Conservative Blogger

"The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America..."

Sat, 04 Jul 2009 09:38:20 -0500

The Declaration of Independence: A Transcription

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

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. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good. He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them. He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only. He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures. He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people. He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within. He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands. He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers. He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries. He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance. He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures. He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power. He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation: For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us: For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States: For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world: For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent: For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury: For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies: For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments: For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever. He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us. He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people. He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation. He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands. He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

The 56 signatures on the Declaration appear in the positions indicated:

Column 1
Georgia:
Button Gwinnett
Lyman Hall
George Walton

Column 2
North Carolina:
William Hooper
Joseph Hewes
John Penn
South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge
Thomas Heyward, Jr.
Thomas Lynch, Jr.
Arthur Middleton

Column 3
Massachusetts:
John Hancock
Maryland:
Samuel Chase
William Paca
Thomas Stone
Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Virginia:
George Wythe
Richard Henry Lee
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Harrison
Thomas Nelson, Jr.
Francis Lightfoot Lee
Carter Braxton

Column 4
Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris
Benjamin Rush
Benjamin Franklin
John Morton
George Clymer
James Smith
George Taylor
James Wilson
George Ross
Delaware:
Caesar Rodney
George Read
Thomas McKean

Column 5
New York:
William Floyd
Philip Livingston
Francis Lewis
Lewis Morris
New Jersey:
Richard Stockton
John Witherspoon
Francis Hopkinson
John Hart
Abraham Clark

Column 6
New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett
William Whipple
Massachusetts:
Samuel Adams
John Adams
Robert Treat Paine
Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins
William Ellery
Connecticut:
Roger Sherman
Samuel Huntington
William Williams
Oliver Wolcott
New Hampshire:
Matthew Thornton

NH Same-Sex Marriage Bill Becomes Law...

Wed, 03 Jun 2009 20:57:21 -0500

Gay marriage became law in the Granite State this afternoon.

Democrat governor John Lynch signed the bill into law today following votes passing the measure in the State Senate and Legislature earlier in the day. The law goes into effect on January 1, 2010.

I have friends who are excited over this development. They feel that they finally have attained the same rights that every other New Hampshirite has.

I also have friends who are upset at this bill being signed into law. They feel that this new law takes something away from the institution of marriage--something that they feel is a religious institution.

While I understand that those people think passing this law is wrong, I have to respectfully disagree with them.

Is marriage a religious institution? It is, but not exclusively.

Regardless of what anyone or any religion thinks it is, marriage is a legal arrangement and one that can only happen with the permission of the State. You are simply not allowed to get married without meeting specific legal requirements and obtaining a marriage license from the Government.

You're also not allowed to dissolve that marriage without the intervention of the State. Typically, you have to hire a lawyer and go to a court proceeding to end a marriage.

...and it's all because of Government. The moment they inserted themselves in this process and began regulating and taxing (via licensing fees) the event of marriage, they created a disparity in our society that would someday have to be dealt with. In New Hampshire, now is apparently the time.

I've heard some of the arguments from the opponents--that this now opens the door for marriage between family members, marriage between adults and underage children or even polygamy. That notion is absurd.

Many people use that argument because they paint homosexuality as aberrant behavior that leads to some of those other things--and we know that's just not the case.

Polygamy is a crime.
Marrying your sibling or cousin is a crime.
Relations with underage children is a crime.

Homosexuality is not. It's that simple.

Government created this problem and, ultimately, government has to rectify it. New Hampshire is the sixth state to try and tackle this issue. Are there other ways to solve this problem? Sure. For now, though, this is the one New Hampshire has chosen and it's the right decision at the right time.

Corresponding with Carol...

Wed, 13 May 2009 11:47:41 -0500

As a general rule, I'm not one to fire off a letter to my Member of Congress. Typically, I feel it doesn't do a whole lot of good. They haven't represented us in years and most letters are typically answered by staffers using form letters.

On April 16th, I broke my rule.

I was in my car heading into downtown Manchester to the famous Red Arrow Diner to meet a friend for breakfast, when I heard my Representative, Carol Shea-Porter, on WGIR-AM 610 talking about the previous day's Tea Party.

When asked to comment on the protest, Rep. Shea-Porter said that she was sure that those at the protest would agree a recent poll that said the spending in the Obama stimulus package was needed. I hit the roof at that point. I listened to as much of the interview as I could stomach and then went into the Red Arrow to meet my friend.

When I was done, I walked back to my car and realized I was parked right in front of Rep Shea-Porter's office in Manchester. I stared at the office for a few seconds and that's when I decided I was going to send my Congresswoman a letter.

This is what I mailed out that same day:

April 16, 2009

The Honorable Carol Shea-Porter
United States House of Representatives
1330 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Congresswoman Shea-Porter:

I was quite dismayed when I heard your reaction to the "Tax Day Tea Party Protests" on WGIR AM610 this morning. In your interview, you stated that you were sure that those gathering to protest yesterday would agree with a recent poll that stated a majority of Americans agree that we needed to spend this money now.

That assertion could not be further from the truth. With all due respect, you could not be any more wrong.

People are angry with their Government and they have every right to be. Washington stopped listening to us decades ago. Americans are struggling right now, and this new Congress and this new Administration have just added trillions more in spending that we just can't afford.

You also said that President Obama inherited a trillion dollar deficit. While that is absolutely true, you failed to mention that President Obama and this Congress have added trillions more. The President's stimulus plan, which went unread by every member of Congress--including you--contained items such as:

$6 billion to turn federal buildings into "green" buildings
$2 billion for a near-zero emissions coal power plant in Illinois that the Dept. of Energy defunded last year because the project was inefficient.
$650 million for the digital television (DTV) converter box coupon program.
$600 million to buy hybrid vehicles for federal employees
$150 million for parking improvements at a Little League facility in Cidra, Puerto Rico
$6 million for a "snowmaking and maintenance facility" at Spirit Mountain Ski Area in Duluth, Minnesota.

I ask you, Congresswoman Shea-Porter : How could we need to spend this money when no one in Washington even knew what was in the bill to begin with? It is precisely this kind of spending that the Tax Day Tea Party protests were rallying against.

The people who rallied yesterday not only believe this spending to be unnecessary, we also believe it to be irresponsible. All Congress does is take a larger percentage of our money and never once do they tighten the belt and reduce spending.

In the last year I've lost my home and my job. How do I get you folks in Washington to see that you already get enough money? I have to scale back my spending and draw clear priorities.

Why can't you?

Sincerely,
William E. Smith

The letter I wrote is pretty self-explanatory, I think. She completely mischaracterized what these protests were about and that made me pretty angry.

It took several weeks, but I got a response:

The letter reads:

Dear William:

Thank you for contacting my office regarding government spending.

The 111th Congress and President Obama have inherited a massive budget deficit and the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. Over the past few months, Congress has passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the Fiscal Year 2009 Appropriations bill, and the Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Resolution. All of these bills are intended to help the country recover from the economic downturn and fund programs that will help the economy grow in the future.

The goal of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act is to create jobs and help jumpstart the economy in the short-term. By investing in critical infrastructure needs, providing a tax cut for 95% of working Americans, and helping businesses create new green jobs, Congress puts a specific emphasis on helping working men and women during these tough economic times. While this legislation did have a significant cost, the losses that our economy could have suffered had we not taken action would have cost the country far more. In addition to the Recovery Act, Congress had to enact legislation, the Fiscal Year 2009 Omnibus Appropriations bill to keep the federal government operating through the 2009 Fiscal Year.

On April 2, 2009 both the House and Senate passed separate budget resolutions for Fiscal Year 2010. These bills were slightly different and will have to be negotiated and passed gain in order for the budget to be finalized. However, the budget does not require the signature of the President and therefore does not have the rule of law. The budget is an outline of what the Congress believes are the priorities we must address. This is why this budget makes investments in modernizing education, making college more affordable, and fixing our broken health care system. In order to address the serious problems of the future, we must take action now and make investments that will control costs and make our economy more competitive.

I continue to be extremely concerned with the debt of our country. As Congress works to restore our economy and make investment in our future, I will continue to advocate for fiscally responsible policies.

Sincerely,

Carol Shea-Porter
Member of Congress

Nice form letter, huh? Like Shea-Porter's comments on WGIR, this letter totally misses the point. Some staffer saw something about "spending" and used the generic form letter to reply to me.

It's what I expected, but...still...I'm not happy. I deserve a better response than this. Carol Shea-Porter didn't even read the Obama stimulus bill and then says it was necessary to spend this money? Does she think I'll fall for this?

Wait until she gets my next reply...

Rundown: 05/13/09...

Wed, 13 May 2009 10:44:25 -0500

In an effort to get back in the swing of things, here are some "quick hit" items. This may become a regular feature...

GOP govs plan Tea Party sequel

It was a matter of time before politicians started to use the Tea Parties as a campaign tool and, now, less than a month after the nation-wide protests.

The problem is, most Republican politicians don't get it. First they tried to take credit for the Tea Parties and now they're trying to take ownership of them. These "tele-town hall" meetings aren't going to send any other message than "I'm thinking of running for President in 2012."

Trump notes Obama, Prejean share same marriage stance

Why, yes...yes they do. This is a story that has been around way too long already and, in all honesty, who the hell really cares?!? It's Miss California, for cryin' out loud! I don't really care what her views are. Let's put this in perspective a bit, shall we? She's a beauty pageant contestant. Two years from now, no one will know who this woman is.

Of course, we will if they don't stop talking about her. That's probably why Trump gave us the sound bite he did...

What better way to get the media off this story than to compare the controversial views of Miss California to the exact same views of the current President of the United States? He may be annoying, but The Donald really does score a good one here.

Stimulus Aid Trickles Out, but States Seek Quicker Relief

So, taxpayers cough up $787 BILLION for a "stimulus package" and now, nearly three months later, that "aid" isn't getting to States quick enough. It was supposed to rebuild roads and bridges. It was supposed to create jobs and help with our critical infrastructure. Isn't that how it was sold to us, both in the campaign and during Obama's first weeks in office?

The administration says it's "right on schedule," though.

The Obama administration has committed to spending 70 percent of the money, or $550.9 billion, within the first two years. By that benchmark, an administration official said, the government is 8 percent toward its goal.

So, we're in the "worst economy since the Great Depression" and the spending bill was to "stimulate" the economy, right? We heard that we were getting that aid right away so the country could get back on track, but now...we're at EIGHT PERCENT OF GOAL?!?

They're spending the money over two years--because next year is 2010.

Mid-term elections. They're waiting to spend some of this money so they can spend the political currency in the campaigns for House and Senate.

There's your "hope and change," folks.

FDA Blasts General Mills over Cheerios Claim

Are you eating a bowl of Cheerios for breakfast every morning? If so, you may be taking an unlicensed (and, therefore, illegal) drug. So says the Food and Drug Administration in questioning the claim on Cheerios boxes that eating the classic breakfast cereal could reduce your cholesterol level by 10% in one month.

The FDA doesn't like the language that General Mills is using to promote the healthy benefits of Cheerios. Don't they have anything better to do? I mean, how many pharmaceutical advertisements are we inundated with during your average hour of prime time television? They want to go after Cheerios claiming that the language they're using can't be used by a food company?

They aren't arguing science. They're arguing semantics.

If only they put this much effort into approving drugs that might help people...

Ennui...

Thu, 02 Apr 2009 18:30:16 -0500

en·nui

Pronunciation: \ˌän-'wē\

Function: noun

Etymology: French, from Old French enui annoyance, from enuier to vex, from Late Latin inodiare to make loathsome

a feeling of weariness and dissatisfaction

That's how I've been feeling lately and, as I noticed when I logged into Movable Type to write this, I haven't been here since February.

I can't help it.

I just feel...down.

I see what's happening to my country in the first two and a half months of the Obama Administration and I find it all thoroughly depressing in the truest sense of the word.

I haven't watched the news since Inauguration Day.

I haven't listened to talk radio.

I haven't blogged since February 19th.

There's a part of me that just wants to tune it out--as if it will be better to experience if I don't know it's coming...

The massive debt we've added on to our children and grandchildren.

The intrusion of the Federal Government into private business.

The foreign policy blunders.

The radical shifts in policy.

The capitulation of American sovereignty.

I'm weary. I'm...worn out.

It's not just me, either. I was talking on the phone with my good friend, Niel Young, the other day. In addition to his weekly Saturday morning radio program, he is a long-time columnist for the Weirs Times in central New Hampshire. Niel's been having the same problem I have--he's finding it harder and harder to sit down and write about these things because of what he sees going on.

"Each week it becomes more challenging to sit down and compose a column that will inform you and stimulate your thought process. Why? You ask.

To paraphrase liberal turned conservative David Horowitz - the Left is now in charge of our country for the first time in our history - and I do not like the idea of my children and rand-children living under socialism. And I am going to still be here during the change!

Does it not seem like every day Barack Obama has found another way to take advantage of this 'crisis' and, as Rahm Emanuel stated upon taking over the White House: a good time to do those things you would not normally be able to get done?"

It was during that conversation I realized that's exactly how I feel.

I was starting to wonder if this little blog even matters in the grand scheme of things and, for a brief time, I even considered shutting it down. That was until I logged into Facebook one night.

I swear on my father's grave that this absolutely is a true story.

I received a friend request from someone I didn't know. It turned out that they were a Conservative Blogger reader and he wanted to thank me for writing me my blog.

And then he did something I didn't expect.

He called me a patriot.

It was my first inkling to dismiss that. Me? A patriot?!?! I mean, I've met real patriots--men and women who put on the uniform of this country every single day and defend her citizens. I've never thought of myself in those terms at all because I write a blog. I'm not a member of the Armed Forces. I'm not even an activist! I write--and sometimes not even often--about the things that matter to me and what I see as wrong about where we're headed because I figure if I can figure these things out, everyone ought to be able to see these things for what they are!

One compliment...no, one expression of gratitude for something I do when I feel motivated enough to do it, was enough to force me into my own little crisis of conscience and force myself to answer the following question:

Am I a patriot?

I...don't know.

I'm not a Marine, Soldier, Sailor, Airman, Coastie or anyone else who serves this country.

I'm certainly not Thomas Paine or Samuel Adams.

I'm not even any of the "big name" conservative bloggers that turn up here and there.

I'm just a guy...an unemployed IT professional in southern New Hampshire who lost his house, watches a bit too much Star Trek and absolutely adores his girlfriend.

...and, man, do I absolutely love this country. Sometimes in ways I can't possibly express without bringing a tear to my eye. I take great pride in calling myself an American because, despite what the Democrats and the liberal media would tell you, it's something other nations wish they were.

While I may not be at all comfortable with the description when applied to me, at least one person in this country has thanked me for being a patriot.

I suppose it's time I acted like one again.

For the first time in a while, I turned on the radio and heard Rush Limbaugh. It was right at the end of his program today and I caught him as he said this:

"Folks, we're going to prevail over this. The country's too strong and there are still too many of us left. So while all this may be disconcerting, we're gonna beat it back."

We are going to beat it back.

This is my country and I'm not going to let these bastards tear down everything Americans have worked for these last 233 years.

There's far too much to do and I don't have time to be depressed about it.

A Nation of Cowards?...

Thu, 19 Feb 2009 16:26:29 -0500

Our new Attorney General, Eric Holder--America's top law enforcement official, thinks that we in America are a bunch of cowards when it comes to racial matters.

He said so.

(If you are unable to see the embedded video below, please click here.)

"Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot, in things racial we have always been and continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards."

Cowards?

COWARDS?!?

With all due respect (and right now you are due none at all), Mr. Attorney General, who the hell are you to tell me that I'm a coward?

You know, before today, I didn't even know that Eric Holder was black. I had absolutely no idea until I saw this video when Michael Graham posted it on his blog. Personally, I don't care what color he is. I don't care what color or race or religion anyone is. What matters to me is who they are as people!

Isn't that what Dr. King dreamed of? For people to be judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin? Isn't that what our society is supposed to evolve to?

How can we with people like Attorney General Holder standing in our way?

If I judge Eric Holder by the content of his character, then I'm left with with the correct impression that our new Attorney General is an asshole.

The people who always insist we talk about race in this country are the people who aid and abet racism more often than not. As of today, Eric Holder is no better than any of them in my book.

WTF?: Monkey Love...

Thu, 19 Feb 2009 14:28:22 -0500

What the f***??

Travis, a two hundred pound simian who starred in several television commercials, enjoyed a life where he ate filet mignon, lobster tails, ice cream and even drank wine out of a glass. He had developed human traits--he dressed himself, bathed himself, brushed his own teeth and even used a human toilet.

He was the companion to Sandra Herold-- widow in Connecticut who had raised him for the last fourteen years.

On Monday, though, it all went horrifically wrong when Travis savagely mauled Charla Nash--a friend of Herold's--and he literally ate her face in an attack that lasted for twelve minutes.

When it was over, Charla Nash lost her eyes, her nose and her jaw. While her injuries were not life-threatening, she is still in critical condition.

There are reports now that the chimp may have had Lyme Disease or even been given Xanax and, though unconfirmed, it would potentially help explain Travis' behavior.

That's not what made me say "What the f***?"

This is.

According to the New York Post, Travis allegedly was more than just Sandra Herold's pet. Allegedly.

She fed him filet mignon and lobster tails. They shared cozy glasses of wine. They bathed and slept together. He tenderly brushed her hair. She gave him gifts and sweet kisses. He drew her pictures.

...

Travis became both a surrogate child and spouse, following the deaths of her daughter in a car accident several years ago and her husband five years ago, friends and psychologists said.

...

"I'm, like, hollow now," she told CBS. "He slept with me every night. He combed my hair. Everything in the house is for him."

Herold would frequently tell those who questioned her devotion to Travis that they simply did not understand.

"Until you've...eaten with a chimp and bathed with a chimp, you don't know a chimp," she said.

Unfortunately, Herold might not have truly known the chimp, either--or so it seems.

WTF?

What the hell makes someone wake up in the morning and think this is a good idea? Sure, chimps may seem cuddly and they may even be cute when they do human-like things, but we're talking about an ANIMAL, for cryin' out loud!

At the end of the day, Travis was a chimp--an animal that belongs in the wild and not as an alleged substitute for a child or husband. Regardless of what traits a chimpanzee might learn, it is still a chimpanzee and a slave to its own nature.

They're. NOT. Humans!

If the New York Post's story is accurate, then this relationship was just creepy--and now it's forever altered the life of Ms. Herold's friend. Not just from the physical scars--losing her eyes, nose and jaw--but also the emotional and mental trauma of being attacked by a wild animal and having your face eaten off.

If you can stomach listening to the audio from Herold's 911 call during the attack, you can find it here.

Detailed "Stimulus" Spending...

Sat, 14 Feb 2009 10:32:28 -0500

Stimulus is spending, but not all spending is stimulus...especially when it's the Government spending money on the Government.

ProPublica.org released a list of all the government appropriations in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.

The appropriations section of the bill details spending in excess of $311 billion for programs ranging from Pell grants for college students to clean water in central Utah to nearly $100 billion in new transportation and infrastructure projects.

Great, huh? I can't wait to see how some of this crap stimulates the economy. (Negative stimulation IS stimulation, I suppose.)

Here's just a small taste of where your money is going. Take a good look--this is what your children, grandchildren and great grandchildren will be paying for in the decades to come.

To see the full list, head over to ProPublica's website...

Program	Funding
Accountability	$323,500,000
Department of Agriculture - Office of Inspector General	$22,500,000
Department of Commerce - Office of Inspector General	$10,000,000
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration - Office of Inspector General	$6,000,000
Department of Justice - Office of Inspector General	$2,000,000
NASA - Office of Inspector General	$2,000,000
Defense Department - Office of Inspector General	$15,000,000
Department of Energy - Office of Inspector General	$15,000,000
Department of the Treasury - Inspector General for Tax Administration	$7,000,000
General Services Administration - Office of Inspector General	$7,000,000
Recovery Act Accountability and Transparency Board	$84,000,000
Small Business Administration - Office of Inspector General	$10,000,000
Department of Homeland Security - Office of Inspector General	$5,000,000
Bureau of Indian Affairs - Office of Inspector General	$15,000,000
Environmental Protection Agency - Office of Inspector General	$20,000,000
Department of Labor - Office of Inspector General	$6,000,000
Department of Health and Human Services - Office of Inspector General related to the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology	$17,000,000
Department of Education - Office of Inspector General	$14,000,000
Corporation for National and Community Service - Office of Inspector General	$1,000,000
Social Security Administration - Office of Inspector General	$2,000,000
Government Accountability Office salaries and expenses	$25,000,000
Veterans Affairs - Office of Inspector General	$1,000,000
State Department - Office of Inspector General	$2,000,000
Department of Transportation - Office of Inspector General	$20,000,000
Department of Housing and Urban Development - Office of Inspector General	$15,000,000

Taxation Without Representation...

Fri, 13 Feb 2009 16:44:50 -0500

1,071 pages and 8 inches thick.

That's how big the Obama Stimulus Package--the so-called "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009--is.

It's a bill that, according to the Associated Press, stands to combine "$281 billion in tax cuts for individuals and businesses with more than a half-trillion dollars in government spending. The money would go for infrastructure, health care and help for cash-starved state governments, among scores of programs. Seniors would get a $250 bonus Social Security check."

$787,000,000,000.00

Seven hundred eighty-seven BILLION dollars.

The bill passed the House of Representatives today by a vote of 246-183. No Republicans voted in favor of the bill and 7 Democrats actually voted against this legislation. As of this writing, the Senate stands to vote on the bill this evening.

There's only one problem, however.

Not a single one of these bastards in Washington has even read the damned "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009."

$787,000,000,000.00

That's not their money. It's yours and it's mine. The United States Congress--our elected representation in Washington--can't even see their way clear to actually read legislation that will add mounds of debt to every American family.

In fact, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi wanted the House to hurry up and vote on the measure because she was on her way to Rome, Italy.

House Republican Leader John Boehner had plenty to say, though.

Republicans said the package won't work because it has too little in tax cuts and spreads too much money around to everyday projects like computer upgrades for federal agencies.

"This legislation falls woefully short," said House GOP Leader John Boehner of Ohio. "With a price tag of more than $1 trillion when you factor in interest, it costs every family almost $10,000 in added debt. This is an act of generational theft that our children and grandchildren will be paying for far into the future."

Boehner also took to the floor of the House today and didn't mince words:

(If you are unable to see the embedded video above, please click here.)

Boehner's right, too. There was indeed a promise to post legislation 48 hours before any vote so the American people can see what's in it---part of the "Hope & Change" brought by our new President. It was posted to Al Gore's InterWebs around midnight. Ten hours to read almost 1,100 pages--and still, no one did.

Obama's bringing transparency to Washington, alright. Sadly, it's in the form of classic liberal "tax and spend."

Leader Boehner is partially right---this bill does amount to generational theft, but it's also something far more ugly and nefarious in my opinion.

This, plain and simple, is the modern version of taxation without representation.

After interest, we're talking about more than a trillion dollars and it's done under the guise of a "worker-friendly stimulus plan." When they put it like that, it would be crazy for the American people to be against it, right?

Our Congress--this parliament of whores--has thoroughly abdicated its primary and only responsibility: representing the interests of the American people.

They're supposed to be our voice and they can't even be bothered to take the time to read the legislation around the largest spending boondoggle in our nation's history? How does that represent me? How does that help us people who actually work.

Congratulations, America. This is what our representative form of democracy has become. Instead of a legislative body, we've got 535 leeches that take your money from you at every turn so they can reallocate it as they see fit.

It's time to vote every single one of these leeches out of office.

It's time to enact term limits.

It's time to change the Constitution of the United States of America so that something like this never happens again.

Congress will never do it because the opportunists there don't want to relinquish the power we've given them, so we must.

Grab your torches and your pitchforks. You should be "mad as hell" about this and you shouldn't take it anymore. Republican, Democrat, Independent...it just doesn't matter anymore. They've all become the exact same thing.

Your rights and your ability to make decisions for your family are next. If they'll take your money without even so much as reading the bill they're voting on, what will we let them take from us next?

This is taxation without representation in its modern-day form and we cannot stand for it.

WTF?: Judd Gregg

Thu, 12 Feb 2009 19:03:09 -0500

"WTF?" will be an occasional series of entries on Conservative Blogger when a politician does something so mind-boggling, that the first response out of my mouth is...well..."WHAT THE F***?"

The inaugural WTF? goes out to the senior Senator from New Hampshire--my Senator--Judd Gregg.

Today, a mere ten days after being nominated to head up the Commerce Department by President Barack Obama, Judd Gregg withdrew from the nomination.

What. The. F***.

Judd Gregg has to be the most politically inept Senator in Washington.

Ten days ago he stood on a podium with Barack Obama and Joe Biden with smiles and handshakes and now--all of a sudden--he can't do it based on principle?

"However, it has become apparent during this process that this will not work for me as I have found that on issues such as the stimulus package and the Census there are irresolvable conflicts for me. Prior to accepting this post, we had discussed these and other potential differences, but unfortunately we did not adequately focus on these concerns. We are functioning from a different set of views on many critical items of policy." ~ Judd Gregg, February 12, 2009.

It's not like the "stimulus package" was a surprise. It absolutely was on the table ten days ago. The Census? I can't believe that he'd give up a cabinet appointment over something as mundane as the U.S. Census.

I also find it incredibly hard to believe that Judd Gregg didn't or wouldn't know what Barack Obama's policies would have been ten days ago to force him into this epiphany. He can't stay on in the cabinet because he doesn't agree with the policies of the Obama Administration, but in the same breath he also believes that he can contribute to Obama's agenda better from the Senate.

WTF?

He can't "be Judd Gregg and serve in that cabinet" but he can support Obama's initiatives in the Senate? Did he really say that? If Gregg and Obama really are "functioning from a different set of views on many critical items of policy," then how could he accept that appointment in the first place?

In my mind, one of two things has to be true. Either Judd Gregg honestly didn't know what Barack Obama's policies were--which seems completely ludicrous since every Republican and their mother figured it out before he was even elected--or Judd Gregg did not understand the political ramifications on either decision he made.

He's effectively neutered himself politically which is why he's now decided to not seek re-election in 2010 after saying he would run again just days after the November election. Judd Gregg has "lame-ducked" himself in the Granite State with his constituents and he's made himself thoroughly unreliable to his party in Washington.

Many Conservatives this afternoon were congratulating Judd Gregg for "standing on principle," and I don't think that's what he's done here. While at face value it may seem that way, he's emasculated himself politically, in my opinion. Gregg has failed to see the big picture--something that's been a hallmark of his entire political career. Instead, he chose what was best for Judd Gregg either time and not what was best for the citizens of New Hampshire.

The vast majority of people congratulating Judd Gregg today are people who don't have him as their Senator. Those of us who do know that this is just "Vintage Judd."

Way to go, Judd.

Other folks with Judd the Spud coverage:

Inauguration...

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 10:35:43 -0500

No one else in the world has a change of power with the pomp, pageantry and peacefulness of the United States of America.

Today, Barack Hussein Obama will take the oath of office and become our 44th Commander in Chief.

Regardless of politics, this is an event that is good for America. The peaceful transfer of power is a reminder of how beautiful our particular form of democracy works.

So, for today, I congratulate and celebrate President Barack Obama's ascension to the White House. Truly an amazing day for America and her citizens--a day which history will remember for generations.

Today, we celebrate as Americans.

WELCOME, MR. PRESIDENT!

Tomorrow...well, tomorrow is a different story.

Help Create Obama's Inaugural Address...

Fri, 16 Jan 2009 16:01:18 -0500

Friends, we are on the cusp of history.

On Tuesday, Barack Hussein Obama will be inaugurated as the 44th President of the United States of America and now you can help craft an inaugural address that will be remembered for generations...

Well, actually you can do it like a "mad lib."

To try your hand at writing the most important speech of our generation, click here to go to the Inauguration Speech Generator on the Atom website.

Bush III?...

Fri, 16 Jan 2009 15:43:31 -0500

As the inauguration of Barack Obama draws nigh, Victor Davis Hanson contemplates how the bringer of "hope and change" may be inching closer and closer to a third term of George W. Bush.

"But when we look at actual specifics and ignore the boilerplate mainstream liberal rhetoric about "multilateralism" and "rebuilding our alliances," and also ignore the "inside" horror stories (cf. the recent Vanity Fair Bush hit-piece) by failures and opportunists like a Scott McClellan or Matthew Dowd, we really do not see very much.

Already there is back-peddling on FISA, the Patriot Act, and renditions. Who knows what the plan is on Gitmo, other than to keep promising prompt its closing, while keeping it open as lawyers wonder whether Khalid Sheik Mohammed might in fact welcome a federal trial in D.C. or New York -- in hopes that one juror could be found to be sympathetic to a radical Islamic agenda and thus nullify the evidence presented and free the ultimate murderer of 3,000 innocents?"

To read the rest of Hanson's piece at NRO's "The Corner," click here...

The Legacy of George W. Bush...

Fri, 16 Jan 2009 15:26:01 -0500

Last night, the 43rd President of the United States of America--George Walker Bush--gave his farewell address to the American people.

As Bush spends his final few days in office, everybody seems to have an opinion on his legacy with most striking a fairly dim view of the last eight years.

Many--including those in his own party--point out what President Bush has done wrong.

Others balance that against what the Bush Administration has gotten right to demonstrate that his Presidency hasn't been an abject failure.

Bush, on the other hand, hopes that Americans agree that he was willing to "make the tough decisions" even if we agreed with him or not.

(If you are unable to see the embedded video from FOX News above, please click here.)

While Bush hopes that history will have a more favorable view of him than most Americans do now, I think that it's very simple to sum up the legacy of the Bush Administration.

Back in December, when Bush was defending the taxpayer funded bailouts, he said the following:

"I've abandoned free-market principles to save the free-market system."

I think that, with a strategic edit, this quote also sums up George Bush's tenure in the White House:

"I've abandoned ~~free-market~~ principles to save the ~~free-market~~ system."

Or, perhaps more succinctly:

"I've abandoned ~~free-market~~ conservative principles to save the ~~free-market~~ Washington political system."

Regardless of the debate that will wage for years on where Bush was right and wrong, his Presidency was ultimately hindered by his moderate and centrist views. The more that President Bush drifted toward the middle, the worse his approval rating became.

But then, George W. Bush was never a conservative--and that was his problem.

In the end, W was a lot like his father: a big-government, country club Republican who alienated the party and ensured a backlash against the GOP in the electorate. Beyond Iraq, the economy, immigration and every other issue that will be debated, George W. Bush's presidency resulted in the GOP's undoing.

That's one hell of a legacy for any President...and not a good one.

Sarah Palin Speaks, David Shuster Listens...Kind Of...

Fri, 09 Jan 2009 14:39:41 -0500

Earlier this week, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin spoke out for the first time about the media coverage of her during the 2008 election. The interview, conducted by documentary filmmaker John Ziegler, will be included in his film "Media Malpractice: How Obama Got Elected and Palin Was Smeared."

The video below is the exclusive footage that Ziegler uploaded to YouTube to promote the film:

(Please click here if you are unable to see the embedded video above.)

The excerpt seems fairly straight forward, in my opinion. Clearly, Governor Palin wants to set the record straight and give her side of the story--which I think she does quite well.

Palin talks about reporters who don't go that extra step to get to the facts and report them and continue to spread things that aren't true.

Which, coincidentally, brings us to MSNBC's David Shuster.

Yesterday, Shuster interviewed John Ziegler regarding the clips and, well...let's just say that it wasn't without incident...

(Please click here if you are unable to see the embedded video above.)

Ziegler's right. ANYONE who has watched the full clip with the Palin outtakes simply couldn't come to the conclusion that Shuster does. David Shuster's anti-Palin bias is transparent.

Perhaps Shuster is at his idiotic best when he questions Ziegler regarding the character assassination of Sarah Palin:

SHUSTER: Of course, that was the question about what does she really read. You've been quoted as saying, "Palin was assassinated by the media?"

ZIEGLER: Well, I think that's accurate although if anything's been taken out of context you just took that clip out of context...

SHUSTER: Wait a second, do you think it's accurate to use the word...wait a second, wait a second...do you think it's accurate to use the word "assassinate" in what the media--regardless of the heavy criticism, doesn't it diminish real assassinations when you throw out the word "assassinate" because Sarah Palin didn't like some of the questions she got in an interview?

I wish I were making this up. David Shuster thinks that describing what happened to Sarah Palin as a character assassination diminishes actual assassinations.

This is the same David Shuster who was suspended by MSNBC for suggesting the Clintons were "pimping out" their daughter Chelsea during the primary campaigns.

This is the same David Shuster who attempted to "gotcha" Tennessee Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn when she didn't know the name of a soldier from her district who had died in Iraq---when the soldier didn't really live in her district to begin with. (Mr. Shuster and I exchanged some email on this topic when I insisted he apologize on air. He insisted that getting the name wrong wasn't really what was important.)

The same David Shuster who called himself "a complete independent" when describing his political party and disputing charges of bias by someone at his own network--MSNBC.

Ziegler went on to call Shuster a "joke" and "an alleged newsperson." Ziegler is right on the money.

John Ziegler's film, "Media Malpractice: How Obama Got Elected and Palin Was Smeared" will be released in February of 2009. I can't wait to see it and how the Media Spin Machine reacts to it.