Thursday, December 27, 2007

Former PrimeMinister Bhutto Death Shifts Game Plan For The 2008 Election

Democrats still haven't got it right with foreign policy matters. Today in Pakistan, former Prime Minister Bhutto was assassinated. Her death is bringing turmoil in a region that is unsettled. It is a region that has nuclear weapons under a careful eye of a "dictator," who is a friend of the United States. It seems Liberals forgot who was Bhutto and the significant of her death. They see her death as setback to the Liberal agenda. Hillary Clinton evoked stupidity saying that the Pakistani people need to get together and promote democracy. Hillary must have been drinking the Kool Aid because Pakistan has a Constitution and a Supreme Court. It has elections and instills the ideology of a democratic country. Hillary is not a genuine lady that promotes empty promises. Let me shed some light. The leaders of Pakistan are all corrupt. Bhutto was not an angel. She was a pro-Taliban supporter, who backed the Taliban movement in Afghanistan. Her hope was to build a strong ally between Afghanistan and Pakistan. The person we should be supporting is the current leader and President of Pakistan, who can do something about the strife that is occurring in that country.

I would like to ask the Libertarians out there what would they do. Should we ignore what is occurring there? Their non-intervention style would not suit toward this current event. Libertarians would say let them work out their difference. That's what Ron Paul, who is a true Libertarian posing as a Republican, said today after knowledge of the assassination of Bhutto. It is exactly what I said last week. If we allowed Israel to fend for themselves, it would be an all out frenzy of many radical Islamic states. I am not suggesting an all out military action. I would persuade the president of Pakistan that such assassination attempts will continue until the radical Islamic group gets what they want. President Musharraf has already come close to be assassinated several times in the past year. Because the Pakistani people do not want the American military in the region, we could suggest that America can provide pinpoint intelligence where the enemy is hiding and allow the Pakistani army to finish the job, or we can even ask the president of Pakistan for permission if we find the target to allow us to send drones or a small delta force to finish the job. Libertarians and many antiwar loons always think that Republicans have to show the military might when there is a problem around the world. Remember. We have gotten North Korea to comply in disarming their nuclear technology by using multilateral talks.

This turn of events is critical to national security. We cannot afford to have a take over or a coup attempt to occur in Pakistan. We cannot allow radical terrorists to get control of their nuclear weapons. To turn a blind eye will be a grave consequence to all Americans. The ugly path that we are trying to avoid is a nuclear attack. Not only us, but to neighboring India and to Israel will be affected. If America does not intervene, we can see another world war. Remember, WWI occurred by a successful assassination that brought allegiance of countries to fight each another.

Many would think that national security and what happens abroad is not as important that domestic policy. If the world participates in a world war, domestic policy would be a mute idea. Domestic policies are important, but we had problems in Social Security, Healthcare, Medicare, and tax reform for quite some time. We don't have the luxury to postpone a dilemma that may cost a lot of lives. What happens abroad will affect us here in the United states economically and financially.

Not to be cynical, but this is a major setback among the candidates of both parties. It has been the standard domestic policy that both parties are using as their platform themes, but fundamentally, it comes back to immigration and national security/foreign policy that shows more importance. Presently, the economy is resilient in America with 4.7% unemployment, a 3% growth in the GDP, 3% growth in consumer spending, and more than 3% growth in after-tax inflation-adjusted incomes. Let's include in the mix inflation (including food and energy) at 2.5 percent, with only 2 percent core inflation. This economy withstood increase gas prices, housing bubble, sub-prime fiasco, and high oil prices. Why are these candidates making it a big deal that we are going into a recession is beyond me? It is important to look around what's happening in the world. Directly or indirectly, it does affect each of us.

Wednesday, December 26, 2007

Ron Paul Idea Abolishing Income Tax and Bring All Troops Home Foolish

I have received comments and email from my blog titled "The Fair Tax is Unrealistic Like Huckabee" stating that we should do away with the IRS and the dreaded income tax. What shocks me is that many do not want to replace the income tax with anything else. Just abolish it.

I am very sure where they are getting this logic. I was watching this past Sunday Tim Russert’s interview Ron Paul in "Meet the Press." It seems the Libertarian view’s of Ron Paul is swiftly being entertained by open-minded young Libertarians, who are seeking some truth about the world around them. My answer to you is to carry a caveat not to believe everything that a politician is saying.

I am going to dissect the transcript of the conservation between Tim Russert and Ron Paul to shed some light in the mind of a Libertarian. This will be three part piece because the content of the interview is enormous.

Dr. Paul, welcome to MEET THE PRESS.
REP. RON PAUL (R-TX): Thank you. Nice to be here.

MR. RUSSERT: Let's start right at the very top, the issues. This is what you have been saying on the campaign stump, "I'd like to get rid of the IRS. I want to get rid ofthe income tax." Abolish it.

REP. PAUL: That's a good idea. I like that idea.

MR. RUSSERT: What would happen to all those lost revenues? How would we fund our government?

REP. PAUL: We have to cut spending. You can't get rid of the income tax if you don't get rid of some spending. But, you know, if you got rid of the income tax today you'd have about as much revenue as, as we had 10 years ago, and the size of government wasn't all that bad 10 years ago. So there're sources of revenues other than the income tax. You know, you have, you have tariff, excise taxes, user fees, highway fees. So, so there's still a lot of money. But the real problem is spending. But, you know, we lived a long time in this country without an income tax. Up until 1913 we didn't have it.

MR. RUSSERT: But, but you eliminate the income tax, do you know how much lost revenue that would be?

REP. PAUL: A lot. But...

MR. RUSSERT: Over a trillion dollars.

REP. PAUL: That's good. I mean, we--but we could save hundreds of billions of dollars if we had a sensible foreign policy.

MR. RUSSERT: Well...

REP. PAUL: And if you go--if you're going to be the policeman of the world, you need that. You need the income tax to police the world and run the welfare state. I want a constitutional-size government.

MR. RUSSERT: Would you replace the income tax with anything else?

REP. PAUL: Not if I could help it. You know, there are some proposals where probably almost anything would be better than income tax. But there's a lot of shortcomings with the, with the sales tax. But it would probably be slightly better than the income tax--it would be an improvement. But the goal is to cut the spending, get back to a sensible-size government.

MR. RUSSERT: But if you had a flat tax, 30 percent consumption tax, that would be very, very punishing to the poor and middle class.

REP. PAUL: Well, I know. That's why I don't want it.

MR. RUSSERT: So you have nothing?

REP. PAUL: I want to cut spending. I want to get a--use the Constitution as our guide, and you wouldn't need the income tax.

Ron Paul is suggesting that the spending of our government 10 years ago is acceptable. Well, that was during the Republican Majority of the Clinton era. Clinton had nothing to do with control in spending. It was the GOP Congress. They determine the best way to allocate money among the vast number of programs. If Ron Paul was satisfied with spending in the mid-90's, I guess he forgot the gross amount of spending since 2000 was due to 9/11. Homeland security, War in Terrorism, War in Afghanistan and Iraq were a big contributor in our spending. The government budget for the military is 4% of the GDP. If Ron Paul thinks taking the state income of excise taxes, user fees and highway fees to run the country, I truly believe it will not be enough. I would say in confidence that every worker in America would not like living paycheck to paycheck. The problem with Ron Paul suggestion to use the Constitution as our guide would eventually lead to increase taxes (Article 1 of the Constitution giving Congress the power to tax). It is bad enough that we pay $3.00 per gallon at the price pump. Ron Paul’s plan after abolishing the income would be increasing the taxes of the goods and services. Therefore, expect high inflation or stagflation under his administration.

Currently, spending has been kept in check, but it is not the case with the pork barrel spending or earmarks Congress love to take back to their respective states. If you want to control spending, stop Congress in wasting away our money to stupid programs in their respective states. The latest are the 9000 earmarks in an Omnibus bill totaling more than $8 billion. I would like to see more transparencies and a standard operating procedure in place for any Congressman or Senator asking for a hand out of our hard earned money. Just note that every single bill passed in Congress have some earmarks hidden behind politician jargon.

As per Tim Russert, if we took away the income tax, there would be a $1 trillion dollar shortfall. It was suggested by Ron Paul by bringing the troops home and close all the bases around the world would cover such shortfall, but make us impotent to protect our interest abroad. No one seems to get the idea that our military presence abroad is a constant reminder that we can resolve a dangerous situation with deadly force without delay. That wouldn’t help with every single troop returning back home. The world would run amuck. The conflicts around the world would escalate. I rather see us being pro-active than retrospective in preventing a dilemma or a national security threat. Isolationism and protectionism are not the way to go in the 21st century.

This whole blog would cease if Ron Paul accepted the Fair Tax. It seems he leans toward that direction. I don’t think he understands the Fair Tax or a national consumption tax/sales tax. To say we will abolish the income tax and only say we can save by bringing our troops home and closing all our bases abroad is a very foolish idea to entertain. I though slashing the funding of the military under Bill Clinton was stupid. Ron Paul’s solution is not a very comforting alternative.

Tuesday, December 25, 2007

The Fair Tax Plan is Unrealistic Just Like Huckabee

I do have a problem with the hype of the Fair Tax. I fully support it without any reservation, but I'm a realist. There is one major dilemma that many supporters fail to mention. In order to make this work, we have to repeal the 16th Amendment of the Constitution.

Huckabee is the only candidate that is focusing his efforts on revamping the tax system in the United States with a national sales tax. The fair tax, also known as the national sales tax or consumption tax, will eliminate all other form of taxes that we have to pay for one national sale tax. This will generate more revenue than the current system because it will affect everybody, including visitors from abroad. No one will be exempt from paying a sales tax.

Huckabee spewing false hope to the country about the Fair Tax plan will fail just like past presidential candidates Jerry Brown and Steven Forbes and their Flat Tax plan. The biggest difference between Huckabees Fair Tax proposal and Jerry Brown and Steven Forbes Flat Tax is that there will be several major obstacles to overcome before one can implement the Fair Tax.

The 16th Amendment states, "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."

This particular amendment took four years to get it ratified in 1913 and this is the root problem. Books and articles briefly mentioned that this small problem can be easily remedied by making the 16th Amendment null and void. Yeah right, think again! To add or amend the US Constitution is not easy as it may sound. To delete something in the Constitution is almost impossible. The intent of the framers of the Constitution is to make it difficult to change the Constitution, but not stringent enough to render it inflexible instrument of the government. These laws will take precedent over all other laws and it is important to get it right the first time around.

To amend a Constitution, one needs a 2/3 majority vote in both chambers of Congress and a signature of the President of the United States. Before the amendment can be enacted, it needs to get ratified by 3/4 of the states (38 of the 50 states). We are not talking about adding an Amendment to the Constitution, but to delete it. By making void of an Amendment is a daunting task and practically impossible to get a consensus. With special interest groups, corrupt politicians and ill-inform American public, there is no way such plans can come to fruition. The way this Democrat Majority behaved in 2007 and its low approval rating leads me to believe that it will take a miracle from above to get everybody on the same page. If we couldn't get the Flat Tax endorse in the halls of Congress in the 1980's, what makes you think the Fair Tax will do any better?

We do need a change in our tax system. There are 1,700 pages of documents that make our tax code. That is equivalent to a person whose height is 6'1". We can significantly eliminate many pages of the current tax code and file our tax return on a size of a postcard by implementing the Flat Tax. Once enacted, Congress can take their time to make the transition go smother to a national sales tax system.

I support the Flat tax because the current tax code does not work and to implement it will take just weeks than years. I am a realist believing that there are too many corrupt politicians who do not have our best interest. Allowing Congress to support the Fair Tax will strip their control over the American public. I don't think Congress is willing to give that part up.

Sunday, December 23, 2007

Democrats Weekly Radio Address Shows Their Impotence

I enjoy listening to the Democrats' weekly radio address. To hear a bunch of grown adolescent men whine and stomp their feet is music to my ears. In Saturdays' weekly broadcast, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) stated the following:

"The Democratic majorities in the House and Senate cut middle-class taxes, raised the minimum wage and took other steps to help working families."

"Democrats tried to do more, but President Bush and his GOP allies in Congress thwarted them while siding with tobacco firms and big oil companies."

"Time after time, when Democrats have fought for change, President Bush and Republicans in Congress have stood in the way. Like you, I am frustrated by the direction of our country."

"But because of President Bush, they remain in Iraq without a clear mission or endgame, and our Armed Forces are stretched to a breaking point."

"And we took steps to secure our country from terrorism, but Bin Laden remains free, al-Qaeda is growing stronger and the president's focus on Iraq has allowed conditions in Afghanistan to deteriorate."

"Despite Congress' efforts to help American families, a possible recession still looms and millions may still lose their homes to foreclosure."

There were more scare tactics the Majority Leader mentioned, but I was unable to jot them down fast enough. Every word made me cringe. To insult the very nature of our intelligence is very revealing. Harry Reid must not read the papers nor understand the power of the information highway called the internet. I am imagining him in his enclosed lair learning how to read a newspaper because everything he said was way off base. Harry Reid said "Bin Laden is a threat and remains free"; "al-Qaeda is growing stronger"; "Republicans siding with tobacco companies and big oil"; " The war in Iraq doesn't have a clear mission," and "Afghanistan is deteriorating. What???

Let me answer: Bin Laden is impotent in power like Reid. Al-Qaeda is on the defense with nowhere to hide. Democrats are also pocketing soft money from these same tobacco companies and big oil they blame on the Republicans. The mission in the war in Iraq is to win. If Afghanistan is deteriorating, why hasn't it been reported by the mainstream media.

To my understanding, Reid and the Democrat party leaders have tempered their accomplishments by putting blame on the Republicans and their veto and filibuster powers to thaw the efforts of many Democrat bills. It's a desperate move to save face for the Democrat party because they lost. They gave in to President Bush. I wonder who is the lame duck now. The only sign of Democrat victory is the 9,000+ earmarks they hid in the omnibus bill totaling more than $8 billion. To say that the Republicans weaken the Democrats' initiatives is laughable. I wonder who holds the Majority in the House and Senate. Last time I remember that the Democrats held the majority of both chambers of Congress.

I think its time for a change in America. Get rid of the Democrat Majority. They had their chance. In the first year of power, the Democrats didn't accomplish anything worth bragging about and they tried so hard to bring this country into a recession so they can blame George W. Bush. Well, look who is laughing now.

Friday, December 21, 2007

Achievements and Failures of the Democrat Majority for 2007

I was being nice about giving the Democrat Majority a "D" grade, but I had to amend my initial thought. I was challenged by several Liberals who emailed me to prove my premise. Their claim was that the Democrat Majority has done more than the last Majority held by the GOP. Then after pondering it for a while and later reading a comment from MySpace friend BRIAN posted on my previous blog, I would have given this Democrat Majority an "F" for a grade.

Let me list you the achievements and failures of the Democrat Majority during 2007.


1. Energy Bill that would increase the motor vehicle mileage standards (Nothing mentioned that we will be less dependent on foreign oil and such technology is years down the road)

2. First minimum-wage hike in a decade (Ok, I have to give them kudos on this, but they had to include it on a separate package bill with other earmarks to get it pass through the back door.)

3. Ethics and lobbing reform (Something that they haven't endorsed nor followed. The Democrats will love putting pork or earmarks in many bills. Just ask John Murtha.)

4. Gun control to deter people with a history of mental illness from obtaining fire arms (There are existing laws that prevent the mentally ill and criminals to obtain a gun license and firearms. It would be nice if they enforce it)

5. More meaningless investigations for consumer safety (a.k.a. Congressional witch hunts. The latest being the destruction of the CIA video tapes of terrorist interrogations)

6. Renamed several National Parks and Federal Buildings and post office (Believe it or not, this took that long to enact)

7. Got rid or pressured resignations from top cabinet members of the Bush Administration (Just when Democrats got the last laugh, they confirmed General Petraeus)


1. Unable to get the Democrat Majority to bring a timetable for troop withdrawal and couldn't have the guts to defund the war. (They tried six times to bring the troops home and failed. After three defeats, I would have gotten the point)

2. Immigration reform (The omnibus package passed by Congress got rid of the Secure Fence Act of 2006 and the border fence all together. Democrats never understood national security and they never will)

3. Expansion of the children's health care coverage (VETOED by President Bush. Democrats wanted to include adults in this coverage)

4. Stem cell research (VETOED. Japanese research found promising results in alternative ways beside using stem cells of an embryo.)

5. Extended the AMT (Alternative Minimum Tax) for one year. (That is about $60 billion of lost revenues that the Democrats can squander.)

6. Unable to pass a clean Federal Budget on a timely manner.

7. Unable to make the Bush Tax-Cuts permanent.

8. The Democrat Majority unable to maintain their unity (Democrats are bickering with one another and unable to get all their specific caucuses on the same page)

9. The Democrat Majority unable to extend the FISA Act. (Wiretapping terrorists is a national security matter that the Democrats do not understand)

10. They were unable to impeach President George W. Bush.

Thursday, December 20, 2007

Democrat Majority Gets Low Grade For 2007

Its winding down for 2007, and if I had to grade the new Democrat Majority, I would give them a "D." I can still remember when they won the majority back in November 2006. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid gloated about the Democratic win and promise for a new change and direction and to listen to the will of the America public. It is so typical of the Democratic party with a half-ass game plan. They worked so hard to win the 2006 Senatorial and Congressional races, but did not foresee how to implement their promises.

The overall game plan of the Democratic party is to promise to bring the troops home. I mentioned way back in December 2006 that there is no way that this Democrat Majority could muster enough votes to get it done. I have to say the failure of the Democrat Majority is vast. They couldn't get the vote to bring the troops home. They waited to the last minute to pass an omnibus package containing the appropriations needed to run the Federal Government. The Democrat Majority allowed 9,000 pork spending projects or earmarks in the omnibus package worth $8 billion. The Democrat Majority took the Secure Fence Act of 2006 off the table and ignored renewing the FISA Act, which expires Feb 1, 2008. They didn't fix the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) and reneged their promise not to increase the federal debt. The Democrat Majority gave in to the President and gave him the resource and money to maintain the war in terrorism. This whole year was full of meaningless Congressional hearings and Senate investigations and I can see more of the same in 2008. I can remember Congressional hearings on General Petraeus and the surge and on Rush and his "phoney soldiers"story to the Senate investigations on Senator Craig and AG Alberto Gonzalez.

Overall, Bush won and Democrats lost. Bush's support of General Petraeus' surge and a positive change of the war is giving headaches to the Democrat Majority and the mainstream media. There is no need for proof. Just ask yourself "Have you heard anything about the war in Iraq lately?" The Democrats enjoy using the latest event of the day to distract the American public and to sidestep their responsibilities.

The Democrat Majority has a long way to go to bring up their dismal approval rating. So far, the Democrats only recourse is to "stay open" during the winter recess to prevent President Bush in appointing certain positions in his Administration without approval of the Congress. Man, talking about being a bad sport. At least the Democrats can be proud of getting the minimum wage increase and increasing the fuel-economy standards. That is a very big accomplishment for them in 2007.

Sunday, December 16, 2007

Stop The Huckabee Express

I want everybody to stand up and derail the Huckabee express because he doesn't have the experience or the honesty to represent the greatest nation on earth. The media may make him a darling, but he is really a poster child for wannabe politicians. Mike Huckabee doesn't understand that any comments will be scrutinized to the last letter.

Huckabee is a typical rookie with no sense of direction. He may have the lead in Iowa and maintaining as a second tier candidate next to Rudy Giuliani, but his latest comment ranting he understands the threat of Islamofascism.than any of the Republican candidate is bogus. Huckabee's proclamation to have such expertise in the matter because he has a theology degree is with no merit. I wouldn't call it a lie, but in the height of his popularity, the hype got the best of him. Actually, Huckabee earned a degree in religion and not theology. Doing only 46 hours toward a master, which he did not finish, doesn't not qualify him as an expert as a theologian.

It seems that Huckabee is learning a very valuable hard lesson. This is not an election for candidates running for City Council, but for President of the United States. Huckabee might get a pass from Iowa voters, but I don't think he can last from the other states primaries.

If we allow the media to control our thought or manipulate the decision of an event, we are doomed to allow the government to do the same exact thing. It is funny when one gets all the attention that their past resurfaces to haunt them. But in this case, the media, the DNC, and the Hillary campaign wants those reports to be ignored. The whole Democrat party knows that Huckabee can be easily defeated if he gets the nomination. Huckabee's policies on immigration, taxes, and his decisions as governor are the tools needed for the Democrats to pounce on him. That is why the Democrat National Committee (DNC) wants a hands off policy and not to attack Huckabee until he gets the nomination.

If such a plan is public knowledge, when then are we blinded to jump onto the Huckabee bandwagon. We are foolish to be apathetic and concede in accepting a false presidential candidate. Huckabee's one liners will not get him in the White House. Not to bash the compassionate Christian conservative group, but it seems that America doesn't want another strong Christian conservative in the White House. Huckabee is not a George W. Bush. Huckabee does not have an MBA to understand the economy and make those right decisions. I am more inclined to believe that the similarities between Bush and Huckabee wearing their religion on their sleeves don't sit well among the general population. That is the polarization the DNC wants the Republicans to believe to break them apart.

The smoking gun the Democrats will use against Huckabee is the former governor inept decision to allow a known convicted rapist pardon to continue his trade. Huckabee blinded decision based on his compassionate religious belief to forgive our fellow man allowed this criminal to rape and murder another victim in another state. Just because a criminal is castrated doesn't mean he is harmless. It's commonsense. I can assure everybody that this piece of information will be the downfall of Mike Huckabee.

Don't let that happen. Do not jump onto the Huckabee bandwagon. Complacency is the death of moral intelligence.

Saturday, December 15, 2007

Obama Is A Drug User and A Drug Dealer

From the Hillary Clinton's camp, a campaign support named William Shaheen and went out and done major damage on Obama's campaign. It's already publicized that Obama admitted that he did cocaine and drugs as a teenager, but the smoking gun coming out of the Clinton campaign is that Obama sold and dealt drugs too.

That is the smoking gun that Hillary stated she had to put Obama away. Journalist Bob Novak wrote an article on the subject and there are many blogs and articles out in the internet from both sides mentioning that Obama is a drug dealer.

If the mantra of society is to accept the smoking pot but didn't inhale issue of Bill Clinton, and the wild hey-days of being young and stupid in reference to George W. Bush, I really believe doing crack or any form of hard illicit drugs and dealing them is going over the top. The position of commander-in-chief is a sacred position that should not be taken for granted nor to be tainted.

William Shaheen stated that Republicans will exploit Obama's past use of cocaine as a teenager and to expose Obama dealing of illegal distribution of drugs. It is quite ironic how the Hillary camp made him resign. It was Hillary that sent emails to journalists and supporters to go ahead and expose the weakness of the other candidates. This is the same Clinton camp that sent emails about remarks of Obama and being a Muslim. That shows the professionalism of a mean spirited machine of the Clinton camp.

But it leaves me to ponder, why doesn't Obama defend his position and condemn those accusations? Probably it is the truth. He already got one strike on him and his drug use. I wouldn't be surprise that these accusations are true. He needs to defend his position. Silence can be a sign of weakness and resemble that the statement had some truth in it.

It is so nice to see the Democrats implode. It's a beautiful thing.

Monday, December 10, 2007

Huckabee Might As Well Give Up and Go Home

How ironic how ones surge in popularity bring criticism. Huckabee surge in the polls is a manipulation and concocted by the mainstream media. It's quite obvious. In the debates, I hardly doubt that Huckabee one liners catapult him to stardom. It's the media under guidance of CNN (Clinton News Network) and the DNC that gave the former governor from Arkansas notoriety. To an astute individual, Huckabee can be easily defeated by any of the Democrat candidates.

Huckabee might as well pack up and go home. He has too many baggage that he is ashamed to explain. From raising taxes as governor in Arkansas, his weak position on immigration as governor, his unethical practice with finances, his ignorant stance to isolate all AIDS patients from society, and his 700 pardons as governor, Huckabee has a lot to explain. Most notable, he allowed a castrated rapist free to continue his trade to rape and kill an innocent victim in another state. That will be Huckabee downfall. It is reminiscent and similiar to Mike Dukakis and Willie Horton.

Whether you like it or not, in the next couple weeks, the GOP presidential candidates will expose Huckabee for what he really is. It is no time to pretend to be presidential. We can not afford to have a Democrat in the Oval Office. It seems that Huckabee only success is that he lost 100 pounds. Now, that's impressive.

Sunday, December 9, 2007

From The Omaha Mall Shooting to Security Guard Killing a Gunman, Justice is Served

From the Omaha mall shooting tragedy, there comes justice for all pro-gun advocates. The tragedy from the Omaha mall brought anti-gun advocates raising arms to "why" and "how" did it happened. Honestly, that is the most idiotic thought one can imagine. We should be saying "what" should we do to prevent this from occurring again. We need to be proactive than to be retrospective and such acts of being proactive occurred in a small town in Colorado. A security guard, who carries a concealed gun license, killed the gunman at a church foyer at a New Life Church in Colorado Springs, Colorado. This gunman went on a shooting spree killing innocent person at two locations. The first occurred at an evangelical missionary training center in Arvada, Colorado and then New Life Church in Colorado Springs, Colorado.

It irritates me that Liberals blast at pro-gun activists. Anti-gun loons must realize that taking guns away from law-abiding citizens will make us helpless to criminals that obtain their guns illegally. I am a pro-gun advocate and a member of the NRA. It will be a cold day in hell if anybody takes away my Constitutional right to own a gun.
Haven't we learned from Columbine and the Virginia Tech Massacre? Didn't we learn from the Omaha mall shooting? Most universities, schools, and malls are off limits to guns, but tell that to the gunman. I am glad that a private citizen used the necessary step to halt the gunman from further killings. If everybody takes the responsibility to protect themselves and those around them, this country would be a better place to live in. The criminal court system is so corrupt and weak that it allows criminals out of jail and onto the streets to continue their trade. There are too many shooting of innocents from criminals and the mentally unstable. You don't hear of responsibly emotionally stable individual committing such heinous acts. To take in the notion that people with guns kill people is absurd. Rather, mentally unstable individuals and criminals with guns kill innocent citizens. That should be the thought of the day.

I really don't care what the Liberal loons has to say about gun control. This security guard taking matter in his own hands alleviated any further senseless killing. Why should we be sympathetic to the killer or criminal? Whatever happened to the victim and their families. Who is suffering the most? To side the criminals is a moral crime. Hollywood enjoys siding with the criminals like "Tookie" Williams. Why do the privileged who have everything act like idiots? I guess people with a lot of money ignores moral commonsense values. It's a shame that they don't represent the role model that each one of us desperately yearns for. Instead, they show us how American can be really stupid.

This is a perfect example that responsible people carrying a concealed weapon license is not out there just to kill other people for the hell of it. We need justice. The police are overwhelmed and not there 24/7.

For those who say that they are anti-gun and anti-capital punishment, I just hope that the unthinkable happen to your family. You would be embracing the pro-gun and capital punishment mentality. I promise you that. Such harsh provoking images would change ones mind in a heart beat.

America wake up. Protect yourself. If you expect the police and law enforcement to come to your immediate aid, you be dead before they arrive. Fight back. It will one less criminal on the street to worry about.

Friday, December 7, 2007

Huckabee's Flaw That Will Undo His Popularity

I am a Fred Thompson supporter. If you were to ask anybody, the only fault that Fred Thompson may have been his persona. Words reflecting laid back, unenthusiastic, and boring are the norms to describe Fred Thompson. Last time I checked, Fred is an actor and being himself in front of people is something he does well. Since when he should be counted out because he gives bad speeches. I’m not going to dwell on talking about Fred, but to shed some light about Huckabee.

Have you notice after the YouTube debate, Huckabee’s rise to stardom was off the chart. Why? He wasn’t near to the top of the polls for many weeks. The possible explanation is coming from the DNC. CNN (Clinton News Network) gave Huckabee a pass and didn’t exploit his weakness than the other Republican candidates. It seems that in Guliani, Thompson, and Romney, Huckabee can be easily be defeated by Hillary Clinton or any of the Democratic candidates.

Huckabee is a religious Christian conservative like George Bush and that will polarize many voters. That is the secret weapon by the DNC to exploit that to the American public after Huckabee wins the nomination. It seems unfair that Huckabee’s shortcoming is not being discussed. The Liberals are putting him on a pedestal and it seems Huckabee believes that he is leading the polls because of his policies. I guess he doesn’t realize that his is being taken for a ride.

The talk now is about Huckabee allowing to pardon a known criminal. Unlike Bill Clinton, Huckabee’s pardon allowed this known rapist to continue his trade and kill another victim. Such reports are not being broadcasted by the mainstream media. Why? It is because they want to see a Huckabee winning the nomination. If Huckabee wins the Republican nomination, every media outlet will make the comparison with him and Bush and the entire laundry list will be very apparent for all of us to see.

It is a clever plan, but there is one thing the Liberal forgot to do. Huckabee’s finances are dwindling and there is a chance that he will go broke before the completion of the primaries. It’s so unfair to bring a Bill Clinton stardom on Huckabee and then outcast him later like a George Bush. It’s time to get serious and pick a true candidate that has a game plan. That is why I’m supporting Fred Thompson. I haven’t heard any criticism about Fred Thompson’s policies as of late. If the American people want a conservative to run this country, vote for Fred Thompson. If the American people want to pick the lesser of two Liberal moderates, you got Romney and Guliani to choose from.

Thursday, December 6, 2007

Bad Parenting Lead To The Omaha Mall Shooting

I wrote a blog sometime back about how our children are being spoiled brats. It seems to be the norm to see children doing violence. This Omaha mall shooting is one of many similar incidences that are too far common in today's society. Not only the act, but there are similar preliminary buttons that led up to this atrocity.

This particular event started with a disturbed, unloved child being abandoned by his parents and then by the state of Nebraska. He was orphaned to fend for himself. After finding a place to stay, he gets a job at McDonalds and finds a girlfriend. Because he was battling bouts of depression and drugs, this 19-year-old boy went on to lose his job and his girlfriend and then went on a shooting spree. The only justice to end the nightmare ended with one self-inflicted shot.

The plot is very similar to what can be found in tv or at the movies. Similar events of past history resemble his horrifying cowardly act. Before over analyzing the "why" and "how," it is important to realize that this child was abandoned by his parents. There was no guidance to tell his what is right and what is wrong, no love to feel accepted and a sense of belonging, and no discipline to provide the means of limitations. These are the roles of good parenting. Without parenting, the child will develop social, mental, and self-esteem problems. It saddens me that we are losing the skills to become good parents for substitutes like television and video games. If parenting is something one cannot do, then don't have children. It is very logical and a valid statement. It is not fair to the child to start life with a hindrance. Drugging our children is not the solution. When I was growing up, Prozac wasn't the drug of choice to treat depression in our education system. Parents use harsh tough-love discipline to rear their child to become normal law-abiding citizens.

Behavioral modification was the norm. Drugs are cop outs in parenting. I was a hyperactive child and my parents always said that I was a poster child for Ritalin, but behavioral changes help me change my life around. That is what parents should do. Perseverance and tough-love are the secrets in rasing a child.

I have said in my blog back in November 17 that this society is heading in the wrong direction. The poison that is on television and the violence in video games are creating a problem child. I said that we need to instil traditional family values and not take the easy path in rasing a child. There are no short cuts in parenting. If one is not ready to be a parent, don't have a child. Save everybody the grief or we will see more of these atrocities created by our children. It is our responsibility as parents, mentors, and role models to provide a path for our children to live a productive normal life.

Wednesday, December 5, 2007

National Intelligence Estimated Created By A Liberal Left Wing Democrat

I just don't understand how the National Intelligence Estimate Report can make such a claim that Iran gave up their nuclear ambition back in 2003. The Iranian president must be in glee and surprised to find out this new fact-finding report favors him. I guess he was amazed by it too.

No matter how you see it, the media has not mentioned that in 2003 as the US launched its attack on Saddam, Libya and Iran showed intent to give up their nuclear ambition or cleverly hid it from the international community. The NIE report is skewed by one unreliable foreign rogue source that admitted Iran does not have a nuclear capability. In addition, the NIE report was prepared by a liberal Democrat plant that is pushing all efforts to embarrass and derail President Bush and the GOP. This is the same NIE that stated Saddam had WMD prior our attack on Iraq.

No denying that Saddam had WMD, but Democrats back then used it against the President and his agenda on using military force to rid of Saddam. Now, Democrats are embracing a cherry pick report to suit their current needs to prevent Bush to launch military attack on Iran. Can someone tell me where was it said that US will attack Iran before Bush leaves office? I didn't know we were going to attack Iran. That was the media making up fantasy to get the American people upset.

The National Intelligence Estimate is produced by Thomas Fingar. He heads the National Intelligence Council and a key conspirator with the Democrat party to derail the confirmation of John Bolton as US Ambassador to the United Nations. Fingar took his liberal ideology and fired many analysts who challenged the chairman's politically-correct views. The other idiots joining Thomas Fingar's support group are Kenneth Brill, Vann H. Van Diepen, and Christian Westermann. This particular group has too many flaws that represent the liberal minded ideology of the Democrat party. They all supported Thomas Fingars final NIE Report.

One cannot deny Iran is enriching materials to produce nuclear energy. The NIE report stated that Iran halted its nuclear program, but did not say it destroyed nor dismantled its nuclear ambition. They can easily restart it at any time or they never stopped it in the first place. Iran is still a threat. They want to annihilate Israel off the face of the map. Iran has a history that is unfavorable with the United States. Whom would you believe? The National Intelligence Estimate and Iran or the USA? What say you?

Tuesday, December 4, 2007

Distraction Is The Cause of Congress' 11% Approval Rating

It's the first week of December and it seems that the priorities of Congress are all over the place. For the past week on talk radio, I heard about fair tax, Huckabee rock-star popularity, Democrat's plant in the Youtube Republican debate, Murtha admitting that the surge is working, and the latest report from the NIE about Iran not possessing nuclear weapons. Who cares at this present time? These distractions do not hide the fact that the media is not focusing on more important things. This current do-nothing Congress has not done much of anything since they took control of the majority this year.

If these top issues are not address before the end of the year, every other story out there will be insignificant. I'm talking about the war funding, Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), federal spending appropriation bill, wiretapping, and the Children's Health Insurance (SCHIP program).

Of the five issues presented, I am most concerned if the AMT aren't fixed by December 31, 2007, a good many of us will be affected on tax day. I am afraid to say that Congress will not touch this issue until next year, which means a good portion of the population will not see a refund check when they file their tax return.

Then there is a war funding bill currently having too much pork for us to accept. That is why President Bush vetoed it recently. Majority Leader Senator Reid (D-NV) says that the military has enough funds til February 2008, but Secretary Gates has been juggling and shifting funds within the military, which may compromise the safety of our servicemen and servicewomen.

The failure of Congress can be seen in reflection that they haven't presented President Bush a clean federal spending budget bill. Of the 12 appropriation bills needed for the government to run, only the Defense spending bill was signed. It's the responsibility for the House and Senate to create and submit a clean bill to the president in order that the government can run efficiently. We have already seen what happens when government doesn't pass a budget. A good example of this happened to New Jersey this year. The government had to shut down the majority of state agencies because they didn't have proper funds to run their organization. That shut down cost NJ millions of dollars in revenue because of an inept state legislator in Trenton, New Jersey.

In the national security front, both parties want to approve permanent revisions to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), but they are stuck on two issues: "how much court review should be required when foreign targets call or e-mail Americans," and "whether companies that helped the government eavesdrop on such calls should be given immunity from lawsuits." I must be missing something. The issues of Congress not able to rectify and make the revisions permanent is quite pathetic. If the current law allows airline passengers to report suspicious activity of another airline passenger without fear of a lawsuit, I don't see a big difference. Make it into law and move on. It is not that hard. Laws are made to protect the innocent. Whether or not they have validity that is up to interpretation.

Finally, there is the Children's Health Insurance that needs to get pass as soon as possible. The Democrat Congress wants to add 10 million more middle-class families into the mix, but as the title dictates, it's for the children. Not adults, but the poorest of the poor children in America. If the Democrats get what they want, then they have initiated the foundation to get this country into socialized universal healthcare.

It seems that the Democrat Majority is reverting back to their old ways. It seems that we haven't learned from our past. Such reminders have costly effects.