Joe Is Always Correct

Social Contracts

2010-05-08T00:29:00.000-07:00

A social contract among individuals is a concept instituted in an attempt to ensure social tranquility. In consenting to the terms of a social contract, members of a societal group agree to forfeiture of certain “Natural Rights” in exchange for the tranquility of a relatively safe and hopefully prosperous civilization brought about by laws put in place to unsure the contract is enforced. These contracts are presumed to be voluntary but are actually compulsory and any individual wishing to terminate their portion of the contract is usually punished.

Each nation presumably enacts laws it sees appropriate to enforce the terms of its contract. A person’s violation of the social contract could result in punishment enacted by a judicial system tasked with the enforcement of the terms of that nation’s social contract. In the United States we have social contract based on individual liberty and personal freedom. This contact is enforced by laws that protect members of our society from violators and can subject them to severe punish. Our social contract holds its member’s personal safety and property rights in high regard. By allowing its members to conduct their lives in a comparatively secure environment, it has permitted our nation to become the prosperous nation that it is. Many people point to the large prison population in the United States and conclude this is a nation full of bigotry and hate that seeks nothing more than to oppress through incarceration as many undesirables as possible. But, the truth is we hold our social contract so dear, that any violation is dealt with in the most appropriate manner. The mandatory long prison sentences given to murderers, crimes involving the use of a gun, kidnapping and drug offences are reflective of our determination and dedication to hold people accountable for their contract violations.

Not all nations maintain social contracts with as high a standards as the United States and it’s evident in viewing their prosperity. One example is our neighbor to our south, Mexico. The citizen’s social contract in Mexico would appear to be grossly inadequate to provide the necessary security to allow a majority of its general population to prosper. The nation of Mexico is rich in natural recourses, such as crude oil, but this surplus of prosperity has not raised the living standards of the population anywhere near that of the United States. There seems to be systemic corruption of their entire society that undermines their otherwise attainable prosperity.

This same scenario is repeated throughout the world. Millions of citizens in foreign nations suffer in needless conditions under brutal governments because their nation’s governing structure is based on weak or purposely tyrannical social contracts. It may sound elitist to state, but until those citizens take the appropriate actions necessary to liberate themselves of their oppressors, they will never earn the privilege of living under a social contract that allows and encourages the prosperity experienced in the United States.

A Little Machiavelli

2010-04-09T21:45:00.000-07:00

The reading of “The Prince and the Discourses” by Niccolo Machiavelli was quite an eye opener for me. For several years I’ve heard the name Machiavelli mentioned in political discussions and as a frequently used term in political discussions, especially, it seems, when describing characteristics of our political system in the United States, is “Machiavellism.”

Frequently, it appears political theories derived from the ideas within “The Prince and the Discourses” are viewed negatively. Having never read this book, I must admit, because of this I also negatively viewed any idea described as originating from “Machiavellism.” But, after reading Niccolo Machiavelli’s book I view him as a practical person. Max Lerner writes as much in the introduction on page xxxiii, “He (Machiavelli) had a clear-eyed capacity to distinguish between man as he ought to be and man as he actually is…”

Yes, in his writings Machiavelli describes methods that seem rather brutal. But, in my opinion Machiavelli is only writing of what he’s witnessed or learned from what others have witnessed as to methods used in the ruling of nations, good and bad up to his time. He appears to draw from a vast knowledge of history and of his contemporary times. Impressive is his detailed knowledge of events during the time of the Spartans, Romans, Egyptians, and of the Popes in the Catholic Church. Not only does he advise how to govern based on different philosophies he also appears to be more than capable to advise on military matters through the books of The Discourses.

Out of these observations and learned methods he does give the impression that his only intent is to advise the reader how to successfully rule. Max Lerner yet writes in his introduction on page xliii, “The common meaning he (Machiavelli) has for democrats and dictators alike is that, whatever your ends, you must be clear-eyed and unsentimental in pursuit of them and you must rest your power ultimately on a cohesive principle.” But, it’s Machiavelli’s writings that speak of the benefits of republics over rule by a prince that I find revealing. This alone should divulge to those who study his writings his true intent in writing these books.

In Chapter III, page 9 of ‘The Prince” Machiavelli writes “For it must be noted, that men must either be caressed or else annihilated….injury therefore that we do to a man must be such that we need not fear his vengeance.” That idea seems rather brutal and can be viewed negatively, but, prior to that statement and on the same page he writes about planting colonies as a means of securing newly acquired lands because, “The colonies will cost the prince little;….he only injures those whose lands and houses are taken to be given to the new inhabitants, and these form but a small proportion of the state, and those who are injured, remaining poor and scattered, can never do any harm to him, and all the others are, on the other hand, not injured and therefore easily pacified.” While this statement may still appear brutal, planting a colony by taking the property of a few land owners in a region the prince needs to control, you have to admit, is far, far less brutal than annihilating the entire local population. Most likely further steps to reduce the hostility from the local population could be taken by only taking the property of persons ruling the region prior to the prince’s conquest. In all probability these rulers were despised for their oppressive, if not tyrannical citizenry control methods anyway and the new prince will be viewed as a savior. Most will accept him as a welcome change. In page 113, Chapter II of “The Discourses” Machiavelli even writes, “Under such powerful leaders the masses armed themselves against the tyrant, and, after having rid themselves of him, submitted to these chiefs as their liberators.” This describes the plight of a people having been ruled by and then riding themselves of a tyrant, not only submitting to a new prince but considering him as a liberator. While the method used to rid them of the tyrant might have been brutal, living under the new prince must have been far less oppressive.

Machiavelli also seems to favor and espouse the formation of governments ruled by the “people” not princes. He goes so far as titling The Discourses, Chapter LVIII, “The People Are Wiser And More Constant Than Princes.” In this chapter Machiavelli states several times how the people formed as a republic and not a prince would be the preferable ruling method.

Machiavelli gives the example of the people of Rome in page 261 of Chapter LVIII in The Discourses that, “…who, so long as the republic remained uncorrupted, neither obeyed basely nor ruled insolently, but rather held its ranks honorably, supporting the laws and their magistrates.” He follows on the same page describing oppression of the republic with, “And when the unrighteous ambition of some noble made it necessary for them to rise up in self defense, they did so.” Because the Roman leadership became corrupt and oppressive the people knew those actions were necessary to restore the republic and had to be taken.

Machiavelli recognizes that in some cases the people may not rise up against a corrupt prince. The last sentence in The Discourses, Chapter XXIX, page 495, he states what additionally could happen by adding, “The example of the prince is followed by the masses, who keep their eyes always turned upon their chief.” This is to caution that the people may emulate the corruption it sees in their prince. He places the blame squarely with the prince in the very first sentence of this chapter by stating, “Let not princes complain of the faults committed by the people subjected to their authority, for they result entirely from their own negligence or bad example.” This is not saying that the people should not be held accountable for their actions, but he states the prince’s negative actions stood as an example and influenced the negative actions of the people. Previous to this passage he informs the reader in the first sentence of Chapter XLII, “…we should notice also how easily men are corrupted and become wicked, although originally good and well educated.”

Although, Machiavelli does warn in his writings, that when comparing the people’s nature to the prince’s, on page 262 of the same text, he states “…for both alike are liable to err when they are without control.” I think we all would agree that this is true and easy enough to understand. In keeping with Machiavelli’s theory that all men have a drive to possess as much as possible, it stands to reason that both people and princes must be constrained by laws from using nefarious means in pursuit of obtaining possessions. But, Machiavelli does make the distinction between the levels of the grievous actions taken by the people and the prince. At the top of page 263 in the Discourses, he includes, “For a people that governs and is well regulated by laws will be stable, prudent, and grateful, as much so, and even more, according to my opinion, than a prince, although he be esteemed wise; and, on the other hand, a prince, freed from restraints of the law, will be more ungrateful, inconstant and imprudent than a people similarly situated.” Further down the same page Machiavelli states again, “I say, that the people more prudent and stable, and have better judgment than a prince…” Again, on the next page, page 264, he weighs faults and attributes of the people against those of a prince and writes, “…we shall find the people vastly superior in all that is good and glorious.”

Machiavelli even goes so far as comparing those actions of a prince that is constrained by laws to those of a people that aren’t. Reading onto page 265, we find him stating, “…we shall find more virtue in the people than in the prince.” And when neither are constrained by laws, Machiavelli adds “…we shall see the people are guilty of fewer excesses than the prince, and that the errors of the people are of less importance, and therefore more easily remedied.”

Throughout this chapter Machiavelli contrasts the virtues of the people to that of the prince and in each instance he acknowledges that the people are more prudent, are more competent evaluators of good and evil, make better choices, make greater amounts of progress in the minimal amount of time and generally do less harm to the state, (Either through the people’s limited capability or their respect for the laws.) than a prince. Which, as I stated earlier, I think is the reason for his writing of these books. He knew from history, which type of governments were most effective and those traits that made them effective. But, he also knew that a government formed of the people and regulated by laws was vastly superior to that of a prince.

So, in my opinion, yes, Machiavelli's "The Prince" describes techniques useful in governing as a tyrant, but also describes the techniques essential in forming and maintaining a successful republic. It's as if Julia Child wrote a cook book that not only describes how to make a the worlds best apple pie, but how to make the worlds worst apple pie.

Obama "S"care

2010-03-23T21:49:00.000-07:00

Well, it passed and was signed. We can only hope a court overturns the "Obama Health Care" bill before it sinks this nation into a bottomless pit of run away federal spending.
This video is a sign of things to come if we allow the health care to bill stand.
Enjoy and try not to puke, then watch it again. (You know you well.)

CPAC, Glenn Beck Speech

2010-02-20T19:53:00.001-08:00

CPAC, Andrew Breitbart Speech

2010-02-20T19:02:00.000-08:00

name="src" value="http://www.ustream.tv/flash/video/4869722" />

The Book of Eli

2010-02-17T12:55:00.000-08:00

I broke a promise to myself this weekend. It’s getting to be a habit with me. I promised myself I wouldn’t pay to see any Hollywood produced movies in the movie theater. I’m just so sick of the “Leftist” “America is bad” ”Belief in God is for the mentally insane” story lines. But, this weekend my wife and daughter begged to go see “The Book of Eli” starring Denzel Washington. You know, Dr. Philip Chandler, from “St. Elsewhere.” I had read some favorable reviews of “The Book of Eli” and decided to tag along with my wife and daughter. After all where else can I gorge myself with a 5 pound box of Dots and not have people stare at me or feel bad about it.

So, here’s the premise of the story line:
1. Denzel’s character Eli, is on a mission from God to deliver a book, well, The Book. He doesn’t know to who or where, but knows he must move West. So, for 30 years he’s been walking West and hacking-up anyone that gets in his way.

2. Gary Oldman plays the evil “Carneigie“ who rules a town full of killers. His main quest is to find a copy of “The Book” that Eli just happens to have as he strolls through Carnegie’s town. Carneigie is older and knows the power he could weald over people if he had “The Book.” He could make Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson and Jim Jones look like amateurs.

3. The scenes of the movie take place in a “post appoctoliptic’ world that was destroyed 30 or so years ago evidently in a war caused by ‘The Book.”

4. After the war, all copies of “The Book” were destroyed because of its danger.

This movie had great actors, a great story line and I absolutely loved how it was filmed. Oh, and my box of Dots was wonderful. But, there were so glaring holes in the premise.

1. 30 years of walking? Really? 30 years? Even with a bad limp he could have walked from the East Coast to the West Coast in a couple of months. Didn’t fur trappers do it all the time a hundred and fifty years ago?

2. Why did Carneigie wait 30 years for a copy of “The Book?” Why didn’t he do like those before him have done, write your own book.

Look, all I’m saying, is, take a pen, some paper and start writing whatever pops into your head no matter how wacky the ideas are. Just like David Koresh, Muhammad, Joseph Smith, Rev. Sun Myung Moon, L. Ron Hubbard or the leader of any communist/socialist country. I also understand Barack Obama is into writing.
Just make something up, some people will believe it. The ones that don’t believe it, well, you can follow the above list of people and, lock them in compound, cut their heads off, take everything they own, take everyone they love and sue them in court after taking everything they own.

I mean, no conniving despot worth a grain of salt would wait 30 years for a book. Despots are people of action, they, “don’t need no stinking book” to rape, plunder, not bathe and chew with their mouths open (a true sign of a despot). They’re despots, they excel at those conniving activities. That in its self blew the whole movie for me. Okay, that and the 30 year cross country meanderings of Eli. Did he get side tracked? Did he drop in on relatives in San Antonio and stay for dinner?
Although, I must admit, he did beat Moses by 10 years.

Like I wrote at the beginning, I enjoyed the movie. It’s a great story with great action and a great ending. But, as usual the writers, producers, and directors took a great story and managed to screw it up just enough to ruin.

All it needed were some blue, 15 foot tall characters and my entire box of Dots would have ended up on the floor.

Che Guevara Interview

2010-02-12T21:15:00.000-08:00

Here's the first in a series of interviews with some of history's biggest idiots.

Super Bowl and Bridgestone Endorse Child Abuse

2010-02-07T18:11:00.000-08:00

Well, it's official sports fans,the NFL endorses illegal drug usage/dealing, dog torture/killing, illegal firearm carrying and now Child Pornography. They continue to place their bottom line (cash) above the safety of others.

I'm writing about the Super Bowl half-time performance of The Who featuring Pete Townshend who was arrested in 2003 for,

"possessing indecent images of children, suspicion of making indecent images of children and suspicion of incitement to distribute indecent images of children."

Sure, the charges were dropped, but,
1. They did find child pornography on his computer.
2. He did admit to having and downloading child pornography on his computer.
3. He was required to register as a "sex offender."

I guess in England, physical evidence and a confession aren't enough to convict.

So, I visited the web site of Bridgestone and sent them the following email:

"Dear Bridgestone,

Your sponsorship of the Who's Super-Bowl half time show can only be judged as your support of Child Pornography and those that continue that morally despicable practice. Of course I'm referring to Pete Townshend and his 2003 arrest on charges of "possessing indecent images of children, suspicion of making indecent images of children and suspicion of incitement to distribute indecent images of children."
It has been proven time after time that these sick, morally repugnant individuals can not be rehabilitated.

Because your company places monetary values over child safety, I will not purchase a set of your tires for my vehicle this month. Because of your company's compliantcy in the support of a child abuser, yes child pornography is a form of child abuse, it can be inferred that you would place monetary value above the safety of my family.
I will use FaceBook, MySpace, Twitter, and my personal blog to inform and deter the purchasing of your products."

They most likely won't, but if they do respond to my email I'll post their response in this blog.

King Obama, er, Arthur

2010-02-07T12:48:00.000-08:00

This is a classic. Watch this video and every time someone says "King Arthur," imagine they said "King Obama."

Sarah Palin Tea Party Keynote Speach

2010-02-07T12:09:00.000-08:00

You may not 100% agree with Sarah Palin or consider her a serious political force, but if you listen to this speech you'll find nuggets of wisdom I'm sure you'll agree with. Give this Tea Party convention keynote speech a listen and if I'm wrong.....well....I'm always correct, so give it a listen.

Don't Buy Stephan King's "Under The Dome."

2009-12-20T00:25:00.000-08:00

Hey, I just finished Stephen King's new book, "Under the Dome." 1072 pages of crap! How or why, does he do it? It was the most boring pile of dead tree pulp I think, I KNOW I've ever read. Is he insane! Did that car that hit him damage his brain? Oh, why couldn't that car have been going faster?

That pile of paper and ink stole hours of my life that I'll never get back. Don't buy it! And don't ask to barrow mine, it's getting burnt into a pile of ashes.

Or better yet, I'm going to place it where the empty role of toilet paper is now hanging and enjoy it all over again, one page at a time.

AL Gore gets "Owned"

2009-12-09T20:08:00.000-08:00

I hate Al Gore's global warming lies as much as the next "Correct-Thinking" person, but the guys in this video make me proud.

Eco-Marxists "Hide The Decline"

2009-12-09T18:46:00.000-08:00

Comrade Gore and the rest of the world Eco-Marxists are meeting in Copenhagen to make their final plans to control every aspect of your life. They insist we are dooming the planet's future because of our man-made climate altering habits. Habits like, eating, breathing, and just plain living. With the resent release of emails that prove the data used to make this claim, was "fudged" to get the desired "the sky is falling" results, you would think these Eco-Marxists would back off a bit. Well, being the good little Eco-Marxists they are, they aren't letting a little truth get in their way.

Here's a nice music video to celebrate their determination.

I Love This Guy.

2009-12-06T20:59:00.000-08:00

Thanksgiving, Star Trek and Truth

2009-11-27T16:43:00.000-08:00

First off, I’d like to wish everyone a very happy Thanksgiving, even if you don’t deserve it. Secondly, I like to say, “WHY WASN’T I TOLD THE TRUTH?!” Why after all these years do I have to read about it on the internet? Where were all my past history teachers on this subject? Why was Mr. (Bozo) Wilson more interested in teaching us how the U.S. Constitution was a “living document” written a long time ago and isn’t applicable now? Why were we forced to make those construction paper indian head dresses, tomahawks, Pilgrim hats and turkeys made by tracing around our hands? And that was my senior year.

What truth? The truth about the Pilgrims, Thanksgiving and how they barely survived those first few winters. The truth about what saved them it 1623 from a sure death. The truth about the people that financed their voyage to the New World and how they expected to be paid back. The truth about how they were able to be paid back. The truth about the form of community organization that almost killed them all. The truth about the form of self-reliance that saved their lives.

To be honest, if someone asked me if they lied to this former high school delinquent, I’d have to say, “No.” But, they also never taught it. Which in this case is worst than lying.

This is what we were taught, every year.
1. The Pilgrims sailed to the New World to escape taxes and VD.
2. Some of them died on the trip.
3. They arrived at Plymouth and named a rock, well, “Plymouth Rock.”
4. Some Indians helped them.
5. Some didn’t help them.
6. Some just handed out coupons for a free buffet and one free spin of the big wheel.
7. Several Pilgrims died the first winter from disease.
8. Several Indians also died of what is known as the first VD epidemic in the New World.
9. Magically, they were able to grow food that third year, they had a big meal to give thanks to the Indians that helped feed them and all was good with the world. We were later taught the first Thanksgiving meal was actually also the first “comp’d” dinner from the Indians.
10. The following year the New York Yankees won their first World Series.

Now, contrast that, and what you were taught, with the truth from an article written by Tom Bethall. You'll see it wasn't "Big Government" providing bailouts, safety regulations, minimum wage laws, closed shops (union only), forced vacations, disability compensation, food stamps or unlimited product liability law suits.

As Mr. Bethall writes, citing Pilgrim William Bradford, it wasn't until every man was responsible for the survival of himself and his own family that the Plymouth Experiment succeeded. Not until the "Collectivist", everyone working for the common good, all needs will be met by society, Star Trek'ish, the needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few, many hands makes the task easier, wrong, wrong, wrong,bla, bla, bla, barf, barf, barf!

So, give Tom's article a read and learn the truth your NEA dues paying teachers were afraid to teach you and that delinquent

How Private Property Saved the Pilgrims

Cash For Clunkers Truth

2009-11-24T22:38:00.000-08:00

Well, I knew the final cost of the the government's "Cash For Clunkers" program would be much higher than originally claimed by our "Ruling Party." But $24,000 per vehicle? Ouch! Below is part of the report.
Read the entire report.

"Cash for Clunkers Results Finally In: Taxpayers Paid $24,000 per Vehicle Sold, Reports Edmunds.com

SANTA MONICA, Calif. — October 28, 2009 — Edmunds.com, the premier resource for online automotive information, has determined that Cash for Clunkers cost taxpayers $24,000 per vehicle sold.

Nearly 690,000 vehicles were sold during the Cash for Clunkers program, officially known as CARS, but Edmunds.com analysts calculated that only 125,000 of the sales were incremental. The rest of the sales would have happened anyway, regardless of the existence of the program.

Happy Thanksgiving, May God Bless Us All.

2009-11-24T22:19:00.000-08:00

Listen to an Intolerant Tolerance Monger

2009-11-24T21:39:00.000-08:00

“It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.” -Aristotle (Ancient Greek Philosopher, Scientist and Physician, 384 BC-322 BC)

"Those whom can't entertain a thought without accepting it are always incorrect." -Joe is Always Correct. (Today)

A Little Something to Think About

2009-11-21T18:25:00.000-08:00

2009-11-21T18:23:00.000-08:00

Picture of The Week

2009-10-30T20:25:00.000-07:00

Leftside Magazine

2009-09-20T17:12:00.000-07:00

Yesterday I canceled my subscription to Outside Magazine. Why? Well, to give you a hint I now call it "Leftside" magazine. I've subscriber to that magazine since July of this year. I love the outdoors and had on occation bought the magazine at a book store. A few months ago I decided to buy a subscription, after all, I only cost $14.95 a year. That sure beats paying over $4.00 a month at a store.

Below is a copy of the email I sent to Outleftside magazine that will explain it all.

Outside magazine,

I enjoy the outdoors very much and have enjoyed your magazine. I love to hike, mountain bike ride, golf and paddle outrigger canoes.
While reading this Septembers issue I was very surprised at what I found on page 32, Mr. Van Jones, environmental advocate, attorney, author, self proclaimed communist and hater of anything to do with the United States or white people.

Sorry, for some reason your magazine left the "self proclaimed communist and hater of anything to do with the United States or white people" part out. Why would that be?
Oh, but you did also refer to him as an "luminary." How nice of you.

While I do admire environment advocates, I like to think of myself as one sometimes, I find it disturbing you would feature any "self proclaimed communist" in your pages.
I suppose next month on the cover of Outside we'll find a picture of Che Guevara, freedom fighter, doctor and all around nice Marxist.

Well, I hope never to see that cover or another issue of Outside magazine. Please, discontinue my subscription and refund my pro-rated subscription fee.

Was I right to cancel my subscription? Of course I was, I'm ALWAYS correct.

Cash For Clunkers is a Clunker.

2009-08-27T21:11:00.000-07:00

Well, I called it weeks ago. The "Cash For Clunkers" program spurred sales of new vehicles, just not the vehicles our dictator and his union handlers expected. But, how could any semi-intelligent person not see what would happen. I'll run it down for you. I know, I know, you're one of the semi-intelligent ones as I am but there might be some of the "Blinded-by-the-obama-glow" folks reading this that always need the obvious explained.

Fallacy #1. The government can run a program involving money or services and not have it work as planned.
Truth #1. US Post Office, Social Security, Medicare, VA Hospitals, Amtrack, just to name a few. What do these all have in common? All are run by the government and all operate in the red by billions of dollars. None of them make a profit and is subsidised by you the tax payer.

Fallacy #2. People will trade-in their clunkers, buy a new American car and the government/union owed (tax payer owned, union controlled) auto manufactures will be saved.
Truth #2. Let me ask, why were the American auto makers were going to go out of business without a bail-out? Because they build "SHITY" cars that cost too much. Now comes along a $4500 "gift" to buy a new car. What are people going to buy? Right, a car not made by lazy, over paid, corrupt unions. Below is a list of vehicles purchased in the program, notice any thing.
Here's the link to this information:

www.cashforclunkersfacts.com

Top 10 New Vehicles Purchased
Toyota Corolla
Honda Civic
Toyota Camry
Ford Focus FWD
Hyundai Elantra
Nissan Versa
Toyota Prius
Honda Accord
Honda Fit
Ford Escape FWD

And here is a list of the vehicals (clunkers) traded in:

Top 10 Trade-in Vehicles
Ford Explorer 4WD
Ford F150 Pickup 2WD
Jeep Grand Cherokee 4WD
Ford Explorer 2WD
Dodge Caravan/Grand Caravan 2WD
Jeep Cherokee 4WD
Chevrolet Blazer 4WD
Chevrolet C1500 Pickup 2WD
Ford F150 Pickup 4WD
Ford Windstar FWD Van

Do you see what I knew would happen? People traded-in their American union made "clunkers" and are buying higher quality, better value Japaneses built vehicles. The funny thing is most, if not all of those foreign manufacturer autos, are made in the United States. And, just like the Fords that are in the "purchased" list, none of them received government (tax-payer) bail-outs.

Fallacy #3. This government run program will run smoothly and the auto dealers will have no problem receiving the "Clunker Cash."
Truth #3. Just like the Post Office. LOL. The web site used to submit the forms crashed. The 13 page forms were often rejected for no reason. There are dealerships that submitted over a hundred requests and only received a few payments.

Scott Lambert, vice president of the Minnesota Auto Dealers Association, said he was "astounded" to learn at a meeting Tuesday representing about 150 Minnesota dealers that not one has had a deal approved.

"We had dealers representing 1,500 to 2,000 transactions," he said. "We asked how many had a deal approved yet, and not one hand went up."

Fallacy #4. This government will freely "give" you $4500 for your clunker.
Truth #4.Yeah right! Guess what little surprise you'll be getting when you file your tax return next April. Yep, you get to pay taxes on that "free" $4500 as earned income.
So you see, this is just another "big-government" "big-screw-up" because the morons in Washington insist on meddling in the economy. The best line I've heard is, "If the government is powerful enough to get us out of a recession, why isn't it powerful enough to help us avoid a recession."

Ronald Reagan puts it best,

"Government isn't the answer to the problem, government is the problem."

"Government does not solve problems; it subsidizes them."

Fidel Supports Obama. No Supprise There.

2009-08-25T06:50:00.000-07:00

The latest sound coming out of our favorite dictator, (no, the one to the south not the one in Washington), is a rant about the "right-wing" Obama haters preventing Obama from implementing his "positive" changes because he's black. Such as turning the United States into a dictatorial-communist nation.

Castro said Obama had inherited many problems from his predecessor, George W. Bush, and was trying to resolve them. But the "powerful extreme right won't be happy with anything that diminishes their prerogatives in the slightest way."

Castro was also heard to say,

"Kill them all."
"Let them rot in prison and then kill them all."
"I don't care if he is my second in command, kill him and his family."
"Let the Russians put their missiles here so we can kill all the Americans with them."
"Che, my life long friend, go ahead and kill them all."
"Raul, kill Che."
"Raul, find me a roll of toilet paper, and ah, um, oh yeah, kill them all."

Left Wing Double Standards.

2009-08-19T19:33:00.000-07:00

The blind hatred and double standard that exists toward anything that doesn’t originate from Democrat Party members is ludicrous. Take as an example the demonizing of President Bush for his commuting of Scooter Libby’s prison sentence. Although, Mr. Libby, his former chief of staff convicted of obstruction of justice in the federal probe of the leak of CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity after her husband, former ambassador Joe Wilson publicly criticized the Bush administration for playing fast and loose with intelligence backing the invasion of Iraq, was not pardoned and still had to pay the $250,000 fine. Now, how many Democrats complained when their “savior,” President Clinton, issued full pardons to 367 people? These pardons were for people convicted of drug dealing, car theft, bank robbery, illegal firearm sales, bribery, embezzlement and perjury.

Another example of this double standard is the firing of U.S. attorneys. President Bush fired four because of poor job performance and the Democrats act as if this is an impeachable offence. But no one even batted an eyelash when President Clinton fired all 96 U.S. attorneys shortly after entering office.

The Democrats also like to call Republicans racists. As an example of Republican racism, whenever Republicans vote for lower taxes the Democrats accuse the Republicans of being racists because according to Democrats, “Tax breaks favor the rich not the poor.” The poor being made up of minorities. What the Democrats don’t mention is that Southern Democrats, including then Senator Al Gore Sr., voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and that former KKK Klansman Democrat Sen. Robert Byrd, who joined the KKK in 1942, was elected “Exalted Cyclops” and held the title of “Kleagle” (recruiter), tried to block the bill by personally filibustering for 14 hours. He also voted against the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that outlawed discriminatory voting practices used to deny or abridge the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color. You decide for yourself, would you rather support a political party who’s members cuts taxes or one that is comprised of KKK recruits of cross burning lynch mobs? By the way, Senator Exalted Cyclops’s hero was segregationist Mississippi Democrat Senator Theodore Bilbo. Senator Theo was also a member of the KKK, wow, what a surprise. Bilbo was outspoken in his belief that blacks should not be allowed to vote anywhere and was a prominent participant in the lengthy filibuster of the anti-lynching bill before the Senate in 1938. He stated,

“If you succeed in the passage of this bill, you will open the floodgates of hell in the South. Raping, mobbing, lynching, race riots, and crime will be increased a thousandfold; and upon your garments and the garments of those who are responsible for the passage of the measure will be the blood of the raped and outraged daughters of Dixie, as well as the blood of the perpetrators of these crimes that the red-blooded Anglo-Saxon White Southern men will not tolerate.” (Theodore G. Bilbo and the Decline of Public Racism, 1938-1947" by Robert L. Fleegler, Spring 2006, The Journal of Mississippi History)

Do I need to say more?

A more recent example of the insidious hatred toward any Republican action is the war in Iraq. President Bush had the blessing from the U.S. Congress including all the major Democrats who later want to surrender and recall out troups. He also had the okay from the United Nations and the cooperation of several nations. But when President Clinton decided to bomb a former ally, Kosovo, without United Nations approval that was fine and dandy with the lefties. Although, he did have the support of the German Luftwaffe who where more then happy to goose-step back into Kosovo and finish off any Serbians they missed in World War II.

The Democrats loved it when President Clinton bombed bridges, hospitals, schools, civilian factories and other non-military targets. Where were the peace marches then?

If a civilian target was bombed in Iraq the Democrats want to Court Marshal everyone involved. But where was the uproar when President Clinton used Tomahawk cruise missiles to destroy terrorist targets in Afghanistan. Targets like an aspirin factory and several civilian neighborhoods. The Democrats couldn’t set a date too soon for a complete withdraw of troops from Iraq, but it’s been 10 years and we are still sending troops to Kosovo. Republican wars baaaaaaad, Democrat wars goooood.

Now we have the example being set concerning Afghanistan. As our troops are exiting Iraq, per the demands of the Democrats, they are entering Afghanistan and by the end of the year should number a round 68,000, yet there hasn’t been one peace march protesting that troop buildup. Why not? The Democrats declared the Iraq war a “quagmire” almost from the first day yet the war in Afghanistan with its vague objectives could become the mother-of-all-quagmires. Republican quagmires baaaaaaad, Democrat quagmires gooooooood.

The “Democrats can do no wrong” attitude is similar to Marxism’s “The end justifies the means.”

Here’s a few choice quotes:

“If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.”

� President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

“We urge you to take necessary actions (including air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.”

� Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Tom Daschle, John Kerry, Dianne Feinstein and Joe Lieberman, Oct. 9, 1998

“We know that he has secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.”

� Al Gore, Sep. 23, 2002

“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.”

� Sen. Ted Kennedy, Sep. 27, 2002

“If left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will develop nuclear weapons.”

� Sen. Hillary Clinton, Oct. 10, 2002