DanaRhea's Blog

Who's a Commie?

2012-01-28T05:32:00.000-08:00

From Free Republic:

What we saw with this ridiculous opposition dump on Newt was nothing short of Stalin-esque re-writing of history. It was Alinsky tactics at their worst. -Sarah Palin

Damn, did I hear that right? Yes I did. Batshit crazy Sarah Palin has called Mitt Romney a Communist.

This pretty much goes to prove that when the nutters in the American debate don't get their way, then it's time to call the opponent a Socialist. And they just can't seem to limit the attacks to Obama. And this gives me an idea.....

An Obama-Romney ticket. LOL. Why not?

1) President Obama was born in Kenya, is a Muslim, and a Communist.

2) Romney claims to have been born in Michigan, but I suspect he is Canadian (Kenyan? Canadian? They sound close to the same thing). He is also a Mormon, which is just as bad as a Muslim (also pronounced a bit like "Muslim"), and now he is a Communist too.

That's right, folks. Obama-Romney, or maybe Romney-Obama. A match that even Karl Marx would approve.

Finally, let's sing along with Sarah Palin...

He's a Commie, She's a Commie,
They're a Commie, I'm a Commie,
Wouldn't you like to be a Commie too.

Much ado over pro-forma sessions

2012-01-09T21:52:00.000-08:00

Did President Obama violate the Constitution of the United States when he made recess appointments to the Labor Board, as well as the Consumer Protection Agency? Republicans claim that he did, so let's examine that claim, and consider the question of whether Obama's "recess" appointments are Constitutional.

From the US Constitution, Article 2, Section 2:

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for,and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

OK, that's a given. Advice and Consent. But what happens when the Senate refuses to do it's job, by refusing the Constitutional role of Advice and Consent? We will get to that later on. But first, let's get to the meat of the issue. From Article 1, Section 5:

Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent ofthe other, adjourn for more than three days,nor to any other Place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting.

So the Republican-controlled House has not given it's consent to the Senate to adjourn. Therefore, the Senate has been holding pro-forma sessions every 3 days, in which no business is conducted, other than providing an "appearance" that it is still in session. But Obama, nevertheless, made his appointments. Unconstitutional? If you listen to Glenn Beck and company, yes. But it seems that Glen Beck doesn't know as much about the Constitution as he would like people to believe. He and Republicans seem to have conveniently forgotten this little part of the Constitution, namely Article 2, Section 3:

[The President] may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.

That's correct. On extraordinary occasions, the president may consider Congress adjourned."to such time as he shall think proper". And what would be considered an extraordinary occasion? The Senate refusing to do it's job, of course. And there we have it. Republicans can whine all they want about this, but if they attempt to take it to court, they will look like idiots..... Wait, they already look like idiots, in attempting to create much ado over pro-forma sessions, or in other words, much ado about nothing.

2012 - The year of the twilight's last gleaming

2012-01-03T12:02:00.000-08:00

From FOX News:

In a scathing statement, the head of the ACLU, and other leading civil liberties and human rights groups who were among President Obama's most ardent campaign supporters said the President's decision to sign a sprawling defense bill including controversial detainee provisions would tarnish his legacy.

And that it will. There is your hope and change, Democrats, shredding the Constitution of the United States, right where the Bush administration left off. And if that isn't enough, there is yet another piece of hypocrisy embedded in this law...... Obama added a signing statement, saying that his administration will interpret the new law in such a way that American citizens would not be detained without due process guaranteed by the Constitution. I have a LOT of problems with this signing statement:

1) First of all, and most obvious, Obama blasted Bush for using signing statements, and now here he is, using one.

2) An Obama signing statement doesn't mean a thing, once Obama leaves office. A different president could negate it in a New York minute.

3) Just because Democrats in Congress didn't have the backbone to challenge Bush on his signing statements doesn't mean that Congressional Republicans won't have the backbone too. On this, though, I must admit that Republicans will go along with the status quo, but their hatred of Obama does make this option pretty tempting. On that, I am rooting for the Republicans, should they decide to take this road.

Here is the deal, folks. The Obama administration has let loose upon the land a law that is just as Odious as the Alien and Sedition Acts, which were signed into law by John Adams. The law is unconstitutional. Period. But where is the Democratic outcry in Congress..... You know, the kind of outcry we heard almost every day during Bush's reign? I only hear Democratic hypocrisy, cloaked in silence.

Have we now entered the age of the twilight's last gleaming? It depends on the American people. If we are content to replace our interest in the political process with interest in Dancing with the Stars, Justin Bieber, and the rest of the garbage that passes for information these days, then we will get exactly the kind of Government we deserve. And Big Brother will be eternally grateful. Say goodbye to America, folks.

Finally, if a case is ever to be made for a third party, this is it, just as long as they don't sell America down the river too.

Does the ghost of Ronald Reagan like today's Republicans? I think not.

2011-12-29T01:52:00.000-08:00

For those who keep praising Clinton's balancing of the budget, I have news for you. It was a Republican Congress that can take credit for that too. This was part of Newt's Contract With America. Clinton did sign off on it though, so both parties can take credit. We were actually beginning to pay off our debt. This goes to show that it takes two to tango, and those were the days when, despite the Democrats and Republicans hate for each other, they worked together to do good things. Those were the days when politicians put America first, once in a while. Today is a different story. Both parties should be ashamed of themselves, but especially Republicans. Ronald Reagan frequently reached across the aisle, and he and Tip O'Neill frequently used to drink beer together at the end of the day. Republicans - You have squandered any legacy you believe to have come from Ronald Reagan. If he were still alive, he'd shoot the damn lot of you and start over. LOL.

House Republicans have shot themselves in the foot

2011-12-20T18:17:00.000-08:00

In years past, it has always been the Democrats screwing themselves on the issues, but what's good for them is also good for the GOP. Here is a case in point. From the Washington Post:

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama says a bipartisan compromise reached by the Senate is the “only viable way” to prevent a tax increase on Jan. 1. In a surprise appearance in the White House briefing room on Tuesday, the president said a “faction” of Republicans in the House is refusing to vote on a Senate bill that would extend a payroll tax cut for two months. Obama said, “The clock is ticking. Time is running out.” The president said House Republicans are trying to “wring concessions” from Democrats on issues that “have nothing to do with the payroll tax cut.”. Obama says lawmakers owe it to the American people “to come together and do the right thing.”

And of course, although I disagree with Obama on a lot of things, sometimes strongly, I have to say that he is right on this one. After all, Speaker Boehner originally kicked this over to the Senate, demanding that Democrats compromise. Democrats in the Senate DID compromise to the extent that the unemployment tax bill passed the Senate with a LOT of Republican support. When it came back to the House, Boehner could not keep the extremists in his party in line, and the compromise failed. I can't fault Boehner for attempting to kick this back to the Senate, and demand more compromises again, even though GOP Senators managed to already extract compromises. Boehner is over a barrel, and his leadership is weak. In the end, almost all of the House Republicans revolted against the bipartisan Senate plan, which was endorsed by no less than Mitch McConnell himself.

Now, instead of forcing Obama's hand, as they hoped to do, House Republicans have put themselves in the hot seat, because the failure here is certainly going to be a red meat issue for Obama and the Democratic party in 2012. When you only hold one House and not the Presidency, "my way or the highway" is not going to work. This was a serious miscalculation on the part of House Republicans, who will suffer consequences for their actions next year. This can still be avoided. Don't attempt to call Obama's bluff. Just go back into session and pass the damn thing. You will look like heroes if you do, and goats if you don't.

Not voting means you voted? OK, whatever you say, but the court disagrees.

2011-12-17T10:29:00.000-08:00

An Appeals court has made an interesting ruling on union voting rules for companies that fall under the Railway Labor Act. But first some background:

House Republicans pushed this year to revert to the old rules, under which workers who did not cast ballots in union elections would be counted as “no” votes. The effort, which came in the form of an amendment to the FAA’s funding bill, led to a protracted fight with Democrats and union groups and to a brief shutdown of the FAA this summer.

That's right. You heard it correctly. Republicans have always supported a rule that says if you didn't vote, then you voted, and of course, you voted "our" ideological way too. That rule was changed to say that if you didn't vote, you didn't vote. Of course, this had to go to court. The Court of Appeals ruled on it yesterday. The court made the following earth shattering announcement:

If you didn't vote, then you didn't vote.

Gee, what a surprise. In another move, the court is going to take up the issue on whether the sky is blue, or as Republicans claim, it is purple with yellow polka dots.

President Obama's Detroit Intervention

2011-12-13T07:26:00.000-08:00

From the Detroit Free Press this morning:

This year, for the first time since 1988, all three Detroit automakers have gained market share in the U.S.

There are a number of factors which contribute to the automakers becoming profitable again, including the earthquakes in Japan, which decimated the Japanese auto industry, and the Obama bailout....... Ahh, the Obama bailout. I want to talk about this one.

To be honest, the Obama bailout of the auto industry is something that I was rather torn on. After seeing the results of the bankster bailout, I was more than a little pissed when Obama decided to bail out Detroit. However, one cannot argue with results here. OK, OK, I can admit when I am wrong. Should the government intervene and attempt to prop up or otherwise save a failing sector of the economy? Generally, I still say no, but now with more nuance in my answer. There are times when government intervention is needed, especially when the end result is that sector paying back the money to the government, becoming more profitable, and yes, saving jobs too. OK, I will give Obama the credit on that. I still don't like him, but even a broken clock works twice a day. Well done, Mr. President.

Yeah, yeah, you can call me a flip-flopper now.

War on Christmas Rhetoric is Anti-American

2011-12-09T08:15:00.000-08:00

I would call the war on Christmas rhetoric by Limbaugh and others anti-Semitic. Jews do not celebrate Christmas, but Hannukah. This is the main reason I tend to say "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas". There is no war on Christmas. There is only a war by nutters against Jews, and others who do not celebrate Christmas, but their own religious holidays.

I always thought religious freedom in America was important enough to stand up for, so I am standing up for it. No doubt some self-righteous assholes will call me an anti-American Communist Nazi that makes baby Jesus cry, but I would call myself someone who is standing up for religious freedom, which is one of the reasons we have founding fathers, a Constitution, and America itself.

The Flip Flop That Wasn't

2011-10-20T13:40:00.000-07:00

From Yahoo News:

During an interview with CNN's Piers Morgan on Wednesday night , Cain said that he personally opposes abortion under all circumstances, even in cases of rape or incest. But when pressed on how that view would direct his policy decisions as president, Cain appeared to support the notion that abortion should remain legal in those cases.

OK, so Cain does not like abortion, even in cases of rape or incest. However, in those cases, Cain says it's not the government's business to dictate to the states. The mass media whores call this "confusing". I do not call it confusing at all. Cain has a personal belief about abortion, but separates it from what he believes to be the role of government. What is so confusing about that, except the media whores attempting to make a mountain out of a???...... Wait, a molehill doesn't even exist here.

Damn, if only Mitt Romney could "flip flop" like that, he would actually be telling the truth, for a change. LOL.

How Today's Conservatism Lost Touch With Reality

2011-06-16T10:13:00.000-07:00

"Conservatism is true." That's what George Will told me when I interviewed him as an eager student many years ago. His formulation might have been a touch arrogant, but Will's basic point was intelligent. Conservatism, he explained, was rooted in reality. Unlike the abstract theories of Marxism and socialism, it started not from an imagined society but from the world as it actually exists. From Aristotle to Edmund Burke, the greatest conservative thinkers have said that to change societies, one must understand them, accept them as they are and help them evolve.

Watching this election campaign, one wonders what has happened to that tradition. Conservatives now espouse ideas drawn from abstract principles with little regard to the realities of America's present or past. This is a tragedy, because conservatism has an important role to play in modernizing the U.S.

A great article which hits hard at the core reason why today's Republicans have lost their ability to reason. Today's Conservatism is not the traditional Conservatism that made America great, and was based in reality, but is one that, much like the Liberals, is based on nothing but abstraction. There were, and still are, some great Conservative thinkers in our time.... Buckley, Buchanan, and Goldwater. What have they been replaced with? Beck, Palin, Limbaugh, and Ryan. The party of ideas, the GOP, has gotten stuck in a ditch, and can't seem to get out of it, and right now, the Conservative movement desperately needs a great thinker once again, to help restore the Republican party to sanity. To those hyperpartisans on the right who maintain that "Liberalism is a disease", I say "Physician, heal thyself".

Evidence for Intelligent Design?

2011-06-02T07:49:00.001-07:00

As the creationist agenda has been stymied in the courts, which have ruled that it's teaching amounts to promoting religion in government (a violation of the separation of church and state), they have turned to another strategy in order to inject religion into the teaching of science in the classroom. They call it Intelligent Design. It is still creationism, but worded differently in an attempt to circumvent court rulings against it. It still teaches that our universe did not evolve, but that a higher power created it all. From Albert Einstein to Steven Hawking, scientists have been attempting to put together a "theory of everything", over a period that spans almost 100 years. yet, in what seems like a fortnight, the creators of Intelligent Design have come up with all the answers, or so they tell us.

There is quite an irony here, because there is a possible case to be made for intelligent design. According to the theory of the Holographic Universe, of which there is at least one mathematical construct for, everything that we know, see, and are, is nothing more than a projection. According to this theory, a prediction was made that there would be found in the universe a graininess, or pixellation of sorts. Last year, that graininess in the universe was found. This give rise to the possibility that this universe is a simulation. Still, it's only a theory, and it is not proven, but it is a possibility.

Now comes the irony. The people in the political think tank that came up with the idea of Intelligent Design are just too dumb to understand string theory and tensors, which is what is required to attain only a very elementary understanding of the theory of the holographic universe, let alone the mechanics of how it works.

Out of the mouths of idiots sometimes comes wisdom. As Jesus said, forgive them Father, for they know not what they do.

Punked by a damn script kiddie

2011-05-03T20:42:00.000-07:00

I have been heavily into computers since the mid 1970's. I know more than a dozen languages, can write Windoze programs, and hell, I even created my own compiler once. I have built my own computers. When it comes to computers, I am pretty fucking smart. So smart that I opened up a facebook app yesterday (The one that purports to have a picture of dead bin Laden). As soon as it was running, I knew something was wrong, so pulled the plug on my computer - Literally, I pulled the plug out of the wall. But too late for some of my friends who had this app spammed to their facebook walls.

So here is the deal. DanaRhea, a very smart computer guy, just got punked by some fucking pimply-faced high school script kiddie, who probably made tons of money off of dumb asses who gave him his pay per clicks by being dumb asses. Did I just call myself a dumb ass? You betcha. I am a dumb ass.

**DanaRhea bends over**

OK, folks, start kicking. I deserve this, and I bet a few of my facebook friends are really going to enjoy this too. LOL.

Say it ain't so, Republicans

2011-05-01T18:16:00.000-07:00

Bill Pocan - father of state Rep. Mark Pocan - may have died long ago. But that doesn't mean he can't sign the recall petition against state Sen. Bob Wirch of Kenosha. Just check page 362 of the Wirch recall petition, and you will find the signature and address for Bill Pocan, also the father of Milwaukee County Judge William Pocan. The petition says Bill Pocan penned his support of the recall effort on March 3.

The guy has been dead for 20 years, but his signature showed up March 3, on a petition to recall Wisconsin Democratic Senator Bob Wirsch. But, according to some people in the Republican Party, it is Democrats that sign up dead people. but here, a Republican has been caught with his pants down, doing the same thing..Say it ain't so. What gives?

OK, so the GOP has committed voter fraud. What do we do now? Let's have a law that forces every Republican in Wisconsin to provide his long form birth certificate, driver's license, his mother's driver's license (to prove that he is an American citizen), proof of who he voted for in the last election, proof that he lives in the county he is voting in, and proof that he holds a job in that same county........ What? How dare you accuse me of attempted voter suppression? I, just like every other American, want to make sure that someone from Kenya doesn't sneak in and vote illegally, thus tipping the balance of our electoral process to the wrong guy. I call this the Fairness in Voting Act, and it needs to be enacted ASAP, before the integrity of our election process is blown to bits, and we end up a Socialist nation headed to hell in a handbasket.

Note to those who don't recognize that the last paragraph is tongue in cheek - God help you.

Leave me alone - All I want is a damn phone

2011-04-28T08:31:00.000-07:00

BEGIN RANT

Yesterday a salesman attempts to push a cell phone plan on me that includes unlimited texting, internet, and a few other bells and whistles. The problem is that I am really, really old school. I am about as old school as they come. I don't know how to text, and don't want to learn, and I get pissed off when people keep trying to push all this new crap on me. Yet, at least 2 or 3 times a month, some salesman attempts to sell me shit that I will never use. They never stop calling me.

So here's the deal. I don't want a phone that I can type on. I don't want a phone that I can browse the internet with. I don't want a phone that I can watch a movie on. I don't want a phone that can massage my balls. All I want is a damn phone. Period. The next salesman who attempts to push a blackberry on me is going to get a raspberry back, and maybe a kick in the nuts to go along with it. Thank you, fuck you, and no thank you!

END RANT

Did Donald Trump just royally punk the birthers?

2011-04-27T13:32:00.000-07:00

Today, President Obama released the "long form" of his birth certificate, just about a week after Donald Trump rallied the birthers, claiming that Obama couldn't prove his citizenship. Did Donald Trump stick his foot in his mouth over the birth certificate business, or was their something else at work here? I say that something else was at work here, namely a masterful plan to make the birthers look like the idiots they are. Mission accomplished. Here are the facts, as anybody with the IQ of a bag of hammers would see them:

1) Obama already released his certificate 2 years ago.

2) The certificate he released was the legal one that the state of Hawaii releases.

3) The validity of this certificate was confirmed by a Republican clerk, and also by a Republican governor, Linda Lingle.

4) The birthers, in their batshit insanity, claimed it wasn't enough. Obama was still a Kenyan, according to them. They even filed lawsuits, one which was thrown out by the Supreme Court, in a session, during which, I assume, the justices laughed until they puked.

5) Enter Donald Trump, who played the birther card, and demanded Obama's birth certificate.

6) But who is Donald Trump? He claims to be a Republican, but has called George Bush the worst president in history, and in February of this year, made a campaign donation to Rahm Emmanuel, the man who gets most of the credit for getting Obama elected. Trump is as much of a Republican as Barack Obama is. A reasonable person can see that Trump was not sincere in asking for Obama's birth certificate. He wanted to punk the birthers. You don't think that Obama's release of the long form, just a week or 2 after Trump demands it, looks at least a little suspicious? If not, then you have absolutely no critical thinking skills whatsoever.

7) The birthers rally behind The Donald, and ramp up the birther nonsense to an unprecedented level.

8) Bam - At a time that has never been more opportune, Obama suddenly, from nowhere, pulls out the long form of his birth certicate, which makes the same conclusion that his certified copy of birth, ALSO A LEGAL DOCUMENT, makes. Obama also smiles, while calling the birthers silly.

9) The birthers have enough egg on their faces now to cook omelets for every American citizen, not to mention at least half the world.

10) Want to here the most hilarious part of all this? The birthers claim victory. Sure thing, guys, and Hitler won World War II. And Russia won the space race. And France has never surrendered. LOL.

BONUS TOP 10.....

11) The sky is green, according to the Birther Bible. LOL.

Slavery is Freedom?

2011-04-21T09:33:00.000-07:00

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has sued a California-based labor contractor, Global Horizons Inc., and farms in Washington and Hawaii, claiming they discriminated against more than 200 Thai workers in what the authorities called the largest human trafficking case in the nation’s agriculture industry. Global Horizons confiscated the workers’ passports and threatened to deport them if they complained about conditions, commission officials said. Named in the suit were the Captain Cook Coffee Company, Del Monte Fresh Produce, the Kauai Coffee Company, Kelena Farms Inc., MacFarms of Hawaii and the Maui Pineapple Company, all in Hawaii, and Valley Fruit Orchards and Green Acre Farms of Washington. The commission also filed a lawsuit in Mississippi against the marine services company Signal International claiming that 500 Indian workers faced discrimination and substandard living conditions in Mississippi and Texas.

For those who say that slavery is a thing of the past, and no longer exists, I submit this entry as exhibit "A".

For those who say that business need not be regulated at all, I submit this entry as exhibit "A".

For those asking why we still need unions, I submit this entry as exhibit "A".

For those who believe that corporations have the right to be considered as "people" under the law, I submit this entry as exhibit "A". There is nothing human in nature about this. It is about as inhuman as it gets.

For those who believe that ONLY market solutions are the correct ones, I submit this entry as exhibit "A". Here is a market solution. Do you like what you see?

For those who believe there need be no laws which cripple corporate productivity, I submit this entry as exhibit "A".

Finally, for those wondering why, from this day on, I will never again buy a Del Monte product, I submit this entry as exhibit "A".

Sarah Palin and Donald Trump - Show us your panties!!

2011-04-19T00:18:00.000-07:00

Donald Trump and Sarah Palin are not from Earth, but from a planet called Headbanger, in a galaxy far, far away. On planet Headbanger, there are no sexes. So when it comes to underwear, there is no distinction. In fact, on planet Headbanger, nobody wears panties.

Donald Trump and Sarah Palin need to prove that they are natural born humans by showing us their panties, but as of now, they have not done so. Yea, Sarah Palin has shown us pictures of her in bathing suits, but that's not panties. Bathing suits are panty forgeries. And Donald Trump? He has never had any comment on the issue, and has never in his life been able to document that he has EVER worn panties (although I suspect that he has, on occasion). That makes him an alien, and illegal, therefore an illegal alien.

So to Donald Trump and Sarah Palin, I say this - Unless you show us your panties, you will never be qualified to be president. After all, who wants aliens from outer space at the helm of our government? Besides, that's unconstitutional. And unless you two show us your panties, we will have to do what we do to all aliens who come here without showing their panties - Send you back to Mexico.

Yea, I know, I know, this post is batshit insane, but so are Trump and Palin. Like they say, if the panties fit......

Referendum in Ohio - America At the Crossroad

2011-04-03T11:31:00.000-07:00

COLUMBUS, Ohio – Opponents of an Ohio law to limit public workers' collective bargaining rights have started gathering signatures to get a referendum on the measure.

In Wisconsin they have recalls, and in Ohio they have referendums. In both cases, the result is a poison pill for the Republican party, which is going to suffer for it's slap in the face of the will of the American people.

I was pretty excited when the Democrats were thrown from power. Like Bush, they were continuing to spend America off a cliff. Republicans came in, promising to restore America's spending habits, and end the fiscal insanity that had rocked the nation for the last 10 years. What did they do instead? They went after unions.

At the national level, the GOP is making a pretense of trying to balance the budget, but their attempt to bust the CWA, by (get this) passing a law in the House which says anyone that doesn't vote in a union election is actually voting NO (George Orwell anybody?), created a backlash among the majority of Americans who support unions.

At the state level, the GOP launched coordinated attacks at the same time in Wisconsin, Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, New Jersey, Nevada, and other states, in an attempt to bust unions. Why? Because unions traditionally support Democrats. Their cynical and psychopathic use of political power against American citizens has resulted in Cheesehead Armageddon, as Wisconsinites have mobilized resources to "throw the bums out". And yet, the GOP has the audacity to call Americans exercising their Constitutional rights to a democratic process "thuggery". Who are the thugs? The unions? How about the Koch Brothers, and other corporate interests, along with their Republican lackeys, who are attempting to subvert the will of the people, under the guise of balancing the budget? In Wisconsin this lie has been exposed by their own actions. What of the budgetary items in Walker's plan? They have still yet to be passed, and are languishing in Congress, while the union busting provisions were ruthlessly shoved down the throats of Wisconsinites. There is your smoking gun, folks.

Is it any wonder that Americans have buyers' remorse when it comes to the 2010 elections? The GOP has lost Wisconsin, as total recall is in full swing. In Ohio, a referendum is going to make it onto the ballot, and people are pissed at Republicans there too. The first shots of slash and burn class warfare have been fired by the GOP, and the people are responding. Right now, it sucks to be a Republican.

The first Republican presidential debate, scheduled for this May, has been rescheduled, due to lack of interest. Only ONE potential candidate pledged to show up. Do you think the rest of them know something he doesn't? After all, who in their right mind wants to run on the platform that has exposed itself in America? At this juncture, I would have to say to Republicans "Congratulations. You have just handed the White House to Obama and the Democrats in 2012, and on a silver platter too". Americans might want balanced budgets, but they don't want "batshit crazy".

Gutting Medicaid to Balance the Budget

2011-04-02T11:36:00.000-07:00

From Politico:

House Republicans are planning to cut roughly $1 trillion over 10 years from Medicaid, the government health insurance program for the poor and disabled, as part of their fiscal 2012 budget, which they will unveil early next month, according to several GOP sources.

A trillion bucks over the next 10 years is quite a bit, but it won't work, and will actually end up being more expensive than what is now in place.

1) The poor will simply get treated at emergency rooms instead of seeing their doctor.

2) The poor will wait until their conditions deteriorate before seeking treatment, which will then become much more expensive than it otherwise would.

3) With no more preventive medicine for the poor, they will be going to emergency rooms in droves, when they develop serious conditions that could have been prevented by treatment in a clinic.

In my opinion, this is a dumb move. Even if you view poor people as leeches on society, gutting Medicaid is going to result in bigger expenditures in the long run. Now there is ONE way to reduce the expenses that poor people cost the rest of us. Just set an earnings limit of, say, 10,000 bucks a year, and everybody under that income gets taken to a field where they are all shot and then dumped into a mass grave. You know, that would work for the disabled too. I know, I know, this sounds cold as hell, but since we are talking about reducing the budget so that banksters can feel comfortable with all those bailout bonuses we are giving them, we are going to have to balance the budget someplace. Since we are choosing to balance it on the backs of the poor and disabled, let's just kill them all so they will no longer be a problem. We can then, in church, raise our hands to the Lord, in front of the entire world, and let Jesus know that we did care enough about the poor to do something about them. Hallelujah!

A Little Birther Batshit Insanity on Donald Trump

2011-03-29T23:17:00.000-07:00

From Newsmax:

Donald Trump, who has been making television appearances calling for President Barack Obama to release his official birth documents, released his hospital birth certificate exclusively to Newsmax on Monday.

Why would I post something here from Newsmax, the batshit insane media source, you ask? Very simple, folks. To show everybody here how batshit insane Donald Trump is:

1) First of all, Trump has questioned Obama's birth certificate, calling it a fake, because there is no signature on it. Guess what? A few days ago, I pulled out my own birth certificate, and there is no signature on that one either, but it's the one Michigan gave me, when I requested a copy. No problem. But don't mind me. I'm just your friendly neighborhood Kenyan peckerwood. LOL.

2) But here is why I posted the Newsmax link - To make fun of Newsmax AND Donald Trump. Why go after one nut, when I can have twice the fun going after two nuts? Logic 101, folks.

3) Are you ready for the fun to begin? Drum roll, please.....

Thank you.

The birth certificate that Donald Trump provided to Newsmax is not an official New York State birth certificate.

So I must question whether Donald Trump is really an American citizen, or whether, like me, he is also a Kenyan peckerwood.

4) An update to the link I provided shows that Trump, on his second attempt, did provide a real birth certificate, just like Obama did.

5) Back to Obama. His birth certificate was certified as real by a Republican governor, Linda Lingle. Damn it. I want Trump's certificate certified by the Governor of New York.

6) Donald Trump's birth certificate is not the long version. Yea, yea, I'm rubbing that one in the birther's faces.

7) According to my link, Donald Trump has a plane registered in the Bahamas. Was there a conspiracy to fly him to New York when he was born, so he could get a birth certificate illegally? The world wants to know.

8) Trump's mother was born in Scotland. Egad!! Don't you know that, according to many "birther" experts, for someone to be a "natural born" citizen, BOTH parents have to be American citizens?

9) If Obama is not qualified to be President of the United States, then neither is Donald Trump.

10) I am now looking to start a new group, and would like to see how many others would be interested. The group will be known as the Donald Trump Birther Society. The purpose of this group will be to question the eligibility of Donald Trump to be President of the United States. I have contacted the infamous Obama birther attorney, Orly Taitz, to see if she would be interested in representing this new group in court, but I have bad news. She turned me down. She doesn't do character assassinations on white people.

Anti-Sharia Law in Oklahoma

2011-03-22T19:42:00.000-07:00

OKLAHOMA CITY -- Last year Oklahoma voters passed a State Question that blocked any use of Islamic or Sharia law in Oklahoma courts. State Question 755 was ruled unconstitutional and unnecessary by the US District Court.But now a new effort to prevent state courts in Oklahoma from using foreign law is underway and this time, an effort is forming to fight it.

Muslims in Oklahoma are pissed, and are going to fight the law. But that doesn't matter. The bill, as proposed in Oklahoma is blatantly unconstitutional. Let me explain:

1) The wording of the bill, in it's present form, would exclude ALL religious law from being followed. That means Jewish, Catholic, and Protestant too. Many, many contracts are made which some of the terms are guided by religious law. All these contracts would become null and void, which means that the First Amendment rights of people of ALL religions would be violated, per the establishment clause.

2) OK, so remove the provisions that apply to all religions, other than Islam, and the law apply to Islam only. Cool? Nope. That isn't cool either, as this would be favor the establishment of some religions over others, which also violates the First Amendment.

3) But, if we allow Sharia law, wouldn't Muslims begin stoning to death adulterers, and those who speak out against Islam? Of course not. There are already laws against that. Let me add that Jews practice Jewish law extensively, and you don't see Jews holding public executions of people who violate God's law, do you? Of course not.

This is why the bill moving through Oklahoma is nothing but a bugagoo, based on nothing but fear tactics. Reasonable people can allow the laws of the various religions to have an impact on the daily lives of those who follow those religions, just as long as it is Constitutional. That, my friends, is the key to the whole thing. As Thomas Jefferson once said:

Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting "Jesus Christ," so that it would read "A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.

In the spirit of Jefferson, let us all pray that the people in Oklahoma put down their pitch forks.

About wars, and those who support or don't support them

2011-03-21T04:22:00.000-07:00

From one side, I heard some people at a political forum that I am a member of bash Bush over Iraq, but give Obama a free pass on Libya. On the other hand, I hear many bash Obama over Libya, although they heavily supported Bush in Iraq. Both are wrong, and I want to address the why in this post. I intend to be hard on party hacks, whether Liberal or Conservative. Why? Because they all deserve it, no matter which party they are hacking for. I am going to start by responding to someone attacking Liberals in general, in a thread I read about Obama's war in Libya, and then equally apply the argument to those who attack Conservatives. What I am posting here is not rocket science, but simple logic. Let me begin.

I am not so sure that all Liberals are supporting Obama, although they bashed Bush, as stated by someone in another thread at the forum. One of the biggest Bush bashers anywhere, Cindy Sheehan, is using irony to blast the crap out of Obama. And guess what, her column actually makes sense, even if I don't agree with all the reasons she gives.

Read Sheehan's column before continuing.

Here's the thing about war - Protesters aren't necessarily Liberals, and Liberals don't always side with the president, regardless of political party. The same can be said about Conservatives. Remember the web site antiwar.com? It is a site that was started by Conservatives and Libertarians, who were really pissed at Bill Clinton getting involved in the Balkans. And what about the web site Americans Against World Empire? How about the web site Conservatives for Peace? A member from that organization wrote this article, which was published on World Net Daily. All Conservatives. So the left doesn't hold a monopoly on being against war.

The point I am making is that there are hypocrites on both the right and the left, who do give a damn about which party is in power before making a decision to bash the president over war policy. And there are those, on both the right and the left, who are honest, either in support of wars or against them. Just lumping everybody into categories, such as Liberal and Conservative, and using those labels to categorize all into just those 2 categories, actually misrepresents political leans. There is no "one size fits all" for either Liberals or Conservatives, unless one just hates either Liberals or Conservatives for the sake of hating Liberals or Conservatives. Unfortunately, there are way too many people who hate first and ask questions later. Such is what American politics has descended into.

Some Liberals, such as Cindy Sheehan, I actually have respect for, because their views don't change when a Democrat becomes president, and there are plenty of Liberals, like Sheehan, who are bashing Obama as hard as they bashed Bush. Of course there are also Liberals who only bash the other party, while giving their own politicians a free pass on the same things. Those are the Liberals I have no respect for.

And the same applies to Conservatives. There are some who are on Obama's side, as they were on Bush's side for doing the same. Although I strongly disagree with them, I do respect them because they are consistent, and not party hacks. To those conservatives who are bashing Obama over Libya, who also bashed Bush over Iraq, they not only have my respect, but also my support, as I believe like they do. The US has no business in Libya, and I can say it with a straight face. I didn't support Bush's war in Iraq (although I did support Afghanistan), and I'll be damned if I support Obama's war in Libya either.

To all those Liberals and Conservatives, who believe that war only matters if the other party is in power, and you guys all know who you are, I have a very short message for you.....

Take a hike.

Packaging with Dead Squirrels

2010-07-25T12:21:00.000-07:00

LONDON — The strongest and most expensive beer ever created sold out within hours Friday, a Scottish brewery said, as they courted controversy by packaging the bottles inside the bodies of stuffed animals. BrewDog, the self-described maverick brewery, presented the beer -- which contains a record 55 percent alcohol -- inside the bodies of dead squirrels and stoats. Animal rights activists rushed to condemn the stunt. "It's pointless and it's very negative to use dead animals when we should be celebrating live animals," Advocates for Animals policy director Libby Anderson told BBC Scotland. "This seems to be a perverse idea."

Perverse? What's so perverse about it? Are leather shoes perverse? How about baseballs? Me thinks that animal rights activists are going too far here. The beer is being packaged in DEAD squirrels, not live ones. Good idea. Dead squirrels have no rights, not even animal rights. In fact, I wouldn't mind squirreling away a few bottles of Shiner Bock myself.

Let's show the animal rights activist how we feel about their silly-assed complaining by taking up a collection to purchase a gift for them - Namely a copy of one my favorite books, 101 Uses for a Dead Cat.

The coming crash

2010-07-18T14:32:00.001-07:00

Although not caused by the same market forces, there is an eerie parallel between what we are now experiencing and the Great Depression. There was also a recovery in 1930, after the crash hit in 1929. Then the second shoe dropped. I have been saying for a long time, in both the Bush and Obama periods, that the market would eventually go a lot further down than it has so far, and I still stand behind what I originally said. My original statement was that the Dow would end up between 7,000 and 8,000, and it looks like a CNBC analyst is pretty much saying the same thing.

Now I am no analyst, and I have no credentials, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that a sizable bubble still exists. That would be the derivatives market. No matter how hard the government tries, it is not going to be able to stop that bubble from bursting. IMHO, and I have felt this way for a long time, the Great Recession is going to turn into the Great Depression, part Deux. I cannot see how this won't happen. Bubbles are still there, the government can only prop up the markets to a certain point, and the Fed can only lower interest rates so far. After all, how much below ZERO can the interest rate go? The Fed's back is now against the wall, and there is no more wiggle room.

As for whose fault this will be, I have said time and time again that it was President Clinton who signed the Gramm-Bliley bill that dismantled all the Glass-Steagal protections that were in place to prevent this from happening. Unfortunately, it is President Bush who is going to be unfairly blamed for something he was not directly responsible for. Obama will take some blame too, but for the short term, Clinton is going to be let off the hook. Not so in the distant future, when historians will look back on Great Depression II more objectively. 20 years from now, I have a feeling that this will become known as Clinton's folly.

In the meantime, get ready for a wild ride. It's coming, whether or not you want to see it. Right now, know that the small light you see, way down the tunnel, is the harbinger of the great freight train that is coming straight at us, and is surely going to run us over. Those who are prepared for it are the ones who will survive the coming crash.

Read this article from CNBC.

Racists Do Not Belong in the Conservative Movement

2010-02-05T10:50:00.000-08:00

From ABC News:

The opening-night speaker at first ever National Tea Party Convention ripped into President Obama, Sen. John McCain and "the cult of multiculturalism," asserting that Obama was elected because "we do not have a civics, literacy test before people can vote in this country."

The speaker, former Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., told about 600 delegates in a Nashville, Tenn., ballroom that in the 2008 election, America "put a committed socialist ideologue in the White House ... Barack Hussein Obama."

The reference to literacy tests says it all. After Civil Rights was instituted in the 1960's, and the practice of conducting literacy tests in the South was effectively ended, racist elements in the United States fell back on subtle "code words" to push their racist views. Lately, however, racists have been emboldened and, as illustrated here, the code words are out, and the real meanings and intents are back.

I for one, do not believe that Obama's plans for America are the right ones, and I will always fight against them. But let's call a spade a spade, and tell it like it is. Some of the Obama bashers (not all of them, but some of them, and I want to make that crystal clear), are dedicated racists, and a few (Such as O'Keefe) have long-time connections to white supremacist groups. As the uncle of two wonderful kids who are the product of a mixed marriage (and a wonderful one, too), I will fight against these vermin, just as hard, if not harder than I will fight against Obama's policies. If I have my way, these kooks will not gain so much as a foothold inside the Republican party.

To the creeps who are attempting to infiltrate and poison the mainstream Conservative movement - The gloves are off. Not in MY house, you sonofabitches.

Fishing for ACORNs

2010-02-04T10:14:00.000-08:00

In the wake of the arrest of James O’Keefe in Louisiana, where he was caught tampering with the phones of Senator Mary Landrieu, along with revelations which reveal that O’Keefe had been illegally taping conversations in other states, while attempting to entrap ACORN workers into giving illegal advise, Republicans need to reexamine the methods that they supported in their attempt to cast ACORN as an organization that rigs elections.

In a lawsuit, filed in Philadelphia last month, the Director for ACORN contends that O’Keefe aggressively attempted to entrap ACORN employees into giving illegal election advice, while surreptitiously taping the conversations. The plaintiffs in similar lawsuits in other states make the same charges. It seems that O’Keefe’s MO has been to attempt to create crimes where crimes did not previously exist. This is known as entrapment, and is clearly illegal. If any employees of ACORN did engage in illegal activities on their own, then they should be prosecuted. Let’s take a look at how ACORN is handling actual allegations of voter fraud, and judge them on that basis. However, anyone who attempts to create a crime in order to bring about a criminal prosecution is himself a criminal, and should be just as aggressively prosecuted. O’Keefe, and those like him, are a cancer on American values.

The Republican Party calls itself patriotic. If the GOP is truly patriotic, then its members need to denounce O’Keefe and his un-American games. And, if the GOP truly loves America, then it will not support such un-American attempts to defame fellow Americans, whose only crime is to believe differently than they do. The GOP doesn’t support tactics from the playbook of the old Soviet KGB, do they? Or do they? Its actions, in the next few days, or weeks, will answer that question.

Where ACORN has done wrong, let it pay for its actions, and by the same token, let James O'Keefe pay for his. And I also sincerely hope that Republicans kick O'Keefe's ass to the curb quickly, and denounce him for his activities, which were clearly un-American.

Filibuster Roulette

2010-01-24T20:40:00.000-08:00

The Democrats have sent a bill, introduced by Tom Harkin, to the floor of the Senate proposing to end the filibuster as we know it, a procedure that, while not written into the Constitution, has nevertheless been there since not long after the founding of the Republic. The filibuster actually goes back much further, and was used by Roman Senators to stall legislation they didn't like, but, in modern practice, filibusters are handled under Rule 22 of the Senate, which does not require holding the floor to be successful. Although, at the present time, 67 votes are actually required to change Senate rules, a Supreme Court ruling in 1892 (U.S. v. Ballin) stated that changes to Senate rules can be achieved by a simple majority. From that ruling:

The constitution provides that 'a majority of each [house] shall constitute a quorum to do business.' In other words, when a majority are present the house in in a position to do business. Its capacity to transact business is then established, created by the mere presence of a majority, and does not depend upon the disposition or assent or action of any single [144 U.S. 1, 6] member or fraction of the majority present. All that the constitution requires is the presence of a majority, and when that majority are present the power of the house arises.

NOTE: Reference is from Findlaw.

You can read more on the history of filibusters here.

The rule now which is about to be introduced would require 60 votes on the first vote, 57 votes on the next vote, then, respectively, 53, and 51. After that, all that is required is a simple majority. This change would effective render Rule 22 useless, but the traditional method of filibustering, that is, holding the floor by speaking, will still exist.

Republicans are, naturally, up in arms over this proposed change in the rules, while Democrats are maintaining that an up or down vote on issues is what is needed. Does this sound familiar? In 2005, Republicans threatened the "nuclear option", which would have consisted of doing away with the filibuster entirely in the case of Supreme Court appointments by then President Bush. Their argument? An up or down vote. Now that the roles are reversed, Republicans are crying "foul". But they are the ones who threatened to end filibustering for judges in 2005, and the Democrats, no doubt, remember that.

You reap what you sow. I thought the nuclear option was a terrible idea 5 years ago, and I believe it's equivalent, that is being proposed today, is just as bad. By threating the nuclear option in 2005, Republicans opened Pandora's Box.

Just a thought - Is it too much to ask for Republicans and Democrats to stop the bickering and gamesmanship, and get to the business of doing what's right for America? You be the judge, at the ballot box, when the next election rolls around.

Of Sarah Palin and Barack Obama

2010-01-23T16:21:00.000-08:00

What's in the news today? Sarah Palin's oldest daughter, Bristol is seeking child support from her ex-boyfriend, Levi Johnston, and it is all over the media. But I must ask "What is so earth shattering about this revelation"? As someone who has bashed Palin for equating the ability to see Russia from an island off the coast of Alaska to being an expert in foreign policy, I find the depths to which so-called talking heads can descend quite disgusting.

Divorces, child custody battles, and attempts to obtain child support from deadbeat fathers, happen every day, all over the world. So Palin's daughter is attempting to get child support from her ex-boyfriend, after they created a child out of wedlock. So what? Because this gives the far left so much meat for their character assassination grinders, as they attempt to link events in Bristol's life to Sarah Palin's being fit to be a mother, and of her pro-life stance in politics.

As for Levi Johnston and Bristol Palin, they should realize that their fight for custody of Tripp is going to result in one severe casualty, the child. Bristol serves no purpose in not allowing Levi to see his daughter, other than using the child as a tool to exact revenge. And Levi? His excuse, that he is not allowed to see his daughter, is lame. If he really cared about Tripp, he would just send the money, and save all the excuses for the courts. By their actions, both Bristol and Levi are setting their daughter up for eventual failure in life.

But where does Sarah Palin come in? She doesn't. For all we know, she could be the best mother in the world, but even that can never guarantee that her kids will end up with values. All she can do is try. A while back, I was convicted of a DWI. Was that my mother's or father's fault? Of course not. The blame is all mine. Parents can only do so much. But Palin will never be able to try hard enough in the eyes of some of those on the far left. To them, she will always be in the wrong. These are also the same people who rallied around Obama, when the "birthers" and "teabaggers" attempted to assassinate his character. You would think that, after the smear attacks on Obama by Orly Taitz and her minions, that the far left would understand that some things are just too slimy, even for politics. Or, could it be that, much like the birthers, the only thing that matters to many of the Palin bashers is the letter, either a D or an R, that comes after the name of someone?

Should we just chalk it up to politics, or should we, the American people, demand more out of those who supposedly speak for us? I believe that the answer to this question is a no-brainer.

The new Iranian uprising. This time, the Mullahs will fall

2010-01-21T18:59:00.000-08:00

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

-Thomas Jefferson

And, it seems, that the Iranian people, after taking casualties, are now beginning to inflict them. Although not in the mainstream media, the Iranian resistance and uprising is very real.

The son of Ahmadinejad's opponent in the last election, Seyad Mousavi, has now been disappeared, and he has most likely been murdered by the Mullahs. The Bah'ai' 7 are still languishing in prison, while the Mullahs attempt to execute them for the crime of practicing their religion, and the Basij, the Mullahs' morality police, are killing Iranian civilians by the score.

Now the people are fighting back. Check out these videos, posted on The Daily Beast.

When religion marries the state, the result is always the same - Tyranny. We saw it in the Spanish Inquisition, when Jews and other "non believers" were tortured to death. We saw it in Salem, Massechussets, when witches were executed. We saw it in the Old South, when black voters were lynched by the KKK. We have seen it, over the ages, in myriad places around the world. And now we see it in Iran, which is controlled by yet another group of religious fanatics, whose prescription for those who don't accept THEIR VERSION of Allah is death.

It didn't stand in Spain. It didn't stand in Salem. It didn't stand in the Old South. It didn't stand anyplace else. And it certainly won't stand in Iran. Death to the Mullahs. So says Thomas Jefferson, who understood that, sometimes, it takes death and violence to throw off the yoke of oppression. These Mullahs are not Godly. They are the Devil's spawn, and the sooner they are dead and buried, the better.

Now here's an idea - Instead of threatening to bomb Iran, why not just give guns to it's enslaved population, who would put them to excellent use? Meanwhile, enjoy this picture of the Mullahs' henchmen getting the crap kicked out of them.

Iran - You rock. Now finish the job, and kill those SOBs - Every damn last one of them. The words of Thomas Jefferson aren't just for Americans. They are universal. Water the tree, and water it well.

Scott Brown for President? Absolutely!

2010-01-21T12:54:00.000-08:00

On the heels of his stunning election victory over Martha Coakley, Scott Brown has suddenly been propelled into the national spotlight, and already, domain names are being snapped up in anticipation of a Brown run at the presidency in 2012. Check out Scott Brown for President and Scott Brown 2012. But is Scott Brown prepared to be president? I believe he not only is, but will sink President Obama in the next election.

When it comes to experience, Brown has served as a selectman, a state Congressman, and a state Senator. At this time, he has a couple of years to get some US Senatorial experience under his belt. Brown also holds a law degree. Does this experience sound a bit like the experience of another candidate? Of course, and Obama won the Presidency in 2008. In addition, Scott Brown is a Lt. Colonel in the Massachusetts National Guard. While these qualifications may be a bit light, compared to some of the other contenders, both in the past, and among other projected GOP candidates in 2012, I’ll take them. If some among us can support an idiot like Sarah Palin for President, I have no problem supporting Brown, who has orders of magnitude more charisma, experience, and knowledge than Palin could ever hope to obtain.

Of course, we all know that experience and knowledge only account for part of a potential candidate’s viability as a presidential contender. A candidate also needs that intangible asset known as charisma, the ability to sweep voters off their feet, and send a message that resonates with them. Like him or not, Obama has that ability, which accounts for much of the reason he is sitting in the Oval office today. Whether or not he let down his voters is another story. He played an excellent game in 2008, and was rewarded with victory. Face it. Republicans lost to a better player. However, with Brown, the GOP has a real contender, and not the milquetoast candidates it paraded around during the last election cycle. Watching Brown work the crowds, and watching his election victory speech, I realized that he has the charisma of Ronald Reagan. I, for one, am very excited for the first time since The Gipper held office. Brown is a winner, folks, and his coming into the national spotlight is a gift that was dropped right into the laps of the GOP.

In 2008, the Republican Party settled for mediocrity. They cannot afford to settle for it again in 2012. This is why I support Scott Brown. If the GOP wants to be viable, it must drop Palin and the others like a hot potato, and go with a true winner.

My prediction? Brown will run, and Brown will win. You heard it from me.

Why the hell should we be in Haiti, anyways?

2010-01-19T16:47:00.000-08:00

I think this video explains a lot about why we should be there. The reward is America once again claiming a role in the world as a nation to be looked up to. America does care, and the whole world knows it. And listen to the Haitian crowd chant "USA, USA, USA" as this team pulls a survivor out of a collapsed building. This alone is worth more than 100 cynical PR guys spinning stories. This is real, and this is what being "Americans" is all about.

I have my problems with this administration. I believe that Obama is wrong in many areas. However, on this issue, I fully support his efforts, along with the efforts of former presidents Bush, Clinton, and Bush Sr, as well as all those who have gone to Haiti, either by deployment, or as civilian volunteers. They are all pulling together, and doing the right thing, as Americans have always done. America - You rock!!

I don't know about anybody else, but, at this very moment, I am listening to God Bless the USA by Lee Greenwood. Who wants to join me in a celebration of who we are?

Pat Robertson - It is now official

2010-01-14T20:54:00.000-08:00

It is now official, folks. Pat Robertson has lost his mind. Pat Robertson is batshit insane.

Quote:

Speaking Wednesday about the earthquake in Haiti that the country's president estimates has taken the lives of "hundreds of thousands," Robertson implied that the quake, and the general suffering of the Western Hemisphere's poorest country, was the result of a "pact with the devil" that Haitian rebels made in the 18th century.

This is the same Pat Robertson that blamed 911 on the victims. This is the same Pat Robertson who blamed Hurricane Katrina on the victims. This is the same Pat Robertson who...... Do I need to go on?

But enough about that. First of all, many historians say that Haiti's so-called "pact with the devil" never even happened, and even those historians who say that it did happen, say that those who did the voodoo ritual were not a "mainstream" part of the Haitian Revolution. If Pat Robertson claims that God hates Haiti because Haitians are in league with the devil, then he would have to admit that the KKK represents the United States of America. Of course, we all know that the KKK nowhere represents America anymore than the devil represents Haiti. But you won't convince the high and mighty hypocrite, Pat Robertson, whose musings belong in a mental institution, rather than in a house of God.

So let me ask you - Who has really made a pact with the devil? Was it Haiti, or was it Pat Robertson? Let's examine the evidence:

1) Robertson took donations meant to feed the poor in Liberia, and used them to mine gold. His partner in crime? None other than Charles Taylor, the mass murderer, who was eventually overthrown. And when Taylor was finally brought to justice, Robertson called it an act against Christians.

2) Robertson took donations meant to feed the poor in Zaire, and used them to mine diamonds. His partner there was another mass murderer, Mobutu Sese Seko, the mad dictator, who terrorized that nation for years, until he was overthrown in the First Congo War.

3) Robertson took donations from his followers and used them to buy race horses. He bought one of his horses for more than half a million dollars and named him "Mr. Pat".

4) Robertson took donations from his followers and used them to start a company to sell "protein shakes". He claimed that drinking the shakes allowed him to do 2,000 pound leg presses. Yes, you heard that right.

5) Robertson took money, and used it in an attempt to rebuild an oil refinery.

Since I don't want to overload the internet with ALL that Robertson has done, I think I will just stop here. But this is just the tip of the iceberg.

So, is it Pat Robertson who is in league with the devil, rather than those poor and destitute victims of the Haitian earthquake? I can't speak for myself, so I will bring out the Good Book to answer that question.

Quote:

Originally Posted by II Peter 2:1-3

But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not

One last question - Why does Pat Robertson still claim that he is a man of God, and why the hell do people still listen to him? I, for one, want to stay as far away as possible from this wolf in sheep's clothing because I do not want to end up in that special place in hell that God has reserved for the hypocrites.

Pat Robertson is a false prophet, and a charlatan sent by the devil, and not the man of God he claims to be. How do I know? Because the Bible says that you can judge a man's word by the fruit it bears. And Robertson's fruit is rotten to the core.