TOTUS, The Monument

Inside sources at the White House have now confirmed that plans have been drawn up for the construction of a new monument in the nations capital. Although, the plans are somewhat sketchy, at this time some details have emerged. Funds for the new structure will come from items hidden in the new budget proposal under the Department of the Interior (cost is rumored to be an astounding 400 billion dollars). The new structure will reach a towering 1110 ft. and 10 2/8 inches high, thereby doubling the height of the Washington Monument which reaches a height of 555 ft and 5 1/8 inches. Studies to change existing laws governing the height of structures in the nations capital are now being undertaken in secret committee meetings in both the House and Senate. It has also been learned that some White House staffers have been sent to Brazil and have approached the chairman of the DNPM, Department of Mineral Production about the purchase of the worlds largest quartz crystal now housed at the Museum of Earth Sciences in Rio de Janiero. This amazing crystal weights a unbelievable 90,000 pounds (the need for this enormous crystal in the construction of the monument remains unclear, at this time). In addition our sources have learned that contacts have been made with Tiomin Resource Inc.--a multi-national company with large holdings in Kenya. Orders have already been placed with their mines at Mambrui, Kilifi and Kwale on the eastern Kenyan coast; for vast quantities of titanium that will be needed in this monument.

Mystery has surrounded this structure. What is it going to be? What is its purpose? Will it be a great monument to America's first black president. Finally the truth is out and we have the full picture. Welcome to the "Age of TOTUS". by Ron Russell

Racism Comes in All Colors

I recently received an e-mail entitled white pride. After reading it I decided it fit nicely with the reports about the comments Sonia Sotomayor made so time ago and the dropping of charges by Obama's justice department against the three black panthers who were obviously attempting to intimidate voters in the recent presidential election. Those on the left in this country firmly believe that people of color cannot be racist and should not be held responsible for what they say or do and the MSM backs them up on this ridiculous accretion. When a white uses racist remarks he is widely condemned and virtually run out of town by the media and those on the left. This double standard in wrong, totally wrong and it is only a matter of time before a severe backlash will occur. Things such as this have an ebb and flow and the tide will turn, because such an injustice cannot long endure. The following is the e-mail I received.

"WHITE " Pride"

This is great. I have been wondering about why Whites are racists, and no other race is.....

Proud to be White

Michael Richards makes his point.............
Michael Richards better known as Kramer from TVs Seinfeld does make a good point.

This was his defense speech in court after making racial comments in his comedy act. He makes some very interesting points...

Someone finally said it. How many are actually paying attention to this? There are African Americans, Mexican Americans, Asian Americans, Arab Americans, etc.

And then there are just Americans. You pass me on the street and sneer in my direction. You call me 'White boy,' 'Cracker,' 'Honkey,' 'Whitey,' 'Caveman'... and that's OK.

But when I call you, Nigger, Kike, Towel head, Sand-nigger, Camel Jockey, Beaner, Gook, or Chink .. You call me a racist.

You say that whites commit a lot of violence against you... so why are the ghettos the most dangerous places to live?

You have the United Negro College Fund. You have Martin Luther King Day.

You have Black History Month. You have Cesar Chavez Day.

You have Yom Hashoah. You have Ma'uled Al-Nabi.

You have the NAACP. You have BET... If we had WET (White Entertainment Television), we'd be racists. If we had a White Pride Day, you would call us racists.

If we had White History Month, we'd be racists.

If we had any organization for only whites to 'advance' OUR lives, we'd be racists.

We have a Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, a Black Chamber of Commerce, and then we just have the plain Chamber of Commerce. Wonder who pays for that??

A white woman could not be in the Miss Black American pageant, but any color can be in the Miss America pageant.

If we had a college fund that only gave white students scholarships... You know we'd be racists.

There are over 60 openly proclaimed Black Colleges in the US . Yet if there were 'White colleges', that would be a racist college.

In the Million Man March, you believed that you were marching for your race and rights. If we marched for our race and rights, you would call us racists.

You are proud to be black, brown, yellow and orange, and you're not afraid to announce it. But when we announce our white pride, you call us racists.

You rob us, carjack us, and shoot at us. But, when a white police officer shoots a black gang member or beats up a black drug dealer running from the law and posing a threat to society, you call him a racist.

I am proud... But you call me a racist.

Why is it that only whites can be racists??

There is nothing improper about this e-mail. Let's see which of you are proud enough to send it on. I sadly don't think many will... That's why we have LOST most of OUR RIGHTS in this country. We won't stand up for ourselves!

BE PROUD TO BE WHITE!

It's not a crime YET.... but getting very close!

Events not Ideology

50,000,000 Mark Note 1923

Recently I have been reading a number of post from various sites indicating that many young people who are now gravitating toward the left will be difficult for conservatives to retrieve in the foreseeable future. I strongly disagree. Ideologies on the left and on the right are often over-ridden by onrushing events. Events will always trumpet ideology. History is full of great changes in public

First the events in Germany during the 1920's and early 1930's. As a result of WWI Germany found itself in a severely weakened position. Germany was left with a destroyed economy and huge war reparations. This will lead to hyperinflation and eventually, the demise of the Weimar Republic.

"A medal commemorating Germany's 1923 hyperinflation. The engraving reads: "On November 1923 1 pound of bread cost 3 billion, 1 pound of meat: 36 billion, 1 glass of beer: 4 billion."During the first half of 1922 the mark stabilized at about 320 Marks per Dollar accompanied by international reparations conferences including one in June 1922 organized by U.S. investment banker J. P. Morgan, Jr.[3] When these meetings produced no workable solution, the inflation changed to hyperinflation and the Mark fell to 8000 Marks per Dollar by December 1922. The cost of living index was 41 in June 1922 and 685 in December, an increase of more than 16 times. In January 1923 French and Belgian troops occupied the industrial region of Germany in the Ruhr valley to ensure that the reparations were paid in goods, such as coal from the Ruhr and other industrial zones of Germany, because the Mark was practically worthless. Although reparations accounted for about one third of the German deficit from 1920 to 1923,[4] the government found reparations a convenient scapegoat. Other scapegoats included bankers and speculators (particularly foreign), both of which groups had, in fact, exacerbated the hyperinflation through the normal course of their profit-seeking. The inflation reached its peak by November 1923, but ended when a new currency (the Rentenmark) was introduced. The government stated that this new currency had a fixed value, secured by real estate, and this was accepted.

Although the inflation ended with the introduction of the Rentenmark and the Weimar Republic continued for a decade afterwards, hyperinflation is widely believed to have contributed to the Nazi takeover of Germany. Adolf Hitler himself in his book, Mein Kampf, makes many references to the German debt and the negative consequences that brought about the "necessity" of National Socialism. The inflation also raised doubts about the competence of liberal institutions, especially amongst a middle class who had held cash savings and bonds. It also produced resentment of Germany's bankers and speculators, many of them Jewish, whom the government and press blamed for the inflation." The previous two paragraphs taken from Wikipedia .

The other example I will mention in the U.S. involvement in WWII. Prior to Pearl Harbor, President Roosevelt had favored the U.S. getting into the war in Europe, but the American public would not support this move. Roosevelt's reasoning on this was swayed by his support for Great Britain, but another factor was Germany's invasion of Russia in June 1941 negating the non-aggression treaty the two countries had entered into in 1939. Russia was viewed by many in the American progressive movement at that time as a great social experiment which the left in this country supported and Roosevelt was eager to assist Russia in the conflict against Germany. But as earlier mentioned the American people did not want to become involved in the war in Europe. Then came Pearl Harbor and minds were quickly changed.

As I said before, events not ideologies shape the opinions of the masses. Those on the extremes of the political spectrum will seldom change, but the vast middle will ebb and flow depending on the onrushing events.

by Ron Russell

Obama's Choice

Above image was taken from Hillbilly White Trash

Protracted Conflict and Systemic Revolution

by Ron Russell

The purpose of this article is to give an overview on "History of Western Civilization". We will begin with the city-states of ancient Greece and proceed to the modern period.

The city-states of Greece such as Athens, Sparta, Corinth and others gave us many contributions to our present day society--democracy, philosophy and literature, just to name a few. They were the dominate force in the ancient world, but due to internal and external forces that period passed. The forces which caused this to happen we will refer to in this piece as the protracted conflict--this is an ongoing struggle between the old order and the new. With the old order always being the stronger in the beginning, but gradually giving way to the new order in the end. This, again, is a continuing struggle in history.

The city states eventually gave way to the Roman Empire, a system which,also, lasted for hundreds of years contributing a great deal to modern society-laws, architecture and literature. But again, this system would soon pass away into history because of internal struggles and the pressures from outside forces--the effects of the protracted conflict. The fall of the Roman Empire was indeed, a defining moment in world history, leading to one of histories darkest periods--appropriately called the Dark Ages or middle ages.

The Dark Ages lasted for hundreds of years. It was similar in some respects to the Greek city-state period in that there were many small seats of power--there the similarities stop. To recap for a moment--we had the disunity of the city-states followed by the unity of the Roman Empire to the disunity of power in the dark (middle ages). Not much good came from that period-- it was, indeed "dark". Probably not a good time to live in. That period begin to come to an end during what we call the Renaissance--a time of enlightenment. But again, the "city state' form of government continued to exist fora time-Florence, Genova. It was appropriate that this period started here in the heart of the old Roman Empire. Gradually, the old city-state form of government in Europe would give way to the larger kingdoms of France, Spain, Portugal, England and others. Here we have the beginnings of--The age of exploration, the Colonial Period. So far we have seem the Greek city-states (decentralized government evolve to the Roman Empire (centralized government) and that in turn giving way to the Dark Ages (decentralized government) to the beginning of the Colonial Period (centralized government)--all part of what we have called the systemic revolution.

Before we move into the colonial period, I need to point out again that this is a continuing revolution brought about by a protracted conflict--the struggle between the old and new orders. History does repeat itself over and over again--it is systemic in nature.

The Colonial Period lasted as those before it for hundreds of years. Its primary players were Spain, Portugal and England--there were others--these, however were probably the most predominate. This was a time when power was centralized in a few of the capitals of Europe, although there were conflicts between the various powers. These struggles would continue up to and including WW1 and WW2. These two world wars will bring an end to this period and carry us to the modern period which will we refer to as the age of Rampant Nationalism. This is the time we live in. Rampant Nationalism, our current period, could possibly be one of our most dangerous times--due to the influence of modern technology on weapons of war. New nations are popping up right and left. Who can keep up with the pace--I can't! The old colonial systems have totally collapsed and the vacuums created by that collapse have helped this process along. I don't know where this will lead, but it doesn't seem to be a pleasant place. Dangers are always out there, but this is, indeed, a troubling period. I hope by this time you have seen the continuing process that has occurred--decentralization to centralization and back, again and again. A continuing process--Systemic Revolution, and within that the Protracted Conflict.

Hydra

Recently, while reading an excellent post on Wealth Distribution on Insight on Freedom I left a longer than usual comment. The following is some of that comment:

Wealth distribution in destructive in many ways, but the worst in the under-mining of a basic American principle---the right to work and to keep the fruits of your labor. Recently I got to thinking about all the rights we have lost over the years in the name of public safety and the list is indeed long. And now a new snake is rearing it's ugly head and "public safety" is no longer alone. The new kid on the block is "public health" and if anything it will be more vicious. Some groups have been suffering the abuses of this monster for a number of years, names those who smoke---the tax abuses imposed on this minority are staggering and punitive. And now this new administration with its Keynesian Economics is getting ready to turn this monster on other groups seeing little resistance to the abusive taxes leveled on smokers. They have alcohol, sugar, soft drinks, snack foods and many other things in their sights and are already planning how to spend the new revenues that will be raised. And a third snake is beginning to show itself, migrating from the west coast and quickly spreading eastward. This new menace is called "Protective Environmentalism", this is perhaps the most dangerous, for its venom can infect the entire populous. Unlike "public health" it doesn't just seek-out the over-weight, the smoker, the drinker, the teenager with his soft drink, this new menace has a voracious appetite consuming everything in its path--liberty, freedom and individualism. This three-headed Hydra seeking to destroy our freedoms under the guise of, "Public Safety, Public Health, and Protective Environmentalism must be eliminated.

Abusive Taxes

The following post is a modified post taken from a blog I recently started at United Smokers And Drinkers Against Tax Abuse know as U.S.A.D.A.T.A. this in a new blog of mine intended to fight the abusive taxes being leveled on a minority. It is relevant to all of us in that we all can be singled out for such abuse. The soda drinker, the big car driver, and the list will continue to expand as political leaders seek more and more tax revenues for their socialist agendas all in the name of public safety and public health. Things are quickly spinning out of control and the smokers and alcohol uses are now the most abused and are a sign of what coming to us all. If this minority can be so abused then no one is safe from a out-of-control government. One cannot sit back and say, "I don't smoke or use alcohol so why should I worry about those who do". You should worry, you should care, because the things you do, the life you value, those things will be next.

These people who are elected by the voters in their respective states are all pawns of special interest and the votes they cast, the laws they pass are intended to help those special groups. Sadly, the only way these politicians will listen to what you have to say is to organize and as a group present your issues to them. As an individual voter you are powerless. I know many will tell you that the single voter is important---that's a lie, a myth and spoken by those who don't understand the political system or else those who do understand it and want to keep you under their control.

The purpose of this post is to begin a movement, a movement by the most discriminated against groups in America (those who use tobacco and alcohol products) and strangely one of the largest. Something is wrong with this picture, a large group that has no power, no agenda and no leaders. A group being led to the slaughter, a spineless herd of wimps. I include myself in this group for I too, have been silent for far too long. Napoleon once said, "Ten people who speak make more noise than ten thousand who are silent". I'm no writer, I'm no orator, I am however, sick of being silent. I want to be one of those ten who make noise, I want to be one of the first hundred, and then one of the thousands and finally one of the millions that will rally for justice and fairness and stop this abuse of excessive taxes on what is a huge and potentially powerful minority. If you fail to speak, if you fail to stand and be heard, then you deserve to remain under the foot of a repressive government, a government that will dig deeper and deeper into your pocket in the name of public health. Its your decision to smoke, its your decision to have a beer on the weekend. Your rights are being taken by the politicians in the state houses and in the halls of congress by the very people who have been sworn to protect then. Now is the time, this is the moment, this is the beginning.

The fight will be long but the victory will be long-lasting. The victory will not be just for those who use tobacco or alcohol, but will be a victory for all who value freedom and liberty. The freedom to do as you please in your home, without the government attempting to regulate your life-style in the name of public health or public safety. Don't feel bad the government is now attempting to regulate the auto industry and tell us what kind of cars to drive, and what foods to eat all in the name of public health and public safety. This is a smoke screen, a ploy by those in power, by those who seek more and more control over your life. By corrupt leaders who have special interest with voices louder than yours, by politicians who want to take from you and give to others. Let the ground swell against big intrusive government begin here, for here we have a great minority who hasn't been heard up until now. Your voices can be loud, very loud and when the great chorus goes up the politicians they will take notice. Link to this blog and others like it and encourage others to join. I want nothing from this effort, except to bring about some sanity in government and to restore those rights that have been so unjustly taken away. Please join me in this effort.

Use the bookmarks to get the word out. Visit our sponsors to support this blog.

Free Speech

Free speech is a fundamental right guaranteed to each United States citizen and it deserves to be defended and preserved if our nation is to remain great. Under the banner of free speech fall the reports by the press, the rights of individual opinions and ideals, artistic expression and the criticism of our government. While individuals may be disrespected, inconvenienced or offended by the use of free speech, society as a whole benefits from its existence.

The existence of free speech insures that each voice is heard and acknowledged and although our opinions may differ and elicit fiery debate, the opportunity to learn and create a pursuit of truth and understanding is invaluable. Our nation's strength lies in our ability to express our opinions, often in opposition to government, which creates debate and ushers in change. Free speech is the foundation of the United States' greatness. To stifle the voice of humanity is to extinguish the flame of democracy which burns bright throughout the world. To limit the ability to speak ones conscience is to stifle the voice of humanity.

Muslims and Prisons

Face of Radical Islam

Our prison systems are a breeding ground for radical Muslim fundamentalist. A fact that few Americans know. Many convert to Islam while in the custody of the state and federal government. The prison systems are set up in such a way that, in an unintended way, they actually encourage this by the special privileges they grant to certain religious groups. Many who go into the system for minor offences come out radicalized and present a real threat to society. This was what happened recently in N.Y. Muslim groups in the prisons are highly organized and seek to gain as many converts as possible. Some have good motives, but others just teach hate of the white man and hate of the government of this country, just as Rev. Wright did in his church to the impressionable young man on his front pew. Many young men who enter the system are susceptible to the teachings of confirmed radicals.

And now Obama wants to bring the worst of the worst of at GITMO into our federal system, where they will eventually have contact with young receptive minds, minds that will be open to their radical philosophies. This in not a good idea by any standard.

Israel and Iran

by Ron Russell

Recently I came across a post on Right Truth entitled "Iranian Missle Watch and Israel" a very detailed and informative post and I certainly recommend this as a worthwhile read. Below is a summary of my comments on this post:

Should the Israeli decide to take out the Iranian nuclear facilities I feel they have the ability to take out many of the key sites. The big ones at Natanz and Bushehr being the most important. In the past the Israeli have come up with unexpected ways to accomplish their goals. I'm old enough to remember the "Six Day War" when the Egyptians blockaded the Straits of Tiran, thereby shutting down the Israeli port of Elat and denying Israel an exit to the Red Sea (Israel could not use the Suez Canal at that time). The Israeli responded with an unexpected air strike on the Egyptian Air Force, by sending their airforce some 300 or so miles out into the Mediterranean Sea north of Egypt and coming in from that direction, avoiding Egyptian radar focused to the east and at the same time sending their tank forces into the Sinai and by-passing the fixed Egyptian positions in the desert--theirs were classic moves and well thought out.

Bebe, sees a clear and present danger from Iran and knows that continued negotiations with Iran are futile(Obama is yet to see this), and are simply stalling tactics to gain more time to complete their nuclear program. Everyone seems to know this except Obama and many on the left who have put their heads in the sand. I suspect however, if the truth was really known, that Obama and those on the left actually favor the Arabs (and I should say Persians) in this conflict. I see nothing in Obama's background that would lead him to support the Israeli positions. If I had to bet, I contend that he is anti-Israel and would love to see the Jewish state disappear. Many, many on the left hold this position and make no secret about it.

I think the onrushing events will soon overtake Netanyahu and he will be forced to act. Events are moving quickly and the "Dogs of War" will soon be released. Whether waves or ripples will come from the attack reminds to be seen, but from the Israeli perspective I feel they see few if any options.

Cheney and Obama

Obama is Playing With Fire

The difference between Cheney and Obama is stark, only a few gray areas here. Cheney's words were based on reality, the reality of 9/11 and the events that followed the attacks. Obama's words on the other hand were those of a law professor taking to his students about some hypothetical situation. One man, a leader, is based in reality; while the other is living in a fantasy world that has never existed. Sadly, the dreamer is the president and the realist in a former vice president. Obama promised change and change is what we got. Change that is dangerous, change not rooted in reality, change based on a belief that America is the villain and the terrorist are innocent victims. These opposing views are clear and distinct, and the direction the president is taking us if fraught with dangers. Dangers, that I believe will over take this new man in the White House and maybe bring him to his senses; or at the very least wake up those Obama supporters who are in a trance. But the over-arching question is how many will have to die to bring about this CHANGE!

California Now, The Nation Next

by Ron Russell

The liberal state government in California knows only one thing, spend-spend-spend its their answer to any problem they see, in short its the liberal way. The government of California has thrown out the welcome mat to any illegal who find his way to the "Nanny" state. The state offers them medical services, social welfare programs and just about anything they want. Is it any wonder most stay in the Nanny state. For years California has been on the cutting edge of many liberal programs, unrealistic CAFE programs(which the Obama administration has now adopted), no reform of welfare programs(when almost ever other state has adopted welfare reform) and a multitude of radical environmental programs(which are draining the states coffers). The state government in California has caved-in to labor and those on the public dole and gives those two groups many special benefits which in the end cost the other citizens of the Nanny state billions of dollars each year, and at the same time prevents businesses such as WalMart and others from locating in the state and providing the consumers with lower prices. The government of California has even tried to impose eating standards on its citizens, because some feel the government has a duty to determine how the average citizen should conduct their lives. In short, the people of California have had their state ruined by a handful of semi-socialist(we know whats best for you) bureaucrats in the state house in Sacramento. I also suspect that the Obama administration is now considering bailing out the state since this state more than any other has policies in place that mirror the policies that the administration in Washington is attempting to install nationwide. Therefore, it cannot let this state fail, because failure there would send a signal that the policies of the Obama administration will lead to a similar nationwide failure.

Obama is Violating His Oath

Obama is Violating His Oath

Obama has taken an oath to defend the Constitution and
defend the American people. He must think that the great floods
that may be caused by so-called global warming
are a greater threat to Americans than the possibility of having
an auto accident.
The above image was taken from a post by Sarge Charlie. This is an excellent post and I recommend it.

The Nanny State

Have the Voters in California had Enough ?

Obama's Plan: The Final Solution

Phase I

Phase II Phase III Phase IV

Today president Obama strolled into the Rose Garden on the White House lawn
and boldly announced his new mandated CAFE standards.
But perhaps the most telling thing about his statement
was his opening remark and I quote:
"Good Morning, what a beautiful day, the sun is out because good things are happening."
He said this without his TOTUS!
This is the true Obama.
This man thinks the sun rises and sets on him and his agenda.

Obama took a huge step today to gather more control,
not more control over big banks,
not more control over medical services(that is coming later),
not more control over the insurance industry,
not more control over utility rates(that too, is coming later),
but more control over the kind of car you drive.
With his words today his has adopted the California CAFE standards.
He has adopted the plans of a bankrupt state.
He has adopted the plans of the radical environmentalist.
He is seeking to control our very life's.
This fool, this idiot, this would be tyrant, this messianic madman
is taking the country over a cliff.
And these are only his first steps.
Remember what he said today:
"The sun is out, because good things are happening"
by Ron Russell

Handcuffing the CIA

Late last night while leaving a comment on Dread Pundit I found myself getting a little carried away in the comment box. I sometimes do that. Usually I don't have time to leave lengthy comments, but on this issue of torture and the sworn duty of the president to protect us a left a longer than usually comment. I'll share it with you now.

"What is or what isn't torture is the question. A question without a clear answer. The question should be will rough interrogation save hundreds or even thousands of lives and if so do we do it. It is the sworn duty of the president to defend Americans not to protect the rights of foreign nationals who may have vital information necessary to carry out that duty. Obama recently made a statement at one of his many public appearances and said, (I have to paraphrase): Yes information was obtained the question is could we have gotten it without harsh methods. This was without a doubt the most ignorant statements one in his position could make and no one member of the press called him on it. The implication of his answer was that the CIA interrogators immediately went to harsh methods when they started questioning the terrorist. That is not how things are done and Obama is aware of that. The CIA does not use harsh methods until all other measures have been exhausted. And as for the terrorist giving misleading information---of course that happens, but the information is checked out and if it is incorrect the CIA goes after the prisoner again and again and finally they get the truth. And in many cases lives are saved as a result of their efforts. To take this tool away from us is to condemn some Americans, not to torture, but to death at sometime in the future. This in not acceptable, this would be a criminal act on the part of the president and a violation of the oath he took. And if such an unthinkable thing should occur the president should be impeached and put on trial in the Senate and the country at that time would applaud that action. Obama may be able to walk on water, but he is skating on thin ice by restricting the actions of those who try to defend us. If he continues to listen to those voices on the far left, the voices coming from a vocal minority, the voices of the hate America crowd, the voices of weakness and appeasement Americans may die and their deaths will be on the hands of this indecisive weakling".

It Has Always Been the Soldier

Many forget what we owe to the men who wear the uniforms of our armed forces. And some choose to denigrate their service to this nation. Many group demonstratate against these men, some accuse them of crimes. Some great universities will not allow organizations associated with them on campus and some of the left even spit on these returning heros. But it is to these few, to these men, to these heros that we owe everything: Found this poem at Political Wonk

IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE SOLDIER

It is the soldier,
not the President who gives us democracy.

It is the soldier,
not the Congress who takes care of us.

It is the soldier,
not the Reporter who has given us Freedom of Press.

It is the soldier,
not the Poet who has given us Freedom of Speech.

It is the soldier,
not the campus [community] Organizer who
has given us the Freedom to Demonstrate.

It is the soldier,
who salutes the flag;
who serves beneath the flag,
and whose coffin is draped by the flag,
that allows the protester to burn the flag.

Father Dennis O’Brien, US Marine Corp. Chaplain

Nancy Pelosi: More Taxes and More Lies

by Ron Russell

Before I get into the lies let me say something about Nancy Pelosi and taxes, particularly the so-called "Windfall Tax on Retirement Income".

Adding a tax to your retirement is simply another way of saying to the American people, you're so darn stupid that we're going to keep doing this until we drain every cent from you. That's what the Speaker of the House is saying.

Nancy Pelosi wants a Windfall Tax on Retirement Income. In other words tax what you have made by investing toward your retirement. This woman is a nut case! You aren't going to believe this.

Madam speaker Nancy Pelosi wants to put a Windfall Tax on all stock market profits (including Retirement fund, 401K and Mutual Funds! Alas, it is true - all to help the 12 Million Illegal Immigrants and other unemployed Minorities!

This woman is frightening.
She quotes...' We need to work toward the goal of equalizing income, (didn't Marx say something like this?), in our country and at the same time limiting the amount the rich can invest.' (I am not rich, are you?)

When asked how these new tax dollars would be spent, she replied:

'We need to raise the standard of living of our poor, unemployed and minorities. For example, we have an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in our country who need our help along with millions of unemployed minorities. Stock market windfall profits taxes could go a long way to guarantee these people the standard of living they would like to have as 'Americans'.'

(Read that quote again and again and let it sink in.) 'Lower your retirement, give it to others who have not worked as you have for it'.

Now why would Nancy Pelosi want to do this, what could her motives be. Could it be that's she is just one of those bleeding heart liberals who feel its their duty to help the poor down-trodden masses. Or maybe its that California has the great bulk of these illegal aliens that are in the country and she sees the necessity of helping them and by doing so to help her state with the burden that is taking California down the road to bankruptcy. Finally, could it be that those who would get the help she is offering will be so grateful that they will continue to vote for her party in the upcoming elections.

All politicians try to maintain their voters and will do most anything to that end. Nancy is no different in that respect. And most will bend the truth from time to time this is what we have come to expect. But Mrs. Pelosi has gone a step farther, a step over the line, a step which could and should cost her the speakership of the House. After changing her story on the water-boarding controversy four or five times she has now resorted to calling those at the CIA liars and attempting to deceive Congress. She has nothing else left to fight with but the liar charge leveled at the CIA. She has been caught, caught in a web that she and those on the left have spun. And finding herself in this web of deception she is hollowing foul and time out--but Nancy the clock is running and the onrushing events are over-taking you. The crowd is roaring and the game is coming to an end and with it your speakership, pitiful as it was, is quickly becoming history.

Second Amendment

When I was eleven years old I purchased my first gun through the Sears catalog, a .22caliber rifle. I loved that rifle and my family was happy for me. The topic of discussion at most family gatherings normally involved whatever species of animal were in season or gun control. Growing up in this environment has given me an interesting outlook on certain issues, mostly those having to do with gun control and the Second Amendment. It is my belief that the original intent and purpose of the Second Amendment was to preserve and guarantee, not grant the pre-existing right of individuals, to keep and bear arms. The Second Amendment reads: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

"And any statute or regulation that burdens the right to keep and bear arms on the ground that guns are a public health hazard should enjoy the same frosty reception in court that would be given to a statute or regulation that burdened the free exercise of religion as a mental health hazard. Such an individual right was a legacy of the English Bill of Rights. (Joyce Lee Malcompg79) When, as William Blackstone phrased it in 1803, "the sanctions of society and laws are found insufficient to restrain the violence of oppression". As with any civil right, the essence of persuasion should remain with the proponent of legislation that restricts or burdens the right to keep and bear arms, rather than, as with ordinary legislation, on the opponent. The House committee eliminated the stipulation that the militia be "well-armed," and the Senate, in what became the final version of the amendment, eliminated any description of a militia. Polsby states, the public policy of discouraging people from owning or using firearms is not, by itself, constitutionally permissible , any more than discouraging people from religious observance would be permissible to some future,oh-so-progressive government that considered religion as hopelessly taboo. The use of the word people in the Second Amendment indicates an individual right. With this wording the writers of the constitution have clearly, distinguished between the rights, states and the people. As some consider the right to keep and bear arms. As was the case in the English tradition, the arms in the hands of the people, not the militia, are relied upon"to restrain the violence of oppression". It did not change the amendments guarantee that the right of the people to have arms not be infringed. While the Tenth Amendment which reads: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Partisan View on Gun Control

Question: How do you tell the difference between Democrats, Republicans, and Southern Republicans?

The answer can be found by posing the following problem.

You're walking down a deserted street with your wife and two small children.

Suddenly, a dangerous looking man with a huge knife comes around the corner, locks eyes with you, screams obscenities, raises the knife, and charges.

You are carrying a Glock and you are an expert shot. You have mere seconds before he reaches you and your family. What do you do?


Democrat's Answer:

Well, that's not enough information to answer the question!

Does the man look poor or oppressed?

Have I ever done anything to him that would inspire him to attack?

Could we run away?

What does my wife think?

What about the kids?

Could I possibly swing the gun like a club and knock the knife out of his hand?

What does the law say about this situation?

Does the Glock have an appropriate safety built into it?

Why am I carrying a loaded gun anyway, and what kind of message does this send to society and to my children?

Is it possible he'd be happy with just killing me and not my family?

Does he definitely want to kill me, or would he be content just to wound me?

If I were to grab his knees and hold on, could my family get away while he was stabbing me?

Should I call 9-1-1?

Why is this street so deserted?

We need to raise taxes, have a paint and gardening day and make this a happier, healthier street that would discourage such behavior.

This is all so confusing!

I need to debate this with some friends for a few days and try to come to a consensus.

Republican's Answer:
BANG!

Southern Republican's Answer:
BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG!
Click...(sounds of reloading).