Passage Of The Day.....

I guess that I am not the only one that thinks that the Democrats are a party of whiners. The passage below accurately reflects what I think that the Democrats have become. This is no longer the Democratic party of years past but one where people ask 'What's my handout today? Free healthcare? What new program are you going to offer and make sure that it is the faceless 'rich' and not I, that has to pay for it. Gimme, gimmee,gimee me something since I was lucky enough to born American." Its also sounds kind of European to me too....

The Democrats have titled their party platform, "Renewing America's Promise."

A more honest and accurate title would be, "We'll Give You More."

The soul of the Democratic philosophy is summed up in this passage from the platform: "For decades, Americans have been told to act for ourselves, by ourselves, on our own. Democrats reject this recipe for division and failure."

Note the disdain for the ethos of self-responsibility. Democrats do not merely regard it as insufficient. Instead they regard the idea that people should provide for themselves as divisive.

This philosophy is not the nation that I know. And all Democrats deserve our scorn.

Africa....

Africa is place that all good liberals want their taxpayers to save but would never go there themselves. I lived there for a year-and-half and came to the conclusion that Africa is hopeless and will not amount to very much during my lifetime. Read this piece where the writer reaches the same conclusion knowing pull well that what he is writing is not politically correct.

Where The Heck Is The Recession?

Although I have noticed that liberals and Democrats are a morose bunch, always seem to see how bad things are, all the deep problems in the world and love to blame ourselves or Republicans, I had a epiphany of sorts on my last trip back to the US; Democrats are whiners and live for moaning, complaining and are looking under every rock and in every utterance for some form of victimization.

And of course, I heard a constant droning on-and-on about the horrible economy and the suffering masses and all of the liberal talking points trying to justify socialization of any risk that faces a human today. This is not my nation.

My nation is this:

I put my faith in people not in the crude machinations of blundering governments

-Milton J. Madison, August 2008

So, with unemployment at a staggering 5.7% (huh?) and starving people everywhere wandering around the streets of the US looking for scraps of food, I am curious why is it that the revision of GDP for the second quarter showed growth of 3.3% up from the initial Commerce Department estimate of 1.9%. Where is the recession for all of these liberal Democrats? I am sure that they see the recession, though, maybe I can say that they are living in their own depression (ha ha ha).

Now for a little Adam Smith lesson. Despite the growth, much of it came from stronger exports. Exports, just of themselves, add nothing to the wealth of a nation. The goods actually leave the country and the utility provided from these goods is enjoyed by others. Yes, the growth is a balancing of the imports that we enjoy (since imports are not include in GDP) and that we used to enjoy without having to work for them. Kind of a gift from the rest of the world to Americans. I guess that they really do love us!

But in the extreme and to illustrate as an indulgence of thought, imagine a nation that exports 100% of what they produce. They wouldn't last long since they would starve since all the food is exported to other countries and the people would live in the elements without clothes or homes. A nation with only money and no goods is a nation that has no wealth. Lots of money but no pockets to put them in and no goods to spend it on. Imagine the converse nation that imports 100% of what they need. They would enjoy the utility of these imported goods without the need to work for them. Citizens would be able to enjoy 100% of their time as leisure and have everything that they need. So what nation would do this transaction where they ship goods to a country without receiving something in return? How about China?

I Look Foirward To Tomorrow Night....

In a place called Denver, the Obamessiah will be accepting his accession to be the candidate from the strange cult called the Democrats. He will accept his coronation in a temple like structure, looking like a place of idol worship, where one can come to worship the new reverent idol, The One resides within this godly home Barakopolis...



Of course, it won't be as great as the places that gods in ancient Greece used to reside...



He is known to dress in the ancient religious garb of the gods...



Of course many of the people that come to worship the one will be dressed in traditional and appropriate garb...




The One seems actually to be channelling the mystical magical days of Earth, Wind and Fire!

If Obama Loses, Then It Shows That America Is Racist...

So, if the Obamessiah does not close the deal with the American public and wins the election for President of the United States, then Caucasian citizens are the ones to blame for the failure of the Democratic candidate....

Things are supposed to be looking rosy for Democrats this November. But in case Barack Obama loses the Presidency, an excuse is all ready to go: America's too racist to elect a black man. Not even, in his Vice Presidential pick Joe Biden's inimitable description, one so "articulate and bright and clean."

Of course, the threats by the liberal left threatening white Americans that if they don't vote for Barack Obama, that the reason that they aren't is because they cannot or won't vote for a black man.....

"Call me crazy, but isn't it possible, just possible, that Obama's lead is being inhibited by the fact that he is, you know, black?" wrote John Heilemann in New York magazine earlier this month. "What makes Obama's task of scoring white votes at Kerry-Gore levels so formidable is, to put it bluntly, racial prejudice."

So there you have it, the shots are being fired across the bow of all white Americans and their slaveships that plied the waters between Africa and Southern ports of the USA 200 hundred years ago. You white Americans are racists and HAVE to vote for the 'black' candidate to discharge the debt owed to all black Americans.

So what about other factors? Of course, according to Liberals, that would never dream of voting for a non-Democrat and never vote for a Republican over a Democrat, they support the liberal positions of the Demcoratic candidate. Also, many of these Liberals are also infected by BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome and not Baby Duck Syndrome) and their dislike of GWB is so complete, that they see the world through the narrow deranged glasses of Bush hate. That is ok too, since they are free to hate whomever they like. So many Liberals have their reasons to support one candiate over the other; the candidates positions are closer to their own thoughts how a country should be managed. So be it. Its their decision and they can do what they like.

So what does Obama stand for as a reason to support the one candidate over another such as McCain? The candidates political positions may be closer to ones own, is a reasonable way to choose a candidate. So, the racism argument has nothing to do about politics or voting for a candidate that represents or reflects your vision of the nation, its racism that drives all of us white people to vote the way we do. Its news to me.

I, for one, could never vote for a Democrat. I do not believe or support several major planks in the Democrats platform:

1. I do not support or think that it is wise to send more money to Washington in the form of taxes. I do not think that they do very well with more than $2 trillion that they now get every year, so I do not think it is wise to give these people even more.
2. I do not believe in socialized medicine on a national level. What we will find is that medicine with be dumbed down to its lowest common denominator and we will get lower services for a lot more money. Some people will get more service than what they pay for and some will get less. The winners and losers will be determined by politicians and how THEY can get the most mileage and benefit out of it. I just do not think that a national government can effectively deliver services such as this effectively and efficiently.
3. I am not a supporter of unfettered access to abortion. I do not buy the 'its my body and my decision' argument that is being foisted upon us from liberals sucking up to women. But I am also a realist and people will make mistakes, but its not a federal issue and its definitely not an issue with an easy answer. But people should also be responsible for their actions and abortion should not be an easily accessible arrow in the arsenal of birth control.
4. I am definitely not a supporter of 'saving social security.' Its a train wreck waiting to happen. An indulgence of an earlier age, it was shameless how Democrats and the AARP foiled every attempt to give people options during the Bush Administration. Democrats want to control your economic life, and social security and Medicare is just 2 very big areas where Democrats think that they are doing things for you. Please don't do me any favors. Besides, by offering this gigantic Ponzi Scheme, people are less likely to structure their lives to save since they think that when they need it, these programs will available. Good luck.

So these are the reasons that I do not vote for Democrats, will not vote for Barack Obama and will vote for John McCain. I think that John McCain is closer to my own opinions on how the nation should be run.

Interesting Olympic Stat....

The Olympic medal totals would have looked very different if the 15 or so countries that made up the former Soviet Union were still competing as one nation. As you can see from the above, they would have led the second place USA by an impressive margin, by more than 50%!!!!

Driving Like A Hong Konger?

Here.

Snobama....

Quote Of The Day.....

As to the question when human life begins, the answer to which is above Mr. Obama's pay grade, let's go on a little tear. You know why they call it birth control? Because it's meant to stop a birth from happening nine months later. We know when life begins. Everyone who ever bought a pack of condoms knows when life begins.

-Peggy Noonan
Wall Steet Journal Opinion: Declarations

Endless Liberal (Democrat) Whining....

It got old about 2 years ago, after listening to these clowns droning on and whining endlessly about our nation's declining world perception due to........(drum roll please)......George W. Bush and his ___________ (fill in the blank) policies. Well, for those hyper-partisan Democrats, a little grounding in reality is on order. In this recent article in Foreign Affairs, the writer brings us back to reality and some chronological truths...

Hard as it may be to recall, the United States' problems with the world -- or, rather, the world's problems with the United States -- started before George W. Bush took office. French Foreign Minister Hubert Védrine complained about the "hyperpower" in 1998. In 1999, Samuel Huntington argued in these pages that much of the world saw the Unites States as a "rogue superpower," "intrusive, interventionist, exploitative, unilateralist, hegemonic, hypocritical."

Yes, these age old prejudices against the US faded somewhat in the months following 9/11, they were never very deep below the surface....

When the shock and horror wore off, it turned out that the September 11 attacks had not altered fundamental global attitudes toward the United States. The resentments remained. A Pew poll of opinion leaders around the world taken in December 2001 revealed that while most were "sad to see what America [was] going through," equally large majorities (70 percent of those polled worldwide, 66 percent in western Europe) believed it was "good that Americans know what it is like to be vulnerable." Many opinion leaders around the world, including in Europe, said they believed that "U.S. policies and actions in the world" had been a "major cause" of the terrorist attacks and that, to borrow a phrase, the chickens had come home to roost.

See, what the Europeans think (and some American liberals) is that we deserved it. Its our policies that drove the bloodthirsty Muslims to attack. But to criticise the US'es more aggressive foreign policy after the attacks is to practice self deception. It is silly for anyone to think that any country can eschew self-interest at all times. In fact, one should EXPECT that all countries act in their self interest. This is reality and reality was what infected US foreign policy in the Bush years. And its important recognize and accept that this Bush policy was not too far off of Clinton's in the late 90's.....

The principal rationales for invading Iraq predated the war on terror, however, and also predated Bush's realism. They were consistent with the broader view of U.S. interests that had prevailed in the Clinton years and during the Cold War. Iraq in the 1990s had been seen by many not as a direct threat to the United States but as a problem of world order for which the United States had a special responsibility. As then National Security Adviser Sandy Berger had argued in 1998, "The future of Iraq will affect the way in which the Middle East and the Arab world in particular evolve in the next decade and beyond." That was why people such as Richard Armitage, Francis Fukuyama, and Robert Zoellick could sign a letter in 1998 calling for Saddam's forcible removal. That was why, as The New York Times' Bill Keller (now the paper's executive editor) wrote at the time, liberals in what he called "The I-Can't-Believe-I'm-a-Hawk Club" supported the war, including "op-ed regulars at [The New York Times] and The Washington Post, the editors of The New Yorker, The New Republic and Slate, columnists in Time and Newsweek," as well as many former Clinton officials.

Those liberals and progressives who favored war against Iraq did so for much the same reason they had favored war in the Balkans: as necessary to help preserve the liberal international order. They preferred to see the United States get UN backing for the war, but they also knew this had been impossible in the case of Kosovo. Their chief worry was that the Bush administration, after toppling Saddam, would take a narrow realist approach in dealing with the aftermath.

This previous passage channels an inconvenient problem for the anti-Bush crowd, and that is that they were supporters of this very policy in earlier iterations. The only defenses that many of these people have been able to conjure up for their complicity is a defense centered on being 'duped' or being oversold by GWB. Some even crazier arguments center on a argument where Bush and Cheney entered the war for profit and personal gain. But this conspiracy oriented argument flies just below schizophrenic hallucination clouds and are completely disassociated with the policy and direction that American policy was moving in the years prior to the Bush administration.

Invasions....

What is wrong with what the Obamessiah said about the recent Russian invasion as reported in Reuters...

Democrat Barack Obama scolded Russia again on Wednesday for invading another country’s sovereign territory while adding a new twist: the United States, he said, should set a better example on that front, too.

The Illinois senator’s opposition to the Iraq war, which his comment clearly referenced, is well known. But this was the first time the Democratic presidential candidate has made a comparison between the U.S. invasion of Iraq and Russia’s recent military activity in Georgia.

The problem of what this youngster bloviates about is that there is a major difference between invading a country that was inarguable a risk to their neighbors and was run by a madman and a country, such as the former Soviet Republic of Georgia, that has a democratically elected government and was being considered for inclusion in NATO.

So, what is Obama arguing about here? That the US is as evil as Russia? Or that the US should never be involved in any conflict irrespective of the need to do so so as to 'lead' the world in our pacifism?

Obama is a one dimensional candidate. A fellow, that as a state senator was opposed to the war in Iraq. A position with little portfolio since he was neither afforded the information that Congress had to consider and never had to go on record with a vote in those days.

Obama is an empty suit.

Barbarism....

Just what is a partial birth abortion?

I'm Brenda Pratt Shafer, a Registered Nurse with 13 years of experience. One day in September, 1993, my nursing agency assigned me to work at a Dayton, Ohio, abortion clinic. I had often expressed strong "pro-choice" views to my two teenage daughters, so I thought this assignment would be no problem for me.

But I was wrong. I stood at a doctor's side as he performed the partial-birth abortion procedure-and what I saw is branded forever on my mind.

The mother was six months pregnant. The baby's heartbeat was clearly visible on the ultrasound screen. The doctor went in with forceps and grabbed the baby's legs and pulled them down into the birth canal. Then he delivered the baby's body and the arms-everything but the head. The doctor kept the baby's head just inside the uterus.

The baby's little fingers were clasping and unclasping, and his feet were kicking. Then the doctor stuck the scissors through the back of his head, and the baby's arms jerked out in a flinch; a startle reaction, like a baby does when he thinks that he might fall.

The doctor opened up the scissors, stuck a high-powered suction tube into the opening and sucked the baby's brains out. Now the baby was completely limp.

I never went back to that clinic. But I am still haunted by the face of that little boy-- it was the most perfect, angelic face I have ever seen.

* Partial-birth abortions are usually performed from 41/2 months to 9 months of pregnancy. In a tape-recorded interview with American Medical News, the doctor who performed the procedure described above said that in his practice, "80%" of these procedures "are purely elective."

Ugly women....

Ugly women now have prospects for marriage from lonely men in the Australian Outback! Good luck to all with this one!

Ignorant Americans?

How about very ignorant British.

Proper Investment Strategies.....

It seems that so many Hong kong friends of mine trade like this!

Hanging With Who?

Hanging with Hu.

Today's Iraq....

One would never know that there was still a war going on in Iraq given the lack of press coverage given to the conflict. Its kind of like the mainstream media's unwillingness to cover John Edward's love child/dalliance; its inconvenient to do so when one is carrying water for the Democrats. However, I looked today and so far this month, there have been 9 soldiers deaths. This is quite high given that there is not the level of conflict. With a slightly close look at the numbers (see them here) one can see that of the 9 military deaths, 7 of them were non-combat related while 2 involved IEDs. What is with that? Why are there so many non-combat deaths, particularly vehicle related? Is it that now that we have all these really heavy armoured vehicles, that these are more prone to accidents? One would never know since the press is only interested in carrying water for the Democratic party and their causes.

Did They Shut Down The Great Firewall For The Olympics?

I can logon and post from China today. I used to never be able to access anything associated with blogger here. Are they putting on a good show or it is permanent change of heart? We will see.

Bomb In Hong Kong....

Apparently, there was a bomb found in the Causeway Bay MTR station this evening. I heard that a robot disarmed or detonated it. I have also read that there was a bomb threat in Chungkin Mansion in Tsim Tsa Tsui yesterday. Looks like the crazies are trying to stir up some mass confusion and hysteria during China's Olympic day. Its really too bad since this should be a time of celebration that this nation has developed to the point where they can afford to waste huge sums of money on thsi party.

If You Are Not Planning To Vote For The Obamessiah, Then You Are A Racist....

Well, I do not want to be too reactionary, since if you are White, there may be other reasons why you may not vote vote for the uber-Liberal candidate Barack Obama, but it really doesn't matter now, since now, if you do not want vote for for him, and you aren't black, then you are a racist.

1.If you think Obama's the most liberal member of the senate you...may be a racist.
2.If you object to Obama raising your payroll, capital gains and estate taxes you...may be a racist.
3.If you'd prefer a president have at least some foreign policy experience you...may be a racist.
4. If you're in favor of drilling for oil and building nuclear power plants you...may be a racist.
5. If you think "Vero Possemus" is Latin for "Massive Ego" you... may be a racist.
6. If you wonder why Obama was hanging around William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn you...may be a racist.
7. If your pastor is nothing like Rev. Wright or Father Pfleger you... may be a racist.
8.If you don't want the majority of justices on the Supreme Court to be like Stephen Breyer you...may be a racist.
9. If you're not impressed with Obama's 100% NARAL rating you...may be a racist.
10. If you're not sure whether Obama opposed or supported FISA reauthorization you...may be a racist.
11. If you don't think America is a "downright mean" country you...may be a racist.
12. If you think Obama should've visited wounded troops at Ramstein and Landstuhl you...may be a racist.
13. If you think the surge is working and that's a good thing you...may be a racist.
14. If you oppose racial preferences in employment, school admissions and contracting you...may be a racist.
15. If you think "we are the change we've been waiting for" is a line from a Monty Python skit you...may be a racist.
16. If you prefer that a president have a smidgen of executive experience you...may be a racist.
17. If you're appalled that Obama voted against treating infants born after an abortion attempt the same medically as other infants born alive you...may be a racist.
18. If you were proud of your country even before Obama's candidacy you...may be a racist.
19. For no particular reason you ....may be a racist.
20. If you don't think American troops are just "air raiding villages" you...may be a racist.
21. If your grandmother isn't a "typical white person" you...may be a racist.
22. If you don't think rural, working class people are bitter and "cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them" you...may be a racist.
23. If you're not sure invading Pakistan is a particularly good idea—what with their nuclear weapons and all— you...may be a racist.
24. If you don't want the president to meet without precondition with the leaders of state sponsors of terror you...may be a racist.
25. If you don't care how Hollywood or the European elite think you should vote you...may be a racist.

Hot Or Not.....

Paris Hilton is a much better candidate than Barak Obama. Maybe she is not as hot as she claims but is defiantly smarter and more qualified...



Skinny and a black man, how could anyone vote for a clown like that?

What Is The Obamessiah's Position On Any Issue?

See what Barak Obama's position is on almost any position in the above Youtube. Can you say which way is the wind blowing?

Massive Pro-American Rallies in Korea.....

I guess we can consider Koreans our friends unlike the spineless Europeans.

Finding Racism In Every Comment......

I have called Presidential hopeful Barak Obama a lightweight. This is apparently considered to be a somewhat racist comment, as we can see in this article here.

The argument goes that almost any adjective describing the Obamessiah or the Obama candidacy can be construed as racist. So my argument that the Obamessiah is a lightweight, is racist and this is how it goes; lightweight draws attention to the fact that Obama is skinny. And if one has seen the movie 'Blackhawk Down' where the Somalians were called 'skinnies,' the term skinnies was a derogatory term, like 'slope' (referring to Asians) or 'jerry' (referring to Germans during WWII) and therefore, get this, calling the Obamessiah a lightweight is somehow channelling the derogatory term 'skinny'. Jeez.

Basically, no matter what anyone calls Barak Obama that isn't clearly positive, they can and will be labelled as a racist or subliminally conjuring up racism. I have also read that I, since I was born a Caucasian, am genetically prone to racism and its something that i am unaware of consciously. For some reason, according these silly theories, I cannot help myself and I am just racist naturally in my normal state of being. Well, if this is the case, then I am perfectly justified in not wanting to vote or support the Barak Obamessiah and frankly, then i am justified in not wanting him as President and therefore, fortunately, since I can't help myself, I won't even feel guilty about it. I guess my racism is the same as being thirsty, hungry or needing a certain amount of sleep every night.

However, the real reason I will not vote for the Obamessiah, is that he is an uber-Liberal that I feel would support destructive socialist policies that will damage the long-term prospects of my nation. Additionally, he is inexperienced and not deserving of the position of President of the United States. If one wants to accuse me of racism on my position, then so be it. I can argue against this line of inquiry since I would love to vote for a man like Michael Steele, a Republican black man that ran for Senator of Maryland in 2006 and was beaten by milquetoast Democrat Ben Cardin. But since he ran in Maryland and has not had the opportunity to run for position that I can vote for, then I will have to withhold my vote till that time.

Republican Or Democrat?

How much of a Democrat are you?

How much of a Republican are you?

This Seems Really Odd....

In preparation for the August Olympic Games in Beijing, China has installed hardware and software in all hotels, to make it easier for state security to monitor foreign visitors that use the Internet. Some foreign owned hotels leaked the documents (orders from the Chinese government to install the systems) to U.S. government officials, who made it public. The foreign owned hotels in Beijing were threatened with closure if they did not comply.

If one looks at anyone one single individual life anywhere, a state like China could somehow dream up some reason, no matter how trite, why that person is a threat. Its all so very paranoid.

So, when is China going to grow up and figure out that some threats just are not worth monitoring? Call the Democrats, they are the champions of human rights and can solve this problem with a single word by the Obamessiah.

Obamessiah....

666

Beerbags For Obama.....

Obama, President elect of the world, wows the beerbags.