The Alternative Conservative

Why I'm An A-Hole To Liberals On Facebook

noreply@blogger.com (Tuesday Money) — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 09:24:00 +0000

I know, I know, you're not supposed to argue over the internet. Whatever. I have been arguing on the internet since day one of signing on in '95. That was the original basis of its appeal. So, here is one example of what really irritates me about liberals.

My friend posted a link so that we could listen to Ronald Reagan speak about healthcare. Mostly, just pay attention to the woman that I colored green. The one in red just made some point about how she had to argue with her insurance company and they they too make decisions without consulting you or your family.

So, this exchange reminded me of one that took place between Michael Savage and Charles Barkley (who is one of the biggest idiots I can think of).

One of the biggest problems with liberals is they do not care about the future or the past. They only care about here and in the now and what they want now.

Charles shows his lack of logic skills when he insinuates that there is no problem that 30% of the prison population in America is illegal, while 70% of them are ours. Well...duh!

For those of you that are a little slow like Barkley...

Our prison population should be 100% American. Illegals have NO business being here. 30% of OUR entire population is not illegal. They are clearly over-represented. The percentage of illegals in this country should equal the percentage in the prisons if it is to be considered an accurate representation of the overall population.

At the time this Savage-Barkley exchange took place, our federal prisons, based on legal status, consisted of 30 percent of the overall population were illegal immigrants. These immigrants come from all over and the majority of them are Mexicans. We do have illegals from China, and El Salvador is another group of immigrants that make up a part of the illegals coming here. Keep in mind these are federal prisons, not state facilities. The state records depend entirely on what state you are researching. Obviously California has an influx of illegals, as does Florida, Arizona, and Texas. It is because of the great amount of immigrants that are clearly coming from the Southern border, we know that border is extremely porous.

It's fairly simple to understand, yet the solution seems to be such an extreme labor for liberals. Why is it so hard to accept the reality of what is going on? What is it about wanting to preserve our great county that these crazies cannot grasp? I have come to a point where I feel obligated to argue with these lunatics. Maybe, just maybe I can knock some sense into their tiny little heads.

If only they could understand irony, they would never, ever vote for a liberal again! I have a secret suspicion that many of them know this but they would never know how to live with the guilt they would have for being so ignorant for so long. It's almost as if they are liberal because they have been made to feel guilty. Perhaps it just makes them "feel better" to say what sounds nice to others.

Like the woman I was talking to on Facebook, concern or interest in advice from generations before them do not exist. They only see the sunny side in more legislation, more government control, and more government spending to help all the little groups that are different from white males. However, whenever something goes wrong - which it always does when it comes to government - they are the FIRST to complain and then just blame Bush or the Republicans.

People who are like this woman on Facebook always come across so condescending and just full of themselves. When I returned the favor, what did she do? She conveniently decided that she would not read anything I have to say (nice excuse for being lazy and refusing to view things from another side - real tolerant, hey?), then has the nerve to complain and say that I am the one being snide? Did she even read what she wrote? She told the world that it doesn't matter what someone from the past says, and that someone also happens to have been president of the United States, who is also considered one of the greatest presidents this nation has had.

Oh, he's just outdated according to her. The stupidity of this woman is astounding. How unbelievably disturbing it is that we have a generation of these nimrods who think an older speech has nothing to offer them. How big of an ego do you need to believe it is normal to suggest such a thing, while expecting to not only be taken seriously, but to be treated with some kind of respect? Is that snobbery, ignorance, stupidity, or all of the above?

There is NO wondering why we have been in quite some trouble for quite some time. These people are not fit to run an insane asylum, let alone the country. Is it any wonder that there are people who would like to have some type of preliminary test that should be required before being given permission to vote? One thousand dollars tells me this woman would not be able to immediately list at least 3 Supreme Court justices.

Should I even bother to argue with people the way I have and continue to do so at times? It is fairly obvious that they have no interest in reading anything that differs from their opinion, nor are they willing to offer some type of analysis to explain their way of thinking. Quite simply, the only thing they know how to do is feel and those feelings have nothing to do with the future, nor are they shaped by the past. Their beliefs are exactly what people around them believe and this is why so many of them struggle with being confronted or questioned about why they think a certain way. They never learned HOW to think, only to repeat what they have been told.

Yes, I'm still going to argue with people. It provides me with a little bit of entertainment and of course, I still pray and hope that there is a chance for me to plant a seed, even if I get a little aggressive with my words. Sometimes people really do need a proverbial kick in the ass in order to understand reality.

Whitney Houston Dies

noreply@blogger.com (Tuesday Money) — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 04:17:00 +0000

Wow. I guess I'm not supposed to be shocked but I most certainly am. I grew up with Whitney! Dead??? I don't really cry over celebrities but I might be shedding a tear or two over this one. Her voice was incredible, as was her talent.

Here's to you Whitney!

Click title of this post for article.

Whitney Houston, who ruled as pop music's queen until her majestic voice and regal image were ravaged by drug use, erratic behavior and a tumultuous marriage to singer Bobby Brown, died Saturday. She was 48.

Beverly Hills police Lt. Mark Rosen told reporters outside the Beverly Hilton that Houston was pronounced dead at 3:55 p.m. in her room on the fourth floor of the hotel. Her body remained there and Beverly Hills detectives were investigating.

"There were no obvious signs of any criminal intent," Rosen said.

Houston's publicist, Kristen Foster, said the cause of death was unknown.

She was supposed to perform at the Grammy's tomorrow night.

Is it just me or have these Whitney obits been written for quite some time? The articles I am finding all over the internet are long and well researched.

Comparing Same-Sex Marriage To Interracial Marriage

noreply@blogger.com (Tuesday Money) — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 22:37:00 +0000

I keep seeing postings around Facebook that compare interracial marriage to same-sex marriage (if you can call it that). I am actually offended by these comments. To compare race to homosexuality is insulting and inaccurate. As a child of parents who were of different races, I can tell you for certain that there is no comparison.

First of all, everyone in this country can marry someone of the opposite sex. No one is currently being denied this right. Gay "marriage" is asking for special rights. Interracial couples wanted to be treated like everyone else, not be given "special" rights.

Gays can conceal their status. If they do not want people to know they are gay, this can be achieved easily. When you are of a minority race, like black or in my father's case - Mexican-Indian, there is no hiding or concealing who you are. People will immediately recognize your race.

I'm okay with interracial marriage but, I do feel there is something to be said about encouraging people not to go down this road. Let me be clear, I would not be here had my parents not got together but, it is very difficult growing up. To this day, I have friends and acquaintances (of course they are all liberal friends), that will make off-hand remarks or jokes about Mexicans. I try not to take anything personal since, I'm not politically correct myself but when you are a kid, these kind of comments can hurt your feelings and make you somewhat embarrassed. On one hand I know they are joking to some degree but, on the other hand, it's hard not to take offence when they are making fun of your father's race.

The conversations I have had with other bi-racial children have reflected my same feelings. It's not that we are against this type of marriage, it's more of a feeling that interracial marriage can be difficult on children. It's as simple as that. Another reason that I would try to discourage interracial families has to do with the races. It is a very positive aspect of our society to have different races. If we all mixed, we'd be boring. I love black faces, brown faces, white faces, etc.

Comparing gays and their desire to be married with those who have struggled because of their race is like comparing the Jewish plight with the supposed "Palestinian" cause. There really is no comparison and I would think that most minorities in this country would be equally insulted.

Former RNC chairman Michael Steele:

First off, let’s just be very clear about a couple of things. There are a significant number of African Americans — myself included — who do not appreciate that particular equation. Ok? Because, when you walk into a room, I don’t know if you’re gay or not. But when I walk into a room, you know I’m black. And whatever racial feelings you have about African Americans, about black people, that is something that, it viscerally comes out. I don’t know until later on, maybe you tell me or some other way, so don’t sit there and make that comparison. It’s not the same.

I do not understand this ludicrous idea that "you cannot change who you love." Of course you can change who you love.

As far as changing the sex of who you love, that could be a different story but, for instance, I have a cousin who lived as a lesbian for years. Now, she carries on relationships with men. She has admitted to me that she most certainly believes that being gay is a behavior, not something you are born with. She also finds it insulting when people try to tell her she "wasn't really a lesbian in the first place." This could not be further from the truth.

My cousin is not the only gay person I know that has switched "sides." If you know me personally, you know I spent most my 20's in gay clubs and working in the theater. I was emerged in the gay culture here in Omaha. I also happen to be someone that people feel the need to open up to. I noticed this early on in my life. People just love to tell me EVERYTHING and I certainly do not mind. I love listening to people's inner thoughts and their inner feelings that they do not typically share with others. It is because of these conversations that my understanding of being gay changed 180 degrees. I have had many people admit to me that they are confused about how they "became gay." There is a lot more here but bottom line, many gays tend to have the same experiences and it has nothing to do with genes.

Those that have shared their life stories with me have told very similar stories. Their fathers were either absent or they experienced extremely strained relationships with them. Most have experienced sexual abuse, either by a family friend or relative. They typically have early sexual experiences with other children of the same sex and do not realize how common this is. They have not even gone through puberty so the part of their brain that controls sexuality has yet to be developed, but for some reason they reflect on these child-same-sex experiences as a way of "knowing they were always gay." Since no one has discussed with them how common this is, they are often shocked when I tell them.

Are all gays and lesbians the same with similar experiences? I'm not exactly sure. I can only share with you what has been shared with me. I have no doubt that some may be born with actual proclivities but ultimately sex is a behavior, not a trait like eye color or skin color. Homosexual sex, strictly on biological level, goes against the nature of humans since it stops procreation. With that being said, my personal opinion based on what I know and what I have witnessed is that it is simply an abnormal behavior. It happens. Sometimes we cannot explain everything in a simple way. There are many different dynamics that come into play here but, my original point is simple - homosexual sex should not be compared to race.

Race is not a behavior, nor is it abnormal. On a biological level, different races are a positive thing and they are normal.

When people make the race-homosexual comparison, they are grasping at straws, hoping to normalize homosexuality while making gays into victims. This type of victimization status is part of the liberal playbook. Just like everything else, if you challenge their beliefs, you are immediately called a name and in this case, a homophobe. I assure you, I am no homophobe. I adore the many gay and lesbian friends I have. I could care less what they do in their beds or who they are doing it with. I may have a spiritual belief that this is a sin but I am a sinner as well. My only concern has been, as with most culture conservatives, is by allowing the definition of marriage to be changed to include same-sex couples, it will lead people to believing this is normal, and that there is no line to be drawn between the differences of same-sex and opposite sex couples.

There are many differences here and one of the main differences has to do with children in the home. Two mothers simply cannot give a child what one father can and two fathers cannot give to a child what one mother can. Mothers and fathers fill entirely different roles. One man, one woman is what is required to make that child in the first place. There is a reason for that. I'm afraid that our culture has become so diluted that we no longer appreciate the different things that men and woman offer. Women act like men and men act like women. It's as if nature is trying to correct itself in some way in order to have a balance.

I will not allow people to call me a homophobe because I believe in the sanctity of marriage and I will not ignore the fact that men and woman are made to offer different values to the world. I will not put my head in the sand and pretend that these relationships are the same. That does not make me bigoted or hateful. It makes me someone that understands reality and knows that the history of man reflects stable families produce stable, productive children. These qualities help children to live fulfilling lives.

We were not made to live complicated lives! When people grow up with so many strains and issues, their focus remains entirely on themselves and their problems. Their inner spirit is broken and their full potential is almost never achieved. It is our moral duty to try our best to encourage ourselves and others to live a more simple, moral life and recognize abnormalities or destructive behaviors for what they are.

I fall in line with many people on the right when I say that this issue is a state issue and can be voted upon. It most certainly should not be forced upon us, especially through the courts who seem to dismiss the public wants in favor of their supposed superior ideas. I don't understand how people on the left are so quick to call people who do not agree with them hateful or some other rude name, yet they also want you to believe that their beliefs are superior and they know better. If knowing better means insulting people who challenge your opinions then I guess I am happy being ignorant. I enjoy when my ideas are challenged. It forces me to think and learn more about other people and how they think. It just so happens that when I am challenged, I typically will find myself siding with those ideas that come from the right.

Click on title of post for source of the video and article.

Vince Foster

noreply@blogger.com (Tuesday Money) — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 09:23:00 +0000

I've been doing quite a bit of digging into Clinton lately, mostly because I was a little young and uninterested during the time of his administration. I've read the Starr Report and have looked up information concerning the Rose Law Firm and the shady land deals. One story that stands out and continues to haunt the administration is the mysterious death of Vince Foster.

Until now, I had no idea how odd this suicide and the circumstances surrounding his death actually were. I'm not big on conspiracies, as the two or three of you reading my blog know. So, it is rather uncomfortable for me to admit that something here just doesn't seem right.

I found this on Youtube and wanted to save it here on my blog. It sums up the very disturbing facts that surround the death of Vince Foster. I'm wondering if we will ever have closure on this issue. So far, I'm not impressed with the idea that he was just depressed and decided to go to a park to kill himself.

Madonna's Revenge and Some M.I.A. Flipped the Bird

noreply@blogger.com (Tuesday Money) — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 04:32:00 +0000

Every year at the Super Bowl, the halftime show since the famous 2004-Jackson-wardrobe-malfunction occurred, older and more mature artists have been asked to perform. The shows have been sterilized and described by many as "boring," "sucked," "lame," "okay," or, "not terrible." The show used to be known for offering spots to very popular artists of current times.

At her height, Britney Spears put in a performance at the Super Bowl. I really cannot think of too many others because I ~~never~~ rarely ever watch the Bowl or halftime show.

This year the older artist was Madonna and it turns out that this was the most watched halftime show ever. Yeah, I watched it. Not only that but, she did fairly well. Though you can tell that age has caught up with her a little bit, she still managed to perform some difficult stunts, like doing cartwheels and some dancing. I would imagine for anyone who is a hundred years old, this would be rather difficult. She looked good and she actually performed some older songs (not that I would know), that would be easily recognizable to everyone. "Vogue" was the first song she began her set with. She ended with "Like a Prayer."

The last song of course got me wondering...was this the ultimate payback from Madonna to Pepsi? Remember the controversy of the 80's and how Madonna was dropped from her Pepsi contract because of her provocative and slightly disturbing video, "Like a Prayer"? Well, Pepsi is a sponsor of the Super Bowl. Knowing the little I know about Madonna from growing up with her music and following her in magazines, on tv, in *cough* movies (yeah, yeah, I loved Desperately Seeking Susan...you did too, don't deny it), this was a calculated move on her part. Watch her perform the song with a big grin on her face.

This year, M.I.A., who is a British singer, also put in a cameo with Madonna and apparently felt the need to flip the audience her middle finger.

I watched the halftime show but only on Youtube. I tried looking for this but did not successfully see this happen. In fact it appears as though many did not notice, until apologies were made from the NFL and NBC.

I found this video and it does appear that at 0:14 she is extending her middle finger and saying, "I don't give a shhhh...." At the end of this video, they repeat the clip and show it in slow motion.

Okay, first off - what an idiot. Does this moron M.I.A. have that little of self control that she cannot act like a descent person for a 2-minute performance? I guess it depends on how you look at it. Perhaps it would have been better to not have said anything since it appears as though many did not even notice.

On the other hand, what was done was wrong and irresponsible. That display of selfishness and disrespect for no reason -other than wanting to be a jerk and cause a stir- is exactly what has been hurting this country for decades. People think only about themselves and what they want.

I guess it is sort of a poetic justice that she upstaged Madonna doing this.

Click title of this post for full story.

The Rampage of Ryan O'Hara

noreply@blogger.com (Tuesday Money) — Sat, 04 Feb 2012 06:30:00 +0000

Make sure you check out my friend's new book! This sounds like it's going to be an amazing read.

Thank you, Jim!

This is a violent tale of vengeance and delayed justice made necessary by a failed system that allows treasonous murders to escape punishment.

Click title of this post for more information.

It will be available at Amazon and on Kindle in a few weeks. Be sure to get your copy.

Los Angeles Teacher Arrested For Lewd Acts With 23 Boys and Girls

noreply@blogger.com (Tuesday Money) — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 07:40:00 +0000

AP/Los Angeles Sheriff's Department

This undated police booking photo released by the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department shows former Los Angeles teacher Mark Berndt, 61, who was arrested for felony molestation of 23 kids after photos surfaced. Berndt been charged with committing lewd acts with 23 boys and girls ages 6 to 10, according to the Associated Press.

LOS ANGELES – A U.S. school teacher bound and gagged nearly two dozen children, put cockroaches on some of their faces and posed in photos with them, possibly inside a classroom, the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department said Tuesday.

A department statement said 61-year-old Mark Berndt was arrested Monday and remained jailed Tuesday on $2.3 million bail. The district attorney's office said Berndt has been charged with committing lewd acts with 23 boys and girls ages 6 to 10, according to the Associated Press.

The investigation began when a film processor gave authorities about 40 photographs depicting blindfolded children in a classroom with their mouths taped shut.

As disgusting as this is, it gets worse. According to the article (click title of this post), he gave them semen to consume and called it "sugar."

None of the children had reported him because they did not understand they were being taken advantage of. Apparently he had told them it was all a "game" of some sorts.

WTF is wrong with people these days? How could anyone do this to children? At a school? Lock him up and throw away the key, please!

LA Teacher Arrested For Lewd Acts With Students: MyFoxLA.com

Obama Recycles!

noreply@blogger.com (Tuesday Money) — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 02:54:00 +0000

It's always good to see a politician who recycles. Only you never really expect it to be their speeches.

Obama repeats his speeches, while Joe Biden steals his.

Democrats and their Roots to Racism and the KKK

noreply@blogger.com (Tuesday Money) — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 06:52:00 +0000

Romney Wins Florida

noreply@blogger.com (Tuesday Money) — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 07:09:00 +0000

Oh, no! I was really counting on Gingrich to win. In short, this sucks. I am not impressed with Gingrich's personal life but he is definitely much more conservative than Romney. At the same time, he is someone that has encouraged Congress to work from the middle.

Mitt Romney crushed Newt Gingrich in the Florida Republican presidential primary Tuesday night, surging from a second-place finish in South Carolina to sweep the winner-take-all contest and reassert his front-runner status.

The victory, in the biggest GOP contest to date, is likely to give the former Massachusetts governor a burst of momentum as he, Gingrich, Rick Santorum and Ron Paul head west to battle in what has become an increasingly negative race.

Click title of this post for full article.

Romney has flip-flopped or sided with liberals on many social issues that include abortion, gay marriage, gay rights, and healthcare.

I believe Romney can explain his support on his healthcare plan by pointing out that a state can decide on public healthcare but the federal government should not be involved. Individual states already mandate which insurance companies are licensed within their borders so precedence of the state being involved has been established. That being said, I do not support such government involvement since states that take up universal healthcare will eventually go bankrupt. When this happens, we all know that those states will be the same ones crying to the federal government for a bailout.

I am not totally opposed to the government having some intervention since, they already do. It's called Medicare and Medicaid. Those programs have been deteriorating into disasters. Something else that could be considered would be making those programs private as well. Have the private sector take control and offer government vouchers to those that cannot afford care. This would be similar to what was previously proposed for private school vouchers. This would take government out of the business of medical care, while simultaneously allow people to make choices. People who live in poverty or who have retired would still receive the benefits they do now but the government would not be as involved as they are now, nor as they would be under Obama or Romney-care.

Newt has definitely proven himself to be a controversial figure. He is not the usual humdrum politician that we usually see in Washington. He has proven himself as someone who knows how to get things done. He most certainly had some issues with ethics while serving and yes, he did resign. You have to wonder why he was railroaded the way he was. The one charge that was not dropped involved him claiming a tax-exempt status for some college course offered at a small college that was created for the purposes of pushing his ideology. This was clearly an ethics violation and he was required to pay a $300,000 fine. The IRS however concluded that there was no scandal involved.

Depending on who you believe, Newt is either a conservative hero or an evil ruler.

We have heard the stories of his infidelity. His ex-wife has recently come forward expressing disdain for Newt. This is another he said/she said issue. Of course the ex is not going to say anything nice. That's why she's an ex. Still, her story could very well be true.

I still wish we had not thrown out the possibility of Cain. If we were going to have a man who is known for cheating than he would have been a much better candidate.

Whatever happens, we need to get behind the GOP nominee. We cannot have another four years of Obama.

Obama Knows It All

noreply@blogger.com (Tuesday Money) — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 00:18:00 +0000

As always, our current puppet in the White House, Obama - A.K.A One Big Ass Mistake America - presents himself as a pompous a$$ during a Google+ hangout session.

Jennifer, who is the wife of a semi-conductor engineer, tells the president her husband has yet to find a regular job in three years. Her first question to the president was an inquiry as to why Obama continues to allow H1B Visa's to be issued when there are Americans who are qualified for jobs and need jobs. He immediately dodges the question and then proceeds to tell her that her story does not seem plausible since his sources tell him that engineers are in high demand across the country. He then offers to handle her husband's resume personally.

Unbelievable.

Police Sergeant in Peoria AZ Posts Violent Image of Obama On His Facebook Page

noreply@blogger.com (Tuesday Money) — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 08:30:00 +0000

Sgt. Pat Shearer

Pat Shearer, who is a police Sergeant in Peoria, AZ, is being investigated for his role in posting a photo involving teenagers holding guns and a T-shirt that depicts an image of Obama, covered in bullet holes.

Pat Shearer, the 25-year Peoria police sergeant, who remains on active duty, also faces an internal investigation on the matter. An administrative investigation was prompted after they got word the Secret Service was looking into the photograph, Peoria police spokesman Jay Davies said.

Click title of this post for full article.

I am under the impression that this is being made into a whole lot of nothing. What you post on a public forum can be taken into consideration and he probably should be reprimanded somehow. I do agree that a public servant should not be involved in promoting violence to our president, nor involve himself in teenagers trying to make a political statement.

He does have a right to freedom of speech and this is certainly no worse than what was posted on liberals' or Bush-hater walls all over Facebook and other forums on the internet. The only difference is, the liberals do not have jobs to be fired from so, of course it means nothing to them when they try and tear people down the way they do.

Take the recent attacks and tear down of Herman Cain. It's considered silly and just ridiculous if you suggest that Clinton was a man of weak character, not suited for presidency, due to his clear disrespect for females and his philandering ways. However, a few stories from women that offer some details about Herman Cain making advancements towards women, ignited a storm-front upon a man that eventually caused his own party to dismiss him, leaving us with Romney or Gingrich. Point, democrats.

Unlike liberals, conservatives often do not stick up for their guy if they did wrong. Whereas liberals will excuse you for anything, but only if you are marching in-step with their views.

Let's take a quick look at Maxine Waters, the far left loon from the democrat party in California.

Rodney King rebellion: During the “Why can’t we all just get along” riots in her congressional district, Waters excused the wonton violence, as her constituents were intent on burning down the city. The Los Angeles Times quoted her saying: “If you call it a riot, it sounds like it was just a bunch of crazy people who went out and did bad things for no reason. I maintain it was somewhat understandable, if not acceptable. So I call it a rebellion.”

Of course, she doesn't seem to apply this standard when The Tea Party is involved.

Tea Party hell: In remarks earlier this month in Inglewood, Calif., Waters went after the Tea Party, telling a group of her constituents (many wearing purple SEIU T-shirts): “I am not afraid of anybody. This is a tough game. You can’t be intimidated. You can’t be frightened. And as far as I’m concerned, the Tea Party can go straight to hell.”

Right to anger: Way back in 1989, Waters was quoted saying how angry she was, and she has been angry ever since. Here are those 1989 remarks: “I have a right to my anger, and I don’t want anybody telling me I shouldn’t be, that it’s not nice to be, and that something’s wrong with me because I get angry.”

At the time, these comments barely raised an eyebrow from the liberal media. Apparently, they are not considered inappropriate and here again we see that only the left has a right to anger. This is something they truly believe. We have a congresswoman who makes these callous statements and no one should be concerned or question these people because they are considered hero's. If you're Republican, you're a racist.

Congressman Keith Ellison of Minnesota is a Democrat. His byline reads Democratic-Farmer-Labor, but that's what they call Democrats up there. Congressman Keith Ellison is a 21st century Dem in the mold of Senate Dem Whip Dick Durbin.

Says Ellison about September 11, 2001:

"It's almost like the Reichstag fire, kind of reminds me of that," Mr Ellison said. "After the Reichstag was burned, they blamed the Communists for it, and it put the leader [Hitler] of that country in a position where he could basically have authority to do whatever he wanted."

We all know that democrats can do no wrong and they would never make insolent claims like comparing Bush to the murderous psychopath - Hitler.

For more pics, click here.

I am sure I don't need to remind anyone of how Randi Rhodes called for the assassination of president Bush. At the time, Randi was hosting on the train-wreck, liberal attempt at talk radio station, Air America. She is not a public servant but I don't remember one liberal condemning the statement. Nor do I remember anyone calling for her to be fired.

Absolutely NO excuses were given for Michael Savage when he called someone a sodomite on his show that appeared on MSNBC.

Savage did get to keep his radio show but he did get quite a backlash.

When Gore Vidal says he wanted to murder president Bush, nobody said a thing.

Democrats only get worked up over outrageous, violent comments when they are made by conservatives. Had this police Sergeant been a democrat posting a pic of teens with guns and a Bush photo with bullet holes, they would have no problem with this. They would probably want them to be given some type of special award for practicing free speech and standing up against the evil right wingers.

Think Bradley Manning, the punk kid in the military who thought it would be cute to leak top secret documents to the accused rapist Julian Assange. The left actually called for this kid to be given a medal and if you Google his name, you will find lefty sites dedicated to helping him.

In a perfect world, no one would do wrong and we would not have to play the blame game. I just find it odd that the left expects so much from their enemies, while accepting complacency and irresponsibility from those that support them. Why would any party do this? Simply put, the democrat demographics are just what the party wants -- the extreme rich and powerful mixed with the poor and down trodden. When are the people going to figure this out? The left needs victims to hold up and push their agenda. They need victims in order to keep people dependent. They are like political crack dealers, making promises of feeling high but the cost for that temporary fix is a person's freedom, a chance at life. As long as you are destroying yourself, you can take those around you down as well. This is their game-plan. It has been for years. As long as you don't ask questions, don't look at facts, and remain politically challenged, the left will accept you with open arms.

One thing that truly disturbs me is that "a citizen" brought this photo posting to the attention of authorities. I would like to know what this man's Facebook settings were at the time. Could anyone see his wall? Or was this someone that was on his "friends" list? Either way, it seems rather disturbing that someone was trolling and reporting this, acting like a tattle-taler. It all seems rather fishy and disturbing. I have seen some deplorable things posted on Facebook by liberals but I never once felt the notion to call the "thought police" over it.

Happy Weekend!

noreply@blogger.com (Tuesday Money) — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 00:36:00 +0000

Haven't posted anything today so I figured, I would just say, "hi" and tell everyone to have a great weekend!

~Tooz

Ron Paul Makes No Sense

noreply@blogger.com (Tuesday Money) — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 07:46:00 +0000

He doesn't believe anything the government says but another investigation made by the government he can trust? Huh?

What more proof do you need that this man is not on the "right" side of politics? Paul and Kucinich working together? Kuchinich is a far, left wing, fruit cake.

In this video, Paul insists that it's no big deal that Iran wants nukes. He states that it is obvious they would want to develop a nuclear weapon since they are surrounded by them from neighboring countries.

In this video, he denies that Iran even wants to have a nuclear weapon.

Either way, Paul wants to bow down to Islamists and do nothing to protect our country. He considers military spending wasteful.

Soros Warns of Economic Melt Down

noreply@blogger.com (Tuesday Money) — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 07:20:00 +0000

George Soros, ultra-left wing billionaire, is predicting an economic collapse in the developed world.

Furthermore, Soros believes that there will be riots and people will take to the streets.

As this anger intensifies, will the inevitable result be a spontaneous eruption of violence and riots?

“Yes, yes, yes,” Soros says, almost “gleefully.”

Click title of this post for full article.

He'll probably profit greatly from any problems that arise. I'm sure he's giddy about people getting violent. This is something the left is known for.

Pelosi On A Gingrich Presidency: "That Will Never Happen"

noreply@blogger.com (Tuesday Money) — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 05:54:00 +0000

Pelosi On A Gingrich Presidency: "That Will Never Happen"

Oh, Miss Pelosi, what is it you "know"?

Click link for video clip.

Buffet To Profit From Cancellation of Keystone

noreply@blogger.com (Tuesday Money) — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 04:25:00 +0000

It turns out that Warren Buffet will profit from the cancellation of the Keystone XL oil pipeline because it will be his railroad, Burlington Northern Santa Fe LLC, that will ship the oil instead.

This is so typical. I wonder how the liberals are going to explain this one away.

Buffet is obviously gaining favors directly from Obama and it has been made no secret that the two have a friendship of some sort. So I guess it is Buffet who is actually deciding and influencing policy, never mind the 20,000 some jobs it would add to the economy.

Remember how the Democrats were screaming about Bush and big oil? Seems like the Dems have some of their own big oil issues as well.

Mr. Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway Inc. owns Burlington Northern Santa Fe LLC, which is among the railroads that would transport oil produced in western Canada if the pipeline isn’t built.

“Whatever people bring to us, we’re ready to haul,” Krista York-Wooley, a spokeswoman for Burlington Northern, a unit of Buffett’s Omaha, Neb.-based Berkshire Hathaway Inc., told Bloomberg News. If Keystone XL “doesn’t happen, we’re here to haul,” she said.

Click title of post for full story.

Does He Hate Big Government Or Not?

noreply@blogger.com (Tuesday Money) — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0000

The issue of Ron Paul and his excessive earmarks has become a more popular talking point during the last few weeks.

He is accused of excessive earmarking, while professing small government.

Ron Paul offers this explanation with Neil Cavuto.

Paul explains that earmarks are necessary and that even if we eliminated them completely, the budget would only be cut by one percent.

Sounds reasonable? Yes? If it only makes for one percent, what does that say about our budget?

Paul insists that all he is doing is earmarking and requesting money for his constituents because that is what his job is. He further protests that he has also voted against each bill with those earmarks, that coincidentally passes anyway.

Ron Paul insists that he is against big government and wasteful spending but what he is really saying is that some things are waste, while things he supports are not wasteful.

At the end of the video Paul seems to suggest that military spending is wasteful. He has repeatedly called for the US to abandon their missions in the Middle East and to close up shop, insisting that it is somehow possible to ignore the world.

There are two kinds of evil in this world - those who do evil things and those who see evil things being done and do nothing about it. Paul falls into the latter category.

He admits that the earmarks are wasteful but his strategy is to tack on his earmarks to those bills which he knows will end up passing anyway.

Paul denounces all interference in the free market and cries foul whenever the government “chooses favorites,” but he has pushed for certain benefits himself. He can argue that tax credits don’t constitute subsidies, but even libertarian tax economists disagree.

The congressman also provides a shaky defense -- to say the least -- of his earmark requests. It appears, from the way he operates, that he doesn’t want to do his own dirty work. He makes spending requests and votes against them while other lawmakers support the measures, bringing the money to his district anyway.

There are far simpler ways to make his point if he really thinks the earmark system fosters corruption. One obvious example: he could abstain from earmarks altogether.

Article here.

This is a cute little scam Paul has going on here. On one hand he can vote for adding big government, getting goodies for his district by attaching it to bills that are guaranteed to pass, afterwards he can then vote against the bill all while making the claim he has, "never voted for any earmarks."

Why do people support this man again? His excuse for putting the earmarks there in the first place is equivalent to a child telling their parents, "Well [insert name here] did it, so I thought I should too, even though I know it's wrong."

Paul supporters sound exactly like liberals when they try and make this one percent argument. Either you believe in pork spending or you don't. They simple go around lecturing everyone about how pure they are and how they know the Constitution, how the government needs to get out of everyone's lives but ironically the man they support is one of the biggest abusers of wasteful spending.

Of course, I write this in absolute vain since even when presented with logic or facts, Paul supporters just fall back on their talking points and end up resorting to calling me or others who disagree with them RINOs and we are all ignorant.

Click title of this post for article.

Terrorists Crossing US - Mexican Border

noreply@blogger.com (Tuesday Money) — Fri, 20 Jan 2012 19:29:00 +0000

Sh*t Liberals Say

noreply@blogger.com (Tuesday Money) — Fri, 20 Jan 2012 01:47:00 +0000

Here is a funny video someone posted on Facebook earlier today. It offers a perfect depiction of the most nonsensical things liberals seem to believe.

Enjoy!

Newt's Dirt Made Public By Ex-Wife

noreply@blogger.com (Tuesday Money) — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 07:48:00 +0000

A story that leaked on Drudge reveals an ABC interview with Newt's ex-wife Marianne will air before Saturday, which is when the South Carolina primary will occur.

Apparently Marianne does not have nice things to say about her ex-hubby Newt. She accuses him of trying to rewrite history in order to make himself look good. I'm not sure why anyone would be shocked by a person trashing their ex but apparently, ABC wants to make this news.

Newt's daughters have responded:

To: ABC News Leadership
From: Kathy Lubbers, Jackie Cushman
Date: January 18, 2012

The failure of a marriage is a terrible and emotional experience for everyone involved. Anyone who has had that experience understands it is a personal tragedy filled with regrets, and sometimes differing memories of events.

We will not say anything negative about our father’s ex-wife. He has said before, privately and publicly, that he regrets any pain he may have caused in the past to people he loves.

ABC News or other campaigns may want to talk about the past, just days before an important primary election. But Newt is going to talk to the people of South Carolina about the future -- about job creation, lower taxes, and about who can defeat Barack Obama by providing the sharpest contrast to his damaging, extreme liberalism. We are confident this is the conversation the people of South Carolina are interested in having.

Our father is running for President because of his grandchildren -- so they can inherit the America he loves. To do that, President Obama must be defeated. And as the only candidate in the race, including Obama, who has actually helped balance the national budget, create jobs, reform welfare, and cut taxes and spending, Newt felt compelled to run -- to serve his country and safeguard his grandchildren's future.

Marianne was the second wife of Newt Gingrich.

Click title of post for full story.

So Much For Transparency

noreply@blogger.com (Tuesday Money) — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 07:55:00 +0000

In this video we witness Carney dodging a question about Obama not releasing his college transcripts. The only reply to the reporter was to "refer to the campaign"?

Carney then continues to talk about the release of income tax records. Not sure what the hell that has to do with Obama's college transcripts.

In my opinion, Obama registered as a foreign exchange student and listed Kenya as his birthplace. Now he wants us to believe he was born in Hawaii. So he either lied then or he is lying now.

Angelina Jolie Comments On Obama

noreply@blogger.com (Tuesday Money) — Sun, 15 Jan 2012 22:06:00 +0000

It's Okay For OWS to Defecate On a Police Car But...G-d Forbid Our Military Piss On Terrorists!

noreply@blogger.com (Tuesday Money) — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 23:59:00 +0000

Apparently this is okay...

...and this is deplorable...

A still shot from the video, titled "Marines Humiliating dead Taliban insurgents." The United States Marine Corps is investigating the video, which could spark a scandal similar to the Abu Ghraib prison photos.

Are ALL of Obama's Relatives Illegal?

noreply@blogger.com (Tuesday Money) — Wed, 11 Jan 2012 19:34:00 +0000

Photo by AP (file)/MetroWest Daily News, Ken McGagh

Onyango Obama

We already know about Obama's illegal aunt so, I guess I'm not supposed to be surprised when I opened the Drudge Report today to find he has an illegal uncle as well. Onyango Obama was arrested for drinking and driving; he blew through a stop sign and almost caused an accident with a police car. Now he wants to go after the police that arrested him.

Not only are Obama's relatives all illegal aliens, they all seem to disrespect this country and its laws! Gee, and people wonder why we think Obama is illegal and he doesn't seem to respect our laws either? It's just in the bloodline.

Obama’s lawyer said Wednesday that he will ask prosecutors for Officer Val Krishtal’s driving record. A court hearing is scheduled Thursday.

Krishtal was injured in November when he lost control of his police cruiser and crashed into a stone wall while responding to reports of gunshots.

What does this guys driving record have to do with him being drunk and behind a wheel? I swear to goodness, this is absolutely ludicrous.

Click title of post for full story.