- Determine which elected Republicans have trampled upon our constitutional rights by promoting socially conservative legislation, by the buildup of big government, by supporting the Patriot Act and the continued existence of the Department of Homeland Security, by supporting the existence the Department of Education and continuing unconstitutional federal taxes for education, and by other such encroachments on the rights of individuals and state governments.
- In the primary, have a tea-party candidate run against any anti-constitutional Republican candidate. Donate to the tea-partier's campaign. These first steps are already being done.
- Target the highest ranking anti-constitutional Republican who wins in the primaries. Make a donation to the campaign of the Democratic opponent. Do not be tempted to contribute to Libertarians or others who have no chance of winning--put the money where it will hurt. Only target one, the top one, so that only one seat will be lost to Democrats. This will send a clear message to the Republican National Committee and to elected Republicans.
- Inform the Republican National Committee and the anti-constitutional candidate of what we are doing and why we are doing it. Send multiple emails, letters, and make phone calls.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
A Proposed Plan for Change
When top-ranking Republicans betray our constitutional rights, we supporters of the Constitution can gain control of the party by a simple plan. This method balances the effective removal of undesirable Republican candidates while still fighting a left-wing Democratic majority in the Congress.
Help Me Start a Revolution
Please join me in donating to the campaign of Justin Coussoule, the Democratic opponent of Republican House Minority Leader John Boehner. If it means getting an Ohio Democrat in office for two years for us to clean out the scum of the Republican Party, then so be it.
I also urge you to donate to the campaign of Republican Joe Barton of Texas. There was no excuse for his party's Minority Leader to silence him.
Send whatever you can afford to each campaign, be it five or five thousand dollars. BE CERTAIN to drop emails to John Boehner, and to R.N.C. Chair Michael Steele, letting them know about your donations and why you are doing it.
I am not asking anyone to excuse British Petroleum from their responsibility. Rather, this is a plea to preserve the constitutional right of a fair trial to every individual and corporation in the United States. When the executive branch usurps this power, we have the beginnings of dictatorship. The Republican Party has sold us out. If the citizens of this nation do not oppose this trend, nobody will.
So let's start taking out the anti-constitutional Republican incumbents one by one.
I also urge you to donate to the campaign of Republican Joe Barton of Texas. There was no excuse for his party's Minority Leader to silence him.
Send whatever you can afford to each campaign, be it five or five thousand dollars. BE CERTAIN to drop emails to John Boehner, and to R.N.C. Chair Michael Steele, letting them know about your donations and why you are doing it.
I am not asking anyone to excuse British Petroleum from their responsibility. Rather, this is a plea to preserve the constitutional right of a fair trial to every individual and corporation in the United States. When the executive branch usurps this power, we have the beginnings of dictatorship. The Republican Party has sold us out. If the citizens of this nation do not oppose this trend, nobody will.
So let's start taking out the anti-constitutional Republican incumbents one by one.
Sunday, June 27, 2010
G-Summit Leftist Violence Still Again
Well, it's that time again for global summits. That means that the leftist violence is here.
More property damage, more burned police cars, more cases of urine being thrown upon normal people who actually earn a living. The protesters brand themselves "anarchists" to hide their leftist agenda. Anarchy is a lack of government, not an organized system of global wealth redistribution.
So who are these "steal-from-the-rich-give-to-the-poor" protesters? Let's try to identify the spoiled rich brats whose corporate parents should have beaten some sense into them when they acted up as children, now filled with guilt for being born with a silver spoon in their mouths, but still rich enough to afford not to work and instead travel, frequently to other nations, to tear up property and harass citizens there. The rest are society's losers, those who feel that the world owes them a living, while making no effort to survive for themselves--in other words, potential recipients of some wealth redistribution.
Compliments go to the Toronto police for handling these criminals in the proper way, unlike the Pittsburgh police at the last G20. Hopefully enough protesters are trampled and die this time to reduce the quantity of scum showing up at the next G8 or G20. That would be true environmental cleanup.
In the meantime, the American mainstream press will ignore this left-wing violence to instead continue to pontificate on the evils of "right wing extremism" in their labeling of tea party rallies. It is undeniable that the only violence present in such rallies is done to the tea partiers by leftist opponents and Democratic-party representatives. One such example of this was in the Nevada protests against Harry Reid, where eggs were thrown at the tea partiers.
So what is the difference between the American tea partiers and these self-proclaimed anarchists? Tea partiers are normally working people, who respect the law, who hold normal jobs, and who cannot afford, under normal circumstances, to take a week off of work to protest and possibly get thrown in jail. The alleged anarchists are those who sponge off their rich parents or their society.
More property damage, more burned police cars, more cases of urine being thrown upon normal people who actually earn a living. The protesters brand themselves "anarchists" to hide their leftist agenda. Anarchy is a lack of government, not an organized system of global wealth redistribution.
So who are these "steal-from-the-rich-give-to-the-poor" protesters? Let's try to identify the spoiled rich brats whose corporate parents should have beaten some sense into them when they acted up as children, now filled with guilt for being born with a silver spoon in their mouths, but still rich enough to afford not to work and instead travel, frequently to other nations, to tear up property and harass citizens there. The rest are society's losers, those who feel that the world owes them a living, while making no effort to survive for themselves--in other words, potential recipients of some wealth redistribution.
Compliments go to the Toronto police for handling these criminals in the proper way, unlike the Pittsburgh police at the last G20. Hopefully enough protesters are trampled and die this time to reduce the quantity of scum showing up at the next G8 or G20. That would be true environmental cleanup.
In the meantime, the American mainstream press will ignore this left-wing violence to instead continue to pontificate on the evils of "right wing extremism" in their labeling of tea party rallies. It is undeniable that the only violence present in such rallies is done to the tea partiers by leftist opponents and Democratic-party representatives. One such example of this was in the Nevada protests against Harry Reid, where eggs were thrown at the tea partiers.
So what is the difference between the American tea partiers and these self-proclaimed anarchists? Tea partiers are normally working people, who respect the law, who hold normal jobs, and who cannot afford, under normal circumstances, to take a week off of work to protest and possibly get thrown in jail. The alleged anarchists are those who sponge off their rich parents or their society.
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Crime, Violence, and Poverty
The correlation between crime and poverty is undeniable. However, the socialist slant to the correlation is to pretend that poverty is the source of both crime and violence. This thinking has proven to be a cancer to our modern society, resulting in overwhelming American national debt, and the destruction of human character regarding personal responsibility.
This thinking has permeated western society since the time of the Great Depression of the 1930's. By using the failed economy as an excuse for government control, the Democrats provided the forerunner of our current "economic stimulus" legislation and budgeting, and set up the structure of today's nanny state. As with the "New Deal" of 80 years ago, today's stimulus packages are doomed to failure, by making the mistake of funding government nanny programs and preventing real economic growth through the private sector. Regulations are favored over incentives, and the redistribution of wealth through high taxation ensures that failed welfare programs are continued in perpetuity.
By the 1960's, the "New Deal" of Roosevelt, designed to stabilize the economy, developed into the "Great Society" of Johnson, aimed at the removal of poverty. The unmet goals of the 1930's developed into a Utopian dream in the 1960's. The idea that taxpayer dollars could remove both poverty and crime has proven, half a century later, to be a whimsical dream which deteriorated into madness.
The brilliant Texas bastard who started the alleged "Great Society" also revised military strategy. Social idealism combined with Lyndon Johnson's criminal interest in the Asian drug market to shape strategy in the Viet Nam War; it is no coincidence in timing between the drug culture of the 1960's and the Viet Nam War. Johnson's failed efforts in Viet Nam gave birth to the "counterinsurgency" strategy currently being applied in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The school systems were seen as tools in this "war on poverty" and racial integration was used as an excuse for change. By bringing students from high-crime and high-poverty neighborhoods into the same schools as the achieving, it was assumed that opportunities would improve for the poor and that both crime and poverty would be eliminated. Instead, the exact opposite happened. The introduction of criminal thinking into previously law-abiding families caused a catastrophic increase in crime. The introduction of criminal elements into the classrooms caused educational standards to spiral downwards, and schools failed to provide for the needs of productive students, regardless of racial background.
Combined with this, federal welfare payments reduced incentives for self-sufficiency among the poor, creating a dependency as sinister as any found under slavery in the 1800's.
Social conservatism combined with leftist liberalism in promoting the lie that poverty could be combated more with money than police action. Social conservatives successfully diverted police efforts into the "war on drugs," pathetic efforts at alleged "child protection," and a vast array of prohibitions infringing on the constitutional rights of citizens.
If something is stolen from one's home today, one should not expect to get it back, nor expect any serious investigation to result. Any theft today is ignored. After all, through theft, wealth is assumed to be redistributed, since poverty is considered the source of crime. Usually insurance companies pick up the tab for now.
With the attacks of 2001, excuses were made for the corrupt programs of the Bush years. The passing of the Patriot Act and the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security resulted in the violation of citizen rights at the cost of citizen tax dollars. The start of Faith-Based Initiative programs ensure eventual government control of the churches. The current Obama regime has used these tools effectively in crushing the rights of citizens, but these were all established under Republican rule. The law-abiding citizens remain under tight government control, their rights violated, while the criminals and terrorists have "human rights" and are the only ones with any protection under the law.
The madness of our domestic policy has been exported to Iraq and Afghanistan, as testified to in the controversial Rolling Stone article on General McChrystal. The madness of "counterinsurgency" strategy implies that the Taliban can be combated more by relieving poverty and providing a stable society of locals than by blasting the jihadi bastards out of existence. Let's send American tax dollars to the poor instead of bombs at the terrorists! Have we lost our minds? This failed policy of building the "Great Society" at home cannot work elsewhere, least of all in Muslim-majority nations, where our dollars end up being collected by terrorists.
In the efforts to stabilize Iraq after the invasion, the city of Fallujah should have been flattened. A significant number of terrorists would have been wiped out. Many civilian lives would have been lost, but many others saved in the long run. Had it been made clear to other terrorist cities and towns that they would meet a similar fate, the uprising would have stopped. A stable government would then have been possible. Instead, vain efforts to build a stable society amidst political instability will continue, and the fighting will continue long after U.S. troops leave either Iraq or Afghanistan. The welfare mentality re-wrote the U.S. rules of combat into a new strategy, called LOSING.
The confusion of cause and effect in the case of poverty and criminal behavior needs to be set straight. Crime breeds poverty. Violence breeds poverty. Forget about fighting poverty, and gain control over the criminals. Poverty will then be reduced, both in America and around the world.
This thinking has permeated western society since the time of the Great Depression of the 1930's. By using the failed economy as an excuse for government control, the Democrats provided the forerunner of our current "economic stimulus" legislation and budgeting, and set up the structure of today's nanny state. As with the "New Deal" of 80 years ago, today's stimulus packages are doomed to failure, by making the mistake of funding government nanny programs and preventing real economic growth through the private sector. Regulations are favored over incentives, and the redistribution of wealth through high taxation ensures that failed welfare programs are continued in perpetuity.
By the 1960's, the "New Deal" of Roosevelt, designed to stabilize the economy, developed into the "Great Society" of Johnson, aimed at the removal of poverty. The unmet goals of the 1930's developed into a Utopian dream in the 1960's. The idea that taxpayer dollars could remove both poverty and crime has proven, half a century later, to be a whimsical dream which deteriorated into madness.
The brilliant Texas bastard who started the alleged "Great Society" also revised military strategy. Social idealism combined with Lyndon Johnson's criminal interest in the Asian drug market to shape strategy in the Viet Nam War; it is no coincidence in timing between the drug culture of the 1960's and the Viet Nam War. Johnson's failed efforts in Viet Nam gave birth to the "counterinsurgency" strategy currently being applied in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The school systems were seen as tools in this "war on poverty" and racial integration was used as an excuse for change. By bringing students from high-crime and high-poverty neighborhoods into the same schools as the achieving, it was assumed that opportunities would improve for the poor and that both crime and poverty would be eliminated. Instead, the exact opposite happened. The introduction of criminal thinking into previously law-abiding families caused a catastrophic increase in crime. The introduction of criminal elements into the classrooms caused educational standards to spiral downwards, and schools failed to provide for the needs of productive students, regardless of racial background.
Combined with this, federal welfare payments reduced incentives for self-sufficiency among the poor, creating a dependency as sinister as any found under slavery in the 1800's.
Social conservatism combined with leftist liberalism in promoting the lie that poverty could be combated more with money than police action. Social conservatives successfully diverted police efforts into the "war on drugs," pathetic efforts at alleged "child protection," and a vast array of prohibitions infringing on the constitutional rights of citizens.
If something is stolen from one's home today, one should not expect to get it back, nor expect any serious investigation to result. Any theft today is ignored. After all, through theft, wealth is assumed to be redistributed, since poverty is considered the source of crime. Usually insurance companies pick up the tab for now.
With the attacks of 2001, excuses were made for the corrupt programs of the Bush years. The passing of the Patriot Act and the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security resulted in the violation of citizen rights at the cost of citizen tax dollars. The start of Faith-Based Initiative programs ensure eventual government control of the churches. The current Obama regime has used these tools effectively in crushing the rights of citizens, but these were all established under Republican rule. The law-abiding citizens remain under tight government control, their rights violated, while the criminals and terrorists have "human rights" and are the only ones with any protection under the law.
The madness of our domestic policy has been exported to Iraq and Afghanistan, as testified to in the controversial Rolling Stone article on General McChrystal. The madness of "counterinsurgency" strategy implies that the Taliban can be combated more by relieving poverty and providing a stable society of locals than by blasting the jihadi bastards out of existence. Let's send American tax dollars to the poor instead of bombs at the terrorists! Have we lost our minds? This failed policy of building the "Great Society" at home cannot work elsewhere, least of all in Muslim-majority nations, where our dollars end up being collected by terrorists.
In the efforts to stabilize Iraq after the invasion, the city of Fallujah should have been flattened. A significant number of terrorists would have been wiped out. Many civilian lives would have been lost, but many others saved in the long run. Had it been made clear to other terrorist cities and towns that they would meet a similar fate, the uprising would have stopped. A stable government would then have been possible. Instead, vain efforts to build a stable society amidst political instability will continue, and the fighting will continue long after U.S. troops leave either Iraq or Afghanistan. The welfare mentality re-wrote the U.S. rules of combat into a new strategy, called LOSING.
The confusion of cause and effect in the case of poverty and criminal behavior needs to be set straight. Crime breeds poverty. Violence breeds poverty. Forget about fighting poverty, and gain control over the criminals. Poverty will then be reduced, both in America and around the world.
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Email to Boehner and Pence
(Note: Cantor's website does not allow for comments, in spite of my intentions of sending this to him as well.)
Your forcing of Joe Barton to recant on his apology for the extortion of money by the current White House regime is a disgrace. You have proven yourself to be unworthy of public office in this land by failing to uphold the authority of the Constitution, by allowing this extortion to happen, and by silencing one with the courage and integrity to condemn this assault on the rights of private business.
Mark J. Richard
Republican voter
Lafayette, Louisiana
Your forcing of Joe Barton to recant on his apology for the extortion of money by the current White House regime is a disgrace. You have proven yourself to be unworthy of public office in this land by failing to uphold the authority of the Constitution, by allowing this extortion to happen, and by silencing one with the courage and integrity to condemn this assault on the rights of private business.
Mark J. Richard
Republican voter
Lafayette, Louisiana
Still Another Republican Betrayal of Justice
Last year I wrote a blog here about the miserable and disgraceful failure of the Republican Party to provide a viable opposition to the Democratic regime. Then only last night, I challenged here the constitutionality of what Rep. Joe Barton rightly described as a "White House shakedown" of British Petroleum.
Rep. Barton obviously agrees with my assessment of the situation. However, the power-wielding scumbags of the Republican Party were quick to oppose this condemnation of the tactics of the current post-constitutional regime, and force him to recant under political threat.
It is time for the Tea Party movement to take on these scumbags who betray those who defend the Constitution, and the constitutional rights of individuals and entities in our nation. Determine the role, if any, of Michael Steele in this. GET BOEHNER, CANTOR, AND PENCE OUT OF OFFICE. Weed out the scum by running deserving candidates against these traitors to our constitutional principles. Let it be a lesson to those others who are tempted to put their political agenda in front of our constitutional rights.
In contrast to these jerks, Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, and Tom Price have made similar condemnations of this White House effort to bypass the court system and proclaim B.P. guilty without trial. Bachman and Price have rightly described the White House extortion of $20 billion as a "shakedown" and a "redistribution of wealth fund."
No doubt dunces like Boehner, Cantor, and Pence think that by giving in to leftist-inspired political correctness, they increase the chance of Republicans getting more seats in Congress. However, the recent primaries have proven that nearly every candidate backed by the outspoken Sarah Palin has won in the primaries, even against party-backed opponents, and usually with an overwhelming victory. Why not take on the policies and approach of Sarah Palin? Why this "let's not rock the boat" attitude that compromises with, rather than confronting, the threat of the current regime?
We Republican defenders of the Constitution do not "more of the same" out of the Republican Party. We do not want another Patriot Act, Department of Homeland Security, or Faith-Based Initiatives to provide a means for federal intervention into the private and religious aspects of our lives. We do not want the curse of another Bush in the oval office, to provide to the even greater tyrants who follow still more governmental tools to be used against us as citizens.
We Americans are tired of seeing constitutional values being watered down and our constitutional rights trampled upon. This is the motivation behind the Tea Party movement. What is being done to B.P. is not something we want to see done to the companies we own, to ourselves as individuals, nor to the family members we love. We will respond in an appropriate way to any government tyranny, be it brought on by Democrats or Republicans, liberals or social conservatives.
Rep. Barton obviously agrees with my assessment of the situation. However, the power-wielding scumbags of the Republican Party were quick to oppose this condemnation of the tactics of the current post-constitutional regime, and force him to recant under political threat.
It is time for the Tea Party movement to take on these scumbags who betray those who defend the Constitution, and the constitutional rights of individuals and entities in our nation. Determine the role, if any, of Michael Steele in this. GET BOEHNER, CANTOR, AND PENCE OUT OF OFFICE. Weed out the scum by running deserving candidates against these traitors to our constitutional principles. Let it be a lesson to those others who are tempted to put their political agenda in front of our constitutional rights.
In contrast to these jerks, Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, and Tom Price have made similar condemnations of this White House effort to bypass the court system and proclaim B.P. guilty without trial. Bachman and Price have rightly described the White House extortion of $20 billion as a "shakedown" and a "redistribution of wealth fund."
No doubt dunces like Boehner, Cantor, and Pence think that by giving in to leftist-inspired political correctness, they increase the chance of Republicans getting more seats in Congress. However, the recent primaries have proven that nearly every candidate backed by the outspoken Sarah Palin has won in the primaries, even against party-backed opponents, and usually with an overwhelming victory. Why not take on the policies and approach of Sarah Palin? Why this "let's not rock the boat" attitude that compromises with, rather than confronting, the threat of the current regime?
We Republican defenders of the Constitution do not "more of the same" out of the Republican Party. We do not want another Patriot Act, Department of Homeland Security, or Faith-Based Initiatives to provide a means for federal intervention into the private and religious aspects of our lives. We do not want the curse of another Bush in the oval office, to provide to the even greater tyrants who follow still more governmental tools to be used against us as citizens.
We Americans are tired of seeing constitutional values being watered down and our constitutional rights trampled upon. This is the motivation behind the Tea Party movement. What is being done to B.P. is not something we want to see done to the companies we own, to ourselves as individuals, nor to the family members we love. We will respond in an appropriate way to any government tyranny, be it brought on by Democrats or Republicans, liberals or social conservatives.
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
A Speech Filled With Lies
In listening to last night's latest propaganda performance by our community-rabble-rouser-in-chief, I find my anger boiling over, living here in Louisiana and staying informed on a day-to-day basis of events of the Obama Oil Disaster.
Let's look now at the truth behind the lies. While the president presented the need for new regulations, the administration failed miserably to implement existing laws and policies. The Huffington Post (not exactly a right-wing publication) described how under the Bush administration, the Deepwater Horizon rig had been issued six safety citations, including one on the blowout protector which failed and allowed the blowout. However, just prior to the blowout, the Obama administration had issued a safety award to the rig.
The proclamation that deep-water drilling is necessary because oil was depleted in shallower waters is maliciously wrong. Environmental policies have put an end to ordinary offshore drilling in many cases, forcing oil companies to go to deeper waters.
The president implied the building of sand barriers to be part of his plan. In reality, Governor Jindal, under whose administration the idea was developed, was restrained for over a month from building those sand barriers to prevent the oil from encroaching into our coastlines and swamps. Now that the swamps are saturated with oil, barrier construction is approved, and the president deceitfully claims "We've approved the construction of barrier islands in Louisiana, to try and stop the oil before it reaches the shore..."
The Obama administration has turned down offers from other nations to send skimmer ships to help in the clean up. The Jones Act prohibits foreign ships from doing such work in U.S. waters, but this act can be rescinded in an emergency, as it was after Hurricane Katrina. The current regime has refused to allow foreign ships to be used because of pressure from labor unions. The Dutch offered early on to help in the clean up, but were refused by the regime.
The only effective responses of the Obama administration are to ban drilling, to threaten to take over British Petroleum, and to push for a "new energy policy." Louisiana, the state most affected by the oil disaster, has maintained a 4-6% unemployment rate, roughly half of the national average. Obama has effectively allowed the destruction of the Louisiana seafood industry. This, in turn, affects our tourism. His ban on drilling will cause the loss of jobs in the oil industry. Republican-run Louisiana will now be forced, by Democratic-led federal intervention, to face the same levels of unemployment as the rest of the nation. Is this a result of coincidence or calculation?
I would like to think that the president simply made poor decisions. A glance at his reaction, however, shows that these were not mistakes. Obama capitalized on the situation by turning a bad accident into a major disaster. His calculated moves increase federal interference in local governance and strengthen the executive branch to a degree of power far beyond that granted by our U.S. Constitution, a document deemed obsolete by most current politicians, but to which our military is sworn to uphold against enemies both foreign and domestic.
Private individuals in Alabama and Florida are PROHIBITED from doing voluntary beach cleanup. So much for their individual rights. Unless a go-ahead is given by our all-powerful federal government, no actions can be taken on a state or local level for cleanup. Obama wants visible damage, in order to remind our people of the catastrophe, so that government regulations and intervention can be increased. I am reminded that James Madison once remarked, "Crisis is the rallying cry of the tyrant."
The executive branch of government has openly usurped the power of the judicial branch. In the president's words, "We will make B.P. pay for the damage their company has caused." It is not up to the president of the United States to hold accountable or punish those companies he deems guilty. It is not within the power of the presidency to dictate what money B.P. has to pay out in damages, nor dictate the manner in which this is done. The proper third party to manage any trust funds or payouts is the constitutionally-established court system, not an executive-appointed board. What happened to the process of the class-action lawsuit? What gives anyone in our government the right to declare a company guilty without due process of the law, and a fair trial?
What is happening to our constitutional rights under the current regime? When the president determines the guilt and innocence of private companies, the next step is to usurp similar power over individuals. This is the mark of a totalitarian dictator rather than an elected official of a free republic.
Let's look now at the truth behind the lies. While the president presented the need for new regulations, the administration failed miserably to implement existing laws and policies. The Huffington Post (not exactly a right-wing publication) described how under the Bush administration, the Deepwater Horizon rig had been issued six safety citations, including one on the blowout protector which failed and allowed the blowout. However, just prior to the blowout, the Obama administration had issued a safety award to the rig.
The proclamation that deep-water drilling is necessary because oil was depleted in shallower waters is maliciously wrong. Environmental policies have put an end to ordinary offshore drilling in many cases, forcing oil companies to go to deeper waters.
The president implied the building of sand barriers to be part of his plan. In reality, Governor Jindal, under whose administration the idea was developed, was restrained for over a month from building those sand barriers to prevent the oil from encroaching into our coastlines and swamps. Now that the swamps are saturated with oil, barrier construction is approved, and the president deceitfully claims "We've approved the construction of barrier islands in Louisiana, to try and stop the oil before it reaches the shore..."
The Obama administration has turned down offers from other nations to send skimmer ships to help in the clean up. The Jones Act prohibits foreign ships from doing such work in U.S. waters, but this act can be rescinded in an emergency, as it was after Hurricane Katrina. The current regime has refused to allow foreign ships to be used because of pressure from labor unions. The Dutch offered early on to help in the clean up, but were refused by the regime.
The only effective responses of the Obama administration are to ban drilling, to threaten to take over British Petroleum, and to push for a "new energy policy." Louisiana, the state most affected by the oil disaster, has maintained a 4-6% unemployment rate, roughly half of the national average. Obama has effectively allowed the destruction of the Louisiana seafood industry. This, in turn, affects our tourism. His ban on drilling will cause the loss of jobs in the oil industry. Republican-run Louisiana will now be forced, by Democratic-led federal intervention, to face the same levels of unemployment as the rest of the nation. Is this a result of coincidence or calculation?
I would like to think that the president simply made poor decisions. A glance at his reaction, however, shows that these were not mistakes. Obama capitalized on the situation by turning a bad accident into a major disaster. His calculated moves increase federal interference in local governance and strengthen the executive branch to a degree of power far beyond that granted by our U.S. Constitution, a document deemed obsolete by most current politicians, but to which our military is sworn to uphold against enemies both foreign and domestic.
Private individuals in Alabama and Florida are PROHIBITED from doing voluntary beach cleanup. So much for their individual rights. Unless a go-ahead is given by our all-powerful federal government, no actions can be taken on a state or local level for cleanup. Obama wants visible damage, in order to remind our people of the catastrophe, so that government regulations and intervention can be increased. I am reminded that James Madison once remarked, "Crisis is the rallying cry of the tyrant."
The executive branch of government has openly usurped the power of the judicial branch. In the president's words, "We will make B.P. pay for the damage their company has caused." It is not up to the president of the United States to hold accountable or punish those companies he deems guilty. It is not within the power of the presidency to dictate what money B.P. has to pay out in damages, nor dictate the manner in which this is done. The proper third party to manage any trust funds or payouts is the constitutionally-established court system, not an executive-appointed board. What happened to the process of the class-action lawsuit? What gives anyone in our government the right to declare a company guilty without due process of the law, and a fair trial?
What is happening to our constitutional rights under the current regime? When the president determines the guilt and innocence of private companies, the next step is to usurp similar power over individuals. This is the mark of a totalitarian dictator rather than an elected official of a free republic.
Never Let a Good Catastrophe Go to Waste???
Rahm Emanuel, concerning the political implications of the Obama oil disaster:
"Never let a good catastrophe go to waste."
So what does this mean? It is an admission of what I've been fuming about all along: that the president of our nation has hampered both prevention and cleanup of the oil spill, in essence creating a disaster, in order to further his political agenda.
Now we can expect government takeover or intensive regulation of oil companies...all in the name of "energy reform," no doubt.
While Barak Hussein obviously did not cause the oil spill, he definitely created the disaster we now see. He should be duly honored by having his handiwork referred to as the Obama Oil Disaster of 2010.
"Never let a good catastrophe go to waste."
So what does this mean? It is an admission of what I've been fuming about all along: that the president of our nation has hampered both prevention and cleanup of the oil spill, in essence creating a disaster, in order to further his political agenda.
Now we can expect government takeover or intensive regulation of oil companies...all in the name of "energy reform," no doubt.
While Barak Hussein obviously did not cause the oil spill, he definitely created the disaster we now see. He should be duly honored by having his handiwork referred to as the Obama Oil Disaster of 2010.
Friday, June 11, 2010
Social Conservatives and the Catholic League
Having visited the Catholic League site, I've noticed how leftist their agenda is, stating their firm stand with the Catholic Church on redistribution of wealth.
I find it both appalling and amusing that social conservatives run to the defense of this leftist group, all in the name of honoring Mother Teresa. Social conservatives completely overlook the fact that this socialist group, in its total disdain for private ownership of property, DEMANDS that a private building be used to further their religious cause--a cause contrary to the principles of the U.S. Constitution--a cause of "social justice" and perverted ethics.
This shows how social conservatism is merely another form of totalitarian thinking. It is time that the libertarian spirit of the Tea Party movement return us to constitutional values of capitalism and private ownership of property.
I find it both appalling and amusing that social conservatives run to the defense of this leftist group, all in the name of honoring Mother Teresa. Social conservatives completely overlook the fact that this socialist group, in its total disdain for private ownership of property, DEMANDS that a private building be used to further their religious cause--a cause contrary to the principles of the U.S. Constitution--a cause of "social justice" and perverted ethics.
This shows how social conservatism is merely another form of totalitarian thinking. It is time that the libertarian spirit of the Tea Party movement return us to constitutional values of capitalism and private ownership of property.
A Message to the Mafia Thugs at the Catholic League
(Sent to the Catholic League website, June 11, 2010)
Having grown up Roman Catholic, it is difficult for me to hate the religion of my ancestors. My parents did a decent job instilling values in me, whether or not I have lived up to these values.
That does not exempt Catholic organizations like your own from my harsh criticism. I have no tolerance when the Catholic League tries to insist that private landowners must cater to your religio-psychotic whims and give in to your leftist agenda. It is disgraceful to you when you refer to refusals to pay homage to your would-be saint as "snubs"
This is America, not medieval Europe. Forget the idea that your link to the Catholic Church gives you the right to dictate to the owners of private property what they should or should not do with what they own. The freedom gained by our founding fathers in the separation of church and state, and the protection of the rights of individuals--this is something Catholic Europe never could imagine, much less implement under any form of government. Catholic nations were too caught up in papal supremacy and divine rights of kings. Rather than giving the world freedom, twentieth-century European Catholic nations all gave rise to Fascism and National Socialism, with the sole exception of France, whose ideals were patterned after ours--not the Vatican's.
The Catholic League subscribes to socialist thinking and wealth redistribution, where what is yours is yours, and what is mine is also yours. And the more I earn, the more it is yours.
I will address your leader now. Mr. Donahue, you seem to disregard the fact that owners of a building do not need to make rules to suit the Catholic League. They only need to make rules to suit themselves. After all, don't they own the building? If you feel so strongly, go buy a skyscraper and put whatever lights on it you choose. And let some Jewish group complain that the lights are not in the shape of a Menorah at Hanukkah.
However, we know that Jews do not use Mafia tactics as developed in Catholic Italy. You organization is obviously not above this.
Having grown up Roman Catholic, it is difficult for me to hate the religion of my ancestors. My parents did a decent job instilling values in me, whether or not I have lived up to these values.
That does not exempt Catholic organizations like your own from my harsh criticism. I have no tolerance when the Catholic League tries to insist that private landowners must cater to your religio-psychotic whims and give in to your leftist agenda. It is disgraceful to you when you refer to refusals to pay homage to your would-be saint as "snubs"
This is America, not medieval Europe. Forget the idea that your link to the Catholic Church gives you the right to dictate to the owners of private property what they should or should not do with what they own. The freedom gained by our founding fathers in the separation of church and state, and the protection of the rights of individuals--this is something Catholic Europe never could imagine, much less implement under any form of government. Catholic nations were too caught up in papal supremacy and divine rights of kings. Rather than giving the world freedom, twentieth-century European Catholic nations all gave rise to Fascism and National Socialism, with the sole exception of France, whose ideals were patterned after ours--not the Vatican's.
The Catholic League subscribes to socialist thinking and wealth redistribution, where what is yours is yours, and what is mine is also yours. And the more I earn, the more it is yours.
I will address your leader now. Mr. Donahue, you seem to disregard the fact that owners of a building do not need to make rules to suit the Catholic League. They only need to make rules to suit themselves. After all, don't they own the building? If you feel so strongly, go buy a skyscraper and put whatever lights on it you choose. And let some Jewish group complain that the lights are not in the shape of a Menorah at Hanukkah.
However, we know that Jews do not use Mafia tactics as developed in Catholic Italy. You organization is obviously not above this.
Thank you, Obama
(Email sent to White House, May 28, 2010)
My thanks to you, the ghetto-boy-in-chief of our nation. Thank you for doing nothing for weeks as the oil slick entered our Louisiana marshes, even when we had a chance to prevent this mess. Thank you for giving us your ghetto-based panhandling-style words to attempt to appease us, but take ABSOLUTELY NO ACTIONS to prevent this rape of our coast.
If this were the California coast, you would be catering to the demands of your political whore, Pelosi, to get things cleaned up. Republican-dominated Louisiana is a different story, isn't it?
Thank you for "supporting" our governor by using your thugs in the Corps of Engineers to block his building of sand barriers to keep the oil from encroaching. Thank you for your racist attitude against our governor--after all, a bigoted reaction is to be expected of a black community rabble-rouser against those dark-skinned individuals with parents from other parts of the world, who prosper in America instead of moaning and groaning about "disparities." Is it a coincidence that you fail to cooperate with the governor whom you despise, whose superior intelligence you envy? The governor who has maintained low unemployment and economic prosperity in our state, despite your attempts to destroy our nation's economy to promote your true agenda? Is it a coincidence that you are out to destroy the only state which is prospering right now, avoiding the economic plight you and your Democratic Congress have inflicted upon the rest of the nation?
Anyone who doubts this should look at the numbers, and see what happened to the stock market once your Dems got control of the budget. Don't blame it on Bush--for his first six years, a Republican Congress gave us a bull market. A half-brain can look at the NASDAQ or Dow Jones records and see when the market plummeted, and see that it coincides with a Democratic majority in Congress.
Thank you for allowing this environmental catastrophe to happen so that you now have another excuse to place heavier restrictions against still another aspect of American business. The only thing you have shown speed in is your rapid effort to block further oil exploration and drilling in the U.S. Your priorities are clear to us. And our precious land in Louisiana is merely a tool for your corrupt political regime. But we Louisianians are not your pawns.
Go back to your Chicago ghetto. Go use your affirmative-action-provided Harvard education to stir up shit among the less educated. At least limit your crap to ruining one city instead of the whole nation. But, then again, is that not ruining our nation your real goal? Who needs external terrorists, when the terrorist-in-chief sits in the oval office?
My thanks to you, the ghetto-boy-in-chief of our nation. Thank you for doing nothing for weeks as the oil slick entered our Louisiana marshes, even when we had a chance to prevent this mess. Thank you for giving us your ghetto-based panhandling-style words to attempt to appease us, but take ABSOLUTELY NO ACTIONS to prevent this rape of our coast.
If this were the California coast, you would be catering to the demands of your political whore, Pelosi, to get things cleaned up. Republican-dominated Louisiana is a different story, isn't it?
Thank you for "supporting" our governor by using your thugs in the Corps of Engineers to block his building of sand barriers to keep the oil from encroaching. Thank you for your racist attitude against our governor--after all, a bigoted reaction is to be expected of a black community rabble-rouser against those dark-skinned individuals with parents from other parts of the world, who prosper in America instead of moaning and groaning about "disparities." Is it a coincidence that you fail to cooperate with the governor whom you despise, whose superior intelligence you envy? The governor who has maintained low unemployment and economic prosperity in our state, despite your attempts to destroy our nation's economy to promote your true agenda? Is it a coincidence that you are out to destroy the only state which is prospering right now, avoiding the economic plight you and your Democratic Congress have inflicted upon the rest of the nation?
Anyone who doubts this should look at the numbers, and see what happened to the stock market once your Dems got control of the budget. Don't blame it on Bush--for his first six years, a Republican Congress gave us a bull market. A half-brain can look at the NASDAQ or Dow Jones records and see when the market plummeted, and see that it coincides with a Democratic majority in Congress.
Thank you for allowing this environmental catastrophe to happen so that you now have another excuse to place heavier restrictions against still another aspect of American business. The only thing you have shown speed in is your rapid effort to block further oil exploration and drilling in the U.S. Your priorities are clear to us. And our precious land in Louisiana is merely a tool for your corrupt political regime. But we Louisianians are not your pawns.
Go back to your Chicago ghetto. Go use your affirmative-action-provided Harvard education to stir up shit among the less educated. At least limit your crap to ruining one city instead of the whole nation. But, then again, is that not ruining our nation your real goal? Who needs external terrorists, when the terrorist-in-chief sits in the oval office?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)