Business or Politics?

The government has taken over control of General Motors (or does GM now stand for "Government Motors"?).
GM had 20 vehicle models that were and had been profitable even in these tougher times.
Whoever is now making decisions for GM, they have discontinued 11 of those 20 profitable models. Those are the SUV's and trucks. If you are running a business and trying to make business recover, you do not get rid of the profitable product. You discontinue the models that cost money to produce, yet produce negative net income.
This is a political move by the leftist regime to force us into smaller cars, period. Once again, the government is taking away choices from the citizen.
They are squeamish about developing our own oil, nuclear, and natural energy resources, but the most liberal government in the history of the United States has no problem forcing us to drive certain kinds of cars.
To me, this supports Ann's thesis that liberals care more about anything than people: unrestrained infanticide, forcing people out of jobs to save birds, keeping needed hydroelectric power from homes because of an obscure plant species.
Do you see how unimportant you are to the liberal movement?
Do you still not see the pattern here?
Marxism anyone?
The Obamanation continues...

Who wrote this?

I found this paragraph in the final chapter of "How to Talk to a Liberal..." I love this paragraph. I am reading "Godless: the Church of Liberalism" now.
"People don’t commit acts of great evil or great courage out of thin air. Character is developed out of a lifetime of choices. Almost every decision you make, however small, will be a step closer to God or a step closer to the devil. When you are unkind to a clumsy shop clerk, you are taking a step closer to the devil. When you snap at your mother, you are taking a step closer to the devil. When you gossip enviously about a friend, you are taking a step closer to the devil. When you go along with the in crowd and don’t speak out against liars, against promiscuity, against abortion, you are taking a step closer to the devil. But it’s never too late to stop and start taking steps toward God. It’s a lot easier to make that journey with companions who know the way."
Coulter, Ann, How to Talk to a Liberal (if you must) (Crown Forum 2004) p. 343.

This is still true.

Luke 4:24

"And he said to them 'a prophet is not accepted in his own country'." 1995 American Standard Version.

The Broken Gargoyle

Can the Broken Gargoyle continue to repel the forces of evil and protect us? How long can it withstand wave after wave of evil spirits crashing against it? "That which is evil must be destroyed so that which is good may flourish."

Strange Happenings in the World...

-Well, that's it for my Sooners. They gave it a good run, though. I really took a beating in the round of Eight. I only have one team left of my picks in the Final Four. It looks like a good Final Four. And I know that I didn't go to college at Oklahoma, but for those of you that don't know, I grew up in Oklahoma City, which was a great place to grow up during that time. I was pretty much raised on Sooner football, so the old feelings never die.

-Speaking of never dying, will the hypocrisy of the current obaminable administration never cease? Now, he is deploying 4000 more troops to Afghanistan. I recall the campaign rhetoric: bring the troops home, end this unjust war, blah blah blah. I guess king barack figured out that it is in the best interest of our nation to fight the terrorists over there instead of sitting around her waiting for the next major American target to be blown up with innocent citizens inside.

-And let's get one thing straight: I never supported the "stimulous plan" form of government when President Bush started pulling that nonsense. Anyone can see that he was only pouring water from the deep end of the pool to the shallow end. You still have the same water and the same pool. Now, king barack is trying to transfer the entire deep end of the pool to shallow end. When I am critical of this plan, I was critical of President Bush's version, too. People respond to me by citing President Bush's economic attempts. HE WAS WRONG IN THIS. He protected us from the terrorist threat and kept the nation safe, but he had poor counsel (council?) on economic matters. Forced income redistribution through taxation is always wrong, no matter who is President.

-What you are witnessing in the reign of king barack is biggest power grab in the history of the United States. He has Tax Cheat Geitner petitionine Congress for more power to seize private businesses that are failing. Currenly, he has power to seize banks under the FDIC, but he wants more. He wants to nationalize private businesses. They are tampering with the natural order. Businesses fail all the time. Goods and services offered fall out of demand or become obsolete. The economy resets when new businesses come into vogue. In nature, animal kingdoms have periods of adjustment where a species' numbers are reduced to protect their resources from becoming exhausted or to allow time for the resources to regenerate. But in our world, we stop the die off thereby throwing the natural order out of whack.

-Apparently, king barack is standing by his insane campaign promise to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay (also known as Gitmo). There are still 240 prisoners there that are not safe to be released on the world. Their own countries either don't want them or will kill them if they are returned. There are 14 Islamic Chinese there who were trained in middle eastern terrorist camps. Our government will refuse to return them to China out of fear that the Chinese with torture, interrogate, and kill these Sino-islamic terrorists. Therefore...guess what...our government will release them in the good old United States, probably with new secret identities and all kinds of tax money in their pockets to help them live. Does anyone believe that king barack is going to protect this nation from terrorists? I don't know for certain, but my gut tells me no. He may yet surprise me. He is sending more troops to Afghanistan, but releasing known terrorists onto American soil. One of them could turn up to be your neighbors (as in Seasons 4 and 6 of "24").

-How is your Chinese? What will happen when the Chinese government forecloses on our country when we default? You do realize that we are borrowing astronomical amounts of money to finance the "spendulous" plan, and China is our heaviest lender. I also hear that they are getting squeamish about lending us any more until they are more certain about out ability to pay. Can we even make the interest payments?

-And finally, you do notice the price of gasoline creeping upward once again. Will the obamanable adminstration protect us by drilling and developing our own energy assets? Of course not, the EPA will never allow it, and they have barack's leash in wrapped around their wrist. OPEC is capping wells and cutting production as fast as they can because the lower price of oil is cutting in on their usually obscene profits. They are cutting supply to intentionally drive up the price is oil in their own interest. They care about no one else, and your government cares nothing about you except your viability as a taxpaying subject of the kingdom, or as a voter beholding to the crown after they lavish you with government handouts. Do you think the government cares about you? They care more about caribou than they do getting energy to you, they care more about spotted owls than they about thousands of unemployed Oregonians who can't work the logging trade, they care more about rare (heretofore unheard of) plants in Maine than they do about getting affordable hydroelectric power to thousands of homes. If you believe that they care at all about you, you are naive and mistaken. They are slowly taking away your liberty. They are turning up the heat under the pot slowly so the frog won't feel it and try to get away.

Finally, a chance to sit down and relax

It's almost like my weekend never came. I have been doing chores around this house all weekend. I not seen much TV, so I haven't been watching the basketball games.
So, I finally sit down and turn on the TV and what do I see? It's His Majesty King Barack telling me how imporant it is not to govern with anger. Of course, this is right after Congress is on the road to passing monumentally unconstitutional taxes against a small group of people who received job bonuses (most of whom probably earned and deserved them). And he is telling the Tax Cheat Geitner to do whatever he has to do to get that bonus money back even if it means withholding the amount of the bonuses from their next stimulous dispersal.
...But we're not angry or anything.

By the way, did you all read in the paper about angry mobs of people threatening the AIG guys with death threats and so forth? Wow, did that not remind you of every description of the Bolshevik revolution in Russia in 1917? Can you not just see the Obamites marching four abreast into your home and declaring that you have too much? They will declare that your house if big enough for more families to live in and - WHAMO - there you are: cooperate or go to the gulag.

Don't you wish they were as hard on the terrorists as they are on Americans and unborn children?

I saw a bumper sticker on a car at the mall: "Against Abortion? Then don't get one." In other words: "You can save your own child, but don't bother me if I want to murder mine."

And then there was a letter to the editor in the paper today that said "the guy that wrote Revelations [you know, the last book of the Bible] must have been smoking marihuana."

I know that we are not to "judge not lest you shall be judged", so I will leave the final assignment of these people to the Lord. But WOW, the evil ones are so obvious. I do certainly hope that the Holy Spirit touches their hearts (although he might have to touch some of them with a sledge hammer).

NCAA Tournament

Oh well, I still have 13 of the remaining 16 teams left in the tournament. I can't say it's too bad for only thinking about the bracket for about 10 minutes.

NCAA Tournament

My brackets aren't doing so well.
Perhaps I should have paid a little closer attention during the season this year.

I finally saw "Watchmen" today

This could potentially be my new favorite movie, I will have to think about it because I have a list of "favorite movies" of all time. This will definitely be one for the DVD library when it comes out.
-Great Rorschach line: "You think I'm locked in here with you, but you're locked in here with me."
-Rorschach is a total sociopath.
-The guy that played "The Comedian" did a really good job, too.
-Drawbacks? Yeah, put a speedo on the blue guy. That got tiresome after a while.
-There were slow points, but the story was excellent.
Where does this fit among my favorites?
Here are some of my favorites in no particular order:
1. Boondock Saints.
2. Ironman
3. Die Hard
4. Deathwish
5. Rio Bravo
6. El Dorado
7. The Quiet Man
8. Once Upon a Time in the West
9. Wanted
10. The Big Country
11. Tombstone
12. Death Race
13. Star Wars
14. Soldier
15. Casino Royale
16. Batman (with Michael Keaton) or The Dark Knight (with Christian Bale).
You know, come to think of it, there are so many that I doubt that I could think of them all so I may have to supplement this list as I go along.

Baseball Season is here!

I love baseball second only to football season.
Here is the Rangers' 2009 schedule.
I always start with the best intentions of going to some games, and then I never do for one reason or another.
2009 Texas Rangers Schedule
If we could only get the pitching together...

Apparently, I do understand the Fairness Doctrine

Fairness Doctrine From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Fairness Doctrine was a policy of the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC) that required the holders of broadcast licenses both to present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was (in the Commission's view) honest, equitable and balanced.
The Fairness Doctrine should not be confused with the Equal Time rule. The Fairness Doctrine deals with matters of public importance, while the Equal Time rule deals only with political candidates.

Granted, this is pretty limited research on the Internet, but what do you think I am missing here. It appears that this is a pretty archaic form of regulation from the 1930's, 1940's, and 1950's to because of an abundance of applications for licenses and a shortages of broadcasting frequencies. The point was to keep any one group from taking control of a frequency and broadcasting one side.
It appears that this rationale no longer is an issue with the seemingly unlimited numbers of cable stations, radio stations, and satellite radio stations.
I really can't see why the government would want to walk all over a basic foundation of our free society.
Besides, the liberal contingent pretty much has control of the major networks, namely, ABC, CBS, and NBC. They had no real competition against their versions of, well, anything until FOX arrived on the scene.
It seems to me that, to revive an archaic doctrine out of the liberals' fear that too many people are paying attention to conservative talk on TV or on Radio, does not serve the original purpose since there are so many available frequencies.
This seems to arise from a fear that the conservative stations are becoming successful with higher ratings whereas the liberal talk shows are having trouble selling commercial time. and keeping their ratings up. Looking at Arbitron ratings, the conservative talk stations on the FM consistently are in the top of the ratings for talk radio.
Program/Audience (Millions)
1 Rush Limbaugh 20.8
2 Michael Savage 17.0
3 Glenn Beck 13.4
4 Laura Ingraham 9.4
5 Sean Hannity 9.2
6 MANCOW 7.5
7 George Noory 6.3
8 Dennis Miller 6.1
9 Neal Boortz 3.8
10 Bill O’Reilly 3.8
Survey Period: 7/1/2007 - 9/30/2007 (July, August & September)Unique ListenersSample Size: 60,548MethodologyAdults 18+Source: TalkStreamLive.com
I don't see what you are arguing with me about. If the Congress legislated that any radio stations had to carry any particular radio show, no matter how unpopular it might be, in any of their time slots. That time slot would be lost to some other station that was carrying a good solid conservative talk show. That hour would lose ratings, and would subsequently lose commercial sponsorship. Therefore, the Congress is legislating that the station would lose money. The freedom of the First Amendment would be lost.
How can you, as a liberal or a conservative, argue in favor of any legislation that will subvert the freedom of the First Amendment? Or do we have a double standard when the liberal point of view is getting trounced in the ratings?

LETTER FROM THE BOSS

Dear Valued Employees,
As the CEO of this organization, I have resigned myself to the fact that Barrack Obama is our President, and therefore, that our taxes and government fees will increase in a BIG way.
To compensate for these increases, our prices would have to increase by about 10%. However, because of the dismal state of the economy, demand for our products is down. In other words, it is not feasible to raise prices at this time.
The only solution available to maintain the solvency of the company is to lay off six of our employees.
I am greatly saddened by this since I believe we are family here. You are all so competent and valuable, I did not know how to choose the six I would lay off, at first.
I finally settled on a solution: I walked through our parking lot and found 'Obama' bumper stickers on six of our employees' cars. These are the people that will be released from employment in this company.
I can't think of a more fair way to approach this problem. Those of you that voted for "change" will now receive it. I am certain that your stimulus checks will arrive at any moment.
I will see the rest of you at the annual company picnic.
Sincerely,

(Great jab at the Obamanation from my sister-in-law in California, of all places.)

Comments

1. Liberals don't like Ann Coulter, but conservatives are elated by her statements. She is about freedom and truth, and both of those things require less government

2. It's king barack's minions who wanted to call his administration, his "rule" after he was elected.

3. I don't hate the guy, I fear what he is doing to the country. Also, by the way, that Rahm Emmanuel guy is very scary ("you can't let a good crisis go to waste.")

4. Teachers? There are good ones and there are bad ones. I had both all through high school. Looking back, I would say that the teachers were of higher quality in my private school years than in my public school years.

5. And Nancy Pelosi? Once again, have you ever listened to the woman speak? She is a walking incongruency. Think about it. She is what those crazy San Francisco people picked for a representative. She's the one who calls herself "an ardent practicing Catholic" who won't defend the right of a child to be born and have a life. She is the person who forces a higher wage on our business owners under the minimum wage law, but she excludes the workers of American Samoa who can tuna for Starkist and Chicken of the Sea, both of whom are subsidiaries of Del Monte, one of Nancy's largest corporate constituents in San Francisco. Wow. Under any definition, she is out there alone.

6. Legislation telling radio stations what programs they have to carry is a direct violation of the First Amendment Right to Free Speech. The reason radio stations carry conservative talk radio is that it attracts an audience, and it attracts much better than liberal talk radio. A larger audience means more advertising revenue. More revenue is better for the economy. If you start telling these successful radio stations that they have to devote a certain number of hours to liberal talk radio, they will lose audience during those times. They will lose revenue, and once again the liberals strike a blow against freedom.

7. Taxing people just to be able to give money to other people is just wrong, and there is no basis or support for it in the U.S. Constitution. The "fundamental right" you claim for all to have medical care? That means that we have a "fundamental right" to reach into our neighbors' pockets to fund our needs or wants that we cannot fund on our own. Where is that right written? In the Constitution? In the Bible? In the Koran? It is nowhere because the right don't exist. No one has a right to charity. No one has a right to take the money of another citizen. Such "rights" only exist in the socialistic, Marxist, communist society, and that is a society where talent and hard work count for nothing because others become "entitled" to the fruit of your labor.

8. We are not "dog eat dog" nor are we a nation that falls together. We are a nation of free people who will not tolerate tyranny or bondage in any form.

The bottom line is that all of these things that you support erode our fundamental liberties and right to live our own lives. That's it.

I think I should point our more of Ann's columns. This is the most comments I have gotten yet.

Another item that just does not compute...

Another thing I don't understand about what is going on in our country.
king barack intends to tax the h*** out of "rich people", that is, people who make $250,000 or more per year.
Assuming that those jackalopes in the entertainment industry, aka Hollywood moguls, are "rich people" [they certainly want us to believe they are rich], why would they support such a person for president? If I were "rich" I certainly would not support a candidate who virtually promises to coerce huge chunks of my amassed wealth from my bank account.
Which begs the question, why do wealthy people support a man with these philosophies and beliefs?
I would vote for the guy that would leave me more of my money to invest in other ventures for profit. If I am rich, and I am investing my money as capital for other businesses to use or for my own business to expand; am I not helping the economy by creating jobs and putting more money into circulation through wages that I pay my workers?
I hear that many Hollywood types, such as George Clooney, Sean Penn, Barbara Streisand, etc., have sought and made appointments for audiences with His Most Puerile Petulence to promote their latest pet causes and to usurp tax dollars from the Spendulous Plan.
But I really don't understand the phenomenon. Why would wealthy people support a candidate who is going to take more of their money by force?

Our local paper does not report local news

For all of you readers of the Denton Wretched Chronicle, after you read the paper, do you know any more about what is going in the Denton and Denton County than you did before you picked up that particular issue?
They seem to stress national and state news, but very little local.
Does anyone know, from reading the Denton [toilet] paper what is going on the commissioners' court or in the courthouse or the Sheriff's Office?
Is that because there is nothing going on? Or is it because they don't want to shine the light there out of fear that the roaches will scurry under the fridge and cabinets?
If I wanted national news, I would take the Dallas Morning News because Belo owns that paper, too.

A homerun for Ann.

Ann Coulter's column was as good as ever. She gets our attention with her wit and grit, and she tell us the truth...which we may not always want to hear.

It is hard to listen to our news reporters "gush[ing] that history is being made as the first African-American President appeared before Congress." This is going to get old pretty fast. I would add this question, is this going to be the liberal fall back position every time this guy pulls some policy out of his rear end? He may have screwed the country up, but he was our first African-American President.

"But," Ann adds, "as long as the nation is obsessed with historic milestones, is no one going to remark on what a great country it is where a mentally retarded woman can become the speaker of the house?" [Bravo...if you don't believe this then you have never listened to this woman speak.]

She points out that king barack is demanding that the taxpayers of the nation support public school teachers even though he won't trust them with his own children. As the Clintons, king barack so believes in public school education that he sends his kids to an expensive private school.

It is a good column with good critical information of why the public school systems fail. Most public school districts are top heavy with administration. So much of the money allocated for schools never reaches the level of the children. The classroom teachers are hamstrung by their administrations who operate fearful of lawsuits and other retaliatory measures from parents who don't want to face their own failures by not intalling or instilling a proper work ethic, respect for authority, and humility in their children.

You should at least read the column before you jump down my throat.