Entries Tagged as 'Politics'

Nancy Pelosi Admits Gas Prices are a Supply Problem, Calls for the Opening of the Strategic Petroleum Reserves

In 2006 the Democrats gained seats in both houses of Congress with the promise of doing something about high gas prices. Since then the price at the pump has increased significantly. See the chart below:

Dems Do Not Control the Price of oil

As prices have skyrocketed, the Democrats have blamed Republicans, the evil oil companies, collusion among the OPEC members, the Detroit car makers, the way Americans drive, anything but themselves. They have told us over and over again high gas prices are not a supply problem.

So I have one little question, if the current high price of gas is not related to supply, why does Nancy Pelosi want President Bush to open the spigots of the Strategic Petroleum Reserves? You can not have it both ways; either it is a supply problem and we need to drill for more oil, or it is not.

Just goes to show, liberalism does not have to make sense for people to line up and start quoting the party line. These Democrats can start talking out of both sides of their mouths and moonbats continue to flock to their side.

What a bunch of numskull losers.

(hat tip: Michelle Malkin)

Tony Snow Dead at 53

Today America lost one of the truly good Press Secretaries and definitely the best President Bush ever had which is not saying much considering the inept performance of Bush’s two previous Secretaries in Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan.  Tony finally lost his long battle with cancerHe defended the President, his policies and made the press briefing fun.  He will be missed as a great American.

Tony Snow, the former White House press secretary and conservative pundit who bedeviled the press corps and charmed millions as a FOX News television and radio host, died after a long bout with cancer. He was 53.

Thanks Tony, for your service to your country and for defending what was right.  You will be missed.  The thoughts and prayers of the Wilson family are with the Snow family. 

Democrats Still Not Happy With Obama

While Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have ended their feud after the contentious Democrat Primary, many voters have not ‘gotten over it’ yet.

A growing number of Clinton supporters polled say they may stay home in November instead of casting their ballot for Obama, an indication the party has yet to coalesce around the Illinois senator four weeks after the most prolonged and at times divisive primary race in modern American history came to a close.

35 % still prefer Clinton to Obama, 22% said they will stay home rather than vote for Obama in November, and his approval ratings have gone from 60 to 51%.  Ouch!  It seems time does not heal all wounds.

‘Poll experts’ say they expect most of Hillary’s supporters will vote for Obama and support his nomination, but I am not so sure.  After most primaries support coalesces around the surviving candidate rather quickly.  This time things seem to be different.  There are too many hard feelings; too many harsh words were spoken for healing to take place this early in the game. 

Hillary Clinton has been defeated at her own game by an upstart from Illinois.  Years from now we may still be talking about the ‘Clinton effect’ among the voters.  Many women felt the Democrats turned a blind eye towards all the racism and sexism coming from the Obama camp.  On top of that is the media’s love affair with Barack Obama at the expense of Hillary (Now she knows how conservatives feel)  Countless women are not happy that an ‘under-qualified man’ has defeated whom they call a ‘highly-qualified female.’ 

Obama’s selection as his VP could figure into the scheme of things.  These same women may be waiting for Hillary to be picked as his VP, but that is highly unlikely.  Since Barack Obama has no experience to speak of, he will have to chose someone who has much more than he does.  Interestingly, this will make the VP a more qualified candidate for President than the Democrats’ own nominee.  Having such an unqualified ‘man’ at the top of the party’s ticket will not sit well with the women who supported Hillary.

How long will it take for the Democrats to heal this rift within their party?  Hopefully, not until after the general election in November.

The Left Finally Admits it; They are NOT Patriotic

On a day when the nation should be thanking God Almighty they were born in the United States of America, the left instead turns to navel gazing reflecting on the real or perceived sins of the past. In their view the United States is not a great county born in liberty and blessed by God. To them this country has killed, taken and lied their way to prominence and power. It is not worth defending physically, verbally, or in print.  This is the ‘new patriotism.’ You show your pride for your country by running it down.

It’s July Fourth again, a day of near-compulsory flag-waving and nation-worshipping. Count me out. Spare me the parades and the martial music. And don’t befoul nature’s sky with your F-16s. You see, I don’t believe in patriotism.

This moron goes on to tell some of the great atrocities of the world (including many of ours) and how these acts can be attributed to misplaced patriotism. Some of the facts he uses are simplistic at best. Or down right wrong at the worst. To say WWI started because of patriotism and nationalism is extremely simplistic.

Then comes the first of the two diatribes:

In the last five years in Iraq, tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians have died because the United States, the patriarch of patriotism, saw fit to impose itself, without just cause, on another country. But the excuse was patriotism, wrapped in President Bush’s brand of messianic militarism: that we, the great Americans, have a duty to deliver “God’s gift of freedom” to every corner of the world.

How many civilians did Saddam Hussein kill before we went in? Hmmm? The US went into Iraq for many reasons: terrorism, WMDs, he attacked US planes, he failed to follow twelve years of UN resolutions and 17 resolutions. At no time was patriotism a thought in attacking Iraq. Those who want to bend or twist the facts for the US entering the war can do so without bashing those who are patriotic to their country. And by the way, President Bush never said anything about it being our duty to ‘deliver God’s gift of freedom’ to the world. The man is trying to hoodwink the American people as others on the left are doing.

Then comes the second diatribe.

To the extent that we’re a great country - not the greatest, mind you: that’s a fool’s game - we’re less of a great country today.

Because those things that truly made us great - the system of checks and balances, the enshrinement of our individual rights and liberties - have all been systematically assaulted by Bush and Vice President Cheney.

From the Patriot Act to the Military Commissions Act to the new FISA Act, and all the signing statements in between, we are less great today.

From Abu Ghraib to Bagram Air Base and Guantanamo, we are less great today.

Admit it. We don’t have a lot to brag about.

It is time, it is long past time, to get over the American superiority complex.

It is time, it is long past time, to put patriotism back on the shelf - out of the reach of children and madmen.

Give a pin (or a computer) to an idiot with an axe to grind, you end up with garbage. This is a great country because of the freedoms we have written in the Constitution. This Constitution allows idiots like you, Mr. Rothchild, to spew all the vile and vitriol all you want without fearing for your life. Most of our men and women in uniform serve their country proudly, with honor and integrity.  Our President is charged with protecting this country.  Our soldiers are charged with defending our country.  Therefore, with your brainless leftist trash list of grievances, we owe the country no apology. 

I served my country proudly so idiots like you can say stupid things. It is people like you who say: “God bless America. No, no, no. G.D. America.” And guess what. The very country you despise, Mr. Rothchild, gives you the right to say it. Think about it, only in America could someone who hates his country have a good shot at becoming President of the United States.

People like you on the left despise our military and the freedoms they ensure. Your brother in the left, Chris Satullo, at the Philadelphia Enquirer pinned an editorial which is a perfect example of rantings of a radical leftwing moonbat. I would like to add more, but I will defer to Lt. Col. Jessup from a Few Good Men:

And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don’t want the truth because, deep down in places you don’t talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said “thank you” and went on your way. Otherwise I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand at post. Either way, I don’t give a damn what you think you are entitled to.” (Hat tip: Black Five)

Thank you, Col. I could not have said it better. Now lets look at some of the things we should be proud of (list is not complete by any means):

We liberated Europe twice. We blocked communism around the world looking in the face for a good fifty years before they blinked. We saved the world from communism.  We fed and rebuilt Europe when they could do neither for themselves.  We gave the world the automobile and the airplane.  Because of the United States, we have cell phone service to almost all parts of the globe, satellite TV, and the internet.   We fight wars to protect ourselves and then help the offending country rebuild.  We fight war with saving civilians in mind.   Millions have been rescued, saved, fed, clothed, and protected by the United States.  In times of disaster the first one in is the United States.

Yes, I am proud of my country.  I am patriotic. And I enjoy the freedoms this country provides, no thanks to the left who are not willing to defend it either vocally or physically.  We have a saying in Aggieland: “Highway 6 runs both ways.”  Pitch in and help or get out.

The world is a much better place because of the United States of America. And I thank God that we are NOT dependent on people like you for our liberty and the freedoms we enjoy. Thank God for the American soldier. (including sailors, airmen, etc.)

God Bless America.

A Chink in the Armor of Barack Obama, Pt. 3

To say that Barack Obama’s speech on race today fell short of expectations is truly an understatement.  He started his speech by quoting a line in the preamble of the Constitution and then goes on to blame racism on the

United States and ultimately all white people. 

“We the people, in order to form a more perfect union.” 
The document they produced was eventually signed but ultimately unfinished.  It was stained by this nation’s original sin of slavery, a question that divided the colonies and brought the convention to a stalemate until the founders chose to allow the slave trade to continue for at least twenty more years, and to leave any final resolution to future generations.  …
And yet words on a parchment would not be enough to deliver slaves from bondage, or provide men and women of every color and creed their full rights and obligations as citizens of the

United States.  What would be needed were Americans in successive generations who were willing to do their part – through protests and struggle, on the streets and in the courts, through a civil war and civil disobedience and always at great risk - to narrow that gap between the promise of our ideals and the reality of their time.
This was one of the tasks we set forth at the beginning of this campaign – to continue the long march of those who came before us, a march for a more just, more equal, more free, more caring and more prosperous America.  I chose to run for the presidency at this moment in history because I believe deeply that we cannot solve the challenges of our time unless we solve them together – unless we perfect our union by understanding that we may have different stories, but we hold common hopes; that we may not look the same and we may not have come from the same place, but we all want to move in the same direction – towards a better future for of children and our grandchildren.   


What a load of crap!  It is as I expected—Barack Obama is as racist as his incendiary pastor. Slavery was a long time ago as was all of the other racist laws outlawed by the US Supreme Court.  Those days are gone, so get over it.  Obama says he began his road to the White House to end racism in

America.  Talk about being self absorbed. And I thought Bill Clinton was a megalomaniac.  Note to Barack, I do not care one whit what your skin color is.  What I care about is where you intend to lead this great country.  I care about your character.  I care about your integrity.  And I care about your judgment.  All of these are needed to hold the highest office in the land and all of which I feel you are sorely lacking.As if we need any more evidence of his racism, here goes:

…I am married to a black American who carries within her the blood of slaves and slaveowners – an inheritance we pass on to our two precious daughters. 

Oh, great.  Obama’s kids are racist too.  Then we hear how race was brought up in the run for the white House over and over again.

This is not to say that race has not been an issue in the campaign.  At various stages in the campaign, some commentators have deemed me either “too black” or “not black enough.” 

Let’s not forget, it was the Democrats who brought up the issue of race.  Bill Clinton, the first ‘black’ President, brought up Obama’s race a number of times.  Black commentators in newspapers around the country have openly wondered if Obama was black enough.Finally Barack Obama brings up the statements spoken by his firebrand preacher at

Trinity

United

Church
.

… [We all have heard] Reverend Jeremiah Wright, use incendiary language to express views that have the potential not only to widen the racial divide, but views that denigrate both the greatness and the goodness of our nation; that rightly offend white and black alike.  
I have already condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy.  For some, nagging questions remain.  Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy?  Of course.  Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church?  Yes.  Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views?  Absolutely – just as I’m sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.  

Nagging?  Nagging?  As if I do not have the right to question him on his association with his fiery and bigoted pastor.  I am sorry, but his association with a bigot as a pastor for twenty years leads me to question his integrity, his judgment, and his character.  I have left churches because the pastor said offensive things.  One was racist and another one spoke out against our troops.  I left and left quickly.  I would expect nothing less from someone who is running on the platform of character, judgment, and integrity.  

 

On Friday, Barack Obama was interviewed by Major Garrett at Fox News and said he would have confronted his pastor if he had heard the remarks and left the church had he heard them mentioned again.  Now I have cause to question his honesty, integrity, character, and judgment.  Which statement is correct, Friday’s or today’s.  He obviously heard his pastor make these comments and he stayed in spite of what he said earlier.  He goes on:

As such, Reverend Wright’s comments were not only wrong but divisive, divisive at a time when we need unity; racially charged at a time when we need to come together to solve a set of monumental problems…
Given my background, my politics, and my professed values and ideals, there will no doubt be those for whom my statements of condemnation are not enough.  Why associate myself with Reverend Wright in the first place, they may ask?  Why not join another church?  And I confess that if all that I knew of Reverend Wright were the snippets of those sermons that have run in an endless loop on the television and You Tube, or if Trinity United Church of Christ conformed to the caricatures being peddled by some commentators, there is no doubt that I would react in much the same way. 

 So basically Barack Obama was not going to bring up the race issue, but he is running because he is black.  Huh!?  He did not like the comments brought up by the Reverend, but he decided to stay because…he liked the guy?  Hmm…He goes on to tell what a great man Jeremiah Wright is and how he led a young Barack Obama to Christianity.  What the church meant to him.  How the pastor never said a derogatory word to a person of any color or even about a person of any color.  (Riiiighhttt)  What the pastor means to his family.  Then he says these words.

I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community.   

 Apparently he lied to Major Garrett when he stated that he would leave the church if he had heard racist comments repeated.  Now we know where he stands.  As a ‘politician’ Obama will say anything to anyone to get elected.  Not much change there.  Not much hope either.


But race is an issue that I believe this nation cannot afford to ignore right now.  We would be making the same mistake that Reverend Wright made in his offending sermons about

America – to simplify and stereotype and amplify the negative to the point that it distorts reality.  

 Then Barack Obama the victim retreats back to the ‘poor black me’ mantra and points out how his people were abused: slavery, Jim Crow laws, segregated schools (and still are?), legalized discrimination through loans and unions, the lack of economic opportunity among blacks, prisons, humiliation, welfare, and blah, blah, blah.  Basically, Obama says blacks have a good reason to be angry.  The fact that this tension came through Jeremiah’s sermons is to be expected.

 Though he does face up to the fact that this anger inhibits blacks from facing their own ‘complicity’ in many of these problems.  There he tells black parents they need to spend time with their children, help them with their homework, etc.    
Obama goes on to tell about white anger—affirmative action, welfare, court ordered busing, quotas in college placement, quotas in jobs, and a belief that people of color receive a leg up at the expense of whites is all perception,  that much of the claims of racism against white is bogus.  If whites lose their job in which they are more qualified to fulfill a quota, or if our kids are bussed to other schools across town, or if whatever else we have a problem with, just understand, the problem is in our head.  Huh!?  And of course there is also corporate greed which is the knee-jerk liberal reaction to all problems.   

 Barack Obama concludes with his campaign trail rhetoric with all of his fixes which include raising taxes and with the government control of our lives.

Oh boy.  Senator Obama’s prepared statement may be enough for blacks who refuse to see the truth and for those liberals who believe that the white man,

America, and big corporations are the root of all the world’s problems.  But for the rest of us, blaming whites for all the problems of blacks is continuing to play the race card.  Racial tentions will never end as long as there are people like the Reverend Jackson, Reverend Sharpton, Reverend Wright, and Senator Obama continue to use race relations to boost their own popularity and to further their own political ambitions.  I did notice that the Senator has done well with his life in spite of his skin color.  Living in the top 1% of wage earners as a black man must indeed be difficult.  I feel for him.

Most Americans could care less what the color of skin is of the next President of the

United States.  What the American people want is someone who will stick to the truth, who has integrity, who has good judgment and who has character.  After hearing this speech, Barack Obama does not have any of these qualities.  Like the emperor’s son in Gladiator, Obama may feel he has other qualities which may suit him just as well.  Only I do not believe this country can afford to see if they are enough. 

Barack Obama’s speech was not enough.  Unlike Nixon’s ‘Checks’ speech, it fell flat.  Pointing a finger at everyone else solves nothing which was much like his speech–nothing.

New Hampshire Republican Primary, In Retrospect

The Republican Debate in New Hampshire is finally over. I do have some overall impressions. First is how boring the debate was with almost no substance. The second is that there is a reason why the first tier candidates are where they are and why the second and third tier candidates are where they are. And third, why is Ron Paul even in this debate? His answers came across as both naive and overly simplistic. And fourth is what a great job Fox News did in conducting this debate.

The winner of the debate was obviously John McCain. He had the most to gain from a good showing and the most to lose with a poor one. Simply stated, McCain needed a win and got one.

The biggest loser was also obvious—Rudy Giuliani. Most of his answers were safe, but many times he did not answer the questions. Say guns, for instance. Rudy never answered the question of whether or not he was against guns, which in fact he is.

The biggest buffoon of the debate was clear cut—Ron Paul. He wants to get rid of the IRS, CIA, FBI, Department of Homeland Security, and ….. He wants to leave Iraq now…

The funniest laugh line of the debate occurred at the beginning at the expense of Fred Thompson when McCain said Thompson did not show up for the debate because it was ‘past his bedtime.’

The best question of the night was from Chris Wallace directed at Ron Paul. After a ‘leave Iraq now’ answer, Chris asked, “So we will be taking our marching orders from al Qaeda?” Ron Paul flubbed this question too.

The best exchange was between Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee over the question of honor. Paul wants to honor the troops by leaving now. Huckabee wants to honor the troops by winning.

On the question of illegal immigration, Mitt Romney, Tancredo and Duncan Hunter gave the better answers, followed by Giuliani, McCain, and Huckabee. Finish building the wall between Mexico and the United States was the overwhelmingly popular answer to the immigration question. Romney also wants to punish these ‘sanctuary’ cities who give illegal immigrants a reprieve from ICE and other law enforcement officers.

On the question of family values, Brownback, Hunter, Romney and Huckabee gave virtually identical answers. Brownback gets the nod for saying redefining marriage as a failed social experiment.

On national security, McCain and Hunter came out ahead with Romney, Huckabee and Brownback are next. Tancredo is next to last when he called for ‘disengagement.’ A distant last is Ron Paul. McCain gets the nod on this one for supporting the position of bringing the troops home with honor AFTER winning the war. And he says they are winning.

On the question of Presidential Power, only three candidates were given a chance to answer: Tancredo, McCain, and Romney. Tancredo gets the nod because of his pledge to do whatever it takes to protect the US whether it is water-boarding, wiretapping, or anything else.

On the question of taxes and spending, all the candidates did fairly well. All told how they were going to cut taxes or did cut taxes as a governor or mayor, but only John McCain said he voted against George Bush’s tax cuts because Congress raised spending levels way too much. Therefore McCain gets the nod on this one.

Finally all the candidates were given a hypothetical question on Iran. The country is killing US troops in Iraq and near to building a nuclear bomb. What do you do as President? Giuliani and Brownback answered the question fairly well, but John McCain knocked the question out of the ballpark. His answer is much like George Bush’s answer to Iraq: there are times when the US must act independently of the other nations and the UN to defend itself, use military and diplomatic force to stop Iran. Best answer of the day.

The overall impression is that McCain won, not by much, but he still won. He was followed by Romney, Brownback, Hunter, Tancredo, and Giuliani. And despite the polls, Ron Paul did not win, nor did he come to close to winning. I really think Democrats are calling in and voting for the wackiest of the bunch.

Is Texas Ready for a Personal Injury Trial Lawyer like Mikal Watts?

The Democrats must think they have found a chink in John Cornyn’s armor (Senator from Texas-R): President Bush’s approval ratings. But typical of liberal Democrats, they recruit a liberal trial lawyer, a personal injury trial lawyer to boot, to run against Cornyn. He is a man who, for all practical purposes, could have been John Edwards double having many millions suing big businesses for product liability. Who is this doppelganger? He is another trial lawyer by the name of Mikal Watts. He has even received an “A” rating by the National Law Journal. Like Edwards, Mikal Watts says he is just trying to render justice to his clients. Of course he makes millions is the process. Having loaded himself up with an obscene amount of cash from the ‘victims’ and the settlements, Watts, like Edwards, wants a go at the Senate.

So we know that Mikal Watts is a rich trial lawyer who has made money by going after big business, particularly the Ford car company because of rollovers. On the surface, that may not sound so bad. After all, the big business has gobs of money. But you can be sure that Ford and other big business with pass along their court costs and other settlements on to consumers. In the end, we all pay for Watts desire to enrich himself.

The question which must be answered by all Texans is whether or not Watts will be good for Texas. The first strike against him is that he is a trial lawyer. Having a trial lawyer to represent the interests of Texas is like asking a kid to guard a candy store, it does not make much sense if you want to stay in business.

On illegal immigration, Mikal Watts is even worse. While most Texans think building a fence to guard against illegal immigration is a good idea, this liberal Democrat calls it, “race baiting.” I guess the trial lawyer in him does not see Texas being overrun with illegals a bad idea. To Watts, they are potential clients.

Like all ‘good’ Democrats, Watts is a purveyor of defeat when it comes to Iraq. I guess just because Osama bin Laden considers Iraq the linchpin to al Queda’s success in the war against the West is not a good enough reason for him to want to stay and fight. Frankly, if someone tells me I am at war with him, I am going to believe him.

There are other differences between John Cornyn and Mikal Watts. One has served his country with distinction starting with a tour in the Air Force. One is a greedy trial lawyer. A comparison of their websites is also very telling. Cornyn’s site, particularly his biography, emphasizes his service to his country and to the state of Texas. Watts site is all about ‘me.’ I did this, I did that, look how smart I am. Again, no comparison between the two.

This guy is an pure unadulterated liberal, personal injury lawyer, self serving slime. To sum it up, Mikal Watts is bad for Texas.

Urban Grounds had more

Southeast Texas Record has some of Watt’s arguments in a Ford case.

Like Rome, the US is Declining

The wisdom of our founding fathers becomes ever more clear as a nation of lazy self indulgent people are willing to turn more and more of their lives over to the government.  The great people who wrote the Constitution in 1781 decided that a great majority of the people were not informed enough to vote for the President of the United States (thus the Electoral College).  In reading some of their opinions, the great men who wrote that document also considered these same people not intelligent enough for them to vote for President or to run the country.  The views of these writers of the Constitution have been borne out over time as more and more of the American people have shown their ignorance.

This country was formed with people who took care of themselves, fed themselves, clothed themselves, and housed themselves.  The government was merely a referee who stood on the sidelines keeping the peace.  As time progressed, these same self motivated people became lazy and turned more and more often to the government for help in dealing with problems once considered the purview of the people. (Sounds a lot like the Roman Empire)

The idea of a self regulating people who depended on themselves died as the government integrated itself into the everyday lives of the American people.  The overriding thought is  that the American people are too stupid to take care of themselves and to make their own decisions, so the government will make decisions for them.  Consider the seatbelt law.  Sure it is a good idea for me to buckle my seatbelt, but for the government to step in and say I must have it buckled tells me that they consider me too stupid for me to take care of myself.  Some states say I can not drink a beer on my front porch.  They say where I can or can not send my children to school.  They even say that it may be considered abuse to discipline my children.  There are a whole host of others which can be found by googling ‘Stupid Laws.’  Lawmakers are much too quick to write a law to fix a problem and the people are much too quick to look to the government for help.  What the politicians are actually doing is taking away some of our most basic and fundamental rights.  Our self-described benefactors are telling us that we do not know how to spend our own money, so they will take it and spend it for us.  We should not hunt or have guns to protect ourselves (it’s the government’s job) so they will take away our guns.  And now the government is telling us what to pay our employees.

We have a free market economy in this country.  When something does not sell, a company has to change the price, change the product, or go out of business.  This free market applies to workers as well.  If the worker does not feel they are paid enough, they should make themselves more valuable, go to work somewhere else or be content where they are.  But today, workers whine to the government for assistance.  Instead of getting out and looking for a better job, these lazy people whine for more money where they are.  Take this waitress from North Carolina:

“Millions of Americans now have a little more in their paychecks to help pay for basic necessities like food and clothing. And now more Americans can save to build a better future for themselves and their families,” Townsend said.

Stupid people!  She does not even realize that any savings people receive from an across the board wage increase will be taken away as the cost to businesses is passed on to consumers.  An artificial wage increase causes inflation and any benefits are temporary.  Yet so many Americans buy into the Democrat talking points.  As a waitress, her increase in tips will last only as long as it takes for her patrons to realize they really do not have any extra money.  Artificial wage increases is nothing more than another tax on business which is passed on to the consumer.  Some business may offset the minimum wage increases by laying off workers. 

The waitress goes on to show more ignorance by saying:

“I’m grateful that our Democratic leaders in Congress are taking our country in a new direction,” she said. “They have accomplished more this year than Republicans accomplished in the past six years combined - including giving people like me a long-overdue raise.”  (emphasis added by TRS)

The Democrats have accomplished nothing in the past year, absolutely nothing.  This is merely the mindless prattle of another on the dole Democrat whose attitude towards the government is that of handouts.  It is not the government’s job to improve the standard of living for the lazy and the ignorant.  It is the government’s job to help you help yourself.

As for the Democrats, they still peddle this garbage from their 2004 Democrat Platform:

“To those who are threatened, we pledge protection; to those who are victims, we promise justice; to those who are hopeless, we offer hope.”

Give me a break.  Always on the lookout for new victims and the down-trodden, the Democrats prostitute themselves to the stupid, the ignorant, and the uniformed.  And to think, these are the same people we let chose our President and the Congress.

Perhaps we are not unlike the ancient people of Rome after all. 

Democrats Given Chance to Lead, But Should Be Wary of What They Asked For

There is an old saying which states: be careful what you wish for.  The Democrats seem ready to take control of Congress for the first time since 1994.  They have been harping how the President has screwed up the country, brought war on the peaceful people of Iraq and gave tax breaks to the rich.  The Dems won the election in November with one word: change.  A change from the status quo, but that was just about the extent of their massive plan to shake things up in Washington.  There was of course the little tidbits like raising the minimum wage, but that was all.  They called for changes in the Iraq, changes in the tax policy, and most of all, changes in the way the administration conducts business.  Well now its time to pay the piper.  They asked for change, the American people rewarded them with the opportunity to change things without a plan, and now it’s their turn.

Leading Democrats like Joe Biden want to call numerous hearings in an attempt, they say, to force the President to listen.  More than likely, the hearing will be a way to fine tune their own views on the war as they place their collective fingers to the wind to see which way the American people want them to go.

The hearing plans of Biden and the other committee chairmen highlight how much the political landscape in Washington has changed as a more critical Democratic Congress moves to directly challenge the president’s management of the war.

Democrats won control of Congress in an election that turned on voters’ unhappiness with the war. But Democrats have struggled for years to articulate an alternative to the Bush administration’s policies.

As recently as last year, when Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) called for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, many in the party agonized over whether that position would permanently tar Democrats as weak. But as discontent with the war has grown, sapping Bush’s popularity, Democratic lawmakers have become increasingly outspoken.

And senior party leaders now appear to be uniting behind the call for a phased withdrawal of U.S. forces, a position that was bolstered by the release this month of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group’s report.

As usual, the Democrats lead by following the political winds and polls.  Real leadership is an anathema to the Democrats.  In fact, I do not know a single Democrat in Congress who shows real leadership and that includes Bill Clinton.

In every single issue from the war in Iraq to taxes, the Democrats have obfuscated and called for change while offering no plans to change things.  They waited until the release of the Iraq Study Group report to say they had a plan.  That is not leadership.

When a fellow Democrat like John Murtha calls for the immediate withdrawal of troops, the rest of his party play a game of hide and go seek with the media.  That is until they think the political winds have changed enough to take a chance on such a divisive statement as abandoning Iraq to the terrorists. Even the term cut-and-run does not seem to bother them.  With a majority of the American people against this war, the Dems seem to be on surer footing.

There was a time when the Democrats could be counted on to defend America.  Great American presidents like Franklin D. Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, and John F. Kennedy were strong defenders of the American dream, of keeping America safe at a time of great peril.  What happened?  Where did all these great Democrats go?

Thank God we were not lead by the likes of Ted Kennedy, John Murtha, John Kerry, and Nancy Pelosi during those troubled times.  Otherwise, we would have really been in trouble.

They asked for their chance and now they have it.  The American people have spoken and gave the Democrats a chance to lead.  Unfortunately they find themselves in the unenviable position of having to learn how.  Having control of both chambers of Congress requires the Dems to actually lead, to do something other than criticize the administration and Republicans.  The Dems do not have a large window of opportunity to demonstrate their leadership capabilities.  After all, two years is not a long time.  If the American people do not see what they were expecting, their tenure may be short lived indeed.  Again I say, be wary what you ask for.

Are Left-Handed People Smarter Than Right-Handed?

There is only one way in which I am on the left and that is in which hand is more dominant. Yep, I am left-handed. I like to recognize other left-handers when I am out and about at a restaurant or shopping. Like me, they like to be recognized as being left-handed. And just today, I found out that one of my favorite bloggers, Michelle Malkin, is also left-handed. She has a great tribute to left-handed people. She is a lefty which just adds to the many things I like about Michelle. She also includes these lefty comebacks:

“It’s the only thing left about me.”

“Only left-handed people are in their right minds.”

“Everyone is born right-handed. Only the greatest overcome it.”

There is one I have to add:

Before man sinned, everyone was left-handed. (think about it)

Like many others, I have had to deal with a right-handed world. My mother tried to make me use my right hand by taking toys from my left hand and placing them in my right until the doctor asked her, why? Lefties can remember that all the desks in school and college were for right-handers. Every day we had to use a number of other things like scissors and notebooks which were made for right-handed people. Most power tools are for right-handers. As a result, more than 1200 lefties a year die from misusing tools make for right-handed people. So its little wonder lefties tend to be a little smarter, quicker, and creative than right-handed people.

Left-handed people once suffered prejudice - the word “sinister” from the Latin for left came to mean “evil” or “unlucky”.

But a study has found that sinistrality - which affects up to 15 per cent of the population and is more common in men than women - is linked with quicker thinking when doing tasks such as playing computer games or sport.

Australian researchers have shown that connections in the left and right-hand side of the brains, or hemispheres, are faster in left-handed people.

The study published in the journal Neuropsychology says the faster transformation of information in the brain makes left-handers more efficient when dealing with multiple stimuli. (snip)

Left-handed people can feel they have been given a raw deal by society. The first reason for this is the nomenclature of handedness. In many European languages, “right” stands for authority and justice - German and Dutch recht and French droit. On the other hand, the English word “sinister” originally meant “left” but came to mean evil or unlucky. Secondly, left-handed people are placed at a constant disadvantage because nearly all tools and devices are designed to be used with the right hand - an example being scissors, which are arranged so the line being cut can be seen by a right-handed user but is invisible to a left-handed user.

Indeed such was the stigmatisation of left-handers that until the latter part of last century, some Catholic primary schools in the United States punished children writing with their left hand. Baseball players and left handers Lou Gehrig and Babe Ruth wrote with their right after enduring such suppression as children.

It has also been claimed left-handers are more intelligent and creative than right-handers. In his book, Right-Hand, Left-Hand, Chris McManus, of University College London, says the proportion of left-handers is rising and they are higher achievers.

Left-handers make up 15% of the population. A great many famous people are left-handed like all three main contenders for the 1992 Presidential election: H. Ross Perot, Bill Clinton, and George H.W. Bush.

Left-handers have had to endure a lot in the past and they have to tolerate a world run by right-handed people. But God in his infinite wisdom made up for all that lefties have had to endure by making them a little brighter, quicker and creative than their right-handed brethren. In the end, the lefties get the last laugh.

Hat tip: Michelle Malkin