Gustav Makes Landfall

I know I haven't posted anything here for quite a while, but with Hurricane Gustav making landfall today, last week's Democrat Party convention and the upcoming GOP convention, I feel obliged to say something, even if no one will read it.

As Hurricane Gustav approached the Gulf Coast, several Democrats made complete fools of themselves as they talked about what a blessing it was for their party to have a hurricane blasting that area so close to both the GOP convention and the anniversary of when Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans.

This more than anything else shows the lengths to which Democrats are willing to go in order to gain power: they will even wish for a hurricane to destroy people's lives and homes just to gain political points over a catastrophe that was originally the fault of two Democrats.

Let's be perfectly clear: the disaster that was Hurricane Katrina was not George Bush's fault. The Democrats love to bash Bush over the response to that disaster, but the truth is that if the preparations had been made properly by the Democrat governor of Louisiana and the Democrat mayor of New Orleans, they would have needed FEMA to come in and help clean up, not come in and rescue hundreds of people trapped in a flood zone.

New Orleans basically exists as two things: a city and a flood zone. Much of the city is below sea level, and a system of levies keeps the water out. Apply too much pressure (such as with a cat. 5 hurricane), and there's going to be trouble. This fact has been well known for years.

The failure in New Orleans was that the governor and mayor did too little to plan ahead for the disaster and get the people out. Add to that the fact that this liberal bastion was full of poor people who couldn't afford to get out of town and an incompetent mayor who decided to pile everyone into the football stadium instead of using any and all resources at his disposal to get them out of there, and the recipe was set for disaster. The blaming of the Bush administration and the branding of the Katrina incident as a Republican failure was nothing more than political blame-shifting, as the Dems successfully pushed the focus of the disaster away from the preparatory failures of Ray Nagin and Kathleen Blanco and toward the horrible response from the federal government and FEMA. The truth is, if Nagin and Blanco had Louisiana and New Orleans properly prepared for the disaster that everyone knew was coming, the devastation would have been far less than it was.

If anything, Hurricane Katrina showed the inherrent failures in liberal thinking: if you're waiting around for the government to be your savior and protector, get ready for disappointment and disaster. There were plenty of people in the Gulf Coast area who got out on their own, successfully, and returned after the hurricane to rebuild.

The current situation also shows just how little Democrats really care about America and the American people. They want us to fail in Iraq so they can act self-righteous and justified in their opposition to the war, to the point that they even say we're failing when we are, in fact, succeeding. They want natural disasters to devastate people's lives so they can score political points by blaming it on Republicans, global warming, and the Bush administration, just so they can gain more power.

The Democrats aren't about doing what's best for America - the Democrats are about doing or saying whatever they think is best for the Democrats. The Democrat party is all about bribing the American people with government hand-outs and making the people dependant on the government so they will have no choice but to vote Democrat because self-reliance is dead.

Food Shortage Problems Worsening

Food prices continue to rise, and the shortage in staple foods is having far-reaching consequences.

Now, the United Nations is getting in on the act, urging nations across the world to increase food production as food riots threaten to destabilize many already unsteady third-world nations.

Why are we having these problems? Today's food shortages are a direct result of the growing demand for ethanol for use as fuel for cars. Ethanol made from corn is in high demand, and the more farmers sell their crops to make biofuels, the less staple foods there are for the rest of the world.

These shortages are even effecting the US, the so-called "Breadbasket of the World." Unfortunately, it will likely take more than a few miffed shoppers to make the people of America wake up and smell the wheat...or lack of wheat.

On top of all of that, the shortage in food staples has driven many manufacturers of processed foods to turn to genetically engineered or altered grains in the name of saving money. With the worries around the world as to the potential side-effects of these engineered foods, this brings up even more concerns as to the true practicality of turning to corn-based ethanol for fuel.

The simple truth of it is that using corn-based ethanol was and is an ill-conceived idea, and has far-reaching side effects that will eventually cause a major backlash. No one can fault farmers for turning to crops that will make them the most money, but we can blame the green movement and the leaders in our government for encouraging the burning up of our food supply.

The United States used to literally be the Breadbasket of the World. Nations the world over depended on the United States' grain exports to feed their citizens. Now the US is burning that food in the name of energy independence and is importing grain to feed its citizens. Widespread use of corn-based ethanol is a mistake, but it's not too soon to correct that error. We can stabilize the world's food supply by turning away from this foolishness and eating our food, rather than burning it.

After all, who will benefit from cleaner air if we all starve to death?

Happy Tax Day!

It's tax day...the day that commemorates the government's bad spending habits and exploitation of the people for their own ends.

This year, millions of Americans are getting money back due to the so-called "economic stimulus package," a lame bi-partisan attempt by our federal lawmakers to bribe the American public and help the economy.

The notable thing about the economic stimulus package is that the Democrats have as much as admitted that money in the hands of the people really does stimulate the economy...a concept that they never can seem to understand any other time they talk about taxes. Of course, for the Democrats, the economic stimulus package was an opportunity to use the IRS as yet another welfare system, offering "tax rebates" to people who don't make enough money to have to pay income taxes.

But if money in the hands of average Americans stimulates the economy, and the Democrats have admitted it with this tax rebate, why haven't the Republicans pointed out the fact that maybe the Bush tax cuts really have been a good idea, and electing Clinton or Obama, who will do nothing but raise taxes and spending, would be a disaster for the US economy?

If a tax rebate will help to stimulate the economy, then lower taxes across the board, accompanied by lower government spending, will help to stabilize our economy and guarantee that the US can retain its superpower status over the long-term. The only thing the Democrats' socialist policies will get us is a quick trip into the dustbin of history...but for some reason, none of our politicians will admit as much, because they're too busy trying to bribe the public.

Global Warming Movement Screws the Little Guy

The "green" movement has gotten bigger and bigger in US politics, with public schools brainwashing our children and politicians grubbing for more and more power, all in the name of "saving the planet."

Now we're starting to see the real fruits of their labor.

The push toward biofuels has driven up food prices across the globe, the green movement is having a negative effect in third world nations the world over. With heightened awareness of ethanol, farmers have been growing more and more corn, with the crops going toward ethanol production instead of food. The shortage is driving up food prices and is creating social unrest in Haiti, the Phillipines, and many African nations whose nations depend on staples such as corn and wheat for their survival.

The American Left often accuses the US of arrogance, but now again we see that true arrogance resides on the Left. They have used the green movement to justify their continued push toward socialism, and now, in their blind push toward "saving the planet," they are driving up food prices for people who already had a hard time affording enough food to survive.

By utilizing corn-based ethanol, the green movement is advocating the literal burning of our food supply, to the detriment of millions of Americans, as well as millions more across the world who depend on American food production and low food prices.

Liberals say that the world hates us because we pissed off a bunch of Islamic radicals (who were pissed off anyway) when we invaded Iraq and liberated millions of oppressed people there. Now they're poised to give the world a real reason to hate America, when the Left makes food unaffordable in the name of clean air.

We should take care of our environment, but we cannot afford to sell our souls in order to decrease pollution. We need to approach environmentalism logically, not emotionally. We need to look at all sides of the issue before handing more and more power to the government in the name of environmentalism. We need to look at how our actions will effect others, as well as how they will effect our children. Will cleaner air truly help our children if they can't afford to eat?

Absolut Insults America...

The makers of Absolut vodka are running an ad in Mexico that shows a map of North America with its pre-Mexican-American war borders, where Texas, California, Nevada, Arizona, and New Mexico are still part of the nation of Mexico. The tag line is, "In An Absolut [read: perfect] World."

They are only running this ad in Mexico (go figure).

From the LA Times:

"[Favio] Ucedo, [creative director of a Lation ad agency] who is from Argentina, said: “Mexicans talk about how the Americans stole their land, so this is their way of reclaiming it. It’s very relevant and the Mexicans will love the idea.”

But he said that were the campaign to run in the United States, it might fall flat.

“Many people aren’t going to understand it here. Americans in the East and the North or in the center of the county -- I don’t know if they know much about the history.

“Probably Americans in Texas and California understand perfectly and I don’t know how they’d take it.”

Think about that: Mexicans still talk about how Americans stole their land...back in 1848. The United States has reached "from sea to shining sea" for 160 years, but Mexico still can't get over it.

What I truly don't get is this: Mexicans seem to have so much pride in their home country...and I have no problem with that: I'm a proud American, after all. But if Mexico were truly so great, why do millions of Mexicans try to flee their nation every year to come to America? The United States of America truly is the Land of Opportunity and is so much better than Mexico, and millions upon millions of Mexicans (even the ones marching in the streets of US cities waving Mexican flags) testify to that through their determination to come here to find jobs. Heck, illegal Mexican immigrants can make a better living in the US at substandard wages then they can earning standard wages down in Mexico.

Personally, I think the whole "reconquista" movement is just a massive case of jealousy: we fought a war. The U.S. won. We signed a treaty. The Southwestern U.S. was claimed by the United States as the spoils of war, and Mexico ceded the territory. If Mexico wants it back, they can try to take it...but they won't do that, because the US military would kick their butts back into the stone age...AGAIN.

Shame on Absolut for trying to further encourage Mexicans to waste their time and energy on taking back what isn't theirs. Mexico is a nation riddled with problems, and the U. S. of A. has become a massive excuse for their politicians to ignore the problems within their own nation and shift blame northward. It's gone on long enough.

We're Going The Wrong Way

The US economy is in trouble...more trouble than most people are aware. The problem is that our government, in trying to fix the problem, is actually taking steps to make things worse.

Treasury Set to Announce Regulatory Overhaul

Fed Eyes Nordic-Style Nationalisation of US Banks

Paulson Plan Endorses Fed's Enhanced Market Authority

Brace for $1 Trillion Writedown of 'Yertle the Turtle' Debt

Not long after our nation's founding, the country was plunged into a debate over whether the federal government had the authority to create its own bank. The truth is that the federal government has no authority to mess with the banking industry, including the creation of a national bank - yet the bank was created. Nowhere in the Constitution is the federal government given the right to nationalize any private industry, but now there are rumblings of a nationalized banking industry. How can this be good news for the US economy?

For a long time now, the US government has garnered a well-deserved reputation as being an inefficient, slow-moving behemoth that just cannot seem to do anything right. Remember Hurricane Katrina? Is that the kind of leadership you want running our banks?

Yet that's just the kind of banking system our leaders are talking about.

The Constitution does not give our government the authority to nationalize our banks. The government has done nothing to help thus far. They've made some cosmetic changes, to be sure, but nothing that will fix the long-term disaster that looms over our economy.

Personally, I think it's time for the people of America to look to our founding documents. Read the Constitution, and realize that the government is exceeding its authority.

How about this line from the Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Nationalizing the US banking industry is yet another cosmetic change that, in the end, will only make things worse...and the more our federal government exceeds its authority, the more I tend to think of the original founding document of the United States: the Declaration of Independence. I think of how, as our federal government becomes larger and larger, taking more and more power away from the people, they "[become] destructive of these ends." It's time for the people of America to wake up. It's time to invoke the "alter or abolish" clause of the Declaration of Independence. It's time to put the politicians back in their place and start running a government that realizes that its authority and power comes from the people, and the people can take that power away.

Maybe it's time for another American Revolution.

Could a New President Tear the Democrats Apart?

The Democrat primary truly is turning into an entertaining race. Hilary Clinton and B. Hussein Obama have been in a virtual dead heat for the past several months, with Obama holding a slight lead and Clinton not far behind in the primary race. Throw in Florida and Michigan (which unfortunately don't count), and they're pretty much neck-and-neck.

So, it looks like the outcome of the Democrat primary will be determined by the superdelegates, which could very well wreak havoc throughout the party...think Florida in 2000, only on a smaller scale: in that election, the Democrats basically blamed the Supreme Court of appointing George W. Bush president (in actuality, they voted to uphold standing Florida state law, which the Florida Supreme Court violated). Instead of the people of the Democrat party choosing their presidential candidate, the candidate will be chosen by the superdelegates, essentially meaning that half of the party's population would be overruled through the hijacking of the election process. According to Chris Dodd, as well as the Boston Globe, this primary election fight could potentially shake the party to its foundations.

What's more, apparently there is some infighting between Clinton's camp and Nancy Pelosi. Pelosi has been urging the superdelegates to follow the voters when they vote to choose a candidate...which would essentially make the superdelegates redundant. Of course, the irony of the party that calls itself "Democratic" subverting the democratic process through the use of superdelegates even further shows the hypocrisy of the Left.

A Man I Would Vote For

I'm a conservative, which means I have strong libertarian leanings, but I've never considered myself a Libertarian, because I have too many disagreements with the Libertarian Party to sign up. However, one of the Libertarian candidates has caught my eye and I think merits a serious look by conservatives who, like myself, just aren't willing to bite the bullet and vote for a Republican as liberal as John McCain.

Wayne Allyn Root is a Libertarian Party candidate who is strongly conservative and stands more for common-sense conservatism than most Libertarians I've heard about in recent years. Limited government, lower taxes, a return to states' rights. This is the kind of conservative candidate that I've been looking for: the kind you won't find in the modern Republican Party. Root is currently leading the field in the Libertarian primary, and if he wins, I will vote for him in the general election.

Check out Wayne Allyn Root's site, see what he stands for, and vote for the true conservative option.

Another Reason Politics Doesn't Make Sense

Politicians have been pointing at higher gas prices for several years now, placing the blame with the Bush administration and the war in Iraq, and pointing to rising gas prices as yet another reason that America needs "change."

Well, Michigan Congressman John Dingell (D) wants to do something about it - he wants to raise the price of gas even further. During a time when consumers are already feeling the pain of higher gas prices, Rep. Dingell has proposed a 50-cent per-gallon hike in gas taxes...in order to discourage consumers from buying gas in an effort to prevent global warming.

The problem: for millions of Americans, gasoline is a necessity, not an option. Raising gas taxes will do little more than hurt average Americans who need to buy gas for their vehicles in order to get to work every day. Hiking up the gas tax may sound like a good idea for a Congressman who spends most of his time in Washington, where the public transportation infrastructure has had to grow in order to meet the needs of millions of people, but that just doesn't work across most of the rest of the nation. I can think of no better way to hurt the US economy and the average American than to raise gas taxes...which makes it the perfect kind of policy for a Democrat to propose.

Obama's Excuses

Barack Hussein Obama today gave a speech which essentially amounted to damage control for the comments of his pastor, Jeremiah Wright. Obama finally denounced Wright's comments, though in my opinion his words rang hollow. Were Obama a conservative, he would have been disgraced, driven out of the race, and his political career would be over - and all of that would have happened before the beginning of the primaries.

The truth is that nothing Obama could say would convince me that Rev. Wright's words didn't effect Obama, or that he didn't agree with them in some way. I can understand Obama having respect for the man who brought him to Christ, but there is no conceivable way that anyone would be a member of a church for twenty years if they disagreed with their pastor's political preaching as much as Obama professed to today.

Based on his comments, rants, and conspiracy theories, Obama's pastor is roughly the left-wing equivalent of Fred Phelps of the Westboro Baptist Church. As I stated earlier, were Obama a conservative, he would be receiving the political equivalent of being tarred, feathered, and run out of the campaign on a rail. As it is, he's largely gotten a pass thus far, probably due to some form of "white guilt" in the media - because it's a black church, Obama has cast this as a racial issue going all the way back to the existence of slavery at the founding of the nation...and because he's black, he'll probably get away with it.

The problem with this is that Obama has run his campaign on the platform that he will unify the nation. Bringing race in as an excuse for Rev. Wright's insanity does nothing more than to further the divide between races, religions, and political parties and ideologies.

Personally, I have no problem with Obama's faith - he has the right to worship as he pleases. But when his religious adviser is a left-wing radical conspiracy theorist, that worries me. Barack Obama may be a brother in Christ, but that doesn't mean I want him as my President.

The Democrat Party...Why They Aren't Democratic

It really is amusing watching the Democrats tear at each other during this primary process. To start with, it's really interesting watching the so-called "Democratic" party tear apart the process of effective democracy. First the party isn't taking delegates from Florida and Michigan, the all of a sudden they're talking about re-doing the Florida and Michigan primaries. Now it looks like the Florida repeat isn't going to happen, while the repeat primary in Michigan still might.

Obama has taken a strong lead...a fact that I'm not particularly fond of. While I'm not planning to vote for John McCain, I'd rather see Hilary Clinton in the White House than Barack Obama - Obama is seen as "tabula raza," but he's actually more liberal than Hilary.

And now there are questions concerning Obama's pastor - an anti-American race-baiting hater. Rev. Jeremiah Wright is pastor at Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago - the church that Obama has been a member of for around 20 years - basically seems to be an expert at spouting anti-American leftist tripe, which definitely makes me more worried than ever about the possibility of his becoming president...because for Obama to stay with that church for 20 years, he has to agree with his pastors' teachings, and the last thing America needs is a president who hates his own nation.

And now, apparently, Obama and Clinton have agreed to play nice - their campaigns basically devolved into personal attacks, which is really all they have to work with, considering that they're not that far apart ideologically.

Ann Coulter: Hillary over McCain

In an interview on Glenn Beck's show on Headline News, Ann Coulter stated that she'd rather have Hillary Clinton in the White House than John McCain.



I'm not sure I totally agree - just hearing Hillary's voice gives me a headache, so just listening to the State of the Union every year would become a major undertaking.

Coulter definitely has a point, though: of the three candidates, Hillary looks to be the most conservative. It's a close call (and a bit frightening to any conservative who may be wondering what the U.S. will look like in 2012), but there it is.

John McCain has tried pandering to the conservative base of the Republican party, but in doing so, he seems to have forgotten that conservatives aren't fools - real conservatives aren't mind-numbed Republican robots - we remember McCain-Fiengold. We remember McCain-Kennedy. We remember the "Gang of Fourteen." And we know that's not who we want in the White House.

One other important point that Coulter brings up in her column: one of the things that has endeared McCain to Republicans is the fact that he's a Vietnam Vet. So is Duncan Hunter, and he would've made a much, much better choice for president.

Personally, I can't say that I'd rather have Hillary than McCain - any of the big three (Clinton, McCain & Obama) would be horrible choices for America, and I wouldn't vote for any of them.

At this point, given the choice of Clinton vs. McCain or Obama vs. McCain, I think I'll probably write in Ann Coulter.

Thanks to Socialized Health Care, Boy Goes Deaf For Nine Years

An eleven-year-old boy in England has finally regained his hearing.

For nine years, doctors and specialists didn't know what the problem was - they thought it was just ear wax blockage that made the child completely deaf in his right ear.

Then one day, the problem was solved when a cotton bud (the end of a Q-Tip) came out of his ear.

Remember, this is in England, where the government runs the health care system.

Does everyone still think Hillarycare is a good idea?

The Woman Versus The Black...And The Evangelical Red Herring

The Democrat primary has heated up. With the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries now done & over with, the candidates have moved on to South Carolina, and the race between Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama is becoming quite entertaining as both candidates fall back on their same-old liberal playbooks.

With Martin Luther King Day just a week away and the first southern primary coming up, Clinton and Obama have both attempted to inject race into the debate. When it comes to playing the race card, though, Hilary has one big factor going against her: the vast majority of South Carolinians can see. Let's face it: it doesn't matter that Hilary is married to "America's first Black president." No matter how much Hilary plays the race card, she's still white...and her commentary thus far hasn't helped her campaign any among black voters, especially since she has been crediting Lyndon B. Johnson with fulfilling Martin Luther King, Jr.'s dream by signing the Civil Rights Act into law. Meanwhile, her husband has been touring black radio stations trying to do some damage control.

Personally, I couldn't care less about which candidate on the left is more racially sensitive - political correctness rarely (if ever) impresses me. It is fun, though, to watch the white woman try to out-PC the black man on racial issues.

What really bothers me about the Democrat campaign is that Obama has been doing quite well...and frankly, I believe that if Obama gets the nomination, our next president will definitely be a leftist wacko. Obama is young, charismatic, and presents a fresh, new face...everything Hilary is not. Put Hilary up against any of the Republican candidates, and the Republicans may actually have a fighting chance. Put Obama up as the candidate, and it's four years of excruciatingly PC news reports about America's first black president.



Meanwhile, the Republican side is turning into a two-man race...and unfortunately it's between the wrong two men. Huckabee has continued to be strong in the polls, with McCain close behind him. Personally, I wouldn't vote for either of them - I'd much rather have a conservative in office. However, if I had to choose, I think I'd rather have the war hero than someone as willing to use religion to get votes as Huckabee has shown himself to be.

Frankly, Huckabee's transparent use of his religious views to get votes is a bunch of bunk: Huckabee's record shows that he is not a part of the so-called "Religious Right," but is in fact a leftist in "Religious Right" clothing. The problem for Republican conservatives is that McCain isn't much better, what with McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy, the so-called "gang of fourteen," and the recently defeated amnesty bill. McCain has shown himself to be on both sides of the aisle...about the only thing he has going for him is his stance on the war.

My candidate of choice is still Duncan Hunter...but unfortunately he doesn't have a prayer of winning the nomination. My second choice is Fred Thompson, and thankfully Thompson has been showing some passion (FINALLY). Thompson came out strong against Huckabee in the last Republican debate, and now his supporters are urging him to stay strong throughout the rest of the campaign.

Thompson has had a couple of things going against him from the beginning: first, he came into the campaign on time...about when presidential campaigns normally start. Everyone else started early and already had some momentum going. Second, Thompson has tried to run a rather laid-back campaign, which the media has taken the opportunity to either ignore or translate into a lack of passion. In times as partisanly-charged as these, candidates need to be recognized, and no one wants a dispassionate candidate, so these have been major stumbling blocks for Thompson's campaign.

I believe Fred Thompson could really make a comeback if he continues to address the issues strongly and call Huckabee out for what he is: a Republican liberal using religion to woo voters. So many on the right are looking for another "Reagan Revolution" - an injection of true conservatism into the debate, and Thompson is the candidate who could bring conservatism to the forefront...he just needs to get his face and his name out there as strongly as possible so that the true conservatives can know that he's serious, he's for-real, and he's the best candidate on the Republican ticket this primary season.

Leno Breaks The Strike...But Why Does Anyone Care?

Jay Leno has been a supporter of the Hollywood writers' strike since the beginning, and now he has won the distinction of being one of the first of the Hollywood elite to break the strike.  

I don't watch late night TV...I don't watch much of any TV for that matter, but apparently Leno had the audacity to write his own jokes for The Tonight Show.  Imagine, a comedian who actually writes his own jokes!

Personally, if I were Jay Leno, I would be ashamed that a writers' strike shut my show down - Leno is supposed to be an ace comedian, a really funny guy, but he has to have someone else write his jokes?  

I've never really cared much about the writers' strike from the beginning - these people aren't exactly hurting to begin with, and they haven't exactly been turning out quality products over the past few years - television these days is rarely much more than smut, filth, gore, and stupid PC messages (just like the movies).  I don't really see what all the stink is about - the only reason Leno can't write his own jokes is because the union keeps him from doing what should be his job in the first place.