To the NYC Mosque Supporters

Dear Liberals:

There has been a lot of uproar lately over a proposed mosque to be built near the sacred ground forever known as Ground Zero. You know, the same place where over 3,000 innocent people were burned, crushed, and jumped to a certain death after 19 jihadists decided to declare war on Western civilization. While most sensible people see this as an insult to what those who died on September 11, 2001, there are those of you in the 'Kumbaya' crowd who seem hell bent on making sure that the mosque is built in the name of 'tolerance'.

Do you not realize exactly what this would do to the memory of those who died? Or do you not care? Yes, our Constitution does allow freedom of religion (not freedom FROM religion). No one is saying that a mosque cannot be built anywhere else. But why build it at Ground Zero to serve as a sort of memorial to those who took so many lives because of the way we Americans live? It is the same twisted logic that has islamic symbolism being built into the Flight 93 memorial here in Pennsylvania.

You speak of tolerance and acceptance. Americans have always been accepting and tolerant of those who come to this country to become citizens and enjoy the freedoms granted to us by God. Those who perpetrated the horrific acts on 9/11 were not tolerant or accepting of the principles this country was founded on. Why is it that people who have a problem with the location of this particular mosque are labeled as intolerant? Just as you say you have the right to erect this mosque at Ground Zero, we who disagree with the idea are just as free to voice our opinions against it. The Constitution does not include the right to not be offended by an opposing view.

Here's a suggestion and maybe some food for thought while you're sipping your lattes or bowing five times a day: How about opening up the cities of Mecca and Medina to us 'infidels' (as we non-muslims are called)? From my understanding, only muslims are allowed within these cities, so why not show us how tolerant and truly peace-loving muslims are by doing this? After all, the left is constantly saying just how peaceful and tolerant islam is, so why not put your money (dollars and riyals) where your mouth is? Open up the damned cities to everyone.

Should those of you who support the idea of this mosque win out and the mosque is built on sacred ground, rest assured that it will be just another log thrown on the fire that was ignited in the hearts of those who love this country on 9/11/2001. And we will NEVER forget all the affronts made to desecrate the memory of the innocents since...including this one.

May God continue to bless this great nation and all who love the freedom it affords.

B & G

The Liberal Bill of Rights

My brain works in crazy ways. While trying to think of a post worthy of posting, I asked myself one question: What if the liberals had written the Bill of Rights within the Constitution? Bingo! My dilemma was solved.

The Liberal Bill of Rights

Amendment I -- Congress shall make no law respecting religion, or encouraging the free exercise thereof; or advocating the freedom of speech (unless you agree with us) , or of the press (We'll handle the press.); or infringe on the right of the people peaceably to assemble (unless you're pro-life).

Amendment II -- A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not exist.

Amendment III -- No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but eminent domain will be used to change ownership to the government.

Amendment IV -- The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not exist.

Amendment V -- No person shall be held to answer for any capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation to be determined by the government.

Amendment VI -- In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense. This is only applies to those of us who agree with our agenda. All others will be pursued by the government to the fullest extent.

Amendment VII -- In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. Unless, of course, we feel you're guilty. Then it's your duty to prove your innocence.

Amendment VIII -- Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. Said punishment shall be determined by those in government. We know better than you what just punishment is.

Amendment IX -- The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people, dependent upon whether the individual believes in the power of the government to do the right thing.

Amendment X -- The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution shall be allotted to to the proper authorities. Federal government shall be the last arbiter and interpreter of those rights.


Thank you, Founding Fathers, for a Constitution based on a moral, ethical, and God-given principles. Yinz did great!

What's the Worst That Could Happen?

Now that we are officially in the beginnings of an election year, the Democrats are hyperventilating over abysmal poll numbers. Approval ratings for their beloved messiah have tanked, and many Democratic politicians are in danger of losing their jobs as the American people continue to voice their concerns over the slow encroachment of government into their personal lives.

In November, all seats of the House of Representatives and approximately half of the Senate seats are up for grabs. Pelosi, Reid, Specter, and many other Dems are going to spend the majority of their time until then interviewing for their jobs in the media, trying to convince Americans that they are best-suited for the position.

The question of the day for Americans who may be mulling over their political ideologies is simple. What's the worst that can happen if we elect a fiscally-conservative, constitutionally-savvy Congress? Let's see...

1. The ultimate death of socialized medicine in this country
2. Americans keeping more of their own money in the form of tax cuts or, possibly, tax cuts for businesses (large and small) that eventually help individuals prosper. Reagan and JFK were both supply-siders.
3. A movement back to the ideals set forth in the Constitution by the Founding Fathers
4. A push to secure this nation and its borders. Gee...we didn't hear of underwear bombers between 2001 and 2008. Wonder why?
5. A sense of personal responsibility and personal liberty
6. A government whose representatives remember just who is in charge. WE THE PEOPLE!
7. Returning to a time when it wasn't politically incorrect to invoke the name of Jesus Christ or say that America is the greatest nation in the history of mankind
8. A renewed respect for our fighting forces and the sacrifices they make
9. A sense of charity among the private sector to care for the elderly, disabled, and needy. That is NOT the job of those in government.
10. Blessing of this country from God. "Blessed is the Nation Whose God is the Lord." -- Psalm 33:12

Consider all the events that have transpired over the past year. Now ask yourself "How many of these ten items have been brought to fruition by the current administration?" [B & G Warning: Don't blow a blood vessel trying to think of one let alone ten.]

Now that it's been pondered, I ask one last question: What's the worst that can happen?

Us vs. Them

I saw this great post yesterday over at Right Guy's site. Stop over and take some time to read his stuff. It's worth it.

The Difference Between Us and Them

If a conservative doesn't like guns - they don't buy one.

If a liberal doesn’t like guns - then no one should have one.

If a conservative is a vegetarian - they don’t eat meat.

If a liberal is - they want to ban all meat products for everyone.

If a conservative sees a foreign threat - he thinks about how to defeat his enemy.

A liberal wonders how to surrender gracefully and still look good.

If a conservative is homosexual - they try to not force it on others.

If a liberal is homosexual - they loudly demand legislated respect.

If a minority is conservative - they see themselves as independently successful.

Their liberal counterparts see themselves as victims in need of government protection.

If a conservative is down-and-out - he thinks about how to better his situation.

A liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.

If a conservative doesn’t like a talk show host - he switches channels.

Liberals demand that those they don’t like be shut down.

If a conservative is a non-believer - he doesn’t go to church.

A liberal wants all churches to be silenced.

If a conservative decides he needs health care - he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.

A liberal demands that his neighbors pay for his.

Why Libs Hate America

This is an excellent guest post from Sharky at LandShark 5150. Thanks to Sharky for allowing me to repost this!

The reason the American left despises this country with the level of hatred – and you libs know I’m telling the truth; you know you despise this land. You hate the fact that what little shreds of this Constitution that we have here that are still preventing mass marches toward socialism. You hate the fact that those shreds are left. Just admit. We’ll all get along better once all our opinions are truthful and out in the open here. This is why they hate us so much, speaking of our domestic enemies here.

This is why they hate this country so vehemently and oppose it so vociferously, with such great consistency. It’s because it exists as the last bastion of freedom and liberty around the world. That’s why.

And as long as we exist, well, then there’s hope for freedom. And as long as we exist, well, then there could be dark days ahead for those that sit around blogging in their pajamas, for those that sit around doing nothing for a living other than attending protests and burning American flags, for those that do nothing for a living other sitting there trying to concoct new and mo’ better ways for them to skim off of the hard work and labor of the rest of us, via their 501(c)(3) non-profit organizations and what have you. And the list goes on and on and on. As long as we exist as the beacon of hope, as Bill Bennett calls it, “America, the last best hope.” Or as Ronald Reagan called it.

As long as we are here, well, then we are a threat to what they seek. And what they seek is your servitude, sir and madam. What they seek is you to be told how you will live your life, you to be told how you’ll recycle, you to be told how many kids you’ll have and when you’ll have them, you to be told what you’ll eat, you to be told what your kids will learn in school, you to be told what you will do with your children, whether or not you will discipline them as you see fit and according to your religious conviction.

As long as we have those little shreds of freedom and liberty left, they’ll never quit, until Atlas has shrugged as he did in Ayn Rand’s book. That’s why they hate us, and that’s why – give them credit. They are committed to the idea of destruction.

We should be equally committed to the idea of preventing that destruction and preserving, thus, the term “conservative,” and conserving what our fore-fathers bequeathed to us. That’s why we’re here. That’s why we oppose them. And you’re not going to make any headway with these people by treating them civilly. I fundamentally, categorically disagree with people that think that these people can be beaten in debates. All they have are talking points to debate. There’s no rational, philosophical or ideological point of view that they bring to the debating table. It’s all invective. It’s all innuendo.

You can’t beat these people like that. And that’s the challenge.

So, why let them get away with it? They don’t let you get away with it. They’re perfectly happy when you lose and when the U.S. loses, and when freedom and liberty lose and are confiscated from the people. It’s a good day for them when they are empowered to do this or that or the other.

As a matter of fact, I would be honored if you people, when you have time, to get back what was bequeathed to us, that which is our birth-right here.

Today’s Republicans are wrong, and I can talk myself blue in the face. It’s not going to change the outcome of this election. But, we can begin the process of getting the party back, and our movement back, on firm intellectual and ideological footing where it should be.

Now, the reason I bring this up is because I stumbled upon a couple of – – some things that I didn’t know. I had nary a clue. And I’m just so tickled to have learned this, and excited about it, I wanted to pass it on to you.

The only notes of what happened behind closed doors from May the 17th, or May the 11th, rather, to September the 17th, what became known as the Philadelphia Convention, which yielded The Constitution of the United States which we have today. The only notes that survive are the writings of James Madison in his personal diary. And people have always – people like me, I have always wondered why. Were they destroyed? What happened to them?

Well, now that I’ve done the research, I know why...

...On the first day, one of the delegates proposed that a secretary be appointed and that the secretary then go out and hire some transcriptionists to transcribe everything, to take minutes, to take notes, and enter them into the official record.

Well, there was a vote held on this. And as James Madison records, the vote yielded this:

Nomina contra decenta.

That is Latin for “without objection.” It failed without objection, unanimous.

And the reason given, the reason that they gave for not taking notes as they were drafting The Constitution was this, which is what I found funny, because they didn’t want – the delegates – didn’t want the proceedings recorded so that, if The Constitution didn’t work – and they didn’t even know it was called a constitution on that day; they just knew they were working on a new government – that if the new government didn’t, if it was tried and it failed, and failed miserably, that no one could go back and get the notes and say, “Well, you see it didn’t work because that jackass, he’s the one that proposed this stupid idea, and that’s why we all died.” So that there would no blame to be passed around.

I found that the more I learned the founding the more you see the sheer brilliance there and the foresight that we’ll never know who proposed this. We have some ideas on certain things. But I just thought that that was just one of the coolest things and the most illuminating things that I have learned in a long time.

And that’s why there are no notes, other than what James Madison surreptitiously transcribed in his personal diary, which, you know, has to be interpreted. I mean this is like deciphering hieroglyphics here. I’ve seen them. I can’t read them. There’s some guys at Yale have transcribed these things, the Avalon Project at Yale, have taken it on. You’d be surprised at Yale – it’s one of the great document and historical repositories, surprisingly.

The Life of Christ in a Liberal World

We all know about the life of Jesus. God in human form, He came to save mankind from sin and give humanity something much greater to look forward to with no strings attached. The only request made of us mere mortals is to believe and live righteously. No greater gift was ever bestowed on man.

During a moment of reflection on all the wondrous gifts God has given us, I began to wonder. What if Jesus had lived in a world run by the liberals?

From the moment of the Immaculate Conception, Blessed Mother would've been besieged by Planned Parenthood with information on her "choices" over her body. "If it's going to infringe on your career, we have ways of ridding you of that mass of unviable tissue. And you don't have to tell your husband about it."

"No room at the inn" would've ignited squeals from HUD. The innkeeper would've been forced to give the Holy Family his own private quarters after being slapped with a discrimination suit for unfair housing practices. The IRS would then call for an audit of the innkeeper's books in retaliation.

Giving birth in a stable would've caused PETA to get their knickers in a twist. What about the animals who call that stable home? PETA would be filing for an emergency injunction from the SCOTUS preventing Mary from upsetting the natural habitat of the endangered Manger Chinchbug.

Shortly after giving birth, Mary and Joseph would receive information on all the programs they could qualify for. Applications for WIC, food stamps, and medical assistance would be given out by those looking to make another family dependent on the government.

Young Jesus would not have been able to learn the carpentry trade from Joseph without first going through an apprenticeship provided by the carpenter's union. If Joseph decided to defy union orders and teach his son the trade, you can bet he'd be blackballed by the United Brotherhood of Carpenters.

Jesus would face many issues in gathering his disciples. La Raza, NAACP, and NOW would all have Him under a microscope to ensure a diverse following. Failure to comply would prompt numerous discrimination lawsuits.

In performing His first miracle at the wedding in Cana, Jesus would've been approached by representatives from the BATF and Liquor Control Board, both of whom were guests at the ceremony. "Do you have a license to change that water to wine?" MADD would immediately sue Jesus for liability in any deaths that should occur following the reception.

Healing the leper and the blind man would've been a major problem. The Bar Association would've dragged Christ into court for practicing medicine without a license. Adherence to FDA guidelines would be thoroughly investigated and turned over to the proper authorities.

In his final hours, Jesus would once again face persecution. His last feast with His disciples would have to be approved as culturally-appropriate. No trans fats, no sugar, and no artificial coloring would be allowed to pass through the lips of those partaking in the meal. Wine would only be served if the guests provided proper identification of age. Serving minors alcohol would take priority over the impending death of the true Messiah.

After his betrayal, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, and CBS would all be clamoring for the exclusive first interview with Judas Iscariot, the man who exposed someone as "intolerant" and "non-inclusive" as Jesus. Oliver Stone would appear with Judas on Oprah, Keith Olbermann, and Leno to promote their new movie about the life of the one person who brought down a Savior.

The Sierra Club would be wailing and rending their garments during the preparation for Jesus' crucifixion. Not because of the fact that the son of God and the son of Man was soon to be put to death, but because trees were cut down. "Couldn't a more eco-friendly product be used to construct the cross? This is deforestation!"

In the end, Jesus would still be crucified. Tears would flow from those who love Him, and cheering would be heard from those who saw this event as an end to tyranny. I mean, how DARE He ask people to believe only in God the Father?

Upon seeing the rock rolled back at the tomb, Mary Magdelene and Blessed Mother would enter the opening in the hillside to find Jesus' burial garments and a letter.

"Dear Madam: While we send our condolences on the loss of your son, this letter is to inform you that you will receive an invoice within the next ten (10) days for payment of estate taxes. Failure to remit said taxes is a violation of Federal law. -- Sincerely, The Internal Revenue Service."

Van Jones: In His Own Words

As you watch these, ask yourself this question: Why the hell is this man allowed anywhere NEAR a government office???

Sickos in Section 8

Let's face facts: Government subsidized housing developments aren't exactly a shining example of government success. I take that back. They succeeded in partially destroying the idea of personal responsibility and creating unsafe urban war zones.

A recent HUD investigation has found that thousands of lifetime registered sex offenders are living with family in Section 8 housing in clear violation of the law. Of course they are. They have no regard for the lives of other human beings, so why would they care about a silly law? What a bunch of dirtbags!!!

A ban concerning subsidized housing for the most serious sex offenders was instituted after a 1997 case when a convicted sex offender was charged with assaulting and molesting a 9-year-old neighbor girl who lived in the same public housing building. That sick rat bastard should thank the Good Lord above that I wasn't his neighbor. These scum have no place in society.

Part of the reason these turds of society have gotten away with it is because HUD doesn't require housing administrators to ask if any residents fall under the lifetime registration requirement. All of this information was uncovered during a probe by the inspector general for HUD. I forgot...we wouldn't want to violate their right to privacy, eh? Their sick personal desires trump the safety of the innocents they prey on in today's society. What an upside-down view the left has put in place.

Those who target the innocent and helpless to get their jollies have NO business breathing air let alone roaming the streets. The safety of the American public has been exchanged for the "right" of a pervert to be free. My opinion? The minute they start to satisfy their twisted fantasies, they surrender their rights. Period.

Now that HUD knows about this situation, what are they going to do about it? Give them a stern warning? Allow them to relocate to another state where no one is required to check their background so they can continue to suck off the public teat? I'd love to know.

Mark my words: Should any of these scum EVER consider targeting my kids, someone better tell the coroner to bring a body bag. That is, if they can find the remains.

MSNBC: Oops!!!

American Thinker has an article today that shows just how blatantly dishonest MSNBC (Mainstream Snarky Nutjob Barack Channel) is in their coverage of law-abiding citizens exercising their rights under the Second Amendment at some town hall meetings. Watch this:



And here's the picture of that gun toting white racist:




Just a bit of FYI for the dope in the middle of the panel on the video. He mentioned "Squeaky" Fromme and Mark Hinckley...it was JOHN Hinckley who tried to assassinate Reagan. Get your facts straight, you twerp!

$2 Billion Loan for Oil Exploration

The Wall Street Journal has reported that the Obama administration is poised to spend $2 billion of OUR money for oil exploration and drilling...off the coast of Brazil. Wonderful, ain't it? Nothing like using our money to possibly create another Hugo Chavez.

We're going to lend Brazil's largest state-owned oil company, Petrobras, money for exploration of a huge offshore discovery in the country's Tupi oil field in the Santos Basin near Rio de Janeiro. White House National Security Adviser James Jones met this month with Brazilian officials to talk about the loan.

The U.S. Export-Import Bank has given Petrobras a "preliminary commitment" of two billion of our hard-earned dollars, and that figure could go even higher. It's not clear whether it will be a direct loan or a loan guarantee, but, either way, if Petrobras defaults, guess who's stuck eating the loss? Hint: It's not Brazil. And to do this at a time when the U.S. Treasury can't pay our own bills is beyond me.

If Dear Leader is so gung ho on drilling, why not do it here? After all, the ban on offshore drilling in this country was allowed to expire to allow the market to go after our own reserves and reduce our dependence on those countries who want us dead. Instead, Chairman Barry has decided to sell oil leases to other countries and allow THEM to drill for OUR oil. The sale of those leases starts today. I've been busy, so tell me: Did the MSM cover any of this? I bet not.

I'm assuming part of the reason BHO is funding Brazil's exploration but not our own is due to the wailing and gnashing of teeth from groups like the Sierra Club and Earth First. After all, they DID help him get elected. How are they going to react when they realize he's funding global warming and CO2 emissions? Oops...it's okay for other countries to do it so long as the evil corporate giants here at home don't benefit. Bunch of screwballs!!!

The question of what Barry's stake in all of this is remains a mystery to me. I mean, c'mon...he doesn't do ANYTHING without strings attached. Is it political pandering once again to apologize for just how rotten this country is? Maybe he's planning on visiting Rio during Carnival on our dime. What ever the case, we should be telling the environmental crowd to shove it and open up OUR reserves to exploration. The rest of the world can get their own frickin' oil.

Bit by bit, this president is selling this country's sovereignty to foreign lands. Why does the word "treason" come to mind???

George Soros=Joseph Goebbels

In Nazi Germany, Joseph Goebbels was appointed the Minister of Propaganda. Today, we have George Soros filling his shoes.

For those of you who may not know who George Soros is, let me give you a brief biography. Soros is a billionaire who acquired his wealth through hedge funds and stock speculation. He has since used his wealth to further liberal agendas around the world, including throwing millions of dollars to efforts to try and unseat George W. Bush in 2004. ACORN and moveon.org have him tagged as one of their top donors. He is a member of the Bilderbergers and also of the Carlyle Group. The man defines the word "leftist."

According to worldnetdaily.com, the Associated Press has agreed to allow free publication by four nonprofit groups: the Center for Public Integrity, the Investigative Reporting Workshop at American University, the Center for Investigative Reporting and ProPublica. All of these groups are funded by George Soros. AP will also distribute the material to their 1,500 subscribing newspapers.

Pro Publica is a group founded by a $10 million yearly grant. Herbert and Marian Sandler, the former chief executives of the Golden West Financial Corporation, were the people backing the grant. Currently sitting on the board of Pro Publica is none other than Henry "Beer Summit" Gates, Jr. Last year, the Sandlers sold their business to Wachovia for an estimated $26 billion, a deal that had their personal shares at $2.4 billion.

The Sandlers are major donors to the Democratic Party and are top funders of ACORN, MoveOn.org, the American Civil Liberties Union and other far-leftist groups like Human Rights Watch.

In 2008, the Sandlers were behind two controversial California Political Action Committees, Vote Hope and PowerPac.org, which spent about $5 million in pro-Obama ads in that state. The two groups were run by the Sandler's son-in-law, Steve Phillips, the former president of the San Francisco School Board.

The journalistic integrity of Pro Publica has been called into question on more than one occasion. The Capital Research Center issued a report concluding that Pro Publica "churns out little more than left-wing hit pieces about Sarah Palin and blames the U.S. government for giving out too little foreign aid."

CPI, another nonprofit group being helped by AP, is funded by Soros' Open Society Institute.

CPI churns out regular partisan pieces. One widely debunked CPI study from last year, covered extensively by the AP, claimed it found President Bush and top administration officials had issued hundreds of false statements about the national security threat from Iraq as "part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses."

Richard Poe, a writer for the Center for the Study of Popular Culture, concluded CPI and other Soros-funded so-called watchdogs "have a long history of coordination with Soros and his Shadow Party. They are beholden to Soros personally for his financial support. His influence often shows in their choice of targets."

The AP itself has called the arrangement to distribute pieces from the Soros and Sandler-funded nonprofits a six-month experiment that could later be broadened to include other investigative nonprofits and to serve its nonmember clients, including broadcast and Internet outlets.

"It's something we've talked about for a long time, since part of our mission is to enable our members to share material with each other," said Sue Cross, a senior vice president at the AP.

She added the development in 2006 of an Internet-based system for members to receive AP material made it easier to do this kind of sharing and to offer new products like the investigative service.

Now we know that Jeffery Immelt isn't alone in all of the Obama hype and hysteria. The man behind the curtain is none other than George Soros.

[Thanks to Clay at BBCW for reminding me about the Bilderberger connection!]

A Letter to the Left

Dear Lefties:

In recent days, there has been much said about those of us in America who disagree with you on Obamacare. While that is only one issue we disagree on, conservatives and libertarians are being painted as an unruly, out-of-control mob. Do you really know who we are?

We are supporters of the Constitution. We believe in free speech for all, including you. Respectful and intelligent debate is what matters to us. We may not agree with what you say, but we will defend with our dying breath your right to say it. Can you say the same thing?

We believe in and encourage religion. We do not believe in the establishment of a state religion, but we believe that our Founding Fathers based the principles of this nation in religion for a reason: To make the statement that our rights descend from God, not man. We don't care what religion you are, but we don't want you telling us that we can't espouse our faith whether it be in city hall or in the schools. That leads to the establishment of atheism as the state religion.

We believe in the sanctity of innocent life. I make the distinction because while supporting the rights of the unborn, I believe the dregs of society who commit unspeakable acts forfeit their rights. It's the basic biblical principle of "An eye for an eye..." Using the death penalty while opposing abortion puts a value on human life. Why does your side support abortion? Do you realize the cure for cancer or AIDS may have been aborted?

We believe the government should play an extremely limited role in our lives. The role of government is not to take care of us from cradle to grave; that is the role of free people. We do not believe the government should be stealing from Americans every pay to fund their programs that are stuffed full of corruption and abuse.

We believe that we should not be told what kind of car to drive or how much water our toilet should hold. The free market should determine that. While we do believe in being good stewards of the earth, we also believe that God gave us precious gifts for our use. To abuse those gifts or to place the earth above all else further decreases the value of human life.

We do not see skin color. Despite the picture that has been painted lately, we believe in equality among all races. We abhor supremacy and separatism; those ideas are counter to what the Founders intended. Why do you have a double standard on race? Average Americans protesting encroaching fascism are racist in your book, but Reverend Wright and the Black Panthers aren't? It makes no sense; wrong is colorblind.

We come from all walks of life. We are your neighbors, your doctors, your policemen, and a myriad of other people you encounter every day. We will gladly interact with you, but don't expect us to sit back quietly while the Constitution is trampled on.

Sincerely,
Blackandgoldfan

With Family Like This...

I got a call from my dad today. We talked for a while, but it's never an in-depth conversation when it comes to my dad; our relationship is complicated.

My dad is a die-hard Democrat (He thinks Hillary is hot). While there a lot of other issues I have with my dad, this only adds to the complexity of our relationship. You would think that being a veteran, he would be more right-leaning; not so. In fact, he takes every opportunity to tell me how W and the GOP are to blame for today's problems. I've got to have the patience of Job to get through a phone call with him.

Today, the issue of Obamacare came up. My dad seems to think that being that he gets his healthcare through the VA that he's going to continue to get anything he needs. I tried to explain that under this hideous legislation, it wouldn't make a dime's worth of difference whether it was through the VA or not; rationing will be the norm and cost effectiveness the bottom line. He said the Dems would never let that happen. How blind are those who refuse to see!

He then went on to tell me about how he found out that he can get his Medicare premiums paid through welfare because of his income. I asked if he really wanted the government to have that much control over his life. His response? "If they're willing to pay for it, why should I have to?" I almost dropped the phone.

In the same line of conversation, he also told me that he found out that he can get a cell phone through welfare. I asked him why should I have to pay for his cell phone. His answer? "I paid into the system all those years. Why shouldn't I get something out of it?" I calmly tried to tell him that no one should be paying for what other people want. I'm pretty sure I used the term "theft" by the government. Then all hell broke loose. He seems convinced that the Dems are just trying to help those who can't help themselves. I realized at this point that calm disagreement wasn't going to change his mind.

It's bad enough when you see strangers with this attitude, but when it's family, it makes you even crazier.

All I can say is this: Mom, thanks for raising me. I love you with all my heart. You done did good.

And They Call Us Hatemongers?

Yesterday, it was reported that Mike Malloy, a liberal talk radio host and one of the original hosts on Air America, told his listeners that he hoped Glenn Beck would commit suicide on television. Isn't that nice?

“I have good news to report,” said Malloy on his Aug. 4 radio program. “Glenn Beck appears closer to suicide. I'm hoping that he does it on camera.”

“Suicide is rampant in his family, and given his alcoholism and his tendencies towards self-destruction,” said Malloy, “I am only hoping that when Glenn Beck does put a gun to his head and pulls the trigger, that it’s on television, because somebody will capture it on YouTube and it will be the most popular little piece of video for months.”

This makes me sick for a couple of reasons.

First, Malloy was absolutely vicious for bringing up what are probably very painful memories for Glenn. That would be like saying that one hopes Kurt Cobain's daughter offs herself and would probably do so because dad did it. It was just wrong.

Second, being from Pennsylvania, a public suicide is not pretty. On January 22, 1987, Budd Dwyer, treasurer of Pennsylvania, called a press conference to address his conviction of receiving bribes. After passing three envelopes to staff members, Dwyer pulled a .357 out of another manila envelope. Despite desperate pleas from onlookers, Budd put the gun in his mouth and pulled the trigger. A state and a nation were stunned.

Whether you like or dislike Beck, you have to agree that a truly compassionate human being would never cross this line. Yet, as we've heard so many times before, the leftist liberals are always screaming about how much they care for people and conservatives only care about the rich. Where's Mr. Malloy's compassion?

Hey Malloy!!! Just to let you know...I make a statue of you every morning.

My Dealings With a Moonbat

In yesterday's post about the rape of young Iranian women before execution, I referred to an exchange I've been having at Libertarian Republican with a woman (I assume; sounds like she might be wearing a burqa) after a comment I made regarding Michael Savage being taken off the UK (United Koranlovers) banned list. I'm warning you that she has tossed in a few expletives. I, on the other hand, have tried to remain respectful, but that's coming to an end.

Here's the exchange so far:

blackandgoldfan said...

After the way he was treated for just giving his opinion about a religion that tolerates the execution of women who are raped and condones men beating their wives, Mr. Savage shouldn't spend another cent of his money in that country.

The UK (United Koranlovers) has capitulated to radical Islam almost to the point of no return. Even after the 2005 London terrorist attacks, there has been little effort to stem the flow of radical Islam in that country.

Tolerance for those whose only mission is to eliminate "infidels" is a national security nightmare for any country.

July 19, 2009 6:55 AM

bint alshamsa said...

blackandgoldfan,

"After the way he was treated for just giving his opinion about a religion that tolerates the execution of women who are raped and condones men beating their wives"

As opposed to the world's biggest religion? The one that condones the rape of little children and condemns those who try to save them? The one whose members have killed more people than Muslims ever have? The one where women who are beat by their husbands are not allowed to divorce them?

blackandgoldfan said...

bint: If you're referring to Christianity, yes, it did have its dark history. No one is disputing that. But when did Christianity ever condone the rape of children? If you're referring to the Catholic Church, you are wrong. I am a Catholic, and I know of no fellow parishoners or priests who condone child rape or the molestation of children. We do not agree with the relocation of priests who commit such heinous acts.

Women who are beaten by their husbands are allowed to divorce, contrary to what you may think. If they are Catholic, or want to remarry in a Catholic church, they need an annulment. They can't take the sacraments of the church until they do. Don't agree with it, but those are the rules. And if domestic abuse is the issue, the church would most likely grant an annulment.

The only reason you can cite Christianity as "The one whose members have killed more people than Muslims ever have" is because the history of Muslims seems to be more secretive. Not much has been said until recent years about what REALLY goes on in the Muslim world. We had the Crusades and the Inquisition, but never was a woman killed by Christians for being the victim of a violent sexual assault. How can any decent human being rationalize that? I forgot; it's different because we're talking about "the religion of peace". The same "religion" that has no problem flying airplanes full of innocent people into skyscrapers because anyone who doesn't believe as they do is an "infidel" and deserves to die. Yeah...real peaceful.

July 20, 2009 5:39 PM

bint alshamsa said...

Blackandgoldfan,

"If you're referring to Christianity, yes, it did have its dark history."

That's definitely the understatement of the year. There was no point where these things stopped occurring.

"But when did Christianity ever condone the rape of children? If you're referring to the Catholic Church, you are wrong. I am a Catholic, and I know of no fellow parishoners or priests who condone child rape or the molestation of children."

Actually, I'm correct. Regardless of whether you know of any priests who condone the rape of children, there are plenty who not only condone it but actually engage in it, too. Do I really need to dig up some links from all of the sex scandals involving clergy (including PLENTY of Catholic priests) and young children? Let's not forget this recent case where the mother of a 9 yr. impregnated by her step-father was excommunicated because she chose to save her daughter's life (instead of forcing her to try and carry TWINS that almost certainly would have killed her in the process) but did nothing to the man who was actually responsible for the girl being pregnant in the first place.

"We do not agree with the relocation of priests who commit such heinous acts."

Nevertheless, the Catholic church certainly agreed with doing this because it happened again and again and again.

"Women who are beaten by their husbands are allowed to divorce, contrary to what you may think."

Clearly you've never read your Bible.

"If they are Catholic, or want to remarry in a Catholic church, they need an annulment. They can't take the sacraments of the church until they do. Don't agree with it, but those are the rules."

Frankly, I don't give a shit about those rules. Every religion makes up rules about why something or another should be allowed or forbidden. The issue is what supposedly-Christian groups teach and allow and what the Bible says.

"The only reason you can cite Christianity as "The one whose members have killed more people than Muslims ever have" is because the history of Muslims seems to be more secretive. Not much has been said until recent years about what REALLY goes on in the Muslim world."

Wrong! The fact that you are ignorant of Islamic and Muslim history doesn't mean that it's any more secretive than that of other religions and their members. It would be nice if people like you would educate yourself before you make comments that are so easily disproved.

"We had the Crusades and the Inquisition, but never was a woman killed by Christians for being the victim of a violent sexual assault."

So, killing a woman because you think she's a witch is somehow more civilized? How about when you kill her because she belongs to the wrong denomination of Christianity? Is that better? How about when you kill her because she lives in a place where you don't like the government's policies? How about when you kill her because she won't convert to Christianity? Is that somehow justifiable, to you?

"it's different because we're talking about 'the religion of peace'."

It's no less peaceful than the religion you are attempting to defend. If you have a problem with a man passing judgment on a woman based on something that happened to her body, then how can you defend the Catholic church? It does just that, over and over again, all around the world.

"The same "religion" that has no problem flying airplanes full of innocent people into skyscrapers because anyone who doesn't believe as they do is an "infidel" and deserves to die."

As opposed to dropping bombs on and slaughtering cities full of innocent people because your leader thinks the whole world is either "with us or against us"? Yeah, that's really peaceful!

July 20, 2009 9:21 PM

blackandgoldfan said...

bint: Here's a story about child rape you might be interested in. Hint: It doesn't involve a Christian denomination.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,534116,00.html?test=latestnews

July 21, 2009 4:40 AM

bint alshamsa said...

Blackandgoldfan,

Is there some reason why we shouldn't pay attention to the rapes committed by your clergy and condoned by your denomination? Are you that ashamed of your church's behavior that you have to try to avoid talking about it by pointing to stories like that one? Have you ever heard of the saying, "Physician, heal thyself."?

I see you still haven't been able to find any justification for how your church treated the 9 yr. old girl who was raped and impregnated by her step-father. Doesn't she matter? Or are you okay with what was done to her? If you had a daughter who was 9 yrs. old, would you tell her that her body was as developed as it would need to be in order for her to have a couple of babies AT THE SAME TIME. Would you tell her that, at the age of 9 years old, she is emotionally mature enough to be able to deal with being a mother? Would you tell her that, if she is raped, she should be willing to die in childbirth?

What's the matter? Are you going to stand by your "those are the rules" justification when it comes to the rape of children?

July 21, 2009 10:21 AM

blackandgoldfan said...

bint: Despite what you may think, I don't agree with everything that has gone on in the Catholic Church, the Muslim religion, or any other heinous act that has been committed in the name of that religion. To pervert religion for the sake of justification of one's sick twisted actions is a travesty.

Not once have I ever advocated ignoring the crimes that SOME within the Catholic Church have committed. In the case of the 9-year-old child, it's a moral dilemma. How do you deal with a situation where you have an innocent child who has forever been violated while preserving the sanctity of life? Unfortunately, it's a double-edged sword, and I can't honestly say how I would handle the same situation with my own daughter. And yes, she is 9.

I don't agree with keeping those who commit such acts around children. They deserve to be in prison. Or better yet, handed over to the families of their victims.

While I appreciate and share your concern for child rape vicitms, I haven't heard anything about the article I posted for you to read. Did you read it? If you did, then you cannot say that what is happening in Iran is any different than what you keep slamming Christian denominations for.

July 21, 2009 3:17 PM

This is what we're up against folks!!! My patience is wearing mighty thin with this mental midget!!

UPDATE: The story of the 9-year-old girl that bint keeps referring to came from the Daily Kos, so there you have it! We all know how ethical they are! Also, check out bint's profile. 32 years old and her career is a student. That speaks volumes!

UPDATE 2: After doing some more checking, it appears that the story of the little girl is true. Fox News and the Catholic News Agency both had pieces on it. Three innocent lives were lost when the abortion was performed; the aborted twins died, but the little girl lost her innocence. I'm having a hard time wrapping my brain around the story because Cheyenne just turned 9. I value innocent life, but I just don't know what I would do if I was in the mom's shoes. Really tough dilemma.

Huffington Post Stoops to New Lows

While the left was painting conservatives as hatemongering, intolerant terrorists, Erik Sean Nelson of the Huffington Post was posting his July 3 article titled: "Palin Will Run in '12 on More Retardation Platform". This takes jumbo-sized coconut ones, folks.

In the article Nelson says that Palin "will be the first politician to actually try to increase the population of retarded people." In an obvious reference to Palin's son Trig, who has Downs Syndrome, Nelson further speculated on what Palin could achieve as president:

"Her policies will increase jobs because Wal-Mart is building new stores each day and someone has to be the greeter."

Nelson continues:

"She will then encourage women to hold off on pregnancies until their 40's just to mix up some chromosomes."

Ok. As a mom of two special needs kids, this hacks me off. As a human being, it hacks me off even more.

Since when did people lose their compassion for those who were dealt a setback in life? It amazes me how kids and adults alike in today's society will casually throw around the "r" word. It's a word I have always and will always find offensive. While my friends in school were using it for those in special education, I was asking those same special education students what their favorite music was. I truly believe that that is why God gave me two kids with special needs; He knew they'd be loved and protected.

Of course, when Dear Leader goes on late-night television and thinks it's funny to make fun of the Special Olympics, what other message can be gathered for today's youth? "Hey! The President is making fun of the mentally challenged, so it must be okay!" Absolutely appalling in my book. I've never tolerated it from my "normal" son, the young girls I coach on my daughter's cheerleading squad, or any other kids I've worked with over the years.

The Huffington Post has since removed the article, but why did they even allow it in the first place? There's political discourse and debate, and then there's this garbage. The higher-ups at HuffPo are just as culpable in perpetuating the double standard the left seems to hold near and dear.

Though I am still unsure of my feelings on the whole Palin resignation, this I am sure of: Trig is an angel sent from God. And Sarah is right when she says we learn so much more from them than they (the mentally challenged) from us. I only wish that the left would quit screaming about how the children are off limits while making sick "jokes" about the children of conservatives.

Hey Mr. Nelson! Did you hear the one about the asthmatic First Daughter? You wouldn't want to appear biased, you know.

The Matrix -- A Symbolic America?

Ok. Before anyone starts calling for the men in white coats to come for me, I want to say two things: I'm NOT crazy, and I'm NOT a conspiracy nut. I just realized a few things after reading "Anthem".

I discussed this with my Limbaugh baby, and he said he needed scuba gear for as deep as I went with this.

I told him that this country could conceivably be similar to the make-believe world of The Matrix.

Liberals could play the role of the alien forces who just take what they need from humans and create a world they want humans to think is real. If you think about that, it kinda fits the liberal mentality. They tell us only what they feel we need to see and believe. And insofar as taking what they want from us: look at your pay stub.

The strong arm of government force could be Agent Smith personified. Ever patrolling and monitoring that no one gets out of line, Agent Smith makes sure that the lie of The Matrix is upheld at all costs. Think about all the tactics used by Barry and his thugs to insure that the American people don't know the truth: The Fairness Doctrine, calling tea party protesters "low-level terrorists", etc.

Then you have The Resistance (conservatives and libertarians). They are the ones constantly trying to expose the truth and reveal to people exactly what the world they live in is like. And, like many of us conservatives, we are always questioning whether the next Palin or Jindal could be The One; the person to defeat those in charge of The Matrix.

I know this sounds REALLY out of character for me, but I bet you won't watch the movie the same way ever again!

Barnes, Noble, and Hope

Today was the first day of my son's summer school class. Being that I had three hours to kill until he was done, I went to Barnes and Noble, a store I have always loved. Books are good brain food.

I immediately went to the political section hoping to score a copy of "Common Sense" by Glenn Beck or maybe even "Fleeced" by Dick Morris. My disappointment quickly turned to delight when neither book was to be found. I imagined the empty shelf space filled with the likes of Beck, Morris, Hannity, O'Reilly, and Goldberg. None of these authors were to be found; they were sold out. Of course if I had wanted a book of pictures of Barry and Michelle, there were plenty of copies of those to be had. In fact, some books about Barry were already in the bargain section. I laughed out loud. How refreshing!

Of course, the Starbucks inside was filled with your mushheaded latte lappers discussing political issues. It is a conservative nightmare to see what may one day be in charge of this country once again.

Since I couldn't secure "Atlas Shrugged", I settled for "Anthem" by Ayn Rand. I'll let everyone know how it was when I'm finished.

Hope springs eternal; at least at Barnes and Noble. Can't wait to go back. Maybe I'll take Ayn out for coffee.