Politics in America features political viewpoints and opinions regarding national, state and local politics throughout the United States Of America.
"We" -- The Democrats' Most Vicious Word, 
Tuesday, July 10, 2007, 06:43 AM
Recently I listened to the Democratic candidates' Presidential debate and I got almost physically sick. They kept repeating their most vicious word, "we".

Here's some typical policies the Democrat-looter candidates suggested:

"We" need to give health care to all people with a "non-profit" socialized-medicine system (the same system that wrecked medical care in England and Canada?, and paid for by whom?).

"We" need to give all kids tuition money for a college education (a socialist, anti-American-values education presided over by Marxist professors?, and paid for by whom?).

"We" need pre-school for all children from age two years old, especially minority kids (with or without the consent of parents?, and paid for by whom?).

"We" need "parent education" programs to teach parents how to raise their kids (the parent-police in Hillary Clinton's "village" that "raises" children).

"We" need more federal programs to cure AIDS, for AIDS education, and to pay for drug addicts' needles (why should we pay for other people's drug habits and unprotected sex that cause most of the AIDS?).

"We" have to raise taxes on the "rich" to pay for all these multi-billion dollar programs (which kills the goose that lays the golden egg--it's the productive "rich" who create the jobs the poor depend on).

"We" need to spend more billions of dollars on government (public) schools (that's like throwing money down a toilet).

"We" need to spend billions of dollars to solve global warming (human-caused global warming is a deliberate hoax designed to destroy our liberty and free economy).

"We" have to take money from the oil companies to fund alternative energy programs (yes, "take" is what Hillary Clinton said in a previous speech. "Take," as in "loot").

"We" have to end the imbecile Iraq war that is bankrupting us. But, God forbid, we will NOT give the billions of dollars we spend on the war back to you, the taxpayers. We'll keep your money and give it away to every petty looter and special-interest group who'll vote us into office.

"We" have to stop companies from moving overseas and not paying heavy corporate taxes (companies want to run from strangling US taxes and regulations -- why shouldn't they?).

"We" have to tax the rich (who earned their money) to pay for welfare, farm subsidies, employment programs for minorities, and dozens of other giveaway programs (why should these people get unearned handouts they didn't work for?).

"We" have to make sure the "rich" pay their "fair share" of taxes ("fair share" means to loot money from brilliant, productive businessmen who earn more than others with their superior ambition and hard work, and give this stolen loot to less productive people who do not produce jobs for others).

And on it went, all night. "We" have to help this group. "We" have to help that group. "We" have to raise taxes or take money from the "rich" to pay for all this looting.

"We" is the Democrats' and liberals' killer word. They mean that "we" are our brothers' keeper, whether we like it or not. "We" must sacrifice our lives, our work, our hard-earned money to pay for any looters who want to take our money, courtesy of government-elected thieves.

"We" is an attempt to make you forget the word "I," as in "I" earned my money and "you" don't have a right to take it from me.

The Democrat-looter Presidential candidates all claimed the right to tax us to death to pay for uninsured people's health care (including Mexican illegal aliens), unemployed peoples' training, tenured-teachers unearned pay raises, congenitally-incompetent public schools' unending failure, government workers who get rich on these programs, and every other whining special-interest group who demands government hand-outs at your expense.

Let's be clear on one thing. You are NOT your brother's keeper, and no government you elect has the right to force you to be. "Compassion" enforced at the end of a government gun (taxes) is naked compulsion. Every program that looting liberals promote with their "we" forces you to be your brother's keeper, whether you like it or not. In effect, Democrats tell you, "your money or your life."

There is only one way to fight the Democrats' vicious moral notion that "we" are our brother's keeper. Like a prayer, keep repeating the words that you have the God-given right to keep every cent you earn. Your property is not someone else's "resource" to spend as they please. Liberal looters who spout their "we" think your hard-earned money is theirs for the taking. They think of you as an expendable sacrificial animal. They think that your duty is to work for the money, but they have the right to spend it.

To fight the liberal looters, keep repeating like a prayer, "My money and property are mine--I earned it. No politician I elect has the right to steal my money to give away to others." It's as simple as that.

If you accept the Democrats' deadly "we," you fall into their trap. You accept the vicious socialist and fascist moral notion that you are your brother's keeper. You accept the notion that the people you elect to office have the right to loot your hard-earned money to enforce that notion. You accept the fact that those you elect to office have the right to make you into a slave--to work your whole life for the benefit of others.

Only when you reject this moral doctrine, only when you reject the vicious liberals' "we," will you elect to office people who will respect your life, your money, your property, and your liberty.

By: Joel Turtel
Joel Turtel is an education policy analyst and syndicated columnist. He is also the author of "Public Schools, Public Menace: How Public Schools Lie To Parents and Betray Our Children" and "The Welfare State: No Mercy For the Middle Class." Contact Information: Website: www.mykidsdeservebetter.com Email: lbooksusa@aol.com, Article Copyrighted © 2007 by Joel Turtel.

Featured by California Personal Injury Attorneys, a directory containing over 2000 links and listings for California personal injury attorneys.

Take a break, have some laughs, visit our attorney Jokes pages.

For articles, editorials and posts about California law see: California Law - Legal Information, a resource blog regarding various aspects of California law, written by attorneys and other professionals.

Comments: For those of you that would like to comment on this or any other post in this blog, go to the Contact me link on the upper right hand side of this page and send your comment via that link. If your comment is on topic, whether pro or anti, and even fairly well written, we will post it with the article. If you have a site that you would like to be linked to your comment please supply it and we will include it.
  |  0 trackbacks   |  related link

Is There Anything More Disingenuous Than a Whining, Petulant Political Party in America? 
Thursday, July 5, 2007, 11:51 PM
Presidential elections provide a lot of humor when you can recognize the joke.

Every few days some new, outrageous flap kicks another outrageous flap off of the front page of our nation's daily newspapers.

Now the Democrats are all upset that President George Bush threw out the 30-month prison sentence for former White House aide Lewis "Scooter" Libby but stopped short of giving him a full pardon. Some first class, heartfelt whining is par for the course among Democrats.

It would be interesting to know just how many abortions-on-demand were performed in the amount of time it took for thousands of Democrats to moan and groan over this pass for Libby.

The Democratic party is all about a woman's right to abort her mistakes and feel good about it.

The Democrats appear interested in the current uproar only because Bush chose not to let Libby do time in the slammer. It seems Libby's relief killed some of the joy Democrats and Secular Progressives had in seeing the nasty Republican Libby behind bars.

All of this whining by Democrats has little to do with any sense of justice. Democrats whine all the time; it is what they have become really good at since they cannot seem to get much else accomplished at the moment.

Democrats had no problem with Bill Clinton lying and not doing time. Democrats had no problem with Clinton pardoning some really seedy people in exchange for contributions to his Presidential Library. But Libby, now that is a different story because he is a Republican.

I do not really care if Democrats whine and complain. They might be foolish enough to think that they have some edge on Republicans in the whining and complaining department, but they have been wrong about a lot other things too.

Heck, I expect the Democrats to bawl like a 1-year-old baby with a dirty diaper that has not been fed for the past 12 hours.

What I do care about is the righteousness with which the Democrats and Republicans do whine and complain. If you are a card-carrying Democrat with a capital "D" I bet you read right over the "and Republicans" in the last sentence.

Both political parties and their politicians do everything in a fit of righteousness, that is politics in America today. There is not a shred of truth or integrity in American politics. It is more a contest of egos and righteousness that never seems to stop.

If you like nitpicking, pettiness, blinders and a rush for glory become a politician. It is a high-paying profession that ignores truth, integrity and almost everything else that made America great.

If you are a person of integrity and cannot stand to lie, cheat and steal, stay out of politics at almost any level, but especially the national level.

About a month from now some well-known Democratic politician will be caught lying, cheating, stealing or playing with his pants down, and it will be the Republicans turn to whine and complain with all the righteousness an elephant can muster.

Politics is like a three-ring circus with the executive, legislative and judicial branches all clamoring for attention with their self-centered, self-absorbed personal agendas. Somebody should tell these clowns they are supposed to be representing us rather than themselves in their quest for fame, glory and money.

By: Ed Bagley
Ed Bagley is the Author of Ed Bagley's Blog, which he Publishes Daily with Fresh, Original Articles on Lessons in Life, Movie Reviews, Jobs and Careers, Sports or Internet Marketing intended to Delight, Inform, Educate and Motivate Readers. Visit Ed at . . . http://www.edbagleyblog.com

Featured by California Personal Injury Attorneys - California Accident Lawyers, a directory containing over 2000 links and listings for California personal injury attorneys.

Take a break, have some laughs, visit our attorney Jokes pages.

For articles, editorials and posts about California law see: California Law - Legal Information, a resource blog regarding various aspects of California law, written by attorneys and other professionals.

Comments: For those of you that would like to comment on this or any other post in this blog, go to the Contact me link on the upper right hand side of this page and send your comment via that link. If your comment is on topic, whether pro or anti, and even fairly well written, we will post it with the article. If you have a site that you would like to be linked to your comment please supply it and we will include it.
  |  0 trackbacks   |  related link

A Kennedy Gaffe. 
Saturday, June 30, 2007, 10:24 PM
Senator Kennedy's speech to The Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce on Monday cautioned against a failure to pass an immigration reform bill by using an inappropriate example. "Just look what has happened with Great Britain, with the isolated communities," he warned. "Look what has happened in France... Look where the cells are in terms of al-Qaeda. They're all with different communities, which have failed to assimilate individuals."

The Senior Senator from Massachusetts demonstrated both his hypocrisy and his ignorance all in the same breath. By shockingly comparing un-assimilated Latin American Catholics to second generation Muslim immigrants, he was negating the importance of culture in the development of terrorism.

Second generation Muslims lived in their own communities and spoke their own language at the behest of liberal European politicians who believed that multiculturalism was the panacea. Instead it was their poison.

They became radicalized in their mosques and enclaves instead of becoming French like their fathers and mothers. Islam fomented their rage against the state and its people instead of providing Muslims with solutions.

Following Kennedy’s logic, India should stay on the look out for unassimilated Buddhist immigrants. I can see it now, barefoot and balding monks walking toward a crowded Indian bazaar with people shouting, “Here come the Buddhist bombers!”

Aside from his deficient religious acumen, Kennedy had discounted liberal academia’s role in devaluing nationalism. Assimilation was the standard practice until the apologist educators began their assault on Americanism. Those proud to wave and wear the American flag weren’t responsible for “press one for English and two for Spanish.” Ted Kennedy and the rest of the haters were the culprits.

Hypocrisy and ignorance aside, the Senator failed to explain how granting amnesty to those living “in the shadows” and doing “work Americans won’t do” will solve a dysfunctional bureaucracy, a porous border, spiraling healthcare and education costs- while insisting with a straight face that we are a country of laws.

By: Hope Marin
Hope Marin is a graduate of the University of Florida who moved to Europe in ‘2002 where she wrote her soon to be released book " Theabsentee Ballot". She’s now back in the U.S writing and editing for her website http://www.theabsenteeballot.com.

Featured by California Personal Injury Attorneys - California Accident Lawyers, a directory containing over 2000 links and listings for California personal injury attorneys.

Take a break, have some laughs, visit our attorney Jokes pages.

For articles, editorials and posts about California law see: California Law - Legal Information, a resource blog regarding various aspects of California law, written by attorneys and other professionals.

Comments: For those of you that would like to comment on this or any other post in this blog, go to the Contact me link on the upper right hand side of this page and send your comment via that link. If your comment is on topic, whether pro or anti, and even fairly well written, we will post it with the article. If you have a site that you would like to be linked to your comment please supply it and we will include it.
  |  0 trackbacks   |  related link

Assaulting Liberty Through Regulation. 
Wednesday, June 27, 2007, 12:06 AM
In the early 20th Century the temperance movement was in high gear. Slowly, county after county then state after state passed laws prohibiting the manufacture, distribution and consumption of alcohol within their borders. The excuse of the temperance movement was that alcohol was evil and a threat to the public health and those claims were eventually ramrodded down the throats of the whole of the American people in the form of the 18th Amendment. Even in those days, those that would become the modern liberals of today were trying to mold society to their whims.

What they did was take something that most people enjoyed and consumed responsibly and focused on the deadbeats who would also get drunk, urinate in public, beat their wives, vandalize property and paint with a broad brush everyone that consumed alcohol. They then branded alcohol as “evil” and “wicked” and eventually won enough support for their own little crusade against liberty. Instead of punishing those that were committing crimes, which is what limited and just government is supposed to do, they punished everyone and shackled Lady Liberty.

We also know how well that worked out in the end don’t we?

Sure we do. Thousands of people were out of work as breweries were shut down and the industries that supplied those breweries lost demand for their products. Backwoods distilleries popped up. Some of these illegal stills cut their alcohol with substances not fit for human consumption. Moonshine was being run by bootleggers all over the country. And even many of federal agents charged with breaking up the now illegal distilleries were involved in making illegal liquor because they could make more calling off sick for a couple days and concocting illegal brew than they could working for the government in a month.

Yeah, prohibition worked great didn’t it? Ah yes the great and powerful government sure saved us from our liberties didn’t they? Can you just hear the sarcasm oozing from my voice?

So what did we get for all this trouble? Not much except the eventual repeal of this absolutely silly attempt at controlling human behavior and liberty with yet another amendment. We again returned to a state where liberty, on this issue, reigned and we focused again on people that abused the liberty of others.

So you would think that we wouldn’t try it again. You would think that we would have learned our lesson. But liberals don’t think. That’s the problem. Their rearview mirror is broken and they can’t see history to learn from it.

Today there is a new bogeyman; a new “temperance movement”. The latest cause celeb of the left in their pursuit of infringing liberty is of course none other than smoking. And make no mistake those that are driving us down this latest road to ruin are no friends to liberty.

Recently, for example, the county of Allegheny where my home city of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania is located, tried to join the growing list of places around the country that have banned smoking everywhere they could get away with it. Note that I didn’t say they tried to ban tobacco or cigarettes. They wouldn’t do that. Oh no, they just wanted to ban smoking such products in restaurants and bars, which they refer to as places of “public accommodation”. Places of “public accommodation”, just so you know, is code for private property government and nebby do-gooders want to regulate and need some auspices to do so.

What they really tried to do was tell private citizens who own private businesses that they could not allow their employees or their patrons to smoke in their establishments. Mind you this was after many of them had invested thousands, if not tens of thousands, of their own dollars in special ventilation and air conditioning systems to keep smokers and non-smokers separate from each other.

Now, maybe you are a liberal. And maybe you feel that is a good idea and that government should do this. If that is the case, I weep for you.

The smoking ban and the assault on private property was touted by those that promoted it much in the same way the prohibition movement was way back when alcohol was the boogeyman. It was deemed as necessary because smoking is dangerous and harmful to one’s health and as a result also to society. You know, since we now have a largely public healthcare system funded by tax payer dollars which in and of itself is unkind to personal liberty. Some of them even trotted out the old canard that smoking “causes” cancer despite the truth that it only increases the risk of getting cancer.

This is much like saying that depressing the gas pedal of a car makes it go forward. No, it doesn’t. It only increases the chance of that happening. There are many other things that also have to be true in order for the car to go forward such as there being gas in the tank, the ignition being turned on, the car in the proper forward gear, and many, many other things.

Like the gas pedal of a car, if smoking, or even second hand smoke for that matter, “caused” cancer or any other disease then everyone that smoked or was exposed to smoke would have that disease. But we know that is not true. So we are back to the fact that smoking simply “increases” the risk of getting cancer.

Well la dee freaking dah! If that’s all it takes to ban something I’ve got a whole list of such things that need to be banned based on the fact that they “increase” the risks of people being harmed. These things range from driving which increases people’s risk of being in a fatal car accident, to swimming which dramatically increases the chance of one drowning, to sky diving which greatly increases the risk of people getting messily splattered all over the concrete. Should we ban these activities in public as well?

Then there are others who said that the ban would be a good thing because they did not like going to their favorite restaurant or bar and having to put up with smokers, which they claimed, put them at risk. To which I asked the question, ”Why just simply not go there?” Then I asked what gave them the right to tell Joe’s Bar on the corner that he could not let his patrons have a cigarette on property he bought and paid for. I still, to this day, have not received a reasoned answer that did not involve someone believing that they have the right to pursue their happiness (i.e. eating at a particular restaurant) at the expense of someone else’s liberty (i.e. their private property rights).

Then of course there were the cries about “the children”. Aw. We all got teary eyed at that one. Even me as I opened up my humidor, picked out a nice cigar and lit up. Taking a long puff, allowing the fine smoke to tickle my pallet I recalled far more hazardous things that happen to children.

Just last week for example we had an example where two women here in Pittsburgh left their young children locked in a bed room while they went out to the local bar. Five of these children are now dead because they decided to play with matches and were not being supervised when they burned down the house.

Yes, I’d say there are certainly more harmful things to children than my occasional cigar. Neglectful parents more worried about their own pleasure than their children’s welfare comes to mind. And of course the excuses for these women have already started as to why they should not be at the very least partially accountable.

I think that is where the whole desire to regulate the behavior of others comes from; people not wanting to be held accountable for their own actions. Or maybe it isn’t not wanting to be held accountable but simply being unable to control themselves. Either way there are many people that are eager to seize upon these types of attitudes and enslave those that cannot or will not be accountable for their own choices while punishing the rest of us as well.

The good news is the county smoking ban here went down in flames. This of course lead to lots of hand wringing and whining by those that really wanted it. I am certain that these are the same people that need government to tell them how many gallons of water are in their toilet and also, most likely, how to properly wipe their posteriors after using it.

Those that seek to control others really wanted the ban because the second they would have been able to ban smoking, again but not ban tobacco, cigarettes, etc., in restaurants and bars it would have been a stepping stone to banning smoking everywhere including in private residences “for the common good”. If you think otherwise you haven’t been paying attention.

But despite the crash and burn of the Allegheny County smoking ban the Commonwealth is pondering a state wide smoking ban for much the same reasons as the county ban was proposed. Again, they are not going to ban cigarettes and other tobacco products which they decry as bad, evil and a pox on our society mind you. They just want to tell us how to use our private property and that we cannot use it to partake of perfectly legal indulgences such as smoking.

And maybe when all is said and done we here in Pennsylvania will give up our liberties just as the people in New Hampshire did when they recently passed a similar statewide ban. Apparently that State’s motto has now been changed from “Live Free Or Die” to “Freedom? We Don’t Need No Stinkin’ Freedom!”

By: J.J. Jackson
J.J. Jackson is a libertarian conservative and the owner and Lead Editor of American Conservative Politics - The Land of the Free and American Infidel T-shirts. His weekly articles can be read at Liberty Reborn.

Featured by California Personal Injury Attorneys - California Accident Lawyers, a directory containing over 2000 links and listings for California personal injury attorneys.

Take a break, have some laughs, visit our attorney Jokes pages.

For articles, editorials and posts about California law see: California Law - Legal Information, a resource blog regarding various aspects of California law, written by attorneys and other professionals.

Comments: For those of you that would like to comment on this or any other post in this blog, go to the Contact me link on the upper right hand side of this page and send your comment via that link. If your comment is on topic, whether pro or anti, and even fairly well written, we will post it with the article. If you have a site that you would like to be linked to your comment please supply it and we will include it.
  |  0 trackbacks   |  related link


Next