Thursday, November 1, 2012

How To Deal With The Media

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.”   –Dresden James

I know what you're thinking ... yet another conservative article offering anecdotal evidence of "liberal media bias" and decrying the fact that Republican candidates can't get a fair shake in the "main stream media" and/or how the media seems to be hell bent on re-elcting Barack Obama. But you would be wrong. I am going to proceed from the assumption that the foregoing is both self evident and not a news flash to anyone.

Instead, I would like to pose a question:  Given the fact that the left wing media constantly pushes the liberal democratic agenda that 1) the country is controlled by the greedy "One Percenters" (presumably almost all conservative republicans) that have way too much wealth for their own or anybody else's good, and 2) that the purpose of government is to strip said greedy One Percenters of their wealth and redistribute it, why in the world do the "One Percenters" put up with it? 

Well, you might say that there is free speech in our country and freedom of the press, and you would be right.  However, at least for now, there is still also free enterprise and if the Republicans control most of the wealth, why don't a few of them simply get together and buy controlling interest in one of the primary broadcast networks ... and throw the leftists out on their collective ear? 

It can't be done you say?  Ponder a few numbers here:  Market Capitalization for the "Big Three" broadcast networks are as follows:  CBS $21.83 billion, NBC approximately $13billion (Comcast bought 51% interest in NBC in 2011 for about $6.5billion) and ABC $10.28 billion.  This means that controlling interest (51% of voting shares) in CBS could be had for $11.14 billion, in NBC for $6.5 billion (assuming you could persuade Comcast to sell) and in ABC for a mere $5.24 billion. 

Of course, most will say that the idea is crazy, after all, people don't have $5.24 billion dollars lying around in their checking account, it's an enormous amount of money. However, consider the Forbes list of the Top 400 Richest Americans. The average net worth of the top 400 is $4.2 billion dollars and the combined net worths of the top 400 is a staggering $1.7 trillion dollars. That's 1700 times a billion. Suddenly $5.24 billion is starting to look like chump change.

Now granted, there are some lefties in the Top 400 (Like Bill Gates and George Soros) but if we are to believe the mainstream media (and Barack Obama), the Republican party is made up almost entirely of greedy, money grubbing wallstreet types who care nothing for their neighbor ... surely there are enough conservative republican "One Percenters" who could get together to buy controlling interest in at least one of the major media outlets? What good is having all of that economic muscle if you don't use it?

A counter argument is that "One Percenters" didn't get to be one percenters by throwing their money away on causes ... they are prudent investors who eschew such things in favor of maximizing returns.  But think of the indirect return to all of their other business interests of being able to influence government and sway politicians and the voting public to embrace a pro-business agenda? And how long will their wealth be safe if the country continues to be influenced by the left wing redistributionists? And aren't these people tired of being punching bags for the likes of every left wing talking head that anchors an evening news (and I use that term loosely) show?

Besides, wouldn't it be just good clean fun to see the likes of Diane Sawyer and George Stephanopolous in the unemployment line?

~R Beckish~  

Tuesday, October 23, 2012

Of Horses And Bayonets

Politicians and diapers should be changed frequently and all for the same reason.  ~José Maria de Eça de Queiroz~

Last night was the third and final installment of the Presidential Debates, focusing on foreign policy.  Since the first debate, President Obama has been slipping in the polls and he was clearly was looking for a knockout punch. Governor Romney who seemed to have adopted a strategy of embracing many of Obama's policies and avoiding seeming "confrontational", much like a boxer who believes he is ahead on points in the late rounds and goes into repeated clinches with his oppenents.

Well, the leftist media and the "twitterverse" was all abuzz about the following line from Obama, parrying a Romney criticism that Obama's economic plans will shrink the Navy to 1917 levels:

"You mention the Navy, for example, and that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916. Well governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets," Obama said during the final presidential debate. "We have these things called aircraft carriers and planes land on them. We have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines. It's not a game of battleship where we're counting ships, it's 'What are our capabilities?'" he said.

Really Mr. President? The publishers of a serious military periodicals like Jane's, for instance, will tell you that the number of ships in a country's navy, the number of combat divisions, and the number of first line air wings is still the measure of a country's military strength.

More importantly, far from being the great "zinger" of the night, this line more than anything else shows Obama's abysmal ignorance of how wars are fought.  In fact, both the Army and Marine Corps USE bayonets today ... there are hundreds of thousands of them in our inventory and our troops are trained to use them.  And as for horses?  They are being used by our troops in the rugged terrain of Afghanistan as we speak. The lowliest PFC could have told Mr. Obama this, but instead he lives in an insulated bubble in the Whitehouse, surrounded by liberals who think war is a video game fought and won with high tech gadgets. The truth is, wars today are ultimately fought and won in the same way they have been won in every war since the beginning of our nation:  A flesh and blood human being must put "boots on the ground", brave bullets and bombs and hold a piece of turf.  You're right Mr. President ... it isn't a game of battleship.

The bottom line is that if Barak Obama is reelected, he will gut the military, and as soon as our enemies sense our weakness we WILL have a war on our hands.  That's how it works.  The only way to avoid it is to have a military so strong that no one dares attack us or our allies. 

~R Beckish~

Tuesday, October 9, 2012


If the United States is likened to a corporation, then the citizens are its owners and Obama, like any corporate president, is an employee that works for the owners (the citizens).  It's now time for the citizens to decide whether to keep him or to fire him and hire a new manager.  So what sort of qualities make for a good CEO and does Mr. Obama make the grade?
A good CEO, first and foremost, is concerned with the financial health of the company.
*    Since Barak Obama took office, our National Debt has skyroceted, increasing by over six trillion dollars.  That is a greater increase in three and half years under Obama than in eight years under Bush. It is now over sixteen trillion dollars ... thats a million dollars times sixteen million ... an unimaginable number. Put another way, every household in America now owes $137,000.  Yet, instead of trying to decrease this staggering debt, he still wants more taxes and a more government.
*    The National Deficit ... the rate at which the US Budget exceeds its revenues every year is now $1.4 trillion dollars under Barak Obama.  We have to either borrow the money or print it. Doing the first means being indebted to other countries like China.  Doing the second means each dollar buys less so the price of gas and groceries goes up and up.  It has been over two years since the democratic senate has passed a budget bill ... that way they don't have to stop spending ... and Mr. Obama is fine with that.    
*   Our country's credit rating has been downgraded. It currently costs $225 billion dollars a year just to pay the interest on our debt.  Government spending is now over 40% of GDP ... that means that government gobbles up 40 cents out of every single dollar of value of all goods and services produced by every citizen and business in the country.  The only time in our history that the government consumed more of our economic output was WWII.  And yet, Mr. Obama still wants more.
Ask yourself: is the country in a better position financially than it was four years ago? 
A good CEO is a good steward of company assets.
*   In the midst of all of this the Obama Administration has pumped billions into a legion of "green" companies that went bankrupt:
Evergreen Solar
Solyndra (received $535 million)
Beacon Power (received $43 million)
AES’ subsidiary Eastern Energy
Nevada Geothermal (received $98.5 million)
SunPower (received $1.5 billion)
First Solar (received $1.46 billion)
Babcock & Brown (an Australian company which received $178 million)
Ener1 (subsidiary EnerDel received $118.5 million)
Amonix (received 5.9 million)
The National Renewable Energy Lab
Fisker Automotive
Abound Solar (received $400 million)
Chevy Volt (taxpayers basically own GM)
Solar Trust of America
A123 Systems (received $279 million)
Willard & Kelsey Solar Group (received $6 million)
Johnson Controls (received $299 million)
Schneider Electric (received $86 million)
That's right ... ALL bankrupt.  80% of these companies were owned by Obama donors and through sweetheart deals, they lost NO money, but WE, the American Taxpayers, picked up the tab. 
*    Then there are the cases of fraud, waste and corruption under the Obama administration.  The GSA spent a purported $800,000 on a "conference" in Las Vegas in 2010.  The Secret Service went even further, apparently spending money on prostitutes during President Obama's recent trip to the 2012 "Summit of the Americas" in Cartagena, Columbia. 
*   Finally, there is the cost of Mr. Obama's frequent absences from his job. All told, Barack Obama has spent more than 400 days on some type of absence from Washington between "fundraisers", "tours" and "vacations".  Remember when the country was in "crisis" facing "financial disaster" because the Republicans refused to raise the debt ceiling?  Where was Mr. Obama? You got it ... at a birthday bash in Chicago. Additionally he’s played 57 rounds of golf since taking office (29 of them in 2010) and gone on 28 basketball outings (20 of those coming in 2010).   And the cost of all of this? The total cost (based on what is known) for the 17-day roundtrip vacation to Hawaii for the President, his family and staff in 2011 was more than $4 million. That's just one "vacation".  
Is this what you would call being a "good steward" of YOUR company's funds?
A good CEO knows that he works for the owners and is always out to maximize their returns.
*    On average, every American taxpayer (the half of us who actually pay taxes) must now work until mid-April just to pay their taxes, and in some states until May 5.  Think of that. You, the owners, must work over a third of each year just to feed the government before you get to keep a dime of your own money!  
*    The U.S. is  suffering massive unemployment (8.1 % is what is reported by the government but its rreally closer to 11% since they no longer count those who have "ceased looking for work").  The Obama Administration claims that it has "created" 4.5 million jobs. However, CNN fact-checked that claim and found it to be "not the whole picture." Instead, CNN found that there has been a net increase of just 300,000 nonfarm payroll jobs since Obama took office. And if you count government jobs, there are actually 400,000 fewer people working today than in January 2009.  In short, job creation is not even keeping up with the numbers of those entering the workforce, and the Obama Administration's sole answer has been to fudge the numbers.
*    Of those households that have work, 42% report living paycheck to paycheck.    
Does Mr. Obama act like he's working for you, or do you seem to be working for him? 

A good CEO carries out his employers agenda.
I think we can all agree that the absolute number one primary duty of the President is to defend the nation and protect our borders.  Has Mr. Obama carried out his duties in this regard?
*     A high-level group of U.S. security experts - including former national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski and former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage - estimated that Iran would need between one and four months to produce enough weapons-grade uranium for a single nuclear device. They could easily obtain a delivery vehicle from their allies, China and Russia. Iran is known sponsor of terrorist groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah, is an exporter of Jihad and has openly called for the annihilation of U.S. ally, Israel.  What has the Obama administration done to quash this threat? Imposed "economic sanctions" and delivered speeches at the UN, neither of which have deterred Iran in the least from its nuclear ambitions. In fact, the Obama Administration has gone out of its way to snub our ally,  Israel at every opportunity and has ignored its pleas for help in dealing with this threat, emboldening the regime in Iran.  
*    On the recent anniversary of 9/11, our embassy in Libya was attacked and our Ambassador was murdered. Mr. Obama's people tried to tell us that it was the result of a "spontaneous demonstration", but the truth has now come out that it was a coordinated terrorist attack and our government knew for months in advance that an attack was imminent.  Why did our government not protect our own people? Why has it done nothing to hunt down those who did this? Why did our UN Ambassador try to claim that the attack was a "spontaneous" response to an anti-islamic video when it was obvious from the start that it was a coordinated terrorist attack?   
*   Since he took office President Obama attends less than 40% of his national security briefings.  Does this sound like a CEO devoted to "the people's business"?

*    There are roughly eleven million illegal immigrants living in the U.S. Of those, approximately 400,000 fill our prisons while another 1.4 Million recieve welfare, foodstamps, free education or some other form of public assistance. The cost to US Taxpayers? Approximately $113 Billion Dollars, or about $1117 per year from every household.  We are being invaded from the south and what has the Obama Administration done about it? They claim that deportations are up, but the truth is they have inflated the numbers by counting "border turn backs" as "deportations". In fact, the truth is that Border Patrol Agents have been ordered to stop arresting noncriminal illegals, and stop patrolling high traffic areas and National Wildlife Preserves (operated by the Department of the Interior, rather than Homeland Security).  
Wouldn't you fire an employee that deliberately neglects or ignores the safety of your company because he has another agenda? 
Wouldn't you fire an employee who misses more important meetings than he attends?
Wouldn't you fire an employee that lies to you?
The "owners" of this country need to ask themselves some hard questions before election day.  Forget "likeability" or party affiliation.  The country is at a turning point and the decision must be made:  If this were your "company" and Mr. Obama was your employee, wouldn't you consider a change of management? 
~Richard Beckish~

Friday, September 14, 2012

Showing Their True Colors

"I am a real Christian – that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus Christ." --The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, p. 385.

At the recent Democratic Convention, Antonio Villaraigosa, the Mayor of Los Angeles, was serving as chairman of the convention, was loudly booed by at least half of the delegates present. Why, you might ask? Because he brought the gavel down and annouced as "adopted" a controversial amendment to the party platform ... You see, the crafters of the platform (the Democrats have refused to reveal who exactly is responsible) meticulously excised all mention of God from the platform ... the first time any major party has done such since the founding of the country. Obama, knowing that his re-election prospects are already on shaky ground, insisted that God be put back in. Mayor Villaraigosa, thinking it just a routine matter, called for a 2/3 voice vote to adopt the amendment ... and had to ask three times because he could not even get a majority of "ayes" (which he never did). 

With this gaffe, the liberal wing of the Democratic Party showed its true colors. It is now starkly clear where they stand and what their values really are ... the mask has been ripped away and voters are now confronted with the fact that a vote for the Democratic Party is really a vote for those who would drive God from our national discourse.  But apologists for the Democratic Party are quick to spin this as a vote for "religous freedom", "tolerance" and "open mindedness".  The underpinning of their attempts at rhetorical ju-jitsu is the claim that the U.S. was never a christian nation founded on christian principles at all. Instead, they claim that the Founding Fathers were "Deists" out to construct a wholly secular government with no reference to any particular god or religion. Thus, they argue, it is the Democratic Party that are the guardians of the true founding principles of the country.  Hogwash.       

The idea that the Founding Fathers were "Deists" is a load of left wing propaganda.  This is simply the tried and true liberal tactic of "relabeling":  If  your side needs night to be day and day to be night, simply rename "day" or "night" so that reality becomes what you want it to be. 

But the truth is that not only were they Founders affiliated with established Christian Churches, several were ordained ministers. Here is a website listing the Founder's church affilitations:

Here are direct quotes from the writings of Washington, Adams, Jefferson, etc. on the subject:

Liberals incessantly attack Christianity and try to rewrite history because liberalism, at its core, cannot tolerate the idea of God, especially the Christian God, because by definition He has the power and authority to say "thou shalt" and "thou shall not".  Above all else, liberals glorify "choice" because in a world governed only by choice, there are no boundries, there are no sins, hedonism is the norm and every perversion must be accomodated. In other words, the "self" is at the center of the universe (aka, the original sin of pride) and in such a universe, there is no room for the Christian God. So, liberals (at least the hard core ones) must incessantly attack Christianity and attempt to drive it from the national discourse and will peddle lies to do so.

The bottom line is that Founders were Christian and Christian priciples and rhetoric are woven throughout the founding documents. You want to be an atheist, fine, dont't worship anyone. You want to be an agnostic, well ... go study until you make up your mind. You want to worship Tufnut, the Goddess of women in tight bluejeans, have at it.  But DON'T try to revise history to suit yourselves and DON'T lay this bunch of "Deist" baloney on the rest of us.    

Beware of liberals preaching "tolerance" and "open mindedness" ... for in truth they are the most intolerant and closed minded bunch on the planet. 

Friday, July 13, 2012

Amen !

"Resistance to tyranny becomes the Christian and social duty of each individual. ... Continue steadfast and, with a proper sense of your dependence on God, nobly defend those rights which heaven gave, and no man ought to take from us."  ~ John Hancock ~  .


I would love to give the Pastor of this predominantly black church in Virginia three cheers. This guy is obviously a leader. Perhaps we should each decide who our real leader is... It is amazing to see that very little has changed in 4,000 years.

"Good morning, brothers and sisters; it's always a delight to see the pews crowded on Sunday morning, and so eager to get into God's Word. Turn with me in your Bibles, if you will, to the 47th chapter of Genesis. We'll begin our reading at verse 13, and go through verse 27.

Brother Ray, would you stand and read that great passage for us? ... (reading) ... Thank you for that fine reading, Brother Ray. So we see that economic hard times fell upon Egypt , and the people turned to the government of Pharaoh to deal with this for them. And Pharaoh nationalized the grain harvest, and placed the grain in great storehouses that he had built. So the people brought their money to Pharaoh, like a great tax increase, and gave it all to him willingly in return for grain. And this went on until their money ran out, and they were hungry again.

So when they went to Pharaoh after that, they brought their livestock - their cattle, their horses, their sheep, and their donkey - to barter for grain, and verse 17 says that only took them through the end of that year. But the famine wasn't over, was it? So the next year, the people came before Pharaoh and admitted they had nothing left, except their land and their own lives. "There is nothing left in the sight of my lord but our bodies and our land. Why should we die before your eyes, both we and our land? Buy us and our land for food, and we with our land will be servants to Pharaoh." So they surrendered their homes, their land, and their real estate to Pharaoh's government, and then sold themselves into slavery to him, in return for grain.

What can we learn from this, brothers and sisters?

That turning to the government instead of to God to be our provider in hard times only leads to slavery? Yes... That the only reason government wants to be our provider is to also become our master?

Yes. But look how that passage ends, brothers and sisters! Thus Israel settled in the land of Egypt , in the land of Goshen . And they gained possessions in it, and were fruitful and multiplied greatly." God provided for His people, just as He always has! They didn't end up giving all their possessions to government, no, it says they gained possessions! But I also tell you a great truth today, and an ominous one.

We see the same thing happening today - the        government today wants to "share the wealth" once again, to take it from us and redistribute it back to us. It wants to take control of healthcare, just as it has taken control of education, and ration it back to us, and when government rations it, then government decides who gets it, and how much, and what kind. And if we go along with it, and do it willingly, then we will wind up no differently than the people of Egypt did four thousand years ago - as slaves to the government, and as slaves to our leaders.

What Mr. Obama's government is doing now is no different from what Pharaoh's government did then, and it will end the same. And a lot of people like to call Mr. Obama a "Messiah," don't they? Is he a Messiah? A savior? Didn't the Egyptians say, after Pharaoh made them his slaves, "You have saved our lives; may it please my lord, we will be servants to Pharaoh"? Well, I tell you this - I know the Messiah; the Messiah is a friend of mine; and Mr. OBAMA IS NO MESSIAH! No, brothers and sisters, if Mr. Obama is a character from the Bible, then he is Pharaoh. Bow with me in prayer, if you will...

Lord, You alone are worthy to be served, and we rely on You, and You alone. We confess that the government is not our deliverer, and never rightly will be. We read in the eighth chapter of 1 Samuel, when Samuel warned the people of what a ruler would do, where it says "And in that day you will cry out because of your king, whom you have chosen for yourselves, but the LORD will not answer you in that day..."

And Lord, we acknowledge that day has come. We cry out to you because of the ruler that we have chosen for ourselves as a nation. Lord, we pray for this nation. We pray for revival, and we pray for deliverance from those who would be our masters. Give us hearts to seek You and hands to serve You, and protect Your people from the atrocities of Pharaoh's government. In God We Trust... "

Thursday, June 28, 2012

Do Not Despair

"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is argument of tyrants. It is the creed of slaves."  William Pitt in the House of Commons November 18, 1783

You gotta love liberals.  They're dancing in the streets thinking they've won some great "victory".  Poor, brainwashed fools.  Today the United States Supreme Court upheld the controversial "mandate" that requires everyone to purchase health insurance or face stiff tax penalties.  The Court held that, while Congress did not have the power under the commerce clause of the Constitution to force people to buy a product, the "mandate" could be upheld as a "tax" on those who chose not to purchase health insurance ... great logic, right?  In addition, the SCOTUS opinion, delivered by Chief Justice Roberts, struck down provisions of the law that allowed the Federal Government to coerce the States into expanding the Medicade rolls to include an estimated 30 million uninsured individuals.

On it's face, the Court's ruling seems to be a victory for Obama and his socialist cronies. However, all is not as it seems.  What has really happened is that by siding with the liberals on the "mandate" issue in exchange for getting them to acquiesce on the Commerce Clause and Medicade expansion issues, Justice Roberts may have pulled off one of the greatest examples of legal ju-jitsu ever recorded.  Oh yes, the government can now coerce all of us to get healthcare by "imposing a tax" ... BUT ... the whole reason that the liberals wanted this legislation was to expand the medicaid rolls thus giving another 30 million deadbeat democratic supporters free healthcare ... And it was THAT part, the part that allowed the Feds to force the States to participate in the Medicare expansion ... that was struck down.  In addition, he managed to set a precedent putting some limits on the Commerce Clause, THE major vehicle the liberals have used over the years to force government intrusion into our lives ... a precedent they can't overturn or attack without gutting their own healthcare law.

SO ... what we're left with is a mandate (excuse me, a "tax") that requires everyone, regardless of their situation, to have health insurance, BUT WITHOUT the freebies that the non-working left wing porch sitters thought they were gonna get.  Oh, yes and now there will be a lot of people (in addition to the majority who hated this law to begin with) who will be energized and sure to vote Republican in November, like small business owners who have to close their doors, employees that get layed off, etc, etc. 

*Chuckles* enjoy your "victory".

Friday, May 11, 2012

That Flushing Sound

The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not. ~ Thomas Jefferson

"Eduardo Saverin, the billionaire co- founder of Facebook, renounced his U.S. citizenship before an initial public offering that values the social network at as much as $96 billion, a move that may reduce his tax bill.

Facebook plans to raise as much as $11.8 billion through the IPO, the biggest in history for an Internet company. Saverin's stake is about 4 percent, according to the website Who Owns Facebook. At the high end of the IPO valuation, that would be worth about $3.84 billion. His holdings aren't listed in Facebook's regulatory filings. Saverin, 30, joins a growing number of people giving up U.S. citizenship, a move that can trim their tax liabilities in that country. The Brazilian-born resident of Singapore is one of several people who helped Mark Zuckerberg start Facebook in a Harvard University dorm and stand to reap billions of dollars after the world's largest social network holds its IPO.

"Eduardo recently found it more practical to become a resident of Singapore since he plans to live there for an indefinite period of time," said Tom Goodman, a spokesman for Saverin, in an e-mailed statement.

Saverin's name is on a list of people who chose to renounce citizenship as of April 30, published by the Internal Revenue Service. Saverin renounced his U.S. citizenship "around September" of last year, according to his spokesman.

Singapore doesn't have a capital gains tax. It does tax income earned in that nation, as well as "certain foreign-sourced income," according to a government website on tax policies there."

By Danielle Kucera, Sanat Vallikappen and Christine Harper  MSN Money Partner

     The upper class has finally had enough.  Mr. Saverin is but one of the forerunners of a mass migration of the upper class from this country. This is the end result of "war on the rich" by the likes of Barack Obama and his cronies in the Democratic Party and the Occupy movement. The left is determined to make the U.S. an earthly utopia and they intend to rob the wealthy blind to do it. They shout from the rooftops that the rich must be made to pay "their fair share" ... nevermind the fact that the top 5% pay over 53% of the taxes in this country (while they actually make about 30% of the income) or that nearly half (over 49%) of Americans pay ZERO income tax ... it's still not "fair" enough for the liberals and their have not allies. The truth is, it will never be "fair" enough for them ...  until we reach the liberal utopian ideal of "equality".    

    Well, that may come about much quicker than the left has bargained for.  One thing about rich people:  they have options.  Above all else, they're mobile.  When the rich finally get fed up with being harrangued and shaken down and decide that America is no longer the land of opportunity, they will simply pack up their billions (and their contributions to our society, such as creating Facebook) and leave.  We're starting to see the first waves of it now. 

    The leftists have already wrung the last drops of blood from middle class. Once they have driven out the rich there will be no one left to fund their utopian society (because good leftists never contribute something so gauche as money to the cause, only their oh so valuable time and verbal "support").  But in the end the left will have achieved their shining ideal of "equality".  We will all be equally poor.   

Tuesday, May 1, 2012

The Lesser Of Two Evils

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.   ~ Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776

    Well, for better or worse, the Republicans have finally settled upon Mitt Romney as their nominee.  The rest of the field has "suspended" their campaigns (a euphamism for dropping out) except, of course, Ron Paul, who never realistically had a prayer of being the nominee anyway.

    I don't favor Mr. Romney.  I don't like his campaign tactics, I don't like the people backing him, and I don't think he has the character to be a great President, nor do I believe he wants to be.  He and his staff flooded the airwaves in each successive primary state with negative ads against whomever was his nearest rival in the polls at the time, turning the primary process into a mud slinging match instead of a contest of ideas.  I'm sure the liberals watched all of this with great glee.

    Those who backed Romney are the same establishment Republicans who rammed such luminaries as Bob "It's My Turn" Dole and John "My Friends" McCain down our throats, and it is they whom I blame for the socialist that sits in the White House today.  You see, these people don't want any real change.  They really don't give a fig about America, and they have no values at all.  All they really care about is maintaining their status quo, their power, and their perks.  Oh, they will talk a good battle, especially when it comes to damning the Democrats, but the truth is there is very little difference between the insiders in one party and the insiders in the other, save that one group will move the meter a little to the right and the other a little to the left.  But they will never allow real reform such as term limits and real curbs on government power such as I've described in preceeding entries.  ... A pox on both of their houses.

    So, the Republican insiders have once again used money and political clout to foist upon us yet another middle of the road, straw in the wind politico who won't mess with their gravy train. Rest assured, Romney is one of the "club".  Oh yes, he tries to portray himself as a pious Mormon, and a "rock ribbed conservative", but this is all posturing and hypocracy. When push came to shove during the primaries, his pious Moromon "morals" went right out the window and he quickly turned to character assassination as his tool of choice.  He made his millions, in part, as a corporate raider, gobbling up companies and stripping them down for a profit ... in the meantime throwing the workers onto the unemployment line.  Gordon Gekko would be proud.   

    And conservative?  While he was Governor of Massachucets, when faced with a Democrat controlled legislature, he cut deals left and right, just one of the results being "Romneycare" which served as the blueprint for the 2700 page abomination of a health care bill.  I would say that Romney is barely one step to the right of Teddy Kennedy, but that would require him to at least have a set of guiding principles and the sad truth is he simply blows with the political wind and changes position accordingly.       

    Nevertheless, I will, in the end, pull the lever for Romney in November (albeit holding my nose), for three reasons: 

1) If the Supreme Court does not strike down Obamacare, our last hope is to have it repealed in Congress, but even the most rosy projections do not show Republicans gaining enough seats to override a veto;

2) Justice Scalia is 78, Justice Ginsburg is 81, Justice Kennedy will turn 78 this year, and Justice Breyer will turn 76. Whoever we elect as president in November is almost certainly going to choose at least one and probably several members of the Supreme Court;

3) Given a second term, Obama will continue with his expansion of government power to achieve his socialist aims, and before he is done even the pretense of freedom will be gone.

    Obama must go.  And as much as I loathe the Republican establishment, they are right about one thing: conservatives have no place to go.  So I will hold my nose and vote for Romney.

    As always, I invite comment on any of these ideas, whether positive or negative but I would ask that discussion be directed to the merits of the ideas rather than simple “emoting".

Monday, February 20, 2012

Deja Vu?

"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded." ~ Barak Obama, July 2, 2008 Colorado Springs, Colorado.  

The DAP or German Worker’s Party formed in Munich in January 1919 and was later renamed the NSDAP or Nazi Party.  In the early days of his rise to party leadership, Adolf Hitler surrounded himself with a group of ex-soldiers known which would later become known as the SA (Sturmabteilung or “Storm Troopers”).  On February 24, 1920, Hitler announced the party's Twenty-Five Point program at a mass meeting of some 2000 persons at the Hofbrauhaus.  Protesters tried to shout Hitler down, but his army friends, armed with rubber truncheons, ejected the dissenters. The basis for the SA had been formed.  The SA developed by organizing and formalizing the groups of ex-soldiers and beer hall brawlers who were used to protect gatherings of the Nazi Party from disruptions from Social Democrats and Communists and to intimidate its opponents.  Though they later fell from grace and were disbanded, Hitler’s original objective was to replace the German Army with an army of SA men, loyal only to him. 

Recently, President Obama has announced a plan to cut half a trillion dollars from the defense budget over the next ten years.  Coupled with the automatic cuts triggered by the failure of the so-called “Super Committee”, and the Defense Department is now facing a drastic downgrade in numbers and capabilities.  This is exactly what Obama planned all along.  Remember, in September 2008, then Senator Obama said, “It's my intention, if elected, to disarm America to the level of acceptance to our Middle East Brethren”.  I’m sure that our “Middle East Brethren” in Hamas and Al-Quaeda find our unilateral disarmament quite acceptable.   

But I believe that Obama’s ambitions go quite a bit further.  Even while he is dismantling the U.S. military, he is also attempting to circumvent the second amendment and disarm the citizenry.   For the past several years, the Obama Administration has been involved in negotiations in the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.  Proponents claim that the treaty “merely regulates the international sales of conventional arms” in an effort to “establish standards for the transfer of such arms between countries”.  However, opponents claim that the treaty will allow for the banning of gun ownership in the U.S., circumventing the Second Amendment.  At last count, 55 senators, including 10 Democrats, have signed letters to the president and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton saying they will oppose the treaty. 

          There is also the matter of the recent “Fast and Furious” scandal.  In Fast and Furious, ATF secretly encouraged gun dealers to sell to suspected traffickers for Mexican drug cartels to go after the "big fish." But ATF whistleblowers told CBS News and Congress it was a dangerous practice called "gunwalking," and it put thousands of weapons on the street. Many were used in violent crimes in Mexico. Two were found at the murder scene of a U.S. Border Patrol agent.

           ATF officials didn't intend to publicly disclose their own role in letting Mexican cartels obtain the weapons, but emails show they discussed using the sales, including sales encouraged by ATF, to justify a new gun regulation called "Demand Letter 3". That would require some U.S. gun shops to report the sale of multiple rifles or "long guns." Demand Letter 3 was so named because it would be the third ATF program demanding gun dealers report tracing information.

At this point, Obama’s agenda becomes pretty obvious.  While weakening the legitimate military to the point of irrelevance and simultaneously disarming the populace, he creates a paramilitary civilian force that reports directly to him to take control and fill the power vacum.  Remind anybody of 1920?   

Monday, February 13, 2012

Some Common Sense From Thomas Sowell

Thomas Sowell (born June 30, 1930) is an American economist, social
theorist, political philosopher, and author.   A National Humanities Medal
winner, he advocates laissez-faire economics and writes from a libertarian
perspective.  He is currently a Rose and Milton Friedman Senior Fellow on
Public Policy at the Hoover Institution at Stanford  University.  Sowell
was born in North Carolina, but grew up in Harlem,  New York.  He dropped
out of high school, and served in the  United States Marine Corps during
the Korean War.  He had received a bachelor's degree from Harvard
University in 1958 and a master's degree from Columbia  University in 1959.
  In 1968, he earned his doctorate degree in economics from the
University of  Chicago.  Dr. Sowell has served on the faculties of several
universities, including Cornell and University of California, Los Angeles,
and worked for "think tanks" such as the Urban Institute.  Since 1980 he has
worked at the Hoover Institution. He is the author of more than 30 books.
The following is written by Dr. Sowell, and I quote,
"The current  Occupy Wall Street movement is the best illustration to
date of what President Barack Obama's America looks like. It is an
America where the lawless, unaccomplished, ignorant and incompetent rule.
  It is an America where those who have sacrificed nothing pillage and
destroy the lives of those who have sacrificed greatly.
It is an America where history is rewritten to honor dictators,
murderers and thieves. It is an America where violence, racism, hatred,
class warfare and murder are all promoted as acceptable means of
overturning the American civil society.
"It is an America where humans have been degraded to the level of
animals: defecating in public, having sex in public, devoid of basic
hygiene. It is an America where the basic tenets of a civil society,
including faith, family, a free press and individual rights, have been
rejected.  It is an America where our founding documents have been
shredded and, with them, every person's guaranteed liberties.
It is an America where, ultimately, great suffering will come to the
American people, but the rulers like Obama, Michelle Obama, Harry Reid,
Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Joe Biden, Jesse Jackson, Louis
Farrakhan, liberal college professors, union bosses and other loyal
liberal/Communist Party members will live in opulent splendor.
It is the America that Obama and the Democratic Party have created with
the willing assistance of the American media,  Hollywood , unions,
universities, the Communist Party of America, the Black Panthers and
numerous anti-American foreign entities.
Barack Obama has brought more destruction upon this country in four
years than any other event in the history of our nation, but it is just the
beginning of what he and his comrades are capable of. The Occupy Wall
Street movement is just another step in their plan for the annihilation of  America.
Socialism, in general, has a record of failure so blatant that only an
intellectual could ignore or evade it."
~Thomas Sowell