I am listening to king barack address the Congress. So far, I hear the same speech I heard a couple of weeks ago.
Alot of slogans and platitudes...
Look to the future
Short sighted past administration
Spendulous bill saved the jobs of 57 police officers in Minneapolis
Tax cut?
Really?
Extended unemployment benefits (on the American taxpayer)
Extended medical protection (on the American taxpayer)
"Nobody messes with Joe (Biden)" leading the tough oversight committee
This is just the first step
Clean up the credit crisis
(Notice the wince on Nancy Pelosi's face when he slams the wealthy, such as, the last administration gave tax breaks to the wealthy)
Too many bad loans on the books of our banks
Give money to the banks to make loans
Housing plan to help responsible homeowners reduce the mortgage (how do I get some of that action?)
Banks will have to prove they are lending the money to taxpayers (uh, that the taxpayers are paying taxes to give loans to the taxpayers...huh)
"I refuse to let that happen" (an economy that sputters along for up to a decade)
"it's not about helping banks, it's about helping people"
budget will cut back in areas we don't need (like national defense?)
He wants legislation to quash geothermal fuels that will force the expansion of renewable energy
(wind, solar, clean coal?...did he miss nuclear energy? I think he did)
It's all Socialism and Marxism. The government is going to provide all of these things.
Did he say that he is going to get a cure for cancer?
Wow...impressive
But private business will not provide these things...the government will.
But the government creates nothing. The government does not generate its own income, it merely takes from those that have and spreads it around.
(What must his liberal, rich, Hollywood friends think of all of this?)
Guarantee a complete education...they are going to pay for college now?
What all am I paying for?
He can't stand not to reach back to slap the past administration. Taking a shot at the war, which by the way, kept terrorism off of American soil since 9-11. Taking a shot at our national missile defense systems (this he says we don't need...huh)
He says that any family earning under $250,000 a year will not see a dime of tax increase, in fact he says, 95% of working families will receive tax cut...and the checks are on the way (what checks?)
He will not allow terrorists to plot against us from secret bases halfway around the world (but what about the secret bases in South America, Mexico, and in the United States?)
He has ordered the closing of Gitmo and ordered swift and sure justice for killer terrorists.
"America does not torture" (but you're killin' me with this tough talk that you cannot and will not back up.)
It all sounds good, but how will he pay for this? Are all of his right friends going to pony up huge sums of money to pay for this? Has he made a deal to borrow vast amounts of money from other nations?
And the bottom line: will this stimulate and save the economy?
I hear lots of cautionary language like: this will take time, and it won't happen quickly, blah blah blah...
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Monday, February 23, 2009
I need local issues.
I am looking for new material. king barack is both a fool and a liar. He is doing so many things wrong the I would have to become a full time commentary writer to discuss them all. Thank God for HumanEvents.com.
The Spendulous Plan is zooming right along helping nothing. The more I read, the more I see how badly the public has been and is being conned by these people.
Future topics:
*The earmarks in the spendulous plan (when the king said there were no earmarks).
*The closing of the prison at Guantanamo Bay (the worst of the worst are still there). We could just hand them all the Israelis; they know how to handle their enemies (because we sure don't).
*king barack's promise to cut the deficit in half (there will have to be some hard decisions, but since when is raising taxes a hard decision for a democrat).
*Did I hear of a failure of the plan to keep spendulous funds for Americans? Can illegal aliens get their share of these funds? I hear "yes".
*Will he cut the deficit in half by cutting the military to the bone or completely out (I never believed that barack ever intended to protect us from the terrorists).
*Do you need more on the choice to spend more government money to murder unborn children than we do on killing murderous islamic extremists?
*Do the democrats really believe they can get away with intrefering with the 1st Amendment freedom of speech with the so called "fairness doctrine"?
At any rate, there must be some good local issues around here. All I have to do is look for them.
The Spendulous Plan is zooming right along helping nothing. The more I read, the more I see how badly the public has been and is being conned by these people.
Future topics:
*The earmarks in the spendulous plan (when the king said there were no earmarks).
*The closing of the prison at Guantanamo Bay (the worst of the worst are still there). We could just hand them all the Israelis; they know how to handle their enemies (because we sure don't).
*king barack's promise to cut the deficit in half (there will have to be some hard decisions, but since when is raising taxes a hard decision for a democrat).
*Did I hear of a failure of the plan to keep spendulous funds for Americans? Can illegal aliens get their share of these funds? I hear "yes".
*Will he cut the deficit in half by cutting the military to the bone or completely out (I never believed that barack ever intended to protect us from the terrorists).
*Do you need more on the choice to spend more government money to murder unborn children than we do on killing murderous islamic extremists?
*Do the democrats really believe they can get away with intrefering with the 1st Amendment freedom of speech with the so called "fairness doctrine"?
At any rate, there must be some good local issues around here. All I have to do is look for them.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
To be a prosecutor in Florida
I love to watch "CSI Miami" on Monday nights. The Vegas version is so much about the technical science of CSI, Miami is more about entertainment. And I love to be entertained.
The messages they leave with the person who doesn't work in the criminal justice system, to say the least, leave alot to be desired. To say the most, they are down right false.
Okay, so CSI Miami starts with a courtroom scene where they are trying some guy for murder. The testimony goes by quickly (well, it is only a 1 hour show). The most disturbing part is during final argument. In the trial, the defendant did not testify on the advice of his brilliant legal counsel Sean "Puff Daddy P Diddy Dimwiddie" Combs. So the prosecutor says to the jury, "We have heard from everyone except one person, the defendant. His silence shows his guilt."
WHAT? In Texas, if a prosecutor comments on a defendant's failure to testify, you can be sure that your conviction will be overturned on appeal so fast it will make your head spin. The defendant's right to remain silent is absolute, and his failure to testify in his own trial cannot be used as evidence against him, period.
So when I saw this happen on TV, I'm thinking that people are going to think that sort of thing is proper to do. Well, it's not...at least, unless they have a different version of the United States Constitution that they follow in Florida.
The messages they leave with the person who doesn't work in the criminal justice system, to say the least, leave alot to be desired. To say the most, they are down right false.
Okay, so CSI Miami starts with a courtroom scene where they are trying some guy for murder. The testimony goes by quickly (well, it is only a 1 hour show). The most disturbing part is during final argument. In the trial, the defendant did not testify on the advice of his brilliant legal counsel Sean "Puff Daddy P Diddy Dimwiddie" Combs. So the prosecutor says to the jury, "We have heard from everyone except one person, the defendant. His silence shows his guilt."
WHAT? In Texas, if a prosecutor comments on a defendant's failure to testify, you can be sure that your conviction will be overturned on appeal so fast it will make your head spin. The defendant's right to remain silent is absolute, and his failure to testify in his own trial cannot be used as evidence against him, period.
So when I saw this happen on TV, I'm thinking that people are going to think that sort of thing is proper to do. Well, it's not...at least, unless they have a different version of the United States Constitution that they follow in Florida.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
I miss Monday Night Football
I actually forced myself to listen to that speech Monday night (mainly because they preempted my shows that make me laugh).
I listened intently to the whole thing.
I still don’t know where this money is coming from.
I still don’t understand how this is going to put the economy back right.
The guy is all form and no substance. Still we only get slogans and platitudes.
I hear that the luster is fading quickly though.
Why can't he or someone explain how this is going to work?
The money can only come from raising taxes, diminishing our national defense, printing more money, or borrowing from foreign sources. None of which can possibly be good for our nation or our economy.
I understand that the new Sec. of the Treasury talked before the Senate for about 3 or 4 hours (was it yesterday?). Apparently, he said nothing interesting, and he was unable to explain to the committee where this money was going, how it was going to be used, or any specifics of the bail out plan.
Looking for answers here folks.
I listened intently to the whole thing.
I still don’t know where this money is coming from.
I still don’t understand how this is going to put the economy back right.
The guy is all form and no substance. Still we only get slogans and platitudes.
I hear that the luster is fading quickly though.
Why can't he or someone explain how this is going to work?
The money can only come from raising taxes, diminishing our national defense, printing more money, or borrowing from foreign sources. None of which can possibly be good for our nation or our economy.
I understand that the new Sec. of the Treasury talked before the Senate for about 3 or 4 hours (was it yesterday?). Apparently, he said nothing interesting, and he was unable to explain to the committee where this money was going, how it was going to be used, or any specifics of the bail out plan.
Looking for answers here folks.
Wow! What are these guys thinking?
Here is an MSNBC story Merrill-Lynch bonuses. I usually don't care for MSNBC (mainly because they try to pass that crazy Keith Olberman off as a journalist when he is really an editorial commentator), and I know that this is part of their heinously liberal slant to pass the big spending bill and to slam capitalism, but these guys at M-L are off the charts as far as having poor judgement.
This is the point where the consumers should speak with their dollars by removing any further business from these greedy clowns. If what they did is a crime, they should definitely be prosecuted.
(Thanks to emailer for the tip. XOXOXO)
This is the point where the consumers should speak with their dollars by removing any further business from these greedy clowns. If what they did is a crime, they should definitely be prosecuted.
(Thanks to emailer for the tip. XOXOXO)
Sunday, February 8, 2009
Congressman Burgess.
http://www.dentonrc.com/sharedcontent/dws/drc/localnews/politics/stories/DRC_burgess_0206.2311aa65.html
This is the story from Friday about Congressman Michael Burgess getting appointed to serve on the Joint Economic Committee.
So far, Dr. Burgess has been voting as he should. The answer is not large spending bills, the answer is tax relief to allow the businesses to grow. President Bush dropped the ball by supporting the first bailout bill that, by the way, did absolutely no good at all.
Do we really want the likes of King Barack and his minions deciding how much the head of a large company can make? Right now, he is putting ceilings on the salaries of CEO's of companies that accept bailout money, but it won't be long before he decides that all CEO's of hugely successful companies are paying themselves too much.
When he does that, will he reach to his Hollywood friends, you know, those overpaid actors and entertainers who are always trying to foist their liberal nonsence on American viewers, and dictate their salaries to them?
I tell you all, freedom and liberty are going to go away fast under this administration...uh...I mean, regime. WE NEED OUR CONSERVATIVE CONGRESSMEN TO PROTECT US.
This is the story from Friday about Congressman Michael Burgess getting appointed to serve on the Joint Economic Committee.
So far, Dr. Burgess has been voting as he should. The answer is not large spending bills, the answer is tax relief to allow the businesses to grow. President Bush dropped the ball by supporting the first bailout bill that, by the way, did absolutely no good at all.
Do we really want the likes of King Barack and his minions deciding how much the head of a large company can make? Right now, he is putting ceilings on the salaries of CEO's of companies that accept bailout money, but it won't be long before he decides that all CEO's of hugely successful companies are paying themselves too much.
When he does that, will he reach to his Hollywood friends, you know, those overpaid actors and entertainers who are always trying to foist their liberal nonsence on American viewers, and dictate their salaries to them?
I tell you all, freedom and liberty are going to go away fast under this administration...uh...I mean, regime. WE NEED OUR CONSERVATIVE CONGRESSMEN TO PROTECT US.
But the Emperor has no clothes...
http://www.lauraingraham.com/blog?categoryID=2
King Barack just kills me. I have listened to his comments on the failure of his "Economic Stimulus Plan" to pass out of the Congress. Listening to him is almost like hearing a petulent child who didn't get his way. This puerile mocking and scolding of the Representatives who aren't falling for his plan would be amusing if it weren't so pathetic, not to mention frightening that the guy we have leading us has less of a clue than Jimmy Carter. The shear arrogance and narcisism of King Barack is amazing to watch. Does he really believe that things are supposed to happen because he wills it?
King Barack just kills me. I have listened to his comments on the failure of his "Economic Stimulus Plan" to pass out of the Congress. Listening to him is almost like hearing a petulent child who didn't get his way. This puerile mocking and scolding of the Representatives who aren't falling for his plan would be amusing if it weren't so pathetic, not to mention frightening that the guy we have leading us has less of a clue than Jimmy Carter. The shear arrogance and narcisism of King Barack is amazing to watch. Does he really believe that things are supposed to happen because he wills it?
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
It's a start, anyway
King Barack lets Daschle go. Apparently, Tom couldn't answer the question on the employment questionaire correctly. You know, the one that says: "do you have anything in your past or background that could cause embarrassment to the administration?"
I will only say that I am happy that he came to his senses on this one. Daschle is an embarrassment to South Dakota and the United States. To put a guy like him in a position of power after he was so soundly defeated in his own state would be the last insult to the American people. We would have to believe that there is no way we can get rid of these guys even after we run them out of office in the election.
Could it be that he will come to his senses on Pelosi's big bailout plan? Will he wake up and decide he really doesn't want that legacy?
I will only say that I am happy that he came to his senses on this one. Daschle is an embarrassment to South Dakota and the United States. To put a guy like him in a position of power after he was so soundly defeated in his own state would be the last insult to the American people. We would have to believe that there is no way we can get rid of these guys even after we run them out of office in the election.
Could it be that he will come to his senses on Pelosi's big bailout plan? Will he wake up and decide he really doesn't want that legacy?
To the anonymous poster of Feb. 1
I didn't post your comment because it had no substance. It proved my point that liberals can't really engage in sensible, logical argument without resorting to name calling. If you have something relevant to add, feel free to contribute. I am always glad to hear reasoned argument or debate.
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Sunday DRC
My letter to the editor was published in today's paper. I am happy that it published, but I do admit that the letter could have been better. The main point was supposed to indicate opposition to using taxpayers to fund family planning (i.e.-abortion). Oh well, live and learn.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
