Debate 2012 part deux

Well there was another debate last night.

I have got to say that it was invigorating that Obama actually showed up!

I do believe that Romney started out better, and the deciding points were really made at the beginning, within the first 30 minutes. Then they were relatively evenly paired for the balance.

Of course I was listening on the radio not watching the tv so there might be a difference in the two venues.

Anyway, I am certain that Obama’s supporters are going to count this one as a win. And I will agree that he did far better in this debate than he did in the first.

But I think that if they are going to be honest about it the best they can really say is that it was only a better performance than the president turned in last time.

The only way the idea of Obama winning works is if you do not count that the real issues were where Romney won, economy, foreign relations, track records… it was the petty things that were not issues where Obama could “speak with authority”.

Personally I think Romney had the lead from the beginning… but then I may be adding more to what I heard than really happened.

But let me make the points that I feel most support my theory.

When asked about gun control or fast and furious Obama turned the talk to community colleges.

When asked about gas prices, Obama basically said high prices were a good thing. (not in MY world, I am not getting paid more but I have to pay more.)

When asked about better pay for women, Obama talked about contraceptives for women.

And, just like the vice-presidential debates, Obama continuously interrupted Romney and would not let him finish an answer.

For that matter so did the moderator. I felt that the debate was structured to favor Obama because of that and for other points.
The majority of the questions the moderator allowed were geared toward Democrat talking points, yet on every one I heard Romney give a decent refutation.

In the meantime, most of the time, when a point came up where Obama needed to provide a counter proof or refutation he could not.

Romney also stayed on topic far better than Obama even bringing the debate back from whatever lah lah land that Obama took it to, and gave an answer to the actual question.

Obama did not stay on topic most of the time.

(This, notably, happened in the discussions about the economy, energy and gun control.)

I did feel there were points that Romney COULD have made but he failed to do so. For an example, I would have liked to see Romney make a better point facing down Obama on the issue of Libya.

I also would have liked Romney to make more points using the numbers that are out there. A common complaint the liberals like to come up with the past two weeks has been that the Romney / Ryan team are not providing enough details.

Conveniently these same people are the ones who forget that Obama’s entire plan when running four years ago were “Hope and Change.” And “I’m different than George Bush.” you do not get much more vague than that.

I feel Romney did a good job with pointing out the failures of Obama to actually accomplish the, few, promises he DID make four years ago.

When Romney pointed out that Obama had promised “unemployment down to 5.4%” or that the deficit would be “cut in half” or that Obama had promised his Obama care plan would “reduce the costs for middle class families insurance by $2,500”.

Then Romney went on to point out that the unemployment is 7.8% which is a difference of 9 million Americans. Worse, that figure forgets the thousands of people of working age who have simply left the work force.
Also Romney mentioned that the deficit is doubled from what Obama inherited and the middle class now pays $2,500.00 MORE on their health insurance then they did AND that is going to go up another 2,500 when Obamacare is fully implemented.

Romney also pointed out that welfare recipients have gone from 30 million to 47 million.

All of that, as Romney said, was even though Obama had a super majority in BOTH houses of congress for the first two years of his term.

On top of those, Obama failed to lower any other prices for the middle class or raise the standard of living for any of us.

I would also have added that he has not closed down Guantanamo bay prison.

ALL of those were promises that Obama made ALL if them he failed to complete and he failed in these EVEN THOUGH he had a, filibuster proof, super majority of democrats in congress when he first took office.
That means the republicans could NOT have done anything to stop him if he wanted to pass this legislation. It did not need to be bipartisan.
In fact, to prove it, there were a couple of bills that he did pass that did not have any republican support whatsoever.

So why couldn’t he have done the same on all these things he made a promise on?

I feel that Romney COULD have done a better job pointing at these things but even though he didn’t take it all the way, Obama still failed to adequately answer the points that came out of that.

Of course Romney was playing against a stacked deck.

Like the time that Candy Crowley claimed that Obama had called Libya terrorism when he hadn’t, or the way that she kept blocking Romney, stopping him from being able to respond to claims made by Obama.
Or the way that in this debate Obama got 9% more time to talk than Romney got.

So for those reasons I have to say I think that Romney did show himself to be the better man, and thus the winner, in this debate as well.

Now it is out there for the people to decide.
They will be the ones who will make that decision in three weeks.

To them I say good luck.

Vice presidential

So the Vice Presidential debates happened last night.

I was expecting a little bit more from Ryan and less from Biden than actually happened. But I do believe that Ryan still carried the day.

Honestly with the way that Biden kept snorting and chuckling whenever Ryan was trying to talk made him sound like a rude Boor. Add to that the fact that Biden kept whining about Ryan getting “more time” to make his points when it turned out in the timing that Biden had a minute more than Ryan, well that made him sound childish.

Ryan on the other hand came across as a gentleman, well versed in the issues and ready to address them.

Biden did have a few points that I might have liked to have expanded on. On the other hand I think that Ryan was smart in not addressing what programs they would specifically cut funding for.

Think back what was the BIG, Specific proclamation that Obama made before being elected? “The day I am elected I will sign the paperwork to close Guantanamo Bay Prison!”

Here we are four years later and Gitmo is still doing business as usual. Sometimes the exigencies of politics would not allow it. In this issue it seems a case of a no win scenario. If Romney/Ryan make specific promises they will be totally castigated for not keeping their promises. By not saying specifics they are open to make the changes they need without breaking promises.

This is an important point. I think what this means is that we are facing people who are not liars. Talk about a novelty in politics. But whether they are trying to cover their bases or simply not reveal too much I feel they are in a no win anyway. Those people who are against Romney and Ryan to begin with are going to do whatever they can to make Romney and Ryan look bad.

I would caution those people though not to start throwing those stones. Obama was elected just on the vague thought that he would bring in “hope and change” you can’t get much more nonspecific than that.

Also I would like to see some back and forth. If the Obama/Biden ticket is going to make points about specificity or records being hidden or anything else than they need to be prepared to show the exact same regard for the Romney Ryan side.

I do totally expect that the liberals will come out crowing about how well their guy did… and they have reason to. Biden avoided a total melt down screw up, which is VERY rare for this man. But I do not count this one as a win for the liberal side.

First blood vs death match.

So the consensus of the debate last night seems to be that the obvious winner was presidential hopeful Mitt Romney.
Obama came across as week, unprepared and unknowledgeable. While Mitt looked certain, confident and capable.

I happened to be at work last night as the debate was going on. That means that, unfortunately I was unable to watch the debate, BUT I did get to listen to it live on the radio as it happened.
To me, listening to this debate, it sounded as if the president was on the defensive for most of the event. He was hemming and hawing and he sounded like he was just not all there. Added to that there was a sense that he was trying to be evasive.

When the moderator asked about one thing Obama had to go over miles of things that he wanted to talk about. He, seemingly, could not stay on one topic throughout the whole debate.
He was consistently using up more time than he was allotted, and he was shaky, only providing generalities when he WAS on topic.

Romney on the other hand generally kept his answers within the time limit EVEN when tracking down ALL the different points to refute that Obama brought up, and his answers tended to have just a little bit more substance.

I heard from people soon after it was over though, and, with a few notable exceptions, they all pretty much said the same things.
“Obama was not engaging, he refused to look Mitt in the eye or look into thew cameras.”
“Obama seemed bored at times.”
“Obama appeared nervous or unprepared.”

On the other side of the coin…

“Romney was confident.”
“He [Romney] had his points well ordered and he expressed himself well.”
“Romney was Confident and appeared honest.”

All good points, and ones that make a real difference.

In trying to find something positive the liberal media outlets seemed to only be able to say
“Obama got in the first Zinger”.

Well wowie! And whoop dee doo!

Here is the thing… I liken this debate to a… well, a duel or a sparring match.

Even if Obama got in the first zinger, that means nothing. I mean after all it is like when in a duel, one of the fighters gets in a cut on his opponent and draws first blood, in some “duels” that would count as a win. BUT this match was not a first blood match. This was a match to the end, or to stay colorful, Death.

See you have to realize that, in a death match, who drew first blood really does not matter. What matters is who gets in the final kill. That is the “blow” that counts, that is the point that wins.

And the general idea seems to be that that person was Mitt Romney.

Sadly after the debates I looked into some of the news feeds that I follow and I found one place where people were commenting on the debate. There were three young men there who were talking about how they thought Obama was the better choice and the better debater.

None of them talked well about it, they could not offer any kind of substance to their contention. Two of these young men were Americans and both had profile pictures that hid their faces completely, almost like they were ashamed. The third man was from England and he kept trying to compare what they have in England to what we have and he was touting the system they have as the better one.

Of course I love to make the point when this comes up that America is NOT England or France or Canada or Australia or…
We are AMERICA and I have always said if you want to live in a country like England then you ought to move to England . the same applies for every other country choice.

I did not actually use that argument in this case but I did point out a few things that seemed to slip his mind. Although I do have to admit that he made one very good point. When another “debater” said “stay out of this, this is American politics, you worry about your queen and royals.” He said that “America does not end at [her] borders, decisions made in America affect the whole world.” His examples of such were

1. America (Bush) “started” the war in Iraq.
2. The collapse of the American Housing market [was a major contributor to] the global recession.
(actually he said it was the collapse of the American economy that CAUSED the global recession.)
3. American conservatives keep supporting the “oppressive” nation of Israel and that is leading to instability in the middle east.

He is right about some of that. But I tried reasoning with him, though I am not sure if I got through.

I tried to respond nicely, I pointed out that we did not start the war that it was terrorism that led to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. He said “the planes that were flown into the WTC did not come from Iraq.” I agreed then pointed out that every one of the allied “spy” groups were certain that the hijackers who grabbed the planes DID get trained in Iraq and that was the basis for the war.

I also pointed out that while it is nice to think that we are solely responsible for the financial conditions we are in, America was NOT the only problem and other nations are turning out to be worse than us in that regard. (it is Greece, Italy and Spain that are having the real problems right now that Europe has to keep bailing out.)

And finally, it is the Palestinians, NOT the Israelis who have declared Jihad against Jews and have stated that the only way there will be peace is when “ALL the jews are dead!”

But I am getting off topic.

One of the young (American) men there, was saying that He felt Obama won . What did he base this idea on?…


Honestly, come to think of it, I do not know. He was unclear and imprecise. Hmm I guess much like Obama himself. Just kidding.

But really where is the evidence that Obama stepped up? It just does not exist.

This young man (who identified himself as someone who relies on the government to survive… maybe that was why he needed Obama to win so bad.) would only say that “Romney is a liar”. Every time he was asked to substantiate his claim he could not. Every time he was challenged he resorted to name calling foul language and threats.

He stated at one point that he was smarter than any of the people he was debating and all of them were just so far under his “intelligence level” that he didn’t know why he bothered.
One of the people he had been debating said “since I have been tested with an I.Q. of 165 and am a member of MENSA, I think the question of who has more intelligence is aimed the wrong way.”

All the other young man could say at that moment was “well you are just an idiotic *^%$% &&(& %^$# %$@# (&%%.”

Talk about an intelligent answer!
But that is the problem, these people are basing their politics on feelings and emotions. They are reaching out trying to get whatever they can with little or no regard for the needs or welfare of others or the nation.

They are reacting to things on a visceral level instead of careful, Sober, thought and facts.

Now if you have followed my blog for any period of time, or if you know me then you realize where my opinion lies. And yes I am rough on those who tend to think differently than I politically speaking.

But this debate was not Obama’s shining moment. As I listened to the debate I identified many places where I though t Romney could have done a better job expressing himself. I do not think that the debate performance that Romney turned in was the best he could have done. BUT it did far outshine the job that the president has done.

And come to think of it, Romney may not be the absolute best choice we could have. But he is what we have to choose from. And in reality I think he will do the same in the presidency as he did in last night’s debate. Maybe not perfectly, but a HECK of a lot better than his opponent.

Points that show the failure of Obama's ideology

Some companies that Obama has given tax dollars to that still failed

Solyndra (green energy/solar)
Amonex (Green energy/ Solar)

Chevy sold just 603 Volts in January 2012. (It sold almost five times as many gas-guzzling, 12 mpg Suburbans that same month.) Nissan moved just 676 Leafs, and the company hasn't sold more than 1,000 in five months.

Consumers' lack of interest in electric cars helped push another Obama-backed company — Ener1 — into bankruptcy protection late last week, despite the $118 million grant its battery-making subsidiary got from the Energy Dept. As the CEO put it, the company suffered a lack of demand, thanks to lower-than-hoped-for electric car sales.

Ener1 joins two other failed green companies — Solyndra and Beacon Power — that took $571 million in taxpayer subsidies down with them.


Unfortunately, like a bad investor, Obama wants to double down on his failure.

"The payoffs on these public investments don't always come right away," he said in his January State of the Union speech. "Some technologies don't pan out; some companies fail. But I will not walk away from the promise of clean energy."

That may be so, but solar, wind and electric cars are hardly new technologies — electric cars were being sold back in the late 1800s.

Indeed, the only thing new here is

from a piece of the $800 billion economic stimulus package passed in 2009.

At least four other companies have received stimulus funding only to later file for bankruptcy, and two of those were working on alternative energy.

Evergreen Solar Inc., reportedly received $5.3 million of stimulus cash through a state grant to install 11,000 photovoltaic panels installed at 11 colleges and universities, a recycling facility and an education center in Massachusetts.

The company, once a rock star in the solar industry, filed for bankruptcy protection last month, saying it couldn't compete with Chinese rivals without reorganizing. The company intends to focus on building up its manufacturing facility in China.

SpectraWatt, based in Hopewell Junction, N.Y., is also a solar cell company that was spun out of Intel in 2008. In June 2009, SpectraWatt received a $500,000 grant from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory as part of the stimulus package. SpectraWatt was one of 13 companies to receive the money to help develop ways to improve solar cells without changing current manufacturing processes.

The company filed for bankruptcy last month, saying it could not compete with its Chinese competitors, which receive "considerable government and financial support."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/15/despite-stimulus-funding-solyndra-and-4-other-companies-have-hit-rock-bottom/#ixzz217xQ6UhG


Another winner of stimulus who ultimately lost is Mountain Plaza Inc. Despite declaring bankruptcy in 2003, the company received $424,000 from the Tennessee Department of Transportation as part of a grant aimed at installing "truck stop electrification" systems that allow idling truckers to plug-in during extended stops and turn off their exhaust-belching, environment polluting diesel engines.

Mountain Plaza had filed for bankruptcy protection again in June 2010. TDOT, which received a $2 million stimulus grant from the Environmental Protection Agency for the project, said it didn't learn about the bankruptcy until October, but it is closely monitoring the project.

Elsewhere, Olsen's Crop Service and Olsen's Mills Acquisition Co. also failed despite Olsen's Mills receiving $10 million to increase employment, add equipment and machinery, refinance existing debts and work capital for operations and acquire land. The payout -- part of a $64 million package to nine rural businesses in Wisconsin for economic development loan assistance -- was delivered in January 2010, after Olsen's Mills filed for bankruptcy protection for defaulting on a $60 million bank loan.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/15/despite-stimulus-funding-solyndra-and-4-other-companies-have-hit-rock-bottom/#ixzz217xr82C3

Three hundred million dollars went to Johnson Controls to make electric batteries. According to the White House, which errs on the side of optimism if not delusion, that led to the creation of ...drum roll please...150 jobs. That comes out to a cost of $2 million per job. Investor's Business Daily has listed more examples of the "Wasted Stimulus" but the examples abound are far too numerous to list in a single column. Green jobs are a myth-like unicorns, writes Walter Russell Mead.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/09/obama_green_jobs_con_job_and_the_ill_wind_that_blows_from_spain.html#ixzz217ylykOD


It is a useful exercise to compare and contrast the job growth in the oil and gas industry versus that of the green economy. In other words, compare reality versus fantasy. Stephen Moore writes in the Wall Street Journal:

President Obama is expected to seek another $250 billion or so in new stimulus funds next week, with plenty of money for clean energy and the creation of so-called green jobs.

Never mind that no one can seem to find many Americans who got green jobs as a result of the original stimulus spending.

Moore does note that energy jobs are being created at a rapid clip, but in the one sector that Obama considers a mortal political enemy and villain; the oil and gas industry.

According to data from the Federal Reserve Board's Industrial Production Indexes, the oil and gas industry, which the Obama Energy Department loathes, has had more growth in output than any other manufacturing industry in the U.S. from 2005 through 2011. As a reward, the administration is proposing $35 billion in new taxes on the industry to slow it down. Even if we accept the dubious White House claim that all the oil and gas tax write-offs are unwarranted loopholes, a 2011 Congressional Research Service study finds that per unit of electricity produced, for every two cents of tax subsidy to Big Oil, Big Green (wind and solar) get closer to $1 in handouts.


Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/09/obama_green_jobs_con_job_and_the_ill_wind_that_blows_from_spain.html#ixzz217zKTB6l



Update: 7/19/12: The Amonix solar manufacturing plant in North Las Vegas, subsidized by more than $20 million in federal tax credits and grants given by Obama Administration, has closed its 214,000 square foot facility a year after it opened.

Solar Trust of America: FAIL - Filed Bankruptcy in Oakland, CA, April 3, 2012 – On April 2, 2012


Bright Source: FAIL - Bright Source warned Obama’s Energy Department officials in March 2011 that delays in approving a $1.6 billion U.S. loan guarantee would embarrass the White House and force the solar-energy company to close. Lost Billions of dollars but Getting More Money To Keep Trying. Canyou say, “This isnt working?”


Solyndra: FAIL - Obama gave Solyndra $500,000,000 in taxpayer money and Solyndra shut its doors and laid off 1100 workers in August 2011 After Billions in Losses due to failure to make a solar product that works!


LSP Energy: FAIL - LSPEnergy LP filed bankruptcy protection and a sale of its assets in Feb 2012


Energy Conversion Devices: FAIL – On February 14, 2012 Energy Conversion Devices, Inc. and its subsidiaries filed for bankruptcy


Abound Solar: FAIL - Abound Solar received a $400 million loan guarantee from Barack Obama announced in June, 2012 that it would file for bankruptcy


SunPower: FAIL – SunPower stopped producing solar cells last year at near bankruptcy restructured only with help of, get this, oil giant TOTAL who owns 60% stake. Irony! Still struggling…


Beacon Power: FAIL – Beacon Power Corp filed for bankruptcy Oct 2011 just a year after Obama approved $43 million loan Government loan guarantee


Ecotality: FAIL - ECOtality, a San Francisco green-tech company that never earned any money on the verge of bankruptcy after receiving roughly $115 million in two loan guarantees from Obama


A123 Solar: FAIL-A123 received $279 million from taxpayers thanks to President Obama’s Department of Energy loan guarantees and after the Solyndra bankruptcy is getting another $500M from Obama and it has lost $400M


UniSolar: FAIL - Uni-Solar filed for Ch 11 bankruptcy in June 20 this year laid off hundreds got more Obama money still failing but still in business


Azure Dynamics: FAIL - Azure Dynamics files for bankruptcy in June ter millions in Obama “Stimulus”


Evergreen Solar: FAIL - Evergreen Solar received $527 Million in Taxpayer money from Obama filed bankruptcy


Ener1: FAIL received more than $100 million in government funding from the Obama administration filed for bankruptcy January 2012


And many many more on the horizon…

Is this election a Hobson's choice?

Recently I heard a radio talk show host declare that the only way that Mitt Romney can win this election is by being like Barack Obama.

Instantly my first thought was “why should I bother voting then?” I do not believe that Barack Obama has done a very good job. In fact I find his capabilities to be far less than I was afraid they might be when he first ran for election. But if the only way to beat him is to become him then it does not matter who you vote for. There is no ne to vote for, there is no choice. It becomes either put Obama back in office, or the next best thing to it or don’t vote at all. How is that a choice?

And if there is no choice, then the country is ultimately lost. The “grand experiment” has failed. That’s it wave the white flag, it’s time to just lay down and give up.

I hope that there is a choice this election. But maybe it is time to start encouraging all of you to accept the Lord Jesus Christ. Because at this point, if there really is no hope left for the country, we need to get ready to meet our maker.

So… as a flashback to other times and such here is a phrase that will come in handy for you to paint on those “sandwich” boards you will be wearing.

REPENT FOR THE KINGDOM OF GOD IS NIGH

Hmm maybe that ought to have been the title for this post…

The wonder of it all.

I had a dream last night. I dreamed that the government said only one person per household would be allowed to vote.
I kind of passed it off for a while but then while I was at work I started thinking about it and I realized something.
IF someone like a democrat/liberal thought of doing that they would be doing two different things.
One, they would be decreasing the number of votes made against them.
Two, they would be encouraging people to allow gay marriage

You see such a move could be useful to certain parties.

If only one person in a household can vote than wouldn’t that mean that married families only get one vote? Of course it does so they are marginalized. But Gays aren’t allowed to marry like that so they are not one household even if they live together. They tend to vote liberal so it is a boost for the liberals.

OR

It is a boost for the gays to get married. Because if I want them to be as hamstrung as I am then I will vote to let them marry so that they also are on e household and they get to have only one vote. Just like me.

How clever would that be huh? Still maybe that would cause the conservative side a little relief too because then the gays would say, wait if I get married I lose my right to vote??? Screw that! I don’t want to get married.
Then again, the married couples are already taxed more and treated worse than everyone else and they still want it so who knows?

Chick-Fil-A

About a month ago, there was a call for a boycott against Chick-Fil-A, then there was a backlash against the boycott. Let me tell you, I think that “boycott” has been better advertising for Chick-Fil-A than anything else! And for that I am truly thankful.

I have really been enjoying some of the reports of the issues going on in this case. I have heard people of all stripes coming out in support of the right of Chick-Fil-A’s president to have an opinion and to voice it.

I have seen news reports from all over the country on this subject. From the store in Atlanta that had to close several hours early because they ran out of food to the one in Philadelphia where they had to call the police to provide crowd control because the crowds were so large.
I liked the account I heard where a customer of one store heard the employee at the register apologizing because they had to stop taking orders for half an hour so the kitchen could catch up. I liked hearing about the customers in a store telling the employees “look it’s ok, if you have a towel we can use WE will bus the tables for you guys so you can keep serving people.

I have heard and seen reports from all OVER the country! From Florida to California! Even Yahoo news reported on stores in Colorado, Georgia, Indiana and other places.

I have heard that even the ACLU is supporting Chick-Fil-A! And the point is simple.

People have the right to say whatever they want. It is called the first amendment.

I have always supported free speech. As long as it is clean speech. That is to say that you can say whatever you like. You can say things that I would disagree with, the only requirement I have is that the language you use is socially acceptable. (no swearing or lewd/rudeness)

In that way I think in that way the current events are a fine example of freedom of speech.

There is also the point that this blowback is coming from the fact that certain people (mostly Liberals) are saying that people cannot say what they want.
In fact I heard one guy call in to a radio talk show last night and declare that he thinks it is a great idea, even necessary, for the government to prohibit business from having any opinion that disagrees with his viewpoint. But he could not get it through his head that if the government can stop one person from their free speech then they can stop ANY speech.

There are people IN OUR GOVERNMENT who have tried to hold Chick-Fil-A back, to deny them their rights, over this issue. (the Mayors of Boston, Washington and Chicago)

Most Notable among the offenders is Rahm Emmanuel. A former member of Obama’s cabinet, now the mayor of Chicago, who said that HE “[would] not let Chick-Fil-A open any more stores in Chicago.”

Personally, I think that Obama’s administration is soon going to have to cut ties with Rahm over this thing that is if they want to have ANY chance at looking like the kind of people we want to have leading the nation.

Some politicians are jumping in on the side of the first amendment, like the 17 Republican congressmen who signed papers supporting Chick-Fil-A.

All in all though I have to say to all those who keep screaming about how they want the government to control all these businesses, You keep it up!
If you keep doing this people will see your idiocy and they will soon move to the area of sanity and away from your stupidity.
That means better government and better food at stores like Chick-Fil-A.

That is all good.

Racist? I think not!

No sir! I am sick of this and I will not let this one go any further.

You claim racism where there is none. You think that because someone disagrees with you or your president that they have to be racist and you automatically paint them with that brush.

Here is the thing.

When you do that you pay a disservice to them and to yourself. It is, in fact, YOUR words and actions that are the racist ones.

If you want to have a discussion, you have to be willing to accept that the other people in the discussion may have opposing views for any number of reasons.

In order to have racism, the racist HAS to see the color of the skin or the difference in race AND they have to think that somehow that confers upon them superiority over the other. In order to have racism you have to prejudge someone by assuming that the person whom you have never met fits into a preconceived mold that you have created.
This is not what [we] are doing here. The only way for racism to really exist is for people to see the difference and think that means something.
Now I don’t know about anyone else, but you aimed this response at me so I am going to speak for me.

You have NO idea who I am.
You do not know what I look like or what I have, or have not done.
You do not know my friends or what service I may have given in life.
For you to label me the way you have is to prejudge me without meeting me. You assume facts not in evidence which makes you as bad as those who ARE racist.

In fact you, by your attack and words, show yourself to be opinionated and arrogant making your decisions and opinions AND judgments based on bigotry, hatred and a preconceived notion of what is or isn’t going on.
All of that is the very definition of racism. Then on top of that you have the gall to claim that it is others who are being racist.
For the record, you, and others like you, who are so quick to claim racism, come across as narcissistic, prideful idiots.

And I have an issue with that.
It is exactly attitudes like yours that led to some of the worst crimes and wars in history.

How do you think the British Civil war got started? Arrogance and self serving leaders. How about , the Salem witch trials? Or McCarthyism? All came from fear of those who disagreed as well as pride and a refusal to accept others, and their ideas, as different.
What about the French Revolution? Pride, Arrogance and a refusal to allow a voice to the disenchanted while putting them down. (sound familiar? “you’re only against Obama because of his race.” Marginalizes and refuses to accept that people are unhappy, WITH THE ISSUES, while putting those people down! )

What about the Revolutionary war? Or The American Civil war, The Inquisition, Tienanmen square, Watergate, Vietnam, World war 1, World war 2, Korea, Operation Desert storm/ Desert shield?… the list is much longer, and all comes from a failure to talk, a failure to accept difference, or a failure to face reality!
But I guess that does not matter to you since it is easier to just glibly assume things about people with no real evidence just because YOU “HAVE to be right” no matter what.

Here it is again

A while ago, a woman who was fired by the Houston Chronicle for being a stripper or “exotic dancer” sued the Chronicle because it was sexist in firing her. Because she was a woman who was fired so it MUST be because of her gender not because of her actions.

She admitted that she did NOT tell them about her side job, as an “exotic dancer”.

She said the way they found out was because a reporter from another newspaper “outed her”.

So she hired Gloria Allred to defend her and she said “They fired me because I am a woman.” As my dad would say, “B-U-L-L-P-U-C-K-Y”!!!!!!!
I will have to yell the next part because clearly it is not getting through to her…
MA’AM IT WOULD NOT HAVE MATTERED IF YOU WERE A CHIPPENDALE DANCER!

You did something that the newspaper was NOT made aware of because apparently YOU were so embarrassed that you did this, that you did not want to tell the employer about it.
Since YOU found it to be embarrassing don’t you think your EMPLOYER could have found it embarrassing? You must have or else you would not have hidden it.

And even if there was no embarrassment in this don’t you think it would have been prudent to let your own bosses in on the deal so that they were not blindsided by the event?

In short my contention is that what you did was ultimately wrong! And you were called on it! Now you are going to use the laws that are supposed to protect people in order to force others to do what you want them to do, even though YOU are the one who is in the wrong.

This is an abuse of the system. In fact I would have NO issues with the idea that what you are doing is worse than any manipulation of the law that others do about, which, you would be the first to complain.

Think about it..

But this does bring me to a point that I want to make here…

Liberals love to lie. Yes I know that sounds like such a hateful statement but it has been MY experience that they do.

In fact it seems to me that they feel the ends always justify the means, no matter what. Sadly the worst of it is not even the lies though.

Let’s look at some recent events to prove my point. Obama has “declared executive privilege.” Why? Because Eric Holder is being held in contempt by congress for withholding information that they have requested, a criminal offense! But Obama has spoken so all us little peons better shape up and do as our great and grand lord and master has demanded.

BUT WAIT has Obama really invoked executive privilege? Some of his toadies have basically said so, but there is one little problem. In order for him to invoke executive privilege he would have to
a. do so in writing,
b. detail WHAT is under the privilege
c. put that out into a PUBLIC venue.

He has not done any of these things so technically he still has not gone that route, and even if he had, executive privilege CAN NOT be used to protect himself or others from repercussions from criminal acts.
Apparently the administration is in a position they do not like! And now they want to cover it up.
But trying to cover it up this way is the BEST way in the world to have to let everyone know what is going on which makes this counterproductive and injurious to their case.

Curiously the issue that the liberals in the media have latched onto is not the fact that Obama has not actually claimed executive privilege, or that he is covering something up, or that there was lying, or that such action is not allowed by law in cases of criminal activity.
No what they had to talk about on the subject right away was that, “Obama is hardly the FIRST president to have claimed Executive privilege.” Like that was really the issue in the first place.


But there you go, another example of how the ends justify the means.

How about the fact that they will resort to physical violence at meetings and events to try to shut up any one who speaks out against them?
Or the way that they will spread misinformation trying to make things seem to be other than they really are. As an example I would like to point out the “creative editing” of MSNBC regarding ANYTHING they are against. (the 911 call by George Zimmerman, What Mitt Romney said in Pennsylvania about Wawa’s)
Or when a blogger speaks out conservatively they make false allegations and even make false 911 phone calls to the police to report the blogger/s of crimes that were not committed.

Still clearly the ends must justify whatever means they employ.

Even if those means are illegal! They lie, but that is ok, they cheat, but that is ok, they steal, but that is ok, they cover up but that is ok, they practice hypocrisy even as they blame others of hypocrisy and they contradict themselves, but that is all ok…
As long as THEY get what they want. And it does not matter who gets hurt or trampled in the process.

Here is one last example, We all agree that bullying and intimidation are bad things right? In fact the media was all abuzz over reports that when he was in high school Mitt Romney MAY HAVE bullied someone.
But it is apparently O.K. that, not only has there been evidence of Obama doing the same thing as a child, but he told the Supreme Court that they had “better be very careful” about how they chose to go about looking at the issue of his health care initiative. Implying it was HIS idea and so they BETTER vote HIS way.
He did this last one just before they looked at his health care initiative to determine it’s constitutionality.
So the ends justify the means even if they are illegal, or morally wrong , or just plain evil.

So there you go, today we get to think about the future, and in those thoughts as we begin to look to the upcoming vote, please look at the person who you want to vote for.
Let us put people in control of the government who will be honest and truthful at least as much as possible. And let us pick those who will be held accountable.

Financial Straits?

Recently I saw an ad from the white house stating that all those who are getting married, about to have a birthday, An Anniversary or other special gift giving occasion, can ask people to donate to Obama’s reelection campaign in lieu of receiving a gift.

I immediately wondered if there wasn’t an ulterior motive to that ad.
Other events that have occurred since then have reinforced that thought. The thought I had was this was an attempt to try to deceive people. This, to me, looked like a way that they could point at the money spent and the democrats could say the only reason Mitt Romney won (idf he did win) was because he outspent Obama. That he Bought the election.

This is exactly the thing they said about Scott Walker. Then a few weeks after that ad appeared what did I see come up in the news? Obama said that Romney raised more money than the Obama campaign… (“hey look they are outspending us.”) I thought AH HAH! I was right.

Other people tried to push that idea but the truth is that when compared side by side Obama has raised more money for his campaign over all. Romney only raised more than Obama in the past couple of months.

But to me the fact that Romney raised more than Obama shows me something. That is the people (who are donating to his campaign) would rather see Romney in office than Obama.

The fact that Romney is getting more means, to me, thst hew is the guy that more people want in office. That Obama has screwed up badly enough that they want him gone.

Still let’s be honest. Even though Romney did raise more lately than Obama has OVERALL Obama is still ahead of Romney. They will make it SOUND like it is the other way around but the fact of the matter is that it is all deceit and lies.

So this November please do not listen to the BS and find the truth consider all angles and vote for the BETTER choice.

America the Majestic

Recently God gave me a new one. A quote that I had forgotten.
It comes from the movie “The Majestic” starring Jim Carrey.

In it Carrey plays a character Named Peter Appleton, in the 50’s, who is accused of being a communist sympathizer. This was set in the High point of the McCarthy era where to be affiliated with communism was, well, taboo. And the McCarthy senate hearings were aimed at rooting out this insidious menace ala witchhunt.
Well Mr. Appleton loses everything in one fell swoop, Girlfriend, Job, money, life, All gone. So he goes out, gets drunk and then is in an accident where he loses his memory.

He is found by some good people in a small town who think he is actually a long lost hero of WW2 one of their own sons who he looks like, he doesn’t know any better so he accepts what he is told.

The town takes him in and cares for him and soon he is part of their community. Then tragedy strikes right as he starts getting his memory back, and before he can set things right the government comes to get him.

Very soon the government agents realize that the guy is falsely accused and they really have nothing on him. But they also have all the power, they can make him disappear as it were or shout loud enough that it doesn’t matter how innocent he is they can make him out to be the scapegoat.

Not wanting to look bad though (gotta cover your butt) they offer him a deal. If he confesses and reads a prepared statement renouncing his communist leanings and implicating other people they will let him off the hook.
When he points out that he was innocent to begin with, Stating that he has rights after all this is a democracy, he is told,

“The declaration of independence, the constitution, they’re all just pieces of paper with signatures on them, you know what a piece of paper with a signature on it is, it is a contract, something that can be renegotiated at any time. It just so happens that the house un-American activities committee is renegotiating the contract this time, next time it will be somebody else. There will always be somebody.”

Instantly I thought of what we are going through today. We have people in Washington trying their hardest to “renegotiate the contract” and they are doing so without OUR consent. In order for the renegotiations to be valid all parties have to sign or the contract is non-binding. That is IF I do not sign that new copy, I am not to be held to that new contract.

We need to go out and vote this year, we need to let the people who are trying to change our lives that we will NOT agree to this new contract and we need to stand up for the contract that exists now. And when they try to change it without our consent we need to fire them for breach of contract.

We need to do like Peter does in the movie, we need to look at the constitution and stand up and say NO. NO I will not let you do these crimes to the people that are supposed to be protected by this document.

It took a lot to get him to that point. I pray that we do not have to wait so long or be pushed so hard before we reach the point where we will stand up for what is right.

In fact, if you would like to realize something today let it be this. When our military swears to uphold what this nation holds dear, they do not swear to protect the president, or the congress, or the people even. They swear to defend and protect the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic.
We all, every one of us ought to do the same.

How many of us would say as he did at the end, “I have never been a man of great conviction, I never saw the percentage in it, Quite frankly I suppose I lack the courage, see I’m not like Luke Trimbul he had the market cornered on those things… I can’t help but wonder what he’d say if he were standing here, the America represented in this room is not the America he died defending. I think he’d tell you your America is bitter and cruel and small I know for a fact that his America is big… where every American has a voice…”
Then he goes on to read the first amendment and follows up with, “this is the first amendment mister chairman it’s everything we are about if only we would live up to it. It’s the most important part of the contract every citizen has with his country. Even though these contracts the constitution and the bill of rights even though they are just pieces of paper with signatures on them they are the only contracts we have that are most definitely not subject to renegotiation… not by anyone ever!”


He made the point that, Men and women have died to keep that contract and every time we try to change it we dishonor them and the sacrifices they have made.

Please and this does come from the heart PLEASE this year remember the sacrifice that all the soldiers have made and keep that contract stand up and tell your congressman or even the president that this stops NOW. That we will all abide by the contract that has served us so well for a couple of centuries. And that NO one has the right to take it away from us now.

who built it?

Recently people are complaining that the President has been taken out of context. That when he said “if you have a successful business, YOU didn’t build that” the republicans and conservatives are all taking it out of context.
Here is a question for you, How else can that be taken except for “you did not cause that business to exist, others built it.”?
“But he said more than that”… yes, you are right, he also said (before that quote) that there is an infrastructure of teachers and firefighters and police officers and roads that caused the business to exist.

Well that is all well and good, except for the factual point that business existed long before ANY of those things. But, looking at the conditions that exist today, is that really true?

According to what Obama said it seems that he believes the teachers and firefighters and police officers and roadworkers are really the people who are responsible for the success of the business.

Here is the problem.
Today the police are always there. Whether I build a business or not but my business does not/ will not exist because of them. And the same goes for the firefighters and the teachers and the road workers and all the others. But they have not ALWAYS been there. In fact many of them would not exist if it weren’t for business needs CAUSING them to exist.

In fact, for today I want to use the example of some successful businesses. Let’s consider Microsoft or Apple or Google or Ben and Jerry’s…

All of these businesses exist because the people in charge of them had an idea and worked to make them happen. If Bill Gates had not had the idea for how to make software for Microsoft, That business would not exist. Period end of story.
If these people had not taken out loans on their own or worked insane hours or invested so heavily of their own. Then these would not exist.

In fact if you think about it there was a guy who had a couple of thousand different patents and inventions. We would not even be able to live the way we do today if it had not been for him. And yet he was never formally educated past third grade because his teachers kicked him out of school for being “wild, incorrigible and in general, unteachable”
His Name? Thomas Alva Edison. You know inventor of the lightbulb and the phonograph… for starters…

I guess all that “infrastructure” really kinda didn’t work for him did it now? The infrastructure, in the guise of his teachers, completely wrote him off and consigned him to nothing. And yet how many of his peers who went through that public school system were the successes that he was?

As for all those other things, every business pays taxes already. In fact many of them, in order to build in the first place, are required to foot the bill for things like road improvements and easements all on their own. So all that “government help” that Obama touts is really just a bunch of bull pucky.

These businesses exist because the effort to make them work is made by the business owner.

The flip side of the same coin is IF Obama is right and the government is responsible for the success of those businesses and it is not the work and sacrifice of the business owner, then why do so many businesses fail?
If the government is responsible for the success of all those businesses that are doing well then conversely that would have to mean that the government is also equally responsible for the failure of every single failed business.
And if the government is responsible for all the failed business then doesn’t that mean that they, themselves, have failed? And if they are responsible then they also ought to be required to make it up in amends to every man wqoman and child who is suffering for those faliures.
They have to make up the losses for all the entrepreneurs who tried to start a business? (and their families and descendants.)

I would think so.

Let’s face it if we look at the difference between businesses run by individuals and ones run or supported by the government the trend is clear. The successful businesses are ALL the ones that are run by private individuals. All the government businesses are mostly costly boondoggles or they are entirely unsuccessful.

Here is a list of businesses that the government has either taken over or developed that cannot seem to operate in a way that makes a profit.
(in other words, successfully)

Amtrak
The United States Post Office.
NASA
The Veteran’s Administration
Social Security
Medicare
Medicaid
Fanny Mae
Freddy Mac

Also there are businesses that the government has “bailed out” which are still not doing as well as their counterparts like GM or ones that have completely failed (Solyndra).

So I have to say that the idea of the government being responsible for successful business is a total lie. Yes I said it this is a lie.

And there is no way you can take the words of the president and put them “into context” so they mean anything else. In fact, the only way you CAN make the president’s words mean anything other than what the conservatives are saying they mean IS to take them out of context.

Flat tax conversation

Everyone is going on about how great a flat tax would be... I’m not sure they really thought it through. A flat tax would hurt the poor a lot while making the rich richer. The guys I heard were talking about how great a flat tax would be and they said that all you need to do is have a good budget.
I tried to point out that sometimes it doesn't matter how good your budget is. They were adamant though that if there were a flat tax then the economy would be better and the people’s needs would be easier to meet.

I think there is an element of naivete to that though because that assumes that all the "savings" that businessmen get would translate into more hiring or more pay raises and that is not going to happen in many cases.
Oh yeah it is a better idea than having the government try to sort it out because they will spend 98 cents of every dollar on that kind of program in bureaucracy fees.

In a private Business a LOT of those businessmen are going to just pocket the extra and say ohh look at me how rich I am getting
Just like the airlines did when the taxes on them expired last year.
Now, they did not pay their employees better and they did not hire more people and they did not refund or lower prices of passengers... they just pocketed the difference and patted themselves on the back for being such good businessmen that they were making more profit.


This all means that it is clear we will not be able to clear up the tax issue easily. But everyone wants to go on and on about it.

So like I said first and foremost we need to just SHUT UP about ANY tax issue and STOP the wasteful spending.
Then we need to figure out how to make sure that people are getting a LIVABLE wage (not minimum wage)
THEN we can focus on how to do tax reform
If we could link the minimum pay index to an area’s cost of living that would be a start.
For example if you live in a place where the cost of living is really high so as to make it unaffordable, then the business would have to pay higher wages.
If you live somewhere cheaper, the wages can go down some. This ought to make at least the intelligent businessmen interested in doing what they can to make the area where they operate more affordable.

Get it through to the business/es that the more they charge the more it drives up cost of living, the more the cost of living goes up the more they have to pay etc... Then they will maybe learn that they can control their costs by charging LESS, or that they can make the whole area wealthier through the rates they charge.
I think it is a good idea and while I have mentioned it to myself out loud I think this is the first time I have really trotted it out here*. What do you think


Maybe if I could get this one out there people would go "HEY that sounds like a good idea!"
Of course I don’t stop there, the next step to my idea was then we could link taxes to the same index.

Now personally I am starting to think that property tax is evil… (who wants to keep buying the same book or toy or whatever over and over again? MOST things we buy you pay for it once and then that is it.)

However if property taxes were linked to this plan “landlords” would realize the more they charge for rent the more they will have to pay in taxes because the Cost of living is high.

Ultimately it would be a percentage factor but then they could learn to save money from taxes by giving renters a break
That still allows for growth because they will make profits but at the same time it controls growth to what society can afford. (NO Bubble markets)

Of course the issue will still has people saying “if everyone were paying a flat tax the economy would be better and we wouldn't be in this mess.”
I want to scream here, but noi one listens.
Again, the problem isn't taxes or economy here! the reason we are in this mess is because of bad loan practices! a flat tax would not have prevented that or fixed it."

Let’s all stop going on about taxes, taxes, taxes. Instead let’s all focus on the real problem, spending, spending, spending.
Shut up about the taxes and address the real issue and now I have gone full circle
As a side note here I have a question regarding a flat tax... would churches have to pay it too?

They get tax shelters now and the idea behind a flat tax is to eliminate preferential treatment with taxes, which in turn would mean that to be fair we would need to eliminate that exempt status, same with 401s and all other tax shelters. After all in order for a flat tax to "work" we would have to eliminate all the exceptions.

But as I, and others, have pointed out before;
You could take ALL the money that exists in this country, all the money that has ever existed and all the money that WILL ever exist; and it would not be enough to deal with the debt we have today.
It won’t deal with all the ongoing costs that we are looking at, and until we get spending under control it will never deal with anything.
So since the people who are talking about raising taxes are refusing to consider reducing expenses we will never be able to get out of the hole we are in.

Liberal shortsightedness

I have the dubious pleasure of having to pass a house on the way to and from work where they are VERY Political, Liberal, outspoken. And they regularly put up some of the most inane things… the latest one is a neon green sign with black lettering nailed to their fence that says…

“Do you Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR and PBS crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in TARP money, gave themselves billions in bonuses, paid no taxes, And dumped a million gallons of oil in the Gulf of Mexico? Yeah. Me Neither.”

Here are the problems I have with that.

1. None of the entities listed here have done for us what the businesses that are being picked on in the statement have. Public employees. PBS and NPR have never employed thousands of people, they have never provided us with the oil or products that we NEED for survival and, some of these would not be possible if it weren’t for the businesses that are being railroaded by this statement.
2. The person/s who post these things refuse to understand that if it were not for the taxes that businesses pay then the public employees would not be paid and the support would be dropped for NPR and PBS.

None of the “examples” that were used in this really contribute to the nation as a whole. Oh yeah NPR will play classical music and PBS will show sesame street and these are great for cultural purposes but if we cannot eat or keep warm or healthy then those points (culture) become unimportant. Before you can feed a person’s soul you have to feed their body, and none of the examples given do anything to feed a persons body.

The God syndrome.

I figured this out, most liberals are either pretty frustrated with God or they just do not believe in God. I mean think about it.

They want people to be able to have ANY sex they want ANY time ANY where. This is against God’s word on the subject, you know the topic… where Paul says “FLEE all sexual immorality” because that is against God’s wishes.

I can already hear the growing dissent… “no GOD didn’t say it PAUL did you said so right there…” um yeah and IF I had not pointed out that it was Paul who said it would you have even known? I think not. But the point is that
(1) God is unchanging. The Bible tells us that he is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. He is consistent never wavering the Alpha and the Omega The beginning and the end!
(2) GOD said in the old testament that we need to abstain from Sexual immorality. That we ought to only have sex within the bonds of matrimony (or within marriage) that we ought not to have sex with anyone who is not our spouse.*
(3) God has always punished those who disobey him.

“But” they say “YOU don’t always get it right.” And they are right about that. I am not claiming that I am better than they are.
Let me be totally honest here… I AM A SINNER! If it would make a difference I would be happy to make that declaration in front of everyone I know. I have in fact done exactly that. In fact let me make it known here and now

I HAVE LIED!
IHAVE CHEATED!
I HAVE STOLEN!
I HAVE LUSTED AFTER WOMEN WHO WERE NOT MY WIFE!
I HAVE COVETED MY NEIGHBORS STUFF!
I HAVE COMMITTED MURDER IN MY HEART!
I HAVE DISHONORED MY MOTHER AND MY FATHER!
I HAVE HAD OTHER GOD’S OVER THE LORD GOD IN HEAVEN!
I HAVE WORSHIPPED FALSE IDOLS!
I HAVE MISUSED THE NAME OF GOD!
I HAVE FORGOTTEN THE SABBATH OR NOT RESTED ON IT!
In other words I have basically broken EVERY SINGLE ONE OF GOD’S TEN COMMANDMENTS!

I am no better than any other. And I deserve to be punished! BUT, here is the thing, the punishment has already been laid out and the pain and suffering of my punishment has been done.

And that punishment was paid. By Jesus!

I am not better than anyone, I am only forgiven,
God has not changed! He still punishes the sin.
It is just that Jesus took my sin. And when I chose to follow Christ I changed.
I changed! NOT God.
I still sin because I am human and it is part of my nature. But I am trying to follow Christ and when I DO sin I ask for Christ to intervene I repent of my sin and I turn to try to do what is right and good.

Liberals might want to say that God has changed because he does not punish us today like he once did, or that they can live how they want because the penalty no longer is upon us but here is the point to that… IF you do not accept Jesus and ADMIT you are a sinner then repent of your sin and ADMIT your need for Jesus then YOU will end up paying that penalty.

But I need to get back to my point.
The thing is that it would seem to me that the Liberals tend to either think that they are better than God and they can therefore BE him or they just think he does not exist.

In fact, as to the second point, I recently watched a debate on Facebook and while the end result was less than inspiring I was very intrigued by how many of the people taking the liberal side of things insisted that there is no such thing as God. That he was/is nothing more than a made up fiction. Existing only in a world of our mind’s creation.

Makes me think, for their sake, they better hope they are right.
But I do not think they are.
IF they are right then there is no hope for any of us. This life is all we get and so all the suffering you are going through is for nothing. Maybe that is what they want though, for us to have no hope.
Or maybe it is another agency, working through them, who wants us to have no hope.

BUT if I am right then there IS hope, unfortunately that hope is one that is limited to those who think as I do, that is to say the only real hope is for those who accepted Jesus as their Lord and Savior.

Make NO mistake though, God will not be fooled and he does not need a jury of our peers. If you choose to live your life the way you want here on earth and refuse to submit to the lordship of God in your life, never accepting Christ as your savior, then you will have to deal with the consequences. There is no construct of man that will supersede the capabilities of God.

Still,

Liberals want to have the lordship over all. They want to tell God that they have it all under control and he can just sit back and let them do it. So I guess that means that they have a God complex.

To them either there is NO god or if there is a god, They are it.



*Which, by the way, is one of the reasons that Christians are against the idea of Homosexuals getting married. To grant them marriage would seem to legitimize their unnatural lusts for one another.
Which, I believe, in turn the homosexual would then try to argue that they did nothing wrong since they were in a “marital relationship” with their “Partner” at the time that they had sex.

the Olympic McMuffin

I was catching up on some tv watching yesterday. And something that came to my attention was Gold Medal winner Gabby Douglas on the Tonight show with Jay Leno.
I thought I would watch for a couple of minutes and so I heard Jay Leno ask her what she ate after the Olympics and she replied that she had had an Egg McMuffin from McDonald’s.

Sitting right next to her though was apparently the first lady Michelle Obama who said “oh Gabby your hurting me here.” Referring to her drive to make all Americans eat healthier.

Gabby laughingly apologized and I thought, “wow I wouldn’t have done that.” I mean no disrespect to either of those people I saw but really come on.
I know that Gabby is a teenager who is being put into new situations that are beyond her experience and I know that MOST people would be a little awestruck to be hobnobbing with national movers and shakers. But I wish that she could have turned to the first lady and said something like…
“listen, I am a Gold Medal winner of the Olympics! I worked hard I trained hard and I did a VERY good job! I think after all the work and exercise and effort I made that I am entitled to enjoy ONE SINGLE EGG MCMUFFIN without you breathing down my neck about it.

“I am NOT over weight, I am NOT obese!”

“I am a healthy young girl who enjoys occasional treats like anyone else does and I am also pretty sure, that with my training regimen, tomorrow I will more than work off ANY calories that I might have gained by eating a fast food sandwich!”
“Besides which it is NOT your place to tell me what I can or cannot eat!”

Or to make that shorter… “You know what? Lay off! I EARNED IT!”

What I find even more disturbing about this is the fact that Mrs. Obama is very quick to tell all of us (including Olympic gold medal winners now, who know VERY well what kind of calorie consumption they can have) how to eat. Meantime EVERY SINGLE FOOD that she has deemed to be bad for all of us, she and her husband will gulp down as fast as they can.
For example, Every where that Michelle Obama has gone we see her eating Burgers, Fries, Onion Rings, Ice Cream, Milkshakes and so on.
When asked about her husband’s (or her) food preferences she mentioned, Guacamole, Onion Rings, Nacho chips and Burgers.

But she has decided that Gabby (ONCE more let me remind you, a girl who has just won several GOLD medals for her athleticism in the Olympics) cannot have an egg McMuffin.

I think the message that Gabby sent was a pretty good one actually. She was saying basically, “look I do a LOT of exercise. I rewarded myself with a special treat. This is not something I do every day five times a day.”

In other words her message is one of moderation! Not excess! And THAT is the best model there is!

So kudos to you Gabby! Keep it up.

As for you Mrs. Obama and all other liberals for that matter, Get the stink out of MY kitchen and diet. That is up to me. And If I cannot have that cheeseburger after my workout then maybe I will just not have the workout in the first place then where will we all be?

My carefully considered response to SCOTUS

I would like to make a point here for all those liberals who are SOOOO compassionate towards the poor and needy.
Did you hear the ruling by the Supreme Court on Obamacare? If so can you explain to me why it is that the decision on how the tax for people who do not carry health insurance is “$95 OR 1% whichever is higher”? let us all think about this.
IF they are willing to put a tax of $95 on something OR 1% “whichever is lower, then that means that they are willing to go at least as low as a $9,000.00 ANNUAL income. The federal poverty level for an individual is $15,000.00 a year.

That means that there has to be intent to apply this tax to people who are below the poverty tax level. The “poor people” who you are so insistent that you want to help with this plan are going to be penalized BY YOU.

Therefor I have determined that I want all of you to be quiet about how you “care so much for the poor” and “all this is for their benefit”. Clearly it isn’t and I am tired of listening to your lies and inconsistencies.

Clearly, WHATEVER you may say, you do not care for, or about, ANYONE at all. All you care about is your own self image and self opinion.

You want to be able to pat yourself on the back while you hurt the people you claim to be helping.
To ME that means… well what it means I cannot say because (1) I am not the kind of guy who uses words like that and (2) even if I were it would be inappropriate to say such things on a public venue such as this.

Suffice it to say that, IF you think this idea is a good one then you have lost ANY respect I might have been able to dig up for you to begin with and in some cases I find you to be no more than a contemptuous jerk.

A different view… I will have to think about this one.

So one argument I heard, on this ACA verdict, was that the Supreme Court did not actually vote on the constitutionality of the law itself. They simply declared that the government cannot force people to buy things BUT the government CAN tax people and they can assess penalties IF they are actually taxes.

So the view is that the Government can tax period
They did not vote on the ACA law as a constitutional entity except for the point that the federal government cannot take away the Medicare assistance from states that decide they do not want to participate.

This means the declaration by Robert’s is gauged to remove the Supreme Court from the political machinations and not giving any power to either side for the upcoming elections. The problem with that view is that the Democrats are claiming that they have won because this means the law is constitutional.


If this was a commerce clause issue then this law would be unconstitutional, but the government can tax. So what we will all have to do is look very closely at what the Court has really said… in other words it is time to really start parsing the WAY they said it because of this.

You don’t HAVE to buy health care, if you choose to not buy it then you will have to pay a higher tax. If you DO choose to buy it then your taxes go down.


Someone has made the point that this was taxation without representation. Everyone wants to say no it isn’t, your congress passed this they are your representatives thus it is NOT taxation without representation, but the guy was insistent and he said, “NO wait think about this. It was passed as a bill with maybe a penalty or mandate as part of the commerce clause, but they insisted THIS IS NOT A TAX. So if they are now calling it a tax it is a tax placed on the voters WITHOUT the representatives getting the chance to vote on it AS A TAX.”

He may have a point.
I will have to think about it

Aiken's mistake

Recently A republican candidate made a boneheaded statement, saying that if a woman is raped then her body has ways of preventing that from turning into a pregnancy.

Immediately influential members of the republican party and other conservatives called for his pulling out of the race for senate that he was in.

The RNC pulled ALL financial support, conservative radio personalities called for him to discontinue his run and conservatives everywhere are saying “NO this guy is not for us.”

His democratic opponent has indicated her “surprise” at the reaction of the conservatives and liberals that I know have declared that the “only reason they [republicans] are being so hard on the guy is because they think it will look bad to support him on the ticket.” Or “it gives his opponent a better chance to keep her seat.”

There is one problem with those assertions though. And that is, they are all nonsense.

The reason why conservatives want this guy off the ticket is because we do not believe in the things that he says. Period. End of story.

The “values” his comment would back are not the values of the republican or conservative platform.

Are we against abortion in general? Yes. Are we against stopping the pregnancy of someone who was raped or who had a tubal pregnancy or in other such cases where the life or wellbeing of the mother and/or the child would be jeopardized? Not necessarily.

One of the big issues at stake here is do we allow people who have been hugely irresponsible get away with no repercussions. Worse every life that is aborted is one that never gets the chance to enjoy life. We all have a life in the here and now. If you are reading this you are alive. You may not like it you may even hate it but you have one.

With that life you have the choice to make whatever decisions you want to. So why are we all hell bent on denying these poor, unborn, children a chance to make up their own minds?

If that child’s life is really going to be as hellish as the critics claim then maybe we ought to let that child make up it’s own mind about what it wants to do about it.

Think about all the influential figures in life who had hellish lives and ended up making the world a better place because they wanted to make their lives better. People like Louis Pasteur, or Samuel Clemens, or even Stephen Hawking.

Most of the stories of inspiration in our culture are about people who overcame from the hardest of circumstances.

Where would we all be if all of those people had been aborted in the womb?

So back to the problem of this conservative idiot, see there is a point that is confusing the liberals, conservatives hold people accountable.

We want to hold people accountable for their actions. We will not let this guy slide, we will not make excuses for him. He has screwed up and now he must pay for it. This is the opposite model that Democrats use.

We will not spin this, we will not laugh it off. He holds an opinion that means that no REPUBLICAN will vote for him.

In short Conservatives use their brains.
And we vote our conscience. And that is why there is this outcry.

My issue with Willie Cunningham.

I am sorry as I was looking over the list of radio personalities with whom I have had issues I realized I missed one. So here we go.

Willie Cunnigham, he is a little extreme sometimes but usually I put that down to his passion. He does get very passionate about things.
Still though, there are a couple of issues that I hold against him.
1. He keeps being FALSELY modest. I know that this is a petty issue but really c’mon. DO NOT tell me that you are quietly proud and humble about winning your second Marconi award while you are trumpeting the fact that you got it every time you get the chance.
You are not being humble OR quiet about it.

Now I will believe that you are proud, and that is fine, but to make claims to humility the way that he does is a false start.
O.k. now that I have that out of the way…

Issue #2. Intolerance. I find that, out of all the radio hosts I listen to, Willie Cunningham is the second most intolerant person on the radio. (Only the liberal Alan Colmes is worse.)
It seems that anytime anyone disagrees with Willie then he cannot accept that they might have anything of value to contribute.

This, to me, is a real issue and failing.

So there you go, I think that is all the radio hosts I will be reporting on but then again I didn’t know this one was lurking.
So if there are any more, they will come out later.

Appeasing a terrorist.

I have heard many times in the last several years that "we ought to try to understand the terrorists and find out WHY they are the way they are so we can make them better". Kind of like we act towards people here who lose control and shoot up their work or whatever. Here is the thing this is what I call the "let's fix it all" syndrome. Now understand that I am all for fixing what can be fixed, but terrorism is not so easy to do. See we tend to think that everyone thinks the same way we do. It is part of the attitude we are raised with here. (Here being the "western" countries.) The thing is that these people do NOT think the same as us. And what is more I can tell you what they want, they have stated it quite clearly. They want us all dead. That is they want anyone who does not believe as they do to die or be their slave. That is all they want. They want their ideals to be the ONLY ideals in the world and anyone who stands against that they want removed. That is why I think we need to stand up against terrorism, I think that everyone ought to be allowed to have his or her own viewpoint. that is the opposite of terrorism that is freedom! terrorism wants to control you, to make you do what they want you to do. So let's choose to be free, and if that is something you cannot abide by, there are plenty of places you can live or go to where they will think just like you.

The source of our racism.

Lately, due to various circumstances I started considering that most sensitive of subjects, Racism. I have heard a lot of people getting into arguments over what is racist. There are major public news stories about events that have been labeled as racist. And there are people who are starting to actually sound racist. I started to wonder why. Why is it that people I know who have never exhibited a racist intent before are all of a sudden starting to become much more polarized, in a negative way, on this subject. Then it hit me… The problem is that if you are going to give anyone preferential treatment or allow them special “passes” that are going to be denied to others then the ones who are being denied will, naturally, begin to resent the people receiving the special favors and privileged positions. That in turn will lead to a self fulfilling prophecy scenario where the person/s who are denied the preferential treatment will aim their resentment at the ones who get the preferred treatment. Thus creating racism. That is right the gist of it is that the system that is supposed to be ending racism is actually inflaming or even Creating the very thing that it is supposed to be designed to fight against. Look at it like this, people see injustice every day, they see people of one “minority race” who regularly harm each other and people of other “races” with no news coverage and no outrage at the horror that is unleashed. But then, in a rare event, when the situation is reversed not only is it news worthy but the whole of that “minority race” stands up and excoriates the other “races” for trying to keep the “minority race” down and that it has to all be due to “racism”. I think that some people are starting to sound a little more racist either because they believe the labels that others cast on them and so are “trying to fit the mold” or they are simply legitimately frustrated. Then rather than aim their anger at the flawed system which caused the injustice they end up aiming it at the individuals who are getting the preferred treatment. Thus racism. Maybe if the “minority race” in question would stand up and tell their spokesmen (self appointed or not) to cut the stupid self serving rhetoric and would try to get along then the racism would go away. Since the election of our “first black president” I have noticed an up tick in the acts that could be considered racist. I have also heard more claims to that state of being. (That our country is racist). Why is it that all of a sudden the election of a black president, supposedly at the time the sign that racism is defeated, has created a whole new world of racism? I think a part of it could honestly be that there are racists out there who are angry and trying to go back to the good old days. But I think A larger part of it is that there are people out there who are accusing others of racism and insisting that EVERY thing anyone else does is motivated purely by racism. In L.A. we hear about cops making a traffic stop that goes bad and the guy in the car (A former prisoner) pulling a gun on the cops resulting in the cops killing him in self defense. But then the people of the neighborhood where that criminal comes from cry out that it was all “because he was a minority, and the cops are all racist [scum]”. No they were simply doing their duty. They were doing what they were hired to do. Period. End of story. But that isn’t good enough. Or the case where a bunch of college kids were accused of committing an act of Criminal Sexual activity against a minority. The news spread it all around that these evil rich boys (all of one race by the way) did this horrendous thing to a poor girl (of a “minority race” by the way). The DA’s assistant had them in court before ANY of the allegations were even investigated. The mouthpieces of the “minority race” were out in force saying how awful it is in this day and age that such things should be happening. The Coach of the team that the accused boys were from was fired, the boys were suspended from school. I mean ALL the stops were pulled. That is until the day that the information came out that (1) the girl who made these claims lied and was just trying to work the system and (2) the Assistant DA covered up all the information that showed this fact. Now all of a sudden the news goes strangely quiet leaving us to wonder, what happened to the boys who were basically exonerated? What happened to the coach who was erroneously fired? What charges were brought against the lady who filed the false report and started us on this road? And last but not least… where are the apologies owed to the coach and those boys from… (1) the media who showed such poor judgement in making this such a big deal (2) The shysters who jumped up in front of the cameras, full of indignant wrath, to call down judgement on those innocents (3) The state officials who went for sensationalism instead of following good procedure (4) The Assistant DA who, although fired, didn’t ever really have to reach out to make amends (as far as we know) (5) The school officials who instead of waiting for a real idea of what was going on acted precipitously in the removal of innocents I mean all of these people acted poorly, at best, and yet they never tried to make it right the way they were so quick to make it wrong. Do I need to point out more examples? The Police officer who, answering a call for help in an affluent area, tried to do his job, but was impeded by the “suspicious person” who turned belligerent and refused to cooperate instead saying the cop wouldn’t be doing this if the suspect was not a “minority race”. Um news flash for you here buddy… Yeah he would, IT IS HIS JOB!!!! You freaking idiot. But all the nation who wants to believe racism is alive and well? Yeah they are in there saying it had to have been racist. Or the “kid” who, sadly, was killed while in an altercation with someone of another “race”. Did you notice, as I did that the news would show pictures of some 60 pound 11 year old tyke with a cheerful grin on his face, while the reports were that a 17 year old 6 foot 2 180 pound “kid” was the victim? I mean why show such an obviously misleading picture? Especially when the only picture they would show, of the other person were his mugshots? Again we also saw everyone jumping to conclusions, and before the month was over certain “representatives” of that “minority race” were declaring they would pay bounties for the guy “alive or dead”. How is that conducive to a civil society? I believe these are the issues why we are seeing an “increase” in the whole racism thing. In fact I recently realized, the only way that racism exists is if people see others as different. Racism comes from a perception that we create by what we see and hear and assume. So the ones who are causing this racism can only be the ones that are seeing the difference/s in the first place. That means the ones who are most responsible for this turn of event are the ones who are ultimately so eager to claim racism exists at every turn. Think about it!

The Hypocrisy of the Anecdote and the EITC. Part 2

Hello, welcome back! Today I wanted to address the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC).

As I mentioned in yesterday’s post I had another issue to talk about and it is the EITC.

The story I mentioned yesterday (the Anecdote that wasn’t) the lady was talking about the importance of the funds people get from the EITC.

She pointed out, rightly, that there are people who cannot make it through without some kind of help. There are people in distress out there who get good use out of the benefits the government gives.

There are also people who abuse the system. Her point I believe was that if we are caring compassionate people we cannot simply let the people who need the programs suffer just because others might benefit from them who do not have a need for them.

And I agree. Here is the problem though. The liberals will keep pointing their fingers at things like the EITC or Access or WIC and say how good these are and how we need to keep these so all those poor kids and others don’t starve, go cold or otherwise suffer. The thing is the Liberals don’t stop at the programs that are helpful. They keep wanting to spend more and more and more and more and…
At the same time there are a lot of people out there who, whether they want to or not, take the position of;
“I am getting these funds and working is so hard, Why should I bother trying to change or improve myself while I am getting all this money for nothing.”

What we really need is a comprehensive system. A way that we can improve people’s position in life and encourage them to grow and get off of the assistance.

For example:
In he case of yesterday’s anecdote that wasn’t, the government could offer that grandmother pay for education. She already has two jobs, if she were getting an education AS A JOB then after graduation from the education she gets a better paying job. Isn’t that better? Then she becomes reliant on herself after a while instead of a capricious government.

That would be a less expensive option than many of the welfare programs that currently exist. It would also put a kind of a burden of responsibility on the individual.

Doing these kinds of things that try to offer a man or a woman a chance to make themselves better is a good way to do things.
It will raise that person’s self esteem (that is a major concern for liberals after all), it will cost less in the long run turning a taker into a giver,(which means it will actually start making more money) it will improve the capabilities of the individual and it will make our country more prosperous and viable.

It also could add a lot more Skilled help to the work force which will encourage more business to start up here which will in turn also build our national wealth.

Like the old saying goes… “you give a man a fish he eats for a day, Teach a man to fish he eats for the rest of his life.”

But until the government starts teaching the needy to fish let’s all have a little bit more compassion for others and maybe start doing the teaching ourselves, instead of griping about the people who won’t.

The Hypocrisy of the Anecdote and the EITC. part 1

So last night I was listening to the radio and as I was scanning through some stations I happened on a certain liberal show that is on every night but I usually don’t listen to.
The host had a call at the time from a woman who was talking about a friend of hers who is a grandmother.

This Grandmother is trying to make ends meet and raise her grandson while working at two minimum wage jobs. She is barely able to make ends meet and relies on the Earned Income Tax Credit in order to make up some of the difference to help her out. (“it was only because of the EITC that she was able to get a mattress, before that she was forced to sleep in a chair that was full of holes.”)

Immediately after she told her story the radio host said “that story was not anecdote. This is what half of our population is going through out there.”

MY JAW DROPPED!!!!!!!!

If that call had been made by a conservative or was against the hosts viewpoint he would have declared it anecdotal and said that it was not real or not what we ought to base anything on. I know because that is exactly the response that many conservatives have gotten on that show.

So the Hypocrisy is revealed. If it agrees with the liberal agenda then it is not anecdote but if it is against their ideals then it doesn’t count it is just anecdote.

Apparently all the liberals out there have a special dictionary.
See MY dictionary describes anecdote as…
“n. A short amusing or interesting story about a real incident or person:
an account regarded as unreliable or hearsay…”
(Oxford dictionary of English; Second Edition, revised.)

I guess, based on the way they use the word, the Liberal dictionary has to say
Anecdote n. A farcical story told by Conservatives that we must ridicule and throw out as useless if it does not suit our needs, please note, any story that sounds anecdotal but supports Liberal Ideology is NOT anecdotal.

Interestingly there was another point in what was in the (NOT ANECDOTAL) story that I want to address but since I do not want that message to get lost in this “rant” I will post that issue next time (look for it tomorrow.)

Please people do not fall for the stupidity being exhibited by these people. Use your mind and see the truth.

Until tomorrow.

Obama outspent???

Recently I saw an ad from the White House stating to all those who are getting married, about to have a birthday, An Anniversary or other special gift giving occasion, that they can ask people to donate to Obama’s reelection campaign in lieu of receiving a gift.

http://www.barackobama.com/news/entry/the-obama-event-registry


I immediately wondered if there wasn’t an ulterior motive to that ad.
Other events that have occurred since then have reinforced that thought. The thought I had was this was an attempt to try to deceive people. This, to me, looked like a way that they could point at the money spent and the democrats could say the only reason Mitt Romney won (if he does win) was because he outspent Obama. That he “Bought” the election.

This is exactly the thing they said about Scott Walker.

Then a few weeks after that White House ad appeared what did I see come up in the news? Obama said that Romney raised more money than the Obama campaign… (“hey look they are outspending us.”) I thought AH HAH! I was right.

THIS MORNING as I logged in to the computer for the day what headline meets my eye?

“Obama bracing to be outspent by Romney!!”
look here

Other people tried to push that idea but the truth is that when compared side by side so far, Obama has raised more money for his campaign over all. Romney only raised more than Obama in the past couple of months. (76 million compared to 60 million they say.)

But to me the fact that Romney raised more than Obama shows me something. That is the people (who are donating to his campaign) would rather see Romney in office than Obama.

The fact that Romney is getting more means, to me, this is the guy that more people want in office. That Obama has screwed up badly enough that they want him gone.

Still let’s be honest. Even though Romney did raise more lately than Obama has OVERALL Obama is still ahead of Romney.

So far they have made this sound like Romney has outspent the president and he even MAY do so at some point. But at this point the president is still ahead on how much money he has collected for his campaign.

And that is understandable! After all The President started raising HIS money a long time ago while the republicans were still slogging it out and none of those candidates could start building a war chest for this campaign.

What kills me is that the democrats are going to do two things. They are going to deny and hide and cover up many of the donations that “aren’t REALLY donations they were just um, kinda generous gifts to the president for his own self not any thing important.”

Nudge nudge wink wink.

Second they are going to cry, moan and whine that Obama was simply outspent and it is all because republicans are “in the pocket of the big oil and big business folks.”
See apparently it is ok for them to get all kinds of money from the big money types that support them but it is NOT all right for the republicans to do the exact same thing.

I think that is what really ticks me off about the democrats and liberals the most. They get up on their high horses telling us how evil everyone else is for doing things that are “shady” by the liberals’ definition, but then they are free to do the EXACT same thing and that is “just the regular activity that goes along with the business of politics,”

It is a level of hypocrisy that stuns and sickens me. Worse, then they turn around again and have the gall to call everyone else hypocrites.


So this November please do not listen to the BS and find the truth consider all angles and vote for the BETTER choice.

The radical cure for racism.

From Jackie Robinson to the Tuskegee Airmen, from Thomas Sowell to Colin Powell, from Tiger Woods to Mean Joe Green, from Denzel Washington to Ray Charles, from every major conflict our country has fought to every sport we enjoy, we have seen them. The amazing people who are of African descent. We have all seen them as they pioneer new inventions, we have all seen them as they have risen above adversity, we have all seen them as they have set the example and we have all seen them as they have entertained us. They have at times embodied the best that man can aspire to. In the Olympics we have seen a bobsled team from Jamaica, YES Jamaica. And we have seen them beat “the master race” in 1930’s Germany. They are just as good as anyone else and they prove it all the time. Only people who are too dense to see or who are too full of poison to figure it out think otherwise. And yet there are people who harp on racism every day. Many of them in the name of fighting it. Well I say if they are harping on it they are really encouraging it! The reason people come to hate is because people are told to! So when people are going around saying look at him he is white so he is ____________ (fill in the blank.) We need to hate him, Or look at him he is black so we have to hate him because he is _____________ (Be honest now, what did you fill in the blank with? And Isn't it possible that, that is because it's what you were trained to do? How about hey look at her she is Hispanic so we must hate her because __________________________ again fill in the blank. what did your mind come up with? what words did YOU put in those blanks? If you did put anything in any of those blanks congratulations you have been exposed to radical, RACIST ideas and they have influenced you into racist behavior. If you could NOT fill in those blanks Congratulations. You are a good person and you need to be careful because this world will eat you up and spit you out. you are lucky to have survived this long. Whatever your mind came up with THAT is the teaching of our society you have to hate this person because... and that is simply the spreading of racism! I think, if only people would shut up about racism and would let the record speak for itself, then we could get past it. Think about it. If you want healing in a relationship you get the problem out in the open, you deal with it and then you let it go. If you keep harping on the same problem over and over and over and… well then it will keep being an issue. NO I am not suggesting we ignore real cases of racist behavior. We need to lance that wickedness like a boil. Drain out the festering pus of it. But lately we are so busy looking for those boils that we are rubbing the skin raw and causing a whole different problem, or maybe it is really a more extreme case of the same problem. Remember the advice you got from your mom? “if you pick it, it will never heal.”? Well the same thing here. Yes we need to stop racism. But we also need to stop CAUSING racism. In a previous post I mentioned what I thought were the causes of racism, but I realize I didn’t give any good ideas on how to combat that issue. So today I want to give you a clear understanding of what I see to be the solution. Here it is. (1) As I already said Stop going on ad infinitum about it. (2) Stop looking for it everywhere, stop calling things racist that aren't! just accept that sometimes things happen because they are part of life; ALL of our lives. (3) Let the actions of the individuals like those I already mentioned speak for themselves. There are hundreds of examples of African descendants who have distinguished themselves and set amazing examples. In acting, there are such outstanding notables as… Louis Gossett Jr. Denzel Washington Cuba Gooding Jr. Morgan Freeman Will Smith Whitney Houston … In music we have such legends as… The Shirelles Ray Charles Nat King Cole Natalie Cole Stevie Wonder Michael Jackson Whitney Houston... In sports there’s… Jackie Robinson Tiger Woods Joe Green Magic Johnson Jesse Owens Shaquille O’Neal… In Military history The Tuskegee Airmen 54th Massachusetts Colin Powell And of course, The thousands of men, and women, who have sacrificed their time and their lives in every combat zone including… The Revolutionary war The Civil war World War 1 World war 2 Korea Vietnam Desert storm/shield Operation enduring freedom… In Science… George Washington Carver Mae Jemison Patricia Bath Garrett Morgan Norbert Rillieux In politics… Martin Luther King Jr. Condolezza Rice Clarence Thomas and this list is a short one there are many more too in all those fields and more. But I think my point is made. I think many would be hard pressed to come up with examples of others that aren’t matched by the examples set here. My point there is that if we simply continue to hold up these awesome examples for people to see and follow then it would not be long before racism would simply slip away. Yes I know some of the names here have also been associated with “bad press” or other(Moments of Indiscretion) but they all rose to the top of their field/s and they all have something good to represent in our culture. Besides look at some of the “Role Models” from other races who also slid to the dark side once (or twice) like… Marilyn Monroe Elvis Presley Bill Clinton Abraham Lincoln And yet they still hold some major prestige, or are remembered fondly, in their areas of expertise. So That is my suggestion for how to overcome Racism. Maybe you think it is simplistic, Maybe you think I am to naïve, Maybe, just maybe, you think I am a racist myself. I am not sure how you come to that point considering the whole set of this piece but I have seen that level of stupidity before. But I honestly believe, As did Martin Luther King Jr., that there is a place in this world where we can all live together EQUALLY without any one “race” having better opportunities or chances than any other. THAT is true equality, and THAT is what will ultimately destroy the specter of racism.