Saturday, March 28, 2009


Presidents don't go on late night TV shows.
Presidents don't "reach out" to terrorists.
Presidents don't enter the oval office without a jacket and tie.
Presidents don't complain about being "couped up" in the White House, especially in their first few weeks in office.
Presidents don't flub the oath of office.
Presidents don't even consider making soldiers pay for their own medical care.
Presidents don't have time for "brackets".
Presidents don't plan to cut military spending in a time of war...or a time of peace.
Presidents don't plan to cut weapons development in a time of war...or a time of peace.
Presidents don't publicly blame previous administrations for their problems.
Presidents don't "market" their policies via TV and radio commercials.
Presidents don't encourage class envy or threaten the use of their office to get back privately contracted bonuses from private citizens, especially when they knew about them beforehand.
Presidents don't embarrass the nation by giving a gift of DVD's to British Priministers.
Presidents don't advocate socialism (nationalized - health care, banks, car manufacturers, insurance companies, etc. etc.).
Presidents don't promote hoaxes like man-made global warming.
Presidents don't grant constitutional rights to foreign terrorists.
Presidents don't take constitutional rights from babies in or out of the womb.
Presidents don't spend the tax payer's money as if it were in limitless supply.
Presidents don't spend more time in front of the camera than in front of their desk.
Presidents don't believe in "spreading the wealth" from the achievers to the slackers.
Presidents don't appoint tax cheats to any position.
Presidents don't giggle about America in recession.
Presidents don't need to have the media hold their hand and wipe their noses for them.
Presidents don't institute socialism, they destroy it.
Presidents don't distrust the free market.
Presidents don't assume the government is smarter than the American people.

Presidents don't do any of these things...until now.

Tuesday, March 17, 2009


Am I the only one who sees what's going on here? Insurance giant AIG takes tax payer money for the purpose of staying in business because the government deemed them "too big to fail". After being bailed out, they continue to grant multi-million dollar bonuses to their executives. Consequently, Congress and the new administration are "outraged" at the audacity of AIG to spend tax payer's money in such a way. According to the media, the people are even more outraged and are sharpening their pitch forks as we speak.

Now, let's look at the real story. Yes, AIG did take the money. Yes, they did pay their executives fat juicy bonuses. But unfortunately for the Obama camp, this happened because of provisions spelled out in Obama's own stimulus bill. Don't get me wrong, I always think it's a good idea to throw a piece of legislation together at the last minute, and pass it without sufficient study, especially when it will involve trillions of dollars and risk the future of our nation. But maybe someone should have read this particular legislation before they gave the green light to the public shaming of a private American corporation.

You see, the bonuses paid to AIG executives were the result of contracts signed before the bailout. That means that AIG was obligated under the law to pay them out. But it gets better. The provisions that allowed them to pay these bonuses which are spelled out in the stimulus package, were actually written by the same people who are faking "outrage" today. The usual suspects, Frank, Pelosi, Dodd, those Democrats.

If these people were only pretending to be mad at AIG, this really wouldn't be much of a story. Unfortunately, they aren't stopping there. Like lemmings, there are both Republicans and Democrats that have taken the bait of moral outrage and are offering ways to "get even". Some are suggesting that the bonus money be taxed at a rate as high as ninety percent. One New York Attorney General has demanded under deadline and subpoena the names of those who received the bonuses. A sitting President has publicly shamed and threatened private citizens with the full power of his office. Obama spoke of AIG not abiding by the principals of this nation (paraphrased). Really? I was not aware that breaking contracts was an American principal. I was also not aware that reaction on the basis of emotion by Congress and the office of the President was an American principal either.

We've gone beyond the subtle stoking of class warfare, and are now entering the world of George Orwell's "1984". The fact that the government is majority share holder of ANY private company is bad enough, not to mention unconstitutional, but when they threaten to use that power to make collective business decisions for that private company, then we're all in trouble.
Besides, wasn't the goal of the stimulus bill to stimulate the economy? Why should the government care which American citizen happens to spend the stimulus money, so long as it goes back into the economy somewhere? They're acting as if these bonus recipients are going to light the money on fire when they get it, as opposed to spending it on something like cars, boats or houses.

Years from now, after most (if not all) businesses are taken over by the government, we can all sit back and marvel at how we showed those evil rich people a thing or we're standing in line hoping they don't run out of our government issued food rations. Hope you like potatoes.

Tuesday, March 10, 2009


Not satisfied with simply peeking into Pandora's box, this week President Obama decided to go ahead and rip the lid off of it in yet another decision designed to show how sophisticated and compassionate he is compared to the evil President Bush. Yes, I'm talking about stem cell research. Part of the problem with this particular issue is the mass-lack of education of the people on the topic. So here is a very basic tutorial to bring you up to speed.

Stem cells are like the building blocks that our bodies are made of. As technology advances, it is hoped that these cells can be programmed to regenerate faulty organs or even entire nervous systems. It is believed that the cures for cancer and even AIDs will be found via stem cell research. For the record, I believe this myself.

So, what's the problem? Well, there's a little problem with how you go about getting these stem cells. Stem cells can be found in more than one place. They can be found in living adult bodies by taking samples of skin tissue or even bone marrow, without harm to the donor of course. These are known as "adult stem cells". They can also be found in the blood found in the discarded umbilical cords of newborn babies, also without harm to the donor. These are known as "cord blood stem cells". Sounds pretty cool so far...right? Now for the controversial part.
Another place these cells can be found are in human embryos. These cells are called "embryonic stem cells". For those of you who slept through biology class, an embryo is a person in his/her earliest stages of life. Yes, I said "person". An embryo is not going to grow to become a tree, a toaster, or an I-pod. It's going to grow to become a person, assuming there are no complications in development.
At this point, the un-informed (liberals) might assume the stem cell controversy is just another case of "Bible thumpers" trying to define when life actually starts. Though that is an issue, it's not the least not for me. My issue is what I call "people farming".

A few years ago, there was a moderately successful movie that starred Ewen McGregor and Scarlett Johansson called "The Island". The premise was that there was a corporation who's clients would supply them with DNA in order for them to grow, stock and "maintain" identical twins for later use as organ donors, according to the need of that client. These "donors" are kept alive in a facility and completely unaware of their purpose thanks to an elaborate system of lies and facades controlled by the corporation. As you can imagine, the corporation falls apart when the truth is discovered after the escape of Ewen and Scarlett's characters.
It was early into this movie when I realized that Hollywood had inadvertently provided us with a brilliant case against the use of embryonic stem cells. Though the "big screen" version of the consequences of treating people as parts bins may be a tad exaggerated, it does vividly force you to consider the ethics of such a thing.

I would like to think that there are not people out there who would look at embryonic stem cell research as a way to make a fast buck...but I know better. I would like to think that there will be no pharmaceutical companies that will offer money for embryos, or women willing to accept such offers...but I know better.

Now that we have decided that embryos are little more than "raw material" to be used at our disposal, I have to wonder what the next step will be. Where will the line be moved to next? Fetuses? Infants? Toddlers? Teens? At what next point do we decide that a person is too old to be used as a guinea pig under the false premise of "the greater good" or "science"? Who will get the honor of making that decision?

Also, keep in mind that it is only the media and leftist politicians who imply that conservatives are against all forms of stem cell research. Truth be told, we are for stem cell research, just not the type that requires the death of another person.

Thursday, March 5, 2009


In recent weeks, I have watched in awe as the bulk of the mainstream media has tried to destroy the credibility of conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh. For what? Daring to say that he hopes President Obama fails. From Obama's Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel lying about Limbaugh's comments on the media circuit, to Obama himself suggesting to Congress that they stop listening to him, this is my first recollection of a Presidential administration publicly trying to destroy the career of a private citizen. I guess that since President Obama has solved the economic crises, terrorist threat, Middle East crises, crime, illegal immigration, unemployment, AIDs, and other various problems facing us today, he finds himself with an abundance of time to devote to picking on those who see things differently than him.

So, what about Rush's comment? He said he wants Obama to fail. What's so controversial about that? I want him to fail too. Not only do I want him to fail, but I want him to fail so miserably and mired in such embarrassment that no other socialist will ever dare to try such an agenda for the rest of time. I want his name to be synonymous with failure and defeat. Nothing personal though.
To understand why anyone would want to see an American President fail, you need to understand what that particular President hopes to accomplish. It's not that I want him to fail as a person, husband or father. I want his agenda to fail. Most importantly, BEFORE it has a chance to have it's inevitable effect on our nation.
Think about it. Do you want socialized health care to be instituted here? Of course not. Do you want "cap and trade" to be instituted here? Of course not. Do you want the military's budget to be cut? Of course not. Do you want your second amendment rights taken away? Of coarse not? Do you want America to become part of some global union? Of course not? Do you want higher taxes or their resulting price increases? Of course not. Do you want terrorists to think their tactics will gain them legitimacy? Of course not. Do you want our economy to fail due to policies that make no fiscal sense? Of course not. Do you want to be unemployed? Of course not. Do you want to be left defenseless against enemy missile technology? Of course not. Do you want to see "card check" forced onto the business community? Of course not. Do you want to see unlimited abortions without parental consent? Of course not. Do you want to see amnesty for illegal aliens? Of course not. Do you want to see the incentive for people to pay their mortgage disappear? Of course not. Do you want to be forced to pay other people's mortgages? Of course not.

You know, come to think of it, I can't think of one thing that I want the Obama administration to succeed at.

Tuesday, March 3, 2009


In the interest of full disclosure, I must tell you that I am no Wall Street genius. I'm still the lovable truck driver/hack writer that I've always been. That being said, the market is not nearly as complicated as people make it out to be. Playing the market can be very tricky, but watching and reading it is not that complex.
Think of the Dow, S&P, and NASDAQ as the voice of our economy in general. Other indicators such as gross domestic product (GDP) and the unemployment rate are also a good way to tell where the economy stands, but they lack the immediacy of the market. Unlike the market, the GDP and unemployment rates are not updated daily-let alone hourly, making them a "lagging indicator" and subject to many more factors over a longer period of time.
If you want to know how your economy is feeling that particular day and even that particular minute, the market is your best "bet" (no pun intended).

So, what is the market telling us today? Well, let's just say that if markets could talk, ours would be begging for mercy. The market is not happy...because it's terrified. The market is shaking in it's boots because it sees what's coming. It sees the seizure of capital by government. It sees the nationalization of industry. It sees the coming of universal (socialist) health care. It sees bailouts. It sees banks not being able to recoup their investments when they are no longer allowed to foreclose on defaulted loans. It sees people knowing they can get away with not paying their mortgages. It sees higher taxes for those who provide jobs, so consequently it sees that cost being passed onto the consumers...ALL the consumers. It sees that resulting in more layoffs, higher prices and business closings. It sees fewer "big ticket" items being purchased. It sees how the new leadership villainizes successful achievers, and profit in general. It sees expansion of welfare diminishing the incentive to loin the workforce. It sees trillions of dollars being thrown down a bottomless government pit with no "hope" of stimulating growth, or prosperity for anyone other than government entities. It sees the socialist agenda gushing from the White House. It sees the intervention of government into every facet of the private sector through excessive regulation and bailouts. But most of all, it sees no reason to be optimistic.

As the new administration goes out of it's way to make this the most business repellent country on the face of the earth, there are still those who are holding onto the whole "hope/change" mantra. Unfortunately for them, they too are going to enjoy the consequences of fiscal naivety. For now though, they are quite comfortable with the child-like notion that President Bush had single-handedly screwed up the economy so bad that the market is incapable of moving on, or that his predecessor is is incapable of fixing it without destroying it first. They're totally cool with Obama doing ten times as much of the same things that Bush did to create this "crises" in the first place, namely spending the tax payer's money. They have no problem dismissing the fact that Obama has ascended to the Presidency at almost the exact same rate as the fall of our economy.

You see, liberals somehow believe that the business community became successful by being stupid, or by not understanding how things work in the real world. They blindly follow a man who's never run a lemonade stand, and brush off the concerns of people who've built empires as "greed" or whining. Rooted in simple jealousy and bitterness, Obamoids scorn the businessman and support those who would make it harder - if not impossible for him to operate his business, then they turn around and complain when jobs become scarce. Insanity.

So for those of you who were shocked to see the DOW go into the six thousands yesterday, all I can say is "strap ain't seen nothin' yet. My prediction is: 5000's by the end of March. Barring any major attitude adjustments at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue of course.