Barack Obama and his Manifest Destiny

So class, who can tell me how many states are in the US. Yes little Danny how many states are there? Little Danny replies “50”, still cannot spell potato but at least he knew how many states he was the VP over. But people still rib him on this one since June 15th 1992. Now we have a Harvard (say Harvard with a snooty better than you voice) educated Illinois senator, who, by the way, is not running for the VP position, but he wants to be the President “of these 60 United States!” Maybe when he wanted to bomb our allies in the Middle east, he wanted to bring them into the Union? Maybe this will be his Manifest Destiny.
I do not want bring up how the media has creamed Dan Quayle with what he said, but they have and have you heard any one (besides the conservative talk shows) get out and make fun of this guy. No, you have not and you will not either, why, because he is the black guy (for the politically correct, that is african American.) Well if this messiah is one of the best that the Democrats have to offer, then this will be a great election year! Oh, by the way if you are from Alaska or Hawaii then you will not be graced by his holiness, because his campaigners do not count you worthy enough to view him.
May 9th 2008 Beaverton, Oregon
"It is wonderful to be back in Oregon," Obama said. "Over the last 15 months, we’ve traveled to every corner of the United States. I’ve now been in 57 states? I think one left to go. Alaska and Hawaii, I was not allowed to go to even though I really wanted to visit, but my staff would not justify it."

By the way, Alaska and Hawaii would constitute “two” states left to visit.

Tax Tips That Work!

Its April 15, 2008 in other words the real April Fools Day! I hope that you have all of your pertinent forms and other IRS regulated stuff filled out ready to send in, of course with that tax check that you owe the IRS. To those of you who think that you are getting a refund, your not! What has really happened is the government took too much from you to begin with. Now think about that, they took too much, this left you with a lot less for you and your family. Imagine what would happen if you were to keep all of your check or at the very least, for now, 95% or better of your check. What would that do for your and this Nations economy? For one you would be able to afford Health Care, much needed food, clothing, or a washer and dryer, or you could even afford to buy or rent a better place to live. Just imagine the power that you would have over your own lives if the government were to say “hey keep more of what you make”, this my friends is the true meaning of freedom… or self determination! I believe that there has to be a way to provide for our general welfare and defense, I just disagree with sucking the life blood out of those who work and those who provide jobs. What happens when you are not sending most of YOUR EARNINGS to the government, you spend it on things that you need and on some things that you want. What does this spending do… it generates sales taxes and other taxes that are attached to the sale of an item. This way you elect how YOU want to be taxed and not the government telling you how to be taxed. To all of you who hate the rich, and you know who you are, because you too would love to be rich. This would affect all the people in our country including the RICH! Yes the rich would get richer but so would the poor minimum wage worker, who by the way is allowed, yes I said allowed, to keep more of their paycheck. And now that people have more money to spend they will want to buy more stuff and that means the rich company owner needs to keep up with the demand for goods and they need more help to build the products that are being ordered at an increasing pace. All of this would create sales tax revenue unlike anything else. Money would be flowing into the US Treasury and the politicians would have a big pot of money to use for the budget. I know Bush 41 (the first George Bush) called this “voodoo economics” but it worked, check the income to the treasury during the tax cuts of Ronald Reagan, it shows that when people were allowed to keep more of what they earned they would spend and in return the treasury got fat with sales taxes. So this is just something to chew on while you agonize about the IRS and the payment agreement that you have to set up with them. Happy April 15th, uh I mean fools day!
You should really ask yourself why does the IRS logo have the scales of justice and an olive branch in it, just curious.

Barack Obama The Stereotypical white guy!

David Duke, Robert "sheets" Byrd (D VA) and many other notorious politicians are owed an explanation or an apology. After Barack gave his rousing throw grandma under the bus speech, he should just go ahead and buy his membership in Robert "KKK" Byrd's organization or that of the equally hateful group the New Black Panthers. He is both black and white. This must cause some conflict in him but because it is easier to pick on the whites as opposed to the blacks (as Bill Cosby found out) he now has told us that he has upped his standards and you should "up yours." Just food for thought in case you still were unsure about him.

As the Supreme Court contmeplates gun control.

Is gun control really racist?
By Jason Hall
First of all, I believe that guns have never harmed or killed a single individual. Having said that, I believe that it is the Nimrods who have misused this great tool to do harm and hurt others. A gun is no more dangerous than a very sharp butcher knife (which, by the way, does not make a sound when used), a metal baseball bat or any other items that can be used in the commission of a crime.
Guns are a tool and have been around for a very long time. Gunpowder was put into reinforced bamboo and ignited with a projectile inside; this was an ancient Chinese secret up to about the 16th century. Guns were a way of making the weak strong and able to protect themselves. Guns provided food, kept the wolves away from our cattle and helped us start a country. My point is that guns are a tool and not a problem. This brings me to the premise of this article.
Do gun control laws have a root in racism?
Now on to how all of this started.
Racist arms laws predate the establishment of the United States. Starting in
1751, the French Black Code required Louisiana colonists to stop any blacks,
and if necessary, beat "any black carrying any potential weapon, such as a
cane (you knew the French were involved some how). The Haitian Revolution in the 1790’s really upset the French folks in the Louisiana territory. They enacted laws that prohibited slaves and free blacks from owning a firearm or any other weapon at that time. For the slaves, a weapon would have been a TOOL used to gain their freedom, forcefully or otherwise. The free blacks needed weapons to provide for their families in the frontier and to protect themselves from animals and stupid people (don’t we all). The stupid people that I refer to, were the folks who would kidnap freed slaves and sell them back into slavery (it was difficult for the KKK to instill fear into the populace, with the populace returning fire). Even Native American Indians were not immune from the laws. Between 1630 and 1640 (not sure of exact date) Connecticut passed laws that only “friendly Indians” should be allowed to have firearms. Indeed only the friendlies. This thinking spilled over into the slave owning states in later year. Because of the threat of slave uprisings, these states enacted laws prohibiting blacks both free and slave from owning any weapons, including dogs. The whites thought that the free blacks and slaves would turn these dogs on them as a weapon. In Maryland, unlicensed dogs owned by free blacks were to be killed. Mississippi went one further and outlawed dog ownership by blacks altogether. Talk about harsh; I love my dogs more than I do my guns. On the other hand, a gun will not lick its butt and then your face. To prevent free blacks from moving to Savannah from other parts of Georgia, they decided to tax each person of color $100 per year. All because the establishment was afraid of freed blacks. This would explain why there were more free blacks that fought for the North as opposed to the number (which was small in comparison) of those who fought in the South.
There were still more laws enacted against blacks in America after the Civil War. Black Americans were prohibited from carrying firearms or bowie knives without a license. Although laws for both white and blacks were passed they were unequally enforced (guess who paid for that). Here is one blaring example of this unequal application of the law in the 20th century. Florida Supreme Court
Justice Buford's concurring opinion in Watson v. Stone (1941), in which a
conviction for carrying a handgun without a permit was overturned, because
the handgun was in the glove compartment of a car:
I know something of the history of this legislation. The original Act
of 1893 was passed when there was a great influx of negro laborers in
this State drawn here for the purpose of working in turpentine and
lumber camps. The same condition existed when the Act was amended in
1901 and the Act was passed for the purpose of disarming the negro
laborers and to thereby reduce the unlawful homicides that were
prevalent in turpentine and saw-mill camps and to give the white
citizens in sparsely settled areas a better feeling of security. The
statute was never intended to be applied to the white population and in
practice has never been so applied.
Condoleezza Rice opposes gun control and even gun registration because Bull Connor Birmingham police commissioner could have used it to disarm her father and others in 1963 as they protected themselves from the segregationists during the marches and protests. The Sixteenth Street Baptist Church bombing killed a classmate of Condoleezza Rice, who at the time was only 9 years old. If anyone understands that human dignity needs to be defended even with the barrel of a gun it would be Dr. Rice.
There are other instances in which the white population was to be protected from the people of color having firearms. I am convinced that the best way to control a population is to take away their ability to stop a group of people from controlling them. A gun is a tool that has stopped a lot of violence from occurring to innocent people of all races. Guns truly are colorblind and equal. To empower people is giving them the ability to control their own destiny. Think of this article what you will but the bottom line is there will always be someone out to control another and with out the proper tools to defend your freedom with you will be enslaved. As an end note the dreaded NRA is opposed to gun control and registration also. Makes you think does it not.

Ralph Nader is Unsafe In Any Election!

2/28/08 at George Washington University Washington DC
Ralph (unsafe in any election) Nader (I) Presidential Candidate.
Excerpts from his speech at this institute for higher learning (I think we all know who was high here.)
Corporations need to be held accountable to law enforcement actions for greed and waste and the corporations are supposed to be our servants and not our masters. We need to amend the constitution to make them work for us. They cook up deals with dictators around the world for mining rights and other such agreements. What about the all mighty government and the deals that we have made with dictatorships in the name of alliances to fight wars or to secure our national interests, how about that. The trust and faith that Nader is willing to put into our government is a little too blind unless of course he is the head of that government. He went on to pontificate that we the people own the lands and we own the technologies, not the corporations. The government through our tax dollars gave the research “freely” to the corporations and now they charge us the “people” money to stop and treat diseases, that the government gave them the research to begin with “freely.” That is like Al (messiah) Gore taking credit for the internet. Yes the government does pour money into research that helps to better our lives but it does not create the things that we need to have in order to live. The only thing that government creates is a lot of red tape and more government. Government this and government that, it is this, the benevolent government idea, that has created the great Socialist and Communist states that have ever existed, oh wait, those governments abused power, stifled creativity, killed innovation (and people) because some bureaucrat did not like an idea or wanted it for themselves.
Micromanagement does not a good government make. For example, do you not like having independent thought at work, the freedom to make decisions on your own that will actually help a company or do you want to have some idea stealing hack (who takes credit for others work) looking over every decision you make and critiquing all. This form of intrusion is not only uncalled for but against the very nature of the innovative spirit of this country’s very founding. The Founding Fathers or The Framers (in new speak, thanks Orwell) were tired of being regulated from afar and not being allowed to think for themselves. The King and select bunch of crown cronies were into anything with regulations and tax happy. They were more worried about how something might affect the King (including speech Mr. McCain) rather than creating a good government that works for the people.
Ultimately the government is the source of all good in the known universe to Mr. Nader. And when our Representative form of government fails, we need to implement a direct democracy. This is what we would call “mob rule” of course this mob would not include you and me but rather those that we would choose to “represent” us the people in the “people’s house”, you can see where this is going, right? We will replace One form of government abusing bureaucrat with another but call it “direct democracy” representing the “will of the peoples”, I am sure when China “liberated” Tibet they told them the same thing. We have to keep in mind that this government only exists because we say so. That is what is so unique about it. But we can also give our government all the power if we so choose. But remember when that happens there is no going back, they will stop you, with force if necessary!
Now here is something else that Ralph claims, the Democrats and Republicans do not have health care for all on the table (does he not watch the Democrat debates.) I understand the thought about the Republican party, but the Democrats, I dunno, maybe I missed something or is he getting his news from…MARS! Hey Ralph, you should really lay off the BONG WATER. At least this explains the hair cut that he has been sporting lately.
Here is a really good bit of wise and well thought out wisdom from the Ralph Meister. Students are the ones who are disenfranchised by voter registration (those who are from out of state I am assuming) and the voting age should be lowered to 16 because “ if you can drive and work then why not vote?” I know I really trust a 16 year old behind the wheel of vehicle let alone our government. Hey why not lower the age to run for senate to 16 or the president to 16. We all know at 16 you are not prone to influence from others and can definitely think on your own with out any bias at all. And this is why I maintain Ralph Nader is “Unsafe in any Election.” Just thought you should know!

Barack Obama enslaving the working poor!

One of the points that I have been making for years is that raising the minimum wage is just a vote buying gimmick; and a way to enslave a large population of unskilled workers to the plantation of government welfare.
Economists and at least one president have for years stated that raising the minimum wage was not a way to help the poor out of poverty.

The Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke on 2/15/06 during his first semi annual report to Congress stated. "I think it (a higher minimum wage) does lower employment," Bernanke told lawmakers. "However, I note that the literature is very controversial on this subject. "One might consider alternative ways of helping working-class Americans -- for example, the earned income tax credit which delivers money to working families without necessarily affecting the employment."
“Raising the minimum wage is the wrong way to raise the incomes of low-wage earners." President Clinton, as quoted in Michael Kramer, "Minimum Wage, Minimum Sense," Time, Feb. 6, 1995. Still does not explain why he raised it anyway, oh yeah, that’s right were talking about Billy boy.

Does the old saying “a rising tide lifts all boats” come to mind, and with NAFTA who in this country (the manufacturers) is going to continue paying the increased wages and sell cheaply priced goods; while having the understanding that the rest of the world especially China, can do it for so much less. Again thanks to NAFTA, these increases are going to create a “wage bubble” and then POP! We will reach a point where there will be very few jobs mainly because the cost of doing business in the US is too expensive. Are we going to become a nation of consumers and not producers; oh wait, we will not be able to afford anything because we have priced our selves out of our jobs! Now that you are out of a job, you need a place to stay, food to eat and help for your family. Guess what, the government will step in and in the name of compassion will help you meet your needs (say hello to a socialist society) and punish those eeevvviiiillll corporations for firing you. But back to our aphorism, all boats will be lifted, and I do mean all boats this includes, the USS cost of living and the USS price of goods. What business is going to just eat the cost of increasing wages and not pass that cost on to you, the consumer in the price of the goods? If they do just eat it, then they will eventually go out of business or they will start “downsizing” workers. Forget about getting a job especially if you are not skilled and say goodbye to entry level work. Again NAFTA will offer a way out of the increased minimum wages by shifting production to poorer countries where labor is really, really cheap.

Excerpted from Barack Hussein Obama book Keeping Americas Promise! Ensuring Living Wages and Improving Working Conditions Raise the Minimum Wage: Even though the minimum wage will rise to $7.25 an hour by 2009, the minimum wage’s real purchasing power will still be below what it was in 1968. Obama will further raise the minimum wage to $9.50 an hour by 2011, index it to inflation and increase the Earned Income Tax Credit to make sure that full-time workers can earn a living wage that allows them to raise their families and pay for basic needs such as food, transportation, and housing – things so many people take for granted.

This guy and others like him (both republicans and democrats or just REPUBLICRATS) are going to create a third world atmosphere and economic condition if we do not stand up and say NO (unless McCaine completely destroys the rest of the 1st amendment.)
You know we could spread this misery evenly for other countries and just annex all of Mexico and Latin America, just a thought.
Now to those of you who are just salivating to run me down as some one who does not care about the “working poor” (there is an oxymoron) and I am some kind of heartless wealthy man, well I am not. In the same vain I would say that you care even less for the “working poor” because you would let politicians destroy our working base and send more jobs out of the country. You are a bunch of heartless hacks take that!

DNA Databases, Jails, and the threat to our Constitution.

Below is the link to the original story.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7260164.stm

In the UK they have a national DNA database that helps to match convicted criminals to a crime scene. This helps increase the efficiency of the police and it brings justice to those who truly are guilty… or does it? There is no denying DNA evidence it is very conclusive (less than1 in a billion match.) But what if your DNA was entered into this database and you were not even convicted of a crime, or worse yet they just want you on record, you know, just in case you do decided to do something.

In September 2007, Lord Justice Sedley - one of England's most experienced appeal court judges - called for the register to be made universal.
He condemned the existing system as "indefensible", said it was biased against ethnic minorities, and it would be fairer to include everyone, guilty or innocent.

Yes in the interest of fairness (let see him impose that standard to UK muslims) he is willing to trash the civil rights, dare I say, the privacy of every citizen (probably not himself of course) in the UK. This whole thinking of fairness leads us down the primrose path of POLITICAL CORRECTNESS and the fact that cops are getting way to LAZY! They want it all to be handed to them.
But what of innocent until proven guilty or should I say guilty until proven innocent (that is what it will come to.) But in the US we enjoy the protections of the Constitution namely the 4th and 5th amendments in criminal court. But at the rate that our politician are going (McCain-Feingold) we will soon see our Constitutional rights being eroded away just so things will be “fairer and easier” for those who are in control. And do not kid yourselves those in control consider themselves in “control.” To use a “Marxist” term, they are the new bourgeois [sic] leadership. This will be a convenient way to just nail everybody in one fell swoop and virtually create a police state, one in which everybody is SUSPECT (think 1984 and the thought police.) Speaking of thought police, hate crimes come to mind; and yes this database being mandatory could be used maliciously, in controlling certain individuals to act the way the “bourgeois” want them to. Who is to say that they will not only swab your mouth but take a few hair samples, you know, to keep as “part of the database records” and you can imagine of the rest. As far as I know the idea of a mandatory DNA registration for everyone in the US has not been taken under consideration, but give it time.
Now back to the other issue of not being convicted of a crime and still having to register. In our constitution (which McCain obviously sees as a pesky nuisance to his grab for power) The 5th amendment gives us the right against self incrimination and it could be argued that forcing citizens to register would be forcing one to testify using their own bodies. So far I would think that the 4th amendment would protect us against the government from “seizing” DNA samples of us all…for now. But we also thought we were protected from government seizure of our private property (that worked our well… Kelo v. City of New London anybody!) Do not count on the Supreme Court
So what are we to do? We need to vigilantly guard our civil liberties in accordance with the Bill of Rights and the Constitution this is why we need constitutional education in our public schools sooooo badly. Kids now days are being taught that we are given our rights by the governments and legislation. The truth is the government governs because the people allow them to. If we ever just stood up and said no more, they would all be out of work in an instant. And this is an unsolicited plug but go to www.heritage.org and you can order a FREE copy of the constitution for yourself. It really is nice to have a copy on hand in case you have any questions.