Post #311 Happy Black Friday!

How was your Thanksgiving? I read an e-mail from the White House in Washington, D.C., written by our First Lady, Michelle Obama:

* * *

Good morning,

Every Thanksgiving, Barack sits down to call some of our troops and thank them for their service.

When he tells me about these conversations, it always reminds me of how blessed we are to live in a country where men and women will stand up to protect our freedoms and preserve our way of life. And whenever I've had the chance to meet with these heroes and their families, I've always walked away inspired by their courage and in awe of their strength.

I can't think of any better way to spend Thanksgiving than letting our service members know how grateful we are for everything that they do. So this year, we're making it easy to do just that.

We've partnered with the USO to create a program called Thanks From Everywhere. To get involved, simply visit JoiningForces.gov/Thanks and write a quick note that troops and veterans all over the world will be able to see.

Add your message to Thanks From Everywhere.

Your note will be added to a map with messages from people all over the country, showing our troops and their families just how much we appreciate their service and sacrifice.

If we all do our part, we'll help to build a wave of support to honor our veterans and their families -- and ensure they get the recognition they deserve this holiday season.

At a time when we are sitting down to share the blessings we've received this past year, please take a moment to be a part of this effort to thank America's heroes and their families.

Send a message to Thanks From Everywhere today:

http://www.JoiningForces.gov/Thanks

Happy Thanksgiving,

Michelle Obama

* * *

And how many "anti-Obama" e-mails did you "Fwd" today? How many did you verify? A misinformed electorate, that is what we need.... :p

Post #310 Missing Michelle Bachmann's 'Cajones,' Pt. II

Good Lord, woman.

"[I]f anyone will not work, neither should he eat."
-- Michelle Bachmann

As Bachmann knows -- or should know, the above quote from the Bible concerns Christians who will not work in anticipation of the Second Coming, not the poor. Indeed, there are over 300 verses in the Bible on how to deal with the poor -- not one verse says to let 'em starve!

Either Bachmann knows this -- and is (mis)using the Bible to advance her own agenda, or she is just stupid.

The campaign needs to end now BEFORE Bachmann says something else stupid, like, say, endorsing torture. Oh, wait.... :p

Post #309 Put Me In Charge . . .

I got this in e-mail, http://www.theveteransvoice.com/Put-me-in-charge.html -- tho it was wrong attributed to a 21 year old female who was concerned with the socialism she is being forced to live under:

* * *

Put me in charge of food stamps. I'd get rid of Lone Star cards; no cash for Ding Dongs or Ho Ho's, just money for 50-pound bags of rice and beans, blocks of cheese and all the powdered milk you can haul away. If you want steak and frozen pizza, then get a job.

Put me in charge of Medicaid. The first thing I'd do is to get women Norplant birth control implants or tubal ligations. Then, we'll test recipients for drugs, alcohol, and nicotine and document all tattoos and piercings. If you want to reproduce or use drugs, alcohol, smoke or get tats and piercings, then get a job.

Put me in charge of government housing. Ever live in a military barracks? You will maintain our property in a clean and good state of repair. Your "home" will be subject to inspections anytime and possessions will be inventoried. If you want a plasma TV or xBox 360, then get a job and your own place.

In addition, you will either present a check stub from a job each week or you will report to a "government" job. It may be cleaning the roadways of trash, painting and repairing public housing, whatever we find for you. We will sell your 22 inch rims and low profile tires and your blasting stereo and speakers and put that money toward the common good..

Before you write that I've violated someone's rights, realize that all of the above is voluntary. If you want our money, accept our rules.. Before you say that this would be "demeaning" and ruin their "self esteem," consider that it wasn't that long ago that taking someone else's money for doing absolutely nothing was demeaning and lowered self esteem.

If we are expected to pay for other people's mistakes we should at least attempt to make them learn from their bad choices. The current system rewards them for continuing to make bad choices.

* * *

And, of course, the e-mail included this little embellishment:

* * *

AND While you are on Govt subsistence, you no longer can VOTE! Yes, that is correct. For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You will voluntarily remove yourself from voting while you are receiving a Govt welfare check. If you want to vote, then get a job. Now, if you have the guts - PASS IT ON.

* * *

WOW. No wonder Hitler got elected. Hitler stirred up fear and resentment, too. The comments I have seen in support of this have been jaw-dropping....

We have man who wants to fight socialism by being in charge of socialist programs and making welfare recipients second-class citizens. It's like Jim Crow based on the size of your wallet.

I, too, would like to see welfare streamlined and better regulated -- there are too many abled-bodied people collecting benefits who don't deserve help. However, I also realize that most welfare recipients need help thro no fault of their own -- they did not make "bad choices."

Governments are instituted among men to secure the unalienable Rights to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Ho Ho's; our government is NOT supposed to deny rights to certain people. It is disheartening to see a 'conservative' who does not seem to understand the proper role of government and can come up with such ideas based on irrational fears and raging paranoia and other 'conservatives' cheering on.

I think many 'conservatives' would benefit from more Sunday School -- "Love thy neighbor," "Do unto others..."

Post #308 The Wage Of Jihad Is Death! Pt. II

Subject: Bin Laden's Liquor Store

http://www.politesociety.com/binladenliquors_ol10[1].swf

Post #307 Missing Michelle Bachmann's 'Cajones'

Well, not yet.

As of this writing, Michelle Bachman is still a Presidential candidate. But I do expect her to drop out soon -- it's inevitable. Mitt Romney and Rick Perry are way out in front in money -- the cool alternative vs. the hothead.

If Republicans are smart -- [rolleyes] -- and really want to win the White House in 2012, they'll rally around the cool alternative instead of the hothead. In one debate, Romney said of Obama: "He's a nice guy, but he's gotta go." -- a much more appealing sentiment to moderate voters than the hotheaded rhetoric coming from Perry, Cain, et al. To win the election of 2012, Republicans must not stir up Obama's base and drive away moderates -- which is exactly what they are doing.

But I'll miss Michelle Bachmann.

Now, don't get me wrong. With the possible exception of Rick Santorum among the Republican candidates, a President Michelle Bachmann would most scare the stuffing out of me. Her lack of knowledge and judgment is terrifying. It's not what you know; it's what you know to be 'right' that is actually 'wrong.' A lack of knowledge can be overcome if you have the judgment to know you need to study.

But at least she had the 'cajones' to run -- unlike other people who criticized President Obama's every move as tho they were a candidate themselves but eventually decided to instead fly around the country raising millions of dollars by stirring up fear and resentment.

If Michelle Bachmann needs to raise money to pay off her campaign debt, sell a T-shirt --"Michelle Bachmann: Bigger 'Cajones' Than Sarah Palin." I'd buy one. :p

Post #306 War Is Over!

Foreign policy -- you either get that right, or nothing else matters....

* * *

Good evening,

I'm writing to tell you that all US troops will return home from Iraq by the end of December. After nearly nine years, the American war in Iraq will end. Our servicemen and women will be with their families for the holidays.

The war in Iraq came with tremendous cost. More than a million Americans served in Iraq, and nearly 4,500 gave their lives in service to the rest of us. Today, as always, we honor these patriots.

When I came into office, I pledged to bring the war in Iraq to a responsible end. As Commander in Chief, I ended our combat mission last year and pledged to keep our commitment to remove all our troops by the end of 2011. To date, we've removed more than 100,000 troops from Iraq.

This is a significant moment in our history. For more information, including video, please visit WhiteHouse.gov/BringingTroopsHome.

The end of the war in Iraq reflects a larger trend. The wars of the past decade are drawing to a close.

As we have removed troops from Iraq, we have refocused our fight against al Qaeda and secured major victories in taking out its leadership -- including Osama bin Laden. And we've begun a transition in Afghanistan.

On the first day of my Administration, roughly 180,000 troops were deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan. By the end of this year that number will be cut in half, and we'll continue to draw it down.

As we welcome home our newest veterans, we'll enlist their talents in meeting our greatest challenges as a nation -- restoring our economic strength at home. Because after a decade of war, the nation that we need to build is our own.

Today the United States moves forward, from a position of strength.

Thank you,

President Barack Obama

Post #305 Free John Edwards! :p

Well, an out-of-control prosecutor has succeeded into turning the most hated man in North Carolina, John Edwards -- personally, I would like to see him hounded to his unmarked grave, into a noble victim. OK, maybe not so "noble" -- :p

George Holding, the U.S. attorney at the helm of the investigation, recently announced his plans to seek a congressional seat as a Republican in 2012 after the conclusion of the Edwards investigation. Holding contributed to the campaign of former Senator Lauch Faircloth in 1998, whom Edwards defeated for the U.S. Senate.

And now we have a 'witch hunt.'

Yes, it disgusts me to think that Edwards paid 'hush' money out of his campaign funds to cover up his affair with that "freak," Rielle Hunter -- to use Edwards' own word. But I think, too, what we have is a prosecutor who continued to abuse his governmental office until he got something to stick.

What stuck?

Um, $900,000 went directly to Rielle Hunter -- not to the Edwards campaign -- to cover living, medical and other expenses. Prosecutors argue the donations exceeded legal limits and were campaign contributions because they were meant to be used to hide his pregnant mistress from the public during his 2008 presidential run.

Even if the motivation is true -- and I think so, do not go there:

Edwards is the first person ever to be criminally prosecuted under the theory that such payments -- going from one person's private account to the private account of someone other than the candidate -- can be deemed a campaign contribution. There has been no such civil enforcement action, either.

Giving money to a candidate's pregnant mistress is not a campaign contribution. Maybe it should be.

The thing to do is to write that giving money to a candidate's pregnant mistress is a campaign contribution into the rulebook -- call it the 'Edwards' rule. But to allow a prosecutor to retroactively change the definitions invites more and more prosecutorial abuse -- and wastes of taxpayer money.

Edwards, a slimy sleezeball, played by the rules as they were written at the time. It's time to move on.

Post #304 Who Lost Continental Tire?

Continental Tire is a BIG international company -- based in Germany, I believe -- that was looking for a place in America to build a $500,000 plant with 1300 jobs, and we, Louisiana and our dim-witted cousins in South Carolina were the finalists. The plant is locating in South Carolina. End of story? No, North Carolina Republicans and Democrats are blaming each other over who 'lost' Continental Tire.

Democratic Governor Beverly Perdue's son works for the law firm that helped Continental Tire chose a site in North Carolina as one of the finalist sites -- a site that is owned by a Democratic state senator and political supporters of the Governor.

Republican Senate leader Phil Berger said the proposed deal with Continental "reeked with cronyism." "She had nothing to do with that site," Jim Bradshaw, who heads the Brunswick County Economic Development Commission -- they offered the site at the middle of the stink. The company had considered eight locations in North Carolina before focusing on the one in question, but there is no evidence it preferred that one because of political relationships -- as of today.

"I don't know if I have all the information to connect those dots," Berger backpedaled. A Republican having trouble with the dots -- imagine that! Hey, look up Bev's skirt, there might be some WMD up there.... :p

So, who lost Continental Tire?

Jochen Etzel, CEO of Continental Tire the Americas, said at a news conference, "South Carolina offered us the most compelling business climate that allows us to create these jobs with competitive pay and benefits for the people of this great state."

Um, well, what kind of "business climate" does South Carolina have? Well, they have an industrial park with the infrastructure built in, including a research facility associated with Clemson University -- two automotive firms have already located there. And South Carolina offered a $31 million bribe.

Continental Tire demanded $45 million from us. The Republicans balked.

Last month, in a letter to Governor Perdue, Berger raised objections to paying $45 million demanded by the company -- up front. "We all share your commitment to attracting jobs for North Carolina," he wrote, "but the negative impacts to North Carolina’s fund availability for education, overall fiscal stability and economic strength outweigh the speculated job creation in this instance." The Republicans offered $45 million spread out over 15 years.

From where I sit, the Republicans lost Continental Tire. But they should also be proud of not giving in to extortion. Only time will tell if this was a good decision of if, as Perdue said, that Berger concluded "the jobs were not worth it."

It seems obvious to me that North Carolina should invest in their own move-in ready industrial park and education, But the Republicans are too busy cutting thousands of education jobs here in North Carolina.

Or we need the NC JOB Fund -- the North Carolina Just Ol' Bribery Fund. Give it a try -- it worked for Rick Perry. :p

Post #303 Welfare In Florida : A Crime To Be Poor?

I got another "Fwd" e-mail -- "Hooray for Florida!!!!" -- and was asked to "Fwd" it if I agreed 100%. No, I do not agree 100% with that e-mail, and I refuse to engage in narrow-minded stereotyping to as a reason to violate the Constitution.

The e-mail said: "In signing the new law, Republican Gov. Rick Scott said, 'If Floridians want welfare, they better make sure they are drug-free.' Applicants who test positive for illicit substances won't be eligible for the funds for a year, or until they undergo treatment. Those who fail a second time would be banned from receiving funds for three years! Naturally, a few people are crying this is unconstitutional. How is this unconstitutional ?"

This policy is unconstitutional because it violates the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches. The Constitution says that the government may conduct searches based on the reasonable suspicion of a crime having been committed, and it is unreasonable to suspect a welfare recipient of a crime just because they receive welfare.

That is not just my opinion; it is an opinion held by the courts, including the Supreme Court -- Scalia and Thomas, you may have heard of 'em. :p

Yes, I am aware that 'peeing in a cup' is NOT a big deal, but that, too, has been ruled a 'search' by those same courts. You know, a search of your home computer is NOT a big deal, either -- how about we target those lazy Social Security recipients who scam the system?

The problem, I think, is that many people are mistakenly thinking the Bill Of Rights applies to private employers. Of course, the truth is a private employer can violate an employee's rights willy-nilly and order searches -- non-evasive searches will not raise a peep. Nor should they -- when conducted by a private employer.

The first rounds of testing in Florida showed that 96% of welfare recipients were clean -- a better average than the general public -- while 2%.were dirty and 2% refused to take the test. Maybe they should test college students... or politicians. :p

But people say -- as the e-mail stated: "It's completely legal that every other working [person has] to pass drug tests in order to get a J-O-B" -- FALSE: I've never taken a drug test to get a J-O-B and do not know anybody who has. Indeed, being a policeman is the only J-O-B around here that requires a drug test.

The e-mail began: "I-95 will be jammed for the next month or so........Druggies and deadbeats heading North out of Florida .."

A joke or an exaggeration is NOT funny when it leads to discriminatory policy -- such as, most child molesters are bald men, let's take all bald men downtown and give 'em a psychological test to prove they are OK. That's NOT funny if you're bald! :p

You want to help? Call the police 'tip line' and report a welfare recipient you know to be using drugs. Or tell the lawmakers to spend money on more police or rehab instead of targeting 'them' with drug tests. Or de-criminalize drugs.

Making sure 'they' are drug-free may or may not be a worthy goal, but try a different -- constitutional -- approach.

Post #302 The Wage Of Jihad Is Death!

:D

Post #301 "It's class warfare..."

... said the rich man.

Yes, it is.

After 30 years of being trickled on, We the People want our country back from the political elite who rob from the poor and give to the rich. The difference between the "haves" and the "have nots" is greater now than anytime since the Great Depression started. It's pretty obvious who has been waging 'war' on whom, and now is the time for We the People to fight back.

Yes, 'class warfare' is on.

Let me be clear. The wealth gap doesn't bother me; the way the gap has widened does -- gifts to the rich and corporations and policies that ensure their gifts remain gifts with no strings attached. We the People don't want to punish those who have achieved the American dream and those who have achieved the American dream don't want to punish their fellow citizens. Stop trying to divide us, Mr. 'Class Warfare' Republican!

President Barack Obama has proposed to make sure those making more than $1 million a year pay at least the same rate as middle-income taxpayers -- Obama will call it the "Buffett Rule." Billionaire Warren Buffett said that the wealthy are sometimes effectively taxed at a lower rate than others -- investment income is taxed at a lower rate than ordinary income.

Duh. Income is income. Who's responsible for saying investment income is not 'real' income?

As I researched as to why Republicans were so upset by this leveling of the playing field -- I mean, beside the obvious of an uppity black man doing the proposing, a recurring theme was that this would hurt small businesses. So, I found on the FOX Business 'site interviews with small business owners as to how the "Buffett Rule" would effect them. All of the interviewees said that it would not effect them because they did not make more than $1 million a year.

And then it dawned on me: A business that makes more than $1 million a year is not exactly "small."

But... but... but... class warfare is bad. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, obviously hit hard by the recession [rolleyes] -- he now ranks 12th on the list of wealthiest Senators up from 38th at the beginning of the recession in 2008, said:

"We can't let the people who've been hit hardest by this recession and who we need to create the jobs that will get us out of it foot the bill for the Democrats' two-year adventure in expanded government."

Republican populism at its best! Concern and compassion for those who still can pay for their food, who still can live in comfort and luxury, who aren't losing their jobs and health insurance in great numbers, and who aren't living paycheck to paycheck.

Of course, too, McConnell forgets his own role in that runaway train of expanded government.

Mr. McConnell, you are on the losing side. We the People will see to it.

Post #300 05/08/12: A Day Of Infamy

"All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression."
-- Thomas Jefferson

A quote from ol' TJ is a good place to start any political discussion....

On May 8, 2012, North Carolina will be exposed as having as many bigots as Alabama, Mississippi or -- gasp! -- South Carolina for, on that day, North Carolinians will vote to oppress a minority by an amendment to the North Carolina Constitution that says that marriage rights, privileges and responsibilities shall be confined to couples consisting of one man and one woman, and that the state shall not recognize any other domestic partnership among consenting adults.

So, North Carolina will join the rest of the Southeast in having an 'anti-gay marriage' amendment in their state Constitution. Now, I've always known that North Carolina was full of bigots, but I enjoyed having a 'good no-nonsense' reputation. But that will change on May 8.

Yep, the Republican-controlled Legislature of North Carolina, with unemployment creeping above 10% in North Carolina, decided to call a special session -- at a cost of $150,000 -- to put this important issue on the primary ballot when Republicans can vote for Rick Perry in the Presidential primary. And how does this make 'em good stewards of our money!?!

All in the name of protecting marriage. It seems to me that the best way to protect marriage would be to outlaw divorce -- tho Newt Gingrich who is on wife #3 might object!

This means that unmarried couples - gay or straight - will be constitutionally barred from numerous benefits automatically given to married couples. No right to visit a loved one in the hospital, no right to make medical decisions on behalf of their incapacitated partners, no inheritance rights shall be extended to a boyfriend or girlfriend. Indeed, a boyfriend or girlfriend cannot make funeral and burial decisions or have access to Social Security and government medical care. Indeed, the General Accounting Office listed over 1000 federal benefits to married couples.

That is why I oppose all marriages -- straight, gay, or the marriage to your dog or your daughters: The government has no interest in promoting unions of any kind -- thro tax breaks or any incentives.

It can be argued that, during the 19th century, the government had an interest in promoting unions and therefore children. The country needed to be populated, and government codifying the value of religious marriage was the way to go. But that changed sometime during the 20th century.

However, the government does have an interest in promoting the establishments of homes to raise children as this would be cheaper than government-financed orphanages. Therefore, gay couples who want to raise children should get government benefits for doing so.

Please note that my argument as of today has nothing to do with religion -- neither for nor against a religious definition of marriage. This amendment is an intrusion by the government into the church's domain. I believe in the separation of church and state....

Post #299 Foaming-At-The-Mouth Insanity: A Personal Story, Pt. II

Again, Vice President Joe Biden did NOT "out" SEAL Team 6 nor did he disclose any operational details.

But, boy, you never would have known that by trudging thro many right-wing blogs -- as I did. In search for the truth, I checked out quite a few blogs that advertised themselves as being for truth, justice and the American way.

Uh-oh, I have long believed that, if somebody threatens you with the truth, you are about to hear spin. Well, these blogs spared no kind of personal insult to Biden and President Barack Obama while ignoring Admiral Edward Winters, the one who "outed" SEAL Team 6. When the truth hurts, just ignore it....

A side note about the right-wing universe: The e-mail I originally got -- "Biden Outs SEAL Team 6" -- was posted word-for-word at numerous blogs without attribution. Or the e-mail was copied from a blog without attribution. It seems like the vast right-wing conspiracy is alive and well. :p

The "Foaming-At-The-Mouth Insanity" charge comes because many of these same blogs, after that helicopter carrying SEALs went down, accused Biden and Obama of plotting and planning to kill SEAL Team 6. The theory: The Bin Laden raid was a hoax -- Bin Laden was already dead, and Team 6 members needed to be silenced.

Good Lord. I need a shower. It's frightening to me that peeps with the ability to connect to the 'net talk such garbage. We really should require a license to use the information highway.

Post #298 Foaming-At-The Mouth Insanity: A Personal Story

I got a "Fwd" e-mail the other day -- "Biden Outs SEAL Team 6." It was full of the same ol' same ol' -- "that dirty stinkin' Obama is a crooked no-good Muslim from Kenya." And since Biden is part of the Obama administration -- blah, blah, blah....

But the actual charge turned out to be true -- well, kind of. The e-mail quoted Secretary of Defense Bob Gates: "Frankly, a week ago Sunday, in the Situation Room, we all agreed that we would not release any operational details from the effort to take out Bin Laden -- [May 1]. That all fell apart on Monday, the next day [May 2]."

I did some research. That quote is true. What happened on May 2?

The current chief of the Navy SEALS, Rear Admiral. Edward Winters, at Naval Special Warfare Command in California, sent an email on May 2 congratulating his forces and cautioning them to keep their mouths shut. "Be extremely careful about operational security. The fight is not over."

Well, the news media -- including FOX News -- reported SEAL Team 6 as being the guys who killed Bin Laden and cited Winters' e-mail as government conformation. Let us point out that FOX News and other media had been speculating that it was the SEALs, but now the cat was out of the bag.

The next day, May 3, Vice President Joe Biden spoke at Washington's Ritz Carlton Hotel at a dinner event to mark the 50th anniversary of the Atlantic Council. "Let me briefly acknowledge tonight's distinguished honorees," he said. "Admiral James Stavridis is the real deal. He can tell you more about and understands the incredible, the phenomenal, the just almost unbelievable capacity of his Navy SEALs and what they did last Sunday."

So, Biden did NOT "out" SEAL Team 6 nor did he disclose any operational details.

The "Foaming-At-The-Mouth Insanity" comes next.

Post #297 9/04: A Day Of Infamy

President George W. Bush's Cabinet held its first meeting on the threat of Al-Qaeda on September 04, 2001. One week later, Bush got the word of the 9/11 attacks, stared like a deer caught in the headlights and pondered 'who could have done this?' Really? No idea, huh?

The CIA had been tracking Bin Laden for five years, and Bush had received 40 Presidential Daily Briefings concerning Bin Laden, and Bush was taken by surprise. [rolleyes]

I do not blame Bush for not connecting the dots; I do blame Bush for ignoring the dots. He did NOTHING -- no warnings, no follow-up questions. That's why I say, George W. Bush was derelict in his duty -- he willing refused to perform his duties of keeping Americans safe -- and should have been impeached.

I realize "impeachment" is a political trial, and, maybe, the outcome would have been to have left him in office -- a la Clinton. But, if his incompetence had of been laid out in a trial, maybe, we would not still be in Afghanistan and Iraq. * sigh *

Post #292 GWB's Pearl Harbor Speech

President George W. Bush strutted to the podium before Congress on December 8, 1941, and said:

Mr. Vice President, Mr. Speaker, Members of the Senate, and of the House of Representatives:

Yesterday, December 7th, 1941 -- a date which will live in infamy -- the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the darn tootin' Empire of Japan.

Remember the character of the onslaught against us, daggumit.

No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory.

I believe that I interpret the will of the Congress and of the people when I assert that we will not only defend ourselves to the uttermost, but will make it very certain that this form of treachery shall never again endanger us.

Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory, and our interests are in grave danger, gosh darnit.

With confidence in our armed forces, with the unbounding determination of our people, we will gain the inevitable triumph -- so help me God.

I declare that since the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Japan on Sunday, December 7th, 1941, a state of war has existed between the United States and the Japanese empire.

Here is what we gonna do:

I'm not gonna ask Congress to declare war against Japan, but I will ask Congress for an authorization to use military force against Mexico.

The leader of Mexico, Don Juan, is bad man. He invaded a neighbor ten years ago, and he tried to kill my Daddy. Also, British intelligence indicates that Don Juan is building submarine bases for use by the Germans.

See, it's as easy as 1 - 2 - 3. Get rid of Don Juan: Mexico falls, then Germany falls, finally Japan falls. That will teach 'em!

Now, y'all have a Merry Christmas. Go shopping. And God bless America!

Post #196 He Answered Duty's Call

Meet a Hero: Wounded in Iraq

Michael Dinkel

After the towers fell in the terror attacks on 9/11/01, Michael Dinkel dropped all other plans. He chose to answer duty's call.

He fought for you and me in Iraq. He gave his leg for our country!

That's the kind of sacrifice you salute each time you choose to help heroes through the Disabled American Veterans (DAV).

Michael was wounded while coming to the aid of troops hit by a roadside bomb. Insurgents had planted a second bomb in the path they thought a rescue team might take. They were right.

A violent blast destroyed Michael's right leg, broke his back, mangled his face, and knocked out four of his teeth!

But because you chose to be there through your fervent support of the leader in service to disabled veterans, Michael isn't looking back.

Michael feels no self-pity, no regrets. He's just grateful for your help.

Keeping Patriots Alive in Our Hearts!

Arthur H. Wilson, National Adjutant
Disabled American Veterans

DISABLED AMERICAN VETERANS

OUR MISSION:
Since its founding more than 90 years ago, Disabled American Veterans has
been dedicated to a single purpose: Building Better Lives for America's
Disabled Veterans and Their Families.

P.O. Box 14301 | Cincinnati, OH 45250-0301

Please thank a disabled veteran for their sacrifice and service!

Post #195 Rick Perry -- The Real Deal?

According to Bob Harris, a North Carolina political operative and a Michele Bachmann supporter, Rick Perry is a Republican LBJ, a career politician who's enriched himself and his friends through government connections. Uh-oh, does that mean he has been slurping at the trough of BIG government while politicking against that same BIG government?

Rick Perry accepted over $80,000 in farm subsidies over an eleven-year period while he was a Texas Legislator and Texas Agriculture Commissioner until he sold his farm in 1998 -- including several years in which he was paid NOT to farm. Yes, Perry received government funds to NOT work -- isn't that kind of like welfare!?! :p

Rick Perry controls the Texas Enterprise Fund and the Texas Emerging Technology Fund.

The Enterprise Fund has dispensed $435 million in grants to businesses since 2003. More than a quarter of the companies that have received grants from the Enterprise Fund or their chief executives made contributions to either Perry's campaign dating back to 2001 or to the Republican Governors Association since 2008 when Perry became its chairman.

The Technology Fund has doled out nearly $200 million to companies since 2005. This, too, operates on a similar pay-to-play scheme -- or, as I saw one commentator colorfully describe it, "incest."

1. I can hardly believe that Texans feel these gifts are an appropriate use of taxpayer money -- how does this sit with the idea that governments are instituted among men to secure unalienable rights for the people? Whatever happened to the idea that businesses would succeed or fail based on their own merits?

2. I can hardly believe that Texans feel the governor should be in control of gifts from Texas. Who is benefiting here? Mr. Average Texan or Rick Perry who, as Governor, has raised more than $100 million in campaign funds? That is, for every five dollars that Texas gave out in gifts, one dollar goes into Perry's pocket.

Yeah, but is Rick Perry the real deal? Well, he is a real politician alright....

P.S.: "We are fed up with bailout after bailout and stimulus plan after stimulus plan, each one of which tosses principle out the window along with taxpayer money."

Sound familiar, Rick? It's from your own book "Fed Up" -- written BEFORE you balanced the last two state budgets using stimulus money.

And, of course, stimulus money -- $10 million -- is being used to repair the Governor's mansion while the Texan taxpayer is paying nearly $10,000 a month for Perry to live in a three-story mansion with a heated pool, cabana and guest house.

I saw a commentator defending Perry's extravagance by snidely asking "What is he supposed to do? Live in a trailer?" Yes, I thought, show some leadership -- set an example.

Post #194 Racism 101, Pt. II

Nothing stirs up like 'racism.' Gimme another chance -- and please note that I am using 'black' as a shorthand for 'minority' (in other words, any minority faces these same issues):

The question remains: "Why is it that only whites can be racists??"

Blacks do not have the power to enforce their prejudices in America.

Of course, it's also true:

Blacks do have the power to enforce their prejudices in Kenya.

Now, I am HAPPY TO BE WHITE with the privileges associated with being a member of the dominant group in society. America is a WHITE society, most of the power and wealth are in white hands. Whites' wealth pulls far ahead of minorities - http://t.co/8PoFZfX The redistribution of wealth IS happening... in whites' favor. HAPPY TO BE WHITE! :p

I have the economic, political, social power in this society. If I use a racial slur, it is offensive -- I have the power to threaten a black's life, liberty and pursuit of happiness; a racial slur against me means nothing -- a black has no power to threaten my life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

We have eliminated the direct political expressions of racism. Until the mid-'60s, all sorts of laws and rules were enforced to support the prejudices of whites -- blacks had to ride in the back of the bus, for example. In contrast, today, blacks do not have the power -- even with a black living in the White House -- to make Glenn Beck use a 'whites only' entrance to the White House. :p

Now, political expressions of racism are sneaky. Today, you may oppose public school funding -- which may or may not be related to prejudices, but surely blacks will bear the brunt. That is what is known as "institutional racism" -- and, too often, is just a front for prejudices. Think about that the next time you are asked to sign a petition for 'neighborhood schools.'

Take the O.J. Simpson case, for example, in which blacks were able to enforce their prejudices and return a "not guilty" verdict. Why were blacks in that position? Because the WHITE criminal justice system put 'em there -- NEVER again.... :p

Of course, socially, things seem to be improving -- well, maybe not. But the economy is firmly in white hands!

And that is why it is that only whites can be racists. Racism = prejudice + power. A white who uses a racial slur is a racist; a black who uses a racial slur is a fool. There is your answer. NOT saying that "Racism = prejudice + power" is 'correct' or the only definition, but it does answer "Why is it that only whites can be racists??"

Of course, I am speaking collectively. Individually, I laugh at Billy Bubba Jim Bob who cries in his beer every night because somebody called him a "Honkey." :p

Of course, too, I am not laughing at the examples sent to me of blacks acting on their prejudices. I hate that a black kid kicked a white kid in the head because of the prejudice that all whites have a snotty tude. That black kid should have the book thrown at 'im! Being racial? Yes. Being racist? No. There is a difference -- what this Post is about.

Post #193 Racism 101

Nothing stirs up like 'racism.' Gimme another chance:

The question remains: "Why is it that only whites can be racists??"

The answer: Blacks do not have the institutional power to enforce their prejudices in America.

Of course, it's also true:

Blacks do have the institutional power to enforce their prejudices in Kenya.

I am HAPPY TO BE WHITE with the privileges associated with being a member of the dominant group in society. America is a WHITE society, most of the power and wealth are in white hands. Whites' wealth pulls far ahead of minorities - http://t.co/8PoFZfX The redistribution of wealth IS happening... in whites' favor. HAPPY TO BE WHITE! :p

If I use a racial slur, it is offensive -- I have the power to threaten a minority's life, liberty and pursuit of happiness; a racial slur against me means nothing -- a minority has no power to threaten my life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

Until the mid-'60s, all sorts of laws and rules were enforced to support the prejudices of whites -- blacks had to ride in the back of the bus, for example. Blacks do not have the power -- even with a black living in the White House -- to make Glenn Beck use a 'whites only' entrance to the White House. :p

Today, you may oppose public school funding -- which may or may not be related to prejudices, but surely blacks will bear the brunt. That is what is known as 'institutional racism' -- and, too often, is just a front for prejudices. Think about that the next time you are asked to sign a petition for 'neighborhood schools.'

Take the O.J. Simpson case, for example, in which blacks were able to enforce their prejudices and return a "not guilty' verdict. Why were blacks in that position? Because the WHITE criminal justice system put 'em there -- NEVER again.... :p

And that is why it is that only whites can be racists. Racism = negative prejudice + power. A white who uses a racial slur is a racist; a black who uses a racial slur is a fool. There is your answer.

Of course, I am speaking collectively. Individually, I laugh at Billy Bubba Jim Bob who cries in his beer every night because somebody called him a "Honkey." :p

Of course, too, I am not laughing at the examples sent to me of blacks acting on their prejudices. Being racial? Yes. Being racist? No. There is a difference -- what this Post is about.