More Proof the Fred Thompson is a genious

Fred Thompson recently commented in Town Hall Magazine about why the fannie mae and freddie mac bailouts were a terrible idea, contrary to what EVERYONE in washington is telling us. Funny that I wrote almost the same thing a few weeks ago.

If you sign up for CRs I'll let you look in my mouth

Oh, the things to which we will subject ourselves to bring lost and apathetic minds to the Right.

The Day: September 11, 2008.
The time: 5 p.m.
The campus: Minnesota State University at Mankato
The numbers: low

I was tabling at a Liberal campus, no more than a day after Al Franken himself refused to sign up for CRs at my table. I wasn't the only person soliciting that day.

The Dental Hygiene students were looking for volunteers to come in for a free teeth inspection and cleaning. They apparently get points for every person they bring in, not to mention good practice.

Tracey managed to find her way to my table. I told her if she signed up for College Republicans I would let her clean my teeth. Considering that I got my diploma and lost my insurance on the same day back in May, I was well overdue for a cleaning anyways.

As I sat in the waiting room of the dental clinic, waiting to sit in the recliner of doom, I decided to seize the opportunity. I talked to every other student in the waiting room. I talked with every pre-dental and dental hygiene major around. I even followed the DH girls to their dinner break. It worked.

The good news: I signed up 10 new CRs in that clinic, got a free teeth cleaning and left with complimentary dental floss.

The bad news: I may have gum disease. I'll be back in 4 to 6 weeks.

MESSIAH!!

Putting Obama in Context

I have recently been accused of taking Senator Barack Hussein Obama's words out of context. I will attempt to clear it up here.

Obama recently told a 7 year old girl at a town hall meeting “America is no longer what it could be, what it once was. And I say to myself, I don’t want that future for my children.”

We have all from time to time uttered the phrase "the worlds goin to hell in a handbasket" or other sort of outlandish claims that we are upset about the direction of our country. Things were always better when we were younger and we always strive for the good ole days. Maybe this was what he was saying. He is not satisfied with the current course of America and wants to change it. Fine. Great. Dandy.

But why "what it once was"? I cant figure out what time he is striving for. Surely he doesnt want to go back to the days pre 1960s when blacks were persecuted constantly. He doesnt want to go back to the rotten economic times of the 70s, which today truly rivals. He may want to go back to the 80s when Reagan was in charge. He may even want to go back to the 90s with Bill Clinton and the Republican Congress. They were truly prosperous times and everything was great. But Senator Obama's platform is contrary to many policies of the 1980s and 90s that made it so prosperous. The 80s and 90s were periods of low taxation. He wants to increase nearly all taxes, including social security and the federal income tax (50.3% in the highest income bracket). The 80s and 90s were a period of a strong coporate environment (anyone remember the yuppies?). Mr. Obama has a 33% pro-business voting record in the 2007 Senate by the US Chamber of Commerce (Mr. McCain has 100%).

So again I ask, to what time is Mr. Obama yearning for?

Perhaps he just didnt think about what he was saying. and Just because he said He wasnt happy with the direction of the country doesnt necessarily means he hates it. His wife certainly does, or did. We've all head the dozens of attacks on the man for being unpatriotic. He wont wear a flag pin. He wont put his hand over his heart during the national anthem. He had the American Flag on his airplane painted over. Though all of these are true, many view them as simply symbolic gestures of patriotism. They are nothing of real substance.

We have been waiting for the speech or the action that shows he really really loves this country enough to sacrifice his privacy and personal freedom to become president. here's what we got:

In Germany:
"People of Berlin - people of the world - this is our moment. This is our time."

"I know my country has not perfected itself. At times, we've struggled to keep the promise of liberty and equality for all of our people. We've made our share of mistakes, and there are times when our actions around the world have not lived up to our best intentions"

In Indiana:
“America is no longer what it could be, what it once was. And I say to myself, I don’t want that future for my children.”

Also in Germany:
Obama cancels trip to visit wounded soldiers in military hospital

In his church:
"Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him." Not out of his mouth, but the doctrine of James H. Cone's Liberation Theology, 0f which Mr. Obama has been a follower for twenty years. (to be fair, Mr. Obama has since left the specific church he attended and we are unclear as to his present religious beliefs).

In his speeches:

*note. I recognize that that photograph looks doctored. It is not. Senator Obama for one speech stood behind a podium with this mock of the Seal of the President of the United States. ok, more symbolic disrespect for America, you get the picture.

Aside from having a skewed view of the world, the political process, the constitution, and economics, the guys character just doesn't line up with what a President should be.

Progressive

Today as I strolled through Green Hills mall, I noticed a young girl, about 16, wearing a Barack Obama shirt that said "PROGRESSIVE" in big bold words. After I got over my initial laughter at the irony of anyone looking to the government for progress, I began to think. Obama, as well as other liberals, have taken control over the term Progressive. What does progressive really mean and what about their ideology lines up with that definition?

I'm not going to go through the trouble of looking in a dictionary, but I think we can all agree that the term progressive means "of progress" or something of the sort. We tend to use it to describe an ideology or behavior that believes in moving society forward, whatever that means. The only thing I can conclude is that "progressive" means getting us to a different point than we are presently, so long as that place isnt somewhere we've been before. Progressives complain that conservatives are backtracking, which leads me to believe that backtracking doesnt constitute progress.

For the life of me i can't figure out what direction is forward though. Here's what i've gathered from some self proclaimed progressives:

Progress is when there are no more poor people. There are no more poor people because a portion of rich peoples money has gone to the poor people. This will lead to a time of no rich people. Let's just hope that after that there will be no more poor people because where would we get the money to help them from?

Progress is when there is no discrimination of any kind, anywhere, ever. Businesses will not be allowed to reject employees or customers based on sex, race, religion, sexual orientation, mental or physical handicaps, weight, lifestyle choices, obnoxious behavior, or poor work ethic. Businesses will be forced to hire everyone; that way, everyone will have a job and we will all live happily in our rainbow of a society. Free speech is only important when it is not directed at someone else, and those who choose to practice their hate speech through hiring practices do not deserve that right and will not be granted it.

Progress is when all religions will get along. This means that no religion will be allowed to openly practice the rituals or beliefs that brinf offense or anger to another. Freedom of religion is only important when it is practiced in ones own home and does not infringe on the comfort of others.

Progress is when power is returned to the people and taken out of the hands of corporations. Corporations will be forced to pay their employees what the government determines to be a fair wage, and pay exessive taxes. These high taxes, though they will probably drive up the prices of their goods and/or services and just might cause the companies to downsize substantially, will teach the corporations that they are not all powerfull and should not be allowed to make more moeny than the people that work for them. Because everyone will be paid a fair wage, they will be able to afford the higher costs of goods and services.

Progress is when no one will be allowed to own a firearm. Guns may not kill people, but they enable people to kill people. Only government can be trusted with such power. people are not responsible enough to handle firearms. Plus, if they own firearms, they may just revolt against the government, which cannot be tolerated. Once guns are outlawed, no one will own one and therefore there will be no crime. The people that still do posess firearms will be arrested.

Progress is when every person, no matter how vile, is granted a fair trial and defense when accused of a crime. Therefor, when people are arrested for owning a firearm, the taxpayer will fund a public defender to represent the accused. Because this government lawyer will be far superior to the for-profit lawyer, the accused man will be allowed freedom once again.

Progress is when all Americans are comfortable with sex and uncomfortable with violence. When these roles are reversed in society, children will be more knowledgeable of sex and will make better choices when faced with it. They will also be less knowledgeable of violence and will therefor be less apt to participate in it.

Progress is when we all do everything we can to protect our earth. Earth was given to us be science and therefor we owe it to science to keep the Earth nice and clean. We also want to protect it for our heirs. Any person or company that pollutes will face heavy fines, license losses, and even jailtime. Whenever a new study comes out regarding the environment, it will be accepted without scrutiny, providing that the research indicates that mankind, or at least America, is destroying the planet. However, if the research suggests otherwise, it will be more than heavily scrutinized; it will likely be discarded.


At least this is some of what I gathered. If you don't see the problems in this line of thinking, it is because you are part of it. I weep.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

The recent situation with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is very confusing. Very simply put, here's what happened:

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are mortgange companies. They grant mortgages to people and businesses and grant that they get paid back to the banks that actually lend the money. They are/were responsible for some $12 Trillion in mortgage debts.

Formerly, they only granted loans to people that could handle it. People with decent incomes, good credit records, etc. These companies were created to add liquidity to the mortgage market, and they did it fine, until the early 2000s.

Due to the rise of subprime lenders (adjustable mortgages), Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were encouraged by the government to lower their lending standards. Although these two companies are non-government agencies, they were chartered by the government under the New Deal in the 1930s. Congress and certain far left interest groups contested that by only granting loans to people who could pay them back, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were being discriminatory thus violating their charter. So they were forced to liberalize their standards which moved the private sub-prime lenders to do the same.

So this is what happened: a bunch of banks started loaning money to people that had no business borrowing money. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac insured those loans. Those loans didnt get paid. the FMs had to cover them. They are now bankrupt.

The government acted because they believe that with these companies collapsing it would be the end of the mortgage industry and people would no longer be able to buy homes. Thus the government bails out these organizations so that the mortgage industry will stay the same.





SOOOO, an industry failed because of government policy, and now the government is bailing out that industry so that it can continue to fail under those same policies. sounds about right.

If the companies fold it would leave millions of americans without guarantees on their mortgages and therefor several banks would probably call them immediatly. This would make millions homeless and destroy their credit, rendering them unable to buy homes in the future, at least with a mortgage.

To prevent this super mortgage catastrophe, which has essentially already happened. the government decided to bail out them out. To do this, the Congress increased the national debt limit by $800 Billion. thats BILLION. 1/4 of the national budget. Billion.

Once again, a recap. A bunch of people were allowed to borrow money that they wouldnt be able to pay back. So to fix the problem, the federal government is borrowing money that it doesnt have and it won't be able to pay back. Just fabulous.

Dont ask me what the solution is. I'm not an economist. But I am rational enough to understand that acting irresponsibly to cover for irresponsible behavior doesnt seem like a good idea. Plus I, as a tax payer just can't afford it.

Elizabeth Hasselbeck. Why she should quit

In case anyone missed it, Jesse Jackson used the N word. This was a topic of discussion on the View and Elizabeth Hasselbeck was yet again destroyed by her colleagues. Here is the video.

First of all, Whoopie is insane. "My mother couldnt vote in the United States of America, the place of her birth," she says. The 15th Amendment to the Constitution which allowed black Americans to vote was ratified in 1870. Whoopies parents must be pretty old. Of course, since she is talking about her Mother, she could be referring to the 19th Amendment, which allowed women to vote, which was ratified in 1920. According to IMDB, Whoopie was born in 1955, which means that if her mother was 21 (the voting age at the time of the ratificatino of hte 19th amendment) before 1920, she would had to have been born at least in 1899 which would make her at least age 56 when she gave birth to Whoopie. Possible, but unlikely. However, if this was the case, the gender issue is completely irrelivant to the race discussion. Shuttup Whoopie.

Back to Elizabeth. She is the lone conservative on a show jam packed with socialists. This is not an accident. The show's producers know that it is nearly impossible to win a fight if you are outnumbered 4 or 5 to 1, as Mrs. Hasselbeck is. Thus, Hasselbeck, every single day of the week is trampled under the feet of large, pissed off, liberal lesbians (or at least lesbian-resembling).

Now Mrs. Hasselbeck may feel like she is standing her ground, and not giving up by remaining the sole conservative in this sea of marxists; she may feel like she can make a difference by staying and fighting, regardless of what happens to her image and how stupid Joy Baher makes her look. She may feel a moral obligation to stay and fight the good fight for all the good christian-conservatives out there. This is not the case.

Elizabeth, we love you dearly and respect what your doing. However, the way you are portraid on the show is not only detrimental to your image and the way your children see you. It is detrimental to the conservative movement as a whole. Any moderates/fence riders watching the view may actually make their voting or ideological decisions based on what they see, and watching a conservative get destroyed every morning is going to sway them the wrong way. It is almost certain that you can make more money working for Fox news or some other broadcast where you dont have to deal with the Whoopis or Barbara Walters of the world.

So please, quit and start your own show. Only the ignorant will take it as a sign of defeat. The rest of us will view it as a step in the right direction.



*note. Did i seriously just write an entire blog about The View? Christ.