Tolerance, Killing, Judicial Stupidity & Brotherly Love

G.K. Chesterton once said, "Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions."  I think my blog has a new motto.

Once again I've come to the point that I've had enough and I need to blow off some steam here on my little corner of the internet.  It seems that's how it goes...I see and hear and read things over time until the point that I've just had it, and I'm either going to go batshit crazy, resign myself to the idea that America is doomed, or furiously attack my keyboard.

Aren't you glad I usually choose option "C"?

Before I start ranting, I'm going to take a minute to shamelessly plug the latest in a series of books by one of my favorite authors, Vince Flynn.  Kill Shot was released today and is a prequel to all but one of the other books in the series of thrillers featuring Mitch Rapp, the country's most lethal terrorist hunter.  In fact, he is SO bad-ass that while the bogeyman checks under his bed for Chuck Norris, Chuck Norris checks under his bed for Mitch Rapp. For readers that were fans of the Fox series "24", Vince Flynn's books are right up your alley.  I can't wait to start reading it on my NOOK tonight.  (Yeah, another shameless plug.)

OK, back to business. The tipping point for me this afternoon was learning that the Obama administration has appointed an official advocate for illegal aliens.  Evidently, this person will be the point of contact for "concerns, questions, recommendations or other issues" that illegals or their buddies (community organizers) here in the United States wish to express.  This position reports up through U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which is part of the Department of Homeland Security.

That's right, folks.  The Department of Homeland Security has a sympathetic ear for criminals that breach the security of our homeland by crossing our borders illegally.

Seriously?  Why don't we just give them a big fat wad of cash and a pamphlet showing how to obtain every taxpayer-funded benefit available to them as we welcome them across the border?

It's not enough that the Obama administration has ordered DHS and ICE to stop deporting illegals unless they have some ridiculously heinous track record of violent crime.  Now, our tax dollars are being used to pay the salary of some schmuck that is an official advocate for foreign criminals on American soil. That just pisses me off.  What's next...a free ticket to America and an advocate for terrorists at Guantanamo?

We have GOT to get rid of this pinhead in the Oval Office come November.  Then, we need to get rid of every other idiot politician sympathetic to illegal alien lawbreaking scum.

Next, from the Hate America wing of the Judicial Branch of the Federal Government...we have Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a liberal activist justice on the United States Supreme Court, telling a crowd of Egyptians that they shouldn't use the U.S. Constitution as a model as they work towards forming a new government.  Rather, she says, they should have a look at the constitution of South Africa...or basically any other nation formed after WWII.

Only mildly offensive to most Americans, on its surface.  But the kicker is her reasoning.  Essentially, she bemoans our founding document because it is so old, behind the times, and inflexible.  While she didn't say it, she undoubtedly believes - as does the New York Times - that the Constitution should guarantee the right to food, health care, and education.

Now folks, the Supreme Court is the highest authority in the land, responsible for determining whether laws passed by legislative machinery at all levels of government throughout the country are, in fact, Constitutional.  The justices are supposed to be experts on the subject of the Constitution, which you cannot be without also having read the Federalist Papers.  These papers are a collection of letters and notes written by the founding fathers as they were going through the process of drafting our Constitution.

Many people believe the founding fathers - Jefferson in particular - were adamant that the Constitution was not intended to be subject to evolving interpretation.  There was debate and disagreement among them, but in the end that is why parts of the Constitution were left vague and a mechanism for its amendment exists.  It is only considered "inflexible" and "behind the times" by those who oppose it's principles - or advocate ideas that would never pass muster with We the People.

Hell, even Obama acknowledges it.  This weekend, he said, "Our founders designed a system that makes it more difficult to bring about change than I would like sometimes."  For once, Obama said something smart that I agree with.  The Constitution was written that way and made hard to change by design.

Justice Ginsburg would do well to appear less foolish while representing the United States abroad.

Moving right along...this from the Department of It's Only Racist if You're White...the City of Brotherly Love has been anything but over the past few months.  One of the latest stories about the violence in Philadelphia involves a group of ten black teenagers who swarmed a taxi stopped at a red light and brutally beat the white driver and white passenger.

Seems that the thugs won't be facing "hate crime" charges.  Unfortunately, I have NO doubt in my mind that if the races were reversed in this story, it would be the hate crime of the century, complete with marches by community organizers, Black Panthers, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and all the other race hustlers we hear about in the news these days.

We'd hear Obama talk about how the taxi driver "stupidly" drove into the wrong neighborhood, and then we'd never hear from those ten racist white thugs until they were up for parole in twenty years.

I guess you have to be a "brotha" for it to be the City of Brotherly Love.

Voter ID: Why do Democrats Resist?

Today I got an email from the State Representative, Rafael Anchia (D-Dallas) that represented the district where I used to live.  It was a pretty simple email, notifying "Constituents and "Friends of District 103" that the Democrat party needed something from them.

I haven't lived in his district for a couple of years, and this is the first email I can recall getting from him since I moved.  Kind of like those "friends" you never hear from unless they want something.

Anyway, below is the text of his email, the subject of which was simply "Texas Voter ID Lawsuit":

Dear Constituents and Friends of District 103:

The Texas House Democratic Campaign Committee is seeking voters willing to be named as intervenors in the voter ID lawsuit who fit the following criteria:

1. The voter is Hispanic, African American or Asian (i.e. groups protected under the Voting Rights Act);

2. The voter does not have any of the forms of ID that would be available under the voter ID bill. 

The types of ID that will be necessary if the voter ID bill is approved are:

• Driver’s license, election identification certificate, personal identification card, or concealed handgun license issued by the Texas Department of Public Safety;
• United States Military identification card containing the person’s photograph;
• United States citizenship certificate containing the person’s photograph; or
• United States passport.
• With the exception of the U.S. citizenship certificate, the identification must be current or have expired no more than 60 days before being presented for voter qualification at the polling place.

3. The voter would have trouble obtaining the free Election Identification Certificate for some reason (doesn't have necessary documents, too far to travel, etc.);

4. The voter is willing to testify to that effect (their testimony would likely be taken in the town where they live, not DC)

If you know of any individuals who meet the above-referenced criteria, please contact Cliff Walker, Executive Director, of the Texas House Democratic Campaign Committee at (512) 473-2004 or at cliff@texashdcc.com.  Thank you for your time on this important issue.

Sincerely,

Rafael Anchia

State Representative

District 103

It's not hard to figure out which part of this letter I was reading that first pissed me off.

And, somehow I was not up to speed on the issue of voter ID in Texas, so I had to do some homework to get caught up.

Last year, the Texas Legislature passed a bill requiring that voters show an acceptable form of government-issued identification in order to cast a vote at a polling place in the Lone Star State.

However, the bill cannot be enacted without approval known as "pre-clearance" from the federal government's Department of Injustice.  You see, about 100 years ago, Texas and various other states had some problems with voter discrimination.  So the feds - by way of the Voting Rights Act - insist on reviewing and providing final approval of anything we and these other states do that would have any impact to elections.

Six months later the Department of Injustice still has Texas' bill on its desk, in no hurry to provide the required approvals despite the bill specifically indicating that it was to be enacted in time for the Texas primaries.  It's no secret that the feds don't like Texas and Texas doesn't like the feds, so the delay isn't much of a surprise.

After having run out of patience, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott filed a lawsuit against the federal government a few days ago to light a fire under the feds' asses so the bill would be approved.  And, based on this email from Rep. Anchia, opponents of the voter ID bill are gearing up for a fight.


Democrats whine that the voter ID requirement would be de facto discrimination against a large part of their voter base - minorities - because they are disproportionately poor and less likely to have the required identification than other groups, while Republicans (and other rational, intelligent people) know that a voter ID requirement is necessary to minimize voter fraud.


State Rep. Dawanna Dukes (D-Austin), one of Anchia's Democrat buddies, was eager to display her stupidity for all to see when she smugly declared that the burden is on the state of Texas to prove that requiring ID to vote isn't discriminatory.  Apparently she is indeed a minority, because the majority of people know you can't prove a negative.


Further, the United States Supreme Court has recently dismissed the Democrats' weak argument against voter ID laws in Crawford v. Marion County Election Bd., 07-21 (2008), saying, "The inconvenience of making a trip to the [Bureau of Motor Vehicles], gathering the required documents, and posing for a photograph surely does not qualify as a substantial burden on the right to vote, or even represent a significant increase over the usual burdens of voting.".  (It's even easier than that here in Texas).  


But let's pretend for a second that there is something to the Dems' argument that requiring ID creates an undue burden on the poor.  Why does Anchia's Democrat party only want to hear from minorities as stated in criteria #1 in his letter above?  Can someone please explain to me how OTC's (Other Than Caucasians) are somehow MORE burdened than an equally poor Caucasian person would be?  Is it somehow MORE difficult for OTC's to obtain identification than it is for Caucasians?


Of course not.


So then, why IS it that Democrats fight so hard against voter ID laws every time a state proposes one?


The only plausible explanation is that they depend heavily on dead people, illegal aliens, and people that don't exist (voter fraud) to have any chance at winning elections.

Singing, Dancing, Waste, Racism, & Censorship

Happy Hump Day!

Today begins season 11 of American Idol, the flagship of those reality shows that crush the dreams of millions across the country.  I hoped that American Idol would fade mercifully into the sunset after the its creator left to start a copycat reality show; alas, it refuses to die and we are stuck with yet another singing and/or dancing show polluting the airwaves during prime time television.  Now I'm starting to wonder where the saturation point is.  We have American Idol, X Factor, Dancing With The Stars, So You Think You Can Dance, America's Got Talent, etc. etc. etc.

I suppose, however, that reality shows such as these are good for demonstrating to young people that, in real life, everybody doesn't get a trophy just for participating.  On the other hand, I fail to understand the twisted allure of watching adult role models open fire on the esteem of naive, idealistic young people...or the fanatical worshiping of these shows by their fans.  If only they demonstrated the same passion and interest toward what's going on around them in America, our country might be in better shape.

Meanwhile, from the Department of Federal Waste and Imprudence, it seems that the federal government deemed it worthy to spend $1.6 million in taxpayer dollars from a transportation fund in order to restore hundreds of Chicano "murals" from the 1970's that were painted onto freeway underpasses in California.  These murals began as simple graffiti borne of "rage" from Hispanics that believe half of the United States should be taken by force and made a part of Aztlan, a fictitious nation that is to be inhabited exclusively by Mexicans.  Some of this graffiti that our tax dollars are being used to restore include glorifying murderous and oppressive asshats like Che' Guevara and Fidel Castro.

Evidently, the funds earmarked for this restoration project were approved in 2002; however, the focus on Aztlan - one pillar of the Mexican supremacy doctrine - was a concern for our government.  But the Obama administration, cozy with the overtly racist group La Raza (The Race) and willfully ignorant of the fact racism  actually IS perpetuated by people that aren't white, released the funds and work has begun to restore these murals.

I marvel at how racism is allowed - and encouraged - to flourish among minority groups, while Caucasians are taught to be ashamed and guilty in perpetuity because of our ancestors' actions.  In order to be politically correct, it seems one must acknowledge that racism is just a white thang...and it warms my heart knowing my tax dollars are paying to spread the word.

Moving on...there have been two bills introduced in Congress recently, informally known as SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) and PIPA (Protect IP Act).  The idea behind the legislation is fighting piracy of songs, videos, and other artistic works that one would normally need to pay for before downloading.  These bills were poorly written to say the least, and if they became law they would effectively become legal justification for subjective censorship.  Websites with even a crumb of questionable content would get shut down immediately, and questions would be asked later.  Guilty until proven innocent.  

As a result of these bills, many internet content providers have chosen to black out their websites today as a form of protest against the proposed legislation.  If you were to try using Wikipedia today, for instance, you'd be out of luck.  Other sites, such as Craigslist, have added front pages drawing attention to the issue and asking surfers to take action by writing or calling their congressional representatives urging them to vote "no" on these bills.  I'm glad that they're using their prominent position in society to protest this idiocy, because we must be extremely careful proposing anything that could come anywhere close to censorship.  We have already lost freedoms and liberties in the name of security with the Patriot Act and similar legislation, and the same encroachment and oppression simply cannot reoccur when it comes to our free speech rights.

As a side note, these artists and owners of the material in question have been pushing for something like this because they don't get paid when their works are copied and shared freely (and illegally).  I find it ironic and slightly hilarious that many of these artists are leftists, and they would just as soon wipe their asses with exact same capitalist system they are trying to exploit.

As another side note, I'm pretty disgusted by the embarrassingly poor job that our legislators are doing in writing bills over the past few years.  There's little doubt in my mind that some of it is by design, but when reading the SOPA and PIPA bills, they reek of their authors' incompetence.  Could it be that the special interests (RIAA, MPAA, etc.) wrote the bills on behalf of the legislators?  The concept is not so far fetched; I'm certain that it's happened before...but the politicians that put their names on this stuff really need to do a better job editing the bills before they're published for everyone to see.

Enjoy your Wednesday!

Politics and Post-Racial Racism

Racism is alive and well in the United States of America.

While some in the media breathlessly declared in 2008 that a post-racial utopia was ushered in with the election of Barack Obama, such declarations were hardly based on reality.  Voter turnout rates of young blacks increased 8.7% over 2004 - the largest jump ever - to 58.2% in 2008, and a full 95% - 95%! - of all blacks voted for Obama.  It's clear that race was a major factor - if not the only factor - in how blacks voted.

That, my friends, is racism.  Racism practiced by some who were once its victims.

Meanwhile here in Texas, The 2010 census showed a significant increase in Texas' population, meaning that Texas is due four additional seats in the U.S. House of Representatives.  The Texas legislature drew up new congressional districts but Democrats and their race-hustler allies immediately began screeching that the new districts didn't properly represent Latinos, who made up the lion's share of Texas' population growth. The issue is currently before the Supreme Court.

More racism and bigotry.  Only racists and bigots care more about the color of their representative's skin than what that representative might actually do.

With blacks eager to see a brotha elected to the highest office in the land for the first time, coupled with leftist fraud machines like ACORN working hard to get the Democrat candidate elected, it's not hard to imagine the intense effort that was expended to get out the Latino vote ahead of the 2008 elections.  Minorities generally vote Democrat for some reason and everybody knows it.  Sure enough, some 67% of Latinos voted for Obama in the general election.

Yep, more blind focus on race.

While Obama never made much of an effort to hide his racism while proudly recounting his time as a parishioner at a church with a hate-filled racist pastor for 20 years, and  immediately jumping to the conclusion that a white police officer "acted stupidly" when arresting a suspected home invader who was black and turned out to be a college professor, it's unacceptable that he use the proverbial soapbox belonging to the president of the United States to spread his racist ignorance like he did at a fundraising dinner last night:

Everything we fought for during the last election is at stake in this election. The very core of what this country stands for is on the line — the basic promise that no matter what you look like, no matter where you come from, this is a place where you could make it if you try.  The notion that we’re all in this together, that we look out for one another — that’s at stake in this election.  Don’t take my word for it.  Watch some of these debates that have been going on up in New Hampshire.

He is inferring that if a Republican wins the White House, the new president will act to minimize opportunities for minorities.  That is intellectually dishonest and frankly, it's appalling to see our president - the leader of the greatest country in the world - stoop so low.  Utterly despicable.  But then again, that's what racists do...they play the race card when have run out of compelling arguments on the actual subject at hand, like Obama has.  He has been in office for nearly four years, and has amassed an impressive, steaming pile of failures to show for it.  Desperate, one of the last weapons he has in his arsenal of failure is racism, hoping that it will somehow help him win re-election.

There's a fair chance it will work.  If it does, we will have post-racial racism to thank for a post-American America.

Fundamental transformation?  Check.

Meet the New Year, Same as the Old Year

Happy New Year!  I hope this post finds you in good spirits and ready to tackle all of the challenges that 2012 is sure to bring, not the least of which is getting back to normal life after a couple of holiday weeks and time off.

A quick check of the headlines this morning seems to indicate that 2012 isn't going to be much different than 2011.  Stupidity, brain damage, bad policy, and general incompetence continues to be prevalent throughout our society.

In the aftermath of a park ranger being shot by a mental defective, a whiny story laments the passing of a law two years ago that allows people to carry guns in national parks.

So, who thinks this guy would have left his guns at home had he not been allowed to have them at the park?  Let me get a show of hands.  Anyone?  Anyone at all?

Yeah, I didn't think so.  I struggle to understand how people of this mindset are even able to dress themselves in the mornings, given their symptoms of extensive brain damage.

Iran has offered to resume negotiations over its nuclear program, while simultaneously threatening its neighbors with war exercises in the Persian Gulf, and directly threatening the United States Navy.

Boy, talk about brain damage.  Do these idiots really believe they have any chance whatsoever against our navy?  Do they really believe the world will allow them to possess nuclear weapons?  The sad thing is that we engage Iran as if they are a responsible and respectable member of the world community, while they've made no secret of their desire to see an entire country and all of its people wiped off the map.

There is yet another story of a responsible, law-abiding citizen (a Marine, actually) falling victim to unconstitutional gun laws in New York. With the rampant moronism on display in New York state government, I'm left wondering why New York hasn't banned jet planes yet.  Apples to apples; think about it.

And, from the Department of Public Stupidity, we have a story of a local library that sent police to the home of a 5 year old girl to collect two overdue books.

Seriously?  Did the library ever consider picking up the phone and giving the family a call first?  Do cops in Boston have nothing better to do than run around and collect overdue library books?  Unbelievable.

One of my favorites from the last few days is Verizon's announcement that it will charge customers for paying their bill.  This, after several major outages affected its highly-touted mobile data network recently.

Was there a government takeover of Verizon when we weren't looking?  Did they hire the Netflix CEO and put him in charge?  Can you hear me now?  Apparently they did, because they backed off that harebrained idea post haste.

Here's hoping everyone has a great 2012!  And remember, if you're an Obama fan, American Idol comes back on soon, so you'd better go get ready.  The rest of you - study up on the candidates and VOTE (for Mitt Romney) in your state caucuses, primaries, and in the November general election!!

He's the Guy, and Here's Why

This morning, I read a couple of opinion pieces that made me think a little bit differently about the upcoming Republican primaries and the November general election.

In Ann Coulter's weekly column, she identifies two issues she believes are critical in the 2012 elections, explains why, and goes on to break down the candidates' positions on those issues and arriving at the one candidate who she believes will do a good job with them as President.  In a rebuttal of sorts, a fellow conservative by the name of Jen Kuznicki blasts Coulter for her endorsement, asserting that she must have lost faith in the conservative ideals she has long championed, and infers that Coulter's main concerns are staying in the spotlight and selling books.

In this painfully long run-up to the 2012 elections, I have been underwhelmed and disappointed by the field of Republican candidates.  Herman Cain was my choice, but he's no longer an option.  I have problems with each of those remaining, and have a feeling it will be yet another situation where I'm having to hold my nose while casting my vote in November.  I really don't like that.  But then again, if you read my last blog installment, you know there will never be a viable candidate that lines up perfectly with my views so I just look for one that comes the closest.

Getting back to the point, if you've read my blog over the years, you also know what my number one hot-button issue is with government, policy, and politics - illegal immigration.  This happens to be one of the two issues Coulter talks about in her column, and what she says about it is spot-on.  Not only is the government's perpetual failure and indifference towards securing the borders and punishing those who are here illegally just plain wrong on it's face, it also has the effect of fundamentally changing the voter base in border states (see California) and eventually, America.

While illegals don't have the right to vote, many of them have family members here that do have that right.  And thanks to liberals fighting tooth and nail against any requirement to show valid identification in order to cast a ballot, along with help from liberal fraud machines like ACORN, illegal aliens DO vote.  And because Democrats openly support amnesty for illegal aliens and are tepid in their support of tighter border security, they typically get the votes of illegals and their legal family members.

The second issue Coulter cites is Obamacare.  We can debate the merits of this legislation until we're blue in the face, but the bottom line is that the vast majority of conservatives believe it to be a perfect example of government overreach.  A government takeover is NOT the right way to address the problems with our healthcare system - or any other problems - and we absolutely cannot let Obamacare stand.  The United States Supreme Court will hear the case against Obamacare in March, and a ruling is expected before Election Day.  In the event that the Court rules even part of it to be constitutional, it's critical that conservatives put forth a candidate for president that can appeal to undecided voters and beat Obama in the general election - otherwise, Obamacare is here to stay.  Forever.

The candidate that Coulter endorsed in her column is Mitt Romney.  Shocking, indeed, to anyone familiar with Ann Coulter.

Yes, his state healthcare legislation while governor of Massachusetts was the model for Obamacare (often referred to as Obamneycare).  But his position is that any legislation concerning healthcare should be taken up at the state level as opposed to the federal level, and he has promised to overturn Obamacare because of that.  He claims that Romneycare is popular with residents of that state even today, and it was the right thing for Massachusetts.

I don't care, because I don't live there, but that's fine and dandy if liberal Massachusetts wants to have government run healthcare.  Let them have it and pay for it, and leave me alone.  He is absolutely right that healthcare mandates are not the federal government's business any more than car insurance is (auto insurance requirements are driven by states, not the feds).

Romney is also one of only two Republican candidates that aren't fellating the business and Latino lobbies when it comes to illegal immigration and border security.  He has been steadfast in his support of E-Verify, the system that allows employers to validate prospective employees' eligibility to legally work in this country.  Aside from the un-electable Michele Bachmann, every other Republican candidate opposes the use of E-Verify.  Consequently, I automatically oppose the election of any of those candidates.  Period!

An interesting inference that Kuznicki makes in her piece is that Ann Coulter has lost faith in the American people.  This is a point that warrants some exploration, as decades of voter turnout records will tell you that the majority of Americans are apathetic about voting and politics; they simply don't care enough about what's going on around them to take a few hours every four years to study the candidates and then take fifteen minutes to cast their vote.  The last presidential election produced hordes of young, new voters thanks to a shrewd strategy by the Obama campaign, targeting a demographic whose lives rise and fall based on the latest American Idol results and wouldn't bother to look too hard at the actual issues.  While some of those voters have woken up over the years of Obama-driven misery, most have not and will likely return to the polls, blindly voting for their messiah once more.

Whether Ann Coulter has lost faith in the American people or not is irrelevant.  The People gave us Obama, so I'm not inclined to have a whole lot of faith in the majority, myself.  However, Coulter is right on the money in her latest view - it's critical to the future of this nation that we secure the border and stop illegal immigration in its tracks, or there won't be another conservative in the White House for decades. And if the Republicans don't beat Obama in 2012, Obamacare will live on and serve as the precedent for more, ever-deeper overreaches by the federal government into states' rights and into the daily lives of individual citizens.  And not even the Supreme Court will stop that, since Obama will probably have an opportunity to appoint one or two more Supreme Court justices, shifting the balance of power to the left.

So, it's Mitt Romney for president, folks.  Obama's got to go, and we just gotta hope Romney does what he says he'll do, and doesn't do what he says he won't.

'Twas the Night Before Solstice...

With credit to Dan Gainor of Fox News...good stuff!

Twas the night before Solstice, and all through the park
No protesters were stirring, even after the dark.
Occupiers were seething, all mad at The Man,
’Tis Wall Street we’re blamin’ and we’re not a fan.

When out of the mud there arose a great crash,
Perhaps it was thugs or a junkie on hash.
I undid my sleeping bag, made fine from bamboo.
(Thank Gaia it was clean and recyclable too.)

I climbed from the muck (or maybe the mire),
And looked through the tents or just a bit higher.
My friends to the left (there were many of those),
They continued to sleep. They continued to doze.

I heard a loud voice or maybe some chanting,
“Whose street? Our street!” someone is sleep ranting.
I shuffled through the crowd, across frozen ground.
Somewhere nearby an answer must be found.

The camp light was eerie, lit bright by the moon.
No, that’s just a camera and some NPR loon.
Then an Escalade pulled up with a flash.
With 400 horses, that sleigh cost big cash.

The hybrided monster held a huge crowd inside.
All sipping Cristal and pimping their ride.
Their SUV silent, the crowd raised a toast.
They toasted their master. They toasted their host.

He called out to them for he knew them by name.
Each one of them bowed – they were pawns in his game.
Now Van Jones! Now Holder! Now some Hollywood vixen!
On Marx! On Mao! It’s capitalism we’re fixin’.

They threw open the doors and threw lots of scratch.
When giving out money, his record unmatched.
He pulled tight on their strings with Gepetto-ish pride.
They did all he said since he ruled the lib side.

The flunkies moved quickly, through marchers all sleeping.
Through tents and police lines, the givers went creeping.
They threw their support to Occupiers they found.
They handed out money and iPads all ’round.

Protesters were silent, no more police they would F.
And Pepperspray cop now unneeded as ref.
They dreamed of revolt both global and red,
While images of Occupying marched through their heads.

Then the black car door opened just one more time.
I saw a foot clear as the door it did chime.
The Hungarian elf with briefcase in hand,
Jumped out of his car dressed decidedly grand.

His attire was Armani, from head to his toe,
And his shoes were so shiny, it seemed they did glow.
He was dressed to the nines, with lots of zeros.
He funded the left. He was one of their heroes.

His silver head furrowed, as he started to frown.
His bushy eyebrows raised as he looked around.
The bags ’neath those eyes were full like a stocking.
His look it was sour, from many a Beck mocking.

His fingers were black from counting his money.
His jowels jiggled some and he talked a bit funny.
That he was a sly fox, it need not be stated.
Which is for best, since we know Fox he hated.

He spoke not a word, but his hands traced a nine.
Then did it again to mock a popular whine.
Then held up a finger (you know which he’d present),
Boasting “I’m the 1 of the 1 of the 1-est percent.”

He walked to the sleigh, as the flunkies bowed down.
And reclined in the back as he raced out of town.
But I heard him holler as they sped from the sight,
Nothing of Christmas or to all a good night.

“Occupy away! Go ahead, do your worst.
“Shut down ports, banks and bridges – just let me know first.”
“Since I’m on the inside, I’ll make lots of dough.”
“That’s how I got rich,” as he laughed “Ho, Ho, Ho.”

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/12/23/twas-occupier-christmas/#ixzz1hTF2xL49

Income "Inequality": Good or Bad?

The mainstream media have been very busy lately, between churning out as many stories as possible about the accusations of impropriety against Herman Cain, working feverishly to ensure the Occupy protests stay firmly atop the fold, and "reporting" anything and everything they can find critical of the diversity among income levels in America.

The accusations against Cain are pretty typical election season muckraking by the leftist lapdog media, no surprise there.  The effort to keep the Occupy movement in front of everyone's consciousness might help the left, if only those darn protesters weren't raping children, pushing little old ladies down stairs, assaulting police officers, trashing businesses, and other various & sundry acts of "peaceful protest".

But I digress, as the issue that stuck in my craw today is being touted as "income inequality".  Big and prominent on the Yahoo homepage today is a link entitled, "Remake America: Income Inequality".  Yahoo claims this is a "conversation" they want to have about "solutions", after running a short video of people moaning and whining about their low-paying job, having to pay the mortgage for a house they can't afford, the rising cost of groceries and gas, and bleating about how "unfair" it is that the rich are rich and they are not.

Evidently Yahoo thinks the answer is to "remake America", much as Obama wants to "fundamentally transform" her.  Apparently Yahoo hasn't been paying attention to what has been going on in the country; Obama is racking up failures in his bid to transform America almost as fast as the country is racking up debt.  Just another example of how the left utterly refuses to learn from history, and demonstrates its collective insanity by trying the same things over and over again, expecting different results.  I guess it's Yahoo's turn to give insanity a whirl.

Life isn't fair, and there is always going to be "income inequality" in a free country.  That's just how it is, and always will be.  In fact, aside from free will, there is little else that is equal.  Folks say there is equal opportunity for everyone, but let's face it, not everyone has the same opportunities.  This isn't the fault of the country, the system, the left, right, or rich...it begins and ends at home.  Young people define "normal" as what they experience in their lives up until they're an adult.  Kids that grow up in the 'hood without a dad and whose mom is a crack whore on welfare and food stamps see that life as "normal", and after years of listening to mama whine that it's someone else's fault, they believe that it must be true...because they don't know anything else.

As adults, they've got to wise up and break that perpetual cycle.  The only way that a society can have "income equality" would be if some central power were responsible for distributing "income" to the people.  Guess what kind of systems THOSE are, boys & girls?  Socialism, Marxism, & communism.  Totalitarian systems of government that turn the principles of freedom and liberty on their ear.  In these societies, the people are dependent on the all-powerful government for everything, from food, clothing, housing, education, medical care, and transportation.  You own nothing; you are merely a subject with no rights, aside what the government gives you.  You do as your masters tell you, or you are beaten, tortured, and killed.  Forget about free speech.  Protests of any kind...dissent of any kind...is strictly forbidden.

Look at East Germany (oops, it's gone), the Soviet Union (whoops), Vietnam, Cuba, and China for some case studies on income equality.  You'll notice a pattern - government officials and their lackeys have all the wealth, while the vast majority of people in these systems are poor when compared to the vast majority of Americans.  The Vietnamese do not live in opulent luxury; most are happy to have a mud hut to sleep in.  Cuba and China have enacted reforms, but again, the majority are poor.  Before the USSR and East Germany ceased to exist, their people were....poor.

But, by God, they had their equality! 

Here in America, we don't need to be "remade" or "transformed".  We are built upon the bedrock principles of freedom, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  It may not be easy to make your own way here, but the rewards are great.  Regardless of how bad an economy is, a free people always have the opportunity to rise above it and drive on.  Here in America, you reap what you sow.  Work hard and do the right thing, and the possibilities are endless.

All of these people who are villifying our system and wistfully yearning for income equality should go spend a month living in one of those countries mentioned above. They'll come back with a new appreciation for the freedom and opportunity they have in the United States of America. 

The same appreciation the rest of us already have.

The Injustice Department Strikes Again

Once again, the federal government has punished one of its own border agents after he didn't treat an illegal alien drug smuggler nicely enough.

For those that are too lazy to click the link above and read the whole story, it goes like this: the Border Patrol got a tip that illegals were crossing the Rio Grande with drugs.  Agents responded and caught one of them with a 75-lb backpack full of marijuana, in addition to another 75 pounds of drugs at the scene.  The illegal alien was taken into custody, given immunity from prosecution in exchange for testifying against the Border Patrol agent, and the agent goes to jail.

Apparently the agent used a technique of raising the illegal alien's handcuffed hands behind his back to bring him to the ground as he was resisting arrest.  No bruises or marks were found on him (except for where his backpack full of drugs dug into his shoulders) and he did not complain to anyone about mistreatment by the agents.

So right after he was arrested, it would seem that the kid was given access to a representative from the Mexican consulate who then coached him to complain of being beaten and abused.  The Mexican government filed an official complaint.  Internal investigations by Homeland Security and Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) did not find any wrongdoing by the agents during the arrest.

But the desk jockeys over at Obama's Justice Department - thousands of miles removed from the situation, and almost a year later - somehow arrived at the conclusion that an agent did something wrong.  The U.S. Attorney's Office for the Western District of Texas brought charges, a trial was held, evidence and facts were blatantly ignored, and the Border Patrol agent was sentenced to two years in prison for improper arrest.

This is the same Justice Department that is guilty of badly botching an operation that allowed thousands of American guns to be purchased on behalf of Mexican drug cartels and taken across the border into Mexico, where one of them was used to kill a federal agent.  The DA's office is the same office that brought charges against officers Ramos and Compean for shooting a drug smuggler several years ago, and the same DA's office that prosecuted a local sheriff for shooting out the tires of a van full of illegals that were trying to run him over.

It should be no surprise that, yet again, the Justice Department is wrong.  The gross negligence and outright hostility that Attorney General Eric Holder and his department demonstrates toward actual justice rises nearly to the level of treason.  Holder's incompetence has resulted in lost American lives and the wrongful punishment of American federal law enforcement agents for *gasp!* enforcing the law.  Now, it seems another American will lose his freedom for years simply for doing his job.

Oh, and the illegal alien drug smuggler?  The one given immunity from prosecution?  Yeah, he was probably given a green card as a reward for his attempted drug smuggling and false testimony against an innocent American.

This is just another example of the contempt and hostility that the leftists in charge of the federal government have towards the Constitution of the United States and the rule of law.  The government refuses to do its Constitutionally-mandated job to secure our borders, actively prevents law enforcement agents from enforcing federal immigration laws, and happily rewards illegal alien criminals for smuggling drugs across the border and perjuring himself in federal court.

In many states, if someone breaks into your home, you can legally shoot them full of holes and never be prosecuted in either criminal or civil court.  That makes perfect sense.

The United States of America is home to We the People.  Much in the way that we pay taxes to support police departments to keep our streets safe, we also pay taxes to support our federal government in doing its job to keep our nation safe.  But the cops can't be everywhere at once protecting everyone all the time.  That's why "castle doctrine" laws have been passed that provide immunity from prosecution to those who employ deadly force in the defense of themselves and their property.  Similar challenges are faced by our Border Patrol and other federal law enforcement agents while trying to keep our country secure, and one way we could deal with that is to allow them the use of deadly force - hell, ANY force - to protect the home of We the People.

Because today, if someone breaks into your home and the federal government had its way, you'd have to show that intruder (er...undocumented resident) some respect and treat him nicely, or your ass is going to jail.

Now, folks, does that make any sense whatsoever? 

I'm SICK and TIRED of our federal government actively working against American principles.  We The People don't want people crossing our borders illegally.  We the People don't want those people bringing drugs into our country.  We the People generally don't have a problem with illegal alien drug smugglers getting smacked around a little (maybe a lot) before being tossed back over the border, especially if they're resisting arrest. We the People understand that illegal aliens wouldn't have anything to complain about if they didn't break our laws coming here illegally in the first place.

We the People secure our individual homes with locks on our doors.  The federal government should secure America, our collective home, accordingly.

And in the case of an intruder?

Shoot 'em full of holes.

Occupiers: Clueless or Treasonous?

In cities across the country - and indeed the world - groups of people have gathered to protest banks, corporations and the rich under the "Occupy Wall Street" banner.  In talking with these protesters, one would be hard-pressed to find consensus on the group's mission or what it wants, but generally speaking, they are whining about not being rich - while villifying the rich.

Yeah, doesn't make sense to me, either.

They moan in blogs written on their $1,600 Macbooks about their student loan debt, cry from the comfort of their living rooms about being expected to pay for the mortgages they signed up for, scream out with their $4.50 Starbucks lemongrass frappalattecinos in hand about how life isn't "fair" and that there's so much "inequality" in the world.

They bellyache about their job prospects after studying art, dance, basket weaving, and other worthless crap. They screech in texts sent via their $250 iPhones that they can't afford health insurance, and that life in America is so horrible and terrible, and it's all the rich's fault.

Conspicuously missing from this movement is a clear message about what exactly it wants.  Google "Occupy Wall Street", and next to the link it says "NYC Protest for American Revolution", yet inside their website they say they want to "restore democracy in America", and are fighting against "social injustice".

History shows that revolutions are actions that aim to rid a nation of one system, and replace it with another.  While America is not a pure democracy, it is generally accepted that we have a democratic system in place already.  That hasn't changed since the founding of the United States of America, so it's unclear what exactly they want to "restore".

Taking into account the overarching theme of these gatherings, and everything that the Occupiers themselves have written and said about their protests, one can only conclude that they do indeed want a revolution.  A second American revolution, that would replace the Constitutional republic/democracy that we have today with a socialist, Marxist, or even communist system.  "From those according to their ability [the productive and rich], to those according to their need [the poor limp, lame & lazy]".

In fact, the Communist and Nazi parties in the USA have both declared their agreement with, and support of, the Occupy movement.

Given the demographics and the ideological bent of those involved in the protests, it's not a stretch to conclude that most of them voted for Obama - if they were old enough to - back in 2008.  This would mean most of them are simply clueless and harmless, and just looking for an excuse to complain and rabble-rouse with those similarly situated.  It sure doesn't hurt that there are plenty of young 20-something hippie chicks that are a part of this novel social experiment.  And to me, it's unthinkable that any American with a clue would support a revolution aiming to replace our system of government that is built upon the foundation of individual liberty with one that is more oppressive.

Or, are they smart and intelligent and know what they're doing?  Do they really want to see freedom and liberty and the American way relegated to the past, in favor of a system that guarantees this "social justice" they clamor for?

Thousands of these protesters have already proven they have no respect for the law, given the staggering number of arrests during their protests.  Images of American flags being walked on, and clips of protesters singing "f*ck the USA" are all over the internet.  So is there a real revolution in the making?  Will the Occupy movement turn into something more structured, and will it take action to overthrow the government?  Are they treasonous?

Nah, if they had all of that drive and determination, they'd have good jobs and would be on their way to being rich themselves. I think they're just a bunch of whiny dumbasses.  Nothing to see here.  Obama will lose his keys to the White House next November, and if the Flea Party is still around, they too will fade into obscurity, a slightly humorous yet sad stain on the fabric of history.