Jan Shakowsky is an embarrassment

If you are deluded about how democrats view the US Constitution, look no further than Illinois democrat Jan Shakowsky...



The 10th amendment to which she derisively refers is of course the states' rights part of the Constitution. Specifically, it is the part that limits the concentration of power in the federal government, and the part that Congress regularly and most often violates. She probably has no clue about the meaning of the document and why we as Americans defend it to the death. Moreover, she's obviously resentful that we insist that our representatives abide by their solemn oath to uphold it.

To conservatives, the Constitution is the most perfect government document ever written. It defines us as a nation and adherence to it guarantees that the US remains intact for our children. To liberals, it is just as troublesome piece of paper that has to be skirted every day in order to implement their big-government, socialistic world view of what America should be.

A vote for a democrat in 32 days is a vote to further erode the Constitution. If you can argue otherwise, have at it.

Women, never get involved with a liberal man

Degenerate child predator Roman Polanski got arrested by Swiss authorities regarding his 31 year-old guilty plea for drugging, and repeatedly raping and sodomizing, a 13 year old girl, Samantha Gailey, in the Los Angeles home of Jack Nicholson. He fled the country and has never returned though he enjoys the praise and accolades of Hollywood's elite actors, no strangers to perversion themselves, who are arguing against his extradition from Switzerland.

This is Chappaquiddick all over again. Ted Kennedy can leave a girl to die in a river and liberals ignore it because he's for health-care reform. Roman Polanski can drug and rape a 13 year old girl and liberals ignore that because he made a couple of movies they like. The lesson here is that to depraved liberals, your support of leftist causes, and that you made a couple of popular movies, more than outweigh the life and rape respectively, of women who you victimized.

The moral of this story for women here is: the more popular the leftist is among his peers, the less your life and safety are worth in comparison to his "accomplishments".

Shame on litterbug liberals!

Over at Gateway Pundit, there is a photo essay that shows the telling difference between conservatives and liberals. First, is the National Mall after two million conservatives gathered on Sept 12th....



And here is Washington D.C. in the wake of liberals gathered for The One's inauguration....utterly disgusting!!!


Democrats are supposed to be the protectors of the environment but, they are nothing but a bunch of dirty, verminous litterbugs.

Conservatives left the capital exactly as they found it because conservatives take responsibility for ourselves. Liberals think everything is somebody elses responsibility. Food, shelter, clothing, mortgage payment, rescue from hurricanes....it's all somebody elses responsibility to provide it.

Let's hope the 9-12 demonstrations marked the beginning of the end of these street vermin trashing the country the way they trashed the capital.

If you are liberal, you can get away with murder....literally

As the world praises "Ted" Kennedy for his career of selfless service to the country, championing liberal causes, let's not forget Mary Jo Kopechne who lost her life because of his cowardice and political self-interest.

Not that the media will tell you but, Mary Jo Kopechne probably didn't drown in Ted's car, instead she died a tortured, agonizing death from suffocation, trapped in his car, as he ran to his bungalow to concoct an alibi with his lawyers. Had he made a simple, timely phone call, she likely would have lived.

You'll read eulogies of Kennedy for days but, one particularly stood out to me. Novelist Joyce Carol Oats wrote this about Kennedy and Chappaquiddick in The Guardian on Thursday...

Yet if one weighs the life of a single young woman against the accomplishments of the man President Obama has called the greatest Democratic senator in history, what is one to think?

The poet John Berryman once wondered: "Is wickedness soluble in art?". One might rephrase, in a vocabulary more suitable for our politicized era: "Is wickedness soluble in good deeds?"

This paradox lies at the heart of so much of public life: individuals of dubious character and cruel deeds may redeem themselves in selfless actions. Fidelity to a personal code of morality would seem to fade in significance as the public sphere, like an enormous sun, blinds us to all else.

How dare liberals write off the life of a young girl as an acceptable loss, given Kennedy's tireless advancement of liberal causes! Would Ms. Oats tell Mary Jo's mother to her face that her daughter's life was worth less than Teddy's career accomplishments in the Senate? How depraved must one be to publicly announce that you think an innocent life is worth less than a political career?

The media will gloss over this issue because they adore the idea of the Kennedy's and Camelot but, don't you forget that an innocent girl needlessly died at Ted's hands. I for one, am glad that the era of Kennedy-Camelot is over and done. I never thought I'd see the media get the vapors and swoon over a politician like they always have the Kennedy's but then along came Barack Obama and the idea of Camelot was resurrected....great!!!

Liberals find brotherhood with murderers and thugs

You ask for stupidity, I give you democrat congresswoman, Diane Watson....



From the hapless Jimmy Carter up to the present lot of despicable liberals, what is it about murdering, thug dictators and terrorists that appeals to democrats? I can only find a single common thread among the bunch....they all hate the United States. Why do liberals pine for the utopian idealism of statist collectivism, when in every instance, it has come through violence and bloodshed, depriving individuals by the thousands of life, liberty, and property? Fidel Castro and Che Guevara were blood-thirsty savages who murdered thousands of innocent Cubans in cold blood in order to seize control of the island nation. How any thinking American can hold these two revolutionaries up as shining examples of anything, boggles the mind, unless you understand that today's liberal democrats hate American-style, individual freedom and liberty every bit as much as Castro and Guevara did. How people like that remain in Washington is a mystery but, one thing's for sure, they do not have our best interests in mind as they force sweeping, socialist changes to the fundamental fabric of American life. Make people like Diane Watson pay in the next election by kicking them to the curb.

2010 is our line in the sand

I found this quote over on NealBoortz' site...

"You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that, my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it."

Dr. Adrian Pierce Rogers (September 12, 1931 - November 15, 2005) of Love Worth Finding Ministries, Pastor Emeritus of Bellevue Baptist Church.

And you don't think that under the democrats' pernicious agenda, we're nearing the end of the United States as it was designed to be, a Constitutional republic based on freedom, liberty, and personal responsibility? If we don't elect conservatives in mass numbers in 2010 to control Obama, then our children, if not ourselves, will witness the fall of America as the beacon of freedom and independence in the world. It will become a second-rate, socialist, nanny-State where perpetually whining minorities clamor for government goody-bags provided by the shrinking productive class. Where innovators and risk takers are punished and the shifless, stupid, and lazy are rewarded with the wealth of men better than them.

I weep for the future.

Liberals are dumber than monkeys

You'd think that even the stupidest of liberals could grasp the simple and obvious concept that rewarding individuals for not working is bad for society.....but then you'd be wrong.....

From an article in NationalGeographic,

In recent tests designed to assess monkeys' sense of fairness, a group of brown capuchin monkeys "went on strike" and refused to perform routine tasks when they saw others receiving greater rewards for the same tasks.

The more effort the primates used to earn a reward, the more upset they appeared to be at the inequity, according to scientists who conducted the research.

Building on previous research, Sarah Brosnan of Georgia State University in Atlanta, and her team tested six pairs of monkeys on a simple task: handing a token to a human examiner in return for a food reward.

When monkeys noticed that their partners received better rewards for the same task—a cherished grape instead of a bit of cucumber—they became likely to refuse participation, the study showed.

The behavior, called inequity aversion, might have its roots in activities like food gathering, in which primates can suffer if they cooperate with others who do not do their share of work, Brosnan said.

Even monkeys will rebel against a system that compels them to work for less reward, while other monkeys do little or nothing for greater reward. When will the productive class in America rebel against the same system, under which we currently toil?

This guy is smarter than the average democrat Obama voter.

Hat tip to Moonbattery.

The soft bigotry of low expectations

The installation by the media of The One into the presidency was supposed to signal the end of racialism in America. This was supposed to be the post-racial era if the media were to be believed. Well, Clinton retread and dwarf, Robert Reich apparently didn't get the memo. Here's what he said when asked about the $1trillion stimulus package, directed toward infrastructure projects.....[emphasis mine]

I am concerned, as I’m sure many of you are, that these jobs not simply go to high-skilled people who are already professionals or to white male construction workers. … I have nothing against white male construction workers. I’m just saying that there are a lot of other people who have needs as well. … Criteria can be set so that the money does go to others, the long term unemployed minorities, women, people who are not necessarily construction workers or high-skilled professionals.

So let me get this straight, construction jobs will go to people who're not construction workers or even skilled, simply on the basis of current employment status, gender, and skin color? Seriously? If you're driving with your family across a bridge over the Mississippi River, wouldn't you like to assume that the best available engineers and most highly skilled construction workers were used to design and build it, regardless of race? How many of you would cross a bridge knowing that only firms owned by a certain protected race were allowed to work on the project?

Where's the post-racialism Robert....you moron! By insisting on race-based set-asides, Reich demonstrates his, and by extension Obama's, belief that blacks can't compete with, and are less competent than, everybody else and must be given an advantage. If you voted for Obama because he was the post-racial candidate and you thought he would end the racial disharmony in America, then you are a retard. He's a liberal, first and formost. Liberalism supercedes all else and racial preferences are the cornerstone of liberalism.

Here's Robert Retch pointing to unemployed blacks in the crowd. They are the ones, regardless of level of competency, who'll be given fat government contracts to build our bridges.

Hat tip to Hotair.

Jimmy Carter...worst President.....and now worst home builder too

Looks like Jimmy Carter's idea of using unskilled, rank amateurs to build houses isn't exactly working out as planned....

RESIDENTS of a model housing estate bankrolled by Hollywood celebrities and hand-built by Jimmy Carter, the former US president, are complaining that it is falling apart.

Fairway Oaks was built on northern Florida wasteland by 10,000 volunteers, including Carter, in a record 17-day “blitz” organised by the charity Habitat for Humanity.

Eight years later it is better known for cockroaches, mildew and mysterious skin rashes.

Putting aside the obvious jokes about the parallels between Carter doing to the country as President, exactly what he did to the poor people he put in these disease traps, what did he expect? Rich liberals love to releive their wealth-guilt by pretending to help the poor. But it's all for show. Once the cameras are gone and the celebrities have gone back to their mansions, the poor are left to fend for themselves in the squalor and filth. Just like with all liberal policies, it's all just symbolism for media consumption. The actual results don't matter, it's the good intentions that count.

Here's one of Jimmy Carter's HFH homes shortly after completion.....inviting isn't it?

Friday funny

See, liberalism even hurts the kids.

My brilliant wife observed that it would have been even more poignant if the house was the Obama residence.

No bottles for you

As dumb as the whole bottled-water craze is(it's just tap water), eco-nuts want to ban the plastic bottles because of their carbon footprint.....

SACRAMENTO (AP) ― Attorney General Jerry Brown on Tuesday said he will sue to block a proposed water-bottling operation in Northern California unless its effects on global warming are evaluated.


These insane environmentalists are literally running the country now. Any human activity that doesn't fit into their demented world view is subject to regulation or even prohibition by them, all in the name of the preposterous notion of man-made global warming. But even that's a charade. Their grand goal is to stifle capitalism as much as possible with onerous regulations, ridiculous fees, and costly environmental impact statements. They gleefully envision the US down on the level of any other third-world country. Like Rush says, liberals' world view is, everybody equal in misery.

Out of the mouths of babes

My wife sent this story to me this morning. It perfectly illustrates why homelessness is sometimes self-induced and why handouts are unfair to those from whom the handout is taken.....

So, I was talking to this little girl Catherine, the daughter of some friends,
and she said she wanted to be President some day.

Both of her parents, liberal Democrats, were standing there with us - and I asked Catherine - 'If you were President what would be the first thing you would do?'

Catherine replied - 'I would give houses to all the homeless people.'

'Wow - what a worthy goal you have there, Catherine.'

I told her, 'You don't have to wait until you're President to do that, you can come over to my house and clean up all the dog poop in my back yard and I will pay you $5 dollars. Then we can go over to the grocery store where the homeless guy hangs out, and you can give him the $5 dollars to use for a new house.'

Catherine (who was about 4) thought that over for a second while her mom looked at me, and Catherine replied,
Why doesn't the homeless guy come over and clean up the dog poop and you can just pay him the $5 dollars?'

And I said, "Welcome to the Conservative side".

Liberals want to take from those who've earned, and give to those who haven't. Conservatives want everybody to earn.

A perfect job to help a homeless dude get back on his feet.

Friday funny

I found this pearl of wisdom over at RightWingNews. John Hawkins is answering a question from a reader about the liberal freak-out when Obama got criticized for suggesting that we talk to our enemies rather than fight them. His point is that liberals are appeasers through and through and left to their own devices, would destroy our country by letting it be destroyed...

......Put another way, if the entire population of the United States was replaced with 300 million liberals -- in 20 years, most of them would be dead and the country would be in ruins because they literally don't have as much common sense as a wild animal, that will at least fight if you back it up into a corner and try to kill it.

less common sense than wild animals........I swear, that's priceless!

Confucius say....

Why, you ask, do I illustrate this post with the Chinese characters for "beef" and "flesh" from left to right. Well, because Manderin Beef is the take-out dish I had for dinner Saturday night from the Mandarin House in my neighborhood. My wife had the Kung Pao Scallops....quite tasty!

I don't know about you but I enjoy eating my fortune cookie...with just a hint of lemon, they're delicious! Until now, I've only gotten one fortune that was in any way meaningful to me. It said..."Get help! I'm being held captive in a fortune cookie factory!"

Yeah, I went with that old joke. It's the only fortune cookie joke I know.

My fortune on Saturday said this, "Life is funny to those who think, and tragic to those who feel. Now that's not exactly a fortune but, it resonated with me since that's the fundamental difference between conservatives and liberals. Conservatives, being generally rational and logical, think their way through life, assigning appropriate levels of alarm to the things we encounter, and using our sense of humor to dismiss the rest. Liberals, being irrational, ungrounded, and humorless, feel their way along, constantly being led this way and that by their emotions, always alarmed by the next boogey-man, concluding that there's no hope, the world is going to hell in a handbasket, and all is lost.

Maybe Confucius said that, maybe not. But who ever, he was on to something.

The nanny state endangers us all....for the greater good

Here's how insane the global-warming hoax has gotten. Al Gore would have you seriously endanger your family in order to fight a menace that is purely a figment of his imagination...

If a bulb breaks, get children and pets out of the room. Ventilate the room. Never use a vacuum -- even on a rug -- to clean up a compact fluorescent light. Instead, while wearing rubber gloves, use stiff paper such as index cards and tape to pick up pieces, then wipe the area with a wet wipe or damp paper towel. If there are young children or pregnant woman in the house, consider cutting out the piece of carpet where the bulb broke. Use a glass jar with a screw top to contain the shards and clean-up debris.

“We found some very high levels (of mercury), even after we tried a number of clean-up techniques," said Mark Hyland, Maine director of the Bureau of Remediation and Waste Management. During several of the experiments, for example, he said mercury in the air was more than 100 times levels considered safe even after a floor was cleaned. He said such levels would quickly decline if the room were ventilated and people followed their tips.

If trace amounts of mercury are rumored to be in the fish-sticks at the school cafeteria, hysterical parents demand the school close and the lunch-room decontaminated, yet in the name of environmentalism, they force you to install expensive, dangerous mercury vapor filled bulbs in your home. You see the hypocricy don't you? With liberals, it's not about the environment or even the health of our children. It's about them controlling every facet of our lives in every possible way. They'll try to take your cigarettes, your whole milk, your pleasure devices, your guns, your full-flush toilets, your CO2 producing gas grill, the Salvia in your garden, your incandescent bulbs, your junk food, your SUVs, the competitive sports your kids play, your right to spank your kid, and even the right to set your home thermostat how ever you like. Liberals want to control your life because you live it differently than they want you to, and they'll use the phony fear of global warming and the power of the federal government to enforce their idiotic way of life upon the rest of us. If that means exposing your children to toxic levels of mercury, that's a small price to pay....that is as long as it's your kids who're exposed and not theirs.

Charity is whose responsibility?

Fred Thompson had this to say about charity the other day....

A woman asked him if he would “as a Christian, as a conservative” continue President Bush’s programs to combat global AIDS.

“Christ didn’t tell us to go to the government and pass a bill to get some of these social problems dealt with. He told us to do it,” Thompson said.

“The government has its role, but we need to keep firmly in mind the role of the government, and the role of us as individuals and as Christians on the other.”

He received a round of applause for his answer, and went on to expand on the role of government in fighting AIDS and other diseases.

“I’m not going to go around the state and the country with regards to a serious problem and say that I’m going to prioritize that,” he said.

He is exactly right and in saying that, distilled down one of the fundamental ideological differences between conservatives and liberals. That is, that conservatives recongize that it's the individual's responsibility, whether through churches, non-profits, foundations, etc, to attend to the charity-based needs of society through individual giving. Liberals, on the other hand, believe that it's the government's responsibility to take care of the needy by taking money from some Americans and using it to fund their giving to other Americans. Liberals love to point out how loving, and generous they are toward "the less fortunate among us". Well it's easy to be generous and loving with other peoples' money.

This difference explains the huge disparity between personal charity donations between conservatives and liberals. Liberals give way less charity than conservatives because they don't believe it's their responsibility to give, it's society's responsibility to let the government take money in the form of taxes and dole it out as it sees fit. Liberals love spending other peoples' money but they don't give any of their own.

If you haven't decided on a candidate who deserves your vote, you could do a whole lot worse than Fred Thompson. He gets it and is not afraid to point it out.

Turning the page in Cuba

This will be a welcome change in the world as long as Hugo Chavez continues to plunge his own country into the third world and leaves Cuba alone...

WASHINGTON - President Bush on Wednesday blistered Cuba's regime and challenged the international community to help the people of the communist island shed Fidel Castro's rule and become a free society.

"Now is the time to support the democratic movement growing on the island," Bush said in an address at the State Department.

"Now is the time to stand with the Cuban people as they stand up for their liberty. And now is the time for the world to put aside its differences and prepare for Cubans' transition to a future of freedom and progress and promise."

When and if Cuba throws open it's doors to Western development and commercialization, it will become THE Caribbean tropical destination of choice. I realize liberals are nostalgic for Fidel and Che the murdering revolutionaries, and they naively view the miserable poverty and squalor in which Cubans toil as "quaint reminders of a simpler time", but they are idiots. Bush is right to encourage capitalism and political freedom in Cuba. That country ceased to progress the day Castro seized power. That's why there are only cars from the 40's on the streets. Liberals like to stupidly brag that Cuba is a socialist utopia where everything is free but somebody has to pay for it. Who? Nobody, that's who. That's why Cuba remains stagnated in the 30's and 40's. The best thing that could happen to that country is Castro's death. The resultant weeping and wailing from liberals would be an amusement.

Relative Morality

Harvard University, bastion of conservative thought, produced this stupid "morality test". Basically you read eight scenarios and then decide how much of a fine the offending person should receive for their offense, that is if you think they did anything fine-worthy to begin with. I scored extremely low on this test. I guess the Einsteins at Harvard want me to think that I'm immoral or something.

It's really a test of your belief in either the concept of personal responsibility or the idea that when somebody gets hurt, it's always somebody elses fault...that there is no such thing as an accident. My morality score was at or below the 0.139th percentile. That means that according to Harvard, 99.861% of people who took the test are more morally conscious than me.
What it shows is that to kooky liberal academicians, morality is defined as the ability to empathize with a "victim", and the willingness to absolve that person of any personal responsibility for his/her own safety by assigning blame to somebody else.

Go here and take the short test. It takes only about 5 minutes and they tell you how you scored compared to everybody else. Of eight possibilities, I only fined 2 people for causing harm to somebody, and the fines were relatively low.

I think a bunch of slip-and-fall tort lawyers commissioned this study to guage people's willingness to extract damage awards from people who are not at fault, just because they feel sorry for the person who got hurt.

Shut up and brew!

If you are stupid enough, or rich enough, or both, to pay $7 for a cup of Joe at Starbucks, perhaps you've been treated to that company's aggressive attempt to indoctrinate you in the ways of radical liberalism...

An Ohio woman is steaming after reading an anti-God message published on the side of a Starbucks coffee cup.

The message that got Michelle Incanno's blood boiling reads:

"Why in moments of crisis do we ask God for strength and help? As cognitive beings, why would we ask something that may well be a figment of our imaginations for guidance? Why not search inside ourselves for the power to overcome? After all, we are strong enough to cause most of the catastrophes we need to endure."

As if cramming atheism down the throats of it's customers wasn't bad enough, they also aggressively advance the homosexual agenda...

"My only regret about being gay is that I repressed it for so long. I surrendered my youth to the people I feared when I could have been out there loving someone. Don't make that mistake yourself. Life's too damn short."

She looks annoyed that she paid $7 for a cup of atheism.

Hat tip World Net Daily.

Why can't they just be happy saturating the Earth with their stupid, over-priced product?
Sadly there are several Starbucks within a 3-wood of where I work. I will not be patronizing them anytime soon.

Of all the subversive, politically correct ideas that government schools cram down the throats of our children, this one takes the cake for stupidity...

DAY OF SILENCE, April 18, 2007: The Day of Silence is an annual event held to commemorate and protest anti-LGBT bullying, harassment and discrimination in schools. Students and teachers nationwide will observe the day in silence to echo the silence that LGBT and ally students face everyday. In it's 11th year, the Day of Silence is one of the largest student-led actions in the country.

Look, I'm not in favor of mistreating anybody. Mistreatment should be punished appropriately whether the subject of the mistreatment is gay or straight. This is another example of the public school system (which by definition is the federal government) indoctrinating your children with liberal ideology by forcing them to embrace the gay lifestyle. If you go to the Day of Silence website, you'll find buttons and T-shirts encouraging sympathy for the gay lifestyle...buttons and T-shirts that teachers should encourage students to wear to show solidarity with their gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered class-mates.

Since when is whining and moaning about the occasional mistreatment of gays in schools considered learning? Kids get mistreated all the time for any variety of reasons. It's part of the growing up process. If nutty, moonbat parents want to indoctrinate their own kids with this stream-of-consciousness drivel about the gay lifestyle, fine, but it shouldn't be forced on them by teachers in the government schools.

Moonbats...I swear!