Trying To Make Up. Really

"Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has no heart; and any man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains." ~ Attributed to many, including Winston Churchill

A former high school classmate of mine posted the following on Facebook this morning. He said he received it in an e-mail from a friend of his who lives in Grosse Pointe, Michigan:

My neighbor is a progressive Marxist of sorts (gung-ho for Socialized Medicine, "All guns should be banned", distribution of Wealth from the Working People to those who do not want to work, etc.).

So this spring I put this sign up in my yard after one of his Anti-Gun rants at a neighborhood party:

Click to enlarge

My sign wasn't up more than an hour before he called the police and wanted them to make me take down the sign. The officer politely informed him that it was not their job to take such action without a court order and that my neighbor had to file a complaint first, which would be reviewed by the city attorney.

If there was a violation, a judge would issue a court order to be served on the offending party (me) to "remove the sign” within seven days.

Several weeks after my neighbor filed the complaint, he was informed that the sign was legal and there was nothing for the city to do.

I then tried to smooth things over by inviting him to go shooting with me and my friends but that seemed to anger him.

I then asked him if he wanted to go to a Tea Party Rally, but, again he declined my outreach efforts to bring about a better understanding between opposing political ideologies.

I could ask him if he wants to go deer hunting, you know, just a bunch of guys running through the woods chasing Bambi, then sitting around the campfire roasting marshmallows and singing our favorite patriotic & country songs. But, he declined because he hates the Killing of animals...except those in the Super Market Meat Department.

He also said that he doesn't like to leave to go anywhere during the week; because he will miss OPRAH!!!

I am at a loss as to how to reconcile our relationship and any suggestions would be welcome!

Who's The Cowboy Now?

"For they are yet ear-kissing arguments." ~ William Shakespeare

Remember when the Liberals called George W. Bush a "cowboy" because he so recklessly got our country involved in an "illegal war"? Remember how they complained that he only invaded Iraq to avenge his daddy?

Never mind the 16 UN resolutions at which Saddam Hussein repeatedly thumbed his nose.

Forget that intelligence sources reported the existence of evidence for WMD. It doesn't matter that he murdered thousands of his own people and invaded Kuwait. His repeated threats against America meant nothing.

This is what we were told by the Liberal intelligentsia:

George W Bush was wrong. He was a war monger. He was a war criminal. He was a cowboy.

All of these appellations and more were common throughout the media and the blogosphere.

Now, we have Obama's war on Libya.

Look at this chart:



For you Libs who can't make simple connections, the above chart shows the difference between the reasons for Bush's "illegal war" in Iraq, and the reasons for Obama's altruistic civilian rescue mission in Libya.

I have to admit, it's hard for me to understand how intelligent people could have fallen for Obama's "ear kissing arguments", but, it happens. Smarter people than they have been fooled.

Many Liberals are already regretting their support of Barack Hussein Obama. Many are now admitting they may have been deluded. Dennis Kucinich, rabid anti-war Liberal, has denounced Obama and even called for his impeachment because of this Libyan incursion.

My own Liberal Doctor Nephew admitted on Facebook, when introducing a link to a video, "This is dedicated to operation "Odyssey Dawn," with a great big f--- you very much to President Obama, who (as I'm starting to believe) conned me into voting for him."

And, in an additional post, "Reading articles like this, about the 2004 softening of (business) relationships between the US and Libya, would be funny if it didn't also provide such a compelling explanation for why the Obama Administration has now decided to bomb Libya, out-Bushing George W. in his haste to employ military 'solutions.'"

In all fairness to my beloved nephew, at least he is consistent. He is anti-war, and that stance has led him to question his judgment. He will not blame his mistake on others. I say, good for him!

Now, for you other Liberals. It's time for you to come clean.

Clear your conscience. Just admit you made the mistake of supporting this man who is incompetent and despises the Constitution of the United States.

But, for God's sake, stop pretending that you still support this man in spite of all the proof that he cares about no one but himself. Grow up! Grow a pair! Admit you were wrong!

I won't gloat, I promise. I understand people can make mistakes. I understand that some people are gullible enough to simply believe all the promises a charming charismatic Presidential candidate makes. I've done it in the past myself. I once supported Carter for president, for God's sake!

There is forgiveness in the Republican party.

Talk Talk Talk

"We have too many high sounding words, and too few actions that correspond with them." ~ Abigail Adams

When the riots began in Egypt, somebody predicted that all the citizens in the Middle Eastern Islamic countries would start to revolt. I don't remember who. But we are now seeing that happen, as one by one, oppressed people in these countries are attempting to throw off the shackles of despotism and agitating for their freedom.

The latest is Libya.

I also made a prediction, back when Barack Hussein Obama was running for President. I wrote a blogpost about it. I said America has little to worry about because a president Obama administration would be one of much talk, little action. I can't find it in my archives. It probably has some ambiguous title that doesn't indicate the subject matter.

As it happens, I was not entirely correct.

For the first two years of Obama's presidency, he worked tirelessly to bring about a totally different type of government, unlike any previous government, anywhere in the world. Part Islamic, part Socialist, and part dictatorship. For the most part (thankfully), Obama was ineffective in achieving his goals, but one thing he did accomplish was the monstrosity known to Conservatives as Obamacare.

In spite of the fact that a judge has ruled Obamacare unconstitutional, Obama is steadfastly ignoring that ruling and is still actively engaged in pushing it forward, as if the judgment didn't even exist.

But, I was mostly correct in my assessment.

As we have seen during these latest crises, Obama's response to them is delayed, when he responds at all. He does, however, talk about them.

While Egypt was burning, and, as Obama lined up his putt, he casually mentioned Mubarak should step down.

As more and more third world republics erupted in chaos, Obama appeared on ESPN and filled out his NCAA brackets, and then, expressed his desire for peace in the middle east.

It is pretty simple to identify which leaders are anti-American. They are the ones who Obama supports.

Japan suffers the worst earthquake and tsunami in recorded history and Obama goes to Rio and offers his condolences.

The Congress cannot come to an agreement regarding the nation's budget, and Obama again, goes golfing. But, to his credit, he speaks eloquently.

The deficit is trillions of dollars in the red and Obama plays basketball. And, defends his position in glowing rhetoric.

I recently went back and re-read some of my own blogposts from the past. In one of them, which I entitled "Politicizing Disaster", I pointed out that many Liberals were complaining about George W Bush's tardiness in responding to Hurricane Katrina. This, apparently, was an indictment of Bush's racist policies and incompetence.

These same Liberals are strangely silent on Obama's lack of action in responding to world crises.

One gets the impression that if Hurricane Katrina had happened on Obama's watch, those poor people might still be living in the Superdome.

But, at least we'd know how he feels.

Wisconsin Democrat's Plan Backfires

"Exile, for no other motive than ease, would be the last defeat, with no seed of future victory in it." ~ Lois McMaster Bujold

Oh, I love this!

The Wisconsin Senate passed Republican Scott Walker's Budget repair bill in spite of the efforts of 14 Democrat Senators who chose to run away rather than vote. They thought, by going AWOL, they could prevent the State Senate from passing the bill.

They thought wrong!

I love it!

I especially love this line from the article: "You are cowards!" spectators in the Senate gallery screamed as lawmakers voted.

Yeah, the ones who stayed in Madison are cowards, but the ones who ran away aren't?

Yeah, that makes sense.

Bust The Unions

"Determine never to be idle...It is wonderful how much may be done if we are always doing." ~ Thomas Jefferson

On Friday, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker finally announced he is issuing lay-off notices to 1500 State employees. Walker sent letters to state employee unions saying that layoff notices would go out to state employees in 15 days. The governor also said that actual layoffs would occur a month from now if legislators do not pass his "budget repair" proposal.

He should have done that two weeks ago, in my opinion. And he also should have strongly suggested voters recall the 14 Democrat senators who went AWOL.

While surfing several blogposts about the Wisconsin public employee union's illegal "strike", many Liberal commenters have accused Walker, and by extension, his Conservative supporters, of "union busting".

They say that like it's a bad thing.

What is surprising to me is that Conservative bloggers and pundits seem to believe Unions are important, and reject the accusation that they support union busting.

Well, I don't.

I think the unions should be busted, and I'll tell you why.

In their day, unions had their place. Manufacturers had long oppressed their workers with long hours, low wages, poor working conditions, and no fringe benefits. Workers had no voice, and only two options:

1. Work under these conditions, or 2. Quit.

Then came organization. The unions, by organizing the workers, and employing various tactics, some strong armed, eventually forced Corporations to meet their demands thereby decreasing working hours, providing benefits, improving workers safety, and raising wages to a more acceptable level.

Unions also led to the establishment of several Government programs and agencies, which today, serve to regulate all things labor related. Wage, hours, working conditions, and benefits. We have the National Wage and Hour boards. We have OSHA. We have the Department of Labor. All of these agencies work together to insure the American laborer is treated by their employers fairly.

Because of these agencies and organizations, unions no longer serve a purpose.

Wait. That's not true. Unions do have purposes. All negative.

Unions now do nothing but drive up the costs of manufacturing, which in turn, drives up the price of products and services. Unions are also heavily influenced by Socialists (and have been since the early days of organization), which, through organizing massive political campaigns and spending millions of union dollars, helps Socialist political candidates such as Barack Hussein Obama attain public office.

The election of Obama alone is enough evidence of the negative influence of unions in America and reason enough to bust the unions.

Unions reward poor performance, and encourage laziness and sloth among workers.

Seriously, I can't think of a single thing Unions do that benefits Americans in any way.

It's time to abolish unions. They are no longer needed.

A Sign Of Hope, At Last?

"All you need in this life is ignorance and confidence; then success is sure." ~ Mark Twain

I will confess right here, that I don't personally know a lot of liberals intimately. I'm sure I work with Liberals, and interact socially with them on a daily basis, but our ideology is not discussed. Probably, out of all the people I know, a majority of them may be liberals. Maybe not. I don't know.

But, two Liberals I do know well are my niece and nephew, the children of my older brother, the college professor. I read their Facebook statuses regularly, and from them, it is clear they are Liberals.

I find it interesting that their Facebook statuses rarely reference politics now, although, a couple of years ago they often did. Included in some of those earlier updates were pictures they took of their trip to Washington DC to attend the inauguration of Barack Hussein Obama.

Oh, what a joyous occasion that was for them!

My nephew, you may remember, is the same nephew who has earned a doctorate in Media studies, and now teaches courses in the same. Similarly, my niece has received a degree from the same institution of higher learning where her brother and my brother both continue to teach.

My nephew and I have had many spirited debates via Facebook regarding Conservative vs Liberal ideologies. One in particular, a debate over how some Christians, being Christians, could support legalized abortion, was contributed to by fellow blogger buddies Neil Simpson and Marshall Art. (or was it Timothy? I forget.) In the end, it would appear that we Conservatives convinced him to reconsider his position. His last comment was something along the lines of, "You've given me something to think about. I'll spend some time thinking and praying about this and get back to you."

I have yet to hear to what conclusion, if any, he eventually arrived. But, regardless, that's one of the things I like about him. He shows an (unique for the typical Liberal) ability to keep an open mind towards other opinions.

This morning, while lying in bed, unable to sleep, with a rather aggravating and unexplainable pain in my right leg, it occurred to me that I haven't seen any Facebook status posts recently from either my Niece or Nephew that wasn't ideologically neutral, and I wonder if the hope and change that their candidate, Obama promised, but never delivered, hasn't somewhat soured on them.

I never could understand how someone of their towering intellect and education could have allowed themselves to be taken in by such an obvious fraud as Obama in the first place.

But now, I wonder if they have finally saw through the deception, and are simply too embarrassed to admit they were duped.

(I realize this blows Lone Ranger's "Immutable Truths About Liberals" number 8 out of the water, and for that, I apologize, LR)

As an aside and possibly an explanation, neither of them appear to have much of a grip on reality. My niece's updates center on her relationships with her friends and trips she takes, and are generally devoid of any kind of intellectual pursuits. She stays well clear of any mention of politics , or any ideology, for that matter.

My nephew's life revolves around fantasy. His job is analyzing and critiquing films, and teaching others how to analyze them. If one spends all their time watching movies and listening to music, how will he ever retain more than a tenuous grasp on reality?

It is not surprising, therefore, that he is so out of touch with the real world.

I've often said that the reason Liberal talk radio and television news commentary is continually unsuccessful is that Liberals don't want to concern themselves with issues of life changing political import. They are more concerned with happy times, happy thoughts, and dreams of living in Utopian worlds of fantasy.

Liberals don't listen to talk radio, either Conservative or Liberal.

Cold hard facts are simply too much for them to bear.

That factoid would seem to be validated by a recent message my Nephew sent me via Facebook, in which he implored me to stop typing out my ideological opinion on his status updates, as he suffers from depression and some of my comments upset him too much.

Out of compassion for him (he is family, after all), I agreed to keep my comments non-provocative and relatively innocuous, but I am left with a pervading feeling that he is beginning to see the proverbial light and the mere thought of having to come face to face with reason and logic scares the daylight into him. So, as a typical Liberal, he prefers to avoid the subject altogether.

And, now, I wonder if other Liberals might be coming to the conclusion that Obama and his Liberal ideology are fraudulent.

If enough of them have the required intellect and guts to admit they may have chosen unwisely in the last election, it may sway the next presidential election results to a true Conservative.

And that would be a joyous occasion, indeed!

The Pursuit Of Happiness

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." ~ Declaration of Independence

Whatever founding father added the phrase "the pursuit of happiness" to the Declaration of Independence had it exactly right. God, in my opinion, has indeed endowed all men (and women) with the right to pursue happiness. Unfortunately, that is a goal that will always elude us on this side of forever.

Nobody is, or ever will be, one hundred per cent happy.

It is with that phrase in mind that I address the issue of the teacher's union's complaint in Wisconsin.

What, exactly are they complaining about?

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker has asked them nicely to make a small sacrifice to help ease the economic burden of the state. He has asked them to contribute a bit more of their own earned income to their own benefits plan. This might be objectionable were it not for the fact that they already have a more generous compensation and benefits plan than any position in the private sector.

Yet, they believe it's unfair to ask them to make that sacrifice.

I submit it's not only fair, it's expected. Their very own darling, their dear leader, the One the Unions supported and voted for, Barack Hussein Obama, has repeatedly demanded Americans to make sacrifice after sacrifice to help ease America's economic burden.

But, somehow, the teacher's union in Wisconsin feel they should be exempted from that demand. Why?

Because teachers, like the rest of us, have the inalienable right to pursue happiness.

Apparently happiness, for the Wisconsin teachers, means they have the right to keep as much of their earned income as they can. Money is happiness. Happiness is money. I have no doubt that money can certainly have an effect on happiness, or at least the pursuit thereof.

Funny. Wanting to keep as much of my earned income as I can is a Conservative concept. I wonder how the Wisconsin Public Workers Union Liberals explain this apparent ideological dichotomy. I wonder if they realize how duplicitous this makes them appear.

Also, the amount of money that might produce happiness is relative. By that I mean, the amount of money it would take to make one happy is different for every individual. I've often used this allegory:

To me, $100,000.00 is a veritable boatload of money. If I was ever lucky enough to have that amount added to my meager bank account, with careful planning and shrewd investments, and barring some severe unforeseen circumstances, I could live a long and comfortable life on that much money.

To Bill Gates, however, $100,000.00 is an insignificant drop in the proverbial bucket. It would be virtually impossible for him to maintain his lavish lifestyle with a mere one time addition of a hundred grand to his bank account.

See what I mean? Relative.

I am going to tell you something I have never told anyone: My income is just a little over $20,000.00 a year.

I recently looked over a list of average teacher's salaries from every state in the union. In all of the states, they make much more than I, and in most states, the average teacher makes more than double what I make in a year.

More than double.

Now, I understand their vocation is more important than mine. I also understand that they have attained their positions by doing the things they needed to do, such as finish college, suffer through internships, obtain their certifications, etc.

But still, the emotional me says, "It's not fair that they make so much more money than I. Don't I deserve to make a living for myself and my family as much as they do?"

The logical me says, "They have every right to try to make as much income as they possibly can, and every right to yearn for more, if they think it will make them happy."

I do not begrudge teachers, or anyone else for that matter, the right to make as much income as they can, as long as they do it ethically.

See, again, that's where that inalienable right to the pursuit of happiness comes in.

Some might point to my last post and say, "But, you think the teachers in Wisconsin are overpaid, and should be fired."

And that is still true.

Don't get me wrong. I don't think the teachers should be fired because they are overpaid. If they can manage to be overpaid for the job they do, I say, more power to them.

But, while I support their right to try to make as much money as they can, I don't support their refusal to do the job they were hired to do.

If I decide I am not being paid what I am worth, and there is much truth in that statement, I cannot just stop coming to work. I'd be fired, and justly so. Besides, if I don't come to work, I don't get paid anyway.

If the teachers in Wisconsin aren't getting paid to stand in the street outside the Capitol building and protest, they are demonstrating that they have enough money to last them if their paycheck stops coming.

Obviously, they make more money than I, because I can't afford to miss even one day of work.

So, again I ask, what are they complaining about?

They want money.

Well, so do I.

But, if money is the reason they became teachers, they made the wrong choice. That is, if we can believe what they say, that they are sorely underpaid.

If they became teachers to make a difference in the world, to help children become educated, to mold the leaders of tomorrow, etc, then the money they make shouldn't be all that important to them.

If it is that important to them, they have a college education. They don't have to teach for a living. They can look for work that's more rewarding. The opportunities are endless for anyone with the drive and determination it takes to succeed. The teachers of Wisconsin have demonstrated in the past they have the capacity and the ambition to study hard to obtain a diploma and certification. Surely that same determination would lend itself to other, more lucrative endeavors.

With a few notable exceptions, these teachers don't even do the job they are being paid to do when they aren't out in the streets protesting. I understand two-thirds of Wisconsin Public School 8th Graders can’t read proficiently, despite the highest per pupil spending in the Midwest.

On the other hand, according to this article, Wisconsin Public schools boast a 90% graduation rate.

Huh?

How do they go from 2/3 illiteracy in eighth grade to a 90% graduation rate? To paraphrase Shakespeare's Hamlet, Methinks something's rotten in the state of Wisconsin.

Bottom line:

You don't like it? Shut up, and get back to work. If not, start looking for something more to your liking. No one said you have to teach.