Tuesday, January 31, 2012

What's In An Endorsement?

Strange, I have never put any stock in endorsements or cared who came out for which candidate. Until this election. It's different this time because I was truly perplexed about which candidate I would push the button for should this Pennsylvania girl actually get a chance to have a say in who becomes the next leader of the free world. So, I began looking at the two camps (sorry Santorum) and asking myself who I trusted, who had less of a gain from the endorsement and who I would align myself most with of the endorsers...

The lists of endorsements are lengthy and plump with no-name senators and businessmen but here is a sample of some of the higher profile personalities that have throw their opinions in the ring:



If there were two banquet rooms side by side, and these were the guest lists, which room would you rather be in?


Right Wing News polled Conservative Bloggers ahead of today's primary in Florida and everyone won something: Newt won the candidate that Conservatives would vote for, Santorum won most Conservative and Mitt won most electable. Oh, and Mitt also won the candidate Conservatives would least like to see as the nominee. (See the results here)

Monday, January 30, 2012

Romney or Obama? All the Same to Soros



"If it's between Obama and Romney, there isn't all that much difference except for the crowd that they bring with them." ~ George Soros (source)

The (Actual) State of the Union at a Glance


¿No Hablo Inglés? No problem! Run for City Council.

  • A would-be candidate in Arizona requests a spot on the ballot even though she doesn't know how to speak English?(source).


  • Occupy Oakland Destroys the City and Then Cry That The Police Were Mean to Them


  • More than 400 people at Occupy Oakland were arrested on charges ranging from failure to disperse to vandalism. "Mayor Jean Quan personally inspected damage caused by dozens of people who broke into City Hall. She said she wants a court order to keep Occupy protesters who have been arrested several times out of Oakland, which has been hit repeatedly by demonstrations that have cost the financially troubled city about $5 million." (source)


  • Ocuppy Wall Street squatters in NYC finally moved out of a home (owned by a struggling single father) that they had taken over and done tons of damage to (including knocking down walls). source)


  • OWS Squatters Take Over a Single Father's Home

  • "California bill seeks to limit detention of arrestees facing deportation
    Legislation would counter Secure Communities program by limiting local law enforcement's role in holding people for immigration authorities." (source)


  • 49 Year Prayers Removed From School Wall at Sophomore Atheist's Bidding

  • Recently in Rhode Island, a 16 year old Atheist teen forced her school to remove prayer from wall of her school auditorium that had hung there for 49 years. “It seemed like it was saying, every time I saw it, ‘You don’t belong here,’ Whined Jessica Ahlquist to a NYT reporter. (source)


  • SIX YEAR OLD BOY suspended for SEXUAL ASSAULT


  • "It started as schoolyard roughhousing during recess, with one boy’s hand allegedly touching the upper thigh, or perhaps the groin, of another. There were no reported witnesses, and it remains unclear if anyone complained, but the principal immediately suspended the student, placing the incident on the boy’s record as a case of “sexual assault.” The children involved were first graders — the purported assailant just 6." (source)


  • Taxpayers Must pay for Occupy D.C.

  • "America's taxpayers, already on the hook for watching over the Occupy movement's three-month seizure of Washington's downtown McPherson Square, are getting stuck with another bill to cover the police protection and port-a-potty rentals at today's Capitol protest." (source)
  • Caption It...

    Friday, January 27, 2012

    Rush's Unofficial Endorsement?

    Over the years, I've mentioned James Carville and Mary Matalin's book All's Fair: Love War and Running for President many times. If you haven't read it, you should.

    There was one part in particular that really made an impression on me and that was the reaction of the Bush Sr. and Clinton campaigns when they found out Ross Perot was running for President. They were all completely dismissive. They all knew him in real life. They all thought he was a loon. BUT, the American public only sees what the candidate's campaign wants them to see and the opponents can't very well say I think this person has a serious, un-medicated mental illness. So, as Perot's polls began to rise, so did the pure shock of all those that knew him.

    SO, now I think about this in each and every election. I always wish there was a way to talk to someone that knows the person well, but that doesn't have a vested interest in the outcome (does that person even exist?). Unfortunately, we'll probably only ever find out about these fatal foibles in a book after the fact.

    That being said, Rush Limbaugh knows everyone. And I imagine he hears everything. And, he's not in politics, so his only vested interest is free speech and a healthy free market in which to exercise that speech. Soooo, I place a tremendous amount of weight on what he says about the candidates given he is privy to all the things we never will be.

    Rush hasn't officially endorsed anyone, but he has sure found a way to slam Romney and defend Newt at every turn.

    And, for me, that speaks volumes.

    Nagging Wife Lazy Husband

    "You all are turning me into a nag!"

    I have been known to yell this at my family in abject frustration. The reason I stopped teaching was I don't enjoy being a disciplinarian and a nag, BUT...

    I live with 4 boys and I am a bit of a perfectionist and a control freak. People are always telling me that I do too much and that I need to delegate more. But, when I want something done, I want it done right then. If not, it's of no help to me to have someone else do it. I also want it done they way I would have done it.

    So, as I read this article this morning about NAGGING being a bigger marriage killer than adultery...I am wondering if the article should in fact say LAZINESS and INACTION are the biggest marriage killers. Saying NAGGING is placing the blame squarely on the shoulders of the woman. Now, if your woman is nagging at you to get her more Twinkies because she doesn't want to miss who the baby daddy on Maurie is...okay, I get it. But if your wife if making you dinner and making your living space a wonderful place to come home to and she has to ask you 20X to anything --that is not her nagging that is YOU being lazy.

    Luckily, The Man is very helpful and I am rarely forced to nag him (unless it's about his own health and making doctor's appointments, etc), but I have friends that are FORCED to nag constantly because husband grows roots on the couch the second he comes home. It's tiring to witness, I can't imagine having to live it...

    Caption It...

    Thursday, January 26, 2012

    Legislating Bullying?

    Bullying seems to be the one thing thing that can bring everyone together. My friends on the left and those on the right obediently 'repost to their statuses' all the Facebook admonishments against the dreaded bully. "If you want to put an end to bullying copy and paste this to your status."

    It seems my thoughts on bullying are SO un-PC. In many cases I place more blame on the parents of the child being bullied... (Now, I am talking about mean talk, mean facebook statuses and school yard teasing --not kids being physically assaulted)

    No one wants to talk about some really simple solutions (not a simple as a copy & Paste, but DIY nonetheless):

    Don't send your kid to school wearing floods, with greasy hair, with glasses that could kill small animals if the sun shone just right, with dirty clothes, with long dirty nails, with filmy unbrushed teeth. Tell your kid that picking his nose and putting the findings on his desk in 6th grade in unacceptable. Tell your kid that being annoying is well, annoying. Tell your kid that you're not going to be friends with everyone in life and if there's a person (or a few) that don't like you and tell you repeatedly to go away...go away. If your child does something that annoys you, imagine what people that don't love him like you do think. So tell your kid not to talk to fuzzies from his sweater in class or repeatedly poke the kid that sits next to him. Tell him not to be the weird kid. Or the kid that eats his boggies. Or the one that rambles on and on to the teacher and makes everyone late to lunch or recess. Or the one that tells on everyone for everything.

    Has bullying and teasing gotten that much worse than when we were young? Or have kids have gotten softer? Learning to deal with people that don't like you is a rite of passage. And an important one to get a grip of before you enter the real world.

    I also don't believe that anyone can MAKE someone else do something. If I say "kill yourself" to you 1,000 times a day and you kill yourself...it's not my fault. YOU did it. If I say "give me $1,000" 1,000 times a day and you DON'T do it, can I sue you then?

    Maybe it's the Libertarian in me that rails against legislating words. Maybe it's how I was raised. I didn't have parents that were all Nancy-pants about WORDS. If we yelled, "I hate you" to my mom we weren't lectured about how hurtful the word hate is. We were told, "Good, get it out and vent and get over it." There wasn't stuff we couldn't say. We could talk about anything. We still do. I think it's healthy. If you have a healthy self esteem, anyone can say whatever they want to you.

    Call me anything you dare, I know I'm awesome.

    Anyway, I started thinking about all this after I read this wonderfully snarky article this morning about Massachusetts attempting to legislate bullying --then if they were going to BLACK out bullying (ah! offensive) then WHITE out bullying (ah! offensive) and now ORANGE out bullying (cause that makes so much friggin' sense).

    "Official “No Name-Calling Day” in Massachusetts?

    What [CENSORED] came up with that brilliant idea?

    Massachusetts politicians, of course. In accordance with the ridiculous and over-reaching 2010 “anti-bullying” law, Gov. Deval Patrick has declared today “No Name-Calling Day” in schools, urging students to wear black as a sign of their commitment to “Black Out Bullying.”

    Does anyone really believe a politician can stop school kids from calling each other [EDITED]? Or [EDITED] or even [CURRENTLY BEING INVESTIGATED AS A HATE CRIME]?

    I got two automated phone calls Monday night reminding me to have my kids wear black,” says Lisa, an annoyed mom in Carver. “This kind of thing isn’t the governor’s job. And what happens if someone calls me a name — am I supposed to call the governor’s office and complain?”

    In Carver, they’ve got complaints. In Wayland, confusion. A student at Happy Hollow School told me that they’re under orders to wear orange, not black. “Our principal said wearing black would offend some people ,” he told me. “Why would an African-American governor tell kids to do something offensive to African-American students?”

    Good question. Principal Jim Lee says it’s all a big misunderstanding, that he told the kids they could choose between orange and black.

    But why orange? What — aren’t we worried about offending area pumpkin farmers? Or the local Oompa-Loompa community? What about Speaker John Boehner?

    Ah, but this is Massachusetts, where winning the title “State’s Biggest [REDACTED]” means bringing your A-game. Dighton Elementary School has announced that instead of the blackout, “students will wear white to ‘white out bullying,’ ”

    White. So instead of Goth Day, we’re going to dress kids for a Little League Klan rally. Just [REDACTED] brilliant." (BE sure to READ THE WHOLE ARTICLE HERE)

    What DId Ronald Reagan Say About Newt's Blueprint For the Future?



    (source)

    Wednesday, January 25, 2012

    Guest From the Left: J. Marquis

    Mitt Draws the Line



    I thought the most interesting part of the GOP debate last night was when Romney and Gingrich were talking about the tax on capital gains.

    Newt's proposing we charge no tax on capital gains. That means Mitt would have made 45 million bucks last year and paid no taxes on it.

    Even Mitt isn't that greedy...

    (You can read J. marquis daily at Major Conflict)

    Guest From the Right: free0352

    (...The views expressed here are those of the guest writer and do not reflect my views as I believe the exact opposite...I still blame you Republican "I'm not voting for McCain"ers for Obama being our President to begin with... -ALa)





    I endorse not voting.

    When you look past the fact that Newt Gingrich is a great speaker, as in Reagan great... you find a guy who has been so wrong, so often that he is totally unacceptable. This guy supports the economically suicidal Cap and Trade. He supports government forcing people to buy the insurance he thinks they need. He thinks Capitalism needs to be "reformed." He thinks the Executive branch should have power over a co-equal branch of government when he determines they aren't following the will of the American People. Never mind they are there precisely to do just that. Last but not least, this is a guy who supported every bail out the Federal Government has done in the last 30 years, and never mind if he was a lobbyist or not... he thought enough of Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac to work for them. One of his primary attacks against Romney, is Romney's experience in business... a blatant capitalization on anti-business sentiment more often heard on the left. Last, Newt supports expanding Big Government limiting numerous individual rights in the name of war... far more than George Bush's moderate approach ever dreamed of... just like Newt's favorite President FDR did. Newt Gingrich is a guy who can articulate the exact wrong ideas perfectly. He's a snake oil salesman.

    In light of this... I will never vote for him. Ever.

    Then you have Mitt Romney. This is a guy who has been for it before he was against it and against it before he was for it on every issue from abortion to gun control. He like Newt supports Cap and Trade, and not only supported government run health care but put it into place in his home state. Gingrich is right what he says about Mitt, he is a guy who has been running for President for six years who is so desperate he will say anything and do anything to be elected. If he's that dishonest to get the job, how honest do you think he'll be on the job? Yeah, not very.

    In light of this... I will never vote for him. Ever.

    Third we have Rick Santorum. Santorum is a Democrat who loves Jesus. He has supported such programs as Medicare Part D along with Newt and Romney. He supported bail outs, he voted for them. Beyond that, if his campaign is any indication he is not organized to present Obama with a meaningful challenge. Also in many ways he is the anti-Gingrich. Gingrich can say the wrong thing wonderfully while Santorum can say the right thing in such a boring monotone you'll end up sleeping through it. The best thing you can say about Santorum, is if you liked a George W. Bush Presidency you'll love a Santorum administration. I did not like the Big Government knee jerk of George Bush, and will not appreciate it coming from an equally bad public speaker.

    In light of this... I will never vote for him. Ever.

    Last is Ron Paul. Ron Paul is exactly right on every domestic issue. From monetary policy to limited government Ron has been a staunch and sometimes lone voice in the fight for limited government and individual freedom. I also support a majority of his foreign policy. I too often wonder why U.S. tax payers are forced to subsidize the defense of countries like Korea, Japan, and Germany even as their citizens ungratefully protest our presence there. Our military budget is quite bloated with pork, often to the determent of the actual fighting man. Too many fat cats eat up Defense funds while infantrymen can't get bullets to practice with their weapons. Someone is needed with the guts to take on the defense contractors and their allies in Congress, and Ron Paul certainly has that courage on that and every other issue. That must be why Paul has received more endorsements and campaign funds from active duty military than any other candidate in both the 2008 and so far this election. I can't think of anyone who has more integrity and consistency than Ron Paul. I don't always agree with him, but at least I can respect him.

    However.

    Where we disconnect is his total blindness to the threat posed by radical Islam. Ron Paul thinks you can reason with the likes of the Muslim Brotherhood and Iran's Mullahs. You cannot. Anyone who would be Commander in Chief has to understand this, and Paul does not.

    Therefore, I will not vote for him. Ever.

    So who does JGFP endorse in the Republican Primary? Answer: No one. In fact, I am not voting. The Republican Party has failed. It has failed to offer a viable alternative to Barack Obama. The Republican Party is a sham, it presents itself as a bastion of core beliefs and principles. It follows none of these. It is only concerned with gaining and holding power for it's own sake. It doesn't wish to change Washington D.C., but to control it and abuse it, or in the case of Paul lead it down a suicidal path that will lead ironically to world war. It is not only not reflective of my Libertarian views, but the views of it's Conservative rank and file.

    Unlike many who are dazzled by the great oratory of Newt Gingrich, JGFP is not. Obama too was a great speaker... and for that matter so was Adolph Hitler. It's not enough to win a debate or get a great sound bite, you have to be right on policy. Policy is what counts, not debate wins. JGFP will not be Jedi Mind Tricked by a speech.

    Further, I have become so dissatisfied with the Republican Party for it's continued failure and more so because it works tirelessly to crush any agents of governmental change- that I now hate it. It has consistently been against more Libertarian and Conservative movements such as the Tea Party, or anyone such as Paul who challenge their hypocrisy. Because it has not only failed but worse seeks to defeat those who would succeed, I am declaring war on the Republican Party. I will donate my money, and my time to see that it looses the 2012 election and every election there after until it is dead, dead, dead. It deserves no less.

    I predict many feel as I do, and on election day will choose the Democrat party, or stay home. The Republican Party will loose it's majority in the House of Representatives, loose ground in the Senate, and in the coming years liberal Supreme Court Justices nominated by Barack Obama will be confirmed by this majority. All because the Republican Party failed to respond to its voters and chose personal power of the good of the country.

    The argument is that the nation is truly in peril from the Socialist agenda pushed by the Democrats, therefore I should hold my nose for the good of the country. Well, choosing between Socialism Lite and full blown Progressivism is no choice at all. I reject both. My strategy is simple. The Democrats cannot be reformed. They are the Labor Party of America today, exactly mimicking their counterparts in Europe from whom they take their cues. European Libertarians for the past 50 years have "Held their noses" and voted consistently for the Socialism Lite... and in the end got radical Socialism by degree. I will not participate in that process. I hope the Republican Party is destroyed, and the sooner the better. The power gap in our two party system can then be filled by the 50% of Americans who do not want the crushing Socialism of the European Union or the Scandinavian countries. Make no mistake, that is the end result of both party platforms... or in the case of Ron Paul a smoldering ruin, world war or both. I have learned from Europe's history and so should Republicans. Abandon Ship Now.

    Only then can Washington D.C. be reformed and America "saved."

    (You can read Free daily at John Galt for President)

    Tuesday, January 24, 2012

    A Different Kind of Modest Proposal
    (Read This! It Isn't About Hockey!)



    Timmy Thomas, Will you marry me?

    Hypothetically of course, but oh man. Tim Thomas is about My Type as My Type can get.

    Hockey player and a goalie to boot. Tea Partier that put country and freedoms above party.

    Love!!!! <3

    Don't have a clue what I'm talking about? Tim Thomas, elite net minder for the Boston Bruins declined an invitation to the White House with his team yesterday for a photo op to be acknowledged by President Obama for winning the 2011 Stanley Cup.

    There was an Internet firestorm all day which eventually culminated in a statement by the man between the pipes himself:

    "I believe the Federal government has grown out of control, threatening the Rights, Liberties, and Property of the People," Thomas said in a written statement. "This is being done at the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial level. This is in direct opposition to the Constitution and the Founding Fathers' vision for the Federal government.

    "Because I believe this, today I exercised my right as a Free Citizen, and did not visit the White House. This was not about politics or party, as in my opinion both parties are responsible for the situation we are in as a country. This was about a choice I had to make as an INDIVIDUAL." (source)


    There was support from unlikely places and then there were such ridiculous statements I shudder to reprint them (but I will in hopes that TSN would think about terminating this goon):


    (source)

    KKK? REALLY? What a douche this guy is, Thomas doesn't want to be a hypocrite and make nice with a man he truly believes is destroying the country and he's a member of the KKK and names his kids in racist code?! What is wrong with these people? If this would have been some heralded athlete claiming to be anti-war and shunning Bush he would be exalted in the media. If this were the Bush White House being shunned Thomas would be credited with moral fortitude and the names of his children wouldn't be called into question.

    I have NEVER called for someone to be fired and have always condemned manufactured indignation, but I truly believe Dave Hodges should LOSE HIS JOB at TSN for this irresponsible and libelous tweet.

    Though I might personally agree with one of my favorite Philly Sportscasters (in that Thomas should have represented the team and just went as a sign of respect to the OFFICE of the PRESIDENT) -it is Tim Thomas' right to decline the invitation he might deem as an unwitting photographic endorsement without being called a racist. Full stop. (And that's a lot coming from a Flyers fan in defense of a Bruin).

    ...And, if Boston Fans read this Blog, they would have known about Thomas' political proclivities a year ago!

    Blonde Sagacity Official Endorsement

    (Now that I might actually have a say...)



    Newt Gingrich

    The Liberals hate him - Check
    The Democrats hate him - Check
    The Media hates him - Check
    The Republican Establishment hates him - Check

    "Newt is winning because he is the only candidate that can articulate Conservatism and is willing to take it to Obama." -Rush Limbaugh

    Rush went on to say that "electable" Mitt Romney is 9 for 25. Ouch.

    And that Newt is the only one that will call Obama the 'Welfare President" and that he employs Saul Alinsky tactics. That Mitt and the Republican establishment says Obama is "in over his head" and Conservatives know better. Obama is a brilliant man who is not in over his head.

    Fred Thompson endorsed Gingrich yesterday on Sean Hannity's show.

    Mitt's supporters are doing that unattractive frothing at the mouth that Libs do. Total turn off.

    I had already decided I would formally endorse Newt today (that and $5 will get him a Skinny Vanilla Latte at Starbucks). Then Rush's show yesterday, Palin's almost-endorsement and Thompson's endorsement validated my guy feeling.

    Monday, January 23, 2012

    Are We Moving Toward a Brokered Convention?



    "From its inception in 1980 through the election of 2008, the winner of the South Carolina Republican presidential primary has gone on to win the nomination." (source)

    But, I believe in each of these cases the candidate that won South Carolina also won either Iowa or New Hampshire.

    I don't know how many of you are on Twitter, but it has gotten SO contentious. I mean, enough so that I don't really want to go on anymore. I touched on this a little last week, but I really don't want Ann Coulter telling me how sub-par my intelligence is because I am supporting a different candidate than she is. (And I have to make note of the fact that the pro-Mitt people are the nastiest hands down...)

    It is possible to voice your opinion without giving the Dems ammunition...









    When was the last time there was a brokered convention in the Republican party --and how much damage is done to the nominee in that process? Are we headed there? Is all this in-fighting handing Obama his reelection on a silver platter? I'm not saying let's not debate on the merits, and I'm not saying that I'm offended by the negative campaigning when it's aimed at the Left...but this petty back and forth between people that are settling to begin with seems incredibly counter productive...

    Florida weighs in next Tuesday (and as of right now, Newt is currently in the lead.)

    Caption It...

    Friday, January 20, 2012

    Glenn Beck Joins Coulter & Drudge...

    ...on my s@#* list, that is.



    When I read that Glenn Beck was saying that he would vote for Ron Paul as a third party candidate if Newt Gingrich ends up being the nominee...I was reminded of the last incredibly stupid thing he said (that I now feel like I forgot to blog about in the Holiday whirlwind....)

    This is from back in December, but for anyone that might have missed it:

    Glenn Beck on Judge Napolitano's show:

    "I issued a challenge to the Tea Party members. The challenge is this: You read [Newt's] record, you read his words. Not just the happy parts like you read about Theodore Roosevelt. Look into his record. See what he believes. This man is a progressive. He knows he’s a progressive. He doesn’t have a problem with being a progressive.

    So if you’ve got a big government progressive [in Newt] or a big government progressive in Obama, one in Newt Gingrich, one in Obama, ask yourself this Tea Party. Is it about Obama’s race, because that’s what it appears to be to me. If you’re against him [Obama] but you’re for this guy [Newt], it must be about race. I mean, what else is it about Judge?

    It’s the policies that matter, it’s the policies that matter." (The Right Scoop)


    Really?

    I have been 100% against Mitt Romney since the last election cycle (why do the losers always run again? YOU LOST, sit down), and I don't get NASTY with fellow Conservatives that are for him now. I privately question their 'Conservativeness' but I'm not out there Tweeting snarkyness and calling my friends racist.

    These Right Wing personalities have become as toxic as the left this time around. What's different? Why so contentious this time?

    Is it because at the end of the day NO ONE is happy with any of the choices and the disappointment is getting to people?

    I was hoping Perry would rebound.

    In my opinion Santorum can't win. That's not saying his positions aren't attractive. He's just not dynamic enough.

    I could NEVER vote for someone with Paul's foreign policy delusions.

    I can't vote for Mitt.

    That leaves Newt. Who apparently holds a 6 pt. lead in South Carolina.

    But if you disagree with my conclusion, I won't Tweet nasty stuff about you or call you names...



    P.S. Is it just me that gets this vibe, or is Brian Ross kinda creepy...?

    Caption It...

    Thursday, January 19, 2012

    Drudge/Coulter VS. Gingrich

    Now word coming out that Newt's ex never said her interview could destroy him as Drudge is reporting... Is he really the one trying to destroy Newt?

    I guess we'll have to see the interview tonight and decide whether Drudge inflated the assumed impact... (It's rumored she's going to say that Newt wanted to be a 'Swinger' while they were married...)

    (Drudge's good friend) Anne Coulter is also for Mitt (which still shocks me as I've always considered her to the far right of me) and has been Tweeting some pretty snarky little things about Gingrich. Sarah Palin now on record for Newt in South Carolina. And now Perry is going to drop out as to not split Newt's vote (Kinda wish Santorum would do the same...)

    Very strange battle lines are being drawn.

    At least this hasn't been boring...

    Guest from the Right: Rebel Yid

    A Better Political Paradigm

    The frustration with our deficit and spending is that we focus on the legislature. Massive spending cuts must come from the top down. Elected representatives are judged by the spending they bring to their districts, not by their efforts to bring fiscal restraint to the process.

    A single representative can do little for the entire budget by exercising restraint. The other representatives will just take advantage and bring home a bigger piece of the pie to their districts. Kudos to Senator Rand Paul for returning $500,000 of funds allocated to his office and staff. It is a rarity, but a move that shows real leadership by example.

    Then Governor Mitch Daniels of Indiana changed the paradigm. After he wrestled the deficit to a surplus, and after he established a rainy day fund of at least 10% of the following year’s budget he established a precedent that the rest would be returned pro rata to the taxpayers.

    Once the first taxpayer rebate has been paid, no matter how menial, the expectation is that the budget will be responsibly handled. Now the tax payer has a reasonable and quick measurement of the work of their representatives. Instead of being bribed with monuments and museums and government bread and circuses, the taxpayers will benefit from responsible government.

    Of course the first obstacle is making the cuts necessary to restore fiscal sanity. Governor Daniels has provided that important element of leadership. Few others, especially our president, has been equal to the task.

    The focus of the administration to raise taxes on any segment is ineffective and counterproductive. It is also a distraction to avoid the more important and difficult task of making the more necessary and important cuts.

    (You can read Rebel Yid daily at Beyond Left & Right)

    Guest from the Left: J. Marquis



    I find it very odd that GOP strategist Frank Luntz goes on the air and tells his party what words to use during their campaigns. It's a bit like a football coach sending a play into the game and then advising a sideline reporter what it's going to be.

    (You can read J. Marquis daily at Major Conflict)

    Wednesday, January 18, 2012

    Newt Edges Mitt Out for the Win



    But, what surprised me even more than the fact that I didn't think anyone here would vote for Mitt and he and Newt were neck and neck in this poll of most of the day yesterday...is seeing Dennis Kucinich's wife on Fox and friends this morning. And she spoke, so she isn't drugged and there against her will...

    Tuesday, January 17, 2012

    Have You Changed Your Mind?


    Of the FIVE candidates left, who will YOU vote for?
    Newt Gingrich
    Rick Santorum
    Mitt Romney
    Rick Perry
    Ron Paul
      
    pollcode.com free polls 


    I didn't watch the South Carolina debate last night, but I heard that Newt cleaned up (dubbed Obama the 'Food Stamp President')...and that Romney seemed 'rattled.' It's also been said that Rick Perry did good, but unfortunately that might be too little too late at this point.

    Once again I have to reiterate that Pennsylvania's primary isn't until APRIL 24TH, so it really doesn't matter who my favorite is...as I have absolutely NO SAY in the person that will eventually have to be my choice for President. That's some serious BS right there...

    Caption It...

    Friday, January 13, 2012

    U.S. Marines Urinate on a DEAD Taliban Fighter

    GUEST POST by SOLOW



    ALa asked for it, so I'll give it. My opinion, that is.

    Apparently, this story surfaced on Wednesday and was being reported on by every major news outlet that could be found by early Thursday morning.

    I'm disgusted by it, quite literally. No, I'm not like a great many people who are shocked at what the Marines in question may or may not have done - I'm disgusted by the so-called Americans who say that THEY are disgusted/disgraced/embarrassed/whatever by what the Marines appear to have done. The first thing that went through my mind was whether or not they remember the stories of our soldiers (and civilians) being beheaded and subsequently mutilated after their death(s).

    I attended the funeral of Thomas Tucker, an Army soldier from Madras, one of 2 that were mutilated & then booby-trapped before they were found. Here's a quote from his Wikipedia page, "The director of the Iraqi defense military’s operation room Major General Abdul Aziz Mohammed told Reuters that the men were tortured and killed "in a barbaric way". The Mujahedeen Shura Council, a group linked to al Qaeda, said in their statement: "We announce the good news to our Islamic nation that God's will was executed and the two crusader animals we had in captivity were slaughtered"."

    And now the Muslim civil rights groups are saying that the "guilty (peeing) parties must be punished to the fullest extent of the law"???????? WTF kind of sense does that make? Why didn't they want those who performed the beheadings punished to the fullest extent? Have we forgotten how many people died on 9/11/01? Or how many other casualties have come from these Taliban or al Qaeda lunatics? We must have forgotten, or else we wouldn't be talking about how horrific it is for a Marine to piss on one of their dead.

    In closing, I just got done reading a GREAT book called Lone Survivor by Marcus Luttrell. I won't go into the details of the book (although I'd highly recommend it to anyone who hasn't read it) but there are several times that he references our ROE as being partly guilty of getting troops killed. That people are afraid to get prosecuted for what they do in a combat zone, therefore they hesitate at some of the worst possible moments. If you ask me, this is a pretty good example of hanging somebody up by a yardarm for what amounts to be a practical joke in the mind of a combat Marine.

    In this Jarhead's opinion, the only thing they did wrong was post the video on YouTube.

    Women Are Better Drivers





    Don't hate, it's official:

    Insurance Study: Women Are better drivers than men

    "Some 80 percent of all fatal and serious car crashes are caused by male drivers, the study says. It says women are 27 percent less likely than men to cause auto accidents. In 2007, statistics reveal men were involved in 6.1 million car accidents while women were involved in 4.4 million.

    Male drivers outnumber females 3 to 1 for DUI violations, according to the study."

    You're welcome ladies, I expect your dinner conversations to be much livelier tonight! :)

    Caption It...

    Thursday, January 12, 2012

    New Hampshire Exit Polls



    The New Hampshire exit polls' results are quite interesting (never in a million years would I ever thought I would be writing that...)

    The first thing one has to ask... Are there no Black people in New Hampshire? 99% White and 1% Other?

    Then, I think we have to acknowledge that whether Ron Paul is a foreign policy kook or not...he does garner the YOUNG vote the way the Democratic candidates do (46% of the 18-29 vote). I saw an interview with him the other day in which he was lamenting the fact that no Republican candidates past or present have ever approached him to ask how he does manage to do so well with the college crowd and I also have to wonder why.

    Another interesting thing (to me anyway) is that Huntsman's numbers shot up among folks that have a post graduate degree. I didn't say I knew what that meant. only that I found it interesting.

    People that made less than $30K went for Paul and those that make $200K or more for Romney.

    38% of the RON PAUL voters had NEVER voted in a REPUBLICAN primary.

    40% of the Huntsman's voters considered themselves Democrat and 25% of Ron Paul voters also considered themselves D's.

    33% of Romney voters and 31% of Paul voters think of themselves as "somewhat liberal."

    "On most political matters, so you consider yourself conservative/liberal?" And on this question, Romney got 38% of voters that consider themselves liberal on most political matters."

    Even on "On fiscal issues such as taxes and spending," 34% that consider themselves "liberal" voted for Romney.

    The two candidates getting the most votes from voters that OPPOSE the TEA PARTY movement? Huntsman (50%) and Romney (21%). More than Ron Paul's voters? Wow.

    And then we see how efficient the MSM is... 65% of those voting for Mitt Romney did so because "they believe he has the best chance of beating Barack Obama." The idea that it will be the person MOST LIKE the one that you want to replace will be the best to defeat him befuddles me...

    See the entire list here.

    Ummmmm....?

    Found this story over at Pat Dollard's site and though it does seem quite super market tabloid-y...this video looks like it was shot in an actual courtroom? The whole torrid tale is quite Vince Foster-ish...

    Wednesday, January 11, 2012

    Guest from the Right: Free0352

    SCORN = $$



    1) People like to be respected.
    2) People know that if they enter a respected profession they will personally enjoy more respect.
    3) This increases the supply of people in the respected profession, which in turn drives down their wages.

    So what happens to inequality when one profession becomes more respected? It depends. If people in the profession currently earn less than average, then giving them more respect increases inequality. But if people in the profession currently earn more than average, then giving then more respect actually decreases inequality.

    Now for the fun part. Imagine people become more egalitarian, to the point where they heap scorn on the rich and successful. What is the effect on inequality? By the previous logic, the effect is directly counter-productive. The more you scorn rich people, the more people you scare away from high-income professions. The more you scare away, the lower their supply. And the lower their supply, the higher their income!

    Lesson: If you really want a materially more equal society, stop beating up on the 1%. Do a complete 180. Smile upon them. Admire them. Praise them. Sing songs about how much good they do for the world. The direct result will be to raise their status. But the indirect result will be to pique the envy of status-conscious people, increasing the competition among the top 1%, and thereby moderating income inequality.

    On the other hand, if you want to increase material inequality, by all means heap scorn on the rich and successful. Try to fill them with guilt and self-loathing. The 1% who remain will find that living well is the best salve for their consciences.

    (You can read Free daily at John Galt for President)

    Guest from the Left: J. Marquis

    Ticking Time Bomb for the Environment



    Even if I was the kind of person who could care less about the environment, I would still be against the proposed XL Keystone pipeline. All it does is take oil from Canada to tankers in Texas and then on to other countries.

    (You can read J. Marquis daily at Major Conflict)

    Caption It...

    Tuesday, January 10, 2012

    Obama and the Middle Class


    Since taking office, Obama has gone on and on about how he wants to protect the middle class and how Republicans want to obliterate the middle class. My tax returns refute this talking point with 100% certainty.

    The only thing that has changed in our tax situation/deductions from Bush to Obama is we had a third child...theoretically, making our deductions greater.

    Last night, as I was plugging away through Turbo Tax Deluxe, I couldn't believe it when it began to show that we were going to OWE. We have never owed.

    This prompted a frantic look though the last 7 years of returns and on average we have a refund of $4000 - $6,000...until last year when we only got $2,600. A refund nonetheless.

    And now we owe.

    Same family, residence, deductions, job, etc. Unless The Man's job secretly changed our deduction status after all these years,, we owe with no apparent change in status.

    We went from an $5K refund during the BUSH YEARS to a owing during the OBAMA years. If we were poor we could have gotten everything we paid back, and if we were rich we could have deducted a ton of stuff we had purchased... But, it doesn't get any more middle class than us: An HVAC foreman, his stay-at-home wife and their three kids...

    So all the talking heads that claimed Republicans were liars to claim Obama was raising taxes on the middle class and just using election scare tactics...please come look through my returns and explain my tangible reality.

    Friday, January 06, 2012

    Déjà Vu?

    According to the email I was sent, this cartoon is from the 60's...but is equally apropos to today's Occupy Wall Street movement as it was to yesteryear's hippies. (Do you laugh every time you say 'movement' in relation to the OWSers, or am I just incredibly immature?) I can't find anything online to confirm or disprove this cartoon assertion:



    (H/T: Mom)

    Thursday, January 05, 2012

    Guest From the Right: Free0352

    What if... Ron Paul won?



    Certain Republican sources are claiming Democrats are infiltrating the Iowa Caucus to sabotage Republicans by voting for Ron Paul. If that is true, it may be working; as my above screen capture from Drudge Report shows.

    My point is... what if this works? For real.

    Hey, it happened before.

    Think about this, after a slight bump Barack Obama's numbers continue to crumble.

    Clearly Americans are fed up with Barack Obama. More importantly many of those Americans live in swing states. What if Paul's message resonates more than Democrats think it does?

    Polls show Americans are tiring of war, something Paul has been against from the start. More importantly, Americans trust Government the least since the percentage was tracked. Clearly, Ron Paul is the most anti-government candidate running on either side. Perhaps in an Obama/Paul match up... hatred for this President will carry the day and -gulp- Ron Paul never happen could be elected?

    Obama's numbers will bump up as he campaigns, and the all important economy for right now is on a post Christmas wave - electoral factors that help Obama. But Christmas is over and tax season is on it's way. The economy will start to tank out again over the Spring and Summer... and by October it will be positively awful; especially if problems in Europe get worse - which they likely will. No President since Truman has won with unemployment so high. People -even many Democrats- are disgusted with Obama. That is a fact.

    Perhaps some Democrats believe getting Ron Paul the Republican nomination will help give Obama an easy opponent. But what if their plan works too well? What if it backfires? Clearly a Ron Paul Presidency is a Progressive's worst nightmare. Wouldn't it be ever so funny if this blows up in their faces, and the message of isolationism, protectionism, and microscopic government that Ron Paul preaches takes hold and he actually wins? Not just the Republican nomination, but the Presidency. I'm sure Democrat Progressives would be many magnitudes more horrified by the prospect than Conservative Republicans.

    Funny, Ron Paul could have never won with the help of Republicans. All it could take however, are a few stupid Democrats. Wow. Does that mean Libertarians have our own Useful Idiots now?

    (You can read Free daily at John Galt for President)

    Guest from the Left: J. Marquis

    Rick Santorum Points To His Problem Area



    Well, the parade of currently popular GOP candidates marches on. Rick Santorum had good timing...it's just too bad he's so batshit crazy.

    (You can read J. Marquis daily at Major Conflict)

    Wednesday, January 04, 2012

    2012 Caucus Raucous

    Rick Santorum and his sweater vest? Wow. That came out of left right field, huh?



    So, I'm assuming that Perry and Bachmann will be dropping out (Bachmann has cancelled SC and scheduled a news conference for this morning). I think I was holding out throwing behind Newt while Perry was viable...

    Mitt's always just surviving (and now a McCain endorsement?). Paul? It seemed even Rand looked embarrassed that he had to be up there with him, didn't it?

    I hope Santorum stays on top for a bit actually. The MSM will devote all their resources to destroying him (the gays hate him and therefore the media will hate him) and that will give Newt a chance to get his organization together.


    So, yeah, if it's between Mitt, Newt, Rick and Ron...I'm going with Newt. (Though, I must concede that a couple of Mitt's sons are pretty handsome...)

    Tuesday, January 03, 2012

    2012 GOP Primary Schedule


    A point of annoyance every 4 years: The primary schedule.

    Here in Pennsylvania, we don't get to have a say until APRIL 24th. 35 states go before us. Even the Virgin Islands have a say before we do... I think it should go in order of the highest amount of taxes paid --then I imagine PA would be right up there at the top. Haven't past choices warranted the changing of the current schedule? Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina have already proved that they have no skill in choosing the candidate...need we bring up Dole and McCain...?

    I guess that's why I haven't felt any pressure to make my choice. I don't really have any say.

    Seriously though, the idea of tax priority aside, why wouldn't all the primaries be held on ONE DAY just like an election. Wouldn't this give us a real idea of who the people wanted?

    Here's the 2012 GOP Primary Schedule

    Case in point- even with all the "we should have let Hitler kill all the Jews because it wasn't our business" talk from Ron Paul...he's still an Iowa front runner. What is wrong with these people? Ron Paul makes Obama look like a hawk and he's a front runner?! I'm so very confused...

    Caption It...