Ronald Reagan on Socialism & Liberalism

I found this piece while suring the met on the day after Christmas (2009).

Ronald Reagan made sense even back them. We sure could use his wisdom today.

Below is a brief discurption which sets up the clip.

Back in 1927, an American socialist, Norman Thomas, six times candidate for president on the Socialist Party ticket, said the American people would never vote for socialism. But he said under the name of liberalism the American people would adopt every fragment of the socialist program.

There are many ways in which our government has invaded the free precincts of private citizens, method of earning a living; our government is in business to the extent of owning more than 19,000 businesses covering 47 different lines of activity. This amounts to 1/5th of the total industrial capacity of the United States.

Clint Eastwood and "Invictus"

I am sitting in my favorite chair, watching "Cash Cab", and surfing the net. A commercial came on for the movie "Invictus".

Below is the plot summary from The Internet Movie Database:

The film tells the inspiring true story of how Nelson Mandela joined forces with the captain of South Africa's rugby team to help unite their country. Newly elected President Mandela knows his nation remains racially and economically divided in the wake of apartheid. Believing he can bring his people together through the universal language of sport, Mandela rallies South Africa's rugby team as they make their historic run to the 1995 Rugby World Cup Championship match.

I am a sucker for a good inspirational sports movie, but I fear "Invictus

" may be another vehicle for Hollywood to revise history and promote their socialist agenda.

I have NEVER been a fan of Nelson Mandela. He was a terrorist who fought against the established government in South Africa and was imprisoned for his actions.

Apartheid was horrid and unjust, but so was Mandela's socialism, and the atrocious act committed by himself and the African National Congress (ANC) should not be forgotten.

He is anti-American and until July 2, 2008, was listed on the United States' official list of terrorists. The ANC was also listed as a terrorist organization.

"Invictus" was directed by Clint Eastwood. History has shown that Eastwood was a long time conservative but recently has been described as a libertarian. He supported John McCain's bid for the White House, but was sympathetic towards Hillary Clinton's bid for the presidency.

In 2006, Eastwood directed two films about the battle of Iwo Jima in World War 2. The first one, "Flags of Our Fathers", focused on the men who raised the American flag on top of Mount Suribachi. The second one, "Letters from Iwo Jima", dealt with the tactics of the Japanese soldiers on the island and the letters they wrote to family members.

Many felt he showed disrespect for the people who fought in World War 2 by humanizing the Japanese in the second film.

As I stated earlier, I hope "Invictus" is not an attempt to further the socialist agenda that is running amok in the United States since the last election.

I hope Eastwood is not going to the Dark Side, but things being the way they are, he could have been a RINO all along, citing his support of McCain and his sympathetic view of Hillary Clinton.

"Sometimes if you want to see a change for the better, you have to take things into your own hands." - Clint Eastwood

Conservatives + War Mongers-I DON"T THINK SO!!!!!

I saw the following stats on a website and thought they looked very interesting. When the koolade drinking, pot smoking, abortion supporting, tree hugging, bleeding heart liberal (socialist) democrats say Conservative Republicans are war mongers, throw these facts at them.

Post WWII wars and casualties:
Harry Truman: Korea = 36,574 casualties
Lyndon Johnson: Vietnam = 58,209 casualties
democrat total = 94,783 casualties

Republican presidents Eisenhower and Nixon got us out of Korea and Vietnam.

George H.W. Bush: The Gulf War = 529 casualties
George W. Bush: The War on Terror = 4734 casualties (to this point)
Republican total 5,263

In any sane and logical world, how could they interpret that Republicans are war mongers?

What a bunch of MOOKS!!!!

"Bigot-A person who wins an argument with a liberal" - Rush Limbaugh

Democrats = Zombies

While I was surfing the web looking for ideas for a post, I came across this video clip on YouTube.

It is amazing what you can find on the Internet from a movie that was made 68 years ago that is applicable to today's issues.

I will post the quote below the video.




Geoff (as played by Richard Carlson): "When a person dies and is buried, it seems there's certain voodoo priests who have the power to bring him back to life."
Mary (as played by Paulette Goddard): "How horrible."
Geoff (as played by Richard Carlson): : "It's worse than horrible because a zombie has no will of his own. You see them sometimes, walking around with dead eyes, following orders, not knowing what they do, not caring."
Larry (as played by Bob Hope): "You mean like democrats?"

Wackos Attack a Fellow Blogger

I was reading some of the posts on my blog list today and stopped by Domestic Divapalooza. I have been reading her blog (and numerous previous blogs) for a long time.

She is a good, level headed All America Christian woman who uses her blog to expound her thoughts and beliefs on various topics. Recently, she posted a series of very humorous pictures of what the United States might be like if Barack Hussein Obama gains the White House. I have published some of them below.

If you get a chance click over to her blog and view the pictures and read the comments. I imagine you will be amused at the pictures and pissed at some of the comments left by the great unwashed "liberal" masses. I have posted some of the photos below.

Let's get together and support her against some of the negative comments she is enduring. She is a great woman, a great mother, a great American, and a great Christian.

"Do the right thing. It will gratify some people and astonish the rest." - Mark Twain

Sunsara Taylor: A Wild Radical? You Make The Choice?

I was watching The O’Reilly Factor last night on Fox News and he had Laura Ingraham sitting in for him. She had on Sunsara Taylor, who is a writer for the Revolution Newspaper and sits on the Advisory Board of The World Can’t Wait-Drive Out the Bush Regime.

As I listened to her and Laura go back and forth, all I could think was how much of a wacko she (Taylor) was.

She is completely out of control; a real nut case. The more she talked, the more ridiculous she sounded. I am going to keep my eye and ear out for her. She certainly sounds like a dangerous young woman and reminds me of some of the radical hippies of the 1960s.

Here is a link to her blog. I do not know where she gets her material, but it seems she has a great deal of hate in her. The sites I have linked above have some very dangerous ideas and thoughts on them.

"Of Whom Should The Government Take Care?"

"Correction of my Grammatically Challenged Title"
A comment was left by "anonymous" stating the my title "Who Should The Government Take Care Of?" was not grammatically correct. I have corrected it and give him full credit for catching my error. Just like the "Unknown Solider" buried in Washington, DC, this kind individual will have to remain "anonymous" to the world. Thank you for helping me be a better writer and thank you for doing it in a polite and courtious manner. I sincerlely appreciate it. Now on to the post.


After watching the Democratic debate in Las Vegas the other night, I started to think about a theory I developed many years ago. I believe that it is as true today as when I first came up with it thirty years ago.

The liberal Democrats want money, money, and more money for their pet projects. They want to be everything to everyone and they do not care what it costs.

I believe there are four groups of people whom the government need to take care of and protect. I do not mean 100% care and 100% protection. I mean if they need help and have no one else to turn to, the government should be there to help, within reason.

1: CHILDREN: The government needs to take care of children in matters of education, child abuse, and their general wellbeing. This does not remove the biological parents or family from their responsibility for the children. The family should be the primary resource for child rearing.

2: ELDERLY: The government need to help the elderly when they can no longer take care of themselves. This does not mean a free handout for those who chose to sit on the asses and not accomplish anything in their lifetime. This does not remove the biological family from their responsibility for the elderly. The family should be the primary resource for caring for the elderly.

3: PEOPLE WHO CANNOT PHYSICALLY OR MENTALLY TAKE CARE OF THEMSELVES: People who have physical and mental disabilities should be taken care. However, the family should have the primary responsibility for them. The government should look out for them and make sure they are not abused or denied basic services. This does not include those who placed themselves in this state, such as alcoholics and drug users.

4: PEOPLE WHO HAVE SERVED IN THE MILITARY TO DEFEND OUR COUNTRY: People who defend our country should be taken care of for life That should be a basic benefit for those who serve in the military.

As for everyone else, they can get off their lazy butts and get a job. If they choose not to work, they can starve. I could not care less. If you are able to work, then work If you refuse, do not expect a handout from the government. That goes for your family too.

I expect some people to agree with me and others to disagree. Let me know what you think and please remember to keep it clean (or relatively so.)

Great Reading for Teachers

I recently bought the book "Behind Enemy Lines...A Conservative Teacher's Observations of Generation XXX" by Marc Howard.

Right after I got it, I sat down and began reading. I could not put it down. I highly recommend it to all educators, parents, and any one who has dealings with students of any age.

He did an excellent job. My only regret is that I did not write the book. I have seen everything he describes in the book in my 30 plus years as an educator.

This book is a great read.

A Quick Quiz on History

I was having another evening (or should I say early, early morning) of insomnia and began surfing on my computer.

I began reading the blog of one of my favorite bloggers, Ol' BC, and came across this interesting quiz. He had posted it as a link from another blogger, Delftsman.

Please take a few minutes to answer the questions. They will really make you think. The answers are posted as comments in the "comments" section of the post.

Have fun and enjoy.

*************************************************************************************

It's been said that if you don't learn from history, your doomed to repeat it, so here's a little history lesson; If you don't know the answer make your best guess. Answer all the questions before looking at the answers. No fair peeking!
Who said it?

1) "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

A. Karl Marx
B. Adolph Hitler
C. Joseph Stalin
D. None of the above


2) "It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few...and to replace it with shared responsibility for
shared prosperity."

A. Lenin
B. Mussolini
C. Idi Amin
D. None of the Above


3) "(We)...can't just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people."

A. Nikita Khrushev
B. Josef Goebbels
C. Boris Yeltsin
D. None of the above


4) "We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up a little bit of their own...in order to create this common ground."

A. Mao Tse Dung
B. Hugo Chavez
C. Kim Jong Il
D. None of the above


5) "I certainly think the free-market has failed."

A. Karl Marx
B. Lenin
C. Molotov
D. None of the above


6) "I think it's time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being watched."

A. Pinochet
B. Milosevic
C. Saddam Hussein
D. None of the above

Now click on the "comments" section below. See if you did as well as I.

Rosie O'Donnell: Loser To The Nth Degree

Rosie O'Donnell is a sick, sick evil woman. The photo to the right was posted to her blog.

She said her kids were just playing and she felt it was art.

This is sick! The bad thing is it is acceptable by liberal standards.

She doesn’t believe in guns, yet her bodyguard has carries a gun.

She doesn't believe in the war, yet has Army toys around the house for her kids to play with.

She is using her children to further political and lifestyle choices. That child's eyes are lifeless. They have no emotion.

Rosie said her kids were just playing she shot photos of what she saw.

Yeah....Right....So she says. That photo was staged... No doubt about it.

She is such a loser. This is an exact reason why a child needs a MOTHER and a FATHER, not two mothers.

Rosie is such an evil loser. She will do anything to keep her name in the spotlight, and the great unwashed, uneducated masses line up to follow her.

This photo is going to come back to haunt her in the future. Mark my words!!!

How Conservartive or Liberal Are You?

I found this test over at at Buckhorn Road blog site.

Try it out. My score is listed below!!!

Your Political Profile:

Overall: 95% Conservative, 5% Liberal Social Issues: 75% Conservative, 25% Liberal Personal Responsibility: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal Fiscal Issues: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal Ethics: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal Defense and Crime: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal

How Liberal Or Conservative Are You?

William Jerrerson INDICTED

Louisiana Democratic Representative William Jefferson was indicted today on federal charges of racketeering, soliciting bribes and money-laundering

The charges stem from a long-running bribery probe surrounding Jefferson's business dealings in Africa. Jefferson is accused of soliciting bribes for himself and his family, and also for bribing a Nigerian official, the Associated Press reported.

The probe made headlines in August 2005 when investigators raided Jefferson's Louisiana home and found $90,000 in cash stowed in his freezer in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

I only have one response.

IT IS ABOUT TIME!!!

Houston Independent Media Center

I frequently visit the Houston Independent Media Center website to keep track of what the tree hugging, koolade drinking, left wing nut cases are doing.

The site is actually a good place to find out where the liberal wackos are "doing their thing" to give me ammunition for my blog.

Below is a short clip from a posting on their blog about their upcoming meeting. Pay particular interest to the words printed in RED.

This Saturday, from 4 to 6 pm, Houston Indymedia comes together for its monthly general meeting. Come to discuss coverage, film screenings, our radio show, outreach y mas.

This month, we're meeting at the t.e.j.a.s. office on 6733 Harrisburg Blvd (in the East End). Check us out if you're into making independent media as part of a non-commerecial, democratic collective that serves as the local organizing unit of the globall Indymedia network.

Doesn't the words "democratic collective" bring back the memory of the good old Communist party. Makes one wonder what their true leanings are.

Rosie O'Donnell: The Newest Member of the "Dancing Monkey Club"

Rosie O'Donnell needs to just shut her mouth and move on. In fact, she is actually helping the conservatives. When people who have loved ones in the military hear her describe them as "stupid" and "felons," they will turn on her and her views.

As I have stated in previous posts and on other blogs I have posted on, this is a classic example of the "Dancing Monkey Syndrome."

Rosie needs to stick to the entertainment world and entertain us like the "little monkey" she is. No one really cares about an enetrtainer's political opinions.

Remember she got her start as a VJ on MTV. That is the same network that brought us "Rock the Vote" and a young woman asking Slick Willie if he wore boxers or briefs.

Here is the clip from "The View" this morning. She is such a hack!!!


O’DONNELL: Wait, can I just say something? Why do people enlist in the Army?

RICKI LAKE: To get an education, and they're poor-

O’DONNELL: Thank you.

LAKE: -and that’s the only way to get one.

O’DONNELL: The vast majority– Yes, Elisabeth. It’s true!

No, it’s not. According to a recent study by the Heritage Foundation, military enlistees are "better educated, wealthier, and more rural on average than their civilian peers." Additionally, "recruits have a higher percentage of high school graduates" and "the distribution of household income of recruits is noticeably higher than the entire youth population." Of course, facts don’t matter to Rosie O’Donnell. After all, fire can’t melt steel.
Token non-liberal Elisabeth Hasselbeck responded harshly and Rosie continued to smear volunteer soldiers before she claimed that she does support the troops.

HASSELBECK: First of all, in the past year, the testing scores of our armed services have been higher than ever, so the education level-

O’DONNELL: You are wrong. We have more convicted felons in the Army because we’re allowing them to get through.

HASSELBECK: So they're awful. They’re awful then.

O’DONNELL: Elisabeth, I do everything I can to support the troops financially and emotionally. I love them as much as you do. I'm as much of a patriot. I want them home.

Texas Democrats: "You Must Be 19 To Buy Cigarettes"

You're old enough to vote and serve your country at 18, but you'd have to wait a year to buy cigarettes under a bill approved Thursday by the Texas Senate.

State Senate Carlos Uresti a Democrat from San Antonio whom is sponsoring the bill, was quoted saying "The further you can put this (legal age) off, there's a much better chance that people will not start to smoke,"

A person is legally old enough to vote. They are old enough to join the military and fight in a war. They are in most ways, legally an adult.

This is another case of lunacy running amuck.

If you are old enough to vote, fight in a war and do things that other adults can do, then you should be old enough to smoke.

Do I smoke? NO. Never have. Never will.

But if you are an adult, then it is YOUR CHOICE. This is another case of government wanting to get caught up in your lives.

Smoking is a nasty habit. I don't like to be around people who smoke, but it is their choice and if their smoking makes me uncomfortable, then I move.

The same goes with drinking. If you are 18 and considered an adult, you should be allowed to drink alcohol.

Do I drink alcohol? Not much. I have in the past, and I do enjoy a beer every now and then.

Do I drink hard liquor, NO, I don't. I can't handle it.

My choice not to drink (much) is my choice. A glass of wine or beer never killed anybody. In fact, I have read that it may be a health benefit. Moderation is the key.

My mother was an alcoholic and smoked her whole life. Both of these killed her in her early 60s. I have seen what it does and I want no part of it.

The bottom line is, in my humble opinion, that if you are of legal age to vote, be in the military, and fight in a war, you should be able to smoke and drink.

It is your choice, but do not expect any sympathy from me when you get lung cancer and liver damage. After all, you made the choice and you since you made an adult decision to partake of these "things" you might have to suffer the consequences.

This is another case of the liberals wanting more control of our lives.

N.J. School Portrays Christians as Terrorists

A New Jersey High School stages a mock school shooting and portrays the gunman as right-wing religious fundamentalists.

It figures that New Jersey is a center of liberal values. If the school had portrayed the gunman as Islamic fundamentalists, you know that some would be up in arms.

I am so tired of the Right taking hit after hit from those who wish to destroy this country. I am willing to bet nothing will be done the the principal and administration that allowed this to happen.

Gingrich: Bilingual Education Is Ghetto-Part 2

Newt Gingrich was on "The O'Reilly Factor" tonight. He responded to Bill O'Reilly's question about why he posted a response in Spanish on YouTube.

He said English should be the official language of the United States. O'Reilly said he knew Newt wasn't being mean spirited. Newt responded he wants to be able to reach everyone with his conservative views.

He clarified his statement that he meant people who do not learn the language of their country (English) where they live (United States), they are relegated to remaining in the ghetto.

I knew that what he meant. He is correct in his assertion that immigrants need to learn English. I agree 100%. Why would one CHOOSE to live in a country and not learn the native language? I have an opinion on that, but it is better leaf to a blog post in the future.

Leave it to the liberals to find a way to turn everything around. As usual they turn things around in order to turn people against conservative views. That is exactly what they did here.

Teachers Given New Discipline Powers

England has given teachers the power to handle students the way they should be handled

Speaking on behalf of teachers everywhere, I would LOVE to see this law enacted in the United States.

Click here for the story from Yahoo News and Reuters

Imagine what that would mean:

1. Teachers could actually teach.

2. Students and parents would be held accountable.

3. Our decisions would be backed by the law.

But you know, the liberal Democrats would never allow it.

As always, they would think we would be stifling the little “angels.”

Alas, We can always hope.

City readies "Boot the Mentally Retarded" Revenue Stream

This is typical of a liberal like Houston Mayor Bill White. I bet he was looking as a big paycheck for the city and possible political contributions from the developes he sells the land to.

Read the clip below. If this doesn't "piss you off," then nothing will.

The Houston Chronicle's Melanie Markley reports that the city is proceeding with plans to tear up its lease with a local non-profit group that houses the mentally retarded, so that it can deliver their prime River Oaks real estate to local developers (and enjoy a nice revenue boost):

For more than 40 years, it has occupied a prime chunk of public real estate near River Oaks caring for, employing and housing the mentally retarded.

But now the city of Houston is planning to sell the land to the highest bidder, meaning the nonprofit Center Serving Persons with Mental Retardation has to find a new home.

The center's directors do not intend to go quietly. They have a 99-year lease signed with the city in the 1960s that required them to construct buildings and provide services for one of the city's neediest populations.

The 99-year lease, signed in 1963 by then-Mayor Lewis Cutrer, is not valid, city lawyers argue, because the city charter limits such agreements to no more than 30 years.

Center officials also worry that the move seriously will jeopardize the centrally located services they provide for roughly 600 Houstonians.

Most at risk, they say, are the nearly 200 adults living in a dormitory on the property. The center faces the task of building new living quarters or finding other facilities and homes that can take them.

We're thinking that it's not going to be very helpful to Mayor White's plans to run for statewide office when opposition researchers discover that he was the Houston mayor who booted mentally retarded people out on the street to help out real-estate developers (or, for that matter, that he was the Houston mayor who planned to finance his big freeway towing program partially on the backs of poor people whose cars were towed, confiscated, and sold by favored towing companies).

Here's hoping Mayor White rethinks this one. He can surely find some other ways to generate revenue.

Charging for a Conference to Impeach Bush

Sometimes, when I have a few minutes, I check out the liberal websites and blogs to see what kind of trash they are putting out to the masses.

One site I frequent is the IndyMedia site in Houston. I can usually get a laugh and sometimes an idea for a post. This morning was no exception. They had a listing from the Houston Peace and Justice Center. I went to their site and found a another listing about a meeting in New York City.

In New York City, on February 17-18, there was an "Emergency Conference to Impeach Bush for War Crimes." What I can't figure out is why this posting would be on a Houston site? Did they really think someone would travel all the way from Houston to New York City to attend?

Here is the post. See if you can pick up some interesting things in it.

Sponsors of this event in New York City believe that it is time to put impeachment back on the table. Iraq spins out of control. Bush escalates plus threatens a still wider war with Iran. The Bush program of torture and illegal detentions continues. Bush's full domestic intelligence program remains in effect: NSA spying, the Patriot Act, the Military Commission Act. Workshops on state-by-state activities for impeachment; organizing labor unions; youth and student organizing; walk-outs, strikes, teach-ins. There'll be an all-afternoon intensive tutorial by experts on the crimes of the Bush administration. Co-sponsors are AfterDowningStreet.org, Progressive Democrats of America, and Green Party of the United States. Registration fee: $25-$50 per person, students/low income: $10-$20. For more information and to register, contact summit@worldcantwait.org or call 866-973-4463.

My questions are as follows:

1. How does one become an expert on the crimes of the Bush Administration?

2. How is it determined if someone is low income?

3. Why is there a sliding scale for payment: $25-$50 per person, $10-$20 for students/low income?

4. Why are they charging at all? If this is that important to them, they might get more supporters is they hosted the conference and let everyone in free.

5. Where was the money going/ If the conference was a sponsored event, it seems to be that the sponsors should take care of the cost.

6. Why was this meeting considered an "Emergency"?

I will never understand liberals. They live in their own little world.