Welcome to GayConservative.org

Rep. Jack Murtha (D-PA) Dead at 77

February 8, 2010 · 4 Comments

The news has just come across the wires that Jack Murtha, former Marine DI and reserve officer and a three-decade-plus veteran of the US House of Representatives, died today as a result of complications of gallbladder surgery. He was 77 years old.

As I believe is only proper, any misgivings we may have about the man should be put aside for now. His family deserves our condolences and prayers. Please show respect during this time.

→ 4 CommentsCategories: Jack Murtha · Politics · Posted By Mel

Iran’s “Peaceful” Nuclear Ambitions

February 8, 2010 · 1 Comment

I had a conversation with a liberal friend some time ago about nuclear weapons. It was pretty short, because I think she expected that my sexual orientation meant I believed the way she did. She made a comment that we needed to “set the example” by getting rid of all of our nuclear weapons, and when America did it, everyone else was sure to follow. We started it, right?

Wrong. Actually, it was in part German scientists defecting to the United States who helped us achieve a nuclear reaction, and they had been lucky to escape the Nazis who were not far from the same technology. The bad guys went after it, so we had to. How do you fight an enemy who wants to see your society burned to a pile of cinders and has the ability to put you in that state? You get a better weapon and you use it first. I hate to say it, but that’s the reality.

Naturally, when I said that (maybe not in so many words, but I made clear that setting an example would only leave us unprotected) she was stunned into near silence. The only reply she had was, “that’s just fear.”

HELLO! Of course it is! Do liberals really think we would want to use those kinds of weapons again? Do you think we enjoy that it had to be done in the first place? On a smaller scale, I don’t like that I have to keep a gun. It isn’t all that much fun for me. I’m not a gun collector, and I am not looking for someone to start something with me so I can use it. I keep a gun and believe in my right to do so because humanity isn’t as rational as liberals would like to think.

Take the anti-war movement. I’ve said before that liberals sing that overdone (and very irritating) John Lennon song as if conservatives didn’t give peace a chance in the first place. The entire idea here–anti-gun, anti-war, get rid of all of our nuclear weapons–is that if we just sit down and talk to the bad guys, they’ll have a change of heart and stop trying to kill us. I have to ask, do you think that would have worked with John Wayne Gacy? Or Jeffrey Dahmer? Do you think it would work with the robber who walks into a bank, fires a few shots into the air and demands that everyone hit the floor while he strips all the cash from the tellers that they have? Sure, go ahead. Just talk to him. Keep talking while he shoots you for getting in between him and what he wants.

Think about how often you have to argue with someone you don’t agree with. Why do you think that happens? Doesn’t it make sense that there are irrational, unreasonable people in this world in light of how many of those around you who disagree with your perspective? Peace isn’t something that’s just going to happen. Peace only comes about because those of us who ARE rational and reasonable understand that we will at times need to defend ourselves against those who unreasonably expect us to give them what they want.

Iran, over the weekend, announced three things. First of all, it’s dumping the plan to send their uranium stores to Russia to be enriched to 20% to be used for energy and medical treatment (that plan would have left Iran with too little uranium to make a weapon with). Second, they’re using 2000 reactors to enrich their own uranium closer to home. Third, they have made advances in laser technology that allow them to fire nearly invisible missiles.

Somebody please tell me why Mahmoud Ahmadinejad felt it necessary to announce those three things over the weekend when Iran supposedly only intends their nuclear program for peaceful ambitions.

We’re talking about a country that wants to see the Nation of Israel destroyed. Mr. Ahmindamoodforjihad has said on more than one occasion that Israel is not to be recognized. I don’t care how you translate what he said in his speech to the World Without Zionism conference in 2005, whether you say “wiped off the map” (which is the translation made by Iranians, not Americans) or “vanished from the pages of time”, he absolutely meant to infer that Israel needs to be destroyed. By arguing about the verbage you’re just playing semantics.

Iran is hostile to any non-Muslim and more so toward Jews. A nation this violent cannot, under any circumstances, be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. As soon as they’ve got ‘em diplomacy is going to go out the window. “We just want energy and medical treatment” will instantly become “kill all infidels,” which will be followed by the Shahada and a very big boom. If you wish to believe otherwise, that is your choice. Just remember this: while Japan was planning to attack us at Pearl Harbor for cutting off their supplies during their invasion of Manchuria, they were pretending to be friendly. They even gave our diplomats friendship medals to signify that there were no hard feelings. Then they struck, and we had a damn hard time recovering enough to put up a defense.

Now we’re playing with much more insidious technology. The genie is already out of the bottle. We can’t put it back in. All we can do is put on our best diplomatic face and try to talk–and when that doesn’t work, we have to be willing and ready to act more decisively. Obama has already tried his “new diplomacy” with Iran. They have made fun of him. Iran has snubbed five UN resolutions and nearly as many different rounds of sanctions. How long are we supposed to keep allowing them to say “nice doggie”?

→ 1 CommentCategories: Iran · Nuclear Weapons · Politics · Posted By Mel
Tagged: ,

Tired of SarahMania? Thank a Liberal.

February 8, 2010 · Leave a Comment

Since I woke up this morning until just moments ago — on Super Bowl Sunday – on the same day a clean energy plant exploded, people just cannot stop looking at or searching for Sarah Palin.

First, we had our usual liberals assailing her for her hard words on Obama last night.  Even the folks on MSNBC promoted her from “dumb” to a “merchant of hate!” 

The immediately liberals started doing Exorcist-head-spins over the fact that during the speech, Palin had some notes written on her hand, comparing it to her joke on Barack Obama’s teleprompter.  Gazing at notes on your hand is a very usual process for many giving speeches.  Since I have personally shaken her hand, I can almost guarantee she did not have the entire 1-hour-long speech written on her little palm. 

 She did make one gaffe.  Instead of saying that America was not seen as the shining beacon by the rest of the world because of Obama, she said “Alaska.”  Even I chuckled, just as I chuckled when Obama proclaimed we had 57 states.

Then she did a full hour interview with Chris Wallace today for Fox News Sunday.

In this interview, she revealed that she was not ruling out a presidential run.  Coupled with last night’s “Run Sarah Run!” chant at the tea party convention, this was enough to set off firestorms all throughout media outlets and boy have the liberals come out screaming today.

Honestly, I caught Chris Wallace’s program this morning as I was getting out of the shower and getting ready to head into the office for a little while.  I also watched her speech last night.  Friday-Sunday are the only nights I don’t work until 1 a.m. so I got lucky.

With all the hullaballoo, you would think Palin has officially announced her candidacy.  But liberals won’t stop.  They constantly ask the question to give the answer.  I can only assume she’s sick of getting the question and tired of giving her stock-card answer: ‘that’s so far off, I am focusing on 2010.’  So today, Wallace turned it around and in lieu of asking if she’d run, he asked if she wouldn’t. 

Obviously just as she won’t confirm one way, she merely replied the total opposite.  ‘No I won’t rule it out.’ 

As much as I love the idea of it, I almost wish she’d give a solid answer of “no!” to running.  I’d really like to see what liberals would do. 

Honestly, Palin has accumulated more power by becoming the leader of the grassroots movements.  Anybody can run for President.  Butrarely does one person comes around who can lead a movement so effectively without an official title, one that outsells both Hillary and Obama with her first book, one that sends ratings of every talk-show she visits soaring all the way through the roof — just as she does with the blood pressure of watchdogs camped out at the White House late at night.

While Sarah Palin drags in headlines by the truckload with one speech or one book-signing, the poor President is standing off in the shadows smiling brightly as if to say: “hey guys, what about me!?”  With one Twitter/Facebook post sent from her kitchen in Alaska, she alters the plans of a health care disaster executed under a “super majority” and causes all pages in the House Bill — referring to incentivizing Doctors with our tax dollars to have end-of-life discussions with certain patients – to get ripped from the bill before passage.

She’s not elected to anything.  Still, current politicians waited with bated breath to hear what she had to say last night.

A woman with this level of power, who earns $100K from one speech (of which every penny will be put back into the conservative cause) and is paid $10M to  innocuously sell a book, should almost never run for any elected office.  Everything that she has delivered on could have not occurred if she were an elected official.  Sarah’s great as she is…a strong feminist in a powerful position because of free market principles – not because of a political establishment.

While we may never know what she’s going to say or do next — let alone in 2012 or 2016, I guarantee liberals will keep searching and reading and commenting on every web page they can in aggressive opposition.  That’s power no President can ever match.

→ Leave a CommentCategories: Obama · Palin2012 · Politics · Posted by Steve · Sarah Palin
Tagged:

Megalomania

February 7, 2010 · 1 Comment

I’m still a Christian.

Those who didn’t know me ten years ago would laugh hysterically at that statement. They didn’t know me before I worked as a corrections officer (both youth and adults) and was actually in the ministry. I didn’t have a foul mouth until I had to police the worst of society’s worst, nor did I have the dark outlook on life that I carry now. I also hadn’t had my heart ripped out by a she-devil in a San Diego PD uniform. I make no apologies much of the time for my rough-around-the-edges personality because that’s not really me. My shrink says it’s a defense mechanism that is basically my subconscious self saying, “well, if you can get past my gruff exterior, then I can trust you!”

I don’t believe that going against the teachings of the church causes an automatic falling-out with God, and I no longer trust everything taught in church. I still believe in the basic tenets of Christianity and believe, from experience, that there are plenty of real Christians in our society that few people ever recognize because they spend too much time expecting Christians to be bible-thumping weirdos. The church is not God, and in the New Testament Christ frequently speaks harshly against religious leaders who think themselves to be better than others.

Then…there’s the Phelpsians. Followers of Fred Phelps, that is. He’s the “senior pastor” of a “church” in Topeka, Kansas, that made their splash onto the national scene in 1991 by picketing gays in Gage Park. Fred later got into a violent verbal row with poet Maya Angelou, who canceled an appearance in Topeka without delay. I guess the attention they received from their first big funeral picket – Matthew Shepard’s- was like a drug, because after that, they refused to quit. Since Shepard’s funeral, their pickets have grown in every way. They’ve brought more people, their signs have improved to be sharper and more eye-catching, and they’ve written new lyrics to well-known songs to get even more attention. Their website is called “godhatesfags.”

If you’ve noticed, Phelps is typically little more than a passing joke here at gayconservative.org (if that). I don’t harp on the Phelpsians’ antics. I don’t follow them much anymore, though before I came out I did, because even then I recognized how wrong, how downright evil they were. I’ve always been a very spiritual person and when I first met Shirley Phelps-Roper in the flesh, I felt a darkness about her that I had not even felt about the worst prison inmates. Something insidious made the hair stand up all over my body. The mere sound of her voice when she first spoke to me (when I offered my hand she said, “I’m not touching you, I don’t know where that hand’s been. You’ve cast your lot with the Sodomites…”) triggered something in some untouched corner of my soul that screamed to get away from these people as quickly as was humanly possible. I’ve seen some pretty eerie stuff, and I’ve felt spiritual fear about people before, but this was unlike anything I had ever experienced.

On that day in downtown Phoenix while I was still barely into my 20’s, I had an encounter that I never expected. Prior to that day I had no idea who these people were, only that they were picketing our state capitol building because we had an openly gay Republican senator (Steve May, my hero to this very day). I began reading every little scrap of information I could about them. What I found was absolutely chilling.

Today, three of Fred’s 13 children have left. All three tell the same story: that Fred had extreme obsessive and psychotically maniacal tendencies, was a drug abuser, and severely abused his children emotionally, physically and spiritually. The man would latch onto an idea and hound it to death, dragging his family the whole way. He beat his wife, even forcibly sheared her hair off once. I know that at least one of his grandchildren has left but have not yet found if more followed. If you care to gouge out your eyes after doing so–I certainly wanted to, I was pretty sure a lobotomy was in order as well–you can click here to read Shirley’s most recent writings.

What strikes me the most about this group, though, is that they’re not out to convert anybody. They seriously aren’t. Sure, they get the occasional email praising their work, but I would be pretty sure at least some are joke emails and the senders hoot and howl when the emails are posted on the Phelpsians’ blog. Some time ago (I think the letter has been removed by now), one person wrote and asked to be allowed to join WBC’s ranks; the letter seemed sincere. Equally as sincere was Shirley’s rebuke, telling this person that WBC had been appointed by God to do great things, nobody could join them, and the writer should have been ashamed for not knowing this before asking. This is in line with their extreme Calvinist views: they’re not out to save people or convert them. They’re out to warn everyone that we’re all going to hell.

It is because of this that I believe these scripture-abusing freaks should largely be ignored. They may call it love even though we know it’s hate. They may never quit. But if you notice, not one writer has said anything to them that is really unique. They really have heard it all, and they’ve got an excuse for everything. They believe themselves to be persecuted when they’re followed and they deliberately do the things they do to attract that persecution. They want you to hate them because it validates their behavior. 95% of the country knows they’re wrong.

Consider this scripture, from Romans 14:10-13: “But you, why do you judge your brother? Or you again, why do you regard your brother with contempt? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God. For it is written, ‘as I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to Me, and every tongue shall give praise to God.’ So then each one of us will give an account of himself to God. Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather determine this–not to put an obstacle or a stumbling block in a brother’s way.” Or this scripture, from I John 4:10: “In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.” That kinda takes the wind out of their “born into salvation” sail, don’t you think?

Ezekiel chapter 16 lays out why God destroyed Sodom. At no point is homosexuality listed or even hinted at (I’m sorry, but “indulgences” is just a little too broad to make that leap). Jesus Himself said, “blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” “Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted.” (Notice, He doesn’t confine that statement–that kills the “thank God for dead soldiers” ideas.) “Blessed are the gentle, for they shall inherit the earth.” (Exactly what about their methods can be considered ‘gentle’?) “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied.” (What about those who hunger and thirst for publicity?) “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy.” “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.” Most importantly, I think, is “blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.” (You cannot claim to be a peacemaker when your actions are designed to divide and have absolutely no justice in them.)

In the same passage is where Jesus goes on to bless those who are persecuted. THAT is why we need to just leave these people alone. That scripture is what they hold onto. What about their claim that they do what they do out of love? The bible has an answer for that, too.

“Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant, does not act unbecomingly; it does not seek its own, is not provoked, does not take into account a wrong suffered, does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth; bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.” (I Corinthians 13:4-7)

I don’t hate these people. They’re little more than an irritation to me. They don’t get a reaction out of me because I see what they are. I don’t bother writing because they’ll likely have heard it and will show no respect (they never do). In some cases, speaking in protest is needed. In others, such as this case, it is best to ignore them. That will take their power away. I promise if we stop being so upset by them we’ll wake up to some new tactic to get our attention because that’s all they really want.

Don’t give it to them.

→ 1 CommentCategories: Pop Culture · Posted By Mel · Religion · Shirley Phelps · Westboro Baptist Church
Tagged: ,

“President Palin”

February 7, 2010 · Leave a Comment

The immediate news shows — even the ones on CNN — gave Sarah Palin’s Tea Party Convention speech great reviews.  The speech was simply inspirational along the lines of her RNC speech in 2008.

In the post-speech Q&A, the gentlemen remarked to her:

I can think of two words right now that scare liberals, “President Palin.”

A simple but classic line that drew roars of applause and ovation followed by a “Run Sarah, run!” chant.

Palin, in answering that comment sure hit the nail on the head when she addressed the current administration’s phony and loose use of the word “bipartisan.”  There was nothing bipartisan about any part of the Obama/Pelosi/Reid plan to hijack another sector of free-market enterprise.  (Since the government’s involvement in the mortgage industry was so impressive!)  This flack about bipartisanship was a strawman for liberals — as it never truly existed — and merely impossible for Republicans since no Democrat took any of their ideas seriously.  Palin said that if she were president, she wouldn’t lie to Americans the way the current administration has in that regard.  If Obama’s policies are so good for the country, and knowing how conservative free-market principles are so demonized by the left, why would he risk his credibility with the moonbats by pretending to even want bipartisanship on an issue so important as health care? 

If Palin were President, she’d tell it like it was.  Her Congress won’t be pointlessly rattling on about a bipartisan effort with nuts like Pelosi or Kucinich.  However; the Tea Party has proven that conservative free-market principles are not Republican ideas.  They are American ideas promoted by conservatives.  There are conservative Republicans,  conservative gays, conservative Democrats, conservative blacks, and conservative whites. 

There is no “bipartisanship” in rejecting the Constitution.

Sarah Palin drove that point home tonight by speaking simply, honestly, and directly to the Tea Party crowd.

I cannot think of a better way to honor Ronald Reagan on his 99th Birthday than to have the nation hear the words “President Palin” uttered after what will go down in history as one of her most definitive and effective speeches ever.

Here is the full speech in all five parts!

→ Leave a CommentCategories: 2010 Elections · Conservatives · Health Care · Obama · Palin2012 · Patriotism · Politics · Posted by Steve · Revolution · Sarah Palin · Uncategorized
Tagged:

The MSM: Our Very Own Pravda

February 6, 2010 · Leave a Comment

Andrew Breitbart spoke at the National Tea Party Convention in Nashville, Tennessee this morning.  He said to the Mainstream Media, “It’s not your business model that sucks, it’s you that sucks.”

Yes, folks.  Our media, with only a very few exceptions, have collectively (of course collectively) become our very own Pravda.  From Wikepedia:

Pravda (Russian: Правда, “Truth”) was a leading newspaper of the Soviet Union and an official organ of the Central Committee of the Communist Party between 1912 and 1991.

Journalism requires objectivity.  Since much of our media is now run by modern liberal leftists who have an agenda–expecting objective reporting out of these people is, to put it mildly, an impossible expectation.

Our Founders expected the media to be watchdogs for the American people against abuses perpetrated upon us by our leaders–on both local and national levels.  If our media had done the job they were supposed to do instead of promoting their left-wing agenda we would not now have Barack Obama in the White House.  While I was no fan of John McCain I am certain of this much–he wouldn’t have been as bad as this leftist ideologue for a variety of reasons–national security among them.

An objective media would have delved into Barack Obama’s past with much more vigor.  They would have insisted upon getting answers to his admiration of mentor Saul Alinsky.  They would have pressed him to explain what “spread the wealth around” meant –and then would have actively tied it into Socialist, Communist, Fascist ideologies.  They would have, during the debates and protests regarding healthcare reform, delved into the horrific treatment of patients in other countries who have socialized medicine and would have brought to the forefront examples of the ineptness of government-run programs.

But sadly…they did none of that. 

Objective thought requires one to see reality as it is…not what one wishes it to be.  Again, my admiration for Objectivist philosophy shines through.  Liberal leftists thrive on their emotional certainty that if it wasn’t for these ignorant individualists we could have Utopia right here on earth.  This is, of course, absurd…because it would require mankind to be perfectible–which it will never be.  This is also why collectivism, no matter how benignly promoted, always and inevitably leads to harsher and harsher methods in order to control and squash those imperfections.

The liberal left-wing media in this country gave up, by their own choice, the role of watchdog of the people ages ago–and instead have become promoters of radical Leftism. They deserve to fail, they deserve to go out of business, and they deserve the contempt of We the People. If you want to work for someone like Hugo Chavez–then move to Venezuela and get the out of our country!

I especially admired Andrew’s final words at the end of his speech:

“If you don’t start reporting the truth I will organize a protest in New York City on Sixth Avenue and you won’t be able to escape to the Hamptons for the weekend.”

→ Leave a CommentCategories: Politics

The Indoctrination of “Change”

February 3, 2010 · Leave a Comment

Since Alan Grayson has taken Obama’s mouthiness against FOX News a bit further and called them (along with all Republicans) “the enemy of America,” I have come to the conclusion that the accusation of “spouting Faux News talking points” simply means that you’re getting to the liberals. So, I have no trouble posting this link about an outrageous indoctrination of youth.

A government/social studies teacher at Perry High School in Massillon, Ohio, handed out paperwork including multiple applications for a group known as Organizing for America. They’re the group set up to take over for Obama for America and they are inextricably linked with the DNC. Included with the applications was a reading list that included Saul Alinsky and a mission statement that explicitly described pushing “the agenda of change.”

Both the principal of the school and the school board superintendent said that the teacher–whom nobody has named publicly yet–was supposedly not trying to indoctrinate his students, yet no conservative alternative was passed out to balance the material he was giving students. They said they had discussed the situation with the staff and the teacher involved and refused to say what disciplinary action, if any, had been taken.

Almost as galling thing to me, though, is that there are several (most of whom don’t even have kids at the school) defending the teacher. One includes a blogger named Elliot Cook, who said, “This is all voluntary!!! No one is forcing anyone to do anything they don’t want to do.”

I would like to see this blogger say the same thing if it ever hits the news that a teacher in Texas handed out the same kind of material for a conservative political action group.

If it was a teacher in Texas handing out applications, reading lists and mission statements for, say, Young America’s Foundation, I guarantee you that Arianna Huffington would blow a gasket reporting on every minute detail of the event, reporters would flood the school’s neighborhoods trying to find students who had been given the material, the teacher’s name would be available within 24 hours of the incident in question and Katie Couric would go on GMA the next morning and ask Americans, “how would you feel if your teenager came home with an application to intern for an extreme right-wing group, and how would you react if you found out they got it from their teacher?” Protests against indoctrination would be held by purple-shirted SEIU members paid to do so outside Republican official’s offices and Obama would shake his head at the cameras in the White House and say that the teacher “acted stupidly.”

Can you imagine the commotion and uproar that would explode if that were the case we were talking about? Holy good godfrey, the noise would be deafening. What’s more, we’d never hear the end of it–we’d be eight years down the road at the next major election and suddenly Chris Matthews would get a thrill up his leg and say, “well, don’t you remember when…?”

This isn’t minor, and I’d bet that it happens more than we know. I have seen elementary school teachers in California put up posters–mind you, we’re talking about kids aged 5 – 11–announcing GLAAD and GLSEN meetings. One kindergarten teacher had the nerve to pass GLSEN pledge cards out to her FIVE YEAR OLD CLASS and make them sign them. The kids couldn’t even sign their names, much less read the cards that promised they’d never discriminate against any gay person. Yes, I said it…THAT. WAS. WRONG.

Schools are not places for this kind of thing. Children, even teenagers, are very impressionable. The best example you can set is to teach them the subject you’re there to teach and help them understand the importance of things like respect, hard work and honesty.

→ Leave a CommentCategories: Political Correctness · Posted By Mel
Tagged: ,

Hey, Folks – Liberals are PRINCIPLED!

February 2, 2010 · 7 Comments

I couldn’t resist this. One of our liberal readers, Robert, has lately become cranky (telling us to “shut up” multiple times because he doesn’t like what we have to say) and actually posted a response on another blog that “it would be an issue but liberals are principled.” The suggestion here is that liberals have principles while conservatives do not, evidenced by our staunch defense of free speech and our capitalist society. That was so absolutely hilarious that it deserved its own post.

HERE, folks, is a list of recent disgraces from the Democrat-controlled congress, compiled from several sources, including both bloggers and national media outlets (Judicial Watch, Michelle Malkin, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, even the New York Times on a couple of occasions–I didn’t look at FOX News once, so right now you can swallow the accusations of “Faux News” riding that wave of bile coming up in your throats).

-Pete Stark is a Congressman from Northern California. Both he and his wife have drivers licenses at their NoCal address and are registered to vote there. HOWEVER, they have a second home in Maryland. It is worth $1.7M. Stark lies about his address in order to qualify for a nearly $4G tax credit on the home. Maryland requires that he live there for at least six months a year, have a driver’s license, be registered to vote at that address and use it for tax filing in order to qualify for the credit, and Stark lies. The House Ethics Committee shamefully exonerated him by accusing the Office of Congressional Ethics (responsible for deciding which cases are serious enough to go to committee) of treating Stark “inconsistently” without really answering why they came to that conclusion.

-Charles Rangel is a New York Democrat. In 2008, it was discovered that Rangel had a vacation home in the Dominican Republic. When not there, he rented the home out, yet failed to declare the income on his taxes. Then, it was discovered that he had used businesses he was involved in to raise campaign funds. THEN it was discovered that he had illegally obtained rent-controlled apartments in New York City and had used them to house campaign offices and the aforementioned businesses. THEN…are you ready for this?…Rangel vewy, vewy qwietly slipped 119 members of Congress campaign contributions. Among them were three members of the Ethics Committee tasked with investigating him–G.K. Butterfield (D-NC), Ben Chandler (D-KY) and Peter Welch (D-VT)–and it has been discovered that he’s hidden possibly more than $1.2M in assets to evade taxes. Nancy Pelosi won’t even censure him, much less remove him from his post on the House Ways and Means Committee, until the House Ethics Committee finds him guilty of misconduct. Gee. I wonder how this one’s gonna end.

-After EIGHT YEARS of wailing about Bush and his no-bid contracts (which I opposed from the get-go), liberals are strangely silent on this one. Obama promised to end the practice of awarding no-bid contracts. He’s been made a liar again! Vincent Checci, a Democrat donor in Washington, D.C., landed the no-bid $25M contract for “rule of law stabilization services” that are supposed to help build the legal infrastructure of Afghanistan. AND, $543M in taxpayer money has been awarded to these no-bid contracts that Obama swore to stop, all of it from the so-called Stimulus funds and largely for infrastructure. Where the hell is Joe Wilson when you need him?!?

-Last month it was discovered that Senators have long enjoyed secret compartment-like relaxation rooms that contain tens of thousands of dollars each in luxuries that we have paid for (these are not legislative offices–they’re essentially party rooms and they are in the Capitol building). For some time it was a pleasure reserved for veteran Senators. Now that the Capitol Police have moved into a shiny new Capitol Visitor’s building, the rooms that they vacated are being turned into more of these covert R&R hideaways for all Senators. And we’re paying for it. Gotta love all this transparency.

-A whopping $133M was set aside for Census ads and pamphlets in English and Spanish. Guess what they’re for? They’re being put out there, mostly in California, to assure illegal aliens that their immigration status is information that apparently cannot be collected by the Census and these illegals need to make themselves count because, as the ad says, “your community needs you.” Completely aside from the fact that we’re spending that freakin’ much money during a recession, I have to ask…isn’t it considered racial profiling if the only language other than English you’re putting them out in is Spanish? So goes the argument against Sheriff Joe Arpaio, at least, for rounding up Hispanics who don’t have any legal identification.

-Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) has actually admitted his schemes recently. About a year ago, the WSJ quoted Treasury spokesmen as saying that only the healthy banks would receive TARP funds as a shot in the arm for lending. Frank, however, admitted to talking to federal regulators about getting $12M in TARP funds put in the pocket of Massachusetts bank OneUnited. The bank had one foot in the grave with federal regulators climbing all over them for predatory lending practices and executive compensation abuses that included having bank-owned luxury cars at their disposal. He also vehemently defended Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac after Bush tried to warn Congress that the lending giants were in danger of failing–this while he and other Democrat lawmakers were quite aware of the lenders’ horrendous banking, investing and lending practices. Frank repeatedly blocked any attempt at bringing the truth to light, and during the 2003 hearing in which Bush tried to push further regulation of the lenders, said, “I want to begin by saying that I am glad to consider the legislation, but I do not think we are facing any kind of a crisis. That is, in my view, the two Government Sponsored Enterprises we are talking about here, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are not in a crisis. We have recently had an accounting problem with Freddie Mac that has led to people being dismissed, as appears to be appropriate. I do not think at this point there is a problem with a threat to the Treasury.” It was ALSO discovered that for nearly ten years, Frank accepted campaign donations from the two GSE’s and at one point carried on an inappropriate relationship with an executive employee.

-A New York State Senator, Pedro Espada (D-Bronx), is about to finally get his comeuppance. He was already a study in what NOT to do when you’re a Senator (including censures for election fraud, creating a special six-figure Senate job for one son and putting the other in charge of his “non-profit” health clinics for the poor for another six-figure salary). Now he’s been caught with his pants down, almost literally–he was caught basically embezzling and then laundering money from the State to give to his nonprofit health clinics, which in turn gave the money to him and several for-profit businesses. Even the New York Times admitted the sad story. Espada has accused the NY State AG of racism because he’s the highest-ranking Hispanic in New York politics.

-Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT), head of the Senate Banking Committee, also defended federal loan giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the financial collapse. Well, where there’s smoke, there’s fire, and this guy reeks of it. He was caught accepting VIP rates from failed lender Countrywide Financial (preferential treatment in this instance, since it involves a politician, is illegal). Another ethics complaint is being investigated now. The claim is that Dodd helped secure a presidential pardon and, in turn, received a smokin’ deal (hence the smell) on a property in Ireland. When filing the requisite financial forms, the property was discovered to be claimed as badly undervalued.

-Only 20 members of US Congress were invited by Nancy Pelosi to attend the UN summit on climate change in Denmark last year, but when family members and staffers were added up, more than 100 people ended up going, and they partied in some kinda style. CBS’s Sharyl Attkisson broke this one despite Pelosi’s frantic efforts to keep it on the down-low. The Democrat crew used three military jets (I wonder what the carbon footprint was for that, kids), a Gulfstream Five, a total of 321 nights at the five-star Copenhagen Marriott, and tens of thousands of dollars for meals and expensive snacks. Among the guests invited by Pelosi included two Republicans – Shelley Moore Capito (WV) and Jim Sensenbrenner (WI), both of whom deserve to be voted out of office for not speaking up against this travesty against the American taxpayers. As for Pelosi, she has refused to comment in any way, shape or form on the trip or the expenses.

-Which brings me to Madame Speaker herself! Nancy Pelosi said at one point not long ago that she had no problem at all with flying commercial. After that quote was printed, though, the ugly truth reared its head. Multiple sources have documented this one, and only the liberal ones have scoffed at the outrage coming from conservatives. Pelosi wanted private use of an Air Force carrier for her, her family and her staff for travel between D.C. and San Francisco. One of Pelosi’s staffers pitched a hissy fit when the Department of Defense told her that the G5’s Pelosi wanted were not available, eventually pouting that if the military couldn’t handle delivery on their demands, they’d go elsewhere. The DoD had to “politely query” Pelosi whether she really wanted to fly every single weekend or if they were just holding up the flight crews and planes for their convenience just in case they wanted to go. Pelosi tried to take her husband to combat zones, which is a Congressional no-no. And, Pelosi wanted these huge military planes she demanded use of to land at a small airport closer to her home outside San Fran so she wouldn’t have to spend over an hour in the car. Trouble was, the planes were too big to land there. The DoD had to “politely” tell her that she needed to bring something to do in the car. (By contrast, after 9/11, then-Speaker Dennis Hastert was granted the use of a 12-seat commuter plane for security purposes. Neither he nor his staff ever complained.)

There have been a handful of Republicans caught in sexual scandals over the last few years, but I fail to find truly conservative lawmakers committing the kind of outrageous improprieties listed here. And, with liberal Democrats in power, many of these abuses either have been or are in the process of being dismissed.

I’ve been plenty mad at some Republicans, including Bush, for their very un-conservative decisions over the last few years. I still am. But with principles like these, it astounds me that the liberals in this country keep bashing Palin as dangerous. If it weren’t so sad it’d be funny.

→ 7 CommentsCategories: Liberal Bias · Politics · Posted By Mel
Tagged: ,

Go Away, Judical Activists–No, Wait, Come Back!

February 1, 2010 · 25 Comments

I’m going to make our liberal readers’ heads spin around. They may even vomit split pea soup.

Last month, the US Supreme Court made a decision that took a large portion of the country completely by surprise. In a 5-4 decision, a decades-old set of rules governing campaign finance was stricken down. The majority decision was that these campaign finance laws flew in the face of the First Amendment by denying corporations or other groups their freedom to spend their money as they like. Here’s where I send the liberals into conniptions:

I agree with the ruling.

In light of the mass amounts of money being poured into Democrat coffers by trial lawyers, labor unions and other special interests groups, I’m not keen on the implications that this has. I don’t like the idea of special interests being able to put even more money into liberal or even socialist causes. It is not, however, about what I like or don’t like; it’s about what’s right, and according to our Constitution, laws putting strict caps on how people spend their money were wrong.

What’s more, the minority opinion wasn’t based on law necessarily. It was based more on the implications that I just discussed rather than anything else. What Obama and all of the liberals who blindly follow him don’t realize is that it is not the job of the judicial branch to legislate or decide what’s best for America. Their job is to interpret the law in the light of the Constitution.

What was that about activist judges…?

Then, in a first-ever move for a sitting President, Obama took his opportunity during the SOTU Address to take a very public, very catty swipe at the justices. And he did it with all nine of the justices sitting directly in front of him. Democrats, in keeping with the new liberal ideal, jumped to their feet. Those sitting behind the justices even leaned in to make sure they really heard their displeasure. It was a display of unbelievable disrespect the likes of which we have never seen. Every Democrat in office deserves to be censured for it.

It is one thing to challenge a judicial decision during Congressional sessions and hearings. It is another entirely to stand up during such a revered event and scold the judiciary in such wanton fashion. Our system of checks and balances isn’t perfect, but it has worked for more than 230 years. Trashing those judges to their faces in front of Congress and the entire nation was a shameful display not unlike a two-year-old screaming and kicking his mother in the shins for not buying him something at the store.

If the Democrats want to pitch a temper tantrum about not getting their way, fine–they can do it at home after we vote them out of office.

→ 25 CommentsCategories: Legal Issues · Politics · Posted By Mel · Supreme Court
Tagged: ,

Never Again

January 28, 2010 · 6 Comments

(I started this yesterday morning and didn’t get to finish it; it was important for me to post, so I will post it today and put off my analysis of Obama’s incredibly disjointed State of the Union Address until later. I still have a headache from trying to follow that crap.)

Witold Pilecki founded the Secret Polish Army during Nazi rule and helped run the Polish Resistance. He was also the only man to ever volunteer to be imprisoned by Nazis in a prison camp in order to report on the activities in the concentration camps. He went to Auschwitz in 1940 and escaped two and a half years later, having given invaluable intelligence on the atrocities being committed by the Nazis.

The Allies refused to believe him. They accused him of exaggerating. It wasn’t until two Jewish prisoners escaped in April of 1944 that the Allies took the reports seriously.

On January 27, 1945, the Allies came to a very rude awakening: he was not only not exaggerating, in fact, there were worse crimes being committed than what he reported. Soviet soldiers liberated Auschwitz on that date, finding Jews, Pols, Gypsies, Allied POW’s, homosexuals and others deemed “undesirable” by the Nazis starving, sick, and dead. They had been rounded up like cattle and shipped in inhumane conditions to live a hell on Earth that no human being had previously imagined. The Jews were the main target: by war’s end, six million Jews had been slaughtered in the Nazi quest for the “final solution” to the “Jewish question”.

After arriving by foot through the wrought-iron main gate of Auschwitz, prisoners were stripped of all belongings–including clothes and shoes–and sorted so their prison uniforms could be marked correctly. Later, once Auschwitz had grown beyond a single camp and became an extermination camp, the sorting was to decide who would be immediately sent to the gas chambers and who was allowed to live.

Those allowed to live would soon wish to die. The rules were numerous, difficult to follow and easy to break, and punishments were dire. There were standing cells, cells measuring a total of about 16 square feet, where prisoners would be packed four or five at a time so that all they could do was stand–and still be forced to work the next day. Dark cells were practically sealed; prisoners would be locked inside until they had used up all the oxygen and suffocated. A popular punishment was hanging prisoners by their arms for days (this would dislocate their shoulder and elbow joints and they would be left hanging in this state). Starvation cells were used where prisoners would be kept without food or water until they started to death. And it was at Auschwitz that a Nazi first tested Zyklon-B on a few hundred prisoners, paving the way for the gas chambers to be put to full use.

It was Auschwitz-Birkenau, or Auschwitz II, that became the main extermination camp after the original camp became overcrowded (an amazing feat considering that bunks lining prisoner’s quarters were stacked three high and held four bodies each). Once Birkenau opened, Jews arrived by train and were immediately sorted between who would live and who would die. Their personal belongings would be stripped of them and put on a train to be sent back to Germany for sale. The incoming and outgoing trains regularly passed each other.

Jews deemed capable of manual labor would be sorted to live. Those who were determined as useless, normally about three quarters of prisoner shipments and including all children, women with children, the elderly and the ill, were sent immediately to the gas chambers. They would be marched to the outer chamber and told to strip for showering and delousing, then herded into the sealed chamber itself and gassed to death. Birkenau had a capacity to gas and cremate upwards of 20,000 prisoners a day. The dead would then be checked for any gold jewelry and teeth, which were also sent back to Germany for sale.

Eventually, the SS troops at Birkenau were murdering so many Jews daily that they had to use open-air pits outside the creamatoria to burn bodies.

Appalling medical experiments were also conducted at Auschwitz by a number of Nazi doctors, including the infamous Josef Mengele. X-rays were used to cause sterilization, women had ther uteruses glued shut with a variety of chemicals, and gangrene was injected into subjects so that the effects of the illness and various treatments could be studied.

Nobody I knew remembered what yesterday was. Not one person I asked could tell me the significance of January 27. Poland turned Auschwitz into a museum just before 1950; it took the rest of the world decades to set up anything in remembrance of the Holocaust. To this day, there remains a small but vehement factor of people who deny that the Holocaust ever happened.

It astounds me that there are those in America who try to compare Republicans with Nazis in the light of what the Nazis actually did. I believe that, for this reason, people have begun to forget just how evil the Nazis really were; using them to describe those disliked by liberals demeans the reality of what happened.

We cannot allow ourselves to forget the incredible darkness that befell the world before and during WWII. Nor can we allow the anti-Semitism that pervades our culture to this day to continue while we lambast those for supposed racism over comments about skin color (ask Al Sharpton what he thinks of Jews–he helped start a riot against them in New York).

We cannot forget or we will be damned to repeat it.

→ 6 CommentsCategories: Politics · Posted By Mel · Racism
Tagged: