Why I Voted Democrat....

Bear who blogs at The Absurd Report compiled the following satirical list of reasons for voting Democrat:

I voted Democrat because I love the fact that I can now marry whatever I want. I’ve decided to marry my horse.
I voted Democrat because I believe oil companies’ profits of 4% on a gallon of gas are obscene but the government taxing the same gallon of gas at 15% isn’t.
I voted Democrat because I believe the government will do a better job of spending the money I earn than I would.
I voted Democrat because freedom of speech is fine as long as nobody is offended by it.
I voted Democrat because when we pull out of Iraq I trust that the bad guys will stop what they’re doing because they now think we’re good people.
I voted Democrat because I’m way too irresponsible to own a gun, and I know that my local police are all I need to protect me from murderers and thieves.
I voted Democrat because I believe that people who can’t tell us if it will rain on Friday can tell us that the polar ice caps will melt away in ten years if I don’t start driving a Prius.
I voted Democrat because I’m not concerned about the slaughter of millions of babies so long as we keep all death row inmates alive.
I voted Democrat because I believe that business should not be allowed to make profits for themselves. They need to break even and give the rest away to the government for redistribution as THEY see fit.
I voted Democrat because I believe liberal judges need to rewrite the Constitution every few days to suit some fringe kooks who would never get their agendas past the voters.
I voted Democrat because my head is so firmly planted up my ass that it is unlikely that I’ll ever have another point of view.

Those who vote Democrat clearly have not followed their platforms through to the logic conclusions.

Zo On Affirmative Action & Socializing The Big Three

Stimulus Package = Predatory Lending

The following article was posted on Copious Dissent by Devil's Advocate yesterday:


"Whenever I assert that people who fail to pay their mortgages should not receive help from the government (they should rent), the Left argues that many of these borrowers were swindled by predatory lenders. The Left claims that some people signed adjustable rate mortgages when the banks knew that these people would never be able to pay the loan back. Then when the monthly payments increase, the bank steps in to reclaim the home.

Ignoring whether or not predatory lending actually takes place, and whether it is a sufficient justification to allow the government to renegotiate mortgages, I have a simple question: How is the definition of predatory lending different from the actual implementation of the stimulus package?

Right now, the government knows that Americans do not have $1 Trillion+ to spend. But, the federal government nevertheless printed money to transfer to State governments, some of which are bankrupt already. California comes to mind.

Now, citizens within those States will be required to pay this stimulus back, and the rate of payment, and burden on society, is going to adjust significantly because of: 1) Inflation; and 2) Interest. If $1 Trillion is borrowed, expect the citizens to be required to pay back a few hundred billion on top of the principle. So what is the difference between this practice and predatory lending?
To answer my own question: The difference is that this economic stimulus package is not just taking place in theory. Another difference is that when America forecloses on repaying this economic stimulus package, we lose much more than a home underwater. We lose the United States of America." (Source)- Emphasis Added

But I am sure that this matters not to many Americans who are still high on the Obamiate of "Hope & Change".

"Forgit Dim Republikins, Pass The Bill...."

(Correction Tom Joyner's guest was not Roland Martin as his engineer informed me but Melody Barnes Director of White House Domestic Policy Council--h/t to anonymous)
The spousal unit forced me to listen to The Tom Joyner Morning Show this morning on the drive in to work. Now I understand why too many black folks are mired in ignorance (notice I didn't say all or most I said TOO MANY). Roland Martin was the guest for the 5 minute segment and they were discussing the stimulus bill. Roland Martin said the stimulus bill is a great bill that will stimulate the economy and will immediately provide jobs for 3 million people and added that 2 million people are out of work. He said that the house and congress spoke with leading economist to ensure that the bill was balanced -- a balance between tax cuts and "programs that will stimulate the economy and help the poor" but he continued the Republicans are trying to block the bill . Tom Joyner replied "well there are enough democrats so forgit dim republikins and pass the bill." He repeated this some 5 to 7 times throughout the rest of the segment. Joyner, questioned how tax cuts stimulate the economy to which Roland Martin replied that "they don't" and then proceeded to talk about how much the stimulus bill would be used for education. They painted the Republicans as rich, white bigots who want to keep the "little guy" down. Needless to say, I was yelling at the radio which irritated the spousal unit and we fought (but, I digress).

I wonder how many people who heard that exchange really believe that the stimulus bill is a good thing? I wonder how many people who heard that exchange really believe that republicans just don't care about the poor? I submit that too many will believe it. Not because they are dumb but because they are busy and they don't have time to peruse the nytimes, wsj, and washpo op-eds. They are busy dressing their children for school, making lunches, making dinner, cleanup after dinner, and they depend on the TV and the radio for information. There is no wonder that the liberal left wants to institute the fairness doctrine because they want to control information. They already have the MSM and the black media doing their bidding. I see why they feel the need to silence talk radio hosts like Limbaugh and Hannity -- they can't have people getting the whole story can they?

Cacophony Of Liberal Hypocrisy....Harbinger or Omen?

The latest harbinger omen foreshadowing PEBO is the Blagojevich, Burris, Reid debacle. For those of us savvy enough to see through the kah-kah (code for bull_S**t) can you believe the cojones of Harry Reid? Liberal elitist believe that they only have to follow laws that they like apparently. Trust me, I no fan of egomanical Roland Burris (check out his monument to himself) and Blagojevich is as slick as snake oil but this appointment is perfectly legal and should stand. Uber-liberal democrat liberal Harry Reid shows his true feelings towards the black folks who overwhelmingly support his party as the Chicago Times reports that Harry Reid makes it clear to Blago in an FBI taped conversation that:

" Days before Gov. Blagojevich was charged with trying to sell
President-elect Barack Obama's U.S. Senate seat to the highest bidder, top
Senate Democrat Harry Reid made it clear who he didn’t want in the post:
Jesse
Jackson, Jr., Danny Davis or Emil Jones." (Source)

How curious that all three are black. Where are the black quasi-socialist progressive fundamentalist racism chaser? Bull Conner and George Wallace would be so proud of Harry Reid. Where is the outrage with TOP SENATE DEMOCRAT, huh? Could it be that house negros are allowed but senate negroes are not? Could it be that the democratic party that is so interested in helping black folks has done all they are willing to do in the next 4 years by not vetting and then nominating PEBO?

I'm no longer astounded by these antics. PEBO hasn't even taken office yet and scandals abound. Bill Richardson had the good sense to step down to bad the same can't be said for Rahm Emanuel as it's only a matter of time before he is implicated in this Blagojevich senate seat matter. "No Drama Obama's" demons are on their way out of the closet but it's doubtful whether or not his acolytes will put down the "obamium" pipe long enough to notice.

Crucifixion Legalized By Humas....Yet The Godless Liberal Elites Sympathize

I came upon an article written on 12/25/08 by Caroline Glick in the Jerusalem Post and I could not believe what I read. She writes:

"Both Iran and its Hamas proxy in Gaza have been busy this Christmas
week showing Christendom just what they think of it. But no one seems to have
noticed. Hamas legislators marked the Christmas season by
passing a Shari'a criminal code for the Palestinian Authority. Among other
things, it legalizes crucifixion. Hamas's endorsement of
nailing enemies of Islam to crosses came at the same time it renewed its
jihad. Here, too, Hamas wanted to make sure that Christians didn't feel
neglected as its fighters launched missiles at Jewish day care centers and schools. So on
Wednesday, Hamas
lobbed a mortar shell at the Erez crossing point into Israel just as a group of Gazan Christians were
standing on line waiting to travel to Bethlehem for Christmas. While Hamas joyously renewed its
jihad against Jews and Christians, its overlords in Iran also basked in jihadist triumphalism.
"(emphasis added)

MSM aka Godless liberal left wing elitists would have us believe that Israel grotesquely and inhumanly slaughtered scores of innocent Palestinians. Directorblue aptly opines:

"It appears that Israel's retaliatory attacks killed 240, of whom 180 were
Hamas leaders or fighters. This means that less than 25% (we're not sure exactly
how many) of the dead were civilian casualties. The number
is elevated because Hamas intentionally places its facilities next to hospitals, schools and mosques. In other words, Hamas routinely uses human shields. These acts violate every facet of any moral code." (Source)

Conservative Brother at Wake Up Black America writes the following regarding Israel:

"I'm one hundred percent in support of Israel defending itself against Islamic terrorist groups that threaten it such as Hamas, Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad. Israel has always been the whipping child of the world every time it defends itself from groups like Hamas firing missiles down into Israel. If I get started on how the media tries to frame Israel as the "aggressors", I won't be able to stop. Here's an FYI. Did any of you know where the media gets it's numbers of Palestinians killed and wounded from? They get their information from groups like Hamas. So the media runs with the numbers as truth from the same "TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS" that started the problem in the first place, go figure. It's so funny as in odd how every time an Israeli missile strikes a surgical target, Hamas always says it was a "civilian target" filled with innocent women and children or a hospital. Once again the media is always there to conveniently report it as such. How this current conflict got started was when Hamas broke the cease fire agreement it had with Israel and resumed firing rockets into Israel."

Americans, particularly Black Americans need to wake up, get informed, grow up, show up, (Gosh, I sound like Jesse Jackson) and stop falling for liberal lies. They are leading us on a path of destruction. Can you not see that when liberals lose their collective mind's over one man (Rick Warren) offering a prayer that they are ravenously opposed to all people of God? In America Judeo-Christian values are under attack. Ideological crucifixion has come to America. In Israel, Jews and Christians are under attack LITERALLY! Physical crucifixion has been legalized by Jihadist. Coming soon to a town near you. Wake up!!!!!!!!!

Update: More Liberal Kah-Kah from Lorelie Kelly at Huff PO. (Kah-Kah is code for Bull Shit in case you are wondering)

Why Are Conservatives Patriotic:As Told By The Astute Blogger

The Astute Blogger responds to an article written by Joel Stein of the LA Times who is befuddled as to why conservatives believe in american exceptionalism. Well, the Astute Blogger ripped Mr. Stein a new "azzhole" as he broke down why specifically a person of Jewish descent should be the last group of people on the planet to question american exceptionalism. He writes:

"Yes, perhaps Nazi Germany in the thirties would have been a better place for a
guy named Stein to live.Or did Joel Stein somehow forget that it was America's blood, sweat and treasure that defeated the twin scourges of Nazism and Militaristic Shintoism?Or perhaps the Soviet Union, which murdered upwards of 90 million individuals, would have been a cool place to live: say, a gulag in Siberia.Or
did Joel Stein somehow miss the news that Ronald Reagan's strategy of peace
through strength -- ("We win. They lose.") -- led to the economic meltdown of the Soviet bloc and the liberation of millions?Maybe Stein would have preferred living under the Taliban, in their tolerant and forgiving culture, or in Saddam Hussein's
Baathist Iraq, which had an unfortunate propensity to gas and rape its
opponents?Or were Joel Stein's newspapers swiped by the neighbor those days, so that he missed the news of George W. Bush's incredible risk-tasking to liberate
fifty million Muslims from the despotic regimes of Bin Laden and Hussein?Forget the fact that more people try to get into America than any other country. Forget, too, the opportunities afforded entrepreneurs by America's incredible innovation engine linking academia, venture capital and industry; and which has launched companies like Microsoft, Intel, Google and eBay out of whole cloth.Were it not for America, Stein would -- today -- be living under Nazism, Communism or some other totalitarian regime. Or, better put, not living.Does that help you understand American exceptionalism..."

Heres the good part:

"Mr. Stein, you ignorant pissant? Tribalism? Tribalism has nothing to do
with it, you pathetic ignoramus. Were it not for America, were it not for
Americans, the world be a far darker place, with hundreds of millions living
behind barbed wire, in concentration camps, in death camps awaiting their smoky
fate.Stein, you are an intellectual midget and a bumbling doctrinaire liberal
hack. Frankly, I'm surprised you can rub enough neurons together to keep
breathing without having to concentrate.If I were a meaner-spirited person, I'd
slit the tires on your home. Instead I'll just mock your astute choice of
profession: liberal hack #117 for the dying Los Angeles Times."

LOL...I love it!!! I have to admit that I have never felt an overwhelming sense of patriotism and I don't get all misty gazing at the American flag. But, I'm not stupid enough to think that any other country on this planet can offer me a better life with all of the freedom and liberty that I possess. America has it's issues but any "pissant" knows that the good significantly outweighs the bad. Further, the part that is bad-- the racism, well that's a result of a sinful human condition and since humans inhabit other countries racism can never be escaped. So, for all of you whining liberals elitist, and black quasi-socialist progressive fundamentalist racism chasers grow up and count your many blessing. Thank you Astute blogger for reminding me why I should be proud of America.

2008: The Year of the White Liberal Elite As Told By Bob Parks

Bob Parks posted this article on his blog Black & Right this morning:

I have said all along that PEBO is a by-product of liberal elitism. It seems that Mr. Parks sees it that way as well:

Of course, this is the year of the Barack Obama phenomenon, but who is really responsible for his rise? His shining personally and “oratory” skills helped, but who was really behind that and other facets of our culture over the last few years? Try looking towards our white, liberal elite and you’ll not only see their political influence but also the mediocrity they’ve molded into our society.
It really dawned on me after watching an episode of Penn & Teller’s “Bullshit” program on Environmental Hysteria, where there was a scene including rhythm-challenged, young white elites, "dancing" like Africans after eating a meal of gazelle meat gone bad.
Look at pop culture, complete with singers who can’t sing, writers who can’t come up with original ideas, reality show participants with few redeeming qualities, and behind the scenes you’ll see white liberal elites who claim to embrace diversity, and you’ll understand why we have a Barack Obama.
White liberal elites are America’s losers with money.
While attending the School of the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston, I met many very talented people. But I also met a disproportionate amount of students who came from rich families, probably couldn’t cut it in a real college, thus they decided to try art school where they created crap that could be “intellectualized”, endure one year of classes at a real college, and get a degree. And they had the cash to do it.
These are some of the people who create our “art”. These are some of the people who are now teaching our kids and creating our music, movies, and influencing our politics.
These are the people who perpetuate the worst in black society, i.e. the black male gansta’. However, white liberal elites don’t really like black people. They wouldn’t let their daughters marry a rapper, but it’s trendy to bring home a black woman, as long as she’s light-skinned. Look at almost all of the today’s black female singers.
White liberal elitism is evidenced in their defense of Affirmative Action. A few years ago, they staunchly defended the AA-University of Michigan case. However, while few in the public knew anything about that case, aside from the fact it had the buzzwords “Affirmative Action”; elites did know what it was about.
A coalition representing 45 student organizations issued a statement at a press conference last Thursday related to the lawsuit filed against the University in October on its admissions practices:
"We support the promotion of diversity and equality through the continued implementation of affirmative action policies at the University of Michigan. We maintain that the lawsuit is without merit. We believe that education is a powerful tool to encourage accurate dialogue. Therefore, we are currently organizing to better educate ourselves and our communities for the defense of this issue in the court of public opinion."
For those who read one of the judge’s opinions,
The majority opinion, written by Chief Judge Boyce F. Martin Jr., an appointee of President Jimmy Carter, concluded that the law school has a compelling interest in considering race in admissions, because maintaining a racially and ethnically diverse enrollment was essential to "educational diversity" — exposing students to peers with different backgrounds and views.
In other words, the case (to white liberal elites) was not about making sure more blacks got into the University of Michigan law school. It was about more black students becoming study aids for white students, “exposing students to peers with different backgrounds”.
With that, is there any wonder why they’ve so embraced Barack Obama? As we’re not privy to his sealed college transcripts, we don’t know if he was this brilliant student or a mediocre AA applicant who was accepted into Harvard Law so his fellow students could be the educational beneficiary (direct cultural exposure) of his presence.
Staying on the topic of education (where white liberal elites gravitate), we see the further embrace of their personal mediocrity: the removal of competition in the classroom and the schoolyard. There shouldn’t be celebrated winners and shunned losers, as they know what category they’d be in.
Our pop culture is ruled (and infected) by “role models” whom we are told not to judge. In what age would a Paris Hilton be celebrated and/or tolerated? But because of nepotism and white liberal racism, some of the most untalented amongst us are in charge of what we, and our kids, see and hear. We already know of industry stars who won’t allow their children to watch the product they sell us. Why? Because they know it’s crap, but as it took little thought to produce and it perpetuates their lifestyle, who cares if our society’s reputation is sullied by it?
They’ve dumbed down society, not only so it’s easier for them to lead, but also because it’s easier for them to understand. They may be rich; that doesn’t make them intelligent. Reciting is easy, thus “change” and “hope” (along with white liberal guilt) could position a black man with questionable credentials to be our next President of the United States.
Now, they are wandering in the wilderness, wondering where the Obama they elected went. Because they aren’t that smart, they fell for the hustle, bamboozle, bait-and-switch, con, and because they come from the spoiled brat wing, will never admit the errors of their ways because they don’t know just how wrong they were.
That would take the ability to not only recite, but read.
The upside is now that they’ve finally assuaged their “guilt”, they have no where to go. They’ve atoned for the sins of America’s past, although they probably can’t name them correctly. They feel like they’ve accomplished something in their relatively empty lives. They’ll now tackle something truly bigger than themselves: the environment. They believe they can fix it. Now, if someone will just show them how.

The last time I linked to an article referencing white guilt I caught all manner of hell from many. But, whether we like it or not without white guilt and white liberal elitism there would be no PEBO (President Elect Barack Obama)

What's Up With Al Sharpton & Sylvia's?

Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg has lunch with Rev. Al Sharpton at Sylvia's today. I find this utterly absurd for a couple of reason. First, why do all pandering democrats feel compelled to dine with Al Sharpton? Isn't Hillary's seat going to be filled by appointment from the governor and not an election? So why does she need to sup with Sharpton? I use to tire of all of these self-appointed black leaders but it really doesn't matter. It seems black folks don't even realize they are being marginalized -- so have at it Rev. . Secondly, why does he always take these idiots who seek an audience with him to Sylvia's? Do they bring him a compulsory watermelon as a gift of appreciation too? Is the good Reverend's palate so indiscriminate that he can't eat any grubbage other that soul food? Don't get me wrong I'm all about baked macaroni and cheese, collards, and smothered chicken but Sharpton's photo opps at Sylvia's are bordering on the absurd. Way to perpetuate the chitlin' eatin' negro sterotype Rev. Sharpton!

Right Klik: Questions for My Liberal Friends

Right Klik has a few questions for his liberal friends which I would also like to have an answered by my liberal friends. I commented on Right Klik's blog that I doubted that there are any rational liberal minds anywhere that can provide answers to these questions without hurling insults or deflecting. Prove me wrong....

Here are Right Klik's questions:

1. Liberals asked Americans to hand the keys of government over to the Democrats in order to end the "Culture of Corruption." In light of the recent antics of Rod Blagojevich, William "Cold Cash" Jefferson, Charlie Rangel and other luminaries, what are liberals saying about the culture of corruption now?
   
2. Liberals do not seem to be bothered by Obama's associations with the likes of Tony Rezko, Rod Bagojevich, William Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, and Rhashid Khalidi. Why not?
   
3. Most Americans (70% of Republicans, 62% of independents and 55% of Democrats) oppose the auto industry bailout plan, yet Democrats in Congress are poised to pass a bailout bill anyway. Why?
   
4. How high will the price of gasoline have to go before you are ready to support drilling in ANWR?
   
5. What kind of economy would be best for America? A. Socialist? B. Communist? C. Fascist? D. Capitalist?
   
6. Obama has stated that he is in favor of tax increases (for reasons of "fairness") even when they result in DECREASES in revenue for the government. Do you support Obama's thinking on this issue?
   
7. Obama has outlined a intentionally vague health care agenda. His health care czar, Tom Daschle wants to push a bare-bones health care bill through congress as soon as possible after Obama is elected. A Federal Health Board would be charged with establishing the system's framework and filling in most of the details. This independent board would be insulated from political pressure. Does this in any way strike you as undemocratic?
   
8. Liberals have consistently opposed voter identification laws aimed at reducing voter fraud. Why?
   
9. Many Americans (particularly minorities) say that their children are trapped in failing schools. Nationwide, 52 percent of parents, and 59 percent of public school parents, support school choice. 87 percent of black parents aged 26-35 and 66.4 percent of blacks aged 18-25 support vouchers. Liberals consistently oppose school choice. Why?
   
10. Obama was asked, "At what point does a baby get human rights?" His response: "...answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade." Based on his leadership in opposition to the Illinois Born Alive Infants Protection Act, Obama has demonstrated that he believes that a baby gets human rights at an unspecified time AFTER he or she is born. My question to liberals: is infanticide acceptable?
    
11. Is there anything Obama could do to lose your support? If so, what?

Here is the reason that I have such little faith in the "rational" liberal mind. Yesterday, I participated in a thread on bookerrising.net with 4 or 5 extremely intelligent liberals and 2 other conservatives(of course they were intelligent-- they're conservatives, duh) . The comments by the cons were thorough and substantive. The responses of the libs while one or two honestly engaged in fair exchange of ideas and offered true insight most of the comments were witty but nasty, rude, cutting and the final comment was crude. So I have little faith that anyone who describes themselves as a liberal thinker is capable of communicating without launching a full on verbal assault-- there must be gunpowder in the kool-aid.

The Black Sphere on The Bush Legacy II

My compatriot Kevin Jackson at the Black Sphere posted an amazing article on his blog today. I mentioned to a friend just yesterday that I thought that perhaps Bush was not given his just desserts for his work in Africa and that I was going to start compiling research in this area because she insisted that I give her proof positive that this assertion is factual. But Kevin has done the hard work for me and I squealed in delight this morning as I read this you will find my commentary written in Scarlet:

"The mainstream media will never tell you this, and I was shocked to hear Fox News today make a short reference to what you are about to read.

So I am asked often by Liberals, "What good has George Bush accomplished? I began this series with the blog Terrorism…Post Election, regarding the fact that since 9/11 there have been no terrorist attacks on American soil. The second part of a multi-part series, i.e. this blog will tell you yet another thing that Bush has done right, with focus on Bush's policies for Africa.

You see, many people are quick to say that the US shouldn't be fighting wars in Afghanistan or Iraq. They are obvious mediabots, spewing nothing but 'talking points'. Because when pressed, all they say is we are spending $10B a month in Iraq, blah blah blah, droning on like Stepford Wives. Forget the fact that the war received bi-partisan support, and was not just George W Bush's Excellent Adventure. I chalk this up to a combination of Liberal ignorance, combined with heavy media hypnosis. But what interests me more is the Black perspective on this.
Blacks are much more interested in domestic affairs for the most part, as opposed to Jews for example who base many of their decisions on how Israel will be treated. But today Blacks act as if they have suddenly become experts in world affairs, yet there is little to no discussion of Africa…the Motherland? Perhaps like Obama, Blacks have thrown Africa under the bus? (Please Kevin Don't Hurt them...lol)

Because if Blacks and other Liberals did look at Bush's policies in Africa, one major policy initiative being PEPFAR, "The President's Emergency Plan For Aids Relief", they could come to but one conclusion. Bush has done more for Africa, than any other US president in history.

Conversely, Clinton, the real first Black president had one of the worst policies in Africa. He actually made Jesse Jackson ambassador to Africa, which was a dismal failure. Recall this assignment was given to Jackson during "The Blue Dress" incident, so Slick was a bit distracted. The 300,000 African deaths for which the Clinton/Jackson team was responsible rates pretty low, when you are dealing the larger issue of "getting rid of a protein-stained dress?" Needless to say, Blacks love of Clinton and disdain for Bush definitely qualifies for a submission to Bizarro World. (CBW, co-signs that)

The media is quick to showcase Darfur, Zimbabwe, the Sudan, or Somalia, when mentioning the Bush administration. In other words, pick your African country failure, then blame Bush, as if he himself is there creating civil wars or captaining Somali hijackers' vessels. But like most Liberals, even when it's proven that a Conservative has done the right thing, they can't give credit without an 'escape clause'. (That's because Liberals are emotionally disturbed)

Said Melvin Foote, president and CEO of Constituency for Africa, a coalition of groups that work to improve conditions on the continent:

"The Bush administration has broadened and deepened U.S. policy towards Africa...I don't know if it got involved for all the right reasons, but once it got involved it realized this was a good thing to do."

What Foote is referring to is the Bush administration's efforts to stabilize Africa's fledgling democracies and combat its daunting health problems, specifically HIV/AIDS and malaria. Since 2003, the Bush administration has provided funding to increase the number of Africans receiving anti-retroviral drugs from 50,000 to 1.4 million, according to Jendayi Frazer, the assistant secretary of the Bureau of African Affairs. The actual number now exceeds 2M. (Kudos W.)

And for you pro-life Conservatives that felt as though Bush has done nothing for the cause, here's a morsel for you:

"It's probably true that the Bush administration has directed more resources to the African AIDS problem than did the Clinton administration," said Nicole Lee in a grudging offer of support. But Bush's African AIDS program has been "a double-edge sword," said Lee, executive director of TransAfrica Forum, a Washington-based advocacy organization for Caribbean and African policy. It has been undermined, she said, by the "Gag Rule," a Bush administration policy that forbids foreign non-governmental organizations from receiving U.S financial support if they offer abortion or abortion counseling."

What Ms. Lee is saying is that Bush tied strings to this money. The strings were that the US would not fund the programs, if the funding was used to promote abortion throughout the world. Yes, Conservatives, abortion is not just a US issue. You should note that one of Obama's first acts as president will be to rescind this order.

The other thing you should note about Ms. Lee's comment is how she casually mentions that Bush spent more money than Clinton in Africa. It was not that Bush just outspent Clinton, but that Bush's policies were effective in Africa, and not just a needed distraction...like bombing an African aspirin factory.

So how has The Bush Doctrine that has been so disparaged by the mainstream media benefitted Africa? Let's look at the statistics.

In 1989, there were only three countries in sub-Saharan Africa that were considered democracies by the international measures of democracy: Botswana, Mauritius, and Senegal. Today there are over twenty. These are measured by Freedom House and several other independent groups.

Ask any Liberal knowledgeable about this topic [if you can even find one], and they will quietly admit that Bush's Africa policies are an overwhelming success. Why doesn't the media report this?

The media can't have African-Americans rallying behind Bush or the Republican party in any way. So just like the Liberals have swept the racist policies of Democrats under the rug, and they are doing the same with the phenomenal work done by the Bush administration in Africa. Keep those "slaves" stupid and hungry. (Boy, you are preaching now!!!)

Most of the world has done nothing but take from Africa, a continent teeming in natural resources. However unlike most of the world, the US, specifically George Bush has shown his compassion for helping Africa, taking nothing. The Liberal hypocrites in America with all their causes, just aren't that interested in telling the truth about the Bush policies in Africa. There's just not enough money in it."(Source) (Kevin & I are screaming throughout the blogsphere-- WAKE UP PEOPLE)

Kevin doesn't have any cut cards he just gives you the unadulterated truth straight up without any chasers and I so appreciated this sort of direct, honest, thoughtful commentary and analysis in this time because you surely can't find it in MSM.

The Religious Right Are We Really The Problem?

Randall Hoven, a self-described libertarian posted an article entitled A Libertarian Defense of Social Conservatism on the American Thinker blog this morning. He takes exception with those who blame right wing conservatives for the loss of this election and who maintain the the GOP should dump the social conservative if they hope to win again. Being a uber-right wing social conservative myself I appreciate Mr. Hoven's support but because of the super-godless, righteousness hating place that America is increasingly becoming I think that critics are right. If you are a believer and follower of Christ most do not consider that you are a rational thinker. Therefore our platforms will continue to be poo-pooed in elections to come because we are considered crazy fundamentalist.

Mr Hoven however does not have a problem with the influence that the religious right has on the the GOP because he is a "libertarian" not a liberal and he clearly understands who the true liberty killers are as he writes:

"The most obvious point to me is that it is the do-gooding liberals who are telling us all what we can and can't do. The religious right usually just wants to be left alone, either to home school, pray in public or not get their children vaccinated with who-knows-what. Inasmuch as the "religious right" wants some things outlawed, they have failed miserably for at least the last 50 years. Abortion, sodomy, and pornography are now all Constitutional rights. However, praying in public school is outlawed, based on that same Constitution."

He goes on to discuss what we are forced to do thanks to democratic liberals

"Just think for a moment about the things you are actually forced to do or are prevented from doing. Seat belts. Motorcycle helmets. Bicycle helmets. Smoking. Gun purchase and ownership restrictions. Mandatory vaccines for your children. Car emissions inspections. Campaign ad and contribution restrictions. Saying a prayer at a public school graduation or football game. Trash separation and recycling. Keeping the money you earned. Gas tax. Telephone tax. Income tax. FICA withholding. Fill in this form. Provide ID.
For the most part, the list just cited is post-1960. Neither Pat Robertson nor James Dobson ever forced any of that on us. How powerful is "social conservatism"?
I can get pornography right at my keyboard, or drive a mile and get all the sex toys I can fit into my car. I can walk to the nearest casino to gamble (but can no longer smoke there). I do need to travel to Nevada for a legal prostitute. If my teenage daughters had wanted abortions, they could have had them free and without even notifying me. (However, had they taken Advil to school, we'd all be in trouble.) (emphasis added)

Abortion
Let's talk about the unavoidable issue: abortion. Who made it a federal issue? The ACLU and then the Supreme Court. Before 1973 it was left to the states; some allowed it, some didn't. Different states could adopt different criteria. Some might allow it under all circumstances. Some other none. Some at 12 or 20 weeks. Some might define "health" of the mother in different terms.
But all that flexibility was halted with Roe v Wade. Since 1973 abortion has been a Constitutional right. Do you know where that right is found in the Constitution? In these words of the 14th Amendment: "[No state shall] deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." Those words, according to our finest Constitutional scholars, mean it's OK to shove scissors through the skull of a baby and suction its brains out, as long as that skull has not yet left the birth canal. I'm sure you see that in those words of the 14th Amendment. Look hard, into the penumbras and emanations - it might take a little imagination.
Regardless of what you think about abortion, to find it in the 14th Amendment is an act of ink-blot reasoning. It might almost be OK, if it meant the court said we have true sovereignty over our own bodies. But the court explicitly said otherwise.
The privacy right involved, therefore, cannot be said to be absolute. In fact, it is not clear to us that the claim asserted by some amici that one has an unlimited right to do with one's body as one pleases bears a close relationship to the right of privacy previously articulated in the Court's decisions. The Court has refused to recognize an unlimited right of this kind in the past... We, therefore, conclude that the right of personal privacy includes the abortion decision, but that this right is not unqualified...
So you do not have the right to do with your body as you please. Neither women nor men own their own bodies. That's what Roe v Wade said. In short, the decision was not "pro-choice". It was pro-abortion, pure and simple. That is the only choice it protected.
If taking abortion out of the hands of the federal government and putting it back into hands of the states, where it is legislated per each state's popular sentiment, let it be. I can stand that kind of "social conservatism." It sounds like federalism and democracy to me.
Guns
Now let's talk about guns. Why is that a "social" issue? We're talking about the Bill of Rights here. You know, where we find the freedom of speech, freedom of the press, religious freedom, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures, no cruel and unusual punishments or excessive bails, etc. The right to keep and bears arms is No. 2 of 10. This is a right the "religious right" wants to keep, not take away. If you keep your gun in your bedroom, it is the religious right that wants the government to stay out of your bedroom. Who is treading on whose rights here?
Gay Marriage
I am not dead set against gay marriage. I'm mildly against it, but if it comes to an honest vote in my state and passes, I can live with that. But so far, every single time the issue has gone to a popular vote, the people voted it down. The only reason it is legal in two states right now is because of the courts in those states; a mere handful of robed Merlins made the decisions.
I also think it a bit risky to redefine such a fundamental institution that has been defined as between one man and one or more women in every successful civilization I know about, for the last 6,000 years or so. How about we use federalism and the states as laboratories before we dive head-first into opaque water on this one?
God
...something is creepy about a government that outlaws Nativity scenes at City Hall, but subsidizes Piss Christ. That tries to disband the Boy Scouts but promotes gay marriage. That disallows even voluntary, student-led prayer at public school, but teaches children how to put on condoms.
What is so funny about Bill Maher's Religulous? What is so bad about Sarah Palin hoping to do God's will or praying for His guidance?
I am not religious myself, but I kind of like the idea that whoever makes and enforces our laws thinks that some invisible being knows his every move and will judge him accordingly in eternity. I would not be offended if the being he prays to is the one who gave the Sermon on the Mount.
I have yet to see the absence of religious devotion replaced with true scientific rationalism. Instead, I see it replaced with Environmentalism, Marxism, New Age "spiritualism" or any of a host of other pseudo-religions. On the other hand, Isaac Newton, for my money the greatest scientist ever and one of our more rational thinkers, wrote way more about the Bible and God than he ever did about calculus, mechanics and optics combined. There is nothing inconsistent between science and religion or reason.
By the way, I know enough about rationalism to know this: anyone who thinks he practices it rigorously has no idea what he's talking about. Bertrand Russell and Alfred North Whitehead are famous for taking a thousand pages to prove, with rigorous logic, that one and one are two (I'll trust them on that). How can anyone with an ounce of humility, or real sense, think he knows the "rational" method of improving the lot of mankind? Lenin and Mao thought they knew, as they sent tens of millions to their graves in the effort.
Mythical Creatures
I'm still searching for the mythical creature that is the "financially conservative, socially liberal" politician. In virtually every case, the pro-abortion or pro-gay marriage politician is the first to vote against a tax cut, the first to vote for more spending and quick to compromise principles on any issue there is.
Using the National Journal's ratings of Senators in 2007 , the correlation coefficient between "economic" scores and "social" scores is 90%. That means they almost always go together; financial conservatives are social conservatives and vice versa. Every Senator scoring above 60 in economic issues, scored above 50 in social ones. Every Senator scoring below 40 in economic issues, scored below 50 in social ones. If there is such an animal as a "financial conservative, social liberal", it does not exist in the US Senate. (emphasis added)

He opines that liberals should slow down and not try to change everything about our culture and society all at once. He asserts that the liberal democrats -- you know, Barack's posse really have a communist mentality as he quotes Karl Marx in the communist manifesto:

"It was communism that tried to change everything all at once. Karl Marx described the approach in the Communist Manifesto.
"Abolition of private property. ... Abolition of the family! ... Communism abolishes eternal truths, it abolishes all religion, and all morality ... this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads ... In short, the Communists everywhere support every revolutionary movement against the existing social and political order of things." (emphasis added)

Hmm, Hope & Change....Change we can believe in....Do you see a correlation here?

He concludes with:

"When the day comes that the only thing between me and liberty are some Bible-quoting know-it-alls, I'll reconsider. But right now, there are a lot of things between me and liberty, and the "religious right" is not one of them. In fact, I see them voting for more liberty, not less. If the Republican party ever decides it really wants to be the party of liberty, rather than the slower-road-to-socialism party, I'll gladly join the religious right there."

So again my tiny little voice in the wilderness is screaming.....WAKE UP!!!!!!!!!!!

Best Post I've Read This Week From TSF Protests!

This blogger @ http://tsfprotests.blogspot.com wrote the following:

"Liberals, White and Black, Are RacistsIs that a radical statement? You bet it is. But it is true. Liberals think the Black community is stupid. Liberals think the Black community is animalistic. Are these radical statements? Listen to the liberal commentators on TV set us up for a racial war if Obama loses. White and black liberal commentators have been saying all hell will break loose if he loses. Apparently, Blacks must have their way or they will riot according to these so called friends.Frankly, I find this notion appalling. But Blacks by and large do vote monolithic. Generally most Blacks, and certainly this election in particular, vote exclusively for the Democrat Party. I find this peculiar, since the Democrats have done everything in their power to keep the Black people in a powerless position. They love to give out freebies at election time, in order to buy votes, but never help their real circumstances. The capitalist economy is what has helped Blacks improve their lot in this life just as it has helped everyone else. But they keep falling for the lies of the same people that think, if they don't get their candidate elected they will act like a bunch of animals. Like they say, with friends like these Democrats, you don't need enemies. American citizens, of any color, are not as stupid as liberals suppose. -They know what Marxism is when they hear it. And they know that most Americans are not Marxist, and thoroughly reject that system of government. Obama is a Marxist to the core. If he loses, it will be because most Americans have caught on to his very specific language that only a Marxist could love. Americans love the word FREEDOM. We don't want to give it up for government imposed new 'rights'. We know the difference between products and rights. We have the right to pursue happiness. That would include, food, shelter, clothing, college tuition, health care. If these are the things that make us happy, then we'll pursue them...we'll get a job and get to work. They are not rights. They are products of happiness to pursue or not. Obama speaks the language of Marxism by promising them to one and all. But the price is too high. We will have freedom taken from us and regret it too late. -Or maybe Americans don't like the fact that Obama loves those that hate America. Like William Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, and Father Michael Pfleger. These people hate the American system and the American people. No one will deny that capitalism has problems. Every system does, because we are all sinners. But these men all think they will bring in a utopia and destroy the mean whites that prevent them. Utopia will come in the resurrection of the dead when Jesus Christ returns and not before. Until then we have to deal with each other as sinners. It would help if these radical types saw themselves as sinners instead of being so far above the rest of us hoi polloi. But they don't, and they have sought the destruction of America, and Obama is in league with them. They are a group of people that also think the average Black person is stupid, so easily duped. Anti-Americans are steeped in class envy and think it normal to manipulate the people. They love pitting groups against each other. Race baiting is ugly, whether it comes from Whites or Blacks. Obama is the only one that kept bringing up race, not John McCain or his campaign.-Or maybe Americans are not that fond of infanticide. Obama has voted for infanticide. What a guy! We are not fond of killing over a million of our citizens a year either. And a disproportionate number of those abortions are Black babies. Are the liberals still trying to create a White race? Looks that way. They put a lot of effort in to getting abortions for lower class Black women. Why Black women fall for this effort at extermination is beyond me. But Obama is all for it. And yet these same Blacks despise the Republicans. But the Republicans don't want to kill them.There is no way racism would be discussed at all with someone of the caliber of Colin Powell or Walter Williams or Robert L. Woodson or a host of other great Black leaders. Because they are respectable Americans citizens. But Obama is a dyed in the wool Marxist. America is not. Only the wealthy, whiney, left is sold to Marxism. Most of America is considered fly over territory to the elitist left. A little dumb, a little stupid. Which would explain all of that Jesus stuff. What else do we have. Oh sure a little Jim Beam, a few extra donuts and GLORY! "Let's mosey on down to Bible Study. And don't forget the shotgun, Ma. We might meet some varmints along the way and git some fixins for Sunday dinner." See we're too poor, dumb and clingy to vote for a black man. If we were smart and godless, naturally we would vote for him. So of course we must be racist for not voting for him.Does anyone really believe this when the obvious is staring us in the face? Liberalism today is racist and Marxist. And so is Obama." (emphasis added by cbw)

My Response: Yes and Amen. We need to wake up.

Why Would Any Self-Respecting Black Person Vote for the McCain/ Palin Ticket? Here's Why...

Well, I have written about this in some form or another 20 times in this month alone, but I think my friend Zo (well, I don't know him personally but if I did he'd be my friend) articulates this masterfully so please watch. It's a bit lengthy but thoroughly entertaining and provocative(at least listen to the 1st 3 mins):



What? I told you I was his new fangirl!

The "O" Team....

A bit of comic relief from our friend at http://www.thezonation.blogspot.com. I know it's a little silly but so am I. Besides this is such a creative presentation of the lies we are fed by the Dem's and mainstream media.

Ladies and gentleman may I present -- "The O Team".....

If you don't get it; you just don't get it. I'm done posting on this topic for a while. I may have purged it from my system as long as I stop engaging in debates with devotees of the democratic party.

"Liberal Democrats are Racist"

I found this clip on Youtube and after some research and in the interest of full disclosure, I regret to inform you the artist who laid the track is regrettably not a "Hip-Hop" Republican and was paid a pitifully small amount to make this recording.

But, none the less, there is much truth in these lyrics which I have included in this post. Here goes:



Chorus:
90% of all blacks vote Democrat - why? Most of us say we won't vote Republican before that day - we'll die. By telling them we're theirs to keep - not right.
We're allowing them to own us cheap - Dem light.
What you say, what you say? Liberal Democrats are racist- what you say, what you say? Liberal Democrats are racist- what you say, what you say? Liberal Democrats are racist- what you say, what you say? Liberal Democrats are racist.

VERSE 1:
With their laws and their lies, the re-enslave us.Living in the inner city and riding the bus is the Liberal Democrat's vision for us, a Liberal party you can't trust Our Black Founding Fathers played a part too, white's gave them guns to free me and you We won and took our guns, 200 years pass, they've got gun control again on our ass, With violent criminals and cops who can't defend, gotta protect our people, with gun control, freedom ends.Oppose school vouchers to strengthen their hold, this left wing agenda leaves us out in the cold

VERSE 2:
Liberal Democrats and teachers bound at the hip, this liberal control of education makes our minds sick. School vouchers will give us a choice and let us decide on how to educate our kids where the opportunity lies. They oppose school vouchers to ensure their own power, they fear educated blacks who will be smarter by the hour. Hillary and Bill said public schools are good enough for us but sent Chelsea to private school so she could be her best. Politicians and hypocrites they must be, social elitists we've exposed them, and now we all see Liberal Democrats step aside and let us be great, let us decide our own fate.

VERSE 3:
Liberal Democrat Senator Robert Byrd, former Klansman this has got to be heard with crocodile tears he says he's sorry, it's just another lie, it's just another story. They want us to believe that Byrd is the first, but we know better, FDR was the worst. He appointed a Klansman to the US Supreme Court Bench, another hooded Democrat- can't stand the stench!!!Southern Democrats bonded with the Klan cuz for the black man, they had their own plan. The truth that's got me thinkin and it's gotten all freakin, the Republican who freed us was Abraham Lincoln. Liberal Democrats, who need our vote, listen up, we've voiced our opinion but that's not enough.You're in Kosovo and not Rwanda or Sudan, your taxes hold back the successful black man. Stop trapping us in by preventing Urban Sprawl, had enough of your control had enough of you all. More cops and cameras you say are good, but it only takes away more freedom from the hood. You can't re-enslave us, we are too strong, we know what you're doing, and we know that it's wrong. Stop stealing our rights and stop interfering, this is our last warning, don't be hard of hearing.