Some Democrats Discover the Free Market!

In his 6/11/2008 New York Post article, entitled, "Do As Dems Say, Not as They Dine", Jonah Goldberg exposes the Democrats for the socialists they truly are, and shows us that socialist ideas are detrimental to society by focusing on the Senate cafeteria.

According to the article, the Senate cafeteria served crappy food not fit for a prisoner. "As befits a government-run commissary, the Senate cafeteria has a decidedly Soviet attitude toward variety. It has averaged only two new menu items a year over the last decade. The food is so bad, every lunch hour Senate staffers rush to the House side of the Capitol like starving New Yorkers of the future storming the last Soylent Green vendor."

This is a prime example of government running something as it believes it should be run, as opposed to what the public truly needs and demands.

"According to auditors, the chain of restaurants run by the Senate food service, including the snooty Senate Dining Room, has almost never been in the black. It's lost more than $18 million since 1993 and dropped about $2 million this year alone."

Well, there is a bit of shock within this article that might surprise many socialist-minded people out there. The Democrats plan on fixing this problem by privatizing it. No need to put on your glasses. You read correctly. Some Democrats have seen the free market in action and are looking to give it a try.

"The House of Representatives made the switch in the 1980s, and its food service is now better. And profitable. $1.2 million in commissions since 2003. The Senate has taken 20 years to follow suit."

Jonah Goldberg then said it best when he continued, "This was a painful decision for many Democrats who believe that privatization can't be justified simply because it delivers better service and higher quality for less money. 'What about the workers?' they cried. Apparently, some Democrats feel that the top priority in the restaurant business is to generate paychecks for people who are bad at their jobs."

I want to thank Jonah Goldberg for saying it so plainly.

Socialism, in all its variant forms, must be completely eradicated from government in order to make America great again. Let the free market reign everywhere!

Barack Obama -- Man in Tights.

Barack Obama wants to play the role of Socialist Robin hood, by stealing money from the rich and giving it to the poor. He wants to levy new taxes on oil companies for making too much money. He wants to raise income taxes on those earning more than $250,000. He wants to raise the capital-gains and dividends taxes on the wealthiest Americans. He also wants to raise corporate taxes. Why does Obama want tax hikes on job-creating businesses? Because he has no understanding of economics.

Has anyone noticed that Obama wants to involve himself in a massive wealth redistribution scheme? Redistribution of wealth is a Socialist idea. In the Socialist mind, the rich are evil and greedy, and because so much wealth is in their possession, it cannot be in the possession of the poor. Therefore, a brave and heroic person must step forward and become the voice of the poor and oppressed, and must shout to the rich bullies, "Stop being so greedy! Share your wealth! Give it away, or I it shall be taken from you!"

Very few people seem to understand that Robin Hood was not a hero. He was a thief, a robber, a crook. His main characteristic was not an overwhelming sense of altruism, but an overwhelming sense of vanity. For had he truly been altruistic, he would have given to the poor all that he owned. Yet, Robin Hood did no such thing; he gave to the poor all that other people owned. There is nothing heroic or admirable about that. He was a criminal in really gay clothing.

So what does this have to do with Obama? Obama is a Democrat, and Democrats have a socialist mindset. They believe in the fairy tale called Marxism. They believe in the mythology of Socialism. They believe that the rich are evil, and only good for giving money to the Democratic Party. No one should have more than anyone else, for that would be unfair. Of course, the Democrats are just like Robin Hood; they are more than willing to hand out other people's money.

So what will the Democrats do with all the money they will steal from the People through taxation? They intend to "help the People" by giving it back to them--in the form of social programs that encourage laziness, discourage entrepreneurship and promote dependence on the State for all necessities (Nanny State economics). The Democrats want to punish people for being successful, for working hard, for being entrepreneurial, and for believing in free market ideas and individualism that discourage dependence on the Nanny State.

The Democrats have no real knowledge of economics. Believing in Marxism, Socialism, Communism, and Keynesian economics makes one economically stupid.

So what will be the result of an Obama presidency? By taxing job-creating businesses, many businesses will stay alive by shedding their dead weight--unskilled workers and non-productive workers who are already being paid more than they are worth because of the socialist minimum wage law. Either businesses will shut down due to unnecessary expenditures forced upon them by government--resulting in lost jobs and unemployment, or these businesses will fire people just to stay afloat--resulting in lost jobs and unemployment, or they will outsource their job openings overseas, where a wage far below the American minimum-by-law is higher than what a foreigner would make in his own country. This, of course, would result in lost jobs and unemployment. Do you see a pattern here?

Either way, Obama will "help" average working Americans by getting them fired. Way to go, Mr. O! And don't think Hillary would have done anything different. She's also a Democrat who harbors the same socialist ideology.

But don't they know any better, one may ask? Not really. Aren't Americans aware of all this? Unfortunately, most Americans are economically stupid as well, and those who know better can't seem to get into power (e.g. Ron Paul). So, why do Democrats insist on sticking to their failed ideology? Easy, because their ideology requires a government with more power, and they like power. But won't it ruin the economy, and make it worse than it already is?

To twist a famous phrase: It's a Democrat thing. You wouldn't understand.

So long, Hillary!

So, Hillary's gone. Now, to quote a famous song:

Na na na na,
na na na na,
hey hey hey,
Goodbye.

And good riddance (not from the above song).

So, was Hillary the lesser of three evils? I am not certain of that. What I am certain of is that three evils were whittled down to two evils.

We have one neo-con who will carry on the task of financing the building and expansion of the American empire through continued expenditure and little taxation.

We have one Leftist who will carry on the task of financing the building and expansion of the American empire through continued expenditure and the raising of taxes.

At this point taxation is a moot point. Our economic woes will be perpetuated and worsened by the continuance of excessive expenditures, and the debasing of the dollar and its consequential inflation of the money supply and prices. The current trend indicates that our dollar will certainly crash.

Our paper money is backed by absolutely nothing of value. It is simply a rag soaked in dye. You could wipe your ass with it, but it would only stain your anus while it cuts it up, thereby lacking any value as toilet paper either.

Our coinage is made of worthless metal. Our 5 cent nickel is not made of real nickel but of worthless tin. Our penny is worth more as a piece of copper than as a noumisma.

Will any of the remaining three evils change this? Will any of them return America to a gold standard, and give our money some real intrinsic worth? If truth be told, we'd have a better chance of inviting Martians to perform a Cabaret for the Pope.

Only Ron Paul offered America any real hope of avoiding its forthcoming demise, and returning this country to its original glory. Unfortunately, Big Brother's Ministry of Propaganda made sure Americans got the wrong idea about the good Doctor and his solid philosophy. The current political power structure has made sure its existence is perpetuated through the continuation of the status quo.

The Left and the Right are two cheeks of the same farting ass. The Left's shit is the Right's shit, because it's all the same shit.

The Reasons They Hate Us?

In a speech made by President George W. Bush on June 18, 2002, on Homeownership Department of Housing and Urban Development, Washington, D.C., he gave his personal view of the reasons behind terrorism. Below is a quote from that speech, which he delivered from 10:20 AM EDT until 10:49 AM EDT:

"Let me first talk about how to make sure America is secure from a group of killers, people who hate -- you know what they hate? They hate the idea that somebody can go buy a home. They hate freedom; that's what they hate. They hate the fact that we worship freely. They don't like the thought of Christian, Jew and Muslim living side by side in peace. They don't like that at all. And therefore, they -- since they resent our freedoms, they feel like they should take out their resentment by destroying innocent lives. And this country will do everything we can possibly do to protect America. (Applause.)"

So, Islamic terrorists hate America because Americans can purchase a house. Can you imagine what went through the minds of the 19 hijackers on September 11, 2001?

"It is time to fly airplanes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. We'll teach those Americans to buy houses!"

So, Islamic terrorists hate freedom. What might those same hijackers have thought before boarding those planes?

"We Muslims live a strict, regimented life, according to the laws of the Quran. How dare those American Christians follow the laws of the Bible instead of the Quran! What were they thinking? Now, they shall pay the price!"

So, Islamic terrorists prefer that Muslims, Jews and Christians hate each other, rather than live together in peace and harmony. What might the hijackers have been contemplating?

"What insanity is this? Christians, Jews and Muslims respecting each other like neighbors? This is disgusting! How dare they! Don't they realize how important it is to hate each other and to fight and oppress each other on a daily basis? Well, we'll fix their little psychosis!"

So, Islamic terrorists hate America because "we worship freely." They hate Americans because Americans are free to be Muslims as well as Christians, Jews, Sikhs, Hindus, etc? What might've been on the minds of the terrorists?

"Don't these infidels realize that their religion must be forced upon them? Who are they to freely accept what they believe, and to accept others who don't believe as they do? Those insane Americans! We will kill them all!"

So the President says that Islamic terrorists want to destroy Americans because they are tolerant of other people's religions and because they buy homes. Does the President truly believe this silliness? And does he really expect intelligent Americans to buy into this one-trick pony show?

For the President to believe this malarkey, he would need to be ignorant of American history, be ignorant of intelligence reports, be ignorant of the history of the Central Intelligence Agency, and to be a regular consumer of LSD.

For the President to not truly believe this junk, he would need to be fully aware of the real reasons for terrorism, and to be consciously blowing this smokescreen over the eyes of the American People to cover up worldwide American sponsored terrorism in the form of our foreign policy. Shouldn't the term "Regime Change" be a part of America's lexicon and mainstream thought? Someone in power obviously prefers it not.

Here's another quote from a point near the end of his speech:

"See, I tell people -- and I believe this -- that out of the evil done to America will come some incredible good. (Applause.) You know, they thought they were attacking a country so weak and so feeble that we might file a lawsuit or two, and that's all we'd do. (Laughter.) That's what they thought. We're showing them the different face of America. We're showing them that we're plenty tough. When it comes to taking somebody trying to take away our freedoms, we're tough, and we're going to remain tough and steadfast. (Applause.)"

So, the Islamic terrorists thought they were attacking a weak and feeble country. Is this what the Islamic world thinks of the United States of America--the most powerful military force in the history of the human race? Let's once again imagine the thoughts of the hijackers.

"Can we really pull this off? Can we really take on America and punch her lights out for good? Let me rationalize this. America is known as a financial power. They give billions of dollars in monetary aid to our hated enemy, Israel, annually, which those Jew-dogs use to buy tanks and weapons to attack our people with and to steal our land! America is known as a military power, an empire. They have a million soldiers, a large air force of fighter jets and bombers, a navy full of destroyers and floating cities called aircraft carriers, a quadrillion bullets, a million bombs, spy satellites, the most highly advanced technology and an arsenal of nuclear weapons that could destroy the planet a hundred times over. Let's see what we have. We have a few hundred martyrs here and a few hundred martyrs there, we have kitchen knives, belt bombs, slingshots, slings, a thousand or so rocks and stones from the rubble of our homes...wow! This battle is so lopsided, it's not even fair! What was I thinking? We're loaded and ready to rumble! Why do I worry my head so much! This is going to be a punishment America will never forget! America? Hmph! Bunch of weak and feeble infidels! We'll show them a thing or two!"

Who was the President referring to when he mentioned "somebody trying to take away our freedoms"? Has any terrorist ever managed to take away our American freedoms? Never. Our freedoms exist because of our Constitution. The only entity who could take away our freedoms is the one who would destroy our Constitution. And since no outside force on earth could conquer America and replace our Constitution with Sharia, the only entity who could destroy our Constitution is our own government. Has anyone noticed the ever-increasing infringements upon our liberties since Tuesday, September 11, 2001?

But why would our own government destroy our Constitution? It's not a complicated idea. The freedoms guaranteed by this document can only exist when government is restrained from infringing upon them. The more restraint that is placed upon government, the less power government has. Government craves power the way a drug addict craves heroin. The more heroin one uses, the more heroin one needs. The more heroin one needs, the more heroin one uses. Rinse, lather and repeat the vicious cycle. At some point the heroin addict, once a very nice and respectable member of the community, is robbing liquor stores and beating his own mother to death for $5. In order for government to gain more power, it needs to have less restraint, and the less restraint it has, the more it will infringe upon our freedoms. So the key to government power--also known as totalitarianism--is the destruction of our Constitution.

But isn't this--un-American? Yes. Yes it is.

Rest In Peace Rebeckha Whitefield.

She lost control of her Jeep Liberty on a rain slicked road and hit a tree. She was thrown from the vehicle. A witness said she ran outside after she heard a crash outside her home, and saw two bodies strewn on the street. The witness said she wants to erase the memory of this because it is too disturbing. The other passenger in the vehicle, a 16 year old male friend of Rebeckha's is in the hospital with severe head trauma. The poor girl never lived her life. She planned on riding horses again after she began taking a criminal law class, but all her plans will go unfulfilled. She will never go to her junior prom. A sweet girl who always smiled will never smile again. I can't reconcile the memory of her at work with the idea of her being killed and never coming back to work. I hate death. I hate it.

Rebeckha, you were always sweetly nice, and a pleasure to work with. I will miss your beautiful big blue eyes and the warm smile that always melted my frazzled face on those hectic freaky Fridays. I will miss seeing you at the phone and the computer. I wish I had known you longer. Rest in peace, Rebeckha. May God keep you in His loving embrace forever.

A Red Sox Fan Gets What He Deserves!

A Tuesday, May 13, 2008 article in the Boston Herald, by Hillary Chabot entitled, "Yanks Fan Suckers Sox Guy For $25G" explains how a Boston Red Sox fan named David Sanborn (no relation to the great Saxophone player by the same name) started a fight with a Yankees fan at a California bar, and got punched in the mouth in self defense.

Ms. Chabot seemed incredulous because the Yankees fan, Mario Melendez, sued Sox fan David Sanborn for damages incurred when his punch knocked a tooth out of his assailant's mouth and it got lodged in his hand. Oh, how dare he fight back! The nerve of that damned Yankee! Mr. Melendez is a musician and his hands are his bread and butter. What else should he have done, given the fact that Mr. Sanborn assaulted him and picked him up in the air like a rag doll? Should he have hung suspended in the air, passively like a possum, waiting for the 6'1" brute to body slam him to the floor? Any one in his right mind would have fought back the same way.

So what drove the Red Sox fan to such an extreme display of violence? "No one wants to hear a Yankees fan cheering," Sanborn said. Yes, you read it correctly. This was his reason. Sanborn was watching the Sox game on one television while Melendez was watching the Yanks game on another. When Jason Giambi scored a home run for the Yanks, Mr. Melendez cheered for his team, and this aggravated Mr. Sanborn, who then shouted at Melendez, "Sit your fat ass down, Jeter." The confrontation escalated and Sanborn attacked Melendez. Sanborn didn't like it that a Yankees fan had the nerve to cheer his own team!

He grew up hating the Yankees. No surprise here. "I'll always hate them. I hate them to this day and I'll probably hate them when I'm 6 feet under."

And Hillary Chabot ignores this fact, as if hate is a normal thing that every human being should feel towards the winningest team in sports history. She concludes her article by mentioning that "a Yankees fan was charged with running down and killing a Red Sox fan with a car outside a New Hampshire bar last week.," as if David Sanborn's violent behavior was justifiable vengeance for an unrelated killing. This shows that Hillary Chabot is as stupid as the Red Sox fan she defends in her piece of worthless journalism.

Yet, Ms. Chabot's incredulity matches that of the attacker, Mr. Sanborn, who called Mr. Melendez a "typical Yankees fan," and went on to say that "it just goes to show what a Yankees fan is like. They're greedy." David Sanborn was generalizing, saying that all Yankees fans are alike, and that they are all greedy. In other words, just because the New York Yankees baseball organization has more money than the Boston Red Sox baseball organization, that makes Yankees fans greedy. How one relates to the other is a mystery. Yet, Ms. Chabot seems to think it's okay for a Red Sox fan to verbally abuse and physically assault Yankees fans. Not only did she not condemn the Red Sox fan for his assault, battery and violent brutality, she called Mr. Melendez' lawsuit "an even lower blow than when A-Rod swatted the ball out of Bronson Arroyo's glove." She went on to describe Mr. Melendez' justified lawsuit as "a new bid to see just how low the Evil Empire can go."

Hillary Chabot needs to reassess her priorities and to start behaving like a journalist. What David Sanborn did was wrong, uncalled for and downright stupid. What Mario Melendez did was right. A true journalist will call a spade a spade. The Red Sox fan was verbally and physically abusive, violent and dangerous. The Yankees fan was innocent, minding his own business and had every right to retaliate with force to defend himself from this crazed, hate-spewing fanatic, and to sue him on top of that. As far as I see it, if criminal charges have not been brought on to the Red Sox fan, that too should be demanded. Put the Red Sox fan in jail for a month, just to teach him a lesson in respect and minding his own damned business.

The Red Sox fan got what he deserved. This should be a loud message to Red Sox Nation that Yankees fans will not stand for such violence against them. Of course, they won't hear it from Hillary Chabot. And, of course, no one could expect anything better from an ink-stained rag like the Boston Herald.

Some Things That Annoy Me

Some things that annoy me include the following:

1. Oncoming traffic that encroaches in my lane when we drive around a curve in the road. If you have to encroach into the opposite lane when rounding a curve, you are driving too fast! Slow down before you kill me! Your entire car should be centered in your own lane. You shouldn't be straddling the dividing line, neither should your wheels be in my lane or even touching the dividing line!

2. Drivers that switch into my lane without looking first to see if they can do so safely. Please, first signal that you are about to switch into the next lane, then look to see that there are no cars already in the spot where you want to turn into. And don't yell at me or shake your fist at me because you suddenly noticed me there and got scared. I honk to make you aware that I am right next to you, so that you won't side swipe me, not merely to scare you to death for shits and giggles.

3. Elderly drivers who drive much slower than the posted speed limit. How do you magically find me on those days when I am running late and in a hurry to get to work, and manage to turn onto my road just ahead of me, so you can drive 30 m.p.h. in a 45 m.p.h. zone?

4. Those drivers in the left left-turn-only lane, whom I pass after the light turns green while I am in the right left-turn-only lane, and whom I beat to the point where the two lanes merge into one, and who become irritated with me for doing so, and speed up until they are side by side with me in the same lane. I was here first, so get behind me before you kill yourself and the oncoming car ahead of you! There is no rule of the road that states that the driver in the left left-turn-only lane has the right of way over the driver in the right left-turn-only lane. If you're too slow getting out of the gate, then you'll have to settle for being second. Live with it!

5. Drivers who drive 30 m.p.h. in a 40 m.p.h zone and who refuse to drive any faster, whom I pass even though the lane line is solid, who then get angry, speed up until they catch up to me and are tailgating me, and turn on their high beams and honk incessantly out of rage. If you drove faster to begin with, I wouldn't have needed to pass you. Couldn't you have driven this fast earlier?

6. Cops who give me dirty looks for having a radar detector attached to the inside of my windshield. A radar detector is nothing more than a fancy radio receiver, and radio waves are still free. It is legal to possess and use a radar detector in 48 states, including NY and MA, so save your dirty looks for the murderers, robbers, rapists, and those meticulously unreliable Dunkin Donuts employees who don't know how to make a cup of coffee to go with your steady policeman's diet of donuts and crullers. What exactly pisses you off about radar detectors? Those speeders who have them slow down when you're scanning nearby, thereby becoming safer drivers. What's more important to you, preventing people from speeding, or catching them in the act so that you could fill your ticket and citation quota for the month?

7. School buses. When you know that driving at the posted speed limit will get you to work just in the nick of time, and you end up behind a school bus between 8 AM and 9 AM, you might as well just call your boss and let him know you're definitely coming in late.

8. Women drivers with cell phones growing out of their ear. Symptoms include distraction, loss of focus, poor driving judgment and car accidents. There is treatment for this problem. It's a little two-part remedy called "Save-the-Gossip-For-Later," which comes in capsule form, and which should be taken with a dose of "Shut the fuck up and drive."