OK, I am somewhat confused about what a lot of the United States is celebrating today.
Is it Washington's Birthday?
Or is it President's Day?
Or is it three in one as Lincoln's Birthday, Washington's Birthday and wrapped up under the generic President's Day?
Or are we celebrating, regrettably, all who have served as president?
See the confusion?
Well, according to Wikipedia, we are actually celebrating Washington's Birthday today, the third Monday in February. And yet it states that it is concurrent with President's Day.
OK, then does this mean we celebrate all the people that have served as president?
Well, oddly enough, not really.
The reason that we even celebrate it on a Monday in the first place is due to this peachy act of our federal overlords, the Uniform Monday Holiday act.
What it did was make four national holidays celebrated on Monday's forever. And they are
Washington's Birthday, Memorial Day, Columbus Day and Veteran's Day. Yet not long after the act was passed, Veteran's Day went back to being on an actual date, November 11.
But here is the thing.
There is actually no such federal holiday as President's Day.
Going back to the original link, again there is nothing in federal law that this is President's Day. In fact, blame corporate America if you will.
It was advertisers in the mid 1980s that started using the term "President's Day". And it started to stick since.
So no wonder many people believe that the holiday we celebrate today is President's Day. And that it is a celebration of all presidents. Yet it is not at the core.
At the core we can only use this day to celebrate the accomplishments of one man.
George Washington.
Without him, there is no United States of America.
Without the sheer determination to see through his command of the Continental Army during the American Revolution, the mostly rag-tag assemblage of troops, many ill equipped and worse trained, there is no doubt the war and the cause would be lost.
Without then Gen. Washington leaving his command when the war ended, we would not see humility.
Without a civilian Mr. Washington answering his new, free nation's call to be the president not once but twice, who else might have been able to deal with the Whiskey Rebellion? Now, forget the causes and what the issue was, but President Washington dealt with it decisively and that saved the fledgling nation.
Without President Washington to walk away with a certain third presidential term, we would not know that a leader can say enough is enough and let new people govern.
Thus do not let the companies try to generic this great day.
It is not President's Day at all. It is and shall always be WASHINGTON'S BIRTHDAY!
Monday, February 18, 2013
Thursday, February 14, 2013
Hey, Maybe Marco Should Have Pulled Out A 40-Ouncer
This really shows how depraved politics has become in the United States that I am writing about Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and his taking a drink of water during the Republican response to the Dear Leader, President Obama's State of the Union speech this past Tuesday night.
It is not that I really want to write about it, but how can I let this opportunity go by? I mean, according to CNN, why Sen. Rubio may have had a career-ender by taking that swig of water, right? If you do not believe me, here it is
OK, now CNN is saying that the caption was a JK-online lingo for a joke.
Really? If that was all it was about, then why did the cable news networks, and yes it does include a more Rubio-friendly Fox News Channel, play the above scene 200 frickin' times Wednesday?
Again, all a joke right?
Well hey, let me get in on the joke.
I would like to know if Sen. Rubio pulled out an ice-cold 40-ouncer and guzzled it on television? and I don't mean a swig to hydrate. But a guzzling to get a quick buzz on. Well, I mean, isn't that something Hispanics do? Oh, really, it would have been awesome if he had a brown-bag with the 40.
Now if you are not sure what a 40-ouncer is and are too lazy to go to the link above, here is a photo of what a 40-ouncer is. And it is representative of the low-end of the beer chain.
And look! To the right is the brown-bag cover! Class, baby! Class!
So is that real funny to you?
Nah, I did not think so either.
But there you are.
The Obamawhore media not even discussing what Sen. Rubio had to say in his response to the Dear Leader, President Obama. Oh, if you want to see it in full and what Sen. Rubio actually said, here it is.
I'll just assume that the 40-ouncer guzzle water break is included in the link.
While the Dear Leader, President Obama, offered more of the same, big government, a decline of American influence around the world and mountainous debt our great-grandchildren will be paying off, Sen. Rubio offered a conservative vision of the United States. Here are a couple of highlights:
This opportunity – to make it to the middle class or beyond no matter where you start out in life – it isn’t bestowed on us from Washington. It comes from a vibrant free economy where people can risk their own money to open a business. And when they succeed, they hire more people, who in turn invest or spend the money they make, helping others start a business and create jobs.
For example, Obamacare was supposed to help middle class Americans afford health insurance. But now, some people are losing the health insurance they were happy with. And because Obamacare created expensive requirements for companies with more than 50 employees, now many of these businesses aren’t hiring. Not only that; they’re being forced to lay people off and switch from full-time employees to part-time workers.
But government’s role is wisely limited by the Constitution. And it can’t play its essential role when it ignores those limits.
There is so much more that Sen.. Rubio said in the Republican response.
But no, the Obamawhore media is more interested in marginalizing the junior senator from Florida because, because he took a sip of water during his response.
BTW, did the Dear Leader, President Obama, possibly take a swig of water while delivering the SOTU? Or maybe he whipped out a 40. I am sure that he did have some water. Is that not maybe awkward? Just askin'.
Saul Alinsky tactics are alive and well and perpetuated by a supposed down-the-middle "news media".
Not at all.
It is why I have coined them the Obamawhore media. Nothing he does can be wrong. Why he could have dragged a kid on the dais Tuesday night and shot him to death to prove something about gun violence. The media? They would have promoted that as brilliance. Performance art maybe.
But take a drink of water?
Why it is a career-ender doncha know.
It is not that I really want to write about it, but how can I let this opportunity go by? I mean, according to CNN, why Sen. Rubio may have had a career-ender by taking that swig of water, right? If you do not believe me, here it is
Really? If that was all it was about, then why did the cable news networks, and yes it does include a more Rubio-friendly Fox News Channel, play the above scene 200 frickin' times Wednesday?
Again, all a joke right?
Well hey, let me get in on the joke.
I would like to know if Sen. Rubio pulled out an ice-cold 40-ouncer and guzzled it on television? and I don't mean a swig to hydrate. But a guzzling to get a quick buzz on. Well, I mean, isn't that something Hispanics do? Oh, really, it would have been awesome if he had a brown-bag with the 40.
Now if you are not sure what a 40-ouncer is and are too lazy to go to the link above, here is a photo of what a 40-ouncer is. And it is representative of the low-end of the beer chain.
And look! To the right is the brown-bag cover! Class, baby! Class!
So is that real funny to you?
Nah, I did not think so either.
But there you are.
The Obamawhore media not even discussing what Sen. Rubio had to say in his response to the Dear Leader, President Obama. Oh, if you want to see it in full and what Sen. Rubio actually said, here it is.
While the Dear Leader, President Obama, offered more of the same, big government, a decline of American influence around the world and mountainous debt our great-grandchildren will be paying off, Sen. Rubio offered a conservative vision of the United States. Here are a couple of highlights:
This opportunity – to make it to the middle class or beyond no matter where you start out in life – it isn’t bestowed on us from Washington. It comes from a vibrant free economy where people can risk their own money to open a business. And when they succeed, they hire more people, who in turn invest or spend the money they make, helping others start a business and create jobs.
For example, Obamacare was supposed to help middle class Americans afford health insurance. But now, some people are losing the health insurance they were happy with. And because Obamacare created expensive requirements for companies with more than 50 employees, now many of these businesses aren’t hiring. Not only that; they’re being forced to lay people off and switch from full-time employees to part-time workers.
But government’s role is wisely limited by the Constitution. And it can’t play its essential role when it ignores those limits.
There is so much more that Sen.. Rubio said in the Republican response.
But no, the Obamawhore media is more interested in marginalizing the junior senator from Florida because, because he took a sip of water during his response.
BTW, did the Dear Leader, President Obama, possibly take a swig of water while delivering the SOTU? Or maybe he whipped out a 40. I am sure that he did have some water. Is that not maybe awkward? Just askin'.
Saul Alinsky tactics are alive and well and perpetuated by a supposed down-the-middle "news media".
Not at all.
It is why I have coined them the Obamawhore media. Nothing he does can be wrong. Why he could have dragged a kid on the dais Tuesday night and shot him to death to prove something about gun violence. The media? They would have promoted that as brilliance. Performance art maybe.
But take a drink of water?
Why it is a career-ender doncha know.
Wednesday, February 13, 2013
Ash Wednesday 2013
For liturgical Christians, and you know who you are, it is the beginning of the 40 days of Lent, the season of the church year of walking with Jesus Christ as he eventually rides in triumph on a donkey in to Jerusalem on Palm Sunday, only to be betrayed by Judas Iscariot, crucified on a tree on Good Friday, and on the third day rose again and now sitteth at the right hand of the Father on Resurrection or Easter Sunday.
The Anglican/Episcopal service of Ash Wednesday is very moving and reflective indeed.
When the ashes are imposed on the forehead, as you see in the photo of your humble blogger above, the following words of imposition are said:
Remember that you are dust, and to dust you shall return.
It really hits it right on the head. That we are but born and die. And when we die, we go back into the womb, so to speak. We are buried in the ground, for the most part. Many look to cremation, the ultimate of being dust. Some are laid to rest in a wall. That is what I wanted until I realized, that will be way too much money.
At the end of it all, we are but mere mortals.
But if you go further to the link of the Book of Common Prayer, 1979, the Litany of Penitence is, well it really hits home for me in many ways.
Here are some of the prayers that strike a chord in my heart:
We confess to you, Lord, all our past unfaithfulness: the
pride, hypocrisy, and impatience of our lives,
We confess to you, Lord.
Our anger at our own frustration, and our envy of those
more fortunate than ourselves,
We confess to you, Lord.
Our negligence in prayer and worship, and our failure to
commend the faith that is in us,
We confess to you, Lord.
Tell me now, has not one of these things you have done? Whether or not you are a believer, you have at one time or another been unfaithful, prideful, vainglorious, a hypocrite and impatient. And yes, we have all had those moments in which we are jealous of those who have more than us. Or so we perceive. And even the most faithful of us often forget who to give all the glory to and that is God.
It is why we Christians need this day, this day of Ash Wednesday. To remind us of our shortcomings. To remind us that there is the hope of repentance. And most of all, that we are mortals. That we are born and we will die.
Remember that we are dust, and to dust we shall return.
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
There Was A State Of The Union Speech Tonight?
Why I kind of sorta forgot that there was the State of the Union speech tonight from the Dear Leader, President Obama, in the hallowed House chamber at the capitol building in Washington, D. C.
I mean, what was more painful to watch?
Crazy Chris Dorner burning up in a fiery cabin near Big Bear, California? Or the Dear Leader laying out an even more audacious socialist agenda?
Honestly, I did not watch the SOTU speech. And I sort of watched the coverage of Crazy Chris, hopefully, going up in flames.
But I am beginning to think that these addresses are a huge waste of time.
Think about it.
What was the most memorable speech given during George W. Bushs' presidency? None, thank you very much. One line after the terrorist attacks of 9/11. The Axis of Evil. But nothing more.
You know, before President Woodrow Wilson came around, the president never actually went to congress and gave a speech. Check that. Presidents George Washington and John Adams did speak to congress. But starting with President Thomas Jefferson and ending with President William Taft, a written SOTU sufficed the constitutional requirement of a president. Oh, as an aside, one modern president reverted back to the written assessment of the SOTU. That is one Calvin Coolidge. Another reason to like that dude!
I mean, the highlights of the speech is basically this.
The Dear Leader wants to yet raise taxes again. He wants more government spending. He wants to raise the federal minimum wage to $9 an hour. He wants to pass gun control legislation. He even threw a bone to the environazis by bringing up the subject of "climate change", aka Globaloney Warming.
And in the official Republican response, Sen. Marco Rubio refuted all of what the Dear Leader, President Obama, would like to do.
Yawn!
We already know that the Dear Leader, President Obama, is going to push for more government and higher taxes to pay for that.
A lot of what was said was to please the Democrat base. The Dear Leader, President Obama, knows that unless he compromises big time he will not get much of anything through a Republican House. And things might look dicey in the Democrat senate. His push for a so-called assault weapons ban already has enough Democrat opposition to kill it before it goes anywhere.
This is really about 2014. The mid-term elections. This is to see what base is more ready to fight, the Dems or the GOP.
History is not kind to second term presidents and their last mid-term elections. Just ask Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush. Messrs. Reagan and Bush 43 lost GOP control of the senate (in Mr. Reagan's case) or control of congress (in the case of Mr. Bush 43). And Mr. Clinton could not get back the Democrats in either House in his last mid-term. One can not help but think that the Dear Leader, President Obama, will suffer a similar fate.
So one really did not need to watch another SOTU speech tonight. There was actually a choice. Wall-to-wall coverage of a cop killer burning alive in a cabin in the mountains of So Cal or a Fidel Castro-like speech from the Dear Leader, President Obama.
And neither one was all that good.
I mean, what was more painful to watch?
Crazy Chris Dorner burning up in a fiery cabin near Big Bear, California? Or the Dear Leader laying out an even more audacious socialist agenda?
Honestly, I did not watch the SOTU speech. And I sort of watched the coverage of Crazy Chris, hopefully, going up in flames.
But I am beginning to think that these addresses are a huge waste of time.
Think about it.
What was the most memorable speech given during George W. Bushs' presidency? None, thank you very much. One line after the terrorist attacks of 9/11. The Axis of Evil. But nothing more.
You know, before President Woodrow Wilson came around, the president never actually went to congress and gave a speech. Check that. Presidents George Washington and John Adams did speak to congress. But starting with President Thomas Jefferson and ending with President William Taft, a written SOTU sufficed the constitutional requirement of a president. Oh, as an aside, one modern president reverted back to the written assessment of the SOTU. That is one Calvin Coolidge. Another reason to like that dude!
I mean, the highlights of the speech is basically this.
The Dear Leader wants to yet raise taxes again. He wants more government spending. He wants to raise the federal minimum wage to $9 an hour. He wants to pass gun control legislation. He even threw a bone to the environazis by bringing up the subject of "climate change", aka Globaloney Warming.
And in the official Republican response, Sen. Marco Rubio refuted all of what the Dear Leader, President Obama, would like to do.
Yawn!
We already know that the Dear Leader, President Obama, is going to push for more government and higher taxes to pay for that.
A lot of what was said was to please the Democrat base. The Dear Leader, President Obama, knows that unless he compromises big time he will not get much of anything through a Republican House. And things might look dicey in the Democrat senate. His push for a so-called assault weapons ban already has enough Democrat opposition to kill it before it goes anywhere.
This is really about 2014. The mid-term elections. This is to see what base is more ready to fight, the Dems or the GOP.
History is not kind to second term presidents and their last mid-term elections. Just ask Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush. Messrs. Reagan and Bush 43 lost GOP control of the senate (in Mr. Reagan's case) or control of congress (in the case of Mr. Bush 43). And Mr. Clinton could not get back the Democrats in either House in his last mid-term. One can not help but think that the Dear Leader, President Obama, will suffer a similar fate.
So one really did not need to watch another SOTU speech tonight. There was actually a choice. Wall-to-wall coverage of a cop killer burning alive in a cabin in the mountains of So Cal or a Fidel Castro-like speech from the Dear Leader, President Obama.
And neither one was all that good.
Thursday, February 07, 2013
The Killer Ex-Cop That Turns Out To Be A Left-Wing Loon
No, I'm sorry, I must be mistaken in that headline. If a one-time member of law enforcement is involved in a murderous rampage, it must be a right-winger, right?
Well, in the immortal words of Gomer Pyle, surprise! Surprise! Surprise!
It turns out that one Christopher Dorner, former Los Angeles police officer and more on that later, is on a murder spree for his delusions of being wronged by the LAPD.
And Chris, well he IS rather special.
For in the time that his carnage began to today, Christopher Dorner found time to write a 20-page "manifesto" on Facebook.
And it is a doozy.
Much of the "manifesto" is about his beef with the LAPD because he filed a report against his training officer, one Teresa Evans. Crazy Chris accused now Sgt. Evans of abusing a suspect in custody. After lengthy process, the LAPD found Crazy Chris' charges unfounded and turned the table on him by canning him for filing a false report and charges against Sgt. Evans.
And it is one long, actually well-written rant.
But you have to go way down to see that Crazy Chris goes off the rails.
While there is a great deal of coherence in his accusations against the LAPD for about a third of the "manifesto", he then goes into a rant about how evil the members of the LAPD are in general. And of course there is the accusation of all accusations.
And that is. . .wait for it. . .raaaaacism!
Remember, there are five a's in raaaaacism.
Then the rails fall off one by one.
Without one hint of irony, he starts going into a rant about gun control.
Oh, no, not that he is against it. No sirree! It seems like Crazy Chris is for gun control for thee but not for he. He praises California Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) for her push for gun control. He writes about the mass shootings that have occurred in the United States in the last few years.
And it does not end there.
Then he goes into a total rant about his love for, you guessed it, the Dear Leader, President Obama, himself.
It is as if this section of the "manifesto" was written by the gang over at MSNBC.
Seriously.
But I think that we should all read the pertinent part of the "manifesto" that may or may not be talked about among the Leftywhore media:
Now, to be fair, it does appear that Crazy Chris was a big fan of onetime Republican presidential candidate, the former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, Jr.
Jon who?!
Like I said, I am not so sure that Crazy Chris did not get some technical help from MSNBC.
Because there is a lot to gleam from Crazy Chris' "manifesto", I suspect that it is a fairly decent excuse for the Leftywhore media to avoid this painful truth about him.
That Crazy Christopher Dorner is in fact and indeed a lefty.
How can they keep going to push for gun control when this could be a poster-boy. Look what happens when a police officer is let go. Or when he is called up from the naval reserves and sent to Afghanistan. Oh, yes, the war will be blamed for his break from reality.
One of the memes of the left and their push for new, harsher gun control is that most gun owners and opponents are right-wingers.
This proves all that wrong.
What I would like to know is how in the hell did this dude pass the psychological testing? Really, there was no way to tell in the process that maybe, just maybe Chris had a least one brick short of a wall?
Now I have to go back to the nuts and bolts of how this has ended up as it has.
This past Sunday evening, the bodies of two people were found in a parking garage in Irvine, California. The victims were Monica Quan and Keith Lawrence. They were college sweethearts and recently engaged to be married.
Miss Quan was the daughter of one Frank Quan. Mr. Quan was a retired LAPD captain that represented Crazy Chris in his legal actions against the LAPD. And he did not do the job that Crazy Chris wanted. And who does he take out his vendetta on? Mr. Quan's daughter. And worse, someone who truly had nothing to do with any of Crazy Chris' delusions, Mr. Lawrence.
And what has accelerated the chain of events is the shooting and killing of a Riverside, California police officer, the wounding of another and shooting at officers in the nearby city of Corona.
As of this writing, Crazy Chris is up in the local mountains, possibly, around the town of Big Bear. For it was there that Crazy Chris, crazy like a fox, burned his car and took off at this point to parts unknown.
And as an aside, because I really did not think it important, Crazy Chris is a Black man. Here is a photo of him. I did not think it was important because at a level I am certain that some would think that race has something to do with him being not all there. It has nothing to do with it as far as I am concerned.
Well, in the immortal words of Gomer Pyle, surprise! Surprise! Surprise!
It turns out that one Christopher Dorner, former Los Angeles police officer and more on that later, is on a murder spree for his delusions of being wronged by the LAPD.
And Chris, well he IS rather special.
For in the time that his carnage began to today, Christopher Dorner found time to write a 20-page "manifesto" on Facebook.
And it is a doozy.
Much of the "manifesto" is about his beef with the LAPD because he filed a report against his training officer, one Teresa Evans. Crazy Chris accused now Sgt. Evans of abusing a suspect in custody. After lengthy process, the LAPD found Crazy Chris' charges unfounded and turned the table on him by canning him for filing a false report and charges against Sgt. Evans.
And it is one long, actually well-written rant.
But you have to go way down to see that Crazy Chris goes off the rails.
While there is a great deal of coherence in his accusations against the LAPD for about a third of the "manifesto", he then goes into a rant about how evil the members of the LAPD are in general. And of course there is the accusation of all accusations.
And that is. . .wait for it. . .raaaaacism!
Remember, there are five a's in raaaaacism.
Then the rails fall off one by one.
Without one hint of irony, he starts going into a rant about gun control.
Oh, no, not that he is against it. No sirree! It seems like Crazy Chris is for gun control for thee but not for he. He praises California Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) for her push for gun control. He writes about the mass shootings that have occurred in the United States in the last few years.
And it does not end there.
Then he goes into a total rant about his love for, you guessed it, the Dear Leader, President Obama, himself.
It is as if this section of the "manifesto" was written by the gang over at MSNBC.
Seriously.
But I think that we should all read the pertinent part of the "manifesto" that may or may not be talked about among the Leftywhore media:
Mia Farrow said it best. “Gun control is no longer debatable, it’s not a conversation, its a moral mandate.”
Sen. Feinstein, you are doing the right thing in leading the re-institution of a national AWB. Never again should any public official state that their prayers and thoughts are with the family. That has become cliche’ and meaningless. Its time for action. Let this be your legacy that you bestow to America. Do not be swayed by obstacles, antagaonist, and naysayers. Remember the innocent children at Austin, Kent, Stockton, Fullerton, San Diego, Iowa City, Jonesboro, Columbine, Nickel Mines, Blacksburg, Springfield, Red Lake, Chardon, Aurora, and Newtown. Make sure this never happens again!!!
In my cache you will find several small arms. In the cache, Bushmaster firearms, Remington precision rifles, and AAC Suppressors (silencers). All of these small arms are manufactured by Cerberus/Freedom Group. The same company responsible for the Portland mall shooting, Webster , NY, and Sandy Hook massacre.
You disrespect the office of the POTUS/Presidency and Commander in Chief. You call him Kenyan, mongroid, halfrican, muslim, and FBHO when in essence you are to address him as simply, President. The same as you did to President George W. Bush and all those in the highest ranking position of our land before him. Just as I always have. You question his birth certificate, his educational and professional accomplishments, and his judeo-christian beliefs. You make disparaging remarks about his dead parents. You never questioned the fact that his former opponent, the honorable Senator John McCain, was not born in the CONUS or that Bush had a C average in his undergrad. Electoral Candidates children (Romney) state they want to punch the president in the face during debates with no formal repercussions. No one even questioned the fact that the son just made a criminal threat toward the President. You call his wife a Wookie. Off the record, I love your new bangs, Mrs. Obama. A woman whose professional and educational accomplishments are second to none when compared to recent First wives. You call his supporters, whether black, brown, yellow, or white, leeches, FSA, welfare recipients, and ni$&er lovers. You say this openly without any discretion. Before you start with your argument that you believe I would vote for Obama because he has the same skin color as me, fuck you. I didn’t vote in this last election as my choice of candidate, John Huntsman, didn’t win the primary candidacy for his party. Mr. President, I haven’t agreed with all of your decisions but of course I haven’t agreed with all of your predecessors decisions. I think you’ve done a hell of a job with what you have been dealt and how you have managed it. I shed a tear the night you were initially elected President in 2008. I never thought that day would occur. A black man elected president in the U.S. in my lifetime. I cracked a smiled when you were re-elected in 2012 because I really didn’t think you were going to pull that one off. Romney, stop being a sore loser. You could’ve exited graciously and still contributed significantly to public service, not now. Mr. President, get back to work. Many want to see you fail as they have stated so many times previously. Unfortunately, if you fail, the U.S. fails but your opponents do not concern themselves about the big picture. Do not forget your commitment to transparency in your administration. Sometimes I believe your administration forgets that. America, you will realize today and tomorrow that this world is made up of all human beings who have the same general needs and wants in life for themselves, their kin, community, and state. That is the freedom to LIVE and LOVE. They may eat different foods, enjoy different music, have different dialects, or speak a second language, but in essence are no different from you and I. This is America. We are not a perfect sovereign country as we have our own flaws but we are the closest that will ever exist.
Now, to be fair, it does appear that Crazy Chris was a big fan of onetime Republican presidential candidate, the former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, Jr.
Jon who?!
Like I said, I am not so sure that Crazy Chris did not get some technical help from MSNBC.
Because there is a lot to gleam from Crazy Chris' "manifesto", I suspect that it is a fairly decent excuse for the Leftywhore media to avoid this painful truth about him.
That Crazy Christopher Dorner is in fact and indeed a lefty.
How can they keep going to push for gun control when this could be a poster-boy. Look what happens when a police officer is let go. Or when he is called up from the naval reserves and sent to Afghanistan. Oh, yes, the war will be blamed for his break from reality.
One of the memes of the left and their push for new, harsher gun control is that most gun owners and opponents are right-wingers.
This proves all that wrong.
What I would like to know is how in the hell did this dude pass the psychological testing? Really, there was no way to tell in the process that maybe, just maybe Chris had a least one brick short of a wall?
Now I have to go back to the nuts and bolts of how this has ended up as it has.
This past Sunday evening, the bodies of two people were found in a parking garage in Irvine, California. The victims were Monica Quan and Keith Lawrence. They were college sweethearts and recently engaged to be married.
Miss Quan was the daughter of one Frank Quan. Mr. Quan was a retired LAPD captain that represented Crazy Chris in his legal actions against the LAPD. And he did not do the job that Crazy Chris wanted. And who does he take out his vendetta on? Mr. Quan's daughter. And worse, someone who truly had nothing to do with any of Crazy Chris' delusions, Mr. Lawrence.
And what has accelerated the chain of events is the shooting and killing of a Riverside, California police officer, the wounding of another and shooting at officers in the nearby city of Corona.
As of this writing, Crazy Chris is up in the local mountains, possibly, around the town of Big Bear. For it was there that Crazy Chris, crazy like a fox, burned his car and took off at this point to parts unknown.
And as an aside, because I really did not think it important, Crazy Chris is a Black man. Here is a photo of him. I did not think it was important because at a level I am certain that some would think that race has something to do with him being not all there. It has nothing to do with it as far as I am concerned.
But if one should see Crazy Chris, DO NOT DO ANYTHING BUT CALL THE POLICE! This is one crazy dude and will do harm to anyone.
This is an awful story all the way around. This will not end well no matter what. But whenever other incidents such as this have taken place, the Leftywhore media has been quick to try to pin it on some right-winger or right-wing sympatizers. Always trying to make law-abiding citizens look bad. Will the same Lefrtwhore media report on Crazy Christopher Dorner's clear left-wing politics? I hope that the crickets will not chirp too long on it.
Tuesday, February 05, 2013
Time For Conservatives To Kut The Kord From Karl Rove
I want to write this upfront. I think that Republican operative Karl Rove is a great strategist. He is a proven winner that was able to elect one George W. Bush president and in an epic battle get him reelected.
But that was then and now is now.
Thus it is time for us conservatives to cut our cord from Mr. Rove and challenge him on all fronts.
That means there will be a lot of skirmishes. Outright battles. Some wins and some losses. Because it is the fight for the conservative movement within the Republican party.
The fight is on now because Mr. Rove and one Steven J. Law figure that American Crossroads has not done enough to damage the Republican name.
The New York Times is reporting this latest development in the war between the establishment wing of the GOP and the conservative grass-roots.
Now, Mr. Rove and Mr Law are forming another group, the Conservative Victory Project and it is an attempt as they put it to nominate the "most electable conservative" to office.
Where have we heard this before?
Oh yeah, maybe in 2010 when the GOP establishment was lining up in Florida to back one Charlie The Closet Crist for the nomination to run for senate. They were pretty quick to dismiss one Marco Rubio. But Mr. Rubio gained and gained and overtook Mr. Christ and won the Republican nomination outright. And did Mr. Christ go off and throw his support for Mr. Rubio? No, no, no!!! He decided to run as an independent and even with that Mr. Rubio won the race going away.
OK, that is one instance in which Mr. Rove, aka "The Architect", did not do so well.
Are there others?
Well, let us look back at the just concluded presidentialdeath march election courtesy of Drew M. over at Ace Of Spades. Oh, these are the establishment picks for the senate:
Connie Mack (Florida)
Pete Hoekstra (Michigan)
Denny Rehberg (Montana)
Rick Berg (North Dakota)
George Allen (Virginia)
Tommy Thompson (Wisconsin)
And what do they all have in common? Why yes, they all lost their races for the senate. Some life Mr. Mack and Mr. Hoekstra lost by substantial margins.
Yet what does the GOP establishment and the Obamawhore media have in common?
Well, they seem to blame the whole reason the Republicans did not gain control of the senate on only two men.
Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock.
Yep, had they just kept their yaps shut about rape, why they would have won their races, right? And their wins would have led to a takeover of the senate, right?
Well, four of the six losers above were running against marginal incumbents and they lost. And they did not say stupid things, right?
No, they just pretty much sucked as candidates.
Look, I am not going to say that the Tea Party always backed great candidates. But in all fairness, the Tea Party did not back Mr. Akin in Missouri. The Tea Party backed Sarah Steelman and the establishment John Brunner. And while Mr. Brunner and Mrs. Steelman duked it out, Mr. Akin squeezed out the win.
And Mr. Mourdock, he had been elected statewide in Indiana and was backed by the Tea Party. And maybe he lost on his rape comment.
But come on Rove and company, you backed more candidates that lost than the Tea Party did last time around.
And BTW, lets take a look at some Tea Party successes.
Here are two election cycle successes in the senate thanks to the Tea Party:
Mike Lee (Utah)
Ted Cruz (Texas)
Rand Paul (Kentucky)
Pat Toomey (Pennsylvania)
Marco Rubio (Florida)
Oh yeah, it is real smart of the GOP establishment not once but twice to back the establishment candidate in two races in which two Hispanics were in the running and ended up winning big. I already mentioned the Florida Christ-Rubio race. But how about Texas and the establishment backing Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst over Ted Cruz?
See, sometimes races we are told are slam dunks when they are not. And the only way to get those slam dunks in the eyes of the GOP establishment is to run milquetoast candidates rather than people that are principled and can win elections.
You know that we heard this line from the very same people about one Ronald Wilson Reagan. The establishment was angry that he took on the weak incumbent president Gerald R. Ford in 1976. Yet Mr. Reagan was what GOP voters were looking for. A total antidote against the stain that was one Richard M. Nixon. And dang if he did not come a few delegates short of defeating Mr. Ford. And this was after two successful terms as governor of California. And when Mr. Reagan ran in 1980, the rationale for the George H. W. Bush candidacy is that he could win a general election and Mr. Reagan could not. And who was proven wrong?
Really, a candidate is only as good as the party and their voters believe they are. And if there are races and not coronations, then we find out what side is right. And yeah, sometimes some up and comers don't win a general election. But to have candidates chosen by the hidden hand of the likes of Karl Rove, well that has got to end.
And I leave you with this spectacular piece by Jeffrey Lord over at the American Spectator. For Mr. Lord is right. It is a battle between between those that want to get along and go along and not face the real issues of the day. And those of us believe that there are some principles worth fighting for, even if it is against friends.
But, at the end of the day, in our discussion among friends, we must always remember the bigger enemy is not ourselves but the Democrat party and their agenda for America.
But that was then and now is now.
Thus it is time for us conservatives to cut our cord from Mr. Rove and challenge him on all fronts.
That means there will be a lot of skirmishes. Outright battles. Some wins and some losses. Because it is the fight for the conservative movement within the Republican party.
The fight is on now because Mr. Rove and one Steven J. Law figure that American Crossroads has not done enough to damage the Republican name.
The New York Times is reporting this latest development in the war between the establishment wing of the GOP and the conservative grass-roots.
Now, Mr. Rove and Mr Law are forming another group, the Conservative Victory Project and it is an attempt as they put it to nominate the "most electable conservative" to office.
Where have we heard this before?
Oh yeah, maybe in 2010 when the GOP establishment was lining up in Florida to back one Charlie The Closet Crist for the nomination to run for senate. They were pretty quick to dismiss one Marco Rubio. But Mr. Rubio gained and gained and overtook Mr. Christ and won the Republican nomination outright. And did Mr. Christ go off and throw his support for Mr. Rubio? No, no, no!!! He decided to run as an independent and even with that Mr. Rubio won the race going away.
OK, that is one instance in which Mr. Rove, aka "The Architect", did not do so well.
Are there others?
Well, let us look back at the just concluded presidential
Connie Mack (Florida)
Pete Hoekstra (Michigan)
Denny Rehberg (Montana)
Rick Berg (North Dakota)
George Allen (Virginia)
Tommy Thompson (Wisconsin)
And what do they all have in common? Why yes, they all lost their races for the senate. Some life Mr. Mack and Mr. Hoekstra lost by substantial margins.
Yet what does the GOP establishment and the Obamawhore media have in common?
Well, they seem to blame the whole reason the Republicans did not gain control of the senate on only two men.
Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock.
Yep, had they just kept their yaps shut about rape, why they would have won their races, right? And their wins would have led to a takeover of the senate, right?
Well, four of the six losers above were running against marginal incumbents and they lost. And they did not say stupid things, right?
No, they just pretty much sucked as candidates.
Look, I am not going to say that the Tea Party always backed great candidates. But in all fairness, the Tea Party did not back Mr. Akin in Missouri. The Tea Party backed Sarah Steelman and the establishment John Brunner. And while Mr. Brunner and Mrs. Steelman duked it out, Mr. Akin squeezed out the win.
And Mr. Mourdock, he had been elected statewide in Indiana and was backed by the Tea Party. And maybe he lost on his rape comment.
But come on Rove and company, you backed more candidates that lost than the Tea Party did last time around.
And BTW, lets take a look at some Tea Party successes.
Here are two election cycle successes in the senate thanks to the Tea Party:
Mike Lee (Utah)
Ted Cruz (Texas)
Rand Paul (Kentucky)
Pat Toomey (Pennsylvania)
Marco Rubio (Florida)
Oh yeah, it is real smart of the GOP establishment not once but twice to back the establishment candidate in two races in which two Hispanics were in the running and ended up winning big. I already mentioned the Florida Christ-Rubio race. But how about Texas and the establishment backing Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst over Ted Cruz?
See, sometimes races we are told are slam dunks when they are not. And the only way to get those slam dunks in the eyes of the GOP establishment is to run milquetoast candidates rather than people that are principled and can win elections.
You know that we heard this line from the very same people about one Ronald Wilson Reagan. The establishment was angry that he took on the weak incumbent president Gerald R. Ford in 1976. Yet Mr. Reagan was what GOP voters were looking for. A total antidote against the stain that was one Richard M. Nixon. And dang if he did not come a few delegates short of defeating Mr. Ford. And this was after two successful terms as governor of California. And when Mr. Reagan ran in 1980, the rationale for the George H. W. Bush candidacy is that he could win a general election and Mr. Reagan could not. And who was proven wrong?
Really, a candidate is only as good as the party and their voters believe they are. And if there are races and not coronations, then we find out what side is right. And yeah, sometimes some up and comers don't win a general election. But to have candidates chosen by the hidden hand of the likes of Karl Rove, well that has got to end.
And I leave you with this spectacular piece by Jeffrey Lord over at the American Spectator. For Mr. Lord is right. It is a battle between between those that want to get along and go along and not face the real issues of the day. And those of us believe that there are some principles worth fighting for, even if it is against friends.
But, at the end of the day, in our discussion among friends, we must always remember the bigger enemy is not ourselves but the Democrat party and their agenda for America.
Sunday, February 03, 2013
So, If The United States Is STILL More Conservative Than Liberal, How In The Hell Did Obama Win Again?
I have been asking myself this question since the election results of the November 6, 2012 election.
I mean, really, in poll after poll asking Americans their political ideology the majority say that they are conservative. In second place, generally, people will consider themselves moderate or middle of the road. People who consider themselves liberal bring up the rear.
Once again, how does this jibe with the election results?
I am sure I have addressed this somewhere back in the RVFTLC archives.
If this poll from Gallup is correct, in only two states of the union, do a majority consider themselves liberal. And they should not come as a surprise that one of them is Taxachusetts Massachusetts. The other one is Rhode Island, basically an unincorporated extension of Massachusetts. Think of Rhode Island as where the regular folks live yet still keep voting liberal and Democrat.
So what gives?
Well, look at the link to Gallup. And look at the people that consider themselves moderate. Eight of the top 10 states ended up voting for the Dear Leader, President Obama. Three were considered so-called swing states in the last presidential election and they are Michigan, Nevada and Ohio. Yet six of those 10 states have Republican governors. For the first time in recent memory, the Republican party controls the majority of state legislatures. Have 29 governorships.
Again, what gives?
Well, defining moderate is always tricky. But I will give it a shot.
In general, people that consider themselves middle of the road generally are conservative in many ways yet liberal in others. Their conservatism is on governance, fiscal policy and national security. Their liberalism is not so much liberalism as much as a live and let live attitude on a lot of the so-called social issues. And even there that has to be more broken down by a slew of issues. In other words, they don't want to be boxed in under one party or one ideology. They are most likely to not care for either political party yet in their mind choose the lesser of two evils. But, in the last election, they not not as likely to vote as they did in 2008.
And what about conservatives?
Go backwards and more conservatives stayed home than moderates. And while almost none would identify with the Democrat party, most in the past did with the Republican party. But a sizable number are not happy with the Republican party. Many feel that they just want to elect people with R's after their name and it does not matter what they believe in.
Well, there is something of an explanation as to how the Dear Leader, President Obama, did win reelection.
One, the base was fired up a lot more stealth than in 2008. It was stealth enough that most political analysts did not see it. They fought for and got every vote they could squeeze out. They were able to convince just enough moderates where they had to how eeeeevvvvviiiiilllll Mitt Romney and the Republicans were. And it worked.
Speaking of Mr. Romney, he did not offer a serious vision and basically ran a classic defense campaign not realizing that he was really already behind everywhere he needed to be ahead. And I add one other thing. Mr. Romney could not explain and correlate that taxes and wasteful spending and big, inefficient government is as much if not more a threat than one's city, county or state government.
Which leads to this smart, yet short, piece from Jonah Goldberg in National Review Online.
Remember those swing states I wrote about earlier? You know, Michigan, Nevada and Ohio? All three have Republican governors, Rick Snyder in Michigan, Brian Sandoval in Nevada and John Kasich in Ohio. In Michigan and Ohio, the states legislatures are Republican-dominated. Mr. Goldberg gets to the heart of the matter right here:
I think an overlooked part of the story is the fact that Americans tend to see federal and local governments differently. At the local level, people seem to have a better grasp that it’s their tax dollars at work. They are far more sensitive to tax increases and more easily outraged by spending boondoggles. They understand the importance of sustainable economic growth.
And I think that he is right. And it does go back to when many of these states did have Democrat leadership and how, after a sufficient time to see how lousy things get when the Dems do run things, people want to change and get some adults in the room.
Now California bucked the trend on the whole issue of tax hikes, but that had to be sold as a tax on the rich and the proponents left out the hike on the state sales tax. But the trend will go back to the Republicans when they get their act together here in the once Golden State.
That goes back to where Mr. Romney could not translate the big, bad government in Washington, D. C. to the voter in Ohio that thought maybe the Dear Leader, President Obama, is still kind of sort of a moderate as he is portrayed to be.
And one more thing about us conservatives.
We need to stop eating each other up and focus on what the next years under the Dear Leader, President Obama, will be. Don't blame So Cons and So Cons need to learn a little about economics before going after Fis Cons. And all need to agree that the biggest international threat is radical Islam.
Conservatives need to translate what the majority of Americans believe into a governing majority at the national level.
That is why one Barack Hussein Obama won reelection. Playing up conservative division.
I mean, really, in poll after poll asking Americans their political ideology the majority say that they are conservative. In second place, generally, people will consider themselves moderate or middle of the road. People who consider themselves liberal bring up the rear.
Once again, how does this jibe with the election results?
I am sure I have addressed this somewhere back in the RVFTLC archives.
If this poll from Gallup is correct, in only two states of the union, do a majority consider themselves liberal. And they should not come as a surprise that one of them is Taxachusetts Massachusetts. The other one is Rhode Island, basically an unincorporated extension of Massachusetts. Think of Rhode Island as where the regular folks live yet still keep voting liberal and Democrat.
So what gives?
Well, look at the link to Gallup. And look at the people that consider themselves moderate. Eight of the top 10 states ended up voting for the Dear Leader, President Obama. Three were considered so-called swing states in the last presidential election and they are Michigan, Nevada and Ohio. Yet six of those 10 states have Republican governors. For the first time in recent memory, the Republican party controls the majority of state legislatures. Have 29 governorships.
Again, what gives?
Well, defining moderate is always tricky. But I will give it a shot.
In general, people that consider themselves middle of the road generally are conservative in many ways yet liberal in others. Their conservatism is on governance, fiscal policy and national security. Their liberalism is not so much liberalism as much as a live and let live attitude on a lot of the so-called social issues. And even there that has to be more broken down by a slew of issues. In other words, they don't want to be boxed in under one party or one ideology. They are most likely to not care for either political party yet in their mind choose the lesser of two evils. But, in the last election, they not not as likely to vote as they did in 2008.
And what about conservatives?
Go backwards and more conservatives stayed home than moderates. And while almost none would identify with the Democrat party, most in the past did with the Republican party. But a sizable number are not happy with the Republican party. Many feel that they just want to elect people with R's after their name and it does not matter what they believe in.
Well, there is something of an explanation as to how the Dear Leader, President Obama, did win reelection.
One, the base was fired up a lot more stealth than in 2008. It was stealth enough that most political analysts did not see it. They fought for and got every vote they could squeeze out. They were able to convince just enough moderates where they had to how eeeeevvvvviiiiilllll Mitt Romney and the Republicans were. And it worked.
Speaking of Mr. Romney, he did not offer a serious vision and basically ran a classic defense campaign not realizing that he was really already behind everywhere he needed to be ahead. And I add one other thing. Mr. Romney could not explain and correlate that taxes and wasteful spending and big, inefficient government is as much if not more a threat than one's city, county or state government.
Which leads to this smart, yet short, piece from Jonah Goldberg in National Review Online.
Remember those swing states I wrote about earlier? You know, Michigan, Nevada and Ohio? All three have Republican governors, Rick Snyder in Michigan, Brian Sandoval in Nevada and John Kasich in Ohio. In Michigan and Ohio, the states legislatures are Republican-dominated. Mr. Goldberg gets to the heart of the matter right here:
I think an overlooked part of the story is the fact that Americans tend to see federal and local governments differently. At the local level, people seem to have a better grasp that it’s their tax dollars at work. They are far more sensitive to tax increases and more easily outraged by spending boondoggles. They understand the importance of sustainable economic growth.
And I think that he is right. And it does go back to when many of these states did have Democrat leadership and how, after a sufficient time to see how lousy things get when the Dems do run things, people want to change and get some adults in the room.
Now California bucked the trend on the whole issue of tax hikes, but that had to be sold as a tax on the rich and the proponents left out the hike on the state sales tax. But the trend will go back to the Republicans when they get their act together here in the once Golden State.
That goes back to where Mr. Romney could not translate the big, bad government in Washington, D. C. to the voter in Ohio that thought maybe the Dear Leader, President Obama, is still kind of sort of a moderate as he is portrayed to be.
And one more thing about us conservatives.
We need to stop eating each other up and focus on what the next years under the Dear Leader, President Obama, will be. Don't blame So Cons and So Cons need to learn a little about economics before going after Fis Cons. And all need to agree that the biggest international threat is radical Islam.
Conservatives need to translate what the majority of Americans believe into a governing majority at the national level.
That is why one Barack Hussein Obama won reelection. Playing up conservative division.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)