Monday, April 28, 2008

We Must Mandate School Uniforms in the Public School System

The children of this generation are getting out of control. They have lost respect and willing to challenge any form of authority. If parents are unable to establish the basic fundamentals of parenting, then it should be the responsibility of the school system to instil the values that make this country great. It would seem appropriate that the school should get involved since a good portion of a student week is in school.

This may be seen to some that my thinking bends to a dictatorial or totalitarian regime, but this particular issue demands an unorthodox method to force change a dilemma that seems to have no solutions. That is why I support public school uniforms to upstart a new way of disciplining children to conform to uniformity and standardization.

I had the opportunity to go to a public elementary school from K to 8th grade and a private Parochial highschool. The difference is like night and day. I remember I was an unruly child during my elementary school years, but when I attended a Catholic high school that was taught by religious brothers and nuns, I was transformed into a well rounded, disciplined young adult. I had to conclude that wearing uniforms and being taught a conservative value system was the essence of going to a private institution.

The most obvious observation one notices a student from a public or private school is that in a private school, students wear a uniform. If the success of these private institutions that instil uniformity in uniforms, then there shouldn't be a reason why the public school system couldn't adopt the same theory. Did you know that as many as 30% of the nation’s pubic elementary, middle, and high schools have successfully implemented a school uniform policy? The success seen in these public schools imposing a uniform system is dramatically positive. Just recently in Florida, the county of Osceola has imposed school uniform for the 2008-2009 academic year. There are more and more counties getting on the bandwagon because they see a positive outcome when student uniforms are implemented.

I hear all the time that wearing a uniform does not increase the level of education. That may be true, but to remove the individuality that student’s wear will remove the stigma that education is the reason why they go to school and not model what they are wearing. If they want to socialize their latest fashion, they can go to the mall after classes. I find that school uniforms greatly benefit both the students and faculty by creating an atmosphere in which the students are able to get the most out of their education.

One of the major benefits of school uniforms is their ability to make schools safer. There are studies showing that school uniforms will reduce gang violence. Since many gang members are associated by a particular article of clothing, accessories, and particular colors, by wearing a standard color in representing the school will diminish any violent tendencies. It has been documented that uniforms will also make it easier for trespassers to be identified. These individuals will definitely stand out from the crowd because they will not have on a uniform like everyone else. It is a main concern with every parent to ensure that their child is safe and secured in the hands of the school system. It has been very difficult during recent years with the killings we have seen on television that has occurred in our school system. With many school shootings, identification using school uniforms would dramatically decrease its incidences.

Another benefit with school uniforms is to help eliminate socio-economical barriers. Many students come from diverse backgrounds. Whether a student comes from a poor or an affluent family, inside the walls of the school, every student wearing a standard uniform will be the same and such economic advantages and disadvantages are now a mute issue. Parents’ incomes no longer determine how well his or her son or daughter dresses at school. Uniforms help to erase the cultural and economic tension that may have affected among the students. Parents are no longer pressured to buy the latest fashions; therefore, they spend less money on clothes and fashionable apparel. With a pair of a jean that may run up to $80.00 a pair, one can purchase a couple trousers and still have enough left to put gas in the car.

I feel school uniforms help to promote structure and discipline inside of the classroom. This structure creates a strong learning environment and improves the students’ behavior and attitude toward schooling. There are several studies showing that student academic achievement was increased dramatically because of the learning atmosphere created by uniforms. It removed the stigma of what is on the students body and more attuned to concentrate on their schoolwork and strive for great grades.

To those who contemplate bringing a law suit against forcing uniforms to be worn in the public school system and the idea that it violates their constitutional rights, it has been done and such case went all the way to the Supreme Court. The Court ruled that in public schools, which are run by the government, students are not to “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.” It said that schools could only limit students’ freedom of expression if their writings or behaviors were disruptive to the functioning of school or if it invades the rights of others. It is evident that in many schools across the nation the types of clothes that kids wear to school are disruptive to the functioning of school. Therefore, the schools are not infringing on the Fourteenth Amendment, and do have the right to implement their own policy as long as it is in reason.

In conclusion, we should have school uniforms because they help to make school a better place. Uniforms help to eliminate socio-economical barriers, help to reduce violence in the schools, and help raise students’ confidence in achieving academic excellence. We have seen in recent months some of the atrocities committed by students as early as 2nd grade. We have seen 3rd graders from ages 10 to 12 tried to murder their teacher. And last week, there was south Floridian 2nd grader, who is a member of a gang in school, stealing his grandmother’s car and caused major havoc in his community. When will this ever end? Since the parents have lost their responsibility in raising their children, the next best place to instil moral values is either in the private or public school system. I want to see basic fundamental instill in our children while they are in elementary, middle, and high school before entering college. We need to give our children an opportunity to succeed in life and not let it end before it has begun.

Saturday, April 26, 2008

Letterman's Top Ten Signs Hillary Clinton Is Exhausted

Letterman's 'Top Ten Signs Hillary Clinton Is Exhausted'

From the April 24 Late Show with David Letterman, the "Top Ten Signs Hillary Clinton Is Exhausted." Late Show home page:

10. Spends most of her time campaigning in Sleepy's mattress stores

9. Barely has enough energy to lie about battling Bosnian snipers

8. Last night, spent 2 hours debating a coat rack

7. Agreed not to dispute Florida and Michigan delegates in exchange for a nap

6. Announced a new tax break for kitties

5. Greeted Philadelphia voters with, "It's great to be back in Tacoma!"

4. She's mismatching her pantsuits -- man, she must be exhausted!

3. When asked how she'd fight terrorism, she said two words: "Iron Man"

2. 3 AM phone call? "Let the machine get it"

1. So tired, she actually crawled in to bed with Bill

Friday, April 25, 2008

Obama Refuses Any More Debates But Will Do an Interview with FoxNews. Huh?

I will never understand the mind of a politician. Barack Obama has been in seclusion for almost two weeks. He has been inaccessible from the media and Hilary Clinton. Why? Is Barack Obama scared? He refused to do any more debates since the Philadelphia meltdown. In fact, he hasn't done any news press in the past ten days. Staying in hiding will not protect his poll numbers. I will be detrimental if he stayed on the down low like his former pastor and his terrorist friend.

I question Barack Obama motive for refusing to do any more debates. The network’s CBS and CNN approach both camps to do another debate before the South Carolina primaries. Hillary was overjoyed and Barack ignored the phone call. If Barack Obama adamantly refuses to do any more debate, why did he agreed to go on the FoxNews Network this coming Sunday to do an interview with Chris Wallace. I heard that the Obama camp will be coming on all cylinders to pounce Chris Wallace and FoxNews on their disparaging reporting that brought ill to the Obama campaign.

I should point out to Obama that Chris Wallace is not a slouch. He is a veteran journalist not afraid of given straight to the point style of interviews. Hey, he made Bill Clinton lose it on national television. It was the most famous of all interviews conducted by Chris Wallace with a past President. Don't forget of other interviews of well-known Democrat Senators and Congressman who got exposed of their hypocrisy. And to say an inexperience politician from Illinois will take down Chris Wallace? I think not! We will have to see it for ourselves this coming Sunday morning. It will be very entertaining.

Its Barack Obamas fault for his misgivings. He cannot blame FoxNews for being the first to expose his personal relationship with his pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright back in 2006, his business relationship with a crooked scumbag Resko in 2007, and his terrorist ties to William Ayers in 2007. Obama did it all to himself and it is his fault that he cannot pick his friends well. That is a character flaw of a man whose judgement is extremely liberal. He is more liberal than Senator Joe Biden and Senator Edward Kennedy, who are at the extreme end of the spectrum of liberalism. Whose fault is it by making race an issue during this presidential election? One cannot blame Hillary or McCain for making Obama attend the church of the racist and bigoted Rev Jeremiah Wright. It isn't Hillary or McCain that made him say how small town USA is bitter and stereotypes them as bible loving and gun loving red-necks. It was all done on the delusion of Barack Obama.

It is so ironic of the idea that Barack Obama going on FoxNews is like the convicted turning himself in to the police. There is no way to defuse Obamas guilt. He is making it very difficult for himself to win the nomination. Probably after the interview with Chris Wallace, we may see Barack Obama as a loose cannon like Bill Clinton. Oh, that would be priceless.

Thursday, April 24, 2008

Hey College Bound Seniors! Democrats Student Loan Promise is in Defunct

Democrats plan for this country will take us into the Great Depression. The policies set forth and their intent is to harm America for personal greed, power, and self gratification. If you can recall back in 2006 prior to the November election and right before Republican lost the Majority of both chambers of Congress, Democrat Leader Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid promise America a change. It is the same change Barack Obama is spinning on the stump. Well, the changes the Democrats proposed are failed policies and broken promises.

The original "Six in 06" campaign slogans were broken promises. They have tried to implement them but they all failed. Remember these famous promises:

“Democrats have a plan to lower gas prices…join Democrats who are working to lower gas prices now.” – Then-Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Press Release, April 19, 2006

"This leadership team will create the most honest, most open, and most ethical Congress in history” – Speaker-Elect Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Press Release, November 16, 2006

Ways & Means Committee Chairman Charlie Rangel (D-CA): “I’m not contemplating any increase in taxes. I’m not assuming the Bush tax cuts will expire.” – “Republicans Start New Pastime: Reading Dems’ Tea Leaves,” CongressDaily AM, March 1, 2007

“A college education is as important today as high school was a generation ago – and Democrats intend to make attending college just as affordable and available to all.” – Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) “A New Direction for America,” Page 17

“Our New Direction plan will slash interest rates on college loans in half to 3.4% for students …” – Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) “A New Direction for America,” Page 17

If you notice, every quote mentioned were utter failures. Let’s look at the last two quotes mentioned about college education and slashing student loans interest rates.

I read in the Wall Street Journal an article saying that the Democrats are asking Federal Reserve Ben Bernanke for a bailout to the Democrats' "student loan crisis" just like they did for the sub-prime loan debacle. I can assure you that this is tuck deep in the abyss of some Mainstream Media Editors desk. It was September in 2007, when the Democrat Majority promised to make college education more affordable by passing the "College Cost Reduction and Access Act." It is a law that mandates interest rates on federally insured student loans to be significantly reduced. These loans account for about 70% of all education lending. The shortage will be forked over by the Taxpayers in the amount more than $7 billion by 2012 to pay for the rate cuts. If you are going to cut something, the portion cut will need to be replaced by something else. This is called redistribution, but nothing was removed to compensate it. Instead of removing a wasteful program that cost "X" amount of money, Democrats wants to keep all the entitlement programs and let the American people pay for it in taxes.

What really irritates me is that Congress went one step further. The Democrat Majority mandated private lending banks to cut their yields on each student loan because Congress felt they are reaping too much profit just like the big oil companies. When you have government starts to be intrusive onto a business, it is bad for the economy. Because of this slowing of the economy, there is no investor willing to purchase these securitized loans and it is putting the squeeze on lenders. In other words, banks are giving money away with no residual income coming from interest rates. If banks are not making any money, what do you think would happen? Well, a third of the nation's top 100 lenders to students in 2007 have suspended servicing any more new loans and many got out of the business altogether. That is why government should get involved or manipulate the economy. Such interference will stop market growth and capitalization.

Now, since May is coming and college bound seniors will be seeking college loans, the Democrats are in panic. Democrat Senators Daniel Akaka, Bob Casey, Tom Carper, Chris Dodd, Tim Johnson, Bob Menendez and Jon Tester have collectively written to the Fed Chairman to accept student loans as collateral under the Fed's new Term Securities Lending Facility. These bozos also asked Treasury Secretary Paulson to order the Federal Financing bank to buy student-loan-backed securities. This is the same thing we have seen the Fed accepting troubled Mortgage-back securities as collateral.

This current student loan crisis didn't have to happen. It is entirely the fault of the Democrat Majority, whose foresight in trying to help the little people is actually screwing us.

Democrats may have great intentions on idea how America should look like, but to implement those ideas is not very realistic. Like I always believe, "Perception is not Reality."

Wednesday, April 23, 2008

Obama Doesn't Want to Win and Hillary Doesn't Want to Lose

The Pennsylvania primary is over and the winner is still John McCain. There wasn't a definitive winner last night between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. The whole tone of the Democrat primary can be summed up with this phrase: "He is unable to win and She won't lose."

It seems that Democrats just can't make up their minds between these two Democrat candidates. Last night, Hillary won her third straight contest and denied Obama the certain victory that would catapult him to the nomination. To see Hillary grandstand her victory is a joke because there is nothing to celebrate about. The winner of the Pennsylvania primary is the loser and the loser doesn’t want to be a winner. It adds up to a net zero. Hillary must have forgotten that she didn’t garner enough delegates to catch up to Obama. In fact, when the distribution of delegates was assignment to each candidate, Hillary gained 10 more than Obama from the Pennsylvania primary. That is it. She is just fooling herself if she can beat Obama on the delegate count and the popularity vote. It is obvious she will pressure the superdelegates at the Democrat Convention in Denver to nominate her and that will cause all hell to break loose.

Obama on the other hand can't seem to close the deal. It just shows that he is not as electable as the media portrays him. With so many miscues, Obama is being dismantled piece by piece. It just shows that his recent comment in San Francisco about small town USA and clinging to their guns and Bible has affected the Pennsylvania primary. It was indeed a low blow and an insult to small town USA. In fact, Obama lost the votes to Catholics, white working men, independents, Reagan Democrats, and gun owners. The people heard and they let Obama know that he screwed up. It also shows that the American people are weary about the mystic of the Obamanation and not fooled how the media is portraying him.

The problem with both Hillary and Obama is that they don't have enough star power to woo the voters in the center. This whole Democrat primary is a total joke. Both candidates are cancelling each other out. Obama seems he can't win a primary after his personal problems have surface and Hillary's victory is meaningless. The only joy that I get is that I love to see them attack each other. Other than that, this Democrat primary is really boring.

We will eventually see Clinton give a nice conciliation speech at the Democrat Convention as she will have to give way to an Obama Democratic nomination. On the other hand, we will see Obama as some badly damage goods. But if the superdelegates change their mind and select Hillary as the Democratic nominee, the party will commit political murder. It will mean suicide for the Democrat party, which is not a bad thing and I am praying for it to happen.

I remember reading an article the night when Obama won the Iowa caucus and it stated, "(Obama) has scant hope of reaching the White House. He's too young, too inexperienced, too vague, and for many Americans, too black. His magic words about the era of change, of hope, of an America he will unite -- all that will evaporate like morning mist."

Well, the journalist that wrote that foreshadowed the events that lead to the Pennsylvania primary. The Obama locomotive express has been derailed. The excitement and hype are dead. Obama only garnered 45% of Pennsylvania voters, who make up a third of the registered voters. One can say he is in trouble, but who cares. LOL. To be presidential one needs to respect the constituents and understand their needs and neither possess such character. Even Hillary is already despised by 55% of American people.

The America person I saw during this election season is little more savvy. They can see through the empty promises, and candidates that promise to be miracles workers. Thank goodness for Conservative Talk Radio and fair and balanced news networks to educated the masses and expose the hypocrisy in politics.

So let Hillary and Obama go at each other. It will have some entertainment value since there is nothing on television.

Tuesday, April 22, 2008

Im Not Satisfied. We Need More Democrat Debates (aka Operation Chaos)

What would happen if we knew what we know so far on Barack Obama if we started the primaries today with the Iowa caucus? I think the tide of the Obama express would have been nonexistent. From people fainting at Obama’s rallies, the American public is having second thoughts about the man who claims that he can bring change to this country. In today’s Pennsylvania primary, Fox News already deemed Hillary Clinton the winner over Barack Obama by eight to 10 percentage points. In the past two months, it is an incredible change of events to see two Democrat candidates to square off with negative ads and personal attacks against each other. What a change we saw in the Obama campaign in the two months that brought out the Rev. Jeremiah Wright racism, Michelle Obama being proud to be an American for the first time of her adult life, Barack Obama’s questionable patriotism, his association with a known terrorist William Ayers, and Hamas support for Obama’s presidency. What a change we saw in the Hillary campaign in the two months that brought out the lies about sniper fire in Bosnia, an exaggeration of a pregnant woman dying in a hospital emergency room, and a terminated campaign staffer contradicting her political agenda. I truly feel there are still more that we need to know about these two Democrat candidates.

I have said months ago that finding a Democrat nomination will be done during the Democratic convention. There is no way I can see either candidate conceding defeat. The more negative attacks from both Hillary and Obama will make McCain the best alternative in the general election. In the past two months, Hillary and Obama are showing their true colors and mistakes. From Hillary’s exaggerated lies to Obama’s elitism, there is no way their character will garner sufficient votes to the White House.

We need more debates between Hillary and Obama. Even though we know what Hillary has done in the past 16 years as First Lady and Senator, we need to vet more on Obama since we have no idea who he is. I find that the voters are looking for a candidate who has a nice personality and a decent character and Obama is far from it. His elitism toward the little people is well documented and his poor choice of his friends from the anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan to the modern day American terrorist William Ayers puts a different light on the Senator of Illinois. I always believe that the friends you have reflect the person you are.

I have people tell me, “who cares that Obama’s acquaintances are bad people. That doesn’t mean that Obama shares the same empathy with them.” My rebuttal is if you have a pedofile who moved next door to you; would you open your door to him and let him meet your wife and children? Would you allow your children to hang out with him? Would you allow yourself to be seen hanging out with this known pedofile in your community? What would your neighbors think? Association with an individual is an important issue in determining good judgement in character. If Obama or Hillary is associated with a known terrorist, what judgement can one determine how they will deal with terrorism as president? If Obama or Hillary shows that they are associated with known criminals, how can one trust them in making appropriate decisions if elected president?

I believe in experience to deliver good judgement and the role of president is to have that experience. Here is a very good example. In regards to foreign policy, Hillary and Obama are so out of touch that their inexperience shows. Obama says he will be successful in negotiating with the President of Iran in disarming his nuclear ambition and deter him from aiding the insurgency in Iraq, but he denounces Jimmy Carters negotiations with Hamas. That is a very bold, arrogant, and a foolish statement from a person who is described by many veterans as a black Jimmy Carter. Hillary today mentioned that if Iran sends nuclear missiles and attack Israel, she would obliterate the country of Iran. Also, it is another foolish statement that has no credence, but a setting stage for a nuclear war and the annihilation of man kind.

Such judgement is critical in finding a good president. I demand more debates to find out more about these candidates.

Okay, I’m more interested in seeing the Democrat party implode and in chaos. I want to see Hillary ends her ambitions to be president. I want to see Obama fall really hard back to reality. I want to see the end of Liberalism.

Monday, April 21, 2008

Grazie Papi Benedict XVI! (Thanks You Pope Benedict XVI)

In these dire times when moral value in America has drained into the murky depths of our sewer system, we needed an uplifting moment to remind us that there is good in all of us and it needs to shine.

In the past months, we have been hearing about the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, the pastor that mentor Barack Obama, vile and vehement disdain toward race and this country. Twisting the mind of the souls of the naive is the making of the devil. Just putting an untruth long enough to sink in will be their truth that will spread like cancer. This is what has become to our society in America. Misleading lies and distorting of the truth has caused us to stray from our basic value fundamental.

It is not “GOD D*MN AMERICA” as noted by Rev. Jeremiah Wright, but “GOD BLESS AMERICA” as revered by our Holiness Pope Benedict XVI.

The pope visit is want this country needed. He came to visit the United States during his 81st birthday. Pope Benedict XVI gave three masses, which we jammed packed of the faithful, at National Stadium in Washington, D.C., St. Patrick Cathedral in New York City, NY, and Yankee Stadium in Bronx, NY.
Pope Benedict XVI went to Ground Zero, the site of the WTC attack, and gave a small ceremony and prayer to commemorate the site and provide comfort to the families whose loved ones perished under this despicable act of cowardliness. Pope Benedict visited a couple synagogues to show his bonding respect and open arms to the Jewish faith. The pope wanted it to be a constant reminder that without Judaism, there wouldn’t be Christianity. And finally, the other major visit of the trip was to speak at the United Nations and address the representing delegates about human rights and peace.

Imagine, the last time a pope came to the United States was Pope John Paul II and that was almost 30 years ago. But since Pope John Paul II passing, the world needed another pope to bring the healing that we desperately desire. It was already known why the Holy Father came to America. That was to address to the bishops and cardinals about the horrors of pedophilia of the children of God by immoral priest. Pope Benedict said he was to bring “healing and strength so that the victims may continue their lives with courage and hope.” For years, the Vatican has rejected all attempts by survivors of these unholy criminal acts to meet the pope. The petitions for the redress of their grievances fell on deaf ears. Instead of these people to meet the pope, the pope went to meet them. Some say that the delay was too long, but to gather the facts before approaching to the public was necessary in order that the right words and action may comfort ones soul and mental well being. The Holy Father had a small audience of victims of sexual abuse by priest and there were anger, deep concerns, and crying. It was the intent of the Holy Father’s trip to promote the healing process that plagued the Catholic Church for decades. In fact, throughout Pope Benedict’s trip, he publicly repeated his contrition at the scandal which his American bishops have themselves admitted they handled very badly. This is a remarkable and astonishing turnaround in Vatican policy after years of ignoring reality.

The purpose of the trip was indeed successful. It brought strength and unity of Catholics and Christians throughout America, and it gave hope that justice and reformation can bring the cure of a cancer that has been ravaging the Catholic Church. Pope Benedict may not be a rock star like Pope John Paul II, but this pope impresses me as a humble, compassionate man, whose only desire is to unite the human race and bring the respect back to the Catholic Church.
Bravo! Molto Grazie Papi Benedict XVI! Grazie per condividere con noi con tuo grazia. Translated from Italian to English, “Great Job! Thank you so much Pope Benedict XVI! Thank you for sharing with us with your grace.”

Sunday, April 20, 2008

Understanding Why Jewish People Vote Democrat

To my Jewish friends and their families, Shalom! It is Passover weekend for the Jewish culture to celebrate eight days of prayer and symbolic foods that commemorates the exodus and freedom of the Israelites from Egypt. I had the opportunity to had celebrated a Seder dinner with a friend and his Jewish family. It was a memorable experience to celebrate the feast with wine, story telling, discussion, and a wonderful symbolic meal. The ceremony was done in traditional Hebrew, but everything was translated to me by my friend Caleb in English. Thanks Caleb!

After dinner while the ladies talked in the kitchen, the men retired to the den for further discussion and they started to talk about politics and the Democrat primary. They knew that I was a Conservative Republican and they offered me to speak with an open mind. Without being disrespectful, I asked why Jews are stereotyped as voting Democrats; even though, they are very conservative in nature.

Caleb’s grandfather, bless his soul, looked at me and told me that Jews take the Torah, the Jewish Bible, to heart and their obligation to their fellow man and society, which leans them to be Democrats. One of Caleb’s uncles jumped in and told me when his family immigrated to the USA, the Republicans, at that time, were against unions. For a young Jewish man finding a job was tough and unions help protect the rights of the little people. Hence, many working Jews lean Democrat.

Caleb’s grandfather told me that Republicans during FDR times were against WWII and against fighting Nazi Germany. He will not forget such events and that's why he supports Democrats. Then Caleb explained to me that none of the Republican dating back to Eisenhower did anything for Israel. Among the men in the room, voting for a candidate that supports Israel is top priority. Caleb said that Eisenhower didn't do anything for Israel, Nixon was stalling until Golda Meir threatened a nuclear attack, Ford did nothing, Reagan gave the Iranian mullahs weapons, Bush 41 did nothing, and Bush 43 egged Israel to attack Lebanon and then pulled the cease fire card.

Then Caleb got carried away by saying the George W Bush is letting Iran get the bomb, just as he did by letting North Korea get the bomb, and George W Bush is forcing Israel to act unilaterally to prevent a nuclear Iran. Caleb went on to say that Jimmy Carter brought peace between Israel and Egypt. During Clinton's Administration, Bill Clinton got Jordan to recognized Israel and tried desperately to bring peace between the Palestinians and Israel at Camp David, but Arafat declined.

This is when I had the opportunity to step in. I never knew the reason why, but I am glad I got to understand why they support Democrats. I can see all the men in the room waiting for me to speak "on behalf of the conservative movement." It was scary, but I took at least 30 seconds to gather my thoughts because it was information overload that I received.

I had to say that since Israel was recognized as a state, the United States has been there side by side with them. We recognize Israel existence and to say what a pass president done or ignored is irreverent. The point was that Israel exists today no matter if it was a Republican or a Democrat President. I had to clarify Caleb and to his dad, uncles, and grandfather that if the Republicans has done wrong so too has the Democrats. Jimmy Carter didn't have any foreign policy experience, and to bring peace with Egypt and Israel was secondary since Egypt was a friend of the United States at that time. I had to remind them that the Carter Administration put the Ayatollah in Iran into power that lead to the Iran Hostage Crisis into being and lead to the beginning of radical Islam, which is a threat to Israel and the world. When the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, Jimmy Carter sent aid to the anti-Soviet Islamists. Jimmy Carter drastically slashed support for South Korea, which his policies are still causing repercussions thirty years later with Iran and North Korea both developing nuclear weapons and al-Qaeda being based in Afghanistan.

Likewise, Clinton's involvement in Bosnia, a Muslim country, brought a wide spread proliferation of radical Islam into light. Because Clinton supported of Bosnia Muslims, Clinton aided thousands of Mujahideens, who are radical Islamic fighters, to help fight the cause. After the war, many of the Mujahideens stayed in Bosnia. I had to remind the group that the Mujahideens were the source of instability and terrorism in Europe. Also, Bosnia is the staging ground of many terrorists plots around the world.

I had to mention to the group not to dwell in the past, but look what is occurring now. To describe the role in Bill Clinton bringing peace with the Palestinians and Israel is not different what this current administration is doing. I needed to add that I had qualms in negotiating with a terrorist state whose hatred for Israel has been historically documented. Israel is a country who has the right to defend itself. That is the policy that is supported by George W. Bush. Whether Israel strikes a nuclear plant or missiles plant, which they have done, will not be excoriated by the United States.

I went on to say that presently, you have Obama who denounces Jimmy Carters talks with Hamas, but Obama is willing to sit down and hold direct talks with Iran and Syria's President. Obama's pious arrogance is demonstrated that he claims a hopeful reconciliation can be rendered without further blood shed. I mentioned that Obama and Hillary is no friend to Israel, and their policies contradict the values of the Jewish faith. Both have terrorist ties and Obama is willing to split Israel in half to appease the Palestinian government. Having to remind them of the hypocrisy of Hillary Clinton and the missteps of Obama's association to an American terrorist, a racist and anti-Semite pastors, and having supporters from Hamas, these are not the candidates that the Jewish people can support.

I went on to say there are many Jewish Conservative Talk Shows on the radio that I pay close attention to. I mentioned "the Great One" Mark Levin, Michael Savage, Dennis Prager, and Michael Medved just to name a few. After shedding some light, majority of the men there were in agreement with everything that I said since they couldn't rebuke it. Even Caleb, who is a die-hard liberal, was astonished that I got his grandfather speechless and in agreement. It seems Caleb is starting to show an opening to my beliefs and will be listening to some of the Jewish Conservative Talk Show host to gain more understanding.

It was a wonderful evening. Discussing politics and religion was memorizing. After saying my full, I sat back and listened to the stories and lessons from the Torah and the understandings of the Old Testament. I really enjoyed listening to intelligent conversation for a change.

Thank you to my dear friend Caleb and his wonderful family the Schwartz for showing me a great unforgettable time.

Friday, April 18, 2008

Barack Obama: There is No Whining in Politics You Cry Baby

I just want to let everybody know what type of person Barack Obama has become. In yesterdays debate in Philadelphia, the ABC network got excoriated by the Left wing Liberal Media about the treatment toward Obama. One may say what type of treatment? Well, I felt that Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos gave not hard questions, but honest questions to Obama. For the first 45 minutes of the debate was targeted to dismiss or acknowledge the rumors and allegations about Obama character.

Running for President of the United States, everything is on the table. All questions to understand the person is reasonable. So far, we know nothing about Barack Obama, but for piece meals that we obtain from the blogosphere, snippets from newspaper articles, and talk radio. The only thing we can go on and what the public is using to justify their choice is character and personality. Personality may be the only good attribute about Barack Obama, but his character is dark and seedy.

To see him gets frazzled on tv is not presidential material and it was only a debate. I can imagine if it was a 3:00 A.M. call on the “red phone” in the White House about a crisis that needs immediate action, Obama would have frozen on the spot. Obama actually whined on national television after the first 45 minutes of drilling from the ABC’s moderators. There has been no other president candidate in our history that whined. That shows weakness and it’s not presidential. The Senator from Illinois was chastising the moderators that he was given an unfair chance in answering their witch hunt. Well, whose fault is it? It turns out that Obama wasn’t prepared and was embarrassed by his display on national tv. I cannot believe he couldn’t answer the questions related to the American terrorist Acers, Pastor Jeremiah Wright, his comment regarding rural America, economics and taxes, Rask, and his foreign policy position. Either Obama is stupid or blinded by vanity. I saw a cry baby at the podium. It was a pathetic sight to behold.

Obama went on record that he doesn’t want to do any more debates. Oh, that is a revelation. LOL. I guess he realized that the media and the public are on to him. His idea of damage control is not to do any more debates. It wouldn’t matter because the facts were revealed about him that night and 10,000,000 viewers actually saw Obama as a whiny spoil brat.

Obama needs to understand that he can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but he cannot fool all the people all of the time.

Thursday, April 17, 2008

Winner of Last Night Democrat Debate- John McCain

It was one of the most enjoyable Democrat debates (15 debates in all) that I had the opportunity to watch its entirety. I must give kudos to ABC and its moderators Charles Gibson and George Stephanopuolos in taking the questions to another level.

I expected a go-for-broke all out war between Obama and Hillary and I was not disappointed. In fact, there were 10,000,000 viewers that evening and 96% stayed through its entirety. It was so ironic how it took place in Philadelphia. It was the same city that gave havoc to Hillary Clinton during the first debate with Tim Russert on the illegal aliens obtain drivers’ license debacles. This time the spotlight was on Obama. It was so enjoyable that every liberal blogger and liberal organizations lambasted the ABC network and the moderators for attacking Obama.

I finally saw Obama crack under pressure and his demeanor was pathetic. He wasn't articulate nor charismatic. He showed temper and disdain. I was expecting him to say, "Hey guy, knock it off. I already answered eight questions already." The whole debate was quite unique. It was the goons (ABC moderators) attacking the victim (Obama) while the head leader of the goons (Hillary) is attacking from behind. Here is the scenario. The moderators attacked Obama with questions. Obama gave his weak pathetic answer. Then Hillary would expand with more information to denigrate Obama. It was so priceless to witness this calculated maneuver.

I call it fair game to give any question to a potential presidential candidate. This is also important because no one knows who is Barack Obama. These are no accomplishments that can be recalled during Obama's time during the State Senate in Illinois and US Senates. The only thing people can refer to are his personality and character. With his connections to a terrorist, a racist pastor, and a corrupt businessman, Obama association and good sense of judgement with them doesn't look good.

Hillary was able to stand on her own, but since George Stephanopuolos and Charles Gibson are personal friends of the Clintons, she got a pass. Obama, on the other hand, wasn't able to explain his association with terrorist ties to Ayers. His weak remark saying that he was eight years old when this American terrorist committed crimes of atrocities and being neighbors doesn't constitute guilt by association was enough to convince the public that he was sincere. But Hillary came in and mentioned that Ayers commended the attacks on 9/11, both men were on the same board of directors, both men toured together giving speeches around the country, and as per Obama aides, both men were friends.

Charles Gibson put the Senator from Illinois in a corner with references about Obama’s pastor Jeremiah Wright and 20 years not knowing anything about the hate and racism of Wright’s sermon and got Obama to concede that capital gains cut does stimulate the economy and increase revenue. Regards to the capital gains cuts, Obama went on to say that he felt further taxing to the very rich was necessary for fairness of all. That was the most incredulous statement coming from a socialist.

With the reference to small town America clinging to their guns and religion to show their bitterness and frustration, it is taking its toll on the Obama campaign. This stupid remark was brought up during the debate and Obama blew it.
That night we saw a whinny and irritated man who are unable to control himself from crossing the podium and bitch slap both moderators. LOL.

The winner of the Philadelphia debate last night was John McCain.

Wednesday, April 16, 2008

Blame the Democrat Majority for the High Gas Price

The plight of the ignorance of some misguided American people to say that the high price of gas was due to the subprime loan mess is completely wrong. That is the most outrageous irresponsible statement without merit and I couldn’t believe educated professionals that I work with would make these incredulous statements.

Let me inform to those who are clueless and for those who obtained their fact by idiots. The high price of gas was an issue back in 2005-2006, when then-Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) made an election year pledge: "Democrats have a commonsense plan to help bring down skyrocketing gas prices."

I remember in January 2007 that the price of gas was about $2.33/gallon. Back then, it was considered high. Today, the price of oil touched the $115.00/barrel and the price of regular gas at $3.35/gallon.

So, what did we get putting a Democrat Majority in power and Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House? Broken promises along with a Nancy Pelosi commonsense plan to bring down the price of gas that lead to a $1.05 per gallon spike under a Democrat controlled Congress. It is nearly two years after the Democrats took control and the price of gas has truly gone out of control. Hey Nancy, you gave us a great plan (sarcasm)!

It is the high cost of gas and oil is one of the contributing factors that is slowing our economy; even though, Wall Street is starting to show some resurgence on the DOW. Because of Pelosi's inaction, the worst will be seen by the summer when forecasters are predicting for gas to peak as high as $3.75/gallon.

The Democrats’ solution is to showcase Congressional hearing with the big oil companies, but what good came out of it. Nothing! Rep. John Dingell (D-Mi), who chairs the House Energy and Commerce Committee, proposed to increase the federal gas tax by an additional 50 cents. Then you have Rep. James Oberstar (D-MN), who is chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure, felt a Rep. Dingell 50 cent tax hike is not enough, so he proposed to add another 5 cents onto it. Therefore, Pelosi’s plan is to increase more than a 50% tax to the price we pay at the pump. Do you think that it's fair? Nancy Pelosi won't send an energy bill to the energy committee, they won't bring a bill to the floor for discussion, and the notion that they can tax their way back to lower the gas price is laughable. Guess what? We are suffering because of the negligence and inactions of this Democrat Majority in Congress. You voted for these bozos in office in belief that the Democrat will do something positive in Capitol Hill. Aren't we going to ever learn?

What we should learn is that Democrats in Congress never had a plan. They ad-lib everything and are willing to test their idiotic theory at our expense.

Hey, I really don't want to hear people bitch and whine about the price of gas. You were the idiots and misguided that believed that the Democrats could be a party of change and voted them into office. Yeah, they are a party of change (sarcasm). They are a party to change everything that took this country toward the right direction into the wrong direction.

Tuesday, April 15, 2008

Isn't 1% of our GDP Spent on the War Worth the Cost for Freedom?

It irritates me when ignorant uninformed people promulgate the rhetoric given by the Liberal left by stating that "we shouldn't have gotten to war in Iraq in the first place." It is the very same crap I hear from our elected idiot Senators during the second recent testimony of General Petraeus on Capitol Hill. The Liberal Senators are saying that we shouldn't have entered the war in Iraq because the cost to run the war is undermining the economy.

Nice try, but off by a mile. It is what I call a half-ass explanation of nonsense.

Let's get the fact straight. The US have spent roughly $700 billion for the five-year war. The total cost is 1% of the $65 trillion GDP over the same time period. It may sound like a lot of money, but it is tiny in comparison to the robust economy we have witnessed during Bush two terms in office.

The question is not "why should we go to war in Iraq since it's costing us a lot of money and treasure," but rather "what is the cost for freedom?”

By not answering this question with idiotic conspiracy theories, the USA has not been attacked since 9/11. Keep in mind that al Qaeda attacked our financial sector of our economy. They knew that if they wanted to cripple us; it would be advantageous to destroy the heart and soul of our economy and that is Wall Street. Because we deterred further attacked, we allowed globalization to thrive and the world recovered. Global GDP as average 5% annually during the five years after 9/11. The capitalization of the world stock market increased 150% or $35 trillion. Isn't 1% of our GDP spent on the war a small burden for the cost for freedom?

Since we were on the offensive and successfully implemented the surge, al Qaeda and other insurgents either is on the run or being captured. By stopping this radical jihadist at their own soil, and preventing them from mounting another attack on our own soil, our economy has benefitted dramatically. Isn't 1% of our GDP spent on the war a small burden for the cost for freedom?

Let me add the positive side of this current slowdown and that is the US economy has performed remarkably well during the five years of the Iraq war. From my favorite economist, Larry Kudlow, he said that real GDP has increased by 16% or 3% annually. Our unemployment rate has remained below historic lows for quite some time. The Bush Administration and his tax cut produced 10 million jobs and the net worth household income increased by $20 trillion. Industrial production has expanded by 14%. Also, despite the current housing correction, home prices have increased by 20%. Keep in mind that an average home will double in price from what you paid for it every 10 years. By keeping terrorist away from our daily lives, this country has prospered. Isn't 1% of our GDP spent on the war a small burden for the cost for freedom?

Now, many are asking how removing Saddam Hussein from power has benefitted us? Well, my question is what are the benefits of removing an insane Iraqi dictator? Remember, Saddam launched a 10-year war against Iran, invaded Kuwait, harbored terrorists like Abu Nadal and Ayman al-Zawahiri, and gassed and killed hundreds of thousands of his own people. Nobody can predict the approximate cost of permitting Saddam Hussein to remain in power, but several economists at the University of Chicago estimated that in certain scenarios that allowed Saddam Hussein in power may have produced security costs that are equivalent to the actual cost of the Iraq war. Isn't 1% of our GDP spent on the war a small burden for the cost for freedom?

I just don't understand why antiwar supporters are not willing to see the positives, but only the negative of this war. The USA doesn't go to war just to leave the place in shambles. We are the only compassionate country that is willing to rebuild a country that we defeated. We have helped rebuilt Japan and Germany after WWII and they have a solid economy. Currently, Iraq's economy is starting to grow and the success of the surge continues to safeguard our troops and our allies. Isn't 1% of our GDP spent on the war a small burden for the cost for freedom?

Well, I hope you answered "yes" to the last five paragraphs. I truly believe that 1% of the GDP spent on the war is not a large price nor a heavy burden for us to endure. There are economic scholars from both sides of the political spectrum agree that the US can afford the war in Iraq, but don't expect that to be reported by the Mainstream Media.

As you can see I am a typical Neo-Con and many antiwar critics are probably rolling their eyes, but I need to express that those people who are against the war has lost sight the meaning of the words uttered of our beloved past president John F. Kennedy. JFK is my personal hero in regards to his ideas he addressed at his inauguration. Beside the famous line about "ask not what your country can do for you, but ask what you can do for your country," my favorite verse of JFK which he called on American to "Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to ensure the survival and the success of liberty."

Monday, April 14, 2008

The Hell With ANWR. North Dakota Struck OIL!

It is the biggest news that nobody is talking about. Parts of North Dakota, Montana, and South Dakota are sitting on huge deposit of recoverable oil, which is bigger than Saudi Arabia and Russia put together. We are talking about 400 billion barrels of light, sweet crude oil in the upper Midwest that isn't protected by any crazed environmentalist or federal government. In comparison, Saudi Arabia has 260 billion barrels of proven reserves, and Russia has close to six billion barrels of proven reserves. That is a very big difference and I am astonished that none of the major tv networks, nor any major newspaper reported on this. But the biggest breakthrough is with the new technology that allowed the oil industry to drill horizontally by a complex computerized controlled drill rather than punching vertically down into the ground to collect this valuable "black tea." This was the problem in the past that prevented us to drill for oil. It is not the case anymore.

Since the Federal government and its corresponding socialist agencies have blocked new coal-fired power plants, discouraged that using biofuels have proved worse for the environment than gas, and the hysteria of using nuclear plants to be a very dangerous thing, it seems that oil will be the mainstay in our culture and the need for it will linger on for another generation.

This is the big break that we need to tell OPEC to screw themselves because we have the resources that we don't need their oil. America can boost their oil reserves by an incredible 10 times, giving our economy the upper hand against being blackmailed by OPEC. Also, it gives the USA the opportunity to say to the Iranian and Venezuelan threat in disrupting supply to "kiss my arse."

Just imagine that in 2007, US imported approximately 14 million barrels of oil a day costing us $340 billion, which went to building palaces in Saudi Arabia and help support hostile anti-America regimes. If we can procure 200 billion barrels of oil at $100 a barrel recovered in North Dakota and Montana, it will add $18 trillion dollars to the US economy, which would wipe out our national debt and stabilize the US trade deficit. Of course, it would completely make us less oil dependent and we would regain our sovereignty.

This new discovery will change the whole political economics of the world. I need to say this again. Just imagine that one hundred billion barrels would be worth $9 trillion at today's prices. Wow! It is important that we insist that our Congressman and Senators of our respective states get on the ball and prevent any shenanigans that would hinder us from being less oil dependent.

There is nothing wrong nor be ashamed that the oil that we produce is affordable and made in the USA.

Sunday, April 13, 2008

Obama Insist on Insulting America

"You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." - Barack Obama

These are the exact words uttered from Obama’s mouth describing the people of Pennsylvania and probably referring to most of the people of the Midwest and the south. This is the man whom I call an elitist. I like how some conservative talk show hosts call him a "limousine liberal." Obama is a man who was born with the privileges of a spoiled brat. He was born in Hawaii and was raised by his white grandparents. He attended private schooling as a child, went to college in Columbia University in New York City, and then law school in an ivy league school in Massachusetts. This man went to Illinois and proclaimed he understands the repression of the black people. It is like Queen of England telling us she understands to be a commoner. It is what I call pandering to the base. If Obama thinks by insulting many groups of people except for the blacks and win the Democrat nomination, then he has another thing coming.

He already insulted the Catholics and Christian population by saying that he hopes he doesn’t have to bear the punishment of a baby if their teenage girls get pregnant. He insulted most of middle America or the working class by saying something stereotypical. He might as well call everybody not living in the big states "rednecks" because that is what he is implying as indicated in the first two paragraphs. He supports the Black Panthers and the racist Rev. Jeremiah Wright and terrorism. Obama is anti-Jew or an anti-Semite for his support of the enemies of Israel. The list is getting bigger and bigger.

Before Obama splits America apart, he needs to understand more about America and outside of Illinois. His audacity of ignorance supercedes his hope for America. We are learning more about Obama in the past several weeks. So far, I’m not impressed. He is the great Satan that we were warned about. Obama is willing to say anything to get elected so he can destroy America. Wake up America!

Thursday, April 10, 2008

How Radical Islam Is Portrayed in 'FITNA'- A MUST SEE

How Radical Islam Is Portrayed in ’FITNA’ - A MUST SEE
Current mood: disappointed
Category: News and Politics

I have just saw on the internet the movie "Fitna" and I was totally aghast and horrified how radical Islam is hijacking its own religion.

This movie was distributed on March 27, 2008, and it has been populated throughout the internet. Many critics tried to ban the short 15 minute movie, but more and more sites are popping up to reveal to the world how radical Islam is taking the verses of the Quran per batem and out of context.

The creator and Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilder wanted to demonstrate how radical Islam is spreading throughout the Netherlands and Europe and how it motivates terrorism. The title of the movie is Arabic and it means: "Test of Faith in Times of Trial."

What bothers me and lend me to think how society and this government takes Christianity for granted in this country; while appeasing the Islamic faith. The Islamic views on homosexuality, treatment of women, and honor killing is edgy and unfounded. In addition, their opposition to democracy does not bode well with me too.

The movie summed it up by stating the following:

- "Muslims want you to make way for Islam, but Islam doesn't make way for you"

- "The government insist to respect Islam but Islam doesn't respect you"

- "Islam wants to rule, submit, and seek to destroy the Western Civilization"

- "In 1945, Nazism was defeated in Europe, In 1989, Communism was defeated in Europe. Now, radical Islamic ideology has to be defeated."

- "Defeat radical Islamization. Defend our Freedom"

To prevent phishing, copy and paste this site on a new window to watch the movie:

Wednesday, April 9, 2008

FoxNews Dominate Liberal Drive-by Media

FoxNews Dominates Liberal Drive-by Media
Category: News and Politics





FNC SHEP 1,577,000

FNC GRETA 1,418,000

FNC HUME 1,376,000

CNN KING 1,136,000

CNN DOBBS 1,000,000


CNN COOPER 849,000




Tuesday, April 8, 2008

David Patraeus vs Goliath Part II

Today, the assessments of Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker on the war in Iraq have given an overall positive review of U.S. progress in Iraq. Although as they try not to sound too cocky, Gen Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker perceived caution that there has much work to be done. It is good news to hear that the desired plan is moving in the right direction.

My question is, "why is the Democrats still content to change the meaning of what is occurring in Iraq?" It seems the Democrats are in another world. I would hear positive new coming from the man who is in charge of the actual fight, but the Democrats falling on deaf ears and not listening one word from the general. Each Democrat on the panel already had their speeches rehearsed or laid out in front of them to read each word per batem. It is so funny to hear some of the Democrats concocted speeches contradict the testimony of Gen. David Petraeus.

I was paying attention to Hillary and Obama. Hillary toned it down a lot to not make a fool of herself since she is far behind in the polls and Obama, also known as the great Satan, twisting words and facts to make his case. His biggest mistake is that he would want to talk to Iran to stop causing problems by sending insurgence into Iraqi.

Can someone tell me what good has ever come out from talking to someone who doesn’t care about what we think? Let’s ask Nancy Pelosi and her trip to Syria. What positive good ever came out from that meeting with that Syrian dictator? How about asking Jimmy Carter and his quest in getting our hostages out of Iran in the late 70’s. If Obama is able to persuade the Iranian President to stop his madness, then I would vote for that racist self righteous hypocrite. I wonder if Obama would use his terrorist ties to persuade Iran to halt their meddling in Iraqi? If you didn’t understand that sentence, I am writing a blog how Obama has ties to terrorists.

Not to digress, I can sum up the Senate Hearing by a statement by Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT). He is the only person, who is a Democrat/Independent, that gets it. He bashed his fellow Democrats in their denial of positive achievements in Iraq by saying, "there’s a kind of hear no progress in Iraq, sees no progress in Iraq, and most of all, speak of no progress in Iraq." Not only that, he bashed the Congress by saying, "The Iraqi political leadership has achieved a lot more political reconciliation and progress since September than the American political leadership has."

Joe Lieberman should be the spokesman of the Democrat party because Lieberman’s intention is pure and straight to the point. Lieberman said, "if only Democrats would accept the clear success of the surge, we can move to more success so we can bring more of our troops home." That is the message the Democrat ought to say instead of spewing idiotic rhetoric.

Transcipt of Joe Lieberman interaction with David Patraeus

General and Ambassador, thank you for your extraordinary service in the cause of freedom in Iraq.
I must say that, as I listen to your testimony, which is encouraging and yet quite realistic, and in my opinion, not overstated -- you’ve told us that the strategy associated with the surge is working, progress has been made, but it’s entirely reversible. You’ve been very frank about some of the problems that we still face.

What I’m about to say, with respect to my colleagues who have consistently opposed our presence in Iraq, as I hear the questions and the statements today, it seems to me that there’s a kind of hear no progress in Iraq, see no progress in Iraq, and most of all, speak of no progress in Iraq.

The fact is, there has been progress in Iraq, thanks to extraordinary effort by the two of you and all those who serve under you on our behalf.

I wish we could come to a point where we could have an agreement on the facts that you are presenting to us, the charts you’ve shown, the military progress, the extraordinary drop in ethno-sectarian violence, the drop in civilian deaths, the drop in American deaths, and the very impressive political progress in Iraq since last September.

Hey, let’s be honest about this: The Iraqi political leadership has achieved a lot more political reconciliation and progress since September than the American political leadership has. So we’ve got to give credit for that.
I repeat, I wish we could have an agreement on the facts which you presented. You work for us. I don’t distrust those facts.

And I wish we could go from an agreement on those facts to figure out how we can move to more success so we can bring more of our troops home. That’s apparently not going to happen in the near future.

LIEBERMAN: Is it fair to say that the Iranian-backed special groups in Iraq are responsible for the murder of hundreds of thousands -- excuse me -- hundreds of American soldiers and thousands of Iraqi soldiers and civilians?

PETRAEUS: It certainly is. I do believe that is correct.

Again, some of that also is militia elements who have been -- subsequently have been trained by these individuals. But there is no question about the threat that they pose, and, again, about the way that has been revealed more fully in recent weeks.

Monday, April 7, 2008

Hillary Clinton Loves To Lie To Us

It won't be hard to take on either Democrat candidate in the upcoming general elections. It is either you have a racist arrogant self righteous hypocrite or a blatant pathological liar. It is up to the Democrats in the United States to pick one Democrat candidate to go head to head against John McCain.

The ammunition given to John McCain as both Democrat candidates ripping each other apart is priceless. We had a couple weeks of Obama's miscue with his pastor Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and now this week, we have Hillary's campaign machine having a couple screws loose.

This week is Hillary's "Bonsia sniper fire" lie and it is a story that has been repeated constantly throughout her campaign regarding to healthcare. Read the story below to understand how her convoluted mind works. Her story telling is very similar to her autobiography. Both are extremely entertaining fictional stories.


April 6, 2008 -- Hillary Rodham Clinton "misspoke" again on the campaign trail - and a distraught Ohio family is furious about it.

Several times in recent months while talking about her plan for universal health care, Clinton told a tale of woe about a young pregnant woman who sought medical care at a local hospital and was turned away for lack of insurance - and both she and the baby died.

But the family of the 35-year-old woman - Trina Bachtel - says the story is simply not true.

"Trina had good insurance. She was a good girl, and she worked hard. That story made her look like she was a welfare bum," her 80-year-old grandmother May Mayle told The Post yesterday.

Mayle confirmed that Bachtel died last August from complications related to a late-pregnancy miscarriage, but said she was never turned away from a hospital.

"The family is real torn up about it. I can't understand why they'd make her out to look like she was so unstable," said Mayle.

As Clinton told the story during campaign rallies, the young, pregnant woman in difficulty was turned down for treatment because she was uninsured and couldn't pay $100 up front.

She didn't name Bachtel or the hospital involved, but after the Washington Post ran a story identifying her and where she worked - a Pizza Hut in Pomeroy, Ohio - local papers made it front-page news, horrifying her still-grieving family.

"Of course she would have had $100," fumed Mayle. "Her boyfriend's real angry about it, too, because he had good insurance. They were going to get married, but worked so hard they couldn't find the time."

Clinton apparently learned of the story from one of her local supporters, Deputy Sheriff Bryan Holman. He told papers he heard it secondhand from Bachtel family members. At an event with Sen. Clinton, he related it to her.

"She tells the story as it was told to her by the deputy sheriff," a Clinton spokesperson said. "She had no reason to doubt his word."

Mayle said Bachtel went to the O'Bleness Memorial Hospital on Aug. 4 for a routine check-up and was told her baby was stillborn.

"They told her to come back the next day, and she did, and they made her deliver the baby even though he was dead. Then she just didn't get better."

The family transferred her to a different facility in Columbus, where she died Aug. 17.

The Clinton camp told papers it had tried to check out as much of Holman's story as was possible, but hadn't been able verify all the details.

Additional reporting by Kathianne Boniello

Thursday, April 3, 2008

Bush Doing It His Way With Border Security

In his final year as President, George W. Bush is trying to make good on his promises. He heard the American people and the people want the borders shut down to illegal aliens. With the bureaucracy in Washington, it seems that illegal immigration is not the agenda of the mainstream media. It has been more on the economy that anything else.

In a gutsy move, the Bush administration announced that it intends on busting through the Washington red tape and gets the border fence built by the end of the year. Using waivers passed by Congress, the construction will bypass environmental and bureaucratic rules to complete 670 miles of the barrier before Bush leaves office. I can see it now. The Liberals are going to attack Bush for his arrogance and being above the fray. I call it, "It's about time!"

The Bush administration plans to use its authority to bypass more than 30 laws and regulations in an effort to finish building 670 miles of fence along the southwest U.S. border by the end of this year, federal officials said Tuesday.

Invoking the legal waivers — which Congress authorized — would cut through bureaucratic red tape and sidestep environmental laws that currently stand in the way of the Homeland Security Department building 267 miles of fencing in California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas, according to officials familiar with the plan. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because the waivers had not yet been announced.

The move would be the biggest use of legal waivers since the administration started building the fence. Previously, the department has used its waiver authority for two portions of fence in Arizona and one portion in San Diego.

As of March 17, there were 309 miles of fencing in place, leaving 361 to be completed by the end of the year. Of those, 267 miles are being held up by federal, state and local laws and regulations.

This move will mean that the Democrats cannot make up stories about the immigration debate. This issue will be left off the table because a completed fence will bring Republicans to cheer in 2008. I cannot believe how hard it is to secure the border. The money has been allocated. The plan has been devised. It is the matter of having the brass “kahuna” to implement the task at hand. This is good for Bush's legacy and leaving his term on a high note. It is not a certain solution, but it is something that no other President had the courage to do and that is to secure the borders. President Bush understands that secure the borders first before tackling the 20 million illegal aliens inside this country.

In regards to the upcoming election, it would be a bonus for McCain. It would make his past position on immigration less of an issue. Hopefully, when the fence gets erected, no candidate from either side of the political party would tear it down. I am betting that President Bush wanted the next president to take the mantle and improve the problem we have with illegal immigration. The fence is only the beginning. Bringing immigration, border security, and national security to the forefront, the Republicans have the advantage by setting a known ideology that their party represents national security, which is the Achilles heel to the Democrat party.

Wednesday, April 2, 2008

3rd Graders Plot to Kill Their Teacher! Good GOD!

It seems nothing to phase me when I hear of a school shooting or a heinous act against humanity inside a classroom, but nothing surprises me more when I found out that there was a plot by students to kill their teacher. What makes this more amazing is that they are 8 to 10-year-old 3rd graders.

It occurred in Waycross, Georgia at the Center Elementary School. What boggles my mind is that there were up to 11 students involved to commit murder. School officials had alerted police Friday after a pupil tipped off a teacher that a girl had taken a weapon to school.

The police uncovered a glass paperweight, handcuffs, duct tape, glass, and a broken steak knife. The scenario was intended for the students to get into position in the classroom. One student’s job is to cover the windows, the other student to knock the teacher unconscious with the paperweight, another student to duct tape her mouth, and other student to stab her with a broken steak knife.

The police were dumbfounded and tried to rationalize the situation what these children was thinking about. That is such a typical liberal in rationalizing the obvious. Hey lardass! It is what a sane individual would describe it as premeditated murder. Duh!

Police have charged three students in masterminding this "CSI" style of murder. The police are saying that these kids thought this was like a cartoon. They think they can do such a hideous act and then she stands up and she will be Okay.

These children aren't known troublemakers, but these students have some learning disabilities like attention deficit disorder and hyperactivity. The teacher who was targeted specialized in teaching third-grade students with these forms of disabilities.

What caused these students to go beyond the level of insanity? The cause isn’t getting enough recess time or getting too much homework, but the teacher scolded a student to get down from his chair. Don't you think that is going quite far to kill a teacher? Hell, when I got a bad grade, I never would have thought of killing my teacher.

Since these kids are too young to be charged as adults and too young to be sentenced to a youth detention center, the police decided to seek juvenile charges to the two girls, age 9 and 10, who brought the knife and paperweight and an 8-year-old boy, who brought the duct tape. They will be facing conspiracy to commit aggravated assault and bringing weapons on school grounds. The other 8 children were given an undisclosed term suspension.

Who is to blame? I blame the parents, Liberal society, television, the mainstream media, broken families, and video games. I have mentioned it in past blogs about unruly students and them needing the old fashion belt for punishment. We have gone into a pornographic society with Liberalism as the mainstay in our society. We are losing our Conservative ways. I thought adults are more affected by the poison of Liberalism, but I would never think it would trickle down to our kids. Bad parenting, neglect, child abuse, broken families, and what is on tv and radio contributed in spawning the new generation of Satan's children. For a child to coerce others to premeditate murder is not a child of God, but an act of the devil.

We have seen blood shed in recent years. There was a gunman on Valentines Day 2008 killing 5 students and wounded 17 in a classroom at Northern Illinois University. April 16, 2007, we had the Virginia Tech massacre that left 33 dead students. August 24, 2006, a 27-year-old male looking for his ex-girlfriend, who is a teacher, at Essex Elementary School in Essex, Vermont, shot two teachers, and prior going to the school, he went and killed his ex-girlfriends mother. Then there is the infamous April 20, 1999 shooting in Columbine High School that left 15 students dead and 23 others wounded.

What has happened to our kids? I want to pose this question to the idiots that comment on my past blog regarding that our kids are out of control and they need a severe tough love disciple. No matter what you may say, a good old fashion beating and constant reminders with repeated reinforcements will lead a child to the straight and narrow.

What is so heinous to good ole fashion disciplining? If talking doesn't work, the belt will! We need to be better stewards to our children’s welfare. Copping out by using the television and video games to substitute parenting is wrong and immoral and these parents need to go to jail for it. No guidance for our kids, no educating to our kids, or no supervision of our kids will be the downfall of this society. Take the responsibility and raise your kids and not this Liberal twisted society, which is poisoning our children.

Tuesday, April 1, 2008

Hey Chelsea Clinton! Monica Lewinsky is Fair Game

I was listening various Conservative radio talk show and the flavor of the day is Chelsea Clinton. I wrote last week how she is a joke being on the stump for her mother, Senator Hillary Clinton. By supporting her mom’s ludicrous and fictitious statement about being under sniper fire in Bosnia during a photo-op trip, Chelsea, who was there in Bosnia with her mom, had the gall to support what her mother said. That is strike number 1. As Chelsea travel on the stump for her mother in 80 colleges and universities, a student asked her about Monica Lewinsky and Bill Clinton scandal and how it will affect her mother if she became president. Chelsea's response, "It's none of your business." That is strike number 2.

This past Monday, Chelsea went to North Carolina University in Chapel Hill, on the stump for her mother and a student asked her, "Last week you were asked a question about how the Monica Lewinsky scandal affected your mom. You responded, saying that it was none of that person's business. And I'd like to briefly say, whether or not it's our business and why that's so."

Chelsea response, "It's none of your business"

The male student presses on, "Right. But I would like to know, because unfortunately, he was president of the United States at that time and so, as the American people, I feel it's our business."

Chelsea arrogantly said, "Sir, I respectfully disagree. I think that is something that is personal to my family. I'm sure there are things that are personal to your family that you don't think are anyone else's business, either. (applause) But also -- also, on a larger point, I don't think you should vote for or against my mother because of my father."

That is strike number 3. It is our business to know what happens in the White House and how Hillary Clinton acted and responded when she was duped by Bill Clinton's infidelity. It is public policy to have transparency of our elected officials. They are serving the best interest of the people who elected them and to serve on our behalf. If there are any shenanigans, we the American people who voted them in have the right to know.

For many months, Chelsea was on the stump for her mom. The young Clinton is not 17 years old, but a matured 28-year-old, who is old enough to make decision. It is sad to see that her campaigning and supporting for her mom are as weak as her father, Bill Clinton. Chelsea is not prepared to answer tough question. I would love to see reporters from the NYT, WSJ, or the Washington Post give her really poignant questions just to see her sweat and squirm. Her answers are weak and would provoke persistent redundant questions. She is lucky no member of the College Republicans came out and articulated questions that would make any Conservatives proud. I must give credit to those students who tried to stir the debate. These young college kids are still learning and this is something new to them. In fact, I would like to pose this idea to every College Republican to go and attend the forum where Chelsea Clinton is at and make her look like a fool, which wouldn't be hard to do.

It is fair game when Chelsea is criticizing the Bush Administration and bragging her parent’s accomplishments as President and First Lady. She keeps saying that her father produce budget surpluses, brought peace in the world, and created thousands upon thousands of jobs. First, those surpluses should be credited by a Republican Congress, who curbed Bill Clintons appetite. Second, peace throughout the world is a total lie. The war in Bosnia was during Bill's watch and we were attacked from the 1st WTC bombing to the USS Cole. Third, those jobs created was lost during the tech-bubble. The average unemployment rate during Bill Clinton Presidency was 5.4%. Presently, the current unemployment rate is 4.8%. In regards to Hillary Clinton, to gain experience by osmosis in the White House is neither an accomplishment nor a virtue. It is down right embarrassing.

So typical for a Clinton to lie or exaggerate their resume. The air of arrogance in Chelsea wants me to vomit. If I had a chance to give one question, I would say, "What does it say about your mom, Hillary Clinton, the way she blamed the vast right-wing conspiracy when everybody knew that there was no vast right-wing conspiracy, that your dad, Bill Clinton, lied to both of you about Monica Lewinsky. How would that affect your mom personal judgement to run this country? How would your mom contain your unfaithful dad if she was president?”

Tough questions needs tough answers without the weak “it's none of your business" crap. Chelsea needs to be coached from the Clinton camp with the proper answers because the former First Child is losing the support of the college students. It is somewhat embarrassing and I don't even like the girl.