Sunday, August 30, 2009

Listing the mental illness of liberalism.

(I've got a list of You Might Be A Liberal If. . . from another blog. I've decided to add the truth and the reality in bold Parentheses.


You might be a Liberal if . . . (the real truth is. . .):


IQ tests should be used to stop the death penalty, but not to determine admission to AP classes. (hence why we have such complete idiots going to school and coming out bigger idiots)


The Ten Commandments in schools will hurt the children, but “Heather Has Two Mommies” won’t. (So having morals are hurtful while a lifestyle that goes against nature isn't. No wonder we have no moral compass any more.)


African-American, Queer and Women’s Studies prepare young people for good careers, but a biology major is an outdated relic of white, misogynist domination. (I better tell my wife she made a huge mistake getting a biology degree. She needs to get in touch with her hatred and anger against men since we're all evil, stupid, and sexist. Women studies is nothing more than teaching women to hate men.)


College students must protest the President (before Obama was elected), but never challenge anything the professor says. (Since Obama is nothing more than a college professor, this rule still applies. This is the left's attempt to silence free speech against Marxism.)


Math tests are racist, but there is nothing racist about blacks being admitted over more qualified white applicants. (Affirmative Action caters to the moron and the lowest common denominator. The government don't want us to think logically, but to react to their slogans and emotional appeals in order to enslave you.)


Spending 4 years – make that 5 years – repeating your professor’s liberal slogans is a solid education, but demanding that colleges present all view-points and actually teach the subject is “anti-intellectualism”. (See the previous 3 entries. More Marxist nonsense)

McCarthyism was wrong, but black-listing “right-wingers” from ever teaching in college is just plain old common sense. (McCarthy wasn't completely wrong as our current education and media proves. As their totalitarian policies are in place to prevent free and open expression.)


A right-winger is anyone who doesn’t toe the line on all issues. (This one is completely true as defined by the left.)

Education is about “feeling”, not knowing. Logic is the product of white male supremacy in our culture. (Feeling isn't thinking and the government hates a populace that can think. What does Logic, which was created by the Greeks from their experience from Oriental influences have to do with race?)


After spending 5 years in college, you still don’t know when the Civil War took place and you are absolutely certain it had nothing to do with freeing black slaves. (Ignorance is bliss as believed by liberals.)

Meat is bad for you. So is milk. But marijuana gets you ready for your finals. (Remember your brains on drugs public service clips. This proves it.)


AIDS is caused by poverty. So is crime. And membership in the Republican party. (AIDS is caused by bodily fluid transfer. Poverty is created by crime, not the other way around. Membership in the Republican Party could be since millionaires are Democrats by a 2 to 1 margin and yet the Democrats continue to demonize them.)


You march to raise awareness about breast cancer, but believe it’s caused by sexism and infant mortality is caused by racism. (Breast cancer is caused by unknown elements in nature. Sexism or Racism have nothing to do with it. As for research, behind AIDS, breast cancer get the largest grants of money, 7 times more than Prostate Cancer, the cancer that kills the most men. As for infant mortality, that's caused by living conditions which certain segments that engage in risky behaviors that contributes to the mortality rate, not by "whitey")


You want to outlaw cigarettes and legalize marijuana. (Both are bad for your health, but dope makes you an idiot while cigarettes don't because they're mind alterning.)


Global Cooling for 10 years proves that there is global warming. (Better yet, try telling them that the planet is cooling and you're branded as a racist, sexist idiot.)


You fly on private jets, but feel free to tell others to use only one square of toilet paper to save the environment. (Liberals are just a bunch of hypocrites.)


You think that using less toilet paper will be good for the air. (huh? What does TP have to do with the gases in our air? Fewer trees? We plant 5 new trees for every one cut down.)


The best way to care about a disease is to wear a ribbon. You must also prevent pharmaceutical companies from making a profit. (The profit margin is the source behind most of our medical breakthrough during the 20th century. Name one breakthrough that came from socialized health care. Wearing ribbons just makes you look silly and does nothing to finding a cure.)


People should be allowed to euthanize themselves, but not to eat in McDonald’s. (Though eating at McDonalds is a slow euthanasia, liberals are quick to kill the surplus population all the while claiming they're bettering their lives by taking away their choices.)


Career welfare recipients are fat because they can’t afford food. (Most them are eating better than I am and I work.)


You preach to everyone that diversity is our greatest strength, but you paid half a million dollars more for a house in an all-white suburb than you could’ve for the same house in a black neighborhood. (Yea, look at Peloski, Reid, Biden and Obama. Elitists! Yet they're viewed as fighting for the poor while they run as far from them as possible.)


You see racist code-words in all media except in hip-hop singles such as “Kill The White People”. (Stupid is what stupid does.)


You wonder out loud, “Why can’t we all just get along?” (Racists like Van Jones and Wright have made it clear: We're superior to you. While the evil death cult of Islam have made their stance clear: assimilate! Resistance is futile. Otherwise you are to be killed.)


You oppose all racial prejudice, but think all whites are racist, consciously or not. (They are the true racists of the 21st century but because of multiculturalism, hating whitey isn't racism, it's common sense.)


IQ tests are completely invalid and there are no differences between people, except when an anonymous blogger posts that all the Red States have a borderline retarded IQ and all the Blue states are made up exclusively of intellectually gifted people. Then you feel the need to send the blog post to everyone you know as conclusive proof that voting for Democrats makes you smart. (I'm not particularly fond of IQ test. They're just measure a person to break down and analyze. Doesn't make you smart nor dumb. Making an argument like above does. Stupidity is knowing better and concluding contrary or denying facts.)


You greet a black person with, “Yo Bro!” (Just another stupid stereotype. The only person I greet with "Yo bro" is my actual brother.)


Indians created the United States and Europe became great as a result of Islamic influences. On second thought, Europe isn’t great. (Try as I might I can't find the Koran in European history or where the Indians were during the continental conferences. One thing liberals are right about is Europe isn't great. Socialism destroyed that.)


You can’t believe you were so racist as to say that there’s something great about Europe except their Social Democrat parties. (Self explanatory)


Black dominance in basketball is progress, but white dominance in swimming is an outrage. (Showing their hatred of whites to the point whites are to not be excellence in anything. Unless they stole it of course.)


Illegal Mexicans are real Americans. Descendants of our Founding Fathers aren’t. (More hatred of America and trying to give credit to ignorant invaders.)


Racial profiling is wrong, but all serial killers are white and all Mexicans are hard-working family men. (Liberals hate racial profiling because it exposes their stupidity, sedition, and their treason against our republic except against whites.)


US wants to build a wall on the Mexican and not Canadian border because of racism, not because 20 million Mexicans and almost no Canadians cross into the U.S. illegally. (More liberal anti-American hatred.)


There is no correlation between Islamic immigration to Europe and increased anti-Semitic attacks against European Jews. (To liberals, there is no such thing as unjustified hatred of Jews or white Christian as they are the root of all the world's evils.)


Prostitution empowers women, but having a man open the door for you is degrading. (Whatever. More hatred against males.)


You get out of bed, look at your naked body and at your wife’s, and then think: “gender is a social construct that has no basis in science”. (I don't know if it's too much pot or just down right stupidity. If you can't tell the difference here, you're deranged.)


On second thought, you got married in Vermont and your wife’s name is Thomas. (Libs love Gay Marriage.)


Your dog is smaller than your cat. (Why liberals love ankle biters is still a medical mystery.)


You bought your son a doll and your daughter a toy truck just to prove that gender is a social construct. (Libs think there are no difference between the sexes other than the "minor" physical equipment.)


You then gave your son a “time-out” for pretending that the doll is an enemy soldier. Such violence will not be accepted. (And they wonder why we're losing the war on terror. . . I mean man made disasters.)


When your 2-year-old daughter turned the truck into a “tea party” table, your immediate thought was, “I got to her too late and she was already brainwashed by society to think she’s a little woman”. (Liberals hate the truth, don't they.)


Men are bigger, stronger and faster than women because our society is sexist. (No, that's by nature's design. Don't forget women are better at linguistics and have longer stimulus, but that's sexists as well. . . right?)


On second thought, it’s sexist to say that men are bigger, stronger and faster. (No, it's just the facts of life.)


Western women suffer at the hands of men, but Islamic women are greatly respected. (We'll see how they feel when Islamic men here start making demeaning demands of American women here. Then they'll keep the first one, but change the second.)


The only time you’ve ever used the word “choice” was in reference to abortion. School choice or the choice to shop at Wal-Mart should be prevented at all costs. (Liberals don't believe in choice unless it's death.)


If you are a man, your hair is longer than your girlfriend’s. (Liberals hate masculinity so it makes sense they want to look more effeminate than their female counterparts.)


Women should stop listening to their husbands and start listening to you. (Depends. Women, thanks to feminazism don't listen to their husbands anyways. Who's doing the talking here?)


There’s never a reason to hit a woman, unless she’s Ann Coulter or another conservative, in which case, she had it coming for having a mind of her own and disagreeing with you. (Show us the love you have for women. Liberals hatred of conservatives override the proper courtesies for women.)


People are born with a sexual orientation, but gender is a social construct and nobody is really born with male or female qualities. (I'm still waiting for a logical explanation form liberals over this one. I'm not holding my breath on one anytime soon. This is liberals attempt to define human qualities to whatever they want it to be.)


You agree with your cross-dressing friend that “our society” is just “too focused” on genitals in determining a person’s sex instead of determining gender by looking at the person’s clothes. Just because she has a penis instead of a vagina, chest hair instead of breasts and a prostate instead of ovaries, doesn’t mean she’s any less of a woman. (Don't tell that to biologists. Oh wait, they're the evil, male oppressive scientists. My bad.)


Men who are aroused by breasts are abnormal freaks, but homosexuality is biologically normal. (more hatred of males and their biology.)


Men stand in front of toilets only to promote male supremacy and should be forced by the government to sit. (who comes up with this? This doesn't even deserve a response.)


Great spirituality is found in Voodoo, but nothing in the Bible. (Marxist belief that religion is the opium of the people but cutting off a chicken's head and dancing in its blood isn't because it doesn't threaten the state.)


Gay students should be allowed to publicly kiss in class, but Christians shouldn’t be allowed to quietly pray during a break. (Hatred of the founding principles that made this country. When has a state religion ever been created by people silently praying. No, Islam is a death cult, not a religion.)


The Christmas tree should be banned from public view, but that anyone objecting to pornography “only has to look the other way.” (Liberals belief we're entitle to our sexuality and have it plastered all over the place while hating God and His people.)


When a Western woman travels to the Middle East, she should respect their traditions and cover up. When Muslim illegally infiltrate Europe, they have the right to expect the Westerners to adjust to them. If the Europeans don’t, Muslims have every right to riot. (I don't care what the liberals say, they're atheists and believe there's nothing more after our life here, so they rather live under a death cult than die fighting them even though they will be their first target with their beliefs in perversion.)


Christianity is a threat. Islam is a religion of peace. (When is the last time a Jew or a Christian strapped on a suicide bomb and blew up a school, pizzeria or a market? Where in the Koran does it promote peace? Yea, I thought so.)


The Constitution allows desecration of the flag, but makes it strictly illegal to desecrate the Koran. (Christians don't mortally fight back while Muslims do.)


You found where the right to an abortion is written in the Constitution, but cannot find where the Constitution provides for a right to bear arms. (The 2nd amendment gives us the right to bare arms, but socialist can't have an armed civilian populace because it's a barrier to establishing a totalitarian state. Since truth is relative to Marxist, they can put anything they want into the constitution including making the constitution unconstitutional.)


None of the Constitutional Rights you believe in are actually written in the U.S. Constitution. (see above)


Constitutional rights that are actually written in the Constitution are outdated and should be ignored. (Because they don't believe in liberty, but statism.)


The First Amendment’s Freedom of Speech must take a back seat to sensitivity. (They don't believe in freedom.)


You think that the Declaration of Independence is a legally-binding document, but the Constitution should be read any which way you want. (The Declaration of Independence was the foundation of the principals of what was to come later in the Article of Confederation which was a disaster and later the Constitution which was set up to be the supreme law of the land. To liberals, the supreme law is what ever the state determine so they need the constitution to be a living document that's suppose to "change" with the time.)


On second thought, the only thing binding about the Declaration of Independence is the sentence “all men are created equal”. (Created to be equal for potential for greatness. It wasn't meant to mean equal in results.)


You aren’t sure what else the declaration says, but you are sure that whitey had no right to declare independence on Indians’ land. (Huh? This still makes no sense.)


Child molesters can live anywhere and maintain their privacy, but Wal-Mart should be limited to far-away places where children can’t be exposed to it. (Even children as young as 12 are entitled to their sexuality, but not to the evils of capitalism.)


Teenagers can’t control their sexual urges no matter what we do, but child molesters and rapists can after counseling. (So we're all entitled to our sexuality unless it's done by force.)


Counseling is the proper punishment for all crimes except sexual harassment and racism. (And hence we have crimes going out of control.)


McDonald’s should be sued for selling dangerous products, but drug dealers should be released from prisons. (They know how evil red meat, or meat in general is while drugs enhance our minds and should be decriminalized.)


Mumia is a great American, but the Founding Fathers were brutal racists and we should ignore everything they said. (Mumia is a racist murderer pure and simple. He typifies the hatred that racist blacks have and want to be empowered to enslave, if not down right take the Zimbabwe method of down right murder, all whites. Many Founding Fathers wanted to end Slavery, but knew they never get the Constitution ratified otherwise. It was the hope of many that the people would amend the Constitution to eliminate slavery which did happen after the Civil War.)


A five-year-old boy who pulls a girl’s hair should be punished, but gang bangers who are caught with guns should be let go because they didn’t do anything. (This is more racist nonsense since they won't let a white gang banger go all the while getting the message across to boys that acting like boys will not be tolerated.)


Affirmative action is the way to solve racial problems in America. (It only escalates the hatred since it caters to the lowest common denominator. It's morons at the lowest common denominator that are closed minded and pigheaded as well as ignorant to embrace racism in the first place.)


Quietly reading “The Bell Curve” on the bus is harassment, but keying someone’s car for disagreeing with you is activism. (More of their hatred towards those that think and disagree with them.)


When rape and murder statistics go up, you blame poverty. (When most of the time, it's when enforcement of such crime is down)


Society should take responsibility for crime, but the criminals need more understanding. (More it's not in the interest of society to let individuals make decisions for themselves and thus failed them by not making decisions for them.)


We have too many police. If the cops backed off, the ghetto would be pristine (This is what's going on and crime rates are completely going through the roof. The ghetto is the way it is because people don't take responsibility for themselves and feel they have the right to take it from others.)


America and Israel are the only problems in the Middle East. (Yea, the Sunnis and Shieas have been slaughting each other for 1300 years because of American and Israel how? It's that death cult Islam that's the real problem.)


Four year old babies should be frisked at the airport because focusing on nervous young Arabs would be discriminatory. (One TSA worker mentioned how a bomb was put into a baby's bottle so that's why they search. Yea, like the baby put that bomb there and why only white babies? This political correctness to appease the terrorists isn't going to break their resolve on terrorism but make it stronger.)


Hezbollah is a legitimate political party, but Republicans are just a bunch of racist haters who should never be exposed to kids or college students. (And liberals are wondering why things in the Middle East are getting worse, especially for Palistians and why college kids are getting stupider as compared to our Asian competition)


It is wrong to kill terror leaders without a trial, but blowing up buses and airplanes is legitimate resistance. (They fear being killed by them so much, they'll let them do as they please in hopes they won't be targeted.)


Your peace rally consists of supporters of Hamas, Hezbollah and Saddam Hussein. (They then blame conservatives when they end up with a bullet to the brain.)


You say, “Why do they hate us?” when America is attacked and “we’re just furthering the cycle of violence” when we retaliate. (Why we're losing the war.)


You aren’t unpatriotic, but you just can’t remember the last time you sided with the United States … on anything… against any country. (Because America today is evil.)


If you support the United States, you are blind idiot who wraps himself in patriotism. If you support Israel, you fell for Zionist propaganda. If you side with Islamists, you truly understand international politics and your views are intricate and nuanced. (Again, anyone say, please Mr. Terrorist, don't kill me!)


We had no business going to Afghanistan, but bombing Serbia in the 1990s on behalf of Islamic terrorist Kosovo Liberation Army was vital to our national interest. (Now that a racist black man is fighting in Afghanistan, the protesters are silent. Because Liberal wars are good, conservative wars are all evil.)


Truth matters less than feelings. (And we have a over emotional, illogical Alice in Wonderland political body.)


You think Hamas and Robert Mugabe were fairly and democratically elected, but President Bush was not. (It's not about democracy, but which thug gets to rule and the liberals want their thugs in power.)


You tell anyone who’ll listen that our elections are fraudulent and then you fight tooth and nail to prevent states from requiring a photo ID to vote. (They know our election are fraudulent in their favor so when a conservative win despite it, they cry foul. They don't want photo ID to vote because it would greatly frament their power base because the dead, invalid, out of state, illegals, mulitple voters, and pets won't be able to rig their election into office.)


You are more proud of Obama’s race than of John McCain’s refusal to leave his buddies behind in Vietnamese prison. (They're the true racist and have no valor themselves.)


Dan Quayle is the dumbest Vice-President ever because he believed a flash card that misspelled “potato,” but Obama is a genius despite the fact that he believes that we have more than 57 states. (Can anyone stay black racism and affirmative action where a moron is considered a genius while a white man that makes an honest mistake is proof that the white race is inferior.)


You laugh at Dan Quayle, but you still can’t figure out the difference between “your” and “you’re”. (See above.)


Governor Sarah Palin is unqualified, but Daughter Caroline Kennedy and Wife Hillary Clinton were great candidates for the U.S. Senate. (Though Palin was unqualified or was as qualified as Obama, it shows the hyprocrisy of the left.)


You are more concerned about a politician being endorsed by the NRA than al Qaeda and the Socialist Workers Party. (Liberals hatred of America, patriots, and fear of Islamic terrorists.)


All recounts must continue until the Democrat takes the lead, and not a second longer. (Fraud is good if they win. After all, look at how Franken stole the senate seat.)


You announce that you will move to Canada every time a Republican wins an election. (The left hate anyone that disagree with them so much that it's the end of world if they don't win. I'm still waiting for Alex Baldwin to move.)


None of your friends ever voted for a Republican. (Birds of a feather flock together. Would you tell any of these lunatics you vote Republican if you were one of a few?)


People who don’t chat, “Bush Lied, People Died” are all stupid. (Liberals are just plain too closed minded. It's their way or the highway.)


Barbra Streisand knows more about politics than Newt Gingrich. (Or Jolie, Pitt, Penn, or any Hollywood moron. As long as they agree with them that is.)

95% of blacks voting for a black guy is normal, but 55% of whites voting for the white candidate is a sign of how flawed our racist voting system is. (Racism is still alive. Too bad is now believed to be good by those of color.)

You call yourself ‘progressive’ but oppose all progress because somebody might get fired and replaced by a cheap and more efficient computer program. (Big Unions anyone?)

Capitalism is the cause of poverty. (Yet, capitalistic society have the highest standard of living and the lowest poverty levels in the world (except the Philippines because of corruption and relying on the US military and shot themselves in the foot when they kicked them out). While the statist country have the worse.


People aren’t successful, they are privileged. (Because most liberals are Elistist)


People don’t earn. They deserve. (By what the government thinks they deserve as well.)


The Christian Right shouldn’t impose their morality on you, but you want to impose big government on everyone else because otherwise they won’t do the right thing. (This is the old argument in the Garden of Eden where Satan claimed that man can make better decision and determine right from wrong better than God could for them.)

You think that consenting adults can engage freely in every activity except capitalism. (Don't forget Christian practice, free speech, or any individualistic free act.)

You think the case for global warming is proven without a shadow of a doubt, but that we need another century or two worth of evidence to figure out if capitalism and free markets work better than socialism. (You can give evidence til doomsday, they're never accept that personal achievement is greater than taking from the productive and giving it to the parasitic.)

It’s obscene that oil companies are allowed to make 8.3 cents per gallon in profit with gas prices this high, but it’s OK for the government to make several times more than that in taxes. (Same with Cigarettes (10 cents for company, $2.50 for government), and alcohol (5 cent for company, $4.00 for government). Individuals making money is evil but government profiting is good.)


McDonald’s gives people an option to super-size their meal because it is purposely trying to kill black people by giving them heart disease, cancer, diabetes and stroke. (More black racism against any sucessful enterprise. Besides, if you don't like the food, don't eat there. Opps, I suggested personal responsibility again.)

You are steeped in compassion, but never gave money to charity or donated blood. (Compassion is what other people are suppose to do.)

Your favorite sport is soccer. You pronounce it “foot-bowl”. You can’t name a single player or when was the last World Cup. You never actually watched a soccer match, but saying “foot-bowl” seems like a good answer to give when you are drinking your caramel latte with scones. (Though most watched sport, it's boring and most matches end in a tie so the socialists love it.)


Your other interests are Ballet, Opera and Gangsta Rap. (That's an interesting list of interests, but doesn't really prove anything. Except the Gangsta Rap which is nothing more than angery men spewing hatred.)

You favor games where you don’t keep score, run or in any way risk bruising yourself. (You won't have much fun, but everyone will feel better about themselves.)


You really wish to go to India to study spiritualism there, but you wouldn’t be caught dead in a church. (Moral relativism which is the keystone to the logic of liberal ideals are from India. Anything that has absolutes are to be disdained.)


Your car has 8 bumper stickers calling Republicans morons and saying that Bush is a murderer, but that “McCain/Palin” bumper stick you just saw is really offensive so you just had to scratch that car with your key. (Hatred of the right is justified because they truly see such people as evil, stupid and racist and thus deserve anything they get. Free speech be damned.)


You wear a Yasser Arafat head scarf, but laugh at those who wear formal ties. (Terrorist appeasment.)


Playing competitive sports could do permanent harm to teenagers, but smoking weed daily and occasionally trying hard drugs is just something all college students do. (Hatred of Capitalism while dumbing down the youth with drugs.)


Fox News is biased, but Al Jazeera isn’t. In fact, Fox News invented media bias. (Al Jazeera is so bad that they're banned in 7 MUSLIM countries. Some for telling the truth, but most for supporting one thug over another giving bias and downright lies. The only reason Fox is hated is because they're not completely with the program of Obama worship.)


Rush Limbaugh and Michael Reagan are mean-spirited racists and promote hate crime, but Maxine Waters, John Conyers and Louis Farrakhan aren’t and don’t. (Black racism is in, but white orators are out.)


Rush Limbaugh’s listeners are mindless “dittoheads,” but you have never doubted anything that you heard from Michael Moore. (Liberals are more smarter, don't you know.)


Assaulting the President by throwing shoes at him is free speech, but political cartoons about Muhammad aren’t. (More appeasement to the terrorists.)

Freedom of speech means the right to scream when a conservative tries to speak in order to prevent anyone from hearing his views. (He who loudest, is the freest.)


Freedom of speech applies to terrorists, not conservative radio talk show hosts. (Please, Mr. Terrorist, don't kill me. Besides, they truly think conservatives are evil while Islamic terrorist aren't.)

Everyone who disagrees with you must be reported for racism to your employer, university dean and the police. (Because dissent is not to be tolerated by the group that claims to be the most tolerant.)


After making the report, you are shocked that racism is not a crime and that the offender won’t won’t be locked up. (Liberals are just to full of hate and bigotry. Not to mention, that the person will be shut up in some way or will be fired, failed or harassed.)

Friday, August 28, 2009

America now has AIDS (or really VIDS).

So now that our tyrant in chief is going after the CIA for extracting information of terrorist activities from his Muslim brothers, it can now be said America now has AIDS or really VIDS (Voter Induced Deficiency Syndrome). This move only makes sense if and only if your goal isn't to make America more safe, but the exact opposite: to completely deball her defense.

In the body, HIV attack the T-cells that produce the white blood cells that defends us from infections that come from common bacteria. The CIA and the Military are the white blood cells of our nation from foreign invaders. Now that the military is under command by Obama, they're pretty much handcuff from doing any real defense. After all, BO thinks there is no war on terror. Just man made disasters. Like somehow these animals are misunderstood freedom fighters which I'm sure is how he sees them. Why else would he want to give them all the advantages by bringing them here to be tried in our civilian courts by civilian rules? And should they be acquitted, which they will because the rules of war aren't the rules of law enforcement, they will be given greed cards and welfare benefits. How sick! Worse, it's treason, but it's the messiah, so he knows what best for us. Well, I'm not taking that to the bank.

Now he wants to go after that dared to get information from his Islamic brothers and empower them more to accomplish what has to be his main goal: the downfall of our republic and our "transformation" to a tyrannical government like those in Islamic countries. At least to Marxist countries, but what's the real difference. Now the CIA that was told by lawyers what was ok'd at the time to extract information are now going to be deemed by these groups of Marxist thugs that the lawyers were wrong and they are criminally liable for doing their jobs. First, since now these lawyers are deemed to have violated the constitutional rights of the terrorists (I'm not kidding when I say that, that's what this evil clown is saying), that they broke the law and are deemed to be prosecuted and punished. The lawyers, if this insane reasoning reaches fruition, will be up for disbarment. You think any agent or lawyer will ever touch the war on terror again? Heck, will they even investigate any Islamic groups for that matter? I know I wouldn't. Without the ability to investigate or interrogate suspected enemies against the country, this administration has basically attack the last of the T-cells of the country. Without our intelligence agency to do any real investigations, our enemies are going to have a free reign to bring about the fruition of their plans without fear, or even a real threat, of arrest or interference. BO wants to bring this to the FBI as if it's a law enforcement problem, what if these plans are being done overseas, which they will do, then it's our of their jurisdiction and the state department is completely useless. We, like a body that lost it's T-cell and white blood cells, will be eaten alive by the infections of our enemies.

The CIA has had enough problems after they were gutted in 1976 when congress had hearing over the Nixon Administration and the agents and staff at the CIA were to testify in public hearings in the congress and had to reveal national secrets, including agents, their names, who they were investigating, and where they were located. Several agents after that were murdered and the CIA dropped using men on the street to gain their information. Did this make America safer? Let's take a look at past history.

First, because we can no longer use humans on the ground to get information because nobody, but jihadist, will have the death wish to try. Without them, the information is sketchy at best and unreliable at worse. In 1979 the CIA said the Shaw of Iran was well loved and is safe to rule for another 10 years. Two months later the Ayatollah Komani staged a coup and started the Islamic Revolution (which Carter did nothing to squelch). The CIA said there were fringe Islamic groups but nothing really organized or a threat when we sent troops to Beirut. Then over 200 marines were killed when they were truck bombed by the Iranian backed Hezbollah. Only till Hezbollah gave their speeches on TV did the CIA ever even heard of them. The CIA never saw the collapse of the USSR coming. They were clueless about the first (and later second) attacks on the world trade center. They trained Bin Laden and never saw the Islamic uprisings, and the formation of Al-Qadia totally took them by surprise. Need I go over the failure of the Cole that was bombed by a rubber boat with explosives in Yemen or the complete fiasco over 9-11. Satellites, electronic surveillance, technology, they can only get so much information. As the Messod could teach us from a country who's survival relays on accurate intelligence can teach us, without your white blood cells of the intelligence agency, you're country is in serious trouble (as is Israel which failed miserably to assess properly the weaponry and manpower of Hezbollah during their Southern Lebanon war in 2007).

Now, first the argument that laws were broken. Which laws are they referring to? We don't have laws about enemy combatants. Even the Geneva Convention, as was beaten over our heads by Ted, good bye and good riddance, Kennedy used to undermine America's defense, has no protection for enemy combatant which is a fancy term for terrorist that doesn't fight with the uniform of a government, but as individuals committing acts of terrorism against civilians. So unless there's some law giving terrorists citizenship rights that I don't know about, this is what we call in mathematics a vacuous argument. It's empty because it's based on a premise that's false so the consequences afterwards are pure non-sense. The second argument is if we're torturing our enemies, then they will torture us in return. Uh, could anyone show in the history of American warfare that our troops WEREN'T torture when captured by the enemy. It happened in every single war, especially by Japan in WWII and by the Chinese in Korea. Let's not forget how groovy the Hanoi Hilton was. These arguments from the left are stupid, don't have any basis in reality or law, and mainly, so full of hate for Bush, Cheney, America, and the Constitution that their ability to reason is completely overshadowed.

A country's military and intelligence are the main line of defense for their citizens. Without them, they get infected by enemies and they die. BO said that the most important job as President is the protection of her people. Well, it seems he has a strange definition of defense or worse, who her people are. Seems he thinks leaving us open to attack and en bolding our enemies to invade and attack is defending us. Or he thinks our enemies are America's people. After all, he think America is an Islamic country and founded on Islamic principals. I just know one thing. If he is successful in destroying the CIA which has enough problems as it now, we're in serious trouble. America is sick and destroying her last T-cell will be a death sentence. But, hey, we'll have free health care. Too bad it's not what's needed to cure America's illness. Without a political enema, I fear she'll die and us with her.

Thursday, August 27, 2009

The biggest treat of Obamacare.

I'm sure we're all sick and tired of hearing about ObamaCare. Frankly so am I. That's why I'm not going to write about it. Not the merits of the plan anyways. There's a much larger threat from this bill that has been under the radar. This bill is the largest threat to our democratic republic mainly from something the founding fathers never put in their equation: voting blocs.

Can anyone name the 3 largest employers in the world? What? No? Number 1 is the Red Army of China of about 4 to 5 million "workers". Number 2, is the Indian Railroad of about 4 million. Number 3, and this shocked me, is Britain's National Health Care with 3 million. We wonder why England is falling so badly. 5% of the total population or about 12% of the work force works for the government in the health care industry. You think they're going to vote against the suicidal, let the Muslim invade us, Labour Party when they're signing their paychecks. If you're a Labour Party candidate, you have 12% of vote locked up even if you say I'm all for having Muslims cut your head off in public and letting the police stand and observe. Given how much of their industries are nationalized, it's amazing that the Labour Party doesn't have 100% of the Parliament.

Now let's take a look at what we got here. We're all well aware certain groups vote in blocs for certain candidate just by the D or R by their names. 96% of blacks will vote for a D even if they're a stone cold racists for or against them. Christians will vote Republican even if they're for the ACLU or RINO's. The bloc that should concern us because they are socialistic in their very nature: UNIONS. The health care bill isn't about universal health care, that's the ruse for the big prize: the voting bloc of the health care unions.

If you want to see where this will lead the nation, just come to my home state of California which is on the verge of bankruptcy, our government is as corrupt as it comes. We make New Jersey look like a choir in comparison. Why we don't get investigated by the FBI is beyond me. The districts are rigged to have the same party elected every time. We've been ruled by the Democrats since I was born other than the Governorship and right now, that's nothing to brag about with that steroid ed moron in office right now. The simple fact is our taxes are the highest in the nation, our car tax, sales tax, government fees and so on are sky high and we have a proposition and a tax initiative that was suppose to make it difficult to raise taxes by requiring a 2/3rds majority. If it wasn't for Prop. 13, I fear what our property taxes would be like. It's considered a joke that the rates were are lower. Many politicians mock us for it, yet our property taxes are so high in dollars from our over inflated property values, that it doesn't matter. We still pay more dollars at the lower rate because property values here are 3 to 4 times the national average. Think what we would paying if these tax and spend Democrats had the means to raise the property taxes which are restricted to no more than an increase of 2% of the rate a year unless the people pass increases greater by a 2/3rds majority. Good thing that 2/3rds because only 36% of the population own property here. The lowest in the nation. If every non-property owner voted, which they seem to do because every increase is voted yea 65%. We nearly have tax inflation but are shielded only by 2%. If that ownership rate falls below 30%, we're finished. The state government is getting around the initiative by simply calling the taxes "fees" and avoiding the 2/3rd to a simple majority and since most of the fees aren't paid by the parasites of this state, they get an easy majority 92% of the time.

So what does that do with the voting bloc. The Democrats that spend money like water from another state (we don't have enough here it seems) just want to keep raising taxes. We already pay between 8-10% sales taxes, up to 10.3% income tax, and with "fee's", vehicle taxes and who knows how much higher rent we pay, I'll wager we're about 30%, more if you own a home, and with the Federal with gas, alcohol, and the ever loving tobacco taxes and the 39.2% income taxes and believe me, Obama thinks that too charitable, it's no mystery why business and people are leaving the state (except illegals). The main reason these tax and spend politicians are in habitually in power, despite term limits in this state that has done nothing to tide the stem of political nepotism, are the voting blocs, mainly from the unions.

California has about 12 million that votes. The teacher's union, and don't me started on that nightmare, has 3 million members and most of them aren't teachers that continues to lobby for politicians that do nothing for education except throw more money into the problem and get bad education in return. The next 3 largest union sects are prison guards, the lawyers bar, and the AMA. Those are nearly another 2 million members. You just need 6 million votes to win in this state at the state level. Add the fraud, illegals, double (or more) dippers, out of staters, invalids, the dead, and pets that vote here, it doesn't take much more to get the 6 million mark. Just with the unions, you have 5 million if you have that D next to your name. Unless your district is from a rural district which is about 34% of the districts, with 32% of the population, it doesn't take much math to see why the Democrats always have 65% of the seats. If they could get the health care trapped and enslaved to the Democrat party, this state would be finished. Nobody but a Democrat will be able to win in the state. We'll become a one party state. We're already teetering on the brink of economic collapse here already.

Now let's take a look at the national level. Health care, and the voting bloc they would bring to the Democrats, will guarantee D's on the California Senators for life as well, since we have 52 congressional districts and 38 are from large population bases in the cities (exactly 1/2 of the legislature comes from LA in my state, so LA really runs our state), guarantees 38 Democrats in the House. That's the worse case scenarios. Add a few conservative district where the voters stay home and it could well be over 40 seats for life. What will the situation be for New York, PA, NJ, FL, OH, and IL. These states from the blocs that would be committed to the socialists for their livelihood if this health care bill passes and will be Democrat for life. That's mean by just having a D by your name, you're guaranteed 156 electoral votes and you just need 271 to win. Heck of a challenge for any Challenger. With those in health care totally dependent on the socialist Democrats for their paychecks, they'll vote in a huge bloc for them no matter their views or desires. And that's just from the health care bloc. Add amnesty for the Illegals and you can add MI, WI, NM, AZ, and TX, as well as possibly, VA and NC. Guess what folks? Election is over and the fix is in because that's enough to win no matter who runs against the Democrat and no matter what the people really want or desire. We'll truly become a Banana Republic. Just a few more states, and you can have any amendment you don't like repealed, like the 22nd, 2nd, 14th, 1st, 4th, and the 10th. Personally, I rather keep the Republic we have. It may not be perfect, but it's far better than what's being proposed and where we're headed. Keep up the fight. This may turn out to be the biggest fight the American people have had since the War of 1812.

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

Good Bye Ted Kennedy.

Looks like for the next week or so we're going to be overwhelmed with the "greatness" of Ted Kennedy. Much condolences will go out to his family as well as the media are going to go muy loco over his career, accomplishments, and will be drooling over him during his funeral. The eulogies will be coming from all directions. Frankly, I find this much ado about nothing. The man was evil and I feel no guilt or remorse that finally he's out of the senate.



What would give me such a cold reaction. First, look at his family. What good have come from the Kennedy's? A family that made their fortune from organized crime, mainly bootlegging. The same business that Al Capone ran. Their history is sorted with many murders that they got away with, drunkenness, including under aged drinking, fraud, theft, corruption, bribery, and murder. I find it hard to have condolences to a family of such ill repute. Sure, he'll be missed by them. Mourning is a terrible emotion to have to endure. With this family, will he really be missed or what he brought to the family fortune.



Next, his accomplishments. There aren't that many considering this man had been elected to NINE terms. To put the math that shows how overdue this change was needed, had he lived to served the ninth term (he died after just one year of his ninth term, and is first term was just two years replacing JFK's seat) that would be 54 years in the senate. I don't know any man that's THAT good. Considering how long he's in there (I'm checking, but that's got to be close to a record), can anyone name any of his accomplishment. That man was in the Senate serving 49 years. I've been around 44 of them so that man has been the senior senator all my life and I can only name a few and few of them good. He voted for the 64 Civil Rights bill. The same bill his brother defeated in 57. Though a good thing, it was his motive I question because most Democrats were against it. Kennedy felt the black vote would make a good bloc for the Dems when most didn't and he was right there. He voted for the 1990 American with Disabilities Act. A complete disaster and boondoggle for lawyers. That bill didn't do a thing for the disabled. Their unemployment is still the same as it was when it was passed, 68% so it didn't do a thing to get them employed, they may have some more conveniences like ramps and restrooms situated for them, but other than that, it's been nothing more than a business killer and an arm of legal extortion by lawyers. He was the first to campaign, successfully so during Reagan's reign and now look at what we got. He opposed the first black Supreme Court Justice over racists reasons. Fortunately he was confirmed despite the Democrats manufactured sexual harassment nonsense. Perhaps if Hill had her so called witnesses tell the same story like knowing when she actually worked for him and not give the incidences happening BEFORE she was employed, it would had worked. He championed affirmative action and minority racism against whites. He promotes sexism while the Democrats maintain 70% of the women's vote with Rode V. Wade and affirmative action for liberal women causes like NOW and gay rights. He fought for the rights of terrorist and the enemies of America joining Turbin Durbin from Illinois by calling our troops, as well as those at town hall meetings, Nazis and for the prosecution of our troops for doing their job. Let's not forget Gitmo was started by this man. I'm sure Muslims all around the world are mourning the lost of their greatest ally in the U.S. Government, behind Obama. Most of all, the man best accomplishment is rigging rules so that Democrats remain in power. He just attempted such an end around in his state of Massachusetts by changing the rules so a Democrat can appoint another democrat as soon as he dies (most likely his sister Caroline). The man was an oligarch and an anti-American. If liberals find this offensive, too bad. I'm sure if Palin or her son died, these Democrats wouldn't be so gracious. Heck, they still hope Thomas will keel over because he betrayed the black cause.



Saving the best for last, this man was a murderer. Mary Jo Kopechne was his mistress at the time and became pregnant with his child (something often forgotten over the incident). This man just happened to drive his car off a bridge, into the pond, Swim for his very life while she's still trapped in the car, walk 15 miles home, wash up, go to work and had it all slip his mind. Think I'm being sarcastic, read Senatorial Privilege. That's exactly was the story he told. In the end, He was only charged with leaving the scene of an accident. Yea, one that HE caused. Most, rightfully so, felt he was guilty of manslaughter. He never called the accident in or try to help get her out. Frankly, I think it's worse than that because a mistress in 1969, pregnant before the Rode V. Wade era, and another election coming and a LOT of anti-democratic sentiment happening over the 1968 convention would had been a real danger to Ted's career. This whole thing reeked of him getting rid of the problem. For most of us, it would had been some jail time and a record, but for him, it just slipped his mind.

I don't wish death on people. What I had wished for for years was that those in Massachusetts grow a brain and elected someone of character and integrity to the Senate. Over time I realized that wasn't going to happen with liberals as they got more and more insane, bitter, belligerent, and anti-America. This man had made his seat completely safe for life. I just accepted that was going to be case for the life of Ted, so death or retirement was the only way to finally get new blood, unless, of course, it's rigged that another Kennedy gets the seat. A seat that the Kennedy's have held since 1952 starting with JFK. Frankly 57 years of this leftist, anti-America, pro terrorists, dysfunctional family is long enough. However, given the praise of evil that comes from that state, I'm not too hopeful.

Sunday, August 23, 2009

The marriage of Islam and Marxism.

With all the outrage, and rightfully so, of the release of Pam Am 103 bombing mastermind, there was a lot of statements about how societies that are embracing Marxism or Socialism, are also embracing Islam. What the $64,000 question for those seeing this, mainly from the left or from those in the center, is why. They don't understand why they support a religion, their word not mine, that supports the overthrow or destruction of their society is amorously embraced by the leftist in Western society. The reason is really simple and the expectation by both side are contradictory and if Islam completely takes over the populace of any one of the Western countries, and given the simple math eventually it will happen unless things change, there's going to be one heck of a rude surprise at the end of this marriage between Islam and the socialist.

The reason for the unholy matrimony is one word: SUBMISSION! Socialist's prime directive is to submit the populace to the will of the government. With Islam, it's submission to Allah. Since the Imam and politicians are viewed as ordained and placed into power by Allah, it's also the objective in Islam to submit the populace to the government that are placed by Allah's chosen ones. They're both about accumulation of absolute power and complete subjection of people for their own selfish desires. With the socialists, it's under the grossly misguided and proven failed policy of group unity for the good of the entire group, humans being flawed as they are, aren't able to keep such promises as their own corrupt traits seems to super cede the lofty goals. Not to mention those that benefit tend to abuse the system. Just look at Canada's health care disaster to see how that works. For Islam, it's the goal of martyrdom that drives those that aren't viewed as the chosen for it's the only free choice they have to assure their place in paradise. No war, no entrance.

You see, they have a marriage, but it's not for love of humanity or each other. It's a marriage of convenience. They have a common enemy and they are unified against that enemy. They believe that they will work harmoniously to rid of a pang that inflict them both: Christians and Jews Basically, those that believe in Judeo-Christian values. They're the ones that fight the tyranny of both Socialism and Islam. They both believe once they get rid of those evil Jews and Christians, then all the causes of the world's ills will die with them and then there will be peace. But like Palatine, just because you rid yourself of the Jedi's, doesn't mean the free will of man will just turn over and let evil reign without regrets or power conflicts. With just two surviving Jedi's, and one new one, the plans of Palatine, I mean Darth Seditious, were foiled and nobody mourned his death. However, it wouldn't even come to that, the marriage will go south as soon as this threat is destroyed. You see, Socialism and Islam have the same trait, subjection of humanity, but different ideas who should rule and why.

Socialist are in power to better the few over the welfare of the many. They use the guise that without them, we'll be in constant conflict. We'll be fighting over the limited resources we can obtain and process at any given point in time. To the Socialist, it's under the guise of fair distribution of the resources. In the end, it's an equal sharing of the misery. Islam's goal isn't so lofty. They're all about who's predestined to be in paradise, and who aren't. Those that are predestined to heaven are given the spoils while here on earth. It's all about the rewards and who gains them. The saying the ones that dies with the most toys, wins. Christians can say those that die with the most toys still dies. Not to Muslim. If you don't have the rewards, the power, the resources, that means that God in his will, has determined you're not worthy of paradise. You have been judged to go to hell and you can't do anything about it. Either you get the rewards by any mean necessary to prove you're worthy. Hence why in Islam, they don't fight for freedom, or for justice or moral imperative. They fight over which thug gets to be in charge. If your thug is in charged, then it must be God's will to go to heaven. If you die in the process, then you're a martyr and will go to paradise as well. They have no altruistic goals. It's all about proving they're chosen.

In the end, the Muslims will want to be the ones in charge and will not tolerate any infidel in position of power. It would be a stain to allah and a violation of their commandments. As soon as the Jews and Christians are out of the way or no longer relevant politically, they will turn on the Marxists. Since the Marxist have no desire to fight anyone that will kill them in return, they will cower and capitulation. Just look at England. They're tripping over their own feet in haste to bend over in surrender to them. France is fighting back and Germany is in the air. One thing for sure, this marriage that Marxist and Islam have can't last and given the history these two lovers have, all divorces aren't only ugly, but bloody. This could end up being the biggest blood bath in human history and if we don't realize that and stand up to these monstrosities, then history will judge us to be the weak, stupid, and apostates that our enemies think we are. I for one would rather chose to go down fighting than in the fetal position begging.

Friday, August 21, 2009

Cash for Clunkers is a Clunker.

Thank God the cash for clunkers deal is over. A bit of misnomer if you ask me since cash wasn't given to the owner of the clunkers, but the dealer that took them in for trade ins. Obama is calling it a huge success, but I'm not convinced because, 1, it would be super easy to commit fraud, 2, so far only the GM and Chrysler's dealers are getting paid, and 3, not all Clunkers are created equal.

First, lets take the fraud. There are all too many ways this could be taken advantage of, but I will focus on just two of them, one by the consumer, and another by the dealer. The consumer, if he's really smart about it, will just get a piece of junk that's abandoned or being given away, or really at a discounted price, go to a dealer, get a car or two, wait a year, and then sell them for more than he paid for them. Ok, that is legal, but not what the intent was because once he sell those cars, what will he drive afterwards? Yeap, another clunker. As for the dealers, and this is what I fear we may hear about especially when 2010 elections are coming close, is that dealers took used cars off their lots, used them as so called trade ins and buy new cars but put them on the used lots for about 3 to 4 thousand dollars below retail and pocket the difference. This is downright fraud, but since the government was really looking, what's to kept the dealers from such activity. Especially since car sales were in hell til this came up. Also, with BO's UAW buddies getting a boom from the sales, is he really going to care how?

Speaking of his union buddies, what's coming out right now is that many dealerships, mainly Toyota and Honda, aren't getting their payments. The administration is using the excuse of backlogs and improper paperwork as the reason why. Given Crazy Barry's reputation and action so far, I find it skeptical that this is not by design. GM and Chrysler aren't complaining, and they had the fewest sales during the program really discrediting BO's assertion that this just saved GM. It may gave GM some sales, but so far it's at the expense of Honda and Toyota. Since these are Government Motors biggest competitor, does it make sense that the government would pay them. That's like Mal Mart being paid by Target for Wal Mart's sales. This whole thing reeks and reeks badly.

The 3rd item that I doubt anyone has given much thought about is not all clunkers are equal nor are all new cars. I currently own two vehicles: a 2006 Ford Focus I got used in 2007 and a 93 Geo Metro that's registered non-0p because I'm keeping when my wife gets her license so we have vehicles when we have to be at different places, like work. My Geo gets 36 miles to a gallon even at its age. My Focus gets about 32. If I had traded it in, I would be getting 4 miles less and be $4500 less in the hole while Ford would be $4500 more in the hole. Many of the clunkers are from the age when the Japanese cars were kicking the rear of the American cars in sales. Oh wait, nothings changed. Well, Ford got the hint and started to make more fuel efficient compacts. GM didn't and stuck with SUV's and then the recession hit and to add insult to injury, the gas hikes of 08 hit. Those are the ones that Obama said didn't go high enough and would have had a gradual increase instead. GM sales tanked and we now have Government Motors instead. I wonder how many clunkers that are in decent shape that get better mileage than the ones being sold out there. Worse, how many are not that old or bad of shape that are going to be destroyed for a BBD (bigger, better, deal?

What I found to be really disturbing is the fact that the cars are going to be destroyed. Some parts can be recycled, but the engine and trans motion systems are to be destroyed. The parts that are most in need. My Metro has one huge disadvantage (other than the AC compressor burned out which makes summer driving a good water weight loss program) is that it's near impossible to find parts for it. After 10 years they don't make them (which many of the so called clunkers are around 10 years old) and there aren't many Metros in junk yards (seems they last and people don't give them up easily). Destroying these clunkers and removing any resale of the parts only can mean one thing: inflation. When you take cars out of the market, the very ones that the poor need because they're the only affordable ones they can purchase, you create scarcity. Like my Metro's parts which cost quite a pretty penny because of the difficulty of finding parts, we're taking actual CARS out of the market. This will increase the prices of used vehicles and make things even more difficult than the poor that BO claimed this was intented to help. People don't know some advice when I went through divorce counseling: the most affordable car is the one you have. I wonder if any of the poor actually got a new car under this program. I seriously doubt they could afford it.

In the end, this was nothing but an attempt to give his Union buddies a boost while claiming to aid the poor. It wasn't so much of a success as it was a victim of its own bad planning. I remember what happened the day the Clinton's moved into the White House when they offered free tours (provided they got tickets). They got overwhelmed by the numbers. You see, when you give something for nothing, you get a lot more people than you expect to take advantage and this happened here. This program didn't even last a month, despite tripling the funding. Mainly the middle class and rich profited from it. I'm sure this will be used as a model for more socialization of our economy. We'll see when the stupid Volt comes out. With a $40,000 price tag, 40 mile range, and no cash for clunkers, the car being green and the only American car at that, we'll see if this becomes the excuse to make all cars green and all non-green cars illegal. I've learned to put nothing past this government.

Thursday, August 20, 2009

Scotland's compassion for evil.

As I heard that Scotland has released the mastermind of the 1988 terrorist bombing of Pam Am 103, I wish I could had said I was surprised, but nothing from the left surprises me anymore. Many young voters weren't even around when the attack happened. I haven't forgotten because I have the air disaster episode with computer re-enactments of the bombing, the fires of the homes in Lockerbie from the debris, and the surviving eye witness accounts and it wasn't pretty. I would be flabbergasted that they would release an evil lunatic that murdered their own citizens, 11 of them in THEIR OWN HOMES!!! Actually, those killed on the ground were a bonus for this nut job. The plane was 25 minutes late and the bomb, cleverly disguised in a radio with a digital timer, was timed to explode over the deepest part of the Atlantic. The terrorists (this one was the only one Libya surrendered for trial) wanted this plane to never be found or the crime to actually be solved. It was to be propaganda that Allah can down planes at will and will if we continue our war against Islam. This before Bush 2 coined the term war on terror.

I don't know what to make of a government that will allow a unrepentant terrorist free. What's worse, they did as an act of mercy and compassion. Why? Why show compassion for an enemy that has no remorse, never asked for it til he got sick, and has no desire to refrain til his dying breath to continue his war against your society? A radio talk show host that the Brits have no compassion or desire to have in their country because they compare him to Hamas terrorists and racist murdering skinhead, but they do for a plane bombing killer, has summed it up best. Liberalism is a mental disorder, and a dangerous mental disorder at that.

Take a look at how this man was received in his home country of Libya. He was given a hero's welcome. No doubt will get a special blessing from an Imam to assure his place in paradise. The Scots are of the thought that by showing mercy, they will be viewed by the Muslims has being good and wise people. As his supporters are showing, they think of them as the penis less fools that they are. They don't respect them, they disdain them. Even worse because now they can cry pity me pity me and get the mercy they lack when they murder their citizens. This is complete stupidity at it's worse. The scots think they're being praised and thank like the jury during the Robert Blake trail. The jury, like Scotland, didn't have brains to realize that he (in Scotland's case, the Libyans) are laughing at them. This is not going to take the desire from further attack but inflame them since Libya hasn't done any more attacks, other than Pam Am 103, since Reagan bombed them in 1988.

I like to see where in the Bible does it says it right to show mercy and compassion to evil? If you do, send it to me. As far as I'm concerned, this man should have the cancer give him a slow and painful death. It still would be far more merciful than the compassion he showed his victims when he bombed that plane. It's more than the Libyans are showing the Scots as they let this animal loose. Remember, it took 11 years before Libya even admitted one of its citizen was actually involved and eventually hand him over for trial. It took 2 years to trial him. This wasn't out of compassion but out of political necessity because Bush had declared war on terror and Libya was on his list. Only after that did Ka-Daffy actually allow the extradition of this monstrosity. What I really fear. I hope the doctor that made the diagnosis isn't a Muslim. If so, he easily could had faked this to let him out. After seeing how this man is being praised at home, I'm finding that practicing Muslim are just down and out evil or supporters of evil. To aide in this evil isn't going to spare anyone of its wrath.

Frankly, England. You're nothing but a bunch of cowards. You'll ban a talk show host that doesn't even want to go to your worthless, stupid, leftist country, and your own citizens for hate speech for speaking out against Islam, but you'll let a murderous terrorist out of prison for "mercy" sake. Frankly, from now on, you get no compassion from me from now on when you get attacked by these animals. You have let them have their way for far too long and have no balls to fight them anymore. You've sided with evil in order to avoid fighting them. All you've done is embolden them more, gained even more of their disdain and down right hatred, and will be bringing the fight to your front door (again). In the end, all you've done, is ticked off good, God fearing (no, not the God of evil and death, allah) people to totally disrespect you (as well as the Muslim animals) and no longer believe in supporting you. Even Obama who's pretty much on the wrong side of everything, regrets your decision. OK, he's covering his rear end, but even this stupid fool can see how bad it is to let this guy go. So good luck in your fight for your survival. You're going to need it. In fact, put me on your ban list. I would consider that a badge of honor.

How dare Obama try to use God!

I've been listening to Obama's statements made during a video conference made to his members of his faith based initiatives. First, I find this ironic since Bush took heavy criticism of his faith based funding as a violation of the separation of church and state which doesn't exist. That said, this man who hates Christians unless they're a part of the black liberation faith or Islam speaking to so called Christians, given his disdain and hatred for past transgression against African Americans, which by the way isn't totally unjustified, but is in the past and have learned from this dark history, or so I hope, was a bit too much for me to stomach. What he said isn't just the height of hypocrisy, or the height of arrogance, or even the devil giving us temptation, but this man is showing that he truly thinks he's the messiah. This man really thinks he's God.

First, his statement about those opposing his Obamanation care are baring false testimony. Those that are protesting are finding things in the bill and are asking legitimate questions. The false testimony is coming from the White House. First, he's not answering the questions when presented to him or to the people that ask them, just giving a bunch of run around bs circumlocution. The other is he then says one thing to one group, and another thing to another group. As we say in logic, you can't have it both ways. You can't have P and Not P both be true. This is a contradiction and one of them MUST be a lie. So BO, you're the one providing false testimony, not your critics.

The other is that we are to be our brother's keeper. He's using the verse in the Bible where Cain after murdering Able (ironic that he's quoting a murderer, isn't it?) asked God, "Am I my brother's keeper?" God never answers the question, just goes on to the crime as Able's blood cried out to Him. I think it's extremely ironic that he picked his verse. The main reason is twofold. First God doesn't answer the question because it's not a simple yes or no question. The Bible's lesson is clear: help those that are willing to help themselves. He's not for charity without responsibility (listening Vatican?). He not for giving to those that refuse to work for if a man will not work, let him not eat (listening socialists and welfare queens?). We are to be our brother's keeper if he's willing to do his share of the work and is a productive member of society. Just that in a world where man, not God, is entrusted to implement a system that's not perfect and we're now subjected to illness and accidents, there are going to be times that we're going to be down on our luck. As long as we're willing to pick up the slack after we're back on our feet, then we're to help. If one is just plain lazy and unwilling to support himself, then he's to be left to his own devices.

What more, if any Biblical scholars are paying attention, BO picked the wrong verse to justify this evil bill. God was calling Cain out because of Able's blood crying out to him. This was a series of events that ended up with Cain's exile for his crimes against humanity, the crime of murder. This was the demonstration of what sin does. It kills, it destroys, it breaks up family, and it separates us from the human family. That BO really doesn't address the rationing, which any historian with a ounce of worth will tell will happen with socialized health care because it always lead to rationing. You can't provide an unlimited service with limited resources, and by limiting the salaries, for example, you're going to limit the human resources even worse. This is going to make things even worse. There's nothing in the bill to PREVENT death panels from being formed and if it's so far fetched, just take a look at how he treated Tootie, his very own grandmother (hence why his critics use the term pulling the plug on grandma. He did on his own grandma). If this is so, the blood of those that die as a direct results of the so called death panels or from the ration care will be on the hands of every politician that voted for this thing. I think if BO knew that, he would had refrained from using this passage.

This demonstrates one of three things about Obama, perhaps both. 1, either he really thinks he's the messiah and the Son of God and his word is divine, or 2, as Imams aren't to be questioned in Islam and lying is a divine tools to destroy the infidels, he's a Muslim and is practicing what he was taught as being right in Islam, or 3, he's a down and out hypocrite using religion to manipulate the naive leftist faithful to be guilt-ed in supporting this evil. Either way, this man has demonstrated that he doesn't have our interests at heart, that's he's going to use religion, something he hasn't shown to have any faith in since taking office, as a weapon against us. Heck, at least Carter went to a Baptist church during his reign of terror. This isn't a man of faith unless you believe Jeremiah Wright's bigotry is a religion. To those of faith that are conflicted about whether it's a sin or not, the apostle Paul thought stoning Christians was righteous as well til the truth filled his heart. Also remember a terrible lesson from history that is proven all too many times: the pathway to hell is paved with good intentions. Don't be a victim of another chapter.

Monday, August 17, 2009

History proves that liberals don't learn from history.

Seems that everyone have a dollar worth of their 2 cents worth of comments over the health care debate. What I read from those that support that utopia will come from socialized health care aren't in step with current realities from countries that already have it, from the realities that have plagued our since government intervention, limited as it may be, has infected the industry, and the political history just 15 years ago. I can see liberals just don't learn a thing from history or even current events.

First, let's take a current events: Cuba and Canada. Cuba is a poor, back water, 3rd world country, but hey, they all have free health care. The problem is the Cubans are getting less than their money worth's from it. There's a saying, nothing from nothing leaves nothing. Or as we like to say in math adding nothing to nothing still leaves you with nothing. Go outside Havana that have minimal supplies and manpower in their health facilities, you have clinics that are grossly short on supplies, medicines and doctors that even want to be there. The average pay is $30 a month (hey, way to keep those costs down) with maybe a few bandages, stitches, and sterilizing agents. That's it. If you're seriously sick or injured, you have free health care, it just can't help you. The stat that they have the best mortality rate in the Caribbean, well, compared to what? Hati or the Dominican Republic. That doesn't say much. Be like comparing rotten apples and they're the least stinky, gooey mess. It's still a rotten apple and the mortality rate is far worse than it is here in the states. However, liberals still use Moore's propaganda to highlight they the road of utopia. I rather go to hell than in Cuba's medical care as well as the Castro Brothers who fly in western doctors and equipment for their care. Got to love the two tier system.

Canada is a first world nation with free health care that the liberals are also saying sets the stage for utopia. Well, I don't know a Canadian that thinks likewise. In fact, the biggest and loudest that are protesting against the current health care bill are the Canadians themselves. Jeff Crooner left Canada because of their health care that let his grandma suffer from her cancer and died a painful death in a gurney in the hallway at the hospital. The excuse by the doctors was there were no room for her at the hospital mainly because of some lipnis test about her age, productivity and terminality of her illness. Sounds like what the protesters are worried about and the left are in denial about. They can stay in denial all they want. Canadians come to the states for their health care because free doesn't mean accessible. The waits are years at a time for the most basic and fundemental of care. This is why the government wants their own plan. They don't want to wait 3 years for heart surgery or 18 months for a cat scan or MRI. Cancer dianosis are death sentences there. Yet the liberals just want to call it scare mongering. Ok, find some Canadian that really recommends Canadian health care. It's like finding someone to say, "man, I really recommend cable." You're not going to find them. They pay taxes that makes ours look minor and 48% of their national budget is health care (unlike ours with is Social Security). Like our deficts are bad enough.

The old Soviet Union (the one that was defeated by the evil War Mentality that we need to rid ourselves of as BO has stated) had major issues with their health care. After their fall, it only got worse and they have the lowest life expectatancy in the industrialized world (if you still consider Russia industrialized). They couldn't get enough facilities, doctors (which 75% of which were women interesting enough) or supplies quickly or efficiently enough. The only ones that got any decent care was the government, which also got the best food while the civilians waited hours to get one chicken, and the military. The government rationed the health care so the government were first, the military second, and the civilians got what was left over. Wonder why the government don't want to be on this plan? Perhaps they know something we're not suppose to know. The historical facts are clear. In the communist regime, the rulers were cared for, the people were not. To this day, they're still not and things are worse than ever with a life expectancy or nearly 40 years and manily because their health care is in shambles. But I'm sure Obama will find a way to blame us for it.

The political history, and the one the left is so clueless about, is the attempt to socialize medicine isn't popular here and for good reason: we don't want it. Most Americans, so far, know what government medicine will mean. Just go to the nearest VA, as my ex father in law had and now his health is a wreck, and see for yourself. minimal supplies, poor care, less than competent doctors, low pay. That's the future. What leftist still believe is that the Republicans won because democrats didn't support Hilary's health care plan. WRONG! They won because of the attempt, not the failure, of socialized health care. The left's strategy is to let the Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats defeat this bill and they will win in 2010 and be forever in power. I say good idea. When they lose BADLY because the attempt to pass this will greatly HUMILIATE the liberals and their results (unless ACORN steals them) that they're going to wonder what the heck went wrong. Remember, Hilary had a Democrat controlled congress and the bill was soundly defeated. Those that supported it were soundly defeated in 94, those that opposed were the ones that survived. Since they're basing the next election on a false premise, that Obama was elected because Americans want socialized health care. No, Obama was elected because 1, every racist African American voted for him, 2, White guilt-ed morons didn't want to be branded as racist for voting against him, and 3, and the biggest reason, was nobody wanted Bush 3. Now what they got is Bush on steroids, and yet now the left thinks it's the pathway to utopia instead of hell.

It's much like in 1860 when nobody wanted nothing to do with Buchanan (Who is debated as being the worse president along with Jimmy Carter) including his own party that didn't even nominated him for a 2nd term. The abolitionist had made a lot of noise and gained favor in the North, the Northern working class didn't want slavery expanded or free as to lower the value of their labors, and the South were terrified after a few attacks that lead to the deaths of a few hundred people didn't want anything to do with the Democrats or the new Republican party. The Whigs were sitting on the fence and losing support. The North voted for Lincoln because he wasn't Buchanan nor his party. The south voted for a candidate I forgot because he wasn't Buchanan nor the Republican. Lincoln won and the South seceded. Just like Carter won not because anyone believed in him, but because he wasn't Ford who was too associated with Nixon. Not because they believed in his agenda.

So to the stupid and insane liberals that believe America wants this socialized health care, go ahead with your plans to discredit the Blue Dog Democrats and the Republicans. Given what you know about history and the American people, it will be just what the doctor ordered to recovered from Obama's socialist agenda and save the country.

Sunday, August 16, 2009

The logic of Bizzaroworld.

I was listening to the clips of Obama's campaigning for his so called health care. Alice herself would be taking a double take after the latest attempts. Obama, off script given his um and ahs, was trying to make a point that any person with any experience and education in deductive logic. Obama was trying to down play the criticism of his health care plan by making some of the claims made by those that oppose him. How if his health care plan is passed that costs will go up, government will get in the way of your doctor, and bureaucrats will determine what care you will get. Guess what. That's going on already. I'll say. What exactly is he saying exactly. Logically, he's actually is making his critic's point.

First off, what exactly does it means to make a sound, logical argument. Math is seen as a progression of numeric operations with numbers. Well, another segment is deductive logic. Though if you go to your local college, you'll find the class in the philosophy department, it's a major segment, especially in set theory and abstract mathematics, in the study of higher mathematics. Basically, an argument is logical in its structure if the rules of logic are followed, then if the premise are true, it's with 100% certainly that the conclusion is true. When an argument is logical in structure AND all the premises are true, then the argument is said to be logical and sound. If one is false, then the argument is called unsound. For example, I can state the following:

All elephants are pink.
Dalphadale is an elephant.
Therefore, Dalphadale is pink.

This argument is logical in it's structure and a computer would accept it since they're a complete slave to logic (they make spook look like an amateur logician). So an argument can be logical but unsound. If it's both illogical and unsound, then it's gibberish. Nothing can be deduced and if the argument is unsound, it's either false or inconclusive depending on which premise is false.

Here is what the critics are reasoning about socialized medicine:

Since when some of our health care has been socialized.
Some of our costs have skyrocketed.
Some of our liberties have been infringed.
Therefore, complete socialization will completely skyrocket our costs and infringe our liberties.

Again logical in it's structure. The only question is are the premises sound (true).

Now, let's look at what Obama stated, that the criticism of the consequences of his health care plan is being higher costs, rationing, and government interferences. Then he stated that it's going on already. So, by his own admission, he's conceding that the premises of his critics are actually correct. He's conceding that there are some elements of socialized medicine already going on and the consequences on a small scale are already in effect. So in effect, he provided testimonial evidence that his critics are right. That government interference and the small scale of socialism is in our health care profession and that our costs have gone up while our liberties have gone down in its duration.

So what has Obama done when this is said and done. He's defending the COMPLETE socialization of our health care. His conclusion is that we need to make socialization complete. Though socialization has given all that our criticism have claimed even by his admission, he comes to a conclusion that's completely against the evidence. The evidence is that socialism is bringing higher costs, and government control. Therefore, the conclusions is to bring costs down and to have more freedom in our health care is to completely socialize medicine. This is what's known as a contradiction. We have what is known as A bring true, but he's claiming Not A is true. The man totally contradicted his argument for health care. What's I find ironic is that the media is playing this clip in attempt to showing his glib in convincing that we're all nuts jobs but if anyone one of a sound, logical mind will see that this man has shown his true agenda: complete socialism. He doesn't care if it raises costs, he admits it. He's admit this plan for energy, for our industries, for every aspect of our lives. After all, as a wise old Vulcan once said, "it's only logical".

Friday, August 14, 2009

The ill will of American women.

There is a story and a personal observation that has come out that has me shaking my head. What's terrible is how the reaction of the women over these two incidence that has supported my belief that women in western society are so filled with hatred and vileness that they don't have any moral compass anymore. One was minor but telling while the other was horrendous but hey, men are all evil by nature and deserve whatever they get. . . right?

The minor observation, or I should say observations was on the TV show I survived a Japanese Game Show. For those not familiar with the show, 12 contestants participate in a Japanese game show called Majide which have the contestants do silly and crazy games in teams at first. The games are done in 3 sets, the first is a team game where the winner gains an advantage during the 2nd team game. Then the 2nd team game gains a reward for the winning team and a punishment for the losing team and they also have to select two people to do a one on one game where the loser is eliminated. This goes on for weeks til there are 3 people left (if one team loses too often as this last season had (Red Robots lost 8 of 10 weeks worth of games to the Green Tigers). Then the last 3 are in two elimination games. What I was seeing was a pattern developing. One of the contestant was winning every single challenge (she was voted to switch teams twice). What was telling about our western society was while this woman was winning, why nobody wanted her on their team even though a win saves the team members from elimination.

The woman, who eventually went undefeated and enjoyed every reward, including the grand prize of $250,000 and never suffered a single punishment and the first contestant, as well as the oldest winner, ever to go through a whole season of Majide without a single loss was a 37 year old soccer mom (one of the games her team won was kicking goals on a rather exaggerated soccer field with an rather BIG foot). Even though she was winning every event and instrumental in those wins, everyone saw her as a weak link. She was voted off the teams when they become too uneven because they felt as a MOTHER, she was useless and weak. I would had thought after the 8th straight win, someone would catch on that she's good at these games and a threat to them winning the whole game. Well, it didn't happen. Even when the finals were about to begin, the opponent stated she's a soccer mom, she can't be good at anything, much less at a physical contest such as this. Well, in the end, the MOTHER won the whole game and it wasn't even close.

What this state is how women, because it was mainly the women that saw her as weak and useless and voted her constantly to switch teams, seems to have the view that women that have children are weak, stupid, and useless. I didn't fail to notice how the in our society that we view those that have children, unless they're working mothers that neglect and just let the hired help do the raising, then they're traitors to the gender. The worse thing a woman can be in western society is to be a "breeder". First, the woman that lost wanted to win the money to have a big wedding, but had no interest in having children. Why? Because she was going to be someone, a person of value, not a mommy. Geesh, one of nature's greatest gift was the power of birth for women. I mean, nature gave women this ability by design and now if any woman uses it, they're viewed as being anti-woman. Forgive my confusion in failing to see the logic. After all, I am a stupid male. I mean my lord. Without moms, there are no people and we die as a race. For that, those that underestimate this woman, they were the weak ones and in the end, they were defeated because they were weak and failed to reconize her stength..

The story that's out is the one that demonstrates to me that 68% of western women are just down and out evil against men. A man was having an affair with 3 women from online dating site. Well, it was Craigslist which should say enough. The 4 women involved all knew of each other, how isn't revealed, but the three mistresses and the wife all knew about each other and devised a vindictive plan. They got one of them to set up a date, after months of all of them playing around, pay for a hotel and the four of them ambushed him, blindfolded, bond, and then super glued his penis onto his stomach. Well, that was vengeance at its worse. I have to admit, when it comes to revenge, women have us beat badly. What I found offensive and despicable, 68% of the women surveyed by the site that reported the story found the action of these women to be funny. They thought it was funny to take a man's penis and super glued it to his stomach. I wonder what these witches would think if four men, one the husband, conspired an ambush and super glued her genitals together or breast to her stomach how their reactions would be.

What's worse, these women justified their anger and their criminal acts. Chances are, because lets face it, the guy was a jerk, they'll get off because the man was cheating on his wife. What I don't get is what the women, at least the mistresses, were angry about. They knew he was married, and they paid for the hotels to have sex with them and they're angry at him. Like do women really believe that men have all the power in relationships or do they just not like taking responsibility for their actions? One of the women had the gall to ask the man as they were taking him to the hospital which one did he love the most. Who cares? What does love have to do with any of this. After this assult, is he going to actually pick one? These women wanted a fix and it was all about sex and self gratification. The fact they found out that they were being played as they were playing him doesn't change a thing. One of the women want to actually shoot him. Lovely. I'll sleep around with a married man, but if I get caught, I get to shoot HIM. Yet, 68% not only think what they did was morally right and he got what he deserved, perhaps should had been shot, but it was funny. I like to see that written in the next sit com. Yea. Yet women in the western world wonder why they have the reputation of making the worse wives and why men don't want to marry them. Tell them what. I'll cut my penis off and throw it at them before I ever be intimate with one again. Even though they'll charge me with assault for throwing it at them. No wonder they have laws like IMBRA passed. They couldn't get a man without it.