November 2007
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
« Oct   Dec »
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930  

Month November 2007

Entries 10 Total

Good News! We’re Sane!

Nov 30, 07 6:43 PM

Gallup has reported that Republicans have better mental health than Dems or independents.  That’s excellent news considering earlier reports that conservatives were illiterate bumpkins since we don’t read enough books.

Republicans are significantly more likely than Democrats or independents to rate their mental health as excellent, according to data from the last four November Gallup Health and Healthcare polls. Fifty-eight percent of Republicans report having excellent mental health, compared to 43% of independents and 38% of Democrats. This relationship between party identification and reports of excellent mental health persists even within categories of income, age, gender, church attendance, and education.

I could rant in so many directions concerning this report, but I won’t  Just suffice it to say that the election of Dems in ’08 may well be due to liberal insanity.  I’ve said that in a lot of ways before.  This just confirms it.  Go GOP!

Comments (2)

Debate Fraud

Nov 29, 07 5:47 PM

I’ll be the first to admit, I missed last night’s YouTube-format GOP Presidential debate on CNN.  In retrospect, it was probably a good thing.  Reading the recaps of the debate, it would have been as much a waste of my time as it was a waste of time for the GOP candidates themselves.  I received one of the action alert emails from RedState.com Editor, Erick Erickson, that was sent out to all RedState.com subscribers.

Dear RedState Reader:

RedState is calling for CNN to fire Sam Feist, their political director; and David Bohrman, Senior Vice President and Executive Producer of the debate.

During last night’s debate, which CNN billed as “a Republican debate, and the goal was to let Republican voters see their candidates,” CNN either knowingly or incompetently allowed hardcore left wing activists to plant questions and Anderson Cooper willingly gave one of those activists a soapbox so he could harass the Republican candidates about military policy.

Simple googling would have revealed these left wing activists.  

Had CNN done its homework, this would not have happened.  They either willfully let it happen, or incompetently bungled it.  Either way, heads should roll.

Likewise, we hope one or more of the GOP Presidential candidates will call for a do-over debate on substantive policy issues.

You can read our Directors post here. 

You might want to take a moment to read the RedState directors’ call to action concerning the debate.  CNN showed their bias by allowing Dem plants to pose questions to the candidates.  RedState allows for the possibility that this may have merely been incompetency, but knowing CNN and their agenda, I find that highly doubtful.

I find it ironic that the Dems submarined a planned debate co-sponsored by the Congressional Black Caucus on Fox News because they were either scared of potential hardball questions or because of their hatred of Fox News.  Yet the GOP willingly participated in the CNN debates despite CNN’s track record as a mouthpiece for Democrats and liberal activists.

I don’t watch CNN on TV or read any of their “expert analysis” online.  I mainly check out their website for news stories.  I will likely continue to do so, but I also don’t think it would be a bad idea to hold someone accountable for allowing Dem activists a platform at a debate that was supposed to serve as an educational forum for GOP voters in the primaries.  Just like CBS and Rathergate, CNN has now painted a clearer picture when it comes to their political and social agenda.  I’m just sorry that more Americans can’t see through this crap.

Comments (5)

Huckabee “Enslaved” in a Failing Campaign

Nov 26, 07 2:03 AM

Just months after Bush told the American people that he believed America was too dependant on oil from the Middle East, Mike Huckabee has decided to re-phrase it to say we are “enslaved” to Saudi Arabia.

Huckabee; who is barely pro-American when it comes to illegals here in the states wants to break all ties with Saudi Arabia because of a recent court case where a Saudi woman/rape victim was ordered a lashing because she herself violated strict Islamic law by socializing with a group of men that were not her relatives.

She was raped by seven men, all men were sentenced to years in prison, but in Saudi Arabia apparently they stick to the laws that everyone is aware of that resides in the country, even if they are broken by someone who was victimized by others who were punished as well.

We can philosophically argue if it is right or wrong.  Of course in the United States, women are free.  Saudi Arabia and other countries don’t operate that way.  I can accept that because finally all the Democratic and flawed-Republican flapping about America’s unwelcomed intervention rings true in this case.  Who are we to tell Saudi Arabia how to run their country?  Are they threatening American women as well?

As it stands, Saudi Arabia maintains a peaceful relationship with the United States.  In the case of Iraq and Iran, we take stands for two reasons:

1.) To establish a civilized foothold to counter the incivilized foothold owned by Islamic fanatics in the Middle East which was handed to them by Jimmy Carter.

2.) To protect ourselves and our allies from bomb-making extremists.

That’s it!

Now, Huckabee comes and proclaims he would have us totally independent from Saudi’s oil in 10 years? 

As if his opinion is any different from any mentioned already on this matter.  Yes, we rely on the Middle East for oil, so what?  We need oil, he needs oil, Al Gore needs oil, Hollywood celebrities need oil!  Who doesn’t?  Will Mike Huckabee stop fueling the jet that moves him from city-to-city during his campaign?

I’d be more interested in how Huckabee plans to reverse his insane views on immigration and domestic policies to make sure things like this don’t happen to American women.  Suddenly, because a Supreme Court in Saudi Arabia orders a lashing for someone who knowingly broke laws on the books of her country, Huckabee wants to denounce an ally and regurgitate an overall concept already acknowleged by Republicans and portray it as if it’s a product of originality.

Comments (9)

Hillary’s #1 Endorsement

Nov 22, 07 7:03 PM

Hillary picked up an endorsement from the wife of former American-hating French President, Jacques Chirac.

 U.S. presidential candidate Hillary Clinton won surprise backing from the wife of former French President Jacques Chirac on Thursday, together with a pledge to join her on the campaign trail.

Actually, it seems like a perfect fit.  I’m just puzzled by a statement in this article.

The Chiracs’ political affiliations are at the opposite end of the spectrum from the Clintons’, but the former French first lady said she had always thought Democratic candidate Clinton had the makings of a U.S. president.

“Opposite end of the spectrum?”  Chirac and Hillary are two peas in a pod.  Hillary gives comfort to terrorists who detest the US.  She loathes the military.  She advocates socialist economic policies.  She attempts to undermine George W. at every turn.  Jacques and Hillary are political twins.  What the hell?

It’d make more since if ole Jacques himself came forward with an endorsement of Hillary.  Of course he’s probably too tied up dealing with new embezzlement and corruption charges.  That, though,  qualifies him to be a Hillary financial donor I suppose.

Comments (8)

The End is Near (For Ron Paul)

Nov 22, 07 12:43 PM

And thank God.  Paul and his supporters are just downright frightening.

His supporters on YouTube are so desperate that they are posting videos of him attempting to challenge Condoleezza Rice and proclaiming him the winner after it is so clear in this video that Paul got his clocked officially cleaned out with facts by Rice.

Paul’s conclusion at the end of the day?  Of course — America should stick its neck in the sand as Carter did in 1979 that gave Islamic crazies their first strong foothold.

Thank God, this is a modern ideology that hasn’t moved past the popularity of the 9/11 Truthers Movement.

Comments (13)

The Language of Insanity

Nov 19, 07 5:44 PM

Here’s another one from the world of the absurd in Washington, DC. Apparently Nancy Pelosi and her cohorts have made a bargain with the House Hispanic Caucus (read – liberal Hispanic Democrats) that would kill a provision that would allow the Salvation Army to insist that its employees speak English.

It’s been less than a week since New York’s Sen. Hillary Clinton and Gov. Eliot Spitzer had to climb down from their support of driver’s licenses for illegal aliens. Now House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has moved to kill an amendment that would protect employers from federal lawsuits for requiring their workers to speak English. Among the employers targeted by such lawsuits: the Salvation Army.

Sen. Lamar Alexander, a moderate Republican from Tennessee, is dumbstruck that legislation he views as simple common sense would be blocked. He noted that the full Senate passed his amendment to shield the Salvation Army by 75-19 last month, and the House followed suit with a 218-186 vote just this month. “I cannot imagine that the framers of the 1964 Civil Rights Act intended to say that it’s discrimination for a shoe shop owner to say to his or her employee, ‘I want you to be able to speak America’s common language on the job,’ ” he told the Senate last Thursday.

Seems pretty cut-and-dry.  Common-sense stuff, right?  Not if you are a Dem.  All hell broke loose, and the House Democrat leadership was forced to abdicate any support of the position after the Hispanic Caucus threatened one of their efforts to overtax Americans.  Amazing!

After testy negotiations, the Hispanic Caucus finally agreed to let the tax bill proceed after extracting a promise from Ms. Pelosi that the House will not vote on the bill funding the Justice and Commerce Departments unless the English-only protection language is dropped. “There ain’t going to be a bill” with the Alexander language, Mr. Baca has told reporters.

Don’t bother telling Mr. Baca that “ain’t” isn’t proper grammar.  Hell, he doesn’t even care if a company wants its employees to speak the English language.  Grammar be damned!  Basically it’s insanity like this that gives me hope that the GOP may actually be back in 2008.

Comments (4)

Merry Christmas & Happy Thanksgiving

Nov 19, 07 1:36 PM

Hi Friends —-

Just wanted to leave a quick note to all of you in no particular order.  People like Jennifer, Airforcewife, DevilDog, Shawmut, Sam, and many more… have made this a fun experience.  I love ranting when I’m aggravated and it’s wonderful to have other great American folks out there to share that with. 

So, the new theme is temporary but celebrates Christmas…and since it’s only Monday I am right on time to say Happy Thanksgiving as I give thanks for the great friendships I’ve established with all of you — including Philip — my wonderful site partner.

Love you all!

Steve

Comments (5)

Tax School, Social Security, and Why I’m a Republican to the Death

Nov 16, 07 1:44 PM

Whenever I hear Republicans talk about Democrats’ insatiable desire to raise taxes, I always have wondered just how important is this issue.  It’s very important!  Once we begin to do the figures….

Every year in November, I have to attend two LONG days of income tax school to prepare us for the new filing season.  So many political references were made this year — more than ever before — with many mentions of Hillary’s proposed health care plan and Charlie Rangel’s insane bill that has been vetoed by Bush that will certainly pass of a Democrat enters the White House next year.

Take social security for example.  Democrats propose that the cap of $97,500 (where taxpayers STOP paying into social security in any given tax year) be removed thus solving the social security crisis as the baby-boomers begin to withdraw in 2008.  Sounds almost too easy, doesn’t it?  And who in the hell are those greedy rich people to complain about it anyway?  Let’s do the math:

Social security is figured by taking life expectancy of 35 years and corresponds those 35 years with the highest years of income.  Now, earlier years of income are indexed properly to match today’s dollars.  The grand sum of the 35 years of social security wages are then divided by 420 to get their base.  If their base is 0.01 to 680.00, they get 90% of that base.  If the base is 681.00 to 4154.00, they get 35% of that base.  If the base is 4,155.00 or over, THEY GET 15% of it.

Three income levels of 97,500 per year, 30,000 per year, and 8,000 per year: 

  • 97,500* 35 years = 3,412,500/420months= 8,125.00 * 15% = 1218.75 per month.
  • 30,000*35 years = 1,050,000/420months= 2,500.00* 35% = 875.00 per month.
  • 8,000*35 years = 280,000/420months= 666.67 * 90% = 600.01 per month

Throughout the working years, Americans pay 6.2% of their gross wages into social security.  For the income levels described above, let’s see how each one pays into social security.

  • 97,500*35 years = 3,412,500* 6.2% = $211,575.00
  • 30,000*35 years= 1,050,000* 6.2% = $65,100.00
  • 8,000 * 35 years=   280,000 * 6.2% = $17,360.00

At the end of the day, if you make 8,000 per year in your working years, you will pay $17,360.00 into social security and will receive $252,000 in monthly benefits over your remaining life (35 years).

If you make 30,000 per year in your working years, you will pay $65,100 into social security and will receive $367,500 in social security benefits over your remaining life (35 years).

If you make 97,500 per year in your working years, you will pay in $211,575 into social security and will receive $511,875 over your remaining life (35 years).

Finally, let’s take a look at the Return on Investment for each.

  • 8000 per year = 252,000/17,360 = 14.52 RETURN
  • 30,000 per year = 367,500/65,100 = 5.65 RETURN
  • 97,500 per year = 511,875/211,575 = 2.42 RETURN

This should be printed and it should be carried with anyone who gives a damn about their future. 

To think, Hillary wants to do the same thing essentially with health care.

To think, liberals think that high-income tax payers are not paying enough into social security.

To think, liberals want to regulate the wages of doctors.  They want more free government income, bigger unions to boss small businesses around, and don’t want to work for any of it.

Comments (2)

Keith Olbermann: Why Liberalism is Failing

Nov 14, 07 12:22 AM

nuts.jpg

I know Ann Coulter’s rulebook of how to treat liberals includes never showing graciousness to one, but I am really feeling sorry for this nutball Olbermann.

Though I did not see the O’Reilly comment on Mark Cuban’s new film that allegedly portrays the U.S. Military raping women, I gather it was good for Mark Cuban (whoever he is, I am not sure if I am even spelling his name right) because it gave Olbermann a reason to drool over O’Reilly.  And boy did he drool tonight!

I had my on-demand feature on and when it automatically shut off, MSNBC was the channel that it went to so I heard the whole thing.

Keith blathered on for what seemed about 10 minutes on O’Reilly – making “jokes” and then reading a statement from Mark Cuban saying that he would debate O’Reilly but it had to be on Olbermann’s show as (and get this) Keith Olbermann serving as the “moderator.”  This is like asking Lindsay Lohan to drive your kids to the movies on a Friday night!

Through Keith’s drivel, I noticed three things. 

1.) Keith dreams that Bill O’Reilly (who has the number one cable news show on any news network) will come on his show on a failing network like MSNBC.

2.) Keith loves talking about Bill O’Reilly (almost as much as he talks about Ann Coulter.)

3.) I didn’t get upset and/or nothing bothered me about the interview.

That last one is probably the most important.  This seems to be the case with many liberals lately.  On the same broadcast, Keith had Arianna Huffington on and they mutually decided that Republicans’ entire campaigns stem from “fear-mongering.”  And it’s the “fear” created by Republicans that fuels Al-Queda.  I think Al-Queda is whipped in a frenzy alright, but I tend to believe that its fear of their own.

Miraculously, Olbermann and Huffington are still not telling us what the best way to combat Jihadist lunatics is, but showing concern for what they might do to this nation – AND ACTING ON IT – certainly is not what they would do.  (Take note young voters.)

I smile when I compare how many times Olbermann references Fox, O’Reilly, or Ann Coulter….at least 1,000 to how many times either of the above mentioned have referenced Olbermann – about 1.5 times – and that’s all of them combined!

Moreover; when liberals aren’t getting under the skin of conservatives, it means their arguments are failing.  And we all know the beloved darlings – proved by Olbermann tonight – can’t go through an hour without crying over something said by Bill O”Reilly or any conservative coming out of high school.

Dream on, Keith.  The host of a number one news show on a number one network does not go to you.  You (as proved tonight) go to him.

Comments (9)

Canada’s Toronto Sun and it’s “Fairness” Doctrine

Nov 12, 07 10:03 PM

marsden.jpg

I picked this up from anncoulter.com tonight. 

Rachel Marsden has always been such a great talent.  I always referred to her as Canada’s version of Ann Coulter and once she even was sweet enough to show up on a previous blog I had a couple years back to personally thank me for my kind words. 

Because of Marsden, I had not completely lost faith in Canada.  Because of Marsden, I got a great laugh whenever I saw her on Fox News.  Because of Marsden, I actually read a periodic column published by a Canadian publisher. 

That’s changed though.   The folks over at DailyKos got a look at Marsden’s latest column which stated:

I suppose that those who object to terror suspects getting water up the nose would say that, as a young competitive swimmer, I was also tortured. It was called “hypoxic training” — swimming underwater and holding our breath until we passed out. Our coaches didn’t call it torture, just an exercise in “mental toughness.” So think of it this way — terror suspects are getting some free mental toughness training courtesy of the U.S. government.

Daily Kos immediately put up a message on its website to write the editors of the Toronto Sun to pull a column that had been published and enjoyed by many individuals for quite some time.   That’s right, nutty leftwingers inspired the Sun to fire a columnist after two years.  I don’t suppose it has anything to do with the fact that the editor in chief is liberal, Lou Clancy, does it?

Well, Kos might be effective in Canada and Marsden is a massive Patriot who deserves citizenship of this country while we ship off about 10,000 Kos nuts to Canada.  Imagine how much better the country would be.

Liberals have gotten their heads so far up their own asses in their campaign to Bush-bash that they’ve actually talked themselves into believing that worrying about the torture of a terrorist – that would do a hell of a lot more harm to the liberal if the circumstance had reversed itself — is worth losing sleep over.  

This is no joke.  Liberals have gone beyond their normal annoying whining selves – they have become a general threat to human safety — in Canada that is.

And no matter how hard they try, they will never be able to silence Coulter, Malkin, Limbaugh, or Hannity.  Because this is America, and like it or not we’re not finished until we waterboard the last creep that thinks that slaughtering Americans is a mission demanded by Allah.

Welcome to America Rachel!  Your next stop is to write a book, because no matter how many times liberals try to get you fired, the real American people will treat you like the patriot you are — just ask Ann Coulter.  ;-)

Go to Rachel’s website to read her rebuttal and purchase a t-shirt to benefit the soldiers.

Also, check out LotusBlog that brought all of this to light here in the states. 

Comments (8)
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 332 other followers