Defining the Abstract

We spend a great deal of time in our country (way too much in my opinion) in arguing over what things mean.  How exactly do you define the abstract?  What does it mean when people say "they just want freedom" when talking about people from other nations?  Do they define freedom the same way you do?

We can't agree on what freedom means in this country, yet people want to define it for someone who has no concept for government like ours.  They have never lived in a "free" society.  President Bush famously (or infamously depending on how you look at it)

"And my deepest conviction, the guiding principle of the administration, is that the United States of America must drive to expand the reach of freedom.”

Go and talk to the average person who lives in Europe and ask them if they are "free" and have "freedom".  The answer you are very likely to get is yes.  Yet, you ask a person who is on the right in this country if they do the answer is very likely to be no.  Most European countries are set up as Socialist Democracies.  A very ugly concept to the view of many in this country.

The Arab spring didn't happen because of the overwhelming desire for freedom.  It started over the price of bread.  In Egypt and Palestine they have gone to the polls and voted in the likes of Hamas and The Muslim Brotherhood.  While you do have to take into account that many of these elections are likely rigged, but sorry to burst your bubble, many people willingly voted these people into office.

While that sometimes is mind-boggling, one has to remember that both of these terrorist organizations also have an arm to them that aren't at all terrorist, but work as a charitable organization.  They help the unemployed feed their families, they help with goods and services that many of the poor in those areas simply cannot afford to get on their own.  When you have close to 70% unemployment in the Palestinian Territories, you are going have a great deal of need.  These organizations go in and fill those needs.  It allows them to do their terrorist activities with a wink and nod from the population, they aren't going to bite the hand that feeds them.  For many, this isn't just a saying, but a literal thing for them.  They are dependent on these people for their livelihoods and for those of their children.  It is far more complicated than many in this country dare to even try to understand.

The world is a very complicated place.  It is very easy to sit in the cheap seats, which believe me the U.S. are the cheap seats, and make statements about what others want and need.   When you live in the U.S. you have safety nets in place (we can argue the right and wrong of these at another time).  No matter how poor you are in this country, you are still richer than approximately 70% of the rest of the world.  This isn't about bashing poor people in this country, but just about perspective.

I saw this posted by Kira Davis on her Facebook page yesterday:

I make it a general rule not to argue about the Constitution or the principles of freedom with non-Americans. Not because of anything biased or personal, but just because being an immigrant myself I know that the way the rest of the world views freedom is far, far different than how Americans view freedom - yes, even the lefties. You can't debate someone who has a fundamentally different understanding of what it means to be a free citizen and what a "right" is.

Decades ago we saw people in the streets in China demanding more "freedoms".  The government crackdown was harsh and immediate.  But, in those preceding decades, the government of China has loosened some of the restrictions.  The citizens are getting more freedom over their lives from an economic perspective.  There are more jobs.  There is more autonomy.  They are allowing more and more people to drive cars.  I look at that country and am horrified at how little freedom those people have, yet they are feeling more comfortable with the changes the government is making.  It is about perspective.  I don't get to define what freedom means to the average Chinese citizen. I wouldn't want to live there, but that doesn't mean that many of the people who do aren't satisfied with their lives.

Emerging markets growth will also dramatically redistribute the bourgeois around the world. For instance, as our Rapid-Growth Markets Forecast explores, the number of households in Mexico with annual disposable incomes over US$50,000 is expected to reach 7.1 million by 2020, and 9.4 million in Brazil. For both countries this is an increase of over 50%.

Nevertheless, China’s and India’s contributions will be substantial.

Today, China has around 150 million people earning between US$10 and US$100 per day. As long as China continues to grow, and necessary economic reforms are made, we expect as many as 500 million Chinese could enter the global middle class over the next decade.

By 2030 around one billion people in China could be middle class — as much as 70% of its projected population.

To them, this may mean "freedom".  You can't say that it does or it does not.  But many have said over the years the reasons that the communist government of China made economic reforms to help its citizens, is because it wanted to keep mass unrest from happening.  This likely will allow them to control the country for a longer period of time.  Are the people stupid for going along with it?  Some will say yes, others will say no.  That will depend on your perspective.  Many in this country look at this a model of how government should work.  The heavy hand of government to guide economic policies that help all.  That is their idea of freedom.

We can talk all we want about what people in foreign lands want and or need.  We are doing so from our perspective, not from theirs.  We have not lived their lives in those places.  We don't get to define what their lives should be, what their hopes and desires should be.  We also can do the same about people in this country.  We have plenty of people in this country who define freedom in ways that I don't.

When you make broad statements about what abstract concepts mean, just remember that just because you define it a certain way that doesn't mean that others do the same way.  When you talk about how everyone just wants freedom, just remember what they view as freedom won't necessarily match up with you think it means.

Tony Blair believes in "freedom" heck President Bush even gave him the Presidential Medal of Freedom, and he is a socialist.

"We are a left of centre party, pursuing economic prosperity and social justice as partners and not as opposites"

Chavez - A Champion for the Poor?

This from 2010:

Analyst estimates Chávez’s family fortune at around $2 billion

Criminal Justice International Associates (CJIA), a risk assessment and global analysis firm in Miami, estimated in a recent report that the Chávez Frías family in Venezuela has “amassed a fortune” similar to that of the Castro brothers in Cuba.

According to Jerry Brewer, president of CJIA, “the personal fortune of the Castro brothers has been estimated at a combined value of around $2 billion.”
“The Chávez Frías family in Venezuela has amassed a fortune of a similar scale since the arrival of Chávez to the presidency in 1999,” said Brewer in an analysis published in their website.

Brewer said that Cuba is receiving about $5 billion per year from the Venezuelan treasury and in oil shipments and other resources.

We believe that organized bolivarian criminal groups within the Chávez administration have subtracted around $100 billion out of the nearly $1 trillion in oil income made by PDVSA since 1999.”

From ABC News Jan 2013:

1. Venezuela has gone from being dependent on oil to being extremely dependent on oil.

Former minister Gerver Torres points out that in 1998 oil represented 77 percent of Venezuela's exports but by 2011 oil represented 96 percent of exports. That means today only around 4 percent of the goods that Venezuela exports are non-oil products! The Venezuelan economy relies almost exclusively on the price of oil and the ability of the government to spend oil revenues. This will take years to reverse because of item two below.

2. The Chavez government has crippled private businesses and national industry through expropriations and nationalizations.

The Chavez government has expropriated or nationalized numerous companies (no one seems to be able to count them all) involved in various sectors including aluminum, cement, gold, iron, steel, farming, transportation, electricity, food production, banking, paper and the media. The number of private companies in industry has dropped from 14,000 in 1998 to only 9,000 in 2011, according to Torres.

Companies need investment to grow and hire new workers. One of the biggest failures of the Chavez government has been to drive away both domestic and foreign investors. In 2011 Latin America enjoyed a record of more than $150 billion in foreign investment with Brazil receiving $67 billion. Venezuela's neighbor Colombia received $13 billion while Venezuela received only $5 billion. To avoid expropriation and find investment a number of Venezuelan companies have moved to Colombia, Panama and the United States.

3. The Venezuelan currency is a mess.

The new currency, the Bolivar fuerte, is anything but strong. The Bolivar fuerte has lost nearly two-thirds of its value since it was launched in 2008. Many analysts expect Venezuela will have to go through a painful devaluation sometime this year or next. This will further reduce the value of wages and sharply increase the costs of imports of basic staple goods. Life will get tougher for most Venezuelans but Chavez probably won't be around to see it.

4. Prices in Venezuela have gone up by 23 percent a year for more than ten years.

Inflation in Venezuela has averaged 23 percent during 1999-2011 compared to a Latin American average of 4.6 percent. Imagine what life would be like if the price of groceries went up 23 percent every year. This craziness combined with stringent price controls has completely distorted the economy, creating black markets and shortages. In 2012 Venezuela will again have one of the highest inflation rates in the world.

5.Under Chavez Venezuela has become one of the most violent countries on the planet.

The murder rate per 100,000 citizens has risen from 25 in 1999 to 45.1 in 2011. This is not an economic stat per se but violence has an economic impact. It is more challenging and dangerous than ever to do business and go to work in Venezuela. When you consider these points, it's hard to call the economic legacy of Chavez and his band of 21st Century Socialists a good one.

From Amnesty International:

Police and security forces

Public security remained a major concern and, according to latest figures released by the Institute of National Statistics, more than 21,000 people were killed nationwide in 2009. There were allegations of police involvement in killings and enforced disappearances.

• In September, Wilmer José Flores Barrios became the sixth member of the Barrios family to be killed in circumstances suggesting the involvement of members of the Aragua State Police. At the end of the year, Venezuela had not adopted measures to protect the family, nor had it ordered an effective investigation into these crimes.
• In March, eyewitnesses saw three labourers – Gabriel Antonio Ramírez, José Leonardo Ramírez and Nedfrank Xavier Cona – being bundled into an unmarked car by a group of between 17 and 20 police officers in the city of Barcelona, Anzoátegui State. At the end of the year, the whereabouts of the men remained unknown. Six police officers were under arrest at the end of 2010 in connection with the incident; a higher-ranking officer remained at liberty.

Repression of dissent

Those critical of the government were prosecuted on politically motivated charges in what appeared to be an attempt to silence them.

• In March, Oswaldo Álvarez Paz, a member of an opposition party and ex-governor of the Zulia State; Guillermo Zuloaga, owner of TV station Globovisión; and Wilmer Azuaje, an opposition candidate for the governorship of Barinas State, were detained for several days on spurious charges. The charges remained pending at the end of the year.
• Richard Blanco, Prefect of Caracas, was released in April, after four months in prison, but continued to face unsubstantiated charges of inciting violence and injuring a police officer during a demonstration against an education law in 2009.
• In November, the trial began of trade unionist Rubén González, general secretary of Sintraferrominera, the union representing workers at the state-run iron mine CVG Ferrominera Orinoco in Bolivar State. He was charged with inciting a crime, curtailing people’s freedom to work, and violating a security zone following his participation in a strike in 2009. He had been in pre-trial detention for over a year and the charges against him appeared to be disproportionate.

People boast on how he was "democratically elected":

He cemented his rule by rewarding allies. Opportunists, notably senior military officers and the tycoons known as “boligarchs”, got rich manipulating government contracts. Civilian ideologues and Cuba got power and influence. Hundreds of thousands of ordinary people got jobs in a bloated bureaucracy. And millions of the poor got social services, scholarships and handouts, notably fridges, tumble dryers and washing machines. Those who voted against him were often barred from government jobs and benefits.
Other Latin American governments knew of the abuses, that elections were free though not fair, but stayed silent. Venezuela’s hollowed economy required huge imports from its neighbours to keep shelves stocked. Why risk the bonanza? Plus Chávez offered discounted oil, called time on Yankee meddling and told the IMF to stuff itself.

And:

Venezuela hasn’t invited international observers to watch its elections since 2006, although it does allow “witnesses” to the process

Somehow this man is a hero to the left:

Hollywood liberals Sean Penn, Michael Moore and Oliver Stone have paid tribute to Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez, who died on 5 Marchafter a long battle with cancer, at the age of 58.

Penn, who first met Chávez in Venezuela in 2007 and attended a candlelit vigil for the stricken firebrand in Bolivia in December, bemoaned the politician's lack of credibility in North America. "Today the people of the United States lost a friend it never knew it had. And poor people around the world lost a champion," he said in a statement to the Hollywood Reporter. "I lost a friend I was blessed to have. My thoughts are with the family of President Chávez and the people of Venezuela." Penn added: "Venezuela and its revolution will endure under the proven leadership of vice president [Nicolas] Maduro."

Oliver Stone, who celebrated Chávez's presidency and the successes of left wing politicians across South America in his 2009 documentarySouth of the Border, said the Venezuelan leader would be remembered fondly by historians as a champion of the poor. "I mourn a great hero to the majority of his people and those who struggle throughout the world for a place," he said in a statement. "Hated by the entrenched classes, Hugo Chávez will live forever in history. My friend, rest finally in a peace long earned."

Michael Moore, who met Chávez at the Venice film festival in 2009 and posted pictures of himself with the president, tweeted: "Hugo Chávez declared the oil belonged 2 the ppl. He used the oil $ 2 eliminate 75% of extreme poverty, provide free health & education 4 all. That made him dangerous. US approved of a coup to overthrow him even though he was a democratically-elected president."

If this is a hero, what does a villain look like?  Oh yeah, I forgot George W. Bush.

I would like to give Kudos to Think Progress of all sources.  They had the balls to stand up to the crazies on the left:

Rep. Jose E. Serrano (D-NY) released a statement today praising former Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, despite the latter’s record of harsh crackdowns on his political opponents and state-sanctioned persecution against Venezuela’s Jewish population. Serranotweeted a statement praising Chavez as an a champion of the oppressed, writing that “Hugo Chavez was a leader that understood the needs of the poor. He was committed to empowering the powerless. R.I.P. Mr. President.” Serrano’s office later released a statement expanding on the tweet:

President Chavez was a controversial leader. But at his core he was a man who came from very little and used his unique talents and gifts to try to lift up the people and the communities that reflected his impoverished roots. He believed that the government of the country should be used to empower the masses, not the few. He understood democracy and basic human desires for a dignified life. His legacy in his nation, and in the hemisphere, will be assured as the people he inspired continue to strive for a better life for the poor and downtrodden.”

While even Chavez’s critics admit that he did attempt to address the plight of Venezuela’s poorest, the decline in economic inequality in Venezuela reflected a broader egalitarian trend in Latin America, and can’t be fully credited to Chavez’s policies. However, Chavez’ policies harmed Venezuela’s poorest in other ways: the value of the Venezuelan currency dropped while prices soared, making it harder for people to buy basic necessities, and crime skyrocketed.

Moreover, Chavez hurt the vulnerable in Venezuela in other ways. Chavez’s state-run media hounded Venezuela’s small, beleaguered Jewish population — he himself once said “Don’t let yourselves be poisoned by those wandering Jews.” A study released by the Kantor Center at Tel Aviv University found that Chavez’s rule “witnessed a rise in antisemitic manifestations, including vandalism, media attacks, caricatures, and physical attacks on Venezuelan Jewish institutions.” Indeed, roughly half of Venezuelan Jews fled the country because of “the social and economic chaos that the president has unleashed and from the uncomfortable feeling that they were being specifically targeted by the regime.”

Chavez also attacked Venezuela’s democratic political system. Human Rights Watch reported in 2012 that “the accumulation of power in the executive and the erosion of human rights protections have allowed the Chávez government to intimidate, censor, and prosecute critics and perceived opponents in a wide range of cases involving the judiciary, the media, and civil society.” Contra Serrano, Venezuela’s elections were not certified as “free and fair” by international monitors of late: Chavez had not allowed international election monitors to observe Venezuelan elections since 2006.

Meet the Latest Medal of Freedom Winner & By The Way She is the Honorary Chair of the Democratic Socialists of America

Yep, the president that the left keeps saying doesn't have socialist tendencies just gave one of the highest honors given to a civilian in America to a socialist.  She is a big fan of Hugo Chavez.

Read more here.

She is also said to the be the inspiration behind Obama's Yes We Can slogan during the 08 campaign.  Oh, thanks for that.

Quote of the Day - Elle McPherson

Yeah, I'm living in London and I'm a socialist.  What do you expect?

Elle McPherson, Former Supermodel, on her opinion if Obama should be re-elected.


Yeah, it is just the conservatives who think he is a socialist.  Hey Elle, how much of your money do you share?  Just wondering.  

Book Review - Never Allow a Crisis Go To Waste - Bart DePalma

I was contacted by the author, Bart DePalma, and asked to be part of a virtual book tour.  Since I love to read, I said sure no problem.  

Never Allow a Crisis to Go to Waste.  Barack Obama and The Evolution of American Socialism is an in depth look at the tactics that President Obama has used to drive this country closer and closer to socialism.  But he does more than that.  He shows in detail the origins of where the ideas for these policies came from; Gorz, Alinsky, Dreier, and Cloward & Piven to name just a few.  

Much of what is in the book will be familiar to those who are paying attention; the bailouts of GM and Chrysler, forcing banks to take TARP money, green energy jobs and more.  But there is more detail on how exactly these things were accomplished.  He goes back to describe the well-meaning legislation passed by President Carter, The Community Re-investment Act.  While this piece of legislation was originally supposed to help people who were credit worthy obtain a home in neighborhoods that banks didn't want to invest in due to crime and poverty rates, it quickly went out of control and led to the deep recession we find ourselves in today.  He details how every president since Carter used this act to increase the level of home ownership.  It also details how  far left wealth redistribution devotees such as ACORN used this to give mortgages to people who never would have qualified and were at very high risk of foreclosure.  

He also goes into some detail regarding how some of President Bush's policies opened the door to Obama pushing his will onto the car companies and to the banks.  A truth that as a party and as a society we need to own up to.  Luckily for all of us, the banks pushed back, while the car companies just submitted to the overpowering control of the government.  

It gives a glimpse into the rise of The Tea Party and the underhanded and illegal means that were used to pass Obamacare.  The story of the effect of the Tea Party has yet to be known.  But the good news is how it did slow down the march towards socialism that President Obama believes in down to his core.  

I found this book to be very interesting and insightful.  A very good tool to use to show to those who are still drinking the President Obama Kool-Aid.  I also just finished reading Ameritopia by Mark Levin and found this to be a good companion for the information that Levin brings out about the history of statism across the ages; how it has failed and exactly what it would take to have the "vision" of their Utopia; Tyranny.  

The book is available on Amazon $11.99 in the paperback version, and for $3.99 for the kindle version.  It is something that I think you find yourself referring back to time and again.   Feel free to purchase through my  Amazon store by hitting the link on the right.  

Quote of the Day - Paul Roderick Gregory Edition

As someone who has professionally studied and written about comparative economics, capitalism, and socialism for almost fifty years, the reticence to probe the core beliefs of a political leader seems odd. The question is perfectly legitimate in both an academic and political context as long as we define terms and place the discussion in proper context.

By “socialist,” I do not mean a Lenin, Castro, or Mao, but whether Obama falls within the mainstream of contemporary socialism as represented, for example, by Germany’s Social Democrats, French Socialists, or Spain’s socialist-workers party?

By this criterion, yes, Obama is a socialist

Paul Roderick Gregory.


Read the entire article here.


This is the conclusion that I have come to as well.  Obama would like America to become like quasi-socialist Europe.  I say hell no, I won't go.  If that is what I wanted, I would move there.

America is Not Buying What President Obama is Pushing

Gallup released a new poll that is not good for President Obama's campaign strategy.  







But what is really fascinating is this:





Even with the economy being much worse than it was in 1998 more than half feel that there being a difference between rich and poor is acceptable.  Another words, they like capitalism. 


President Obama should take heed.  Even in a horrible economy Americans don't want a quasi-socialist economy that President Obama has spent the past three years trying to create.  


God Bless America. 

Cross Posted at Potluck Bloggers and Pundit Press




Please bookmark!

While We Were Sleeping

“Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers’ associations. Put the party line in textbooks.”

Albert Herlong Jr., Florida Congressman, 1963


The next time you are at the ballot box and see names for the school boards - don't think that your vote doesn't matter.

Just once I would like to hear a moderate dem (they do exist) come out and admit that their party has been taken over by an element that doesn't have America's best interest at heart. 

The Promise and The Reality

President Obama was swept into office with such great hope. He was “The One” to bring about the change this country was looking for. The country was tired of the Bush administration. The left was crying foul each and every day and the media was a willing helper in spreading the word of how terrible President Bush was.



To the far left in this country Obama was the hope of all the dreams of getting a nanny state implemented in this country. The far left is very vocal in its desire to get “the rich”, after all they are evil. They are going to do what God himself cant and make the world fair. Obama is the most pro abortion president this country has ever had. While the public rhetoric is “rare and safe” the goal is allow women (and girls for that matter) to have abortion on demand at anytime up to birth. And hey, let’s make it free while we are at it. Obama is arguably the most liberal president this country has every elected. He was the promise for the socialists that have taken over the democratic party.


Two and half years in and reality has set in. Not just for the left who are seeing the promises unkept, but the rest of the country who were too blinded to see what President Obama really is. Obama is not the democratic party of old. He represents the new socialist wing that many thought the right was being hyperbolic to point out.


The democratic party of old (while I still disagree with much of) believes in The American Dream. They believe that if they work hard and catch a good break, they too can live a comfortable life, give their children things that their parents were unable to provide for them. The democratic party of old wanted people to succeed. The idea of being a financial success wasn’t evil. John Kennedy was the democratic party of old. He didn’t try to hide his family’s fortune, nor did he apologize for it. People looked at how the Kennedy family succeeded and hoped that one day that could be their children too. He wasn’t evil, forgetting for the moment how Joe Kennedy obtained much of that money.


The far left is frustrated that Obama hasn’t fulfilled the promise. They are actually thinking to themselves that Obama is a centrist that is spending too much time giving into the evil republican demands. Only someone completely delusional would be of that mindset. But what the far left refuses to see let alone accept is that America doesn’t want to go down this road.


Americans don’t want to work three-part time jobs because they can’t find a full-time one that pays them a livable wage. Americans don’t want to see our debt grow and grow on a daily basis. Americans don’t want to be Greece.


The reality is hitting Americans in the face. Keynesian economic models are unsustainable. Spreading the wealth is not making their lives easier, it is making them harder. Spending billions of dollars in “stimulus” that was in reality a pay off for getting Obama elected has hurt our economy even further. People are seeing for themselves that public union pensions are hurting everyday taxpayers who are not lucky enough to find themselves receiving one. People are seeing for themselves that the unions are standing in the way of much-needed reform of our public school system. People are seeing for themselves that under the model of the far left their American Dream is slipping away.


People are seeing for themselves that Obama is not the democrat of old. He is the part of the socialist wing that has infiltrated their party. The question is what do they do about it? Do they stay home next November? Do they pull the lever for the president because they can’t vote for a republican? Only time will tell.


But I think America has realized that the promise that swept Obama into office will go unfulfilled.

Jesse Jackson Jr.'s Version of the Constitution

Life, Liberty, and an IPod:



While there can be no doubt that we have a homeless problem in our society, the vast majority of people have a place to live. So my question is what does decent mean? We are living through the aftermath of government involvement in homeownership with the Community Reinvestment Act and lowering the standards of home loans. Does he want to continue down that road?


What student in this country is not offered an education in this country? While I am the first to say that our public schools stink, no one is denied the right to go. I don't think the issue is that we need to build more schools; we need to give parents more choice to attend the school that is going to fit their child’s needs.

But hey what let’s make a constitutional amendment to give everyone an IPod and laptop. I don't happen to have an IPod, so let me know where I can pick mine up

Video from Weasel Zippers

Umm, It Is Called a Job, Not a Dictatorship

Seriously, I can't watch this often enough.  He is a self proclaimed socialist that believes that Noodles and Co. is a dictatorship.  He also talks about studying history.  He obviously has not done a very good job at studying because socialism has never worked anywhere in the world.  It always has failed.  At least he works at a restaurant and isn't a teacher.  Hey, dude - when you are selling something it is called capitalism.  Just thought I pass that on to you. 



 Everyone sing it with me - Kumbaya my Lord, Kumbaya

Quote of the Day - Raul Castro Edition

"Many of us Cubans confuse socialism with freebies and subsidies, and equality with egalitarianism,"

Raul Castro to his legislator.

Well, what did he expect?  Socialism has never worked anywhere in history.  Cuba is know in the process of shedding the over bloated government.  It is estimated to have more than a million workers in jobs that are not needed.  All of this while they have little to no free economy to provide the revenue to pay for all that government.  The money to pay them has to come from somewhere.  Castro has also said that he will be allowing more free markets to open in order for the government to have money to pay for the largess.  So basically, even in Cuba you have to work for what you have.  What a concept.


Michael Moore couldn't be reached for comment. 

Only 100 al Qaeda Left in the World? Congresswoman McCollum on Terrorist Threat

Well, it is good to know that we are no longer in danger, isn't it? 

Sadly, this woman will probably be re-elected as her state is very liberal and she is in the 2nd most liberal district in the state of Minnesota.  Her smallest victory was her first race with 48% of the vote, a race that had three candidates in it.  She has won with as much as 70% of the vote.  She is a member of the Democratic-Farmer Labor Party, basically a socialist party that believes in government ownership of certain industries. 

The Communists Are Coming, The Communists Are Coming....

On Saturday there will be the left's answer to Glenn Beck's Restore Honor Rally.  Oh, looking at the list of "sponsors" was eye opening. 

It was not all that long ago I was talking to several people who not only voted for President Obama, but actually think he is doing a good job. One of which grew up in Africa where the government has basically total control of your lives.  He refuses to see that there are forces in this country that would like nothing better than to turn the U.S. into another one of those countries.  What is truly scary to me that I don't think President Obama sees them either.  He doesn't see that he is merely a puppet of those forces. 

What  I would like to know is why is the NAACP is working so closely with GLSEN?  The black community regardless of how they may vote are pretty generally social conservatives.  I am not too sure that they would be all that jazzed to find out the NAACP is closely working with an organization that sole purpose it to push sexually explicit information on the acceptability of homosexuality starting with children as young as kindergarten.  Remember the fisting demonstrations done for teenagers?  That was sponsored by this group. 

The Communist Party USA is also a sponsor!  What is it supposed to say when a former candidate for the presidency in the democratic party is working this closely with communists?  The squishy middle and the people who have their heads in the sand need to wake up and ask themselves these questions. 

We live in democratic republic, people are allowed to their views and are allowed to express them.  But, the issue is how long are going allow them to push this country into their vision?  A vision that has nothing to do with the founding documents of this country.  Here is a good example of what I am talking about:



What Van Jones doesn't understand I have no desire to "run his family" or "run his community".  I want limited government that doesn't run anyone's family.  I am not the one that is trying to tell people what to put their thermostats on.  If they want their a/c turned down to 60 in the middle of summer, have it at.  As long as I don't have to pay the bill it is none of my concern.  I also am not the one that doesn't think that this country is running out of money.  Jones' said that Haliburtion has plenty of money.  Maybe they do, but it doesn't belong to me nor to the US treasury.  I don't want the government telling me what food to eat, what doctor I can go to, or what choices are put into vending machines.  San Francisco is working towards closing pet shops because people decide not to keep hamsters after buying them.  I agree if you get a pet you should be responsible for it, but why are they punishing everyone?  There are plenty of responsible pet owners; even in San Francisco.  If a business can make boatloads of money for themselves and their stockholders, more power to them.  As long as they are doing it honestly and legally, again it is not my business.  Nor, do I think that they owe me some of that money. 

There is a part of me that longs for the days that I thought communists only existed in the Soviet Union, and socialism in the guise of government totalitarianism was a thing of the past. 

Paging Penn and Glover - Chavez Introduces "Good Life" Card

Chavez has recently introduced what he is calling the "Good Life" card.  This card is how the people of Venezula will be buying their groceries.  That's right, the government now will have control over how and when you buy your groceries. 

The card is said to be a way to beat inflation.  According to Chavez:

"It's a card for you to purchase what you are going to take and they keep deducting. It's to buy what you need, not to promote communism, but to buy what just what you need.''

Hmm, "just what you need".  Who is it exactly that is deciding what you need?  Does this card have information on it about how large your family is?  After all, a person who has five kids needs more than a person with none. 

The reason that this is so worrisome is:







When the government controls how much you eat, they control everything about your life.   This is a dangerous road to travel down and when we have people in the administration that hold this man up as an example of how life should be, we have every right to be not just worried, but scared for our children's future.  

The Good Life Card, Can't Eat at Home without it. 

Have These People Read the Constitution? Socialist Members of Congress

The Socialist Party of America has released it's congressional members list: 

Co-Chairs



Hon. Raúl M. Grijalva (AZ-07)
Hon. Lynn Woolsey (CA-06)


Vice Chairs

Hon. Diane Watson (CA-33)
Hon. Sheila Jackson-Lee (TX-18)
Hon. Mazie Hirono (HI-02)
Hon. Dennis Kucinich (OH-10)


Senate Members


Hon. Bernie Sanders (VT)  (This guy is at least honest about it)


House Members


Hon. Neil Abercrombie (HI-01)
Hon. Tammy Baldwin (WI-02)
Hon. Xavier Becerra (CA-31)
Hon. Madeleine Bordallo (GU-AL)
Hon. Robert Brady (PA-01)
Hon. Corrine Brown (FL-03)
Hon. Michael Capuano (MA-08)
Hon. André Carson (IN-07)
Hon. Donna Christensen (VI-AL)
Hon. Yvette Clarke (NY-11)
Hon. William “Lacy” Clay (MO-01)
Hon. Emanuel Cleaver (MO-05)
Hon. Steve Cohen (TN-09)
Hon. John Conyers (MI-14)
Hon. Elijah Cummings (MD-07)
Hon. Danny Davis (IL-07)
Hon. Peter DeFazio (OR-04)
Hon. Rosa DeLauro (CT-03)
Rep. Donna F. Edwards (MD-04)
Hon. Keith Ellison (MN-05)
Hon. Sam Farr (CA-17)
Hon. Chaka Fattah (PA-02)
Hon. Bob Filner (CA-51)
Hon. Barney Frank (MA-04)
Hon. Marcia L. Fudge (OH-11)
Hon. Alan Grayson (FL-08)
Hon. Luis Gutierrez (IL-04)
Hon. John Hall (NY-19)
Hon. Phil Hare (IL-17)
Hon. Maurice Hinchey (NY-22)
Hon. Michael Honda (CA-15)
Hon. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (IL-02)
Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson (TX-30)
Hon. Hank Johnson (GA-04)
Hon. Marcy Kaptur (OH-09)
Hon. Carolyn Kilpatrick (MI-13)
Hon. Barbara Lee (CA-09)
Hon. John Lewis (GA-05)
Hon. David Loebsack (IA-02)
Hon. Ben R. Lujan (NM-3)
Hon. Carolyn Maloney (NY-14)
Hon. Ed Markey (MA-07)
Hon. Jim McDermott (WA-07)
Hon. James McGovern (MA-03)
Hon. George Miller (CA-07)
Hon. Gwen Moore (WI-04)
Hon. Jerrold Nadler (NY-08)
Hon. Eleanor Holmes-Norton (DC-AL)
Hon. John Olver (MA-01)
Hon. Ed Pastor (AZ-04)
Hon. Donald Payne (NJ-10)
Hon. Chellie Pingree (ME-01)
Hon. Charles Rangel (NY-15)
Hon. Laura Richardson (CA-37)
Hon. Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-34)
Hon. Bobby Rush (IL-01)
Hon. Linda Sánchez (CA-47)
Hon. Jan Schakowsky (IL-09)
Hon. José Serrano (NY-16)
Hon. Louise Slaughter (NY-28)
Hon. Pete Stark (CA-13)
Hon. Bennie Thompson (MS-02)
Hon. John Tierney (MA-06)
Hon. Nydia Velazquez (NY-12)
Hon. Maxine Waters (CA-35)
Hon. Mel Watt (NC-12)
Hon. Henry Waxman (CA-30)
Hon. Peter Welch (VT-AL)
Hon. Robert Wexler (FL-19)


And people think that Glenn Beck is paranoid.
 
I say that we hold a fundraiser to buy them all one way tickets to go hang with Chavez and Castro. 
 
H/T to Gateway Pundit

Finally, Some Hope and Change I Can Believe In

The country is awaking.  Here are some results to a poll:

55% describe President Obama as socialist.  62% describe him as a big spender and 57% describe him as too liberal. 

Well, I have been saying this since 2007, but at least people are finally starting to see it. 


Poll from Democracy Corps

Say it Ain't So, ACORN's Bertha Lewis is a Socialist

The video sound quality is not that great, so here is the transcript:

First of all let me just say any group that says I'm young, I'm democratic and I'm a socialist is alright with me. You know that that's no light thing to do, to actually say, I'm a socialist, because you guys know right now we are living in a time which is going to dwarf the McCarthy era. It is going to dwarf the internments during World War Two. We are right now in a time that is going to dwarf the era of Jim Crow and segregation. They are coming and they are coming after you and they are going to be brutal and [unintelligible] ... they've already shown it to you. Organize. Get out into the street.




You really have got to circle the wagons. This is not rhetoric or hyperbole. This is real. This rise of this tea party so-called movement -bowel movement in my opinion- and this great uncovering and ripping off the mask of racism, here's what we have to do. This particular organization, Young Democratic Socialists, you do whatever you can in every way that you can, in all you devote more time to building this organization. [unintelligible] We need more members. Get out there and do everything that you can to build this institution.


H/T to The American Spectator

It is such a shame that people in America that don't believe in Socialism were so wrong about ACORN's intent to turn America into a socialist country.  

Spreading The Wealth - Not So Much

While perusing other blogs I enjoy reading the comments. In many cases we are really just preaching to the choir, but every now and then we get the real treat of hearing opposing opinions. Sadly, sometimes they are not opposing opinions, but the comments are outright mean-spirited. While reading a post on a blog I read often; Left Coast Rebel I came across one such comment.

This is a comment left by Anonymous:

I find it far more elitist to think that the poor deserve to die starving, diseased, and ignorant while the those who happen to be born with talents the market happens to be seeking at the time are rewarded with opulence and excess beyond measure

Now, this comment is placed on a post about MSNBC’s deception of showing a picture of a man who came to a town hall meeting with guns. During the showing of this picture they were having a discussion about racists possibly taking a shot at a black president. The problem was the man with the guns was also black, but they cropped the picture in such a way that you wouldn’t know that.

I will be the first to admit that bloggers on both sides of the aisle can be, let’s just say, not very tolerant of other views. I sometimes cringe when I read some of the things that are posted. I recently hid someone on facebook because I found the postings to be vile and unproductive. This particular person epitomizes what is wrong with the political landscape in this country. The posts have racial undertones that I find very uncomfortable. But I digress here. What exactly is the correlation here?

I have been reading LCR’s blog for a while now. I have yet to find anything on there that would warrant such a charge. There is a stereotypical view of conservatives; we have outright disdain of the poor. The facts just don’t bear out that conclusion.

Studies have shown that conservatives/republicans/Christians give more money to charity than the leftwing/democrats/atheists’ of the world. One has to look no further than Vice President Biden. This is a man that has the audacity to go on television and talk about paying higher taxes as a patriotic duty as we need to help the vulnerable of our nation; yet he gives a mere pittance of his yearly salary to help these people. I give a larger percentage of my salary to charity than he does.

Recently I came across a very interesting tidbit. Regular readers of my blogs know that I love little tidbits, and post them regularly. So here is one that should make anonymous think. I may be incorrect here, but I have this feeling that (s)he believes in the president’s view of “spreading the wealth”. Economists call the total global wealth supply the M3 value. We will take the entire world’s wealth and put into one large pot and “spread” out equally among every person on earth we would each get $9000. Does this still sound like a good idea? If you live in say North Korea or the poorest sections of South Africa I guess the answer would be yes. But if you are living in America, you will be thinking this is not such a good deal.

So, let us take this one step further. Does anyone believe that after making everything equal financially that it will stay that way in say 18 months? There is no way a logical thinking person can conclude that it will. One needs to look no further than Chris Gardner. This is a man who against all odds succeeded. He is far from the only person who makes a very successful life for himself after having virtually nothing. There are plenty of people who don’t make that type of wealth, but still make a decent life for themselves and their families. Yes, luck is sometimes a factor, but almost always hard work is involved.

It just irks me that people feel like some sort of Utopia actually exists. It doesn’t. It would be nice if that were true, maybe it would be more “fair”. The reality is life is not fair. No government or human being can make it so. Good things happen to bad people, and bad things happen to good people. All we can do is work hard and help others along the way.