact that the Democrats pale in comparison to the Republicans. Here is a telling line:

But come on, a guy doesn't have to be great to be better than Nancy Pelosi (Dem house leader), the armchair general of armchair generalities.

I believe that sums it up. No matter what criticism you may have of any Republican, most Democrats are worse.

Economic Facts

2005-09-14T11:54:00.000-07:00

Here is an article that proves, without a doubt, why you should never listen to a liberal, a Democrat or a Socialist in regards to taxes or the economy. Because they are proven wrong every time. Since Socialism dominates the liberal Democratic thinking these days, it's important to review history to understand the economic principles they believe in. And to compare what the Democrats say with what the Republicans say, then look at the results. The Democrats only focus on the old tried and true policies of the Communists - namely focusing on the class differences and blaming them on business and tax policy, and not looking at the actual results of those policies in economic terms.

This just leads me to repeat another of my sayings...."They don't call it the right wing for nothing!" -me.

News Flash

2005-09-14T11:35:00.000-07:00

This just in from North Carolina.....stop.....Hurricane Ophelia makes landfall....stop.....it's several hours since lunch....stop.....still no aid delivered yet by feds....stop.....employees resorting to eating co-workers....stop...but starting with the annoying ones or the ones with colds....stop....still no helicopters dropping aid....stop.....no matter how many they shoot at.....stop.

Governing during an emergency

2005-09-14T04:25:00.000-07:00

Pete Wilson was the Governor of the State of California from 1991 to 1999. One of the things he had to deal with was the '94 earthquake. He has an article this morning that features a couple of profound points.

First, he says that he lifted the bureaucratic burdens that stifle business. This just goes to show how burdensome the bureaucracy really is.

First, I quickly exercised the extraordinary emergency powers conferred upon the governor of California by the state Government Code. I suspended the operation of statutes and regulations that would have required the protracted public hearings called for before environmental impact reports could be filed and acted upon, and I suspended other normally demanded procedural hurdles. The elimination of these legal requirements drastically reduced purposeless delays that would have impeded recovery and compounded the injury inflicted by the quake.
I cannot emphasize too strongly the need for governors to be given such clear emergency powers if they are not provided them by existing state law.

The second thing he did was provide market based incentives. This is exactly how the free market works, and creating more incentives just encourages it to work even better.

Second, we took a page from the book of private-sector incentives for accelerating performance. We told contractors bidding to repair the bridges that they must submit bids that specified not only the cost but the date of completion, and that they must agree to an added condition: For every day they were late, they would incur a penalty of $200,000; and for every day they were early, they would be rewarded with a bonus of $200,000. The winning bidder, C.C. Myers Inc., put on three shifts that worked 24/7. In order to prevent any delay in the work, they hired a locomotive and crew to haul to Los Angeles steel sitting on a siding in Texas. Myers made more on the bonus than they did on the bid.

Incentives work. The reward to the contractor in this instance was well worth the reward to the public in achieving restoration of critical infrastructure two years early.

In times of fat prosperity maybe some socialism can be afforded by society. But notice what I said, socialism has a price tag. The market is always burdened by it, and when under stress, the market needs to be free of such constraints to survive. Socialism, therefore, is an anchor around the neck of the economy. Politicians implement it at their peril, and the smart ones lift it when the market cannot handle it. I would go so far as to say that Louisiana should lift all state taxes on business for a certain period of time, as an incentive to re-start their work. Thereby restarting the local emplolyment market. Thereby putting real money into peoples hands. But all we hear on the news is one program or another being proposed to "give" aid to people.

Teach a man to fish....don't just give him one.

Unreported Katrina facts

2005-09-13T22:24:00.000-07:00

This is a must-read!! Still more will come out in the weeks and months to come...so stay tuned!

Oh, but he probably has an excuse

2005-09-13T22:08:00.000-07:00

You just can't make this stuff up! When will they ever learn? The Republicans learned from Watergate, you'd think the Democrats would've learned from Clinton...but alas...once again..asking too much.

But what hypocricy they have...This guy would have been skewered by now if he were a Republican. If the main stream media were really fair, he will.

The Looney Left

2005-09-13T21:08:00.000-07:00

They have totally lost it. Here is a post of a collection of quotes from left-wing blogs. When one considers the fact that these people really believe those things they blurt out, then there is no reasoning with them at all. They have all lost their minds! I hope the reasonable Democrats will take back their party.

As far as how the looney left, with their socialism, screw up society...hurricane Katrina has revealed many things about a whole class of people who have become dependent upon government for their survival. George Will wrote a column that points this out with some of the same passion I've had. Here is a portion of it:

Liberalism's post-Katrina fearlessness in discovering the obvious -- if an inner city is inundated, the victims will be disproportionately minorities -- stopped short of indelicately noting how many of the victims were women with children but not husbands. Because it was released during the post-Katrina debacle, scant attention was paid to the National Center for Health Statistics' report that in 2003, 34.6 percent of all American births were to unmarried women. The percentage among African American women was 68.2.

Given that most African Americans are middle class and almost half live outside central cities, and that 76 percent of all births to Louisiana African Americans were to unmarried women, it is a safe surmise that more than 80 percent of African American births in inner-city New Orleans -- as in some other inner cities -- were to women without husbands. That translates into a large and constantly renewed cohort of lightly parented adolescent males, and that translates into chaos in neighborhoods and schools, come rain or come shine.

80% fatherless families. There is no good male role model in the family. There is no help for the mother. There is no financial help. There is no household maintenance help. The fathers usually join the criminal element. All this bred by the 'generosity' of the socialist benefits provided by the government.

Your tax dollars hard at work.

The grown-ups are in charge

2005-09-13T04:32:00.000-07:00

I love it when I come across a piece that is written well and summarizes powerfully. This piece does that. It's a great read. Let me quote part of it here:

"We do not yet have teleporter or replicator technology like you saw on 'Star Trek' in college between hookah hits and waiting to pick up your worthless communications degree while the grown-ups actually engaged in the recovery effort were studying engineering.

"The United States military can wipe out the Taliban and the Iraqi Republican Guard far more swiftly than they can bring 3 million Swanson dinners to an underwater city through an area the size of Great Britain which has no power, no working ports or airports, and a devastated and impassable road network

Do you see how important it is to keep things in perspective? The left dominated media does not seem to know how to do that. The truth is not in their best interest, as it leads people away from them and towards conservatism. And I'm not surprised that the left is holding on to the perspective that the rescue efforts were botched, but I am surprised why they don't care where the real damage was done. The local officials have more responsibility in situations such as this, than the federal government has. Why the Democrats don't see the wrong-doing of their own is beyond me. Us, on the right, have to purge our own when they mis-behave, but the left seems to idolize their failures.

But then socialism never has liked excellence, it only produces mediocrity at best....and New Orleans at the worst.

The anti-religious left

2005-09-12T04:30:00.000-07:00

Here (registration may be required) is an article that touches on something I have been saying for a long time. Namely, that the people on the left side of the political spectrum have turned their world view into a religion. The religion is commonly known as Secular Humanism. But the left-wing political groups behave in ways that only religious zealots have in the past. They bristle at any thought or comment that appears to violate their religion and call those that do violate their religion as evil doers.

There are certain tenets to the religion of the left in addition to secular humanism that you must believe in to be a member in good standing. They actually are all negavtive. Tenents such as abortion on demand at any age, hatred of all things Republican and hatred of capitalism. Lots of death and hate on that side of things. Like Rush Limbaugh always says...it's hard to attract someone to a movement that is preaching so much hate all the time.

Democrats unhinged

2005-09-11T06:25:00.000-07:00

Here, here and here are stories of Democrats becoming unhinged. They really think they have something to chew on with the Katrina aftermath. They are convinced they are in the right. I love it! Eventually the facts will catch up with them and they 'll have to find something else to whine about.

But never fear, when you have the facts on your side you cannot lose.

Have you forgotten?

2005-09-11T05:27:00.000-07:00

Have You Forgotten?
(Darryl Worley/Wynn Varble)

I hear people saying we don't need this war
I say there's some things worth fighting for
What about our freedom and this piece of ground
We didn't get to keep 'em by backing down
They say we don't realize the mess we're getting in
Before you start your preaching let me ask you this my friend

Have you forgotten how it felt that day?
To see your homeland under fire
And her people blown away
Have you forgotten when those towers fell?
We had neighbors still inside going thru a living hell
And you say we shouldn't worry 'bout bin Laden
Have you forgotten?

They took all the footage off my T.V.
Said it's too disturbing for you and me
It'll just breed anger that's what the experts say
If it was up to me I'd show it everyday
Some say this country's just out looking for a fight
After 9/11 man I'd have to say that's right

Have you forgotten how it felt that day?
To see your homeland under fire
And her people blown away
Have you forgotten when those towers fell?
We had neighbors still inside going thru a living hell
And you say we shouldn't worry 'bout bin Laden
Have you forgotten?

I've been there with the soldiers
Who've gone away to war
And you can bet that they remember
Just what they're fighting for

Have you forgotten how it felt that day?
To see your homeland under fire
And her people blown away
Have you forgotten when those towers fell?
We had neighbors still inside going thru a living hell
And you say we shouldn't worry 'bout bin Laden
Have you forgotten?

Have you forgotten all the people killed?
Some went down like heros in that Pennsylvania field
Have you forgotten about our Pentagon?
All the loved ones that we lost and those left to carry on
Don't you tell me not to worry about bin Laden
Have you forgotten?

Visit Cox & Forkum's website today for a poignant editorial cartoon
and a list of educational links

It's called Treason

2005-09-10T06:00:00.000-07:00

Here is an excellent overview of how the Clinton Administration ignored the terrorist threat and how the left-wing ideology turns a blind eye to such realities. And that trend doesn't seem to be ending any time soon. In fact, the end result of all the left's approaches to fighting terrorism is a strengthening of the resolve of the terrorists!! That is aiding and abetting the enemy - it is treason. The above linked article is a must-read, it highlights all the major events.

Lets consider a few obvious facts for a second. First of all, when you have an opponent, one of the most important things you can do is to listen to what they actually say their motivation is - and not just what we imagine it to be. We do have on record, exactly why the Islamo-fascist terrorists want to kill us. And the more one studies Islam, the more one sees the bloody trail they leave behind. It should be no mystery, when looking at history, that the followers of todays Islam will be just as bloody as their predecesors.

Secondly, from simply a human nature point of view, what zealous and suicidal militant is going to be swayed by law enforcement measures? Throwing a handful of people in jail will not stop a global movement. Especially one that is over 1,400 years old with a track record of not really caring too much about political correctness or sensitivity training. So in order to kill the war-making ideas of someone like that, you basically need to give him the proper motivation to stop. Which means you have to convince him he has no hope of success, only the guarantee of his own death.

On the eve of 9/11, we need to always remember why they really hate us. It is because we do not live under a world-wide Caliphate. Islam means submission. That is their ultimate goal, and they will kill as many as needed in order to attain that goal.

The American left, and the Democratic party, are their de facto supporters. - Therefore, they are guilty of treason.

Too Perfect?

2005-09-09T04:36:00.000-07:00

Well now that the real blame for the Katrina mess is being placed, rightly, at the foot of Governor Blanco, the Democratic attacks have turned back the Supreme Court. I've noticed their trend, if the heat gets pointed back at them, they change the subject. So ok, fine children.

In this piece, Richard Cohen is trying to make the case that Bush Supreme Court nominee Roberts is too perfect to know about life. Excuse me, but growing up, getting married and having two kids is not real life? And what about making mistakes. If he is a judge, shouldn't the quality of his life decisions be relevent? The fact that he made better decisions in his life, than Richard has in his just means that Mr. Cohen is a pale reflection of Mr. Roberts.

I like how the Democrats always change the parameters depending on which party benefits. If Mr. Roberts was a Democrat, they'd be saying how wonderfully perfect he is!

Sometimes its like debating children when debating Democrats.

More Democratic Leadership

2005-09-08T05:24:00.000-07:00

These Democrats sure make my job easy. Just when I think I've seen it all. Hillary now suggests that higher taxes is how we all share in the sacrifices.

If ever there was a time for lightening the Federal burden the economy, it's now in the gulf region. And yet ignoring basic economic principles, she is showing all of us her inept leadership. But alas, she isn't the only one. We must stay dilligent.

Red Cross Hindered by Democrats

2005-09-08T04:33:00.000-07:00

We already knew that the Democrats are inept at leadership. Here is further proof. And here is the link confirming it on the Red Cross web site:

Access to New Orleans is controlled by the National Guard and local authorities and while we are in constant contact with them, we simply cannot enter New Orleans against their orders.

The state Homeland Security Department had requested--and continues to request--that the American Red Cross not come back into New Orleans following the hurricane. Our presence would keep people from evacuating and encourage others to come into the city.

They are always so worried about appearances and goals that they never think about actually doing something worthwhile. How many days did we have to put up with all the clammering about the Federal Governments response, when the Democrat Governor Blanco was the responsible one. It was her Administration that communicated this order to the Red Cross, NOT the Presidents.

Just think...pretty soon the media is going to say: "You know, all that hatred that we spewed towards Pres. Bush was really supposed to be directed at the Mayor and the Governor - We're sorry"

I'm not holding my breath.

They're everywhere

2005-09-07T17:39:00.000-07:00

Keep your eyes open. Pay attention. Don't be afraid to say something. They're even in the most unlikeliest places. Read this and get steamed.

There's a reason why they call them illegal aliens...because they are ILLEGAL! I often wonder what part of that word people don't understand! We pay enough taxes to support too many of our own as it is, not to mention the security problems our borders present.

We need to pressure our elected representatives to secure our borders.

Click here to find/write to your Representative.
Click here to find/write to your Senator.

Is that you daddy?

2005-09-07T12:02:00.000-07:00

I was reading this column by Robert Novak in The National Review this morning, and noticed how he is making a point I always try to make. Namely...where are the men, or dads? Not the biological life forms, but the real man, the real dad.

His column discusses the demographics of the New Orleans area, as well as some other issues I've discussed in previous posts. But there are two passages I want to highlight.

If you add together the 26,000 female householders with children under 18, no husband present, and the 18,000 householders more than 65 years old and living alone, that is an estimated 40,000 female-headed households. That explains the pictures we are seeing on television, which are overwhelming female, most often with young children. The chances of persons in this demographic being employed full-time, year round, and with a good income, are not high. The chances of them living in poverty, and without an automobile, are exceedingly high.

and:

The younger mothers among them have been abandoned by those they should have been able to count on, the males in their lives.

Notice that the number of fatherless households in 2000 was HIGHER than the number of two-parent households! One of my theories as to why so many inner-city kids turn into thugs is because there is no strong, moral, dad in the house. And look what we've seen demonstrated on t.v. this last week. Mothers in desperation, and male gangs roaming the empty streets shooting up the town and looting it. What a good moral example.

And then it is no wonder why these women look to government to help them instead of their worthless men. After all, ever since the Bolshevik revolution, communists and socialists have been telling us that the land is "mother" (in song even!) and "father". Why would these ladies, who have been raised under socialism, think any different. This is how socialism breeds dependence on the government, and never breeds self-reliance like a good father should. Also consider what kind of "dad" government is...blind, distant, unfeeling, unfulfilling - but they balance it by being generous without any expectations. So these ladies bitch at the government just like they would bitch at their husbands.

I can't blame the ladies, but hey guys....where are you? Don't you care about your kids? Or are you too consumed by your uncivilized selfish ways. Us men who think we are good need to consider those points as well.

Like I've said before, how many people would have survived if a few good men were in that city.

Blogs vs New York Times

2005-09-07T04:43:00.000-07:00

The blog Power Line has an excellent response to Paul Krugmans editorial on the Bush Administrations handling of the Katrina aftermath. As the response states, facts are in short supply over there at The Grey Lady.

Over the course of Labor Day weekend, the only reliable source of news were the blogs. The t.v. news was only focused on the video images of victims in need, and the newspapers are frankly too slow to respond to anything. It has been the blogs, many I've linked to in posts below, that were on the story and it was the blogs that actually have done the research.

Just like the left beats up on talk radio hosts (instead of debating their points), now they are dismissing the blogs and ignoring their research. It is comforting to know what is really going on, but it's frustrating that there are people who don't consider facts in forming their opinions. And then the only issue they want to discuss is their opinion of you! Talk about snobbery!

Blogs are individuals and not 'group-think'. Socialism creates 'group-think' and the left wing media elites are trying their best to spread their propaganda.

Deadly Duo - Nagin & Blanco

2005-09-06T12:21:00.000-07:00

Here is an excellent narrative of the emergency proceedures, and the results thereof, of the city of New Orleans. Most of the sources in this article are linked in my posts below. I listened to the news all day today with rapt attention hoping to hear some discussion of this issue. I think I heard someone say that there was enough blame to go around, and that we should just focus on helping the victims. I love it how they turn away from the controversy they started when it looks like someone on their side is at fault.

Some who haven't learned the full details still have been clammering for investigations. And President Bush is now also saying the same thing. I think there are many on the right looking forward to them, and many on the left dreading them.

They don't call it the 'right' wing for nothing!

Cover Thy Ass

2005-09-05T21:08:00.000-07:00

"I'm not afraid of the truth" - That's what I always say. I'm willing to wait until it does come out. I've been saying lately that the only person to blame for anything, is the Administration of Louisiana Governor Blanco. And now, in classic CYA (cover your ass) fashion, Mayor Nagin of New Orleans is deflecting (full interview here)blame in Gov. Blanco's direction. He's going to let her hang alone! He knows it's going to get hot and would rather be spared. This confession is very damning! This interview happened on CNN. And since it aired, the blogs have been on it. See here and here. Lets see how long it takes for the media to catch on.

So let them have their little "Investigations", and like Mayor Nagin did, they'll quickly distance themselves from the true guilty party - Gov. Blanco. And apologies for President Bush will be in order.

Blame Game

2005-09-05T07:56:00.000-07:00

The fevered pitch of asinine comments comming out of the mouths of the anti-American left right now is too much to bear. And I've even heard some from weak-kneed Republicans jump on the "blame the Federal Government" bandwagon. Didn't anyone learn any lessons from previous disasters? When the authorities say 'get out', you're supposed to get out!!! I wonder what part of that sentence is so hard to understand? In the aftermath of the evacuations during hurricane Ivan, the Lousiana Governor Blanco, and the New Orleans Mayor Nagin both acknowledged the need to improve - exactly in the same areas that failed this time, but never mentioned any hinderance or lack of support from the Federal Government. So why now? Just because it's convenient? Or is it because it is politically advantagous now? Read here to see their emergency rules and it clearly shows that the areas of responsibility are different for the different authorities.

Here is an excellent explanation and chronological history of the events leading up, and following the storm.

The highlights are:
1) The Governor took charge of all emergency services when she declared a State of Emergency.
2) The U.S. Military has been prohibited since 1878 from operating on U.S. Soil, therefore the National Guard and the Coast Guard are the only services able to be used.
3) The National Guard is under the control of the Governor unless the Governor requests a Federal takeover of the situation - known as Federalization (.pdf).
4) The Bush Administration has gone so far as to petition the Governor to ask for Federalization. And after discussing it all night long (while people die) the Democratic Governor rejected the idea based on how it would appear, and to avoid the blame-game thay thought the Bush administration would engage in!!! Then read here and it is clear there is a culture of avoiding the Bush Administration even when they need it. How juvenile!! And yet they have the gall to accuse FEMA?? Good Gawd!

So the blame, if any, should be laid at the feet of the Democratic administrations of Mayor Nagin and Governor Blanco. Once again, we see how liberalism kills. And that the Democrats are always more interested in fluff rather than substance - they should be disqualified from governing. In fact, I'll go so far as to say if they want to investigate anything - they should investigate whether or not Governor Blanco should be impeached.

This morning on the t.v. I watched President Clinton mention how he wished the Congress would suspend their schedule, when they return next week, to deal with all the issues swirling around now (ie the blame game). And why do you think he would say that? I think he is revealing his true liberal stripes because the Congress was set to discuss several things he is opposed to. And that position is getting traction. But, as I will detail in future posts, economic and tax relief is exactly what is needed in times like this. Why oh why they don't understand basic economics is beyond me, but I digress....

Check back for more Blame Game posts with updated links and more examples of liberal lunacy.

Urban War Zone

2005-09-04T09:44:00.000-07:00

I've been hearing more rumors of gun battles in some parts of New Orleans. Here is the first time I've seen it written about, and with this much detail. I will link related stories as I find them. See this post as well.

I also witnessed something very curious on t.v. this morning. I saw people refusing to be rescued on t.v. this morning, even after they were told it would take between 30 to 60 days for the city to be dry. I wonder why? I mean, no water, no electricity, no fresh food...oh but there is plenty of stench, heat and filth. People usually makes decisions that they think is in their best interest. Sometimes convenience is a self-interest that the person values over safety. Sometimes there are other incentives to stay. At the risk of being controversial, let me venture a guess: How many little mountains of loot are some people trying to protect?

I will be discussing this more as it is written about in the news. The crime issue is going to be one of the biggest ones after the city is dry. So check back as the story unfolds...

National Guard

2005-09-03T18:22:00.000-07:00

Here and here are articles shedding some light on the whole National guard issue. The left believes the National Guard is stretched too thin because they are all overseas. Of course they have no figures - only anecdotes. The truth of the matter is that we have plenty of them. And that they are citizen soldiers, therefore it takes time for them to get assembled and deployed. Mayor Nagin has mentioned that the lines of responsibility, between the States and the Federal Gov't, are unclear. Well maybe for the liberal Democrats running Louisiana who know more about corruption than actually governing. Mississippi didn't seem to have a problem figuring that part out. But then most liberals don't know much about civics anyway. The Governors are in charge of the National Guard unless they have been federalized. In the initial moments of the tragedy, it was the Coast Guard that was conducting what air rescues they could because they are a full time force actually trained in this sort of work. But they still had their own problems to deal with. The National Guard was to be the land force. And responding to the gigantic scale of this disaster is hard no matter how much planning is done. But the lack of self-reliance of the population, bred by socialism, makes things like this much more difficult than they need to be. I am still shocked at the constant attempts to justify the looting (we need to understand them), similar to how they told us we needed to understand the terrorists.

After this is over, the real stories will come out revealing if they had enough men or equipment. And the true stories will come out about the extent of the violence. I am going to form my final opinion at that time, but the facts don't seem to be something the left wants to consider when they form an opinion.

Thanks a lot neighbor

2005-09-03T13:01:00.000-07:00

New Orleans Evacuations

2005-09-03T10:27:00.000-07:00

I came across this news story from 8/28 while reading Orbusmax.com this morning. If you read the whole thing, you'll notice a couple of mind-blowing things.

The first thing is that the true leadership, before Katrina hit, came from the President. In the 4th paragraph it mentions that President Bush provoked the Democrats running Louisiana and New Orleans to issue a mandatory evacuation because of the flooding danger. If he didn't call the Governor, I don't believe they would've made it mandatory. How many lives were saved because of the elevated status from optional to mandatory??? And that credit directly should go to the president!

The second thing is that the people who couldn't get out, were told they should get to one of the safe spots like the Superdome to survive the flooding, and to bring several days worth of food! How many more lives would have been saved if the people had complied? But no, they were partying and not taking the authorities seriously! I also think the looting was pre-meditated. Not all, but a lot of people stayed behind just so they could engage in lawless anarchy. And look at the hindering of rescue efforts they caused! Here and here too.

So there's some credit that should go to President Bush (and also the Democratic leadership of Louisiana - only because they recognized good advice) and some blame should go to the victims themselves for not heeding the warnings!

But alas...that would make too much sense....

I believe it is the laziness that socialism breeds that is the fundamental cause of both things. Intellectual laziness in the news media, and personal laziness in the welfare and criminal communities. Socialism does not encourage individual thinking or charity on behalf of your neighbor. Now we see how lethal it really is.

Liberal logic?

2005-09-01T09:59:00.000-07:00

Because of the devastation from Katrina in the Gulf of Mexico oil production facilities, the anti-American left has been clammering for President Bush to release some of our strategic oil reserves. The strategic oil reserves only hold approx. a 60 day supply of oil. And President Bush has relented.

But consider the logic of the anti-American left for a second:

They sit there and scream that we cannot drill in ANWR (Alaska), for many illogical reasons, but one reason is that there really isn't that much oil up there so it wouldn't make a real difference in our supply needs. But yet they have been demanding that President Bush release a far lesser amount of the strategic oil reserves than we would be getting out of ANWR because they claim it WOULD make a difference!! So which is it?...either a certain amount will help, or it wont.....it doesn't matter where it comes from.

Also there have been warnings from some Democratic lawmakers that there is going to be a push to drill more. A warning? Like it's a bad thing? We don't have alternative fuels yet and they want to hamstring their own country prior to having alternatives in place? Combine this warning with the resistance they put up to building any new refining facilities and there is no wonder why our gas prices are so high. This is basic economics 101.

One has to wonder who's side the liberals are really on. That's why I call them the ANTI-AMERICAN LEFT.

(credit for the logic perspective goes to Rush Limbaugh)

Fluff over substance?

2005-09-01T06:39:00.000-07:00

Here is the full text of a letter to the editor at the Seattle Times I submitted today. I doubt they'll print it, so here it is:

Why is it that the people on the left never engage their brains before they open their mouths? In todays (9/1/05) letters to the editor section, there are 5 letters taking pot shots at the President over the appearance of how he does his job, or that his policies have somehow contributed to the chaos in New Orleans.

Consider the facts: 1) The President, no matter where he is, has his key staff with him and many ways of communicating and directing national assets. Do liberals realize this, or are they more interested in fluff than substance? 2) During the term of The previous President, The U.S. was attacked no fewer than 5 times by terrorists. But yet he did nothing but bite his lip and play with some fluff in a blue dress in the Oval office. 3) FEMA and other agencies pre-positioned many assets in anticipation of this catastrophe, but it was impossible to mobilize immediately because of the debris. 4) New Orleans police and rescue helicopters have to deal with looters and gun fire instead of rescuing people. Where is the outrage at the looters behaviour when their city is in ruin? The looters themselves seemed to be doing well enough to carry huge amounts of goods down flooded streets, why couldn't they be helping their fellow citizens?

The selective outrage of the left leaves me disgusted. I'm ashamed of the whiners, the looters and even the reporters that always ask "why can't we do more?", when they don't even check out just how much we are doing.

This is a time for good people to rise up and help their fellow countrymen, yet the whiners on the left only look at this as an opportunity for political pot-shots.

Killer Katrina

2005-08-31T06:17:00.000-07:00

This terrible tragedy will probably be worse than 9/11 or the Galveston Hurricane. Anybody who can, should donate to the Red Cross.

With all the death and destruction, there are still the loons on the left who are trying to find someone to blame the storm on. I suppose, similar to 9/11, someone soon is going to say that we should feel sympathetic to the hurricane...that we should understand why it hates us so...that we should feel ashamed about how bad we are as a people. At times like this we need to put differences aside and pull together as Americans. But then that makes my point, the liberals in the American left - ARE NOT AMERICANS. I also think that the looters in times of crisis are not Americans either.

Is there no shame anymore?

Here is a story, in the New York Times no less, that states that the hurricanes are not coming at an unusual rate. I would venture to guess that the editor that allowed that story is going to get a "talking to" later when the P/C police find him.

Remember to donate and pray.

Good news in Iraq - very long post

2005-08-30T11:51:00.000-07:00

Chrenkoff

Introduction to Islam pt. I

2005-08-29T19:47:00.000-07:00

Ever since 9/11 people have been trying to understand Islam and it's followers. Many theories abound as to why they hate us and our culture. The facts are not that hard to learn. They are taught daily by Imams and covered in many books. Islam is a warrior philosophy that has a violent history and promises more in the future. It does not teach love, tolerance or compassion - only submission. Here are some basic tenets of Islam:

1) The word Islam means "submission". Al-Islam means "submission to God". Ultimately, in practice, this refers to Muslim men only, and all others must submit to the Muslim man. That includes his wife, even if she is a Muslim too. It is ordered by Islamic scholars that "no non-Muslim should ever hold a position in which he can have power over a Muslim" - Behind the Veil, p.139 by Abd El Schafi.

2) The whole world is divided between two houses:
a) Dar al-Islam (house of Islam) where Muslims dominate and non-believers exist only at their mercy. Non-believers are called the Dhimmitude which comes from the word dhimmi meaning "protected" because they agreed to a treaty called a Dhimma under threat of death.
b) Dar al-harb (house of war) where all non-believers still dominate. Muslims are encourage to populate in these areas until they are strong enough to convert or subjugate all the non-believers.

3) Jihad (struggle) has different meanings to different Muslims. This is where the "Islamo-fascist" terrorists differ from the "moderate" Muslims. The moderate Muslims believe this is an internal spiritual struggle to submit ones will to that of Allah. The terrorists, as we all know, believe it to be a literal struggle to subjugate all non-believers. Those who believe that will settle for one of three choices...convert, be subjugated or die.

4) Allah is the name of the pagan god of the moon in the ancient Meccan religion and the head of their pantheon. He had three daughters who are represented by the pillars pilgrims run between in their rituals at Mecca. I find it interesting that Islam claims that Allah is the "one true God", yet he is part of a pantheon.

In the beginning Islam took hold in the Arabian penninsula by dominating Medina and Mecca. But Mohammed could only win through the sword. From the very beginning, the sword was his tool of conversion. To list their complete history here would take the space of a medium-sized book. See the link above, and there are several books written on the subject by Sir William Muir (1819-1905) and The Sword of Islam by Serge Trifkovic.

The asian people, especially the Hindus in India, where brutally and methodically butchered. Town after town, province after province was put to the sword. The Hindus have long memories of this period. This website shows in exhaustive detail how the Hindus were massacred by the Muslims. And not just the Hindus were affected. At every step along the way, the spread of Islam was more of an advancing army that took no prisoners. It wasn't until Hitler and Stalin in the 20th Century that the brutality of Islam had been bested. In fact, Hitler had as a main ally the former President of the Supreme Muslim Council of Palestine - Haj Mohammed Amin al-Husseini. Hitler was asked by members of his inner circle if Germany's reputation would suffer if they persecuted the Jews. Hitler responded by saying "Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?" Refering to the massacre of the Armenians in 1915 by the Turks who were Islamic.

The recent history of Islam is also colored red...blood red. Today we are told that Islam is the "religion of peace". And that there is a moral equivalency between the Islamo-fascists and the western European Crusaders. The senseless debauchery committed by the "Franks" (western Christians) was far from morally equivalent to the 1,400 year history of blood shedding by Muslims. An honest reading of history will leave a very bad taste in ones whole being, if they have a heart.

Our present challenge in the west, is to confront and defeat this every threatening storm. All of us must have the courage to verbally defend our way of life, support our leaders and troops who must defend us, and do our best to promote liberty, representative governments and all philosophies and religions that teach love.
Islam truely is the "dark side of the force".
">

True Colors

2005-08-28T09:07:00.000-07:00

This article in the American Spectator is illustrative of the medias fawning over Democrats while disparaging Republicans over the littlest of things. Here is one paragraph that details what I mean.

The media doesn't resent George W. Bush because he exercises too much or takes too many vacations. They resent him because he's authentic when he should be artificial, reserved when he should be resplendent.

Democrats merely posture, whereas Republicans (some anyway) are more interested in actually being substanative. I'm reminded of a quote that Pres. Clinton uttered after winning the Presidency in 1992: "This administration will be the most ethical administration in the history of the Republic" And we all know what happened after that famous line....one ethical disaster after another. Compare that with the quiet work-a-day attitude of Bush....substance over fluff. A good book on this subject is A MATTER OF CHARACTER by Ronald Kessler.

You can usually tell the fluff politicians from the substanative ones by tracking how much time they spend in front of a camera. There are a handful of Senators that come to mind at the present who are on every weekly pundit show, and at every news conference. The ones who are back in their offices actually working are the substanitve ones. Remember how Kerry didn't even show up for hearings because he had to go snowboarding or some such silliness. (I have tried to find a site that tracks attendance rates of politicians, no luck so far...I'll update this post as I learn more)

We need adults in positions of power, and that practically eliminates one whole party from consideration.

2005-08-28T08:48:00.000-07:00

A boy and his cat

'Democrat' - a new oxymoron?

2005-08-27T12:26:00.000-07:00

It never ceases to amaze me how the Democrats still insist on using the word "Democrat" as a name for their political party. With all the socialistic and almost communist (yes I said 'communist') policies and positions they stake out, one has to wonder why they don't change their name to something more descriptive such as "Social-Dems" or even "The idiots". Everytime they have a choice between a practical solution to a problem, or a heavy handed top down management solution (read: socialism), they opt for the latter. I challenge Democrats out there to show me any example of sound reasoning with regards to economics, national defense and tax policies. Unfortunately, if any Democrat does come up with a good idea, they are quickly destroyed by their own as a sell-out. No wonder reasonable people are leaving their party in droves, and they have no respectable representatives...only kooks. My poor old dad would be dismayed at what has happened to his beloved party.

The Republicans are appropriately named as their interests are in preserving the republic known as The United States of America. This country is a "Representative Republic", not a democracy. Libertarians also are appropriately named as they are more focused on liberties. Todays Democrats are the ultimate examples in being hypocrites.

The future of this blog is going to be my rantings on what is right, wrong, hillarious and totally ridiculous about American politics and culture. Sign up for email notices when the site is updated, post comments, and enjoy learning about the Constitution, economics and history while I skewer liberal positions.

2005-08-27T12:03:00.000-07:00

A boy and his dog