Sunday, October 31, 2010

What I find REALLY scary this Halloween.

With California, despite all the hoopla that the races are going to be close believe me they're not, going to officially going to the far left with the concept that the best way to job creation is to make it too difficult to run one while taxing the stuffing out the Thanksgiving turkey of those that run businesses or still have a job. With the elections now just two days away, there's a common theme I see from leftist voters that should put the fear of evil and tyranny in all of us. Those the statements vary a bit, the theme is the same. One comment sums it up: The tea party hate the government unlike those that embrace law and order. Oh how that statement should scare us.

There's a speech by a famous politician that went as follows: "We have people starving in the street, our currency isn't worth the paper its printed on, communists are knocking on our front door and lawlessness is every where. What we need in our country is law and order. Yes, without out law and order, our country can't survive". Does anyone know who made that speech in 1931? By the year I take it you can make a pretty good guess and you would be right. It was Adolf Hitler. He used the law and order, as well as hope and change as the Weinhiemer Republic was collapsing. Seems those on the left are claiming Obama is bringing law and order to our Republic as well as the hope and change that is needed from the oppression that Bush instilled during his 8 years, so they say. Those are bad enough, but this statement: "Tea Party hates government". They make it out those in the Tea Party are a bunch of anarchists, just as Hitler was stating about the communist from the East and the democratic societies from the West.

First of all, where is it written anywhere, that a person MUST love the government, or ever like it, or to make it simpler, even entrust the government? This is why the Constitution was written. People shouldn't trust their government. Power corrupts and the goal was to LIMIT government power. The goal was to divide the power among the populace with the theory that the people will keep the politicians as well as any government over reach, in check. This defies that people should place trust in their government, but it's wisdom was in the distrust of power to government. That statement that those that distrust government are loony defies the fundamental foundation of the power of the constitution. That the government have no power that isn't given from the consent of the governed. Anyone that state we should always trust or have love for the government disdain this principal.

This can lead to another abuse of power. Too often messiahs have risen with the promise to the citizens a trip to the promise land. History is filled with them. When one has a love and complete trust of their government, they are endangered of becoming a useful idiot or a willing slave to a tyrant. Remember, power corrupts. This is what bothered conservatives during the campaign about Obama and his supporters. They were more mesmerized by his orator skills than what the man stood for or critically analyzing what his beliefs and policies can lead us. Now we're learning the hard way. Though 67% have smelled the caffeine, there are still 33% that just refuse to look at facts and continue to love their government even when they're not looking out for your best interest. Should this grow to 50% plus one, we're in trouble.

Tea Party members don't hate government, they oppose an overreaching and bloated government, especially in regards to over empowerment upon their citizens rights to choose for themselves. They believe that government should be limited to a limited few obligations, mainly protecting life and property. What the government has become now is a nanny state with the President being the top nanny. We have a government that doesn't believe in the liberties of the individual, that people are too untrustworthy and stupid and need a centralized federalist government to maintain law and order. What we're getting is completely the opposite. This is what Obama care is about, this is what the issue over his Czars are about, Cap and Trade, Global Warming, heck even the Blank Panther Case is about.

Jefferson stated that natural law can't be defied. Any attempt at destruction of natural law will only lead to either anarchy or complete tyranny. What are these natural laws? There are only two. Bill Wittle at PJTV summed it up best: "Do what you promise to do" and "The limitation of your liberties unlimited with the restriction that is must not impune another person's liberties or his property". Basically, this is what the tea party wants to bring back into government, enforce contracts and protect life and property. The bail outs defied the first one, do what you promise to do. GM didn't do what they promised, and then the government gave them a get out of jail free card. Now if you're a creditor of GM or even Crystler, are you going trust the company to full fill their contract if the government can come in and say no they don't? Same with the banks and financial institution. Why do you think the money supply is so tight right now. Nobody trust industry to full fill their obligation fearing the government will negate the contract. Small business have the largest cash reserves in US history right now, but are too afraid to invest because they have no clue what's going to happen nor what laws and contracts are actually going to be enforced. This is why most 3rd world countries economies are so crappy. With government corruption so bad, what can business and banks trustwith their money, not to mention the waste that must be overcomed.

Being free as long as you don't impune another liberties and property. Government is suppose to protect life and property, but look at what's happened in just under the last two years with Obama. Terrorists are going crazy trying to commit terrorist acts and our government is not only failing to protect us, or even to attempt to protect us, but doing everything they can to make easier for them to murder us. So far the perfect system has been working only because of terrorist's incompetence. Our right to vote is being impune as they protect the illegal alien invasion as well as Black Panthers right to intimidate white voters. They're under minding our national defense and TSA intrude on our property and person with their invasive machine while placating the demands of those that want to take our lives and properties away with the Islamic threat by having them exempted from such procedures. Our property, such as wages and earnings, are being impune to pay for social programs, illegal aliens, felons, and the unproductive. Yes, there are going to be some impunity as government need taxes and revenue to provide the protection of our life and property, however, these social programs do neither. They punish the productive, take their property, and now with Obama care perhaps our lives, to give it to those that don't earn nor deserve it. No wonder so many in the younger generation don't want to work and feel entitle to a living by the state.

We should fear an over reaching and unchecked powers within a government. The abuse and oppression threatened is documented though out history. However, when people feel that we should love the government and trust it implicitly, that's a far worse threat of them all. Plato said, "A life unchecked, is not worth living." Jefferson said, basically, "A government unchecked is not worth supporting." Right now a third of our populace now believe otherwise. I fear what will happen when it comes over 50% and that is the scariest thought of them all.

Saturday, October 30, 2010

The country can have real hope and change on November 2nd, unlike California.

Judging by the latest polls and protests and outspokenness by the populace, the dems are running scared and with good reason. Obama has poisoned the well so badly that only those with death wishes or down and out parasites are going to vote for the party of "change". However, in California, things are far far more darker. Jerry Brown, perhaps one of our worse governors in history behind his protege Gray Davis who was the 2nd Governor in the history of the country to be recalled and less then two years at that, is going to be elected to a 3rd term (he served two terms in the 70's and I rather not remember that decade), Boxer is going to get her 3rd term, Gavin Nussome, the illegal's best friend in San Fransisco, is going to be lieutenant Governor, and for the most part the same leftist clowns are all going to get elected. Who knows how our propositions will go. The only one I'm interested in is Prop. 20 that allow citizens, not politicians to draw district lines which has been tried 6 times before and failed. However, it's clear about one thing, California is going to become more red even though the rest of the country isn't.

When Obama is considered a positive influence and we go more and more to the left, it's a bit hard not to become even more jaded. Just look at what's being mocked and disdained. Running a business, believing in doing the same thing over again with different results as being insane, ostracising illegals and support of the rule of law. Brown is being seen as a savior because he has no plan as what California needs. Tax breaks and easing the ability to run a business is considered insane while having 1100 lawyers ready to sue to ensure green polices is. Catering to illegals and eliminating law abating citizen so the illegals can get into our schools with tuition paid by the state. Jacking taxes in a state with the highest in the country even higher so parasite and non-citizens can prosper is what this state needs. Pardon me while I make my plans to bail out.

California is going to be the first state to collapse economically and declare bankruptcy with this clown taking office and I fear what our unemployment is going to be. Now that we're going to become Mexifornia, officially, the other states can see what their fate will be if the dems keep power or ever get it back should the dems lose their majority. However, living the first state to lose it's freedom and being the first to convert to foreign national socialism, it's a bit difficult to avoid jadedness and cynicism.

Sunday, October 24, 2010

More insanity and stupidity from the Feminists.

I've often written about the feminist and how destructive and evil their mindset have been. Based on lies, hatred and downright narcissism they have laid a path that has been so destructive to human relationships and societies that implement them. The story that's coming from Taiwan has to take the cake. If you think gay marriage is oxymoronic well this one isn't just oxymoronic, it's downright silly, if not stupid, and demonstrates what western feminism is bringing to the world.

I had to take a double take on this story because it seemed to absurd to be true, but alas, it's on record for all to see. There's a male hating feminist out there deciding to concede to societies' pressure to get married, so she is. . . to herself. Has the dress, catering, guests, and chapel ready for her self grandizing ceremony. Her excuse is basically the same, men are too stupid, evil, selfish, demanding, blah blah blah and she wants to demonstrate to women around the world that they need to love themselves over others, especially men. Wow, what a surprise.

Taiwan, as well as other Asian industrializing countries, are seeing a huge dropped in marriage and child bearing. Japan, Korea, and Taiwan are seeing huge drops, even worse than the US, and we can think western feminism and I'll make a bold prediction right here: India will be next. As more and more of the hatred of family and narcissism over love of family mentality of feminism spreads like a cancer in these industrialized countries that follow the old American model, these countries are becoming more and more Americanized, which means taking on the attitude that marriage is oppressive and the best value for women is career over family. This is way you hear perverse stories like Japanese men more into sex dolls and virtual girlfriends. They're sick and tired of the attitude of their women. It's why their birthrates are dying.

Just read the comments that the women that support her self nuptials. Oh sure there are the share of jokes like did she get a pre-nup and who do the police arrest if she gets in a physical altercation with herself, but most of it is the male hating brile. They even argue that it's good for society for these "modern" women who get educated and go into the work force over supporting a family traditionally. Really? They why are these societies desperate to get these women to have families. What, are they oppressive? Why are their birth rates going down? Why is unemployment going up, especially for men? The biggest issue that's starting to plague these nations, the financial strain on their version of Social Security. Right now, like America, they have 3 workers for every senior citizen. In 20 years it's going to 1.5. Taiwan isn't as bad, it's 7 to 1, but in 20 years it's going to be 3 to 1. I'll let you do the math to see Taiwan is just 20 years behind. There isn't going to be enough workers to support the seniors. Perhaps they'll follow our example and pass Obamacare and they can have their death panels as well. Perhaps they should be aware that the generation that's going to suffer for this matrimonial discrimination is going to be theirs since it will be their generation that's going to lose the benefits their parents enjoy today.

What makes this particularly silly is that marriage is an institution that was designed mainly to encourage and nurture procreation. This is why women, unless it's lesbians, hate marriage. They view childbearing as the pathway to oppression and poverty. The fewer that marry and have children, the fewer that will live in liberty and prosperity. My wife worries that in her old age nobody will care for her since she never had any children. Perhaps these marriage hating hags should ask the same question, because right now they expect the state to do so and like France, who are having riots over it, and Greece, they just plain can't do it. The money isn't there. It also goes against nature since women where designed to have children. Oh, not every woman is suited to be a mother, just look at the hags that run the NOW. However, they policy that the norm of women aren't suited is just plain wrong and society is going to pay the price.

How? A nation or culture dies if the procreation rate isn't at least 2.21. In liberalized nations, US 2.21 but only because of illegal immigration, average of Europe, 1.6, Japan, 1.8, Korea, 1.9, Taiwan, 1.7, Canada, 2.0, get the picture. These societies are going to die. The only industrialize country that isn't effected China. Dispite a one child policy, many in the rural areas aren't well policed, there's too much ground to cover, and they are having children like it's becoming illegal. Oh wait, it is, but they are anyways. China is the only industrialized nation that doesn't have western modes or influence in their culture. The one child policy was created as their population has become too massive to control at 1.6 billion. Not because their women have become "empowered". Now that India is taking the American model to industrializing their society as well taking in the western culture of empowering women, it won't be long before they stop having babies as well. Not only do they have a large massive population, but have a great deal of poverty themselves and I'm sure they'll blame marriage and child rearing for that too, not the main reason poverty exists today. No, it's not "overpopulation". Japan, Korea, and Taiwan have dense populations, but they're not suffering from poverty. It's cultural and government corruption. All the poverty in the world are from countries are massively corrupt or have cultures, like ours, that encourage parents not to care for their children and blame them their for their plights.

So with women now demanding the right to be married to themselves (does that mean she has to go f*ck herself when she's done?) just demonstrates the agenda of the modern feminist to destroy everything that is feminine. They're enemies of families, of their societies, and nature. Every society that are implementing their cultural biases and mores are in decline. With this silliness and insanity now being brought out and encouraged, what's next? Marriage to goats, virtual people, sex dolls, robots, mother earth? I mean where does this end? Since marriage has been perverted and skewed from it's original and intended meaning, what's no longer tabooed? How far down does a society have to go before we say enough is enough on this nonsense. Given how supportive the populace has been so far, it doesn't look like any time soon.

Tuesday, October 19, 2010

Things are getting Ugly in California's campaigns.

You want a look at the future of elections in the country, come take a look at what's going on in California. I know politics can get messy, ugly, and downright nasty at times, but what I'm seeing this year has put it all to level that just defies belief. It's like now that the leftist socialists have been exposed and they're drunk with the powers to be, it's a no holds barrage now. I've never seen such ugly campaigns as I've seen now, and what's worse, they're all accurate leaving Californians left to basically vote between two candidates at various positions: Satan or Lucifer.

Take the governor's race. Whitmen vs. Brown. Ugh, talk about ugly. They've stop slinging mud months ago, now they're slinging rocks. Basically both sides are attacking the credibility and character of each other. Neither looks good. Brown, if anyone born before the 1980's know, is a failed tax and spend gutless liberal. He founded the gay rights movement that we suffer from today as with the exception of marriage (gay marriage is an oxymoron since gay people can't procreate naturally) and working within a religious business (why would they want to work there in the first place?), they're not discriminated against. Brown called Prop. 13 a fraud and waste because it limited the ability of government to raise property taxes. Californians do have some of the lowest rates, thank God, but because of the excessive high costs of real estate, pretty much pay the same monetarily. If Prop. 13 wasn't law, they would be so massive with our government here, nobody would be able to keep their homes as the taxes would be 2 to 3 times higher than the payment for the house. Brown is weak on crime, oppose the death penalty so much so that he appointed such leftist and radical judges, anyone remember Rose Bird for if you do you know how radical she was and how bad Brown can be. Brown after all signed an INMATE bill of rights. Seems Brown cares more about criminals than law abating citizens. Brown even supports affirmative action and wants to include illegal aliens to affirmative action rights including instate tuition.

Meg Whitman, other than she ran a business, Ebay, she's no different than Brown. A liar and a crook. She's a typical elitist that took over 100 million in salary at Ebay while laying off hundreds. She's in support of illegal alien rights as she stated in Spanish. She says she'll run the government like a business, but who's she going to lay off to get her millions? The taxpayers? I'll avoid the nanny gate. Her character doesn't instill a great deal of confidence and she's making the same promises that Arnold made without seeing the reality of our corrupt legislature.

As bad as this one is, the senate race is even uglier. Not only the two women running are as ugly as can be, but when you get down to it, you can flip a coin and let the coin vote because they're both the same candidate. They're both running on the platform that the other is exporting jobs to China and both are right. Boxer with the federal regulations and policies that encourage those to ship the jobs overseas and then her husband profits with his import/export business. Fianoa who shipped jobs oversea to save money and buy lavish goodies for herself and the board with 5 jets. Yea, I'm going to trust her on fiscal responsibility? I'm going to trust her on preserving jobs here in California or even in the states? I rather write in Donald Duck.

We got a real winner for the 3rd district between Berra and Lungren. Lungren has been in politics for nearly 30 years. Another lifetime politician. Berra is a radical, La Raza supported, Poloski selected candidate. Need I say more?

Lt. Govenor, who are elected separately, we got a guy I've never heard of vs. Gavin Newsome. Here, at least there's a choice because we don't have a career politician running against Gavin Newsome who's making the false claim that he oppose San Francisco's Sanctuary policies. Yea, after the highly profiled murder a father and 2 of his sons by an illegal alien gang banger. Newsome instill those policies, put in supervisor that supported the policies and only after gaining ambition for higher office, did he oppose. Add that if you're the manager of his campaign, you better make sure you have your wife under lock and key. He slept with the last one.

Thus are my choices this election. Given how bad and ugly the choices are, I think I'll vote and go to hell for some R&R.

Thursday, October 14, 2010

A trend that the left won't mention.

Here in Sacramento, an all too familiar story is out. A mother decided to stab, murder, and then set fire to her 3 year-old twin daughters. She's been arrested and charged with several counts, one of which is 2 counts of murder. What's a shocker to me isn't the crime, but that she's been charged with murder. Far too often, the woman isn't charged at all. However the statistic that should be raising eyebrows isn't even mentioned: the high rate of mothers murdering her children.

Only on Good Morning America had the gall, surprising, to mention a disturbing trend in this country. If I was to ask which family member would be the most likely to murder a child most people would be wrong and badly. As stated on the show, 85% of children who are murdered by a family member, are murdered by their mothers. Think about that, that's nearly 7 out of 8 times. Fathers are the culprit only 7%, which means mother is 12 more likely to do the murdering and nearly 6 times more than all other relatives COMBINED! It was only mentioned because that evil b*tch Bates is having a hearing to seek her release after 8 years in a mental institution for planning, hunting down and drowning her five children, the youngest only months old and the oldest, 7, fought to the bitter end as he was the only that knew what his fate was going to be (four dead siblings in the tub was a rather obvious clue). If you think this woman got away with premeditated murder, you would be right. It's how often they get away with it.

If I was to ask you what percentage of woman that commit these murder see jail time, what would you think? Quite a bit, murder is murder after all. Not when you're a woman. First, half aren't even prosecuted. Anyone remember Sandra Smith? She was the one that, because she was having an affair and want to abandoned her family for him, drowned them as he wasn't interested in having her as long as she had children. Though she got convicted, and only after she managed to enrage the black community claiming she was car jacked by a black man which I'll add they make too easy to frame for such a fabrication but that's another blog entry, she was convicted for murder and sentence to life. She was spared the death penalty because she confessed. Would John Smith, the father, had been shown such mercy had HE actually committed the crime? Well, take a look at the following statistic and you tell me. Women who are prosecuted and convicted for such murders are hospitalized 86% of the time, imprisoned 14%. Men on the other hand if you say the statics are turned around you would be wrong. They are hospitalized only 12% while 88% see prison. Yates may get out after 8 years, just a year older than her oldest victim and had they been alive today, still would be minors. Yet their lives don't even generate an iota of sympathy, not like their mother receives.

With women being excused from their behaviors because of things like poverty, bi-polar disorder, PMS, and as in Yates defense, PPD, it's a wonder women are held responsible for anything. Oh wait, they aren't. As with Yates, she gets a lot of sympathy because she's viewed as being ill. This is why go to prison 1/8th as much as men for the same crimes. With our male hating as well as child hating society, why do women have so little compassion or feelings for the children in these hideous cases, it's no clue as to why there are no real consequences for such abuses. It's always the societies, the children, the men, the order of the stars fault. The only real reason Sandra Smith saw time wasn't because she was viewed as ill. It was because she did it for a man. Had she made up some illness and not try to trampled on a scared minority, she too would had gotten away with it. Just how much longer are we going to accept this? Give how far below the radar such crimes are, I don't expect any changes within my lifetime.

Race baiters are at it again.

It's coming out that the NAACP is condeming the Tea Parties for racism. Considering that 91 % of blacks will vote for any black candidate simply because they're black (just look at Allen Greene in South Carolina if you need more evidence), support a racist party because it's the "black" thing to do, make accusation that they're being oppressed for "acting too black", and considering they support a united NEGRO college fund, but any school or scholarship that only support white as being racist, community organizer that threaten banks and business if they don't hire "enough" people not based on ability, talent or merit but only by the color of their skin, ACRON need I say more there, and they should learn that people that live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Seems that the tea parties, a "party" that have all people from all walks of life, not just whites, must be getting under the skin to the hyperbole of the race baiters that not only can't the baiter defend their bigotry, but they used the tired and now cliched "racist" card that the word is truly having no meaning. This not only deludes their credibility, but also those that do suffer from real racism. Time for this outdated and outmoded "civil rights" organization to realize they have become the bigots that they were formed to oppose and realize they're of no use nor value anymore. Other than to promote more bigotry.

Sunday, October 10, 2010

Obama to show his true, Chicago thuggery?

I caught an article in the Sacramento Bee, the only rag of a newspaper that exist in this city. I don't normally look at it as I put it under a birdcage once, the bird broke out of the cage and pooped on me. However, I digress. I noticed an article that Obama has a plan to push, more like shove down our throats, his agenda should the Republicans take control of the congress after next month's election: executive orders.

The gist of the theme is to advance the change that he's promised, that he will just bypass the congress and follow through with executive orders. Anyone that understand our constitutional republic will realize what this mean? It will be war on our republic. Not only will this be a means to by pass the checks and balances in our Constitution, but given his affection to Czars, who knows what those executive orders will entailed. The biggest one that I fear will be the funding of his civilian national force to enforce security of our country that only answers to him. Given the abuse of power this man has demonstrated thus far, this is quite a scary thing. Not to mention, if he just want any law he likes, like no civil rights for white voters, citizenship for illegals, or forget taxing the wealthy, just nationalized all their possessions. This threat should be met as for what it is: a declaration of war against America and her people.

Saturday, October 9, 2010

Why do liberals fight for illegals then bash those that hire them?

Right now, the biggest shock being a Californian isn't that we've finally passed a budget 95 days late. Heck, that's par for the course, though 95 days a bit on the 2nd standard deviation. It's the dirty and evil tactic by Jerry Brown and his media whores. If anyone hasn't been tuning in, I can't say I blame you how nasty and dirty politics get here, there's a brouhaha over candidate Meg Whitmen having employed an illegal alien as a house keeper for 9 years. When you look at the big picture here, the irony of this is inescapable.

Unless you've been living in a cave, you know that California has a massive invasion of illegal aliens. Only Arizona has a larger problem by density of population. Since illegal aliens, unofficially, get to vote, our politicians tend to pander to their interests. One of which is that many want to give in state tuition to them, even though most natives can't get in now much less afford it, but I digress. One of the political footballs that are played with here is worker rights for the illegals. Democrats fight so hard for "rights" of the illegal, free health care, free education, free from deportation and prosecution, but most importantly, their right to work. They're fighting here to force those that employ them to pay them minimum wage. Since by law they're not allowed to work, sort of make no sense. Was this what the Confederacy meant by state rights?

So since the Democrats are big on illegals being able to work here while the unemployment rate for Americans continue to go up, it's the height of hypocrisy to demean as well as libel and slander a person just for SUSPICION of employing an illegal alien. I guess when it's the democrat doing the criminal activity, it's human compassion. When it's their opponent, it's exploitation.

My lord! if anyone had any sensitivity, this should backfire in Brown's team face. It's seem typical of the democrats to exploit minorities for their own political gain. What's worse, the Hispanics and illegals actually think this party is fighting for them, when they're being used. This woman, if her claims of abuse are true, which I doubt because she rambles a bit of nonsense like puppets are people too, but that's just my opinion, this epitomizes not just the Democrat vs. Republican issue, but of human rights. Exploitation, either for votes or slave labor, is just plain wrong. This is why this whole issue really ticks me off and why the Tea Parties want our immigration laws enforced. To avoid this abuse of these people. Giving them a lawyer that exposes them to deportation for a politicians ambitions or their own gains should be seen for what they are: self serving bigots.