Who’s the Real Republican, Now?

While working on the Ron Paul campaign I was often accused of not being a “real Republican.”  In fact, at several meetings I was shouted down by Republican officials because, in their words, I’m not a real Republican.

Well, I get up this morning (severe hangover) and check the Drudge and what do I see:

“Lieberman on McCain Short List.”

So, after accusing Ron Paul of not being a “real Republican,” the Republican Party nominee may pick none other than Joe Lieberman, a DEMOCRAT.

To me, this is hillarious.  I wonder if those McCainiacs, who accused me of not being a “real Republican” will say the same about John — who may pick a damn Democrat as his running mate.

You McCain Republicans are worthless.  Y’all suck and have destroyed the Party.

For this I hope Republicans lose the Presidency and lose even more in the House.  I only hope we keep 41 votes needed for a filibuster.  I’m fed up with this bullshit.  If you’re a communist, join the damn Democrat Party.  But please, just get the hell out of the Republican Party — you’ve already destroyed it.

Advertisements
Published in: on August 9, 2008 at 3:50 pm  Comments (4)  

More McCain Leftism

It gets better every day:

Republican Sen. John McCain, engaged in increasingly sharp attacks on rival Barack Obama, pledged that if elected president, he would work closely with Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, praising her as an effective leader and an “inspiration to millions of Americans.”

“I respect Speaker Pelosi. I think she’s one of the great American success stories,” McCain said during an interview with The Chronicle prior to a fundraiser at the Fairmont Hotel in San Francisco.

“We talk about (New York Sen.) Hillary Clinton and her inspiration to millions of Americans. Speaker Pelosi has been an inspiration as well” in a role that is “in many ways … more powerful than the president.”

And McCain also had high praise for the 2000 Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore and his advocacy on the issue of climate change. McCain recently raised eyebrows in GOP circles by calling “doable” Gore’s suggestion that the country could become entirely energy independent through use of renewable resources within 10 years.

More HERE

Published in: on July 30, 2008 at 3:26 pm  Comments (1)  

What Ever Happened to Virginians?

It’s that time of year again. Time for me to take my car across the street to the gas station and get my government-approved inspection. For that reason, I am in a highly pissed off mood today because it’s just another of the many reminders that freedom is dead in America.

But my main question is, have all Virginians lost their spines?  Have you all turned into Damn Yankees?

We’re talking about the state that produced men like Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, Richard Henry Lee, the great General Robert E. Lee, and the brave Stonewall Jackson. These men would be ashamed of todays Virginians! In fact, they would probably disown every damn one of you!

Even though I’m a Georgian, I’m now, unfortunately, in occupied Virginia so I’m going to try to do something about this communist bs where the government has to approve my car.

I’m going to start researching the subject today, but can anyone tell me a little bit more about what I’m missing here? Why haven’t so-called conservatives in the VA legislature got this socialist crap repealed? Why haven’t Virginians simply refused to pay the tax and made it go away?

After my research I hope to start a non-profit solely dedicated to abolishing this nonsense.

Wake up Virginians. You’re disappointing your great ancestors!

Update: From the government website:

“To ensure that your vehicle is mechanically safe to operate on the highways of the Commonwealth, it must pass an annual vehicle safety inspection.”

Damn. If the government didn’t approve my car I guess it wouldn’t work. Thank you government for treating me like a child in elementary school.

Update II: Just talked to my mother in Georgia, and she said that they used to do this crap there but Georgians weren’t having that so they got it repealed.

Published in: on July 30, 2008 at 12:13 pm  Comments (1)  

McCain Picks Gore As VP…

… not really, but it wouldn’t surprise me…

But I don’t know, Gore may be a little too far to the right for Juan.

Published in: on July 30, 2008 at 1:32 am  Comments (10)  

More McCain Leftism

Every day John McCain gives me more reasons to just stay home in November.

Today, at a town hall meeting in Nevada, McCain, being his usual self, spewed more leftist views — all while claiming to be a conservative.

McCain criticized Obama for wanting to raise taxes on everything, and then turned around and “told a disabled woman facing home foreclosure that he would step up enforcement of the Americans With Disabilities Act and assured a self-described cancer survivor that he supported stem cell research.”

One should especially note the irony in the video I posted the other day of Juan’s brother talking about how Juan wanted to uphold his Oath.  I guess something has changed, because last time I read the Constitution it seems that the Americans With Disabilities Act and government funded research are both blatantly unConstitutional.

But of course, Juan didn’t stop here.

After being questioned by a so-called “conservative” (so-called because anyone who votes for Juan is not really a conservative) about McCain’s conservative credentials, McCain reaffirmed his support for Al Gore’s Global Warming, better known as global government, agenda by stating, “Climate change, my friend, I have to tell you with all due respect, is real. It’s real and the question is how do we address it,” he told Englekirk. “Suppose I’m wrong and there’s no such thing as climate change. All we’ve done is give our kids a cleaner planet. But suppose I’m right and we do nothing? Then what kind of a planet do we hand off to our kids and our grandkids?”

So there you have it.  More McCain leftism.  I’m guessing you Republicans out there, or better called you Republicans in name only, who are voting for Juan, are also supporters of Al Gore?  Perhaps you should buy some Gore gear or have a movie night at your house and show him film.  Who knows, you may even be able to raise some money for McCain….

Published in: on July 30, 2008 at 1:31 am  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , , , ,

These People Understand Markets…

… About as much as John McCain understands them.

LOS ANGELES – The Los Angeles City Council has approved a one-year moratorium on new fast-food restaurants in a low-income area of the city.

The moratorium unanimously approved Tuesday is a bid to attract restaurants that offer healthier food choices to residents in a 32-square-mile area of South Los Angeles.

Councilwoman Jan Perry says residents at five public meetings expressed concern with the proliferation of fast-food outlets in the community plagued by above-average rates of obesity.

Nearly three-quarters of the restaurants in South L.A. are fast-food outlets. That’s a higher percentage than other parts of the city but the restaurant industry says the moratorium won’t help bring in alternatives.

“Our communities have an extreme shortage of quality foods,” City Councilman Bernard Parks said.

The aim of the yearlong moratorium, which was approved last week in committee, is to give the city time to try to attract restaurants that serve healthier food.

The California Restaurant Association says the moratorium, which could be extended up to two years, is misguided.

Fast food “is the only industry that wants to be in South LA,” said association spokesman Andrew Casana. “Sit-down restaurants don’t want to go in. If they did, they’d be there. This moratorium isn’t going to help them relocate.”

The ban comes at a time when governments of all levels are increasingly viewing menus as a matter of public health. Last Friday, California became the first state in the nation to bar trans fats, which lowers levels of good cholesterol and increases bad cholesterol.

It also comes as the Los Angeles City Council tackles issues beyond safety, schools and streets. The council last week decided to outlaw plastic bags.

Fast-food restaurants have found themselves in the frying pan in a number of cities. Some places, including Carmel-by-the Sea and Calistoga, have barred “formula” restaurants altogether; others have placed a cap on them — Arcata allows a maximum of nine fast-food eateries; others have prohibited the restaurants in certain areas, such as Port Jefferson, N.Y., in its waterfront area.

Most initiatives were designed to preserve a city’s historic character. The Los Angeles bid is one of few that cite residents’ health.

The mounting pressure has caused chains to insert healthier food choices in their menus. McDonalds offers salads and low-fat dressings; Burger King stocks Kids Meals with milk and apple pieces.

That’s why the restaurant industry says it’s unfair to blame them for fat people.

“What’s next — security guards at the door saying ’You’re overweight, you can’t have a cheeseburger’?” Casana said.

But public health officials say obesity has reached epidemic proportions in low-income areas such as South Los Angeles and diet is the key reason.

According to the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health, 30 percent of adults in South Los Angeles area are obese, compared to 19.1 percent for the metropolitan area and 14.1 percent for the affluent westside. Minorities are particularly affected: 28.7 percent of Latinos and 27.7 percent of blacks are obese, compared to 16.6 percent of whites.

Published in: on July 29, 2008 at 10:39 pm  Leave a Comment  

Typical Liberalism

Why does this guy support Tim Johnson?

Because Senator Johnson knows what’s best for the people of South Dakota.  Remember, the stupid people in South Dakota don’t know what’s best for them, so they need an elitist Senator to plan their lives for them.  This is typical thinking for the left, and, unfortunately, those on the right like Mike Huckabee and John McCain.

Published in: on July 29, 2008 at 11:25 am  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , , , ,

Disgusting War Propaganda

Published in: on July 28, 2008 at 5:53 pm  Leave a Comment  

How to Identify Legal Plunder

I recently borrowed a copy of Frederick Bastiat’s great classic, “The Law,” from CrystalClearConservative, and I must say it is a great book. I can’t believe I haven’t read it yet, but I don’t feel too bad because Walter Williams, who wrote the foreward, said he didn’t run across it until he was 40 years old.

Anyway, here’s one of the great quotes from the book, which can be read online HERE:

How to Identify Legal Plunder:

But how is legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime.

Then abolish this law without delay, for it is not only an evil itself, but also it is a fertile source for further evils because it invites reprisals. If such a law — which may be an isolated case — is not abolished immediately, it will spread, multiply, and develop into a system.

The person who profits from this law will complain bitterly, defending his acquired rights. He will claim that the state is obligated to protect and encourage his particular industry; that this procedure enriches the state because the protected industry is thus able to spend more and to pay higher wages to the poor workingmen.

Do not listen to this sophistry by vested interests. The acceptance of these arguments will build legal plunder into a whole system [emphasis mine]. In fact, this has already occurred. The present-day delusion is an attempt to enrich everyone at the expense of everyone else; to make plunder universal under the pretense of organizing it.

Published in: on July 27, 2008 at 10:27 pm  Comments (4)  

The Right to the Private Ownership of Property

The right to the private ownership of property in the United States is almost dead — and with it’s death, so dies liberty.

All individuals are born with certain inalienable, God-given rights  — among these being life, liberty and property.

These rights, being given to us by our Creator, means that no man has the authority to deprive another of their natural rights.  And acting collectively as a group, commonly called the state, no group of men has the moral authority to deprive an individual of their rights.

All three rights are inseperable, for they are all interdependent upon the other.  Without life, there is no liberty and property.  And because of life, liberty and property rights are needed.

Because of human nature and the nature of government, humans have been on a constant struggle since the beginning of time to defend their natural rights against aggression by the state — nothing more than a group of men acting collectively.

This was the genius of the American experiment in self government.  The founders of this nation were very well read on political philosophy, and they had a deep understanding of human nature, the nature of government and the natural course of government to grow and deprive more and more of their God-given rights.

That’s why they established a constitutional republic, with a decentralized government that had very limited powers — namely to be a defender of our natural rights.

Unfortunately, but not surprisingly giving the nature of government, since the founding of the US, Americans have constantly been deprived of their natural rights by an ever expanding central government.

And one of the basic rights that we’ve been deprived of is the right to the ownership of private property.

For it can be seen all around us.  Government approval of cars, smoking bans, regulations on private businesses — the list goes on and on.

Let’s take one example, say smoking bans, and analyze how it is an enormous violation on the right to the ownership of private property — thus, the death of liberty.

Brian has been working all his life, saving his money so that one day he could open up his own restaurant/bar.  Finally achieving his goal, Brian opens up his bar.  Because he is located in a college town, and because college kids generally smoke at bars, Brian makes a wise business decision to allow people to smoke freely in the bar.

Enter the do-gooder politician, Lefty.  Lefty realizes the scientific fact that smoke increases the risk of cancer.  Wanting to do a so-called “public service,” Lefty finds a few people who don’t ever go to Brian’s bar because they don’t like cigarette smoke.  Lefty gets the people in front of the city council to talk about how it’s unfair because they can’t go in Brian’s bar because they’re either allergic to smoke or fear cancer, or some other blah blah blah.  In the name of public safety, Lefty gets the city government (or any government) to pass a law requiring Brian’s bar to have a smoking and a non-smoking section.

A few people may be upset, but most just say it’s not worth the fight and Brian divides his bar into a smoking and non-smoking section.

But what is missed is the enormous violation of Brian’s God-given right to the ownership of private property.  Brian owns his bar.  It is his private property.  If Brian wants to allow people to smoke in his bar, then that is his solely his decision and the decision of no one else.  If a group of men, acting collectively and calling themselves the government, can deny Brian the right to the ownership of private property, then liberty is indeed dead.

And, since our rights are inseparable, when Brian loses his private property rights, he also loses his liberty and his life.

What’s sad is that all of us are like Brian, because in some way or another, we’ve been deprived of our right to the ownership of private property by the government.

And what’s even sadder is the fact that most people don’t even realize it.  Some, who would claim to believe in property rights, would support Brian having to divide up his bar into sections, and would also support the next step — a full ban on smoking in all bars.  I hear this every time I bring up this subject among my friends.

“But Brian, I don’t like smoke.  I remember going in restaurants when I was a kid and having to breathe in cigarette smoke.”  Or, for the one’s that do smoke, “It sucks, but I’ll just go outside and smoke.  No big deal.”

But it is a big deal.  It is an enormous deal.  Every time the issue of a smoking ban is debated, most people focus solely on the public safety side, and no one seems to even think about how that doesn’t matter at all.  It wouldn’t matter if one breathing second-hand smoke one time would make them die a horrible death.  It’s Brian’s bar, and if he wants to allow people to smoke, if they don’t like it then use their market choice and go somewhere else.

But it’s damn time we start defending private property rights once again!

Published in: on July 27, 2008 at 10:05 pm  Comments (7)