WOW!!!
Watch this and tell me what you think.
What I think is that Alan Grayson is a fool!!!
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Monday, March 29, 2010
Arizona Rancher Killed Near Border
The border has been an issue for years and nothing has been done by either party. I used to like Napolitano because of her stance on gun rights and the border. As an underling of Obama she has to obey his mandates, so not all of her policies should fall squarely on her shoulders. But she has made some really bad statements since taking of the position of Homeland Security Director.
First, she insulted all veterans, gun owners, and patriots with her idiotic discription of what officials should look for in home grown terrorists.
Basically this is her discription: Ex-military, pro second amendment, disgruntled about big government, anti illegal immigration.
I don't know about you but that sums up my entire family and friends. I do not consider myself anywhere near the league of Timmothy Timothy McVeigh.
Second, after the christmas panty bomber incident she went on tv and said the system worked. Well she was right about the TSA system working, there was no one looking for bombs in panties, but not about the rest of her subordinates. The man's father had come to the CIA and said he he thought his son had become a terrorist and would strike soon. That earned the report a spot on an over crowded desk and was not looked at again till someone remembered it after the attempted attack. Homeland Security was created to promote communication between security agencies and that apparently is not happening. So to come out and say the system worked is just assinine.
Third, and related to the article below, Napolitano stated the border is more secure than ever.
“As governor of Arizona, Napolitano deployed the National Guard to help the Border Patrol do its job… Three days ago, Napolitano told an audience at Arizona State University that the border is more secure than ever," Tancredo said Sunday through his Rocky Mountain Foundation. "I challenge her -- no, I dare her -- to come to this community and try to sell that lie.”
This article below harps on illegal imigration. This is not an illegal imigration issue. Illegal Imigrants do not cross the border carrying weapons. Drug dealers, kidnappers, and coyotes carry weapons.
This man probably came upon drug dealers while he was riding around on his land. We have to lock down the border and if the government doesn't do it, you will soon find a bigger and tougher Minute Men project with plenty of armed volunteers doing it for them.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/03/29/arizona-ranchers-killing-sparks-calls-beef-border-security/
First, she insulted all veterans, gun owners, and patriots with her idiotic discription of what officials should look for in home grown terrorists.
Basically this is her discription: Ex-military, pro second amendment, disgruntled about big government, anti illegal immigration.
I don't know about you but that sums up my entire family and friends. I do not consider myself anywhere near the league of Timmothy Timothy McVeigh.
Second, after the christmas panty bomber incident she went on tv and said the system worked. Well she was right about the TSA system working, there was no one looking for bombs in panties, but not about the rest of her subordinates. The man's father had come to the CIA and said he he thought his son had become a terrorist and would strike soon. That earned the report a spot on an over crowded desk and was not looked at again till someone remembered it after the attempted attack. Homeland Security was created to promote communication between security agencies and that apparently is not happening. So to come out and say the system worked is just assinine.
Third, and related to the article below, Napolitano stated the border is more secure than ever.
“As governor of Arizona, Napolitano deployed the National Guard to help the Border Patrol do its job… Three days ago, Napolitano told an audience at Arizona State University that the border is more secure than ever," Tancredo said Sunday through his Rocky Mountain Foundation. "I challenge her -- no, I dare her -- to come to this community and try to sell that lie.”
This article below harps on illegal imigration. This is not an illegal imigration issue. Illegal Imigrants do not cross the border carrying weapons. Drug dealers, kidnappers, and coyotes carry weapons.
This man probably came upon drug dealers while he was riding around on his land. We have to lock down the border and if the government doesn't do it, you will soon find a bigger and tougher Minute Men project with plenty of armed volunteers doing it for them.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/03/29/arizona-ranchers-killing-sparks-calls-beef-border-security/
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Why Democracy Will Fail
The British historian, Alexander Tytler, in his lifecycle of civilizations said,
”A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.”
How much longer do we have?
”A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.”
How much longer do we have?
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Racist Comments - Death Threats - Broken Windows
Not sure what is happening out there. But I do not know what to think.
I believe the death threats and broken windows. People are cowards and doing things solo and in the middle of the night is just the coward’s way.
My first reaction to the news release that racist comments were made to congressmen during the Tea Party protest at the capital building was that there were shills in the crowd who did it so the Tea Party could be blamed.
I can not imagine someone screaming this out loud in a crowd of people who are making every effort to prove they are not racists. I think the person who did it would have been called out by the people in the crowd.
I may be wrong but this is my opinion. I would have called them out.
In addition, I can not find anything on youtube where these comments have been made. These comments were made to prominent congressmen who were walking through huge crowds of protesters. Brave of them to be sure, but are you telling me that none of the news media was with them and would have caught the slurs?
I believe there are racists in the Tea Party but I do not think the Tea Party is a racist group. The left wants to make these people irrelevant and the only way to do that is to discredit them by calling them racists.
I believe the death threats and broken windows. People are cowards and doing things solo and in the middle of the night is just the coward’s way.
My first reaction to the news release that racist comments were made to congressmen during the Tea Party protest at the capital building was that there were shills in the crowd who did it so the Tea Party could be blamed.
I can not imagine someone screaming this out loud in a crowd of people who are making every effort to prove they are not racists. I think the person who did it would have been called out by the people in the crowd.
I may be wrong but this is my opinion. I would have called them out.
In addition, I can not find anything on youtube where these comments have been made. These comments were made to prominent congressmen who were walking through huge crowds of protesters. Brave of them to be sure, but are you telling me that none of the news media was with them and would have caught the slurs?
I believe there are racists in the Tea Party but I do not think the Tea Party is a racist group. The left wants to make these people irrelevant and the only way to do that is to discredit them by calling them racists.
MSNBC made me happy today
Record numbers now licensed to pack heat
Firearms deaths fall as millions obtain permits to carry concealed guns
You can still tell there is a lib hatred that what he is writing is true, but I thought the article said everything we as gun owners already new.
Guns in the hands of law abiding citizens, deters dirt bag criminals from commiting crimes.
Firearms deaths fall as millions obtain permits to carry concealed guns
You can still tell there is a lib hatred that what he is writing is true, but I thought the article said everything we as gun owners already new.
Guns in the hands of law abiding citizens, deters dirt bag criminals from commiting crimes.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
HealthCare
Had a nice weekend going. Had date night with the wife, spent a great Saturday with good friends, had Sunday brunch with Mom, worked on the house a bit, and then things turned to shit oh 4pm. News alert saying that Obama had issued an Executive Order stating that health care reform would not pay for abortion. Well there goes the pro life dems.
Later that night, the progressives pushed through a health care only the worthless and hanky stompers want. I have been thinking about this for the past two days. Trying to decide what to write and get my feelings under control.
I say progressives pushed the bill through because there were Democrats who voted no. The ones who voted for the bill are progressive/communists or corrupt politicians who got paid, in one way or another, for selling hard working Americans out.
This bill has been designed to take time to go into full affect. The sky is falling fear is not that it will happen immediately but that it will happen eventually.
There are many things that just happened and most have nothing to do with health care itself.
- Personal responsibility was completely abolished. No longer will Americans have to be responsible for themselves, father government will take care of everything.
- Personal freedom was abolished. No longer does a person have the choice to do what they wish even when what they want hurts no one but themselves.
- America took one step closer to communism as the government now can tell you what to buy. This was not done by raising taxes; this was done by forcing you what to buy. Why? Because you idiots would have fought this if they raised taxes. By the way, taxes are still going to go up.
- Incentive - There is much less now. No need to get a job quickly after college, you can still get healthcare from your parents. What’s even better, with Obama's college reimbursement plan, you can now go to college, put off getting a job for four or five years, and then have your college loans paid off by the government.
- This bill will not be an instant bomb. Obama is too smart for that. This bill is time release and the goodies come slowly, with the debt coming due for the next president which Obama hopes is not around till 2016.
The hard working people of America need to wake up.
I am not talking about the people who already oppose this bill.
I am talking about the people who support it, the people who coddle those people who take advantage of other people's kindness. I am talking about the hanky stomping liberals who can not say NO.
The people who hear a sad story and don't bother to ask why it happened. The people who believe in the inherent kindness in everyone and then get stabbed in the back continuously. The people who are the kindest people in the world, and because of that kindness they are ruining initiative, incentive, and personal responsibility.
You people are needed because you keep people like me from getting out of hand. You remind me that not everyone is bad and that some people actually do need help.
You need me as well. You need me to help you say no. You need me to fight your wars because you never think you will have to fight one.
We, the hard working people of optimism and pessimism, can live together and prosper greatly. But you optimists have to stop trying to save those that do not deserve to be saved. The users, takers, and worthless individuals who need nothing but a swift kick in the ass. They will get to work as soon as you stop feeding them, clothing them, making excuses for them, paying them for doing nothing, and making it easier to not work than it is to work.
Open your eyes and do not allow yourselves to destroy the American Way. The American Way is not "all people are always it equal; it is all people are created (start off) equal".
There are good people who need help and unfortunately they do not get it because of people who abuse the system. The people who abuse the system are greater than the people who truly need it.
Let communities help their people. They know them and can make the decision if someone deserves help. The federal government can not do it.
Later that night, the progressives pushed through a health care only the worthless and hanky stompers want. I have been thinking about this for the past two days. Trying to decide what to write and get my feelings under control.
I say progressives pushed the bill through because there were Democrats who voted no. The ones who voted for the bill are progressive/communists or corrupt politicians who got paid, in one way or another, for selling hard working Americans out.
This bill has been designed to take time to go into full affect. The sky is falling fear is not that it will happen immediately but that it will happen eventually.
There are many things that just happened and most have nothing to do with health care itself.
- Personal responsibility was completely abolished. No longer will Americans have to be responsible for themselves, father government will take care of everything.
- Personal freedom was abolished. No longer does a person have the choice to do what they wish even when what they want hurts no one but themselves.
- America took one step closer to communism as the government now can tell you what to buy. This was not done by raising taxes; this was done by forcing you what to buy. Why? Because you idiots would have fought this if they raised taxes. By the way, taxes are still going to go up.
- Incentive - There is much less now. No need to get a job quickly after college, you can still get healthcare from your parents. What’s even better, with Obama's college reimbursement plan, you can now go to college, put off getting a job for four or five years, and then have your college loans paid off by the government.
- This bill will not be an instant bomb. Obama is too smart for that. This bill is time release and the goodies come slowly, with the debt coming due for the next president which Obama hopes is not around till 2016.
The hard working people of America need to wake up.
I am not talking about the people who already oppose this bill.
I am talking about the people who support it, the people who coddle those people who take advantage of other people's kindness. I am talking about the hanky stomping liberals who can not say NO.
The people who hear a sad story and don't bother to ask why it happened. The people who believe in the inherent kindness in everyone and then get stabbed in the back continuously. The people who are the kindest people in the world, and because of that kindness they are ruining initiative, incentive, and personal responsibility.
You people are needed because you keep people like me from getting out of hand. You remind me that not everyone is bad and that some people actually do need help.
You need me as well. You need me to help you say no. You need me to fight your wars because you never think you will have to fight one.
We, the hard working people of optimism and pessimism, can live together and prosper greatly. But you optimists have to stop trying to save those that do not deserve to be saved. The users, takers, and worthless individuals who need nothing but a swift kick in the ass. They will get to work as soon as you stop feeding them, clothing them, making excuses for them, paying them for doing nothing, and making it easier to not work than it is to work.
Open your eyes and do not allow yourselves to destroy the American Way. The American Way is not "all people are always it equal; it is all people are created (start off) equal".
There are good people who need help and unfortunately they do not get it because of people who abuse the system. The people who abuse the system are greater than the people who truly need it.
Let communities help their people. They know them and can make the decision if someone deserves help. The federal government can not do it.
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Fox News interview with Barrak Obama
You tell me does he answer the questions? If you think he does will you tell me what he said?
Full Video
One question and a lot of dancing
Question: Do you support the Deem and Pass rule?
Answer: ?????????????????? (what did he say?)
Full Video
One question and a lot of dancing
Question: Do you support the Deem and Pass rule?
Answer: ?????????????????? (what did he say?)
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Free E-Book on Survival
Free E-Book on Survival - Only a few hoops to jump through.
http://www.americanpreppersnetwork.com/2010/02/2-free-james-stevens-e-books.html
http://www.americanpreppersnetwork.com/2010/02/2-free-james-stevens-e-books.html
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
New Jersey Tea Party wants to recall senator
New Jersey Tea Party wants to recall senator. See Foxnews article by clicking HERE.
Short Excerpt: A New Jersey appeals court ruled Tuesday that a conservative tea party group should have the right to try to throw a U.S. senator out of office, but also said the group would have to wait for a final decision by a higher court before proceeding.
My question, after reading this article, is why shouldn't we be able to recall our senators, representatives, or any other government employees?
The opposition's arguement is that the constitution does not say anything about recalling federal legislators.
I guess its time for a new amendment!!!
Short Excerpt: A New Jersey appeals court ruled Tuesday that a conservative tea party group should have the right to try to throw a U.S. senator out of office, but also said the group would have to wait for a final decision by a higher court before proceeding.
My question, after reading this article, is why shouldn't we be able to recall our senators, representatives, or any other government employees?
The opposition's arguement is that the constitution does not say anything about recalling federal legislators.
I guess its time for a new amendment!!!
Israel
Israel is a country that has been under great stress and constant threat since its creation. Regardless of religion or politics these are a people to be admired and supported.
They have fought off mass attacks from their neighbors, Jordan, Syria, and Egypt, not only defending their borders but increasing them by taking land from their invaders. They then gave most of that land back. They also distroyed Iraq's attempt to build a nuclear reactor with a daring air raid.
Israel’s enemies, knowing they can not defeat the smaller country, started supporting and inflaming Palestinians who lost there remaining land when they joined in the attacks on Israel.
Israel has shown restraint in many aspects when dealing with its aggressive and threatening neighbors. At the request of the United States, they stood by idly as Iraq launched scud missles at it, trusting that America would take care of the issue.
Israel is a country that has turned their crappy sand box into a thriving industrialized country. Something none of the other countries, in the big sandbox, seem to be able to do, with the exception of the United Arab Emerits, without oil.
Israel continues to face attacks from terrorists and refuses to back down. Just recently they assassinated a terrorist master mind in a foreign country. They pissed off their allies in the process, by using fake passports from allied countries, but they refuse to bow down to pacifist demagogues who support or are afraid to offend terrorist countries.
Now Israel has to deal with America coming down on them which is empowering Israel’s enemies. Israel’s decision to build in a highly controversial area of Jerusalem may be a bad idea but America’s government should be dealing with our displeasure behind closed doors.
By openly condemning Israel’s actions, Israel’s enemies are taking that as support. They are using it to rally disgruntled poor people to riot and terror attacks are surely soon to follow.
Israel should be proof to the people of the Middle East that prosperity can be had in that area of the world. Beirut used to be called the Paris of the Middle East, before a civil war that destroyed any prosperity in the country. The Palestinians have beach front property and billions of dollars of American aid they can use to build a thriving tourist industry if they can just get past the pity party and hate.
They have fought off mass attacks from their neighbors, Jordan, Syria, and Egypt, not only defending their borders but increasing them by taking land from their invaders. They then gave most of that land back. They also distroyed Iraq's attempt to build a nuclear reactor with a daring air raid.
Israel’s enemies, knowing they can not defeat the smaller country, started supporting and inflaming Palestinians who lost there remaining land when they joined in the attacks on Israel.
Israel has shown restraint in many aspects when dealing with its aggressive and threatening neighbors. At the request of the United States, they stood by idly as Iraq launched scud missles at it, trusting that America would take care of the issue.
Israel is a country that has turned their crappy sand box into a thriving industrialized country. Something none of the other countries, in the big sandbox, seem to be able to do, with the exception of the United Arab Emerits, without oil.
Israel continues to face attacks from terrorists and refuses to back down. Just recently they assassinated a terrorist master mind in a foreign country. They pissed off their allies in the process, by using fake passports from allied countries, but they refuse to bow down to pacifist demagogues who support or are afraid to offend terrorist countries.
Now Israel has to deal with America coming down on them which is empowering Israel’s enemies. Israel’s decision to build in a highly controversial area of Jerusalem may be a bad idea but America’s government should be dealing with our displeasure behind closed doors.
By openly condemning Israel’s actions, Israel’s enemies are taking that as support. They are using it to rally disgruntled poor people to riot and terror attacks are surely soon to follow.
Israel should be proof to the people of the Middle East that prosperity can be had in that area of the world. Beirut used to be called the Paris of the Middle East, before a civil war that destroyed any prosperity in the country. The Palestinians have beach front property and billions of dollars of American aid they can use to build a thriving tourist industry if they can just get past the pity party and hate.
Monday, March 15, 2010
The words I wish I had
These are the words I wish I could have written to answer Fluffy in our debate in a previous post.
I said the same thing, but not in such a well written manner.
A MINORITY VIEW
BY WALTER WILLIAMS
RELEASE: WEDNESDAY, MARCH 10, 2010
Is Health Care a Right?
Most politicians, and probably most Americans, see health care as a right. Thus, whether a person has the means to pay for medical services or not, he is nonetheless entitled to them. Let's ask ourselves a few questions about this vision.
Say a person, let's call him Harry, suffers from diabetes and he has no means to pay a laboratory for blood work, a doctor for treatment and a pharmacy for medication. Does Harry have a right to XYZ lab's and Dr. Jones' services and a prescription from a pharmacist? And, if those services are not provided without charge, should Harry be able to call for criminal sanctions against those persons for violating his rights to health care?
You say, "Williams, that would come very close to slavery if one person had the right to force someone to serve him without pay." You're right. Suppose instead of Harry being able to force a lab, doctor and pharmacy to provide services without pay, Congress uses its taxing power to take a couple of hundred dollars out of the paycheck of some American to give to Harry so that he could pay the lab, doctor and pharmacist. Would there be any difference in principle, namely forcibly using one person to serve the purposes of another? There would be one important strategic difference, that of concealment. Most Americans, I would hope, would be offended by the notion of directly and visibly forcing one person to serve the purposes of another. Congress' use of the tax system to invisibly accomplish the same end is more palatable to the average American.
True rights, such as those in our Constitution, or those considered to be natural or human rights, exist simultaneously among people. That means exercise of a right by one person does not diminish those held by another. In other words, my rights to speech or travel impose no obligations on another except those of non-interference. If we apply ideas behind rights to health care to my rights to speech or travel, my free speech rights would require government-imposed obligations on others to provide me with an auditorium, television studio or radio station. My right to travel freely would require government-imposed obligations on others to provide me with airfare and hotel accommodations.
For Congress to guarantee a right to health care, or any other good or service, whether a person can afford it or not, it must diminish someone else's rights, namely their rights to their earnings. The reason is that Congress has no resources of its very own. Moreover, there is no Santa Claus, Easter Bunny or Tooth Fairy giving them those resources. The fact that government has no resources of its very own forces one to recognize that in order for government to give one American citizen a dollar, it must first, through intimidation, threats and coercion, confiscate that dollar from some other American. If one person has a right to something he did not earn, of necessity it requires that another person not have a right to something that he did earn.
To argue that people have a right that imposes obligations on another is an absurd concept. A better term for new-fangled rights to health care, decent housing and food is wishes. If we called them wishes, I would be in agreement with most other Americans for I, too, wish that everyone had adequate health care, decent housing and nutritious meals. However, if we called them human wishes, instead of human rights, there would be confusion and cognitive dissonance. The average American would cringe at the thought of government punishing one person because he refused to be pressed into making someone else's wish come true.
None of my argument is to argue against charity. Reaching into one's own pockets to assist his fellow man in need is praiseworthy and laudable. Reaching into someone else's pockets to do so is despicable and deserves condemnation.
Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University. To find out more about Walter E. Williams and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at http://www.creators.com/.
COPYRIGHT 2010 CREATORS.COM
I said the same thing, but not in such a well written manner.
A MINORITY VIEW
BY WALTER WILLIAMS
RELEASE: WEDNESDAY, MARCH 10, 2010
Is Health Care a Right?
Most politicians, and probably most Americans, see health care as a right. Thus, whether a person has the means to pay for medical services or not, he is nonetheless entitled to them. Let's ask ourselves a few questions about this vision.
Say a person, let's call him Harry, suffers from diabetes and he has no means to pay a laboratory for blood work, a doctor for treatment and a pharmacy for medication. Does Harry have a right to XYZ lab's and Dr. Jones' services and a prescription from a pharmacist? And, if those services are not provided without charge, should Harry be able to call for criminal sanctions against those persons for violating his rights to health care?
You say, "Williams, that would come very close to slavery if one person had the right to force someone to serve him without pay." You're right. Suppose instead of Harry being able to force a lab, doctor and pharmacy to provide services without pay, Congress uses its taxing power to take a couple of hundred dollars out of the paycheck of some American to give to Harry so that he could pay the lab, doctor and pharmacist. Would there be any difference in principle, namely forcibly using one person to serve the purposes of another? There would be one important strategic difference, that of concealment. Most Americans, I would hope, would be offended by the notion of directly and visibly forcing one person to serve the purposes of another. Congress' use of the tax system to invisibly accomplish the same end is more palatable to the average American.
True rights, such as those in our Constitution, or those considered to be natural or human rights, exist simultaneously among people. That means exercise of a right by one person does not diminish those held by another. In other words, my rights to speech or travel impose no obligations on another except those of non-interference. If we apply ideas behind rights to health care to my rights to speech or travel, my free speech rights would require government-imposed obligations on others to provide me with an auditorium, television studio or radio station. My right to travel freely would require government-imposed obligations on others to provide me with airfare and hotel accommodations.
For Congress to guarantee a right to health care, or any other good or service, whether a person can afford it or not, it must diminish someone else's rights, namely their rights to their earnings. The reason is that Congress has no resources of its very own. Moreover, there is no Santa Claus, Easter Bunny or Tooth Fairy giving them those resources. The fact that government has no resources of its very own forces one to recognize that in order for government to give one American citizen a dollar, it must first, through intimidation, threats and coercion, confiscate that dollar from some other American. If one person has a right to something he did not earn, of necessity it requires that another person not have a right to something that he did earn.
To argue that people have a right that imposes obligations on another is an absurd concept. A better term for new-fangled rights to health care, decent housing and food is wishes. If we called them wishes, I would be in agreement with most other Americans for I, too, wish that everyone had adequate health care, decent housing and nutritious meals. However, if we called them human wishes, instead of human rights, there would be confusion and cognitive dissonance. The average American would cringe at the thought of government punishing one person because he refused to be pressed into making someone else's wish come true.
None of my argument is to argue against charity. Reaching into one's own pockets to assist his fellow man in need is praiseworthy and laudable. Reaching into someone else's pockets to do so is despicable and deserves condemnation.
Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University. To find out more about Walter E. Williams and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at http://www.creators.com/.
COPYRIGHT 2010 CREATORS.COM
Back In San Fran and listening to LEFT raido
My rental car has satellite radio and I was checking out the talk radio stations when I found the "LEFT" channel.
http://www.sirius.com/siriusleft
Talk about garbage. I know it's satellite so you can say what ever you want, but the cursing was constant and meaningless. I curse but I am not on the radio and I try to limit it on the blog to only important statements, lol. I also make an effort to not do it in front of family and never curse in front of customers when working.
The worst part was that these gentile leftists were berating blacks who do not agree with Obama. Mind you that the female hose, Lynn Samuels, and the male caller were both white. They starting calling them F^&*ing uncle toms.
Can you believe it?
Rush Limbaugh has made some borderline offensive things about race but nothing even close to these out right racist comments.
I then had to listen to this woman defend a Utah politician, ironically a Republican, who resigned after it came out that he shared a naked hot tub dip with a 15 year old girl 28 years ago. She was only right in saying the girl should be in jail for extortion when she asked for 150k to keep silent. She got the money but the story still got out and the guy resigned.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/13/kevin-garns-skinnydip-con_n_497812.html
The fact he paid the money to her implies to me that he was guilty of the crime.
Lynn Samuels then went on a diatribe about how 15 shouldn't be illegal and there is a definite difference between a 7 year old and a 15 year old.
I do not disagree that there is a difference between the two but a 30 year old man in a hot tub with a 15 year old, both naked, is just wrong no matter what spin you put on it.
This is what the left stands for? Defending 30 year olds naked in hot tubs with 15 year olds and calling black people names for not supporting the person they are "supposed" too?
http://www.sirius.com/siriusleft
Talk about garbage. I know it's satellite so you can say what ever you want, but the cursing was constant and meaningless. I curse but I am not on the radio and I try to limit it on the blog to only important statements, lol. I also make an effort to not do it in front of family and never curse in front of customers when working.
The worst part was that these gentile leftists were berating blacks who do not agree with Obama. Mind you that the female hose, Lynn Samuels, and the male caller were both white. They starting calling them F^&*ing uncle toms.
Can you believe it?
Rush Limbaugh has made some borderline offensive things about race but nothing even close to these out right racist comments.
I then had to listen to this woman defend a Utah politician, ironically a Republican, who resigned after it came out that he shared a naked hot tub dip with a 15 year old girl 28 years ago. She was only right in saying the girl should be in jail for extortion when she asked for 150k to keep silent. She got the money but the story still got out and the guy resigned.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/13/kevin-garns-skinnydip-con_n_497812.html
The fact he paid the money to her implies to me that he was guilty of the crime.
Lynn Samuels then went on a diatribe about how 15 shouldn't be illegal and there is a definite difference between a 7 year old and a 15 year old.
I do not disagree that there is a difference between the two but a 30 year old man in a hot tub with a 15 year old, both naked, is just wrong no matter what spin you put on it.
This is what the left stands for? Defending 30 year olds naked in hot tubs with 15 year olds and calling black people names for not supporting the person they are "supposed" too?
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Holy Obama
If you thought the love affair with Obama was over you were wrong. He is our savior after all!!!
Illustration by Nola Lopez, photograph by Damon Winter/The New York Times
You can find this image in the following article http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/15/weekinreview/15baker.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
You can find this image in the following article http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/15/weekinreview/15baker.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Natoma Canfield
Natoma Canfield has become President Obama's example of why government health coverage is needed. I read the story he tells and it stirs all the expected feeling: sadness, pity, anger. Once I got past the sad story, I started asking myself, well why didn't she have affordable health coverage?
To tell you the truth I was expecting to find no story or a story that pointed at her lack of coverage as being her fault. If her losing her job was no fault of her own, what I found was a similar story used by democrats before.
Person X loses gets sick, loses job, can not get affordable coverage due to pre-existing condition.
THIS IS BULLSHIT, SHE SHOULD STILL HAVE COVERAGE.
I do not think this is cause for changing the whole system, simply a change in laws.
Insurance is a gamble.
-You are hedging your bet by paying a small amount per year just in case you get sick and if you do you don’t have to pay out a large amount.
-The insurance company is betting that you will not get sick and therefore they get to keep all your money. They are able to do this because the odds are in there favor and only get better when they have more people in the pool.
-If you go your whole policy without getting sick the insurance company makes out very well. But if you do get sick, they lost the bet and it is their responsibility to pay. No matter what you got sick from or how long you will be sick.
If Mrs. Canfield was covered when she got sick then the insurance company lost the gamble and should have to pay. If I get into a car accident the day before my car insurance is canceled the insurance still covers everything from that accident.
I think health care insurance should be the same.
While I was doing my research I came upon the blog pasted below and thought it was interesting:
What President Obama Should Say to Mrs. Natoma Canfield [John R. Graham]
This morning, the nation's health insurers assembled for a beating at the hands of Kathleen Sebelius, U.S. Secretary of Health & Social Services. Unannounced, a frustrated President Obama strode in, waving a letter from an American who can no longer afford health insurance.
According to White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, Mrs. Natoma Canfield of Medina, Ohio, had just written a letter to the president describing her plight. Fifty years old, Mrs. Canfield was employed when she was diagnosed with cancer 16 years ago. Twelve years ago, she lost her job, took COBRA benefits, and then migrated to an individual policy (likely under Ohio law, which guarantees her access to either and Ohio Basic or Ohio Standard plan, without underwriting). I hope this was a set-up. (If it wasn't, I suspect that Mr. Gibbs and perhaps even the president have violated the privacy provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, but we'll let the lawyers worry about that.)
Her premiums are going up to about $8,000 annually, which, as a self-employed house-cleaner, she cannot afford.
Unbeknown to the president, this was one of his famous "teaching moments." Note that Mrs. Canfield originally fell ill when she had employer-based benefits. Upon leaving her job, she became subject to the crazy-quilt acronyms that govern the migration of people's health coverage between jobs. The problem with continuation coverage, such as Ohio Basic or Ohio Standard, is that only the sickest people take advantage of them, so naturally premiums go up faster than other premiums. There's no point in the president attacking the health insurers for this fact.
The president's response to Mrs. Canfield should have gone something like this:
"I regret that the tax policies of the United States government make it impossible for health insurers to pool risks properly, like they do for life insurance. Life insurance policies, which are owned by individuals, offer fixed premiums.
If the government stopped discriminating against individual ownership of health insurance, instead of favoring employer ownership, health insurers would be able and motivated to offer insurance policies that guaranteed long-term premium increases no greater than the increase in overall medical costs. Unfortunately, because the median individual health-insurance policy only lasts for three years, people like yourself, who have had individual insurance for over a decade, lose the benefits of long-term risk pooling.
Furthermore, the House and Senate do not propose to solve this problem by removing the discrimination from the tax code. Rather, they substitute massive taxation and subsidies through 'exchanges' instead of effective risk-pooling.
Your letter has motivated me to abandon this approach, and instead reform the tax code so that the American people, not their employers or the government, chose their health insurance."
— John R. Graham is director of Health Care Studies at the Pacific Research Institute.
To tell you the truth I was expecting to find no story or a story that pointed at her lack of coverage as being her fault. If her losing her job was no fault of her own, what I found was a similar story used by democrats before.
Person X loses gets sick, loses job, can not get affordable coverage due to pre-existing condition.
THIS IS BULLSHIT, SHE SHOULD STILL HAVE COVERAGE.
I do not think this is cause for changing the whole system, simply a change in laws.
Insurance is a gamble.
-You are hedging your bet by paying a small amount per year just in case you get sick and if you do you don’t have to pay out a large amount.
-The insurance company is betting that you will not get sick and therefore they get to keep all your money. They are able to do this because the odds are in there favor and only get better when they have more people in the pool.
-If you go your whole policy without getting sick the insurance company makes out very well. But if you do get sick, they lost the bet and it is their responsibility to pay. No matter what you got sick from or how long you will be sick.
If Mrs. Canfield was covered when she got sick then the insurance company lost the gamble and should have to pay. If I get into a car accident the day before my car insurance is canceled the insurance still covers everything from that accident.
I think health care insurance should be the same.
While I was doing my research I came upon the blog pasted below and thought it was interesting:
What President Obama Should Say to Mrs. Natoma Canfield [John R. Graham]
This morning, the nation's health insurers assembled for a beating at the hands of Kathleen Sebelius, U.S. Secretary of Health & Social Services. Unannounced, a frustrated President Obama strode in, waving a letter from an American who can no longer afford health insurance.
According to White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, Mrs. Natoma Canfield of Medina, Ohio, had just written a letter to the president describing her plight. Fifty years old, Mrs. Canfield was employed when she was diagnosed with cancer 16 years ago. Twelve years ago, she lost her job, took COBRA benefits, and then migrated to an individual policy (likely under Ohio law, which guarantees her access to either and Ohio Basic or Ohio Standard plan, without underwriting). I hope this was a set-up. (If it wasn't, I suspect that Mr. Gibbs and perhaps even the president have violated the privacy provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, but we'll let the lawyers worry about that.)
Her premiums are going up to about $8,000 annually, which, as a self-employed house-cleaner, she cannot afford.
Unbeknown to the president, this was one of his famous "teaching moments." Note that Mrs. Canfield originally fell ill when she had employer-based benefits. Upon leaving her job, she became subject to the crazy-quilt acronyms that govern the migration of people's health coverage between jobs. The problem with continuation coverage, such as Ohio Basic or Ohio Standard, is that only the sickest people take advantage of them, so naturally premiums go up faster than other premiums. There's no point in the president attacking the health insurers for this fact.
The president's response to Mrs. Canfield should have gone something like this:
"I regret that the tax policies of the United States government make it impossible for health insurers to pool risks properly, like they do for life insurance. Life insurance policies, which are owned by individuals, offer fixed premiums.
If the government stopped discriminating against individual ownership of health insurance, instead of favoring employer ownership, health insurers would be able and motivated to offer insurance policies that guaranteed long-term premium increases no greater than the increase in overall medical costs. Unfortunately, because the median individual health-insurance policy only lasts for three years, people like yourself, who have had individual insurance for over a decade, lose the benefits of long-term risk pooling.
Furthermore, the House and Senate do not propose to solve this problem by removing the discrimination from the tax code. Rather, they substitute massive taxation and subsidies through 'exchanges' instead of effective risk-pooling.
Your letter has motivated me to abandon this approach, and instead reform the tax code so that the American people, not their employers or the government, chose their health insurance."
— John R. Graham is director of Health Care Studies at the Pacific Research Institute.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Housing Crisis
I want to know why this wasn't covered more. I remember hearing snippets here and there, I remember Fox News, specifically O'Reilly, blasting Barney Frank. But having to work for a living I never had time to follow it up on my own very well.
It's this kind of thing that makes me wonder about the shadow government conspiracies. I am not one for the crazy conspiracies, but WHY would the Republicans not be using these kinds of videos to fight Democrats?
This clip is from Fox News, why are they not playing these clips over and over again? Why is this not on Glenn Beck's chalk board?
GSE - Government Sponsored Enterprises
Read Ron Paul's essay on the crisis.
Remember that this is Bush's fault, right? At least that is what I heard a lot from the left. So why didn't the right shout at the top of their lungs for people to watch these videos of them trying to warn us and of the dems saying everything is going to be okay?
I have always felt that this was peoples fault. People bought homes they couldn't afford, companies gave loans they couldn't trust to get paid, and the house of cards came crumbling down. I have been in plenty of arguments with libs about the cause. I just could never understand why businesses would not follow a business model. It’s bad business to give a loan to someone who is highly likely to default.
Maybe I am just not smart enough to understand what seems like basic math to me.
It's this kind of thing that makes me wonder about the shadow government conspiracies. I am not one for the crazy conspiracies, but WHY would the Republicans not be using these kinds of videos to fight Democrats?
This clip is from Fox News, why are they not playing these clips over and over again? Why is this not on Glenn Beck's chalk board?
GSE - Government Sponsored Enterprises
Read Ron Paul's essay on the crisis.
Remember that this is Bush's fault, right? At least that is what I heard a lot from the left. So why didn't the right shout at the top of their lungs for people to watch these videos of them trying to warn us and of the dems saying everything is going to be okay?
I have always felt that this was peoples fault. People bought homes they couldn't afford, companies gave loans they couldn't trust to get paid, and the house of cards came crumbling down. I have been in plenty of arguments with libs about the cause. I just could never understand why businesses would not follow a business model. It’s bad business to give a loan to someone who is highly likely to default.
Maybe I am just not smart enough to understand what seems like basic math to me.
Police Quotas
In a previous post the comments turned to police quotas. One commentor (who believes police have quotas) vs a Phoenix PD Officer (who says they are illegal).
I was provided this video by the commentor. He is correct that in order to be fair I should post it and let the debate continue.
I was provided this video by the commentor. He is correct that in order to be fair I should post it and let the debate continue.
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Conservative women vs. Liberal women
I am sure there are very attractive liberal women out there. Tina Fey comes to mind.
But its my blog so I get to post what I want and you are welcome!!!
But its my blog so I get to post what I want and you are welcome!!!
200th Post - Patriotism
I am guilty of being overly patriotic, if that is even something that on can be found guilty of. I get goose bumps when I hear the "Star-Spangled Banner" before a ball game and want to stand up even if I am in my own living room. I get teary eyed when I hear Al Greenwood sing "Proud to be an American" or someone give a patriotic speech like the one below.
I do not know why I feel the way I do when so many others do not. I did not grow up in a home that was overly patriotic; my redneck, white trash step father cared only for himself. My father’s side of the family is patriotic, but I was not raised by them. At a young age I was drawn to the American Flag, I sang the National Anthem with pride in grade school, and meant it with all my heart when I recited the Pledge of Allegiance.
I joined the military to defend my country and give my life if necessary.
I was the only one in my basic training class who raised his hand when the question was asked, "Who joined to serve their country?". All the others raised their hands when they were asked if they joined for college or because they had no other options.
I have been an unrepenting patriotic sap for as long as I can remember and I hope to instill that in my children. All Americans owe everything they have today to the Founding Fathers and the men and women who have given their bodies to defend our way of life. I say that they gave their bodies because some came home, some lost limbs, and others gave their lives, but all gave themselves to a higher cause than themselves.
I do not know why I feel the way I do when so many others do not. I did not grow up in a home that was overly patriotic; my redneck, white trash step father cared only for himself. My father’s side of the family is patriotic, but I was not raised by them. At a young age I was drawn to the American Flag, I sang the National Anthem with pride in grade school, and meant it with all my heart when I recited the Pledge of Allegiance.
I joined the military to defend my country and give my life if necessary.
I was the only one in my basic training class who raised his hand when the question was asked, "Who joined to serve their country?". All the others raised their hands when they were asked if they joined for college or because they had no other options.
I have been an unrepenting patriotic sap for as long as I can remember and I hope to instill that in my children. All Americans owe everything they have today to the Founding Fathers and the men and women who have given their bodies to defend our way of life. I say that they gave their bodies because some came home, some lost limbs, and others gave their lives, but all gave themselves to a higher cause than themselves.
Eric Massa
Eric Massa is a Dem who is against the health care bill. He believes he is being thrown under the bus because of it. You tell me what you think.
This is going to get bigger.
This video will not give you the whole story. It is just a good idea of what he is being accused of and what he considers to be over the top but good natured ribbing.
I was in the military so I know that this stuff goes on and I know that the Navy is probably the worst about hazing and homosexual (not sure what to call it) joking/pranking. I heard from an enlisted Navy coworker that they would initiate a new guy by jumping him, pinning him down across a desk, pulling his pants down, and sliding a hot dog between his butt cheeks. And the Navy wonders why they are represented in the Village People. The Air Force did nothing even close to this. We would duct tape a person to a wall or to the missile rack of an A-10 and hit them with a hose.
Pay attention to this Eric Massa controversy. His crime was telling a bad joke and he was forced to quit. We have other politicians in the news this week who did far worse and only lost their chairmanship, temporarily.
This is going to get bigger.
This video will not give you the whole story. It is just a good idea of what he is being accused of and what he considers to be over the top but good natured ribbing.
I was in the military so I know that this stuff goes on and I know that the Navy is probably the worst about hazing and homosexual (not sure what to call it) joking/pranking. I heard from an enlisted Navy coworker that they would initiate a new guy by jumping him, pinning him down across a desk, pulling his pants down, and sliding a hot dog between his butt cheeks. And the Navy wonders why they are represented in the Village People. The Air Force did nothing even close to this. We would duct tape a person to a wall or to the missile rack of an A-10 and hit them with a hose.
Pay attention to this Eric Massa controversy. His crime was telling a bad joke and he was forced to quit. We have other politicians in the news this week who did far worse and only lost their chairmanship, temporarily.
Monday, March 8, 2010
Protests.............I am Sad
Sometimes I get an idea for a blog post and I think it is great. This one is about comparing the different protests we have had in the recent years and that the Tea Party Protests are not violent by nature. Then I start doing research and it just starts bumming me out. I was going to delete this post all together but I the whole reason I started this blog is to get things off my mind and hopefully get feed back and debate.
The reason I am bummed is not that my premise is wrong. I found only one video that showed any signs of violence from tea party people and it sure wasn't mob violence.
What bummed me out were the idiots from the many many videos I watched. Mostly the idiots from the communist and anarchist protests, but the idiots interviewed at tea parties.
We have talked on this blog about bias and bad journalism so we can always find a racist in all protests and we can hear the town idiot supposedly stating the whole beliefs of the protest.
To be perfectly honest the most depressing thing is that there are people out there that think America, despite who is president, is imperial and wants world domination. I can support the arguement that America does what is in its best interests, but I can not support that we invade countries that do not deserve it. That we slaughter innocent people for the fun of it.
I watched a protest with Sean Penn and he praised Hugo Chavez and Castro. Chavez has not started filling mass graves YET, but Castro has. To praise these people and denounce your own country is horrendous.
These videos are of three protests by different groups. You be the judge of who is the most danger to your way of life.
Communist Protest
Anarchists
Tea Party
The reason I am bummed is not that my premise is wrong. I found only one video that showed any signs of violence from tea party people and it sure wasn't mob violence.
What bummed me out were the idiots from the many many videos I watched. Mostly the idiots from the communist and anarchist protests, but the idiots interviewed at tea parties.
We have talked on this blog about bias and bad journalism so we can always find a racist in all protests and we can hear the town idiot supposedly stating the whole beliefs of the protest.
To be perfectly honest the most depressing thing is that there are people out there that think America, despite who is president, is imperial and wants world domination. I can support the arguement that America does what is in its best interests, but I can not support that we invade countries that do not deserve it. That we slaughter innocent people for the fun of it.
I watched a protest with Sean Penn and he praised Hugo Chavez and Castro. Chavez has not started filling mass graves YET, but Castro has. To praise these people and denounce your own country is horrendous.
These videos are of three protests by different groups. You be the judge of who is the most danger to your way of life.
Communist Protest
Anarchists
Tea Party
Sunday, March 7, 2010
Not a Statistic and Not News Worthy
A close friend of mine had an incident a couple of weeks ago that required him to pull his gun. This incident will not be found on any website, newspaper, or statistic database. Names have been changed but story is true.
Bill was on the way to Southern Arizona with his father for a hunting trip. Driving south on I-10 from Phoenix the truck had a flat tire. Bill and his dad pulled off at an exit and stopped at a gas station that was closed but had 24hr gas pumps so they parked their truck next to one of the pumps.
Bill had noticed another truck that was sitting off the side of the road when they pulled off the highway and it had immediately pulled behind them and followed them to the empty gas station. The man in the truck pulled up to the opposite side of the gas pump Bill and his father had parked next too.
Bill’s dad had been driving and his door was closest to the man and his truck. The man got out of his truck and started a conversation with Bill’s dad. The man’s appearance immediately put Bill on edge. “He had the appearance and actions of a meth head”
Bill said, “and he was asking personal questions and for money”.
Bill’s father moved around to the other side of the truck to inspect the flat tire, while the man continued talking. He asked them where they were going, what they were going to do, and if they had any money they could give him.
Bill did not like the situation at all. His body was hidden behind the truck from below his chest, so he pulled his gun out of his concealed carry holster and racked a round. He had to rack a round into the chamber because his father did not like him to carry it loaded. This sound was louder than he had hoped and both his father and the man noticed it right away. The man stopped talking, turned around, and left immediately.
Bill’s dad thanked him for doing what he did, because he was concerned about the guy too. Everything told both Bill and his father that something was not right and that they were in possible danger.
What malice, if any, was on the man’s mind will never be known. What we do know is that three men walked away with their lives and barely a story to be told. If fact I am willing to say that this story is not interesting to 75% of people out there.
But to people who are aware of the dangers in the world and the bad people that would do us harm, we see this for what it most likely was. A gun owner prevented a crime from happening by letting it be known he was armed and was willing to use it.
Some of you might ask, “Didn’t Bill commit a crime by upholstering his weapon? Isn’t that brandishing or assault?”
I will let the officers who read this blog opine on that. In my mind, I know Bill did the right thing and I believe the laws have been changed recently so that what Bill did was not against the law. You decide what you would have done and feel free to comment.
Bill was on the way to Southern Arizona with his father for a hunting trip. Driving south on I-10 from Phoenix the truck had a flat tire. Bill and his dad pulled off at an exit and stopped at a gas station that was closed but had 24hr gas pumps so they parked their truck next to one of the pumps.
Bill had noticed another truck that was sitting off the side of the road when they pulled off the highway and it had immediately pulled behind them and followed them to the empty gas station. The man in the truck pulled up to the opposite side of the gas pump Bill and his father had parked next too.
Bill’s dad had been driving and his door was closest to the man and his truck. The man got out of his truck and started a conversation with Bill’s dad. The man’s appearance immediately put Bill on edge. “He had the appearance and actions of a meth head”
Bill said, “and he was asking personal questions and for money”.
Bill’s father moved around to the other side of the truck to inspect the flat tire, while the man continued talking. He asked them where they were going, what they were going to do, and if they had any money they could give him.
Bill did not like the situation at all. His body was hidden behind the truck from below his chest, so he pulled his gun out of his concealed carry holster and racked a round. He had to rack a round into the chamber because his father did not like him to carry it loaded. This sound was louder than he had hoped and both his father and the man noticed it right away. The man stopped talking, turned around, and left immediately.
Bill’s dad thanked him for doing what he did, because he was concerned about the guy too. Everything told both Bill and his father that something was not right and that they were in possible danger.
What malice, if any, was on the man’s mind will never be known. What we do know is that three men walked away with their lives and barely a story to be told. If fact I am willing to say that this story is not interesting to 75% of people out there.
But to people who are aware of the dangers in the world and the bad people that would do us harm, we see this for what it most likely was. A gun owner prevented a crime from happening by letting it be known he was armed and was willing to use it.
Some of you might ask, “Didn’t Bill commit a crime by upholstering his weapon? Isn’t that brandishing or assault?”
I will let the officers who read this blog opine on that. In my mind, I know Bill did the right thing and I believe the laws have been changed recently so that what Bill did was not against the law. You decide what you would have done and feel free to comment.
Statistic Myths
Gun statistics are easy to find and they always differ depending on the source. Like all statistics and surveys they can be skewed to conclude what ever a person wants. For example, you take the FBI crime statistics for any given year but view them on the NRA’s website and they will conclude something completely different than the Brady Campaign’s website.
You also have the misnomer that is used such as “gun crimes”. This is my personal favorite and it is used constantly on the Brady Campaign website. Let me paraphrase a quote I read on the site, “If there were fewer guns on the streets there would be less gun crimes!” Sure sounds like it would make sense. Gun crimes in Australia went down after guns were band.
Um…….so Warthog………..are you supporting gun control?
I am just stating the facts. Fewer guns can equal less gun crimes. Especially in a country that is an island like Australia.
Um…….so Warthog……….uh you are supporting gun control.
I am making a point. If we use certain logic and numbers we can come to the conclusion that gun control would lower gun crime. The key word is GUN.
Yes we might lower gun crime if we some how got rid of most guns. But we would never get rid of CRIME. In Australia gun crime went down significantly, but all other non-gun crimes went up significantly, especially crimes against women and the old.
So I would like to play a game. Both sides of the gun debate should post up stats that support their opinion on gun control.
This will be a little of kilter due to the fact that all but one of the known readers of this blog are gun supporters. So feel free to play devils advocate.
I would also urge you to find more than one source for your stats. We want to see how many different groups or websites we can get saying different things.
You also have the misnomer that is used such as “gun crimes”. This is my personal favorite and it is used constantly on the Brady Campaign website. Let me paraphrase a quote I read on the site, “If there were fewer guns on the streets there would be less gun crimes!” Sure sounds like it would make sense. Gun crimes in Australia went down after guns were band.
Um…….so Warthog………..are you supporting gun control?
I am just stating the facts. Fewer guns can equal less gun crimes. Especially in a country that is an island like Australia.
Um…….so Warthog……….uh you are supporting gun control.
I am making a point. If we use certain logic and numbers we can come to the conclusion that gun control would lower gun crime. The key word is GUN.
Yes we might lower gun crime if we some how got rid of most guns. But we would never get rid of CRIME. In Australia gun crime went down significantly, but all other non-gun crimes went up significantly, especially crimes against women and the old.
So I would like to play a game. Both sides of the gun debate should post up stats that support their opinion on gun control.
This will be a little of kilter due to the fact that all but one of the known readers of this blog are gun supporters. So feel free to play devils advocate.
I would also urge you to find more than one source for your stats. We want to see how many different groups or websites we can get saying different things.
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Carl Rove vs Howard Dean Live Debate
http://www.ticketmaster.com/Karl-Rove-and-Howard-Dean-Debate-tickets/artist/1415289
If Dean can not hang against Chris Mathews he is going to be eaten alive by Carl Rove.
Anyone want to go????
If Dean can not hang against Chris Mathews he is going to be eaten alive by Carl Rove.
Anyone want to go????
Drug gangs taking over U.S. public lands
Imagine you were hiking through the woods in northern Arizona. You stumble upon a group of people deep in the woods. They turn out to be growers of illegal plants and they are hostile. They take your hostage or maybe just shoot you right there on the spot. Why? because you accidentally came across their pot garden. You weren't looking for their garden but you found it...and all the trouble that comes with it.
I first heard about this a few years ago from a friend who's father is a officer up in Payson, AZ. They said that these gardens if not guarded by armed men are boobie trapped with anything from guns to small explosives. I was told if you ever come across one of these gardens just turn around the way you came and get out of the area as quickly as possible.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35650016/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/
All that being said it brings me to the point of all this. I haven't always thought this way about drugs, in fact I have thought the exact opposite for many years, but drugs are illegal and I have no pity on anyone who every gets arrested for them. Maybe I'm just getting older and my views are changing, but drugs (even weed) aren't good for the country until they can be legalized and controlled. A lot of people say that they can drive while high on weed....bullshit. They say it doesn't effect their motivation.....bullshit. I was there for a long time, I know what it does and i have done a lot of stupid things because of it. If marijuana is legal a year from now than I will be cool with it, but until then it is illegal and can't be controlled correctly. I have heard before that some peoples local weed isn't as bad as that stuff coming from Mexico because no one gets killed because of it. Again.....bullshit. It is an illegal trade and people will get in trouble and die at all levels.
All that being said, I'm not going to turn in the people that I know that do partake in any of these activities. What they do in their own time is their business, But it is when it effects me that I have a concern. And don't think for a second that I don't think that driving or any thing of that nature isn't wrong while under the influence of any mind altering substance, just like alcohol. The only difference is that alcohol is regulated and there are systems in place to let me and the police know when someone has had to much.
I first heard about this a few years ago from a friend who's father is a officer up in Payson, AZ. They said that these gardens if not guarded by armed men are boobie trapped with anything from guns to small explosives. I was told if you ever come across one of these gardens just turn around the way you came and get out of the area as quickly as possible.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35650016/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/
All that being said it brings me to the point of all this. I haven't always thought this way about drugs, in fact I have thought the exact opposite for many years, but drugs are illegal and I have no pity on anyone who every gets arrested for them. Maybe I'm just getting older and my views are changing, but drugs (even weed) aren't good for the country until they can be legalized and controlled. A lot of people say that they can drive while high on weed....bullshit. They say it doesn't effect their motivation.....bullshit. I was there for a long time, I know what it does and i have done a lot of stupid things because of it. If marijuana is legal a year from now than I will be cool with it, but until then it is illegal and can't be controlled correctly. I have heard before that some peoples local weed isn't as bad as that stuff coming from Mexico because no one gets killed because of it. Again.....bullshit. It is an illegal trade and people will get in trouble and die at all levels.
All that being said, I'm not going to turn in the people that I know that do partake in any of these activities. What they do in their own time is their business, But it is when it effects me that I have a concern. And don't think for a second that I don't think that driving or any thing of that nature isn't wrong while under the influence of any mind altering substance, just like alcohol. The only difference is that alcohol is regulated and there are systems in place to let me and the police know when someone has had to much.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
