By J.J. Jackson
I know how to push people's buttons and week after week I love to push those buttons. Usually I revel in pushing the buttons belonging to liberals and then watching the nonsensical hate mail roll in with so-called rebuttals to my postings and articles that contain no such thing. At best they contain lies and manipulations of the truth to continue promoting discredited claims. At their ugliest they contain nothing more than expletive laced rants about me, my wife, my children and other families members wishing harm upon me for daring to shatter their little world of make-believe.
Now in between torquing off liberals I do like to see how many self-titled and so-called conservatives I can tweak and get a rise out of. Over the years I have become equally adept at that game too especially when it comes to making conservatives confront some of their non conservative beliefs. What I have found is that when I tackle my fellow conservatives and their icons, even while paying them compliments, dispatch the lies of the liberals concerning them but daring with audacity to confront them on certain issues where they have fallen short, the only thing that gets mentioned in the emails to me from those angry at being confronted are how I dared to have a critical thing to say about them.
Take this past week for example. On Wednesday I came across a Rasmussen poll which said that American voters believed Sarah Palin shared their values at a rate of 52%. Compare that to President Obama who got the thumbs up from only 40% of Americans voters. What this poll did was put the lie to the myth that Sarah Palin was unelectable because if President Obama at just 40% could get elected there is no reason Sarah Palin at 52% could not be as well. The left tells us that Sarah Palin is unelectable harlot who has dared time and again to not fall in line with the feminist left and accept her status as a victim of a white male dominated society. This poll tells another story.
But I dared to go further. I pointed out some truths that some conservatives really do not want to hear. I broached the topic as to what exactly Sarah Palin would be if she were ever elected President saying that she would be a stop gap and not a cure all. I pointed out that Sarah Palin has never shown any real political backbone to deal with clearly unconstitutional programs that are burdening taxpayer and which make up huge chunks of our federal spending. You know, programs like Social Security and Medicare that force American workers to pay into mandatory government programs that exceed the constitutional powers of our Washington DC based government? I pointed out that if elected President, at the end of her term there would still be Welfare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, Unemployment Benefits and that they would still exist because she does not have the political courage to tell people the truth and bring the hammer down on the most egregious and illegal of all government programs.
Sniff. I am sorry, so sorry, that I stepped on the toes of you "conservatives" out there who felt the need to write me in droves upon reading this and try pathetically to toss out all the old liberal arguments for these programs to justify their persistence under the Presidency of someone like a Sarah Palin simply because she was your preferred candidate. But all you did by saying that you or others were entitled to these programs is to prove that you have a lot of growing up to do before you will be considered a true conservative.
Yeah, I know that I will get a lot of nasty emails from you self anointed conservatives over that previous statement too. I am ready for them because I know I am right and your insults and vapid arguments defending unconstitutional government spending and forced confiscation of our wealth will not cut me at all.
And for those of you who still believe that someone like Sarah Palin would act against unconstitutional government programs long considered the third rails of politics I turn your attention to Exhibit A which is her own post on Facebook on Thursday, September 23rd 2010 entitled, "Lies, Damned Lies – Obamacare 6 Months Later; It’s Time to Take Back the 20!" In this article she demagogues and bemoans Obamacare's reduction in reimbursement cuts under Medicare. Her exact words were, "In Texas alone a record number of doctors are leaving the Medicare system because of the cuts in reimbursements forced on them by Obamacare! The president of the Texas Medical Association, Dr. Susan Bailey, warns that “the Medicare system is beginning to implode."
Oh the humanity! An unconstitutional program withering and dying on the vine? Setting aside that it is doing so because of another unconstitutional program, a true conservative would be happy about this. But instead Mrs. Palin is bemoaning it. So my fellow "conservatives" please spare me your phony outrage over me pointing out a truth about an icon of the movement.
I understand that people are not perfect creatures. That is precisely however why I point out the problems people in the conservative movement have when they act non-conservatively. If all you can do is attack me for such an outrageous, in your own mind, act of disloyalty then I have proven that there are even more conservatives out there than the one I try to correct who need to reassess whether they are seriously interested in being conservatives or just political beasts who will act in any haphazard way they so choose without regards to the truth and even accept a soft socialist tyranny of the unconstitutional government they have chosen to accept.
The truth will set you politically free. But first you must embrace the truth. Otherwise you will remain in limbo and this county will continue to list as it prepares to sink beneath the waves.
=====================================
J.J. Jackson is a libertarian conservative author from Pittsburgh, PA who has been writing and promoting individual liberty since 1993 and is President of Land of the Free Studios, Inc. He is the Pittsburgh Conservative Examiner for Examiner.com. He is also the owner of The Right Things - Conservative T-shirts & Gifts http://www.cafepress.com/rightthings. His weekly commentary along with exclusives not available anywhere else can be found at http://www.libertyreborn.com
Saturday, September 25, 2010
GOP Pledge To America Opposed by Democrats
By Douglas V. Gibbs
The Republican Party's attempt to steer back in a conservative direction, and proclaim they have so by offering a Pledge To America, that seems eerily similar to Newt's Contract With America in 1994, has received considerable opposition by the Democrat Party. . . imagine that.
But if you think about it, this is what Pelosi and gang is opposing:
· Cutting government waste,
· Ending the bailouts,
· Repealing ObamaCare,
· Creating jobs,
· Cutting taxes for small businesses,
· Stopping taxpayer funding for abortions, and
· Keeping tax rates low for all Americans.
It is those liberal Democrats that are truly the radically extreme ideologues, and the true minority. They are so intent upon forcing their leftist ideals on America that they could care less about what is best for the citizens of this country, or what the will of the people is, for that matter.
The principles of the Constitution, and the Tea Party Movement, is the mainstream. The liberals are being exposed day by day that they are nothing but a fringe minority doomed to fail. The people have sent their message, and the result of that will be the incredible win by the GOP in November.
And you would think, with such big ears, Obama would be able to hear the cry of the people.
Arkansas Razorbacks and Alabama Crimson Tide, College Football
UPDATE: Alabama beats Arkansas with late rally, 24-20.
By Douglas V. Gibbs
I am going to step away from the politics for this post to relay my feelings about the big game today between the Number 10 Arkansas Razorbacks, and the defending national champions, top ranked, Alabama Crimson Tide.
We must begin this by explaining that though I was born and raised in Southern California, most of my family on my Dad's and Mom's sides of the family (as opposed to my Father's, which is primarily California, Hawaii, and Florida) are from Arkansas. Dad grew up on a dairy farm near Hot Springs, and Mom spent time growing up at various points in Arkansas, and California. My Grandfather, on my Mom's side, spent many years on his piece of property in Conway before passing away a decade ago.
Today, much of my family still resides in the grand State of Arkansas. So, though I am a Californian through and through, I have this little bit of Arkansas tucked away in my soul that keeps me an Arkansas Razorbacks fan. (The fact that I am a veteran from the U.S. Navy keeps me loyal to the Navy Midshipmen too. . . and the fact that my biological father lived much of his life, and died, in Oregon, makes me have a particular liking for the Oregon Ducks).
The Hogs dominated the Southwest Conference decades ago, then made the move to the SEC searching for more competitive pastures than those they had been playing in Texas. The Texas teams took considerable issue with the "searching for better competition" thing, and during the Razorback's final year in the SWC the Texas teams had a field day with the Hogs. Teams that hadn't beaten the Razorbacks since the 40s were slaughtering the departing Arkansas team.
Southeastern Conference football is, however, a whole new ballgame, and though the Razorbacks have won the western division of the SEC a few times, they have never really had a dominant team since the move to the new conference, save for one year where Darren McFadden nearly took them to the BCS dance. This year, however, the search for the national championship, and a serious contender for the Heisman Trophy, both belongs to the Arkansas Razorbacks. . . should they beat the defending national champions at home, in Fayetteville, Arkansas.
Heisman contender, and Arkansas' heart and soul of this year's team, is the quarterback, Ryan Mallett, a junior that led the SEC in all of the quarterback statistics, for the most part, last year. A year later, Mallett is better, more mature, and has a team that has matured with him. The thrilling win last week against Georgia has placed incredible momentum on the side of the Hogs.
Alabama's great defense returns only two men, this year. Arkansas' running game is historically good, but lately Arkansas hasn't had a 100 yard rusher in a game, so Alabama's defense could still pose a problem for the running game. And if the running game doesn't get kick started, it could be a rough ride for the quarterback in search of opening up the passing game. Alabama also has a potent offense, and during the second half of the game against Georgia, Arkansas' defense almost allowed Georgia to come back and win it.
The salvation last week against Georgia in the final quarter was Ryan Mallett, and the Hogs' offensive line. If Arkansas is going to win this week, Mallett will have to have a Heisman performance, and both the offensive and defensive lines of the Razorbacks will need to show us something special. I do believe that the Hogs have it in them.
Watch for the Crimson Tide to have their way offensively in the first quarter, but somehow the Razorbacks with keep pace. Then the Arkansas defense will settle down, and Alabama will go into halftime with a slim lead. Third quarter, Arkansas will explode, but in the final quarter Alabama will battle back, bringing the game down to the final play of the game, and possibly it will go into overtime. However, after the dust settles, Arkansas will win it by a slim margin, and look forward to their next challenges with Texas A&M and Auburn. Should Arkansas make it through the gauntlet of the next three games, and pull off a win against LSU in the season finale, expect the Hogs to win the SEC Championship Game, and be in position to pursue the national championship.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
George Washington quote regarding the providence of Almighty God
"It is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favors." --George Washington, Thanksgiving Proclamation, 1789
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
O'Donnell Casts A Spell on the Left
Democrat Party Witch Hunt Fails, Conservatives Have Democrats Writhing in Agony. . .
.jpg)
Get Liberty
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
.jpg)
Get Liberty
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Friday, September 24, 2010
Thomas Jefferson on Government Spending
"The same prudence which in private life would forbid our paying our own money for unexplained projects, forbids it in the dispensation of the public moneys." --Thomas Jefferson
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
James Madison and Owning Property
"A just security to property is not afforded by that government under which unequal taxes oppress one species of property and reward another species." --James Madison
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Republicans Release Their Pledge To America
Reincarnation of the Contract With America?
This is a second chance. Question is, will they follow through, this time?
Read the Pledge HERE.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
This is a second chance. Question is, will they follow through, this time?
Read the Pledge HERE.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Was the Civil War about government expansion?
By Kevin J. Price
I remember wondering, why was the United States was the only major country that required a civil war to end slavery? With only 25 percent of the white population owning slaves, and of them half only had five or fewer, and less than 1 percent having 50 slaves or more, why would all those people fight a battle over slavery? Was the Southern move towards succession moral and legal? These questions and more are addressed in The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Civil War by H.W. Crocker, III. I have now enjoyed a few in the Politically Incorrect series by Regenery. The series does not shy away from controversy as they tackle conventional wisdom on a plethora of issues, including the Vietnam War, the sixties, the Founding Fathers, the Great Depression, Western Civilization, the Constitution, Global Warming, Islam, and many other important subjects. The Guide to the Civil War is particularly vigorous in its defense of the South and persuasive in its attack on conventional wisdom when it comes to this terrible period in US History.
There are many things wrong with academics today, one of the biggest challenges in the classroom is the insistence that there was a consensus view of historic events. For example, we are largely led to believe that all the Founding Fathers were in agreement when it came to government (tell that to Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson), that the Great Depression was caused by the lack of government intervention (when the reality was we saw a series of government actions in the 10 years before the economic crisis that made it ripe for such a disaster), and that only racists and rednecks disagree with the Civil War.
Ironically, when I was a student in elementary school, people like Robert E. Lee were treated with respect for their leadership, even if they stood on the "wrong side" of the war. Today, institutions that are named after the great general are being renamed as quickly as possible.
So, what can the reader learn about the Civil War from this compelling book?
· If there had been no Civil War, the South would have abolished slavery peaceably. In fact, if the United States had taken a chapter from the British and paid slave owners sixty cents on the dollar for their release, the whole ugly institution would have ended in a shorter period of a time, at a significantly lower cost, and without the loss of 600,000 lives (the largest loss of any US war). Furthermore, we would have protected our Republican form of government and state rights.
· Why leading Northern generals-like McClellan and Sherman-hated abolitionists. In fact, very few of those behind the war had any interest in racial equality. Most of those who fought the war wanted to end slavery because they were opposed to the cheap (or free) labor that would hurt lower income whites. So what would be done with all of these free blacks? Most Northern leaders wanted to send them to other countries, like Liberia, few had any interest in black equality.
· Most people associate the expression "bombing people 'back to the Stone Age'" to the Vietman War. In reality, it got its start with the Federal siege of Vicksburg.
· The Civil War had more to do with protective tariffs and other taxes that were deigned to make the Southern states disproportionately saddle the national financial burden. That is the compelling argument that the author makes.
I believe this is an important book and one I found easy to read and certainly appreciate. Since most Americans have been fed propaganda when it comes to the treatment of Civil War, it is time for us to open our minds a little and tackle Crocker's thoughtful, well researched, and even delightful book.
--
Kevin Price
Host, Price of Business, M-F at 11 am on CBS Radio News
Frequently found on Strategy Room at FoxNews.com
Syndicated columnist whose articles appear on a variety of media outlets.
His http://BizPlusBlog.com/ is ranked in the top 1 percent of all blogs by Technorati.
Kevin Price's Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/PriceofBusiness
I remember wondering, why was the United States was the only major country that required a civil war to end slavery? With only 25 percent of the white population owning slaves, and of them half only had five or fewer, and less than 1 percent having 50 slaves or more, why would all those people fight a battle over slavery? Was the Southern move towards succession moral and legal? These questions and more are addressed in The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Civil War by H.W. Crocker, III. I have now enjoyed a few in the Politically Incorrect series by Regenery. The series does not shy away from controversy as they tackle conventional wisdom on a plethora of issues, including the Vietnam War, the sixties, the Founding Fathers, the Great Depression, Western Civilization, the Constitution, Global Warming, Islam, and many other important subjects. The Guide to the Civil War is particularly vigorous in its defense of the South and persuasive in its attack on conventional wisdom when it comes to this terrible period in US History.
There are many things wrong with academics today, one of the biggest challenges in the classroom is the insistence that there was a consensus view of historic events. For example, we are largely led to believe that all the Founding Fathers were in agreement when it came to government (tell that to Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson), that the Great Depression was caused by the lack of government intervention (when the reality was we saw a series of government actions in the 10 years before the economic crisis that made it ripe for such a disaster), and that only racists and rednecks disagree with the Civil War.
Ironically, when I was a student in elementary school, people like Robert E. Lee were treated with respect for their leadership, even if they stood on the "wrong side" of the war. Today, institutions that are named after the great general are being renamed as quickly as possible.
So, what can the reader learn about the Civil War from this compelling book?
· If there had been no Civil War, the South would have abolished slavery peaceably. In fact, if the United States had taken a chapter from the British and paid slave owners sixty cents on the dollar for their release, the whole ugly institution would have ended in a shorter period of a time, at a significantly lower cost, and without the loss of 600,000 lives (the largest loss of any US war). Furthermore, we would have protected our Republican form of government and state rights.
· Why leading Northern generals-like McClellan and Sherman-hated abolitionists. In fact, very few of those behind the war had any interest in racial equality. Most of those who fought the war wanted to end slavery because they were opposed to the cheap (or free) labor that would hurt lower income whites. So what would be done with all of these free blacks? Most Northern leaders wanted to send them to other countries, like Liberia, few had any interest in black equality.
· Most people associate the expression "bombing people 'back to the Stone Age'" to the Vietman War. In reality, it got its start with the Federal siege of Vicksburg.
· The Civil War had more to do with protective tariffs and other taxes that were deigned to make the Southern states disproportionately saddle the national financial burden. That is the compelling argument that the author makes.
I believe this is an important book and one I found easy to read and certainly appreciate. Since most Americans have been fed propaganda when it comes to the treatment of Civil War, it is time for us to open our minds a little and tackle Crocker's thoughtful, well researched, and even delightful book.
--
Kevin Price
Host, Price of Business, M-F at 11 am on CBS Radio News
Frequently found on Strategy Room at FoxNews.com
Syndicated columnist whose articles appear on a variety of media outlets.
His http://BizPlusBlog.com/ is ranked in the top 1 percent of all blogs by Technorati.
Kevin Price's Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/PriceofBusiness
Constitution Class in Temecula Discusses Congressional and Executive Powers Regarding War and the Military
FREE CONSTITUTION CLASSES
We the People have the duty to restrain a government operating outside Constitutional boundaries. Douglas V. Gibbs invites you discover your American heritage and birthright. Join us on Thursdays from 6:00 pm to 7:00 pm for basic Constitution studies held in the classroom next to Faith Armory, 27498 Enterprise Circle West, #2 in Temecula, California.
Free Pocket Constitutions will be handed out to all attendees.
Join in the cause of preserving our God-given Liberty and
restoring our Constitutional Republic. After all, if you
don’t defend Liberty, who will?
Thomas Jefferson on Nullification
“Resolved, That the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government . . . . and that whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force. . . . that the government created by this compact [the Constitution for the United States] was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; . . . . that this would be to surrender the form of government we have chosen, and live under one deriving its powers from its own will, and not from our authority; . . . and that the co-States, recurring to their natural right in cases not made federal, will concur in declaring these acts void, and of no force, and will each take measures of its own for providing that neither these acts, nor any others of the General Government not plainly and intentionally authorised by the Constitution, shall be exercised within their respective territories.”
So wrote Thomas Jefferson, Vice President of the United States, in a document drafted at the request of members of the Kentucky legislature in 1798.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Don't Ask, Don't Tell - Lady Gaga and the Democrats
By Douglas V. Gibbs
President Bill Clinton and Colin Powell did not see eye to eye on the issue of gays in the military. The high ranking officer believed the presence of openly gay service members may compromise the superior discipline of the U.S. Armed Forces. The President, with no military background to speak of, disagreed. So, as a compromise, "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" was created with the intention of allowing gays to service while at the same time not compromising military discipline.
The policy seems to have achieved a nominal amount of success. The homosexual community, however, wants more. The gays claim they are being denied their Constitutional Right to serve. However, they are wrong in their claim. The Constitutional Right to serve in the U.S. Military does not exist.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 14 of the U.S. Constitution states that the Congress shall have the power "to make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval forces." In those rules created by Congress are the limitations regarding who can, and cannot, serve in the armed forces. The determinations are based on what the military, and Congress, believes to be what most benefits the discipline and battle readiness of the military. Limits on height, weight, physical abilities, family status, and a whole host of other things, are all in place to make sure that our fighting men and women are the best of the best. In response, should potential service members that are denied the opportunity to serve for being too tall, or too fat, or unable to pass the fitness tests, or are single parents sue the government because their "Constitutional Right to serve" was denied? Should married service members who are denied nuclear submarine duty demand that the military not deny them the right to serve aboard a sub?
The answer is obvious. These people are denied for reasons that include what is best for our military. They don't have a right to serve any more than does homosexuals.
What is best for the armed forces is the issue at hand, not what is best for the individual. When you enter the U.S. Military, the U.S. Constitution ceases to be your governing document. Though you are fighting to protect the U.S. Constitution, the governing document over the military is the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
A bunch of people with no military experience whatsoever, and a minority of active duty members and veterans, disagree. Lady Gaga, a "shock" entertainer, has gone on her own personal crusade to have "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" repealed. She has no military experience, no military knowledge, and no military training. Yet, she thinks that she knows more than those directly involved with the daily functioning of the U.S. Military. And why does she think she has any expertise in this issue? Because she has a bunch of young fans who, like her, does not have a clue regarding what it is like to be in combat.
The Founding Fathers wrote Article I, Section 8, Clause 14 for a reason. In order to be second to none our military had to have strict discipline. As a military member your free speech rights are suspended, as are much of your other Constitutional Rights, until you are a civilian again. You do what you are told, when you are told, because you are told, with only a few exceptions. You, as a member of the armed forces, belong to the U.S. Government. You can get yourself in trouble for damaging government property if you get a sunburn, and you can hurt yourself if you don't follow the training to the tee. You need to ask before you eat, crap, or sleep. Your training, and your chain of command, is your primary concerns in life. It has to be that way in order for our armed forces to function at their highest possible capabilities. If you don't follow the training, and the discipline, you can get yourself, and your fellow service members, killed.
One of the reasons for the incredible level of discipline is to eliminate the opportunity for hesitation as much as possible. Hesitation in combat in any of the service branches can result in the death of a service member, and possibly the death of other service members as well. Therefore, hesitation must not be tolerated, and any chance of hesitation must be eliminated.
Openly gay personnel in the armed forces are a potential distraction. Their very presence, if they are openly gay, presents a compromise in the discipline of the unit, and can cost lives. The repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," will cost lives.
Lady Gaga, Barack Obama, and liberal voters - Do you really want the blood of service members on your hands because you gave in to the temper tantrums of a bunch of sexual deviants determined to display their behavior openly, regardless of the cost?
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
President Bill Clinton and Colin Powell did not see eye to eye on the issue of gays in the military. The high ranking officer believed the presence of openly gay service members may compromise the superior discipline of the U.S. Armed Forces. The President, with no military background to speak of, disagreed. So, as a compromise, "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" was created with the intention of allowing gays to service while at the same time not compromising military discipline.
The policy seems to have achieved a nominal amount of success. The homosexual community, however, wants more. The gays claim they are being denied their Constitutional Right to serve. However, they are wrong in their claim. The Constitutional Right to serve in the U.S. Military does not exist.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 14 of the U.S. Constitution states that the Congress shall have the power "to make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval forces." In those rules created by Congress are the limitations regarding who can, and cannot, serve in the armed forces. The determinations are based on what the military, and Congress, believes to be what most benefits the discipline and battle readiness of the military. Limits on height, weight, physical abilities, family status, and a whole host of other things, are all in place to make sure that our fighting men and women are the best of the best. In response, should potential service members that are denied the opportunity to serve for being too tall, or too fat, or unable to pass the fitness tests, or are single parents sue the government because their "Constitutional Right to serve" was denied? Should married service members who are denied nuclear submarine duty demand that the military not deny them the right to serve aboard a sub?
The answer is obvious. These people are denied for reasons that include what is best for our military. They don't have a right to serve any more than does homosexuals.
What is best for the armed forces is the issue at hand, not what is best for the individual. When you enter the U.S. Military, the U.S. Constitution ceases to be your governing document. Though you are fighting to protect the U.S. Constitution, the governing document over the military is the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
A bunch of people with no military experience whatsoever, and a minority of active duty members and veterans, disagree. Lady Gaga, a "shock" entertainer, has gone on her own personal crusade to have "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" repealed. She has no military experience, no military knowledge, and no military training. Yet, she thinks that she knows more than those directly involved with the daily functioning of the U.S. Military. And why does she think she has any expertise in this issue? Because she has a bunch of young fans who, like her, does not have a clue regarding what it is like to be in combat.
The Founding Fathers wrote Article I, Section 8, Clause 14 for a reason. In order to be second to none our military had to have strict discipline. As a military member your free speech rights are suspended, as are much of your other Constitutional Rights, until you are a civilian again. You do what you are told, when you are told, because you are told, with only a few exceptions. You, as a member of the armed forces, belong to the U.S. Government. You can get yourself in trouble for damaging government property if you get a sunburn, and you can hurt yourself if you don't follow the training to the tee. You need to ask before you eat, crap, or sleep. Your training, and your chain of command, is your primary concerns in life. It has to be that way in order for our armed forces to function at their highest possible capabilities. If you don't follow the training, and the discipline, you can get yourself, and your fellow service members, killed.
One of the reasons for the incredible level of discipline is to eliminate the opportunity for hesitation as much as possible. Hesitation in combat in any of the service branches can result in the death of a service member, and possibly the death of other service members as well. Therefore, hesitation must not be tolerated, and any chance of hesitation must be eliminated.
Openly gay personnel in the armed forces are a potential distraction. Their very presence, if they are openly gay, presents a compromise in the discipline of the unit, and can cost lives. The repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," will cost lives.
Lady Gaga, Barack Obama, and liberal voters - Do you really want the blood of service members on your hands because you gave in to the temper tantrums of a bunch of sexual deviants determined to display their behavior openly, regardless of the cost?
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Islamaphobia Myth
By The Wize One
OK, this islamaphobia has gone too far. It is not a phobia but a real fear.
First of all, do you understand that islam IS NOT a religion, it's a Political Ideology such as Nazism and Communism. Islam means "submission". Islam does not espouse a better life, it is all about being subservient.
The problem that exists today is that everyone is looking back and saying that the Christians did the same atrocities such as the Inquisition. That was then, the Holocaust happened...and that was then, etc. (see note at bottom of this post)
Today, the largest birthrate throughout the world are muslims. And you know when they populate an area or nation by more than 2%, they become demanding and resort to violence as their koran instructs them to.
Let me ask you; how many muslims do you know that have showed any remorse, embarrassment or apologized for 9/11 ???
Read The Rest at Ta Da Today
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Note: The writer should realize that the Inquisition was largely a response to Islam, or the Moors, in Spain. The writer should also understand that Hitler's Nazism, and the Holocaust, was heavily influenced by Hitler's relationship with the Grand Mufti of Islam.
Tea Party Australia Style
By Douglas V. Gibbs
As in the U.S., Australians are sick of the professional politicians, and their high tax and spend tendencies. So, in response to the "ruling class", the Australians have decided to embark on having their own Tea Party Movement - one that is much like its American version.
As with its U.S. counterpart, Australia's Tea Party Movement is an anti-tax, anti-government grass roots movement that also heavily promotes its links to "our friends" in the United States.
Like the American version, no leaders and no organizational structure, is desired. The desire is to simply be a political movement that influences the existing parties.
The Australian Tea Party says it has not received U.S. funding, and the Americans have been very careful because they don’t want to interfere. However, Australia's version of the movement is looking to update and adapt U.S. training videos for its own purposes.
While battling big business and unions, the group does back a few individual politicians. However, those politicians are not welcome to be members of the movement. A spokesman for the group states, "We wouldn’t have any politicians being part of our organization, that would be incompatible with what we do."
Small Tea Party groups and supporters have popped up around the world, and the estimated number of Tea Party members is claimed to be about 50 million members worldwide. Australia's numbers are unknown, but since its founding, it has been growing rapidly.
All the Aussies know is that in agreement with their American counterparts, the role of the government in the economy, and in people’s lives, should be small, and currently it isn't.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Tea Party Comes to Australia - The Australian: National Affairs
Liberalism's Failure to Understand Socialism and Capitalism
By Douglas V. Gibbs
Obama and gang are so stupid, even Chris Matthews, who is an idiot most of the time, has come up with a correct opinion, and then scolded Obama for being an idiot on the item.
Hey, even a broken clock is right twice a day.
“Stop saying that giving people tax cuts is giving people money. It`s their money!”
Matthews seems to have half a brain, after all.
The same doesn't seem to be true with the liberals I meet in my daily activities.
Two days ago in an editorial meeting with a local newspaper one of the other candidates criticized me for supporting three initiatives on the ballot which will, if passed, impose term limits, limit the pay of the City Council, and limit the pay of administrative officials. While making his argument, the other candidate said, "With these you are placing controls. And people talk about socialism with Obama. This is not the kind of thing this democracy was built on."
In other words, he was calling the initiatives I support "socialistic."
First, I corrected his erroneous claim that this nation is a democracy. In the meeting room I called him out, and explained that we do not live in a democracy, this country is a Constitutional Republic. I then gave evidence from the text of the U.S. Constitution.
As for his socialism comment, apparently he does not understand what socialism is. Socialism is when the government takes control over the people. These initiatives are hardly that. The initiatives are designed to return the control of the government to the people.
That, my friends, is hardly socialism as the other candidate claimed.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
MURRIETA: Arguments for, against initiatives filed, VOTERS GET TWO SIDES TO MEASURES C, D AND E - The Californian
Obama and gang are so stupid, even Chris Matthews, who is an idiot most of the time, has come up with a correct opinion, and then scolded Obama for being an idiot on the item.
Hey, even a broken clock is right twice a day.
“Stop saying that giving people tax cuts is giving people money. It`s their money!”
Matthews seems to have half a brain, after all.
The same doesn't seem to be true with the liberals I meet in my daily activities.
Two days ago in an editorial meeting with a local newspaper one of the other candidates criticized me for supporting three initiatives on the ballot which will, if passed, impose term limits, limit the pay of the City Council, and limit the pay of administrative officials. While making his argument, the other candidate said, "With these you are placing controls. And people talk about socialism with Obama. This is not the kind of thing this democracy was built on."
In other words, he was calling the initiatives I support "socialistic."
First, I corrected his erroneous claim that this nation is a democracy. In the meeting room I called him out, and explained that we do not live in a democracy, this country is a Constitutional Republic. I then gave evidence from the text of the U.S. Constitution.
As for his socialism comment, apparently he does not understand what socialism is. Socialism is when the government takes control over the people. These initiatives are hardly that. The initiatives are designed to return the control of the government to the people.
That, my friends, is hardly socialism as the other candidate claimed.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
MURRIETA: Arguments for, against initiatives filed, VOTERS GET TWO SIDES TO MEASURES C, D AND E - The Californian
$50 Million of your tax dollars to. . . Cleaner Stoves Around The World
By Douglas V. Gibbs
Once again, to show how insane our current government leaders are, money is being spent on other countries for things they should be responsible to take care of on their own.
In the latest insane spending of our money (of which we have none since we are deep into deficit spending), Secretary of State Hillary Clinton plans to send a U.S. contribution of more than $50 million toward providing clean cooking stoves in developing countries, so that we may protect them from themselves, while fighting the mythical, alarmist unicorn called climate change at the same time.
Jeeez, nearly as bad as the money we are spending on African men washing their privates.
The spending of the tax payer's $50 million is going to be spread over five years (That's $10 million per year for you slow minded Democrats in Plano).
The Democrats are trying to be compassionate, because deaths do in fact result around the world from smoke inhalation from rudimentary stoves.
Remember, though, the environmentalists also do not want these people to develop because then their carbon footprint will be larger. It's like teaching someone to drive while not letting them have a car.
So we have to keep them in the stone age, while making sure they act like they aren't in the stone age, so that they don't die from sucking too much smoke into their lungs.
Are you following?
I am saddened by the deaths around the world, but understand that first, we don't have the money to be spending, and secondly, it is not our responsibility to make sure that everyone in the world doesn't hurt themselves. I mean, please. These are backward cultures. Of course their stoves are rudimentary. Of course they foul things up sometimes. That is part of the journey to development. You want to help? How about Hillary visit each hut in person and teach them personally. At least then we will have one less idiot here in the U.S.
I get it, liberals, you are worried about the children, and such. We are unable to do what you want to do. We don't have the money, nor the resources. This is a job for charities, not the U.S. Government. The Federal Government is not the Red Cross. It is not the Constitutional responsibility for the Federal Government to be forking over money we don't have to good causes around the world. Yes, we are great in granting aid, and when disaster strikes, we tend to be the first on the scene. But this is going too far. My God, Democrats, we have unemployment, homeless, and a collapsing economy, and you are spending money on African men cleaning their private parts, and African women getting new stoves.
I am speechless.
Probably next Michelle Obama is going to demand an anti-obesity program in Africa.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Clinton to unveil US funds for clean cookstove push - Reuters Alert Net
Your Tax Dollars At Work, Washing Genitals - Political Pistachio
Once again, to show how insane our current government leaders are, money is being spent on other countries for things they should be responsible to take care of on their own.
In the latest insane spending of our money (of which we have none since we are deep into deficit spending), Secretary of State Hillary Clinton plans to send a U.S. contribution of more than $50 million toward providing clean cooking stoves in developing countries, so that we may protect them from themselves, while fighting the mythical, alarmist unicorn called climate change at the same time.
Jeeez, nearly as bad as the money we are spending on African men washing their privates.
The spending of the tax payer's $50 million is going to be spread over five years (That's $10 million per year for you slow minded Democrats in Plano).
The Democrats are trying to be compassionate, because deaths do in fact result around the world from smoke inhalation from rudimentary stoves.
Remember, though, the environmentalists also do not want these people to develop because then their carbon footprint will be larger. It's like teaching someone to drive while not letting them have a car.
So we have to keep them in the stone age, while making sure they act like they aren't in the stone age, so that they don't die from sucking too much smoke into their lungs.
Are you following?
I am saddened by the deaths around the world, but understand that first, we don't have the money to be spending, and secondly, it is not our responsibility to make sure that everyone in the world doesn't hurt themselves. I mean, please. These are backward cultures. Of course their stoves are rudimentary. Of course they foul things up sometimes. That is part of the journey to development. You want to help? How about Hillary visit each hut in person and teach them personally. At least then we will have one less idiot here in the U.S.
I get it, liberals, you are worried about the children, and such. We are unable to do what you want to do. We don't have the money, nor the resources. This is a job for charities, not the U.S. Government. The Federal Government is not the Red Cross. It is not the Constitutional responsibility for the Federal Government to be forking over money we don't have to good causes around the world. Yes, we are great in granting aid, and when disaster strikes, we tend to be the first on the scene. But this is going too far. My God, Democrats, we have unemployment, homeless, and a collapsing economy, and you are spending money on African men cleaning their private parts, and African women getting new stoves.
I am speechless.
Probably next Michelle Obama is going to demand an anti-obesity program in Africa.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Clinton to unveil US funds for clean cookstove push - Reuters Alert Net
Your Tax Dollars At Work, Washing Genitals - Political Pistachio
Dabbling In O'Donnell's Past
By Douglas V. Gibbs
When Shirley Sherrod told her story about how she denied a white farmer aid due to her own racism, and then later the Democrats claimed it was a tale of how she was once a racist, and she changed her ways away from her racist tendencies as she grew older, I was amazed that the Left was actually willing to admit that they believed people's hearts can change. Yet, if a Conservative's past includes a single moment that is contradictory to their current beliefs, suddenly the person is a hypocrite, and in the case of Christine O'Donnell, unelectable.
Yet it never bothers those same leftists that Al Gore flies around in a private jet, and rides in a limo, while expecting everyone else to act green.
Thanks Doug Ross
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
When Shirley Sherrod told her story about how she denied a white farmer aid due to her own racism, and then later the Democrats claimed it was a tale of how she was once a racist, and she changed her ways away from her racist tendencies as she grew older, I was amazed that the Left was actually willing to admit that they believed people's hearts can change. Yet, if a Conservative's past includes a single moment that is contradictory to their current beliefs, suddenly the person is a hypocrite, and in the case of Christine O'Donnell, unelectable.
Yet it never bothers those same leftists that Al Gore flies around in a private jet, and rides in a limo, while expecting everyone else to act green.
Anyway, Christine O'Donnell admitted in an interview that once upon a time in her life she dabbled in witchcraft. Therefore, to the leftists, and the moderate establishment Republicans, the Delaware Senatorial candidate is unelectable.
It's fascinating, you know, that the progressives feel this way. I suppose dabbling in horrible things makes you unelectable, and not worthy of serving, right?
Hmmm, if that's the case, then none of the below should have ever been in politics.
It's fascinating, you know, that the progressives feel this way. I suppose dabbling in horrible things makes you unelectable, and not worthy of serving, right?
Hmmm, if that's the case, then none of the below should have ever been in politics.
Thanks Doug Ross
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
George Washington: God's Holy Protection
"I now make it my earnest prayer, that God would have you, and the State over which you preside, in his holy protection, that he would incline the hearts of the Citizens to cultivate a spirit of subordination and obedience to Government, to entertain a brotherly affection and love for one another, for their fellow Citizens of the United States at large, and particularly for their brethren who have served in the Field, and finally, that he would most graciously be pleased to dispose us all, to do Justice, to love mercy, and to demean ourselves with that Charity, humility and pacific temper of mind, which were the Characteristicks of the Divine Author of our blessed Religion, and without an humble imitation of whose example in these things, we can never hope to be a happy Nation." --George Washington, circular letter of farewell to the Army, 1783
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Where has all the stimulus gone?
By Kevin J. Price
President Barack Obama has consistently defended the quality of the spending that has taken place in the stimulus package. He has repeatedly told voters how impressed he is that there has been so little waste in the spending. "If there has been any waste," it was "miniscule," according to the Administration.
Senators Tom Coburn (R-OK) and John McCain (R-AZ) beg to differ and do so in a recent report they released entitled "Summertime Blues," in which they examine widespread waste in the various stimulus programs. This is the third in a series and in this most recent report they write: "Eighteen months since the passage of the stimulus bill, millions of jobs are still gone and the economy is as uncertain as ever. The only thing getting a boost is our national debt. The stimulus has helped push it 23 percent higher, to $13.2 trillion, a new record.” Coburn went on to talk about the specifics of the waste, saying that he "expected to get criticism for pointing out 'stupid and inappropriate" expenditures from the 2009 stimulus bill, whose cost is now estimated at $862 billion."
Here are a few examples of the incredible numbers:
- $554,763 for the Forest Service to replace windows in a closed visitor center at Mount St. Helens
- $762,372 to create “Dance Draw” interactive dance software
- $62 million for a tunnel to nowhere in Pittsburgh, PA that even Governor, Ed Rendell called “a tragic mistake”
- $1.9 million for international ant research
- $1.8 million for a road project that is threatening a pastor’s home
- $308 million for a joint clean energy venture with…BP
- $89,298 to replace a new sidewalk that leads to a ditch in Boynton, OK
- $3.8 million for a “streetscaping” project that has reduced traffic and caused a business to fire two employees
- $16 million to help Boeing to clean up an environmental mess it created in 2007
- $200,000 to help Siberian communities lobby Russian policy makers
- $39.7 million to upgrade the statehouse and political offices in Topeka, Kansas
- $760,000 to Georgia Tech to study improvised music
- $700,000 to study why monkeys respond negatively to inequity
- $193,956 to study voter perceptions of the economic stimulus
- $363,760 to help NIH promote the positive impacts of stimulus projects
- $456,663 to study the circulation of Neptune’s atmosphere
- $529,648 to study the effects of local populations on the environment…in the Himalayas
The waste is not so small that is is "difficult to measure," as apologists for the President would claim, but so obvious that every politician that has supported such programs should fear for their political lives.
President Barack Obama has consistently defended the quality of the spending that has taken place in the stimulus package. He has repeatedly told voters how impressed he is that there has been so little waste in the spending. "If there has been any waste," it was "miniscule," according to the Administration.
Senators Tom Coburn (R-OK) and John McCain (R-AZ) beg to differ and do so in a recent report they released entitled "Summertime Blues," in which they examine widespread waste in the various stimulus programs. This is the third in a series and in this most recent report they write: "Eighteen months since the passage of the stimulus bill, millions of jobs are still gone and the economy is as uncertain as ever. The only thing getting a boost is our national debt. The stimulus has helped push it 23 percent higher, to $13.2 trillion, a new record.” Coburn went on to talk about the specifics of the waste, saying that he "expected to get criticism for pointing out 'stupid and inappropriate" expenditures from the 2009 stimulus bill, whose cost is now estimated at $862 billion."
Here are a few examples of the incredible numbers:
- $554,763 for the Forest Service to replace windows in a closed visitor center at Mount St. Helens
- $762,372 to create “Dance Draw” interactive dance software
- $62 million for a tunnel to nowhere in Pittsburgh, PA that even Governor, Ed Rendell called “a tragic mistake”
- $1.9 million for international ant research
- $1.8 million for a road project that is threatening a pastor’s home
- $308 million for a joint clean energy venture with…BP
- $89,298 to replace a new sidewalk that leads to a ditch in Boynton, OK
- $3.8 million for a “streetscaping” project that has reduced traffic and caused a business to fire two employees
- $16 million to help Boeing to clean up an environmental mess it created in 2007
- $200,000 to help Siberian communities lobby Russian policy makers
- $39.7 million to upgrade the statehouse and political offices in Topeka, Kansas
- $760,000 to Georgia Tech to study improvised music
- $700,000 to study why monkeys respond negatively to inequity
- $193,956 to study voter perceptions of the economic stimulus
- $363,760 to help NIH promote the positive impacts of stimulus projects
- $456,663 to study the circulation of Neptune’s atmosphere
- $529,648 to study the effects of local populations on the environment…in the Himalayas
The waste is not so small that is is "difficult to measure," as apologists for the President would claim, but so obvious that every politician that has supported such programs should fear for their political lives.
--
Kevin Price
Host, Price of Business, M-F at 11 am on CBS Radio News
Frequently found on Strategy Room at FoxNews.com
Syndicated columnist whose articles appear on a variety of media outlets.
His http://BizPlusBlog.com/ is ranked in the top 1 percent of all blogs by Technorati.
Kevin Price's Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/PriceofBusiness
Kevin Price
Host, Price of Business, M-F at 11 am on CBS Radio News
Frequently found on Strategy Room at FoxNews.com
Syndicated columnist whose articles appear on a variety of media outlets.
His http://BizPlusBlog.com/ is ranked in the top 1 percent of all blogs by Technorati.
Kevin Price's Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/PriceofBusiness
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
.jpg)
Jefferson on Tyranny
"When the government fears the people there is liberty; when the people fear the government there is tyranny." --Thomas Jefferson
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Islamic Revolution Feared in Sweden
By Douglas V. Gibbs
The Islamic Revolution that swept through Iran in 1979 changed Iran from an ally to an enemy in a moment. The region was ripe for such a revolution, and now Islamic Jihadists have captured control over the entire Middle East. One place, however, one did not expect to see this kind of thing happening soon at, or at least not until recently, is Europe. Now Sweden fears such a revolution could sweep through its country, and destroy the last remnant of freedom.
Some Swedish officials believe Sweden, and many other western countries, are at risk of going out with a whimper because of the influence of Islam, drawing a connection to 1400 years of Muslim aggression.
Islamification, in the minds of the Muslims, is a simple matter of destiny for the entire western world. And despite the claim that there are moderate Muslims, in the end all Muslims hold to the ideology of Islam, and believe that the destiny of the planet is for all nations to fall under Sharia law.
It’s a political ideology masking as religion. Religion as Americans view it does not aim to change the law, and institute a theocracy in the place of the host's governmental system, as is the aim of Islam.
One Swedish official is quoted as saying, ". . . when the Islamists came to power [in Iran], they wiped out the socialists too. And I’m saying that if we don’t take the Islamification that’s taking place in western Europe right now seriously, maybe history will repeat itself."
He continued, "Sweden is being Islamified right now. We’ve taken up countless examples of how Sweden is adapting to Muslim demands and we’re seeing how mosques are popping up like mushrooms from the ground in Sweden and all over Europe. It’s not necessarily the case that we’ll all become Muslims, but that we will have to obey Sharia. . . Through Muslim immigration and rapid propagation, as well as through Turkey’s membership in the EU, Europe can become dominated by Muslims."
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Sweden Democrats fear Islamic revolution - The Local, Sweden's News in English
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)