Friday, April 30, 2010
Someday, maybe we can have an opportunity to sue him, and his High Preist of Deception and Stupidity, Al Gore....for conning the public.
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Needless to say, this is puzzling.
I say this because, all I hear from conservatives is how Washington needs to be shaken up. Then out comes a poll that says Republicans are favoring a Washington insider, and old guard Republican who is nowhere near as conservative, nor does he adhere to the Constitution nearly as much as Mr. Hostettler.
Part of the problem may be that there are too many cooks in the kitchen.
As it stands now, Stutzman, Bates, and Behney have no chance at all. And yet, I will bet that all three will tell you that getting the right person in DC is more important to the state and the nation, than anything else right now. Additionally, I bet they will say they are willing to sacrifice anything to get their country back on track.
Well, I say prove it.
Don't get me wrong here, Dan Coats is way better than anyone the Dems could put up right now. If he wins, I will work for him because Ellsworth is not fit to serve after he voted with the progressive wing of his party. But if the people in the Tea Party movement and constitutional conservatives truly want a return to the principles laid out by the Founding Fathers, John is the one to vote for on Tuesday.
And....if Behney, Bates, and Stutzman really care about getting the best man in DC to represent the state of Indiana, they can prove it tomorrow.
1. Call a news conference
2. Withdraw from the race
3. Throw their support behind John Hostettler
If they do not, I don't want to hear any rhetoric (in the coming six years) about how Coats is a RINO. I don't want to hear any whining from any of these candidates or their supporters about how he isn't following the Constitution or doing the will of the people.
If you are puzzled by all of this, maybe you didn't catch this one from the Navy Times:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi praised the Navy’s decision to name an amphibious warship after Rep. John Murtha, but the formal announcement Friday added fuel to an already smoldering backlash online.
Murtha — “our dear Jack,” as Pelosi referred to him — deserved the honor as a tireless advocate for troops generally and Marines in particular, she said, and she recalled admiring his rapport with them.
“Whether on the battlefield, or on the bedside, he thanked them for their courage, listened to their concerns, and asked them for comment — and he answered their needs, and responded to their calls, whether it was for body armor, up-armored vehicles… radios, you name it,” Pelosi said. “In those minutes [together], he bonded with them especially because he would share his own personal military service with them, and cared for them as a father. They knew it, and they returned his respect.”
How about we modify this a little?
Let's change this to "Murtha-our dear Jack",--- deserved the honor as a seditious, treasonous, lying and thieving politician.... who gave aid and comfort to the enemy, just to score political points at home? Whether on the House floor, a campaign stop, or a media interview, he never failed to take a potshot at a Marine or Soldier who was getting shot at with real bullets, by calling them out of control terrorists and war criminals -- before they could be afforded any level of "due process".
Now that's what I call a real advocate for the troops.
The USS Murtha, what a catchy surrealistic ring that has to it.
I say, let's park it in the harbor next to the USS Rosenberg and USS Benedict Arnold, for effect.
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Before you cast your all-important vote, think about something....will you?
If you want Washington to take notice, you have to send someone who will form positions based on the Constitution and not special interests. And that's someone, who is not beholden to lobbyists.
From time to time I hear many people in this area singing the praises of Ron Paul, and his strong belief in smaller more efficient government (as precursors to liberty). If this is the case, you may know that Mr. Paul has endorsed Mr. Hostettler.
So if you are sincere about wanting to send this kind of a message to Washington, I think this is the BEST way to do it. There are some people there who know John is not a puppet, and others who know he is very serious about doing the people's work.
Winning the election is always the easy part, how they lead becomes the hard part. I think he is up to it, and I think he deserves six years to show us what he can get done.
If one wants to play it, they must have thick skin. As constructive as it can be, there are times when criticism can be (and is) perceived as negative. People can (and do) take it personally, when it involves a candidate that a given individual may support. But I assure my readers this is not my intention in this post.
Those who support Richard Behney (for the GOP nomination in Indiana's U.S. Senate race) may see this as negative and some may even view it as insulting. But nevertheless, I am bound by a conscience and personal commitment to speak and write the truth.... as I see it. While not everyone will see it from my perspective, these things I am writing today are what I believe to be true. They are based on what I have seen, heard, and learned from Mr. Behney himself.
During my own vetting process, I have analyzed speech, facial expressions, and body language. I have also been attentive to candidate backgrounds, as well their stances on the issues and specific plans to implement the things we need to happen to save the nation... from its current destructive path. All of these things I have found useful and not uncommon as a part of any reasonable hiring process.
If this is the case, why shouldn't it be used in this forum?
Earlier in the week, I said this about Mr. Behney in my endorsement post of John Hostettler:
Mr. Behney has a lot of energy, I have seen it in person. He is a good speaker, has a great story behind him, and seems to get the big picture. He has an energetic following that responds well to his sense of humor and purpose. But it is my fear that he will get eaten alive in Washington with no prior political experience.
And I still stand by the statement, but with some additional thoughts I'd like to express.
While Mr. Behney was responding to a question about abortion at the debate I attended last weekend, he made this statement:
“One of the things I’m most disappointed about in running for the United States Senate – I’ve met many people here – I’ve met many of these leaders – pro-life leaders – here in our state. And I’m convinced as sure as I’m standing here that they are more concerned with their egos and with their jobs than with saving lives.”
First, let me clarify something before we get too far along.
The issue I am trying to present here has nothing to do with his specific stand on abortion, nor does it have to do with his view of the leadership of the right to life movement. I have some marked differences with both Behney and the leadership in the movement, but my criticism goes much deeper than this.
At issue here is whether or not, Mr. Behney's lack of experience in the political arena lends itself to a tendency to be overly driven by the emotion of the moment. I think it does and I will tell you why.
In this particular instance, many of his followers whooped it up and clapped when he said this. Without seeing the potential repercussions of saying such a thing-- about those who had previously endorsed him-- they were his personal amen corner and may have clapped to just about anything he said.
Very soon after he made this remark, the Indiana Right To Life PAC released this statement:
“Mr. Behney’s comment reveals an uninformed and cynical view of what drives Indiana’s pro-life leaders to invest their lives in the most selfless of causes by speaking on behalf of unborn children."
"Indiana’s pro-life leaders are mostly volunteers who give sacrificially of their time and money so that children they will never meet might be given a chance at life. This is the heartbeat of Indiana’s pro-life movement.”
"An error of perception and judgment of this magnitude, and concerning allies in the fight for the unborn, has caused us to lose confidence in him and his reliability, so much so that we cannot recommend him to voters."
It's this kind of impetuousness that often causes embarrassment and in this case can sink a candidacy. How many pro-life voters will now look for Mr. Behney's name on the list of endorsed candidates, not see it, and then vote for another?
The answer is not so important as the next question.
What other unmeasured emotionally driven statements will he make, if he is the GOP nominee? Will they be disastrous enough to hand the election to another Democrat? Will we be saddled with another Senator who will line up behind the progressives... like Bayh did when he voted for Obamacare, the Stimulus Package, and the bailouts? I know the likely Democratic nominee will do just that, because he did so as Congressman from the 8th District.
If this isn't enough, there's another area that I have to wonder about.... his judgment.
Behney (in his own words) told us about how he lost a company that he built from scratch -- one that made him lots of money and employed hundreds. He didn't say what that company was, but okay, I will play along for now.
He further stated that he lost it in a hostile takeover by the Chinese. I don't know all of the details, beyond that. I do know that hostile takeovers are part of the game, sometimes. And those who take capital and business risks, sometimes can get burnt.
But in my rational thinking, I have to wonder how someone who is asking me to send them to Washington can expect me to trust their judgment, when I know they put a company of the size he claims at such a risk. What kind of other risks will he willing to take with the people's tax dollars, if he does not adequately guard his won?
For this reason, I hope some who were thinking about voting for Mr. Behney will reconsider. Instead, I hope they will give a second look at John Hostettler, who is far less given over to emotional rhetoric and impulsiveness.
As for Mr. Behney, this is not the end of the road for him -- should he choose to continue in politics. Sarah Palin was not politically mature enough for the national scene, when she was tapped to be McCain's running mate either. But she has made the best of a bad situation, by better educating herself and learning to conduct her speaking in a more measured manner.
There is no reason that Mr. Behney cannot do the same.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
I cannot speak enough about how Mrs. Sunsett and I enjoyed the "meet and greet" portion of the Indy Tea Party's forum on Saturday, where we got to talk with several candidates who are running in some important races in my area. We said we wanted to get involved in something worthwhile, and we thought helping to get this country turned back around was well worth the time.
One race I have concerned myself with, is choosing a successor to the retiring Representative Steve Buyer (IN-4). Like the Indiana Senate race, it's not been an easy call to make.
One of the applicants for the job is Mike Young. He's been around a awhile in one side of the Indiana State Assembly, or another. He started out in the House side, but now serves in the Senate. We chatted for a few moments and he genuinely seemed like a nice guy wanting to take on the next level of challenges.
Another candidate we were pleased to meet was a young man by the name of Eric Wathen. He currently serves at the county level as a County Commissioner. Much to his credit... he didn't seem much like a typical politician. I got the sense that he was an earnest guy but not quite ready for the national scene yet. But beyond that, he does have much potential for future races and should not be counted out of a higher level of service.... someday.
I didn't get to meet State Sen. Brandt Hershman and to be quite honest about it, I am a little glad that I didn't. He felt the need to go negative against the front runner, Secretary of State Todd Rokita.
And it hasn't set well with me.
I say front runner because Mr. Rokita is the man with the most name recognition in the race, and that may very well be a sore spot with Mr. Hershman. Whatever the case, I thought it was uncalled for.... especially when he offered nothing to back it up.
You see, Mr. Hershman is the endorsed successor of the current Congressman. Maybe, there was a sense of entitlement on Brandt's part and this was his way of lashing out.
Even at that, this author does not make choices based on the biggest name or who is next in line. Never have, never will. If that were the case, I'd support Dan Coats for Senator.
Let me say that the biggest reason I am endorsing Rokita is, he was very instrumental in getting a Voter ID Law in Indiana, to include winning not one but two Supreme Court challenges to its constitutionality.
This isn't the only reason.
I do believe I am comfortable in saying that this is the kind of person I want representing me, for the next two years in Washington. This is the guy I will be voting for next week. And if you live in the 4th District, I hope you will give him a good close look too.
Sunday, April 25, 2010
These are trying times. They are are full of angst and anxiety for those of us who embrace reality.
In the past several weeks, I have spent some time researching the candidates who are vying for my vote -- here in my little corner of the earth. I take it seriously. I do this because this is one of the most important elections in my lifetime.
It will determine many things and I think the most important outcome it will yield will directly affect the future of western civilization, as we know it.What happens in November will determine how our children and grandchildren will fare as they grow up and live their lives.
We need leaders that will lead and put the people they serve, first. They need to understand the Constitution. Why have a founding document, if we do not follow it and use it for the framework of our government?
So as part of this quest, I have been trying to educate myself by watching debates and generally listening to the five gentlemen, who have been kind enough to offer their services to represent the state of Indiana.
All are currently seeking the GOP nomination for U.S. Senator, and are as follows:
1) Richard Behney
2) Don Bates
3) Indiana State Senator Marlin Stutzman
4) Former Senator Dan Coats
5) Former U.S. Representative John Hostettler
Please take special note of the following:
1) All five are quality candidates.
2) All five would make a better choice than the likely Democratic nominee.
3) All five make it hard to choose between them, as they all have their unique qualities and attributes.
4) All have special talents that would be excellent assets for the job at hand.
But I am not a member of the Dead Democrats club, so I can only vote once. And the objective here is to choose the best possible candidate.
As I said earlier, all are good in their own way. And if my man doesn't win, I will support any of them in the general election (over and above someone who voted for Obamacare, as the Congressman of the IN-8th District).
I am grateful for the service of Mr. Coats. Overall, I think he has done a decent job for Indiana in the past. But I didn't always see things his way on the second amendment, and I see if him as part of that "old guard" GOP machine. For these reasons, I think his time has past. But I still I want him to know that we appreciate what he was able to do, in his time.
Mr. Behney has a lot of energy, I have seen it in person. He is a good speaker, has a great story behind him, and seems to get the big picture. He has an energetic following that responds well to his sense of humor and purpose. But it is my fear that he will get eaten alive in Washington with no prior political experience.
I haven't seen Mr. Bates in person yet. He could not attend the Indianapolis Tea Party forum, where I was on Saturday morning. He was ill. But I have seen him on TV debates and have read some about him. I do find him to be a bright young man -- who also gets the big picture. But he has no prior political experience either. And like I said, it's brutal in D.C. and the mess is thick.
Like Behney and Bates, Mr. Stutzman also has a level head on him and good grasp of the problems we face as a nation. He is smart and knowledgeable, he states his positions well. In addition, he has experience in politics and government.
I did give him a good look. But remember, we only get one vote. We must select the BEST candidate with it.
As I listen to John Hostettler, it has become clearer to me that he is the one who I think can best represent Indiana, as its junior senator.
He knows how Washington works.
He can set up his office tomorrow and go to work on fixing the problems right away, with limited orientation and far less time to get acclimated to the federal experience.
And it's not just his experience that makes him appealing.
He knows the Constitution. He is a very smart man, he is a concrete thinker who is able to analyze and troubleshoot well. As he states his positions and stances, he can and often does reference the section(s) and article(s) that apply to what he wants to do.
When he was in the House, he broke ranks with the GOP when he has felt they were wrong. You have to respect that.
He seems to vote his deeply guided principles well, and has done it consistently. There are but a few things, of which I am sure I may not agree with him. That's always the case in this world. But in the deep analysis, I have come to the stark conclusion that I do agree with him on the lion's share of the issues--especially those things that are vital to preserving the personal freedoms that have made this nation so great.
Make no mistake. If he does not win the nomination, I will support the winner and I have a feeling that Mr. Hostettler will too.
If he does win, I want all to know and understand that this is not the necessarily the end of the road for the others. But it will very important for them to be supportive of the nominee, so that we can wrest control of government from the hands of the progressives in the fall. These idealogues seek to bankrupt and weaken this nation, with their out of control spending and unprecedented expansion of government.
They must be stopped before they do enormous amounts of irreparable damage.
For the above reasons stated, PYY is freely and willingly choosing to endorse Mr. John Hostettler for U.S. Senator, for a constitutional term of six years. If you are from Indiana and still reading, I ask that you give this man a good look....and your vote.
It will help begin the process of restoration. It will begin the process of rediscovery of the values and principles that have been lost for so long. It will do much to give America the true hope that its young will see the same opportunities available to them, like we were able to enjoy.
Saturday, April 24, 2010
It won't be long and April will be over. It's been a good April-- in that-- Spring has come early this year, defying the Ground Hog's prediction. The weather has been very pleasant and the blooms seem to be extra colorful.
So just to keep April in our minds for another week, I thought we'd look at a girl who is not exactly a household name.... but, nonetheless, has some unique and distinctive tastes in music.
They call it "indie"... I call it good. She calls herself... April March.
We'll kick it off with a song that is the consummate and classic, sexy beach tune-- pre-Beach Boys:
Here is one with much the same style, but uniquely different:
I think most of her music is pretty good. But if I just had to choose a favorite, this would be the one:
Friday, April 23, 2010
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Take the well-known progressive hack, Markos Moulitsas, for instance. You know him as Kos, from the leftist blog called The Daily Kos. Here's the kind of things he likes to say about people, who merely disagree with his politics:
I mean, this is what the people voted for. And it's one thing to oppose it on policy. It's another thing to use the kind of exterminationist, eliminationist rhetoric that they are using in appealing to violence and that sort of thing.
You can read the article that uses this as a lead-in, it is a piece that provides some retrospection of historical events that have led us to the point we are at, today.
If you want something to seriously chew on, I recommend you read the article and then just let it digest for awhile. As you think about the things said in it, I propose that you begin to wonder why the left is so fearful of people who can articulate their platforms, and why they are their platforms.
I think it is because people like Moulitsas are not able to argue the merits of their stances, without demonizing those who only are offering what they honestly believe to be valid criticism, of the progressive doctrine. Rule #5 of Alinsky's strategic model is based on the use of ridicule and one that is used often, when facing opposition to the actions of those who were foolishly chosen to lead.
But more than anything, see if you really think this article is full hatred. See if you cam find any talk of extermination and elimination of anyone.
I don't see it. All I see is an honest attempt to express what many see as a truth. That's all.
It is true that many are angry right now. But since when did anger ever equate to hatred or rage? How did it become synonymous with racism? These are different entities altogether
No folks, they clamor that the Tea Party is nothing more than a bunch of angry, raging, and even vengeful whackos --- who are bent on an armed revolution and condone the use of violence as a means of advancing a political agenda. But in reality, we are just mad at what we perceive to be an out of control government who have no accountability to their actions. And the left hates us for it.
In this case, the anger is healthy. There is even a verse in the Bible that exhorts its readers to Be ye angry and sin not.
Healthy anger can result in positive action and that's what these people are doing, trying to work toward more productive solutions to real problems that we will all soon be facing.... especially when this latest round of bills come due. It's about keeping freedom alive so that our children and grandchildren can have the same opportunities afforded to us. And it's about promoting responsibility, so they will never need to rely on anyone else, but themselves and their closest friends and family within their chosen support system.
Don't let the Left fool you, this is all it is and it is nothing else.
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
A man was shot the other night.
I know, I know.
I am sure you are asking, what's new about this? And the answer is nothing.
Except..... it (once again) shows how important it is to have the basic right to protect yourself, and those you love.
Here's the gist of the news report on the incident:
Metro Police say it appears that a man opened fire and shot another man in self defense during an attempted robbery at a downtown apartment complex.
Brian Blevins, 24, told police he was moving into a building near 16th and Pennsylvania on Sunday when he was approached by 38-year-old Christopher Hampton. Blevins said Hampton asked him if he had change for a $5 bill.
“The one guy said no the other guy said yeah let me go get it, it's in the apartment so he then followed him into the apartment, once they were in he pulled a gun out on them and ordered them into the back room,” said Sgt. Matt Mount of the Indianapolis Metro Police Department.
Police say Blevins kept his gun in a back room. He came out and opened fire shooting Hampton in the back.
Hampton was pronounced dead at the scene.
Yes it's sad.
And it didn't have to happen.
But what's a person to do when they are accosted in such a brazen and dangerous manner? Hampton obviously miscalculated and underestimated the resolve of a young kid who just wanted to get moved into a new place. You can't blame the protector and self-preservationist.
But before you feel too blue about this entire scenario, take a look at this story -- one that followed up:
24-Hour News 8 has uncovered more about an alleged armed robber who was shot and killed Sunday. We've learned that would-be robber was already being monitored with a GPS tracking device for other alleged crimes.
Christopher Hampton was wearing an ankle bracelet so officers could track his whereabouts. But when Hampton allegedly robbed two men Sunday afternoon, his GPS anklet wasn't working.
Hampton's rap sheet stands as proof that the 38-year old had a tough time staying out of jail. He has 10 convictions in 15-years, five of which are felonies.
Earlier this month he got in trouble again. He was accused of violating a no-contact order with his wife. A judge mandated he wear a GPS tracking device around his ankle.
So now that we have the rest of the story, it appears that this career thug just saved a lot of grief for a lot of people. He presented himself to someone who wasn't going to take it, someone who had a right to meet that objective (if confronted). On the other end of this process is a man who lost his battle with his inner-most demons, when he made that fateful choice.
Certainly, the man who was forced to pull this trigger and facilitate this act is responsible for a woman being able to sleep better at nights, knowing that this jerk will never threaten her again. But not only her, all of the future victims of his strong-armed tactics can now rest a little easier, even though they know not who they are.
Bottom line, no one will ever have to face this puke again.
Despite what seems like a case of a creep getting his just desserts, the man did have a name and a family. The day after this, a family member was on TV grieving and plainly in denial. He said that his brother was not there to rob anyone. He went on to say that he was there to buy drugs and the reason he knew this, was because his late brother had earlier made a statement that he needed to get some money----for drugs.
This isn't rocket science here, but I do struggle with this kind of thinking sometime.
Even at that, I am willing to bet that with this surviving sibling's words out in the open, the authorities will not heed his pleas and keep this investigation open any longer. Why should they?
And just to let you all know, if I had so happened to be the man who was forced to pull the trigger in this (or any other similar) instance, I would not exactly be beaming with radiant joy right now.
But make no mistake..... I would regret NOTHING.
Sunday, April 18, 2010
As for some of the myths from some of the usual suspects, here is one example from a well-known ex-president and perjurer, Bill Clinton:
"What we learned from Oklahoma City is not that we should gag each other or that we should reduce our passion for the positions we hold - but that the words we use really do matter, because there's this vast echo chamber, and they go across space and they fall on the serious and the delirious alike. They fall on the connected and the unhinged alike," he said.
"One of the things that the conservatives have always brought to the table in America is a reminder that no law can replace personal responsibility. And the more power you have and the more influence you have, the more responsibility you have."
So let me see if I can get this straight. He who has power also has influence, right? If that is the case, I guess it means he has some element of responsibility to pick and choose his words wisely. So far so good, right? But what about those on the left who aren't picking and choosing their words very well?
Here is a bright shining example. This time, it comes from some young unknown upstart hack:
The Tea Partiers aren’t too fond of racial underdogs either. They’re more likely than other Americans to believe that the Obama administration favors blacks over whites, and that black people’s hardships have been exaggerated. America does have a history of right-wing, often racist, populism. Segregationist Alabama Governor George Wallace called his party the Populists in 1968. But at least Wallace’s economic views were reasonably progressive. The Tea Partiers favor the economically and racially privileged.
How anyone could tie Tea Partiers to George Wallace and keep a straight face, is way beyond me. The Tea Party gathering I just attended in Indianapolis (on the Capital grounds) had black people speaking to an energized, but civil, crowd. No one engaged in racist speech at all. No one advocated anything like Wallace did, there were no calls to deny black people anything.
If there had been, you could bet that no black person would have stuck around until then very end.
No, these were merely people who are concerned about the state of their country and do not support what has been going on. Some of them just happened to be black. Not as many as I would have liked to have seen, but I understand the pressure that is being put on blacks by the radical left.
Even at that, this is not the best myth to come out of this weak and faulty piece of journalism. Let's look at this one:
The Tea Partiers aren’t standing up for the little guy; they’re standing up to the little guy.
Makes me laugh, how about you?
This is how it is. The Tea Partiers stick up for the WORKING people, those who pay their bills and taxes. These are the ones who get up everyday, drag their asses to work and put in long hours. It is they who earn the money necessary, so the government can tax it.
Elected officials could not spend like they do, if it weren't for the bill payer and the tax payer. In fact, we now know that almost half of the people in this country pay no taxes at all, which makes them recipients of collected money, after the government has taken their cut for their own self-serving purposes.
So, if you want to paint the Tea Partiers as being in the upper echelons of wage earners, I find nothing wrong with it. Where these myth-makers go astray is to suggest that we are the upper crust of society who are loaded with money. They screw up even worse, when they believe that our opinions are not valid.
Do we not have rights? Do we not have the right to demand those rights be respected? Do we not have the right to speak out when we feel those rights are being violated?
Why should we be required to keep paying more of our hard-earned money to lazy bums who are capable of working, but won't? I know not all recipients are in this category, but a good many are.
They won't work because the government will pay them to sit at home, deal drugs, work under the table like an illegal immigrant, and basically contribute nothing of any value to the country. And they honestly think it is alright to do so.
How can any progressive reconcile this mentality, with any sense of true justice?
If that isn't clear enough, let me be plain. Let's break it down in idiot's terms and examine it closer, shall we?
Myth #1 - Tea Partiers are tied to domestic terrorists.
Q. What did Tim McVeigh's agenda have to do with over-spending and high taxes?
By his own admission, it had everything to do with an overzealous government who chose to go into a situation with guns blazing, when there was no need to do so.
Myth #2 - Tea Partiers are racist.
Q. If you believe this, why are there blacks at almost every large Tea Party gathering?
A. Because a lot of them are bill/tax payers and do not like the way the government is handling their tax dollars. These are they who do NOT factor race into their ideology, in any way whatsoever. I suspect there are more who would attend if they could. but many may have had to work and many may have felt intimidated by the radical left.
Myth #3 - Tea Partiers are greedy people who want to keep the little people down.
Some may be greedy to a fault. I don't know every last one of them, so I cannot say for sure who is and who isn't.
But I saw no one pulling up in limos, there was no preferential seating for large donors. Everything at Tea Party rallies is first come, first serve. I saw a lot of retired people who have paid their dues and are now living on fixed incomes. I saw a lot working stiffs like me who were tired after a long day, and yet made it anyway. I saw young, old, and middle aged. The one thing that united all of the people was a genuine concern about the direction the nation is being driven, by deceitful and manipulative leaders.
After all of these queries I have posed here today, there only remains one intelligent question left to ask.
If the Tea Party Movement is not a relevant force, why are so many progressives scared of them and seek to demonize them -- in place of a debate about the issues? What could they possibly be afraid of, that they would stoop to such a low level of behavior?
Saturday, April 17, 2010
This song has a Neil Diamond quality to its melody, I'm not sure who wrote it:
Always pensive and reflective, Procol Harum:
Anyone who lived through the 60s knows how introspective that decade was. This tune is an example:
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Indiana Congressman André Carson was the target of racial slurs directed at him by Tea Party protestors on Capitol Hill. Or was he?
It's a controversy that started more than three weeks ago when Carson and other members of Congress were on the way to the Capitol to vote on the health care reform bill. Congressman Carson was walking with Congressman John Lewis of Georgia, another African American Democrat, when they encountered protesters.
Carson told reporters that he heard the N-word used numerous times even though the word is not audible in a short video posted on Youtube .
"It happened," said Carson chief of staff Justin Ohlemiller. "I think the reason he brought it to light is the fact that we need to use this incident and others to raise our civil discourse."
Three weeks and counting, and there is still no tape of the incident. Not one.
Doesn't this strike people as odd?
Oh, I know.....I believe they were trying to goad the Tea party members into it. I believe they WANTED to hear the words. I said as much about this, awhile back.
No, the only reason they do this is because they have no answer to valid criticism. The critiques against this government are rendered by people who have different opinions than those in power, nothing else.Those who are driving the train do not cope well with dissent. So they try doing the only thing they can and that is control the narrative by changing the subject.
They cannot refute the intellectual points the Tea Party makes in the free exchange of ideas. They see no value in debating the issues on their merits. So, they seek to destroy those who are in opposition with them. They try to discredit the messengers by any means possible, even if it means uttering lies and deceptions to divert attention away from their inability to hold an intelligent dialogue.
The government spends too much money. That's racism.
The health care bill does not address the real problems the healthcare system has. That's racism.
Let's kill the bill and start over again. Again, racism.
I can do this all day long, the outcome is the same. Whatever point or counter point I make with this government, I get equated to being a racist.
And that isn't all.
One or two idiots in a crowd, spouting off or displaying signs with inappropriate or offensive comments, just means that the entire multimillion who think smaller government is smarter government, are racists too.
Or are they?
The Tea Party movement is a "loose affiliation of racists, homophobes and morons" that must be stopped "by any non-violent means necessary," according to the Web site "Crash The Tea Party."
The group's founder, Jason Levin, told the Associated Press that it has 65 leaders in cities around the country who are seeking to orchestrate infiltration of this week's Tea Party protests.
"Do I think every member of the Tea Party is a homophobe, racist or a moron? No, absolutely not," he said. "Do I think most of them are homophobes, racists or morons? Absolutely."
There you have it. Only it's not just beginning, it's been going on for awhile now and too many people are not able to comprehend it.
Don't be surprised to find out that someone tries to blame this on the "Tea Party racists". It just might be said that this was an inside job to cover for the millions of "racists", who are behind this movement.
But I digress.
If this was just a group of people who were not happy with a black President, why would such an underhanded game need to be played? Why would they feel the need to counter the influence of those who are not on board with political espionage?
The answer is not blowing in the wind. It's anchored front and center for all to see. But you have to look at it.
If we look at it with objectivity, we will see that race-baiting is no different than racism. So each and every time Andre Carson, John Lewis, or any other radical agent makes baseless accusations like this, it is a wanton and willful act of bigotry and prejudice. Every time a race baiting subversive infiltrates a gathering of peace loving people who just want their government to listen, it is an act of racism.
As Tea party protests take place tomorrow, my advice is to watch out for these bozos. And if they start uttering racist remarks or are found to be carrying offensive signs, make them leave. If they won't, film it and put it on You Tube for all to see.
Monday, April 12, 2010
So because of my lack of interest in things political the past two days, I must rely on an old tried and true strategy to bail me out of a tight spot. I will ride the coattails of my friend Mustang, who has an excellent post up at Social Sense.
And why stop there?
AC at Fore Left posted something interesting on Saturday. Give it a look when you get a chance.
Saturday, April 10, 2010
This is one song by him that I think is nothing less than phenomenal:
After his departure another talented musician and performer, by the name of Phil Collins, took the band in another direction.
This one is as good as any:
Thursday, April 08, 2010
Wednesday, April 07, 2010
But there are some exceptions, and this post is one of them.
From USA Today comes this story:
U.S. officials are expressing puzzlement and dismay over the latest remarks by Afghan President Hamid Karzai, including his reported threat to join the Taliban if foreigners don't stop meddling in Afghanistan.
In light of Karzai's "troubling" and "confusing" remarks, the White House is debating whether it's "constructive" to go on with a planned meeting between President Obama and the Afghan president next month, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Tuesday.
This isn't the first incident with the Afghan President. He has been blaming the US for his problems for awhile now.
Some are even suggesting that he may have a substance abuse problem.
Afghan president Hamid Karzai's "mental stability" is in doubt and he may even be taking illegal drugs, a former top UN envoy to the war-torn country told MSNBC television.
"He's prone to tirades. He can be very emotional, act impulsively. In fact, some of the palace insiders say that he has a certain fondness for some of Afghanistan's most profitable exports," Peter Galbraith told the US network.
Here's a thought worth exploring and then I am going to stop.
Someone from the State Department needs to tell him privately to shut the hell up now, or we will pack up our gear and leave the hellhole and be prepared to do it. If that happens, he will be left to the mercy of those who will certainly reassert their control over dilapidated nation that produces nothing of any value, except for the production of illegal drugs.
Personally, I am tired of our brave men and women putting their lives on the line to prop up a corrupt jerk who is trying to exacerbate the already fervent anti-American feelings that permeate the place. This is giving aid and comfort to the enemy, and clearly demonstrates these people do not appreciate the price that has been paid for their liberation form an oppressive regime.
Obama likes to sport paraphernalia of the Chicago White Sox, as if it were some kind of badge of honor. But in this video, the BS Artist In Chief doesn't really know much about the team:
Maybe he just doesn't want to admit that he only wears the Sox hats and shirts to look cool, because his fellow South Side gang-bangers wear them. These are the ones who he came to know while he was a community organizer.
Just a thought.
Tuesday, April 06, 2010
Mr Istook really cleaned this loud-mouthed idiot blowbag's clock, and solicited his other guest to take potshots at him too. But how does Ed Schultz respond when he is respectfully challenged?
Watch this classic display of sophomoric behavior by Eddie:
Looks like Ed can't debate without overbearing his way through something. And when he cannot control the outcome, he's weak and his arguments are easily shown to be faulty.
After seeing this overt dishonesty and hypocrisy, it's also easy to see why Ed has almost no viewers.
Hat Tip on the first video: I Hate The Media.
(The second video is so old, I have no idea where I found it.)
These kids had heart, they played team ball with no one team member anymore important than the other. They did what we they were asked to do, they were unselfish.
So in the end, when the shock wears off, I hope they will see that they have nothing to be ashamed about. I hope they will come back next year, more determined than ever.
They say that no one ever remembers the losers of a championship. But I suspect that this year it will be different. Not many will forget the little school from Indianapolis that ran through the tourney with a spirit that was unmatched by any.
Think this was good? Just wait until next year.
Monday, April 05, 2010
Just cue up the tape from the West Virginia game Saturday night and watch them smack down one of the best players in college basketball without a call. Not enough? Try one from the Laettner days, when he stomped on the Kentucky player's chest without any foul and no review by NCAA officials.
It is likely that I will not be able to stay up and watch the game, because my days are long and start early. I have been fortunate enough to see every game in the tourney so far, especially their great game Saturday night against MSU.
It turned out just as everyone expected, very tough defense by both teams. MSU had a definite size advantage but did not take advantage of it, due to foul trouble. When a physical half court team gets in foul trouble, it affects their aggressiveness in the paint. Butler was able to capitalize on it and took advantage of the turnovers that State so generously gave them.
When Butler can control the tempo, they always have a chance to win the game. The problem Butler had in this one was shooting at the end of the game. MSU gave them every opportunity to close the game out strong, but the ball just would not fall into the basket. This probably had cardiac telemetry units all over town going berserk.
Luckily for the Bulldogs, MSU's shooting wasn't anything to write home about either. Some of it was pressure defense, the rest was desperation shots that were ill-advised.
I think they do have a chance against Duke, but they will have to get their shots to fall and will need to take the refs out of the game. They will need to play near perfect and possibly do it without their center, Matt Howard. He is questionable after suffering a mild concussion, Saturday night.
They will need to play smothering defense and confuse Duke's blue blood team, who are used to benefiting from favorable conditions, not of their own creation. It will be tough. But I think there is a chance.
Sunday, April 04, 2010
Saturday, April 03, 2010
I know this I have posted this first one before, when I did the Steve Miller piece. But is too good not to hit it again:
As you may know Indy's own Butler University is still in the tourney and plays Michigan State tonight. Everyone makes a big deal over how good of a program Duke is with their graduation rate and squeaky clean program. But many do not place much emphasis or consideration that to get into Butler you must have a B average.
When all is said and done, the city of Indy and much of the state is proud of the accomplishments of this team -- both on and off the court. Ten players on the roster are from the state and there is not a real perennial basketball power here, anymore. So this old song covered by Michael Buble might be what Indiana is longing for:
If they do hit it big and win it all, you can expect this as a response all over town and more than half of the state:
Friday, April 02, 2010
Here is inarguable proof that Obama is a Marxist:
Now that we are done laughing, we should all be crying. That is because beyond the absurdity that is slapstick comedy, this really is true.
Who would have thought that the Marx Brothers were prophets?
Thursday, April 01, 2010
Maybe they should listen to this video from a Tea Party event last year, before they run their oral cesspools:
And if that is not enough, watch this one:
Well....I cannot imagine that either of these gentlemen would have been invited, nor would they have accepted the invitation to speak at a Tea party rally, if it were riddled with racists. I cannot imagine that black conservatives are not very fond of bigots, can you?.
I would say to Keith Olbermann, Janeane Garafalo, and the rest of the lot that they are fools of the highest order. But in one respect, i must say that in doing so I will offend all of the fine upstanding fools in this world.
If anger is so wrong, why do they allow themselves to appear so utterly enraged when discussing people who simply disagree with the Democrats' policies? After all, they did win the election didn't they?
My guess is they are just plain angry by nature, as well as ignorant. And it's kind of hard to fix both of them, simultaneously.