Canadian Health care: Not good enough for Parliament Member (Read the Comments Section for the People's Assesment of Socialized Medicine in Canada)


Canadian Parliament Memberess, Belinda Stronach, has traveled to the U.S. for cancer treatment. Her doctor in Canada recommended that she go to the States because "the U.S. hospital was the best place to have it done due to the type of surgery required."

As I researched Parliament Memberess Beliinda Stronach, I uncovered a lot of dirt, all public information, such as:

1) She is an heiress to millions. That's not real dirt, but worth mentioning because she is a Liberal hypicr...er...fanatic.

2) She was on the board of Directors for 5 automotive parts companies. You know, they provide parts for cars which are killing our planet.

Now for the good stuff!

3) In January, 2004, Larry Zolf of CBC news reported that Stronach admitted that she used marijuana.

Not surprised as she is a good "friend" of former U.S. President, Bill, I didn't inhale" Clinton. Oh yeah, I almost forgot, womanizer. Wink, Wink.

4) She is twice divorced

5) She was the "other woman" in 2 extramarital affairs she had with a couple of ex-NHL players. And dated several other men in a year or two and said this to defend her actions: "Let's face it. I don't sit at home and knit on Friday nights."

6) She is pro abortion

7) She is pro gun control

8) She is pro gay marriage

Belinda_Stronach



I am not in the habit of trashing members of another nations government, but in this case, it is warranted and here is why as it may apply to the U.S. government on health care.

American Liberals tout socialized health care as being more important than economic and political freedom. Canada's health care system is commonly used as an example. But if Canada's system was so damn good, why did a member of their government, come to the U.S. for treatment? Liberals also praise Fidel Castro because he provides socialized health care, yet recently, when Fidel Castor became ill, he had a doctor fly in from Spain!

On Monday, Spanish authorities confirmed that Garcia Sabrido had traveled to Cuba's capital with advanced medical equipment for Castro and to study a possible surgery. The Madrid's health department has been sending medicines to Cuba since June.

Dr. Sabrido has had some training in the U.S., courtesy of privatized medicine. Ironic, isn't it?
Spanish Health care

So now, we have a fanatical supporter of socialized medicine, coming to the U.S. at the behest of her socialized doctor, for treatment in a privatized health system, because "it is better". We have a Communist Dictator requesting a doctor from a nation that is welcoming privatized health care. We have people from third world cesspools and other socialist nations coming to the U.S. to become doctors only to go back to their native countries. Are you seeing the pattern here?

Countries with a long history of socialized medicine are beginning to privatize. The quality of privatized health care in the U.S.is considered impeccable by the world. And like it or not, the United States does have socialized health care already! It's called county hospitals! It's called Social Security! It's called Medicare/Medicaid! And my proof is that 1.5 trillion tax payer dollars are used to fund it!

One last thing. Socialized health care is nowhere to be found in the Constitution. It is not in the Bill of Right's. As a matter of fact, it is found nowhere in any founding document anywhere! So these Liberal "humanists" need to get this through their heads: NOBODY HAS A "RIGHT" TO SOCIALIZED MEDICINE!

Once again, our votes are meaningless
I say votes because in the past six years the voters of CA have voted against gay marriage, not one, but three times in general elections. Do our votes not matter at all anymore?

Apparently not. As this week the CA Senate has once again ignored the voice of the people and has passed AB43.

A previous post demonstrates how those in a domestic partnerships can and do have the same "rights" as those in a marriage between a man and a woman, the objective of the gay community is not seeking equality...they seek special acknowledgements, entitlements and superiortity in all aspects of life, as we see with their continued battle over the military's "Don't ask, don't tell" policy. Instead of being grateful that the military considers one's sexual preference as "none of their business"...the gay community wants to force them to not only recognize sexual preferences, but then give preferential treatment to certain groups because of it!

Little by little, we are losing more and more of any resemblance to a moralistic society. Those of us who simply want to live our lives freely, without extensive government involvement and intrusion; without having the majority of our paychecks taken to support non-essential government programs (i.e, the welfare state), and without government interference in the daily practice of our faith and beliefs, are ridiculed. We continue to have our voices ignored, even when they are in the majority, as in the case of gay marriage and California. We appear to no longer be a nation in which government is ruled by the people, for the people!

Instead, we have become a nation in which those in "power" have manipulated the system, taken advantage of the people and rule without regard to the laws in which our great nation was founded.

First Amendment 101, for the Constitutionally illiterate.


Amendment I to the Constitution of the Unites States.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Note the very first word in this very first Amendment. Congress.

Congress, definition of from Dictionary.com:

1. (initial capital letter) a. the national legislative body of the U.S., consisting of the Senate, or upper house, and the House of Representatives, or lower house, as a continuous institution.
b. this body as it exists for a period of two years during which it has the same membership: the 96th Congress.
c. a session of this body: to speak in Congress.

2. the national legislative body of a nation, esp. of a republic.
3. a formal meeting or assembly of representatives for the discussion, arrangement, or promotion of some matter of common interest.
4. the act of coming together; an encounter; meeting.
5. an association, esp. one composed of representatives of various organizations.
6. familiar relations; dealings; intercourse.
7. coitus; sexual intercourse.
–verb (used without object) 8. to assemble together; meet in congress.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech

The First Amendment to the Constitution, says that Congress shall pass no law prohibiting free speech.

Now, I am not the government. I have not sought nor have I been elected to any body of government. I am not a member of Congress. I cannot pass a law of any kind. Therefore, the First Amendment does not regulate me. It regulates the government.

The last time that I checked, Fox News was not a member of the government. So when they chose, as free citizens of America, to turn off Sally Fields microphone, they have not violated ANY LAW in the United States of America.

This is where the hypocrisy and blatant ignorance of Liberals shines through brightly. I cannot state obvious facts, such as:
Blacks have the highest abortion rate in the nation.
If I were to say that, which is factually true, I would be branded a racist by most Liberals, and in today's world, who wants to be branded a racist? One can even get fired for exercising their "free speech" in that regard.

On most Liberal blogs that I have tried to have debates on, I am censored constantly by them. They constantly ban me from their sites. So much for "free speech", huh? They can call me: Hitler, Fascist, Nazi, Hillbilly, Redneck (even though I live near Chicago) but I cannot call an illegal alien, an illegal alien, without being branded a racist. They must be called "Undocumented Worker" because that highlights their "humanity", in an attempt to lessen the fact that they have deliberately violated our laws.

A few more examples: Former presidential candidate Pat Buchanan was hit with salad dressing during a speech, while right-wing pundit Ann Coulter, Weekly Standard editor William Kristol, and right-wing commentator David Horowitz all had pies thrown at them by so-called, tolerant, "free speech" loving Liberals while speaking at Universities.

Some random comments from Liberals taken from blogs or comments sections from articles:

Fox, like the administration, think that censorship and repetition of lies will keep us at war. Fox is sleaze TV, has been since the beginning, yet anti-war free speech must be censored from our delicate ears. Profits and power above humanity allows them to sleep well at night. Sleep tight.

As for saying goddamn? Who cares? It wasn't f*** or something major like that. I'm sorry if some of the more radical Christians are so offended, but they are not the only people in this country.

Freedom of speech, look into it.

This is _supposed_ to be a free country with a First Amendment to the Constitution. Field has a right to say whatever she damn well pleases.

It is truly amazing how many people confuse religion with politics... have your religious beliefs but don't push it onto everyone else. We are a nation that used to believe in the freedom of religion and speech. If I want to say "GOD DAMN", I will and so will Sally. Get over it. If you just can't, why don't you win your self rightious butt an Emmy and tell us all how much you love the war and hate people who say god damn, I bet you won't be censored.

Sally’s Comment should not have been censored by Fox, since it was just an opinion, that should have been allowed by our Constituitional right to free speech. Where is the democracy here Fox? Fox-do American’s still have the right to Free Speech and opinions?

The issue was her politics, which were in the face of the politics of all News Corp and Murchdoch holdings. Pretty sad shot at the already dying First Amendment.

Here is the simple difference. Fox News is not the Government! Fox can cut the mic from anyone they want to! If we are in fact, losing our First Amendment rights, which applies mostly to Conservatives rather than Liberals, it is because Liberals lack of respect and decency have forced some sort of mediation(government). I have always said: If society does not regulate itself, then the government will, and that is exactly why Liberals pull this offensive nonsense.(Current Communist Goals, #'s 24 &25 ) The more reckless our society becomes, the more the government will step in, and that is exactly what the Liberals want, as long as it is a Liberal government.

Communist Goals (1963)
Documention below

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Congressional Record--Appendix, pp. A34-A35
January 10, 1963

Current Communist Goals

EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. A. S. HERLONG, JR. OF FLORIDA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Thursday, January 10, 1963



Mr. HERLONG. Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Patricia Nordman of De Land, Fla., is an ardent and articulate opponent of communism, and until recently published the De Land Courier, which she dedicated to the purpose of alerting the public to the dangers of communism in America.

At Mrs. Nordman's request, I include in the RECORD, under unanimous consent, the following "Current Communist Goals," which she identifies as an excerpt from "The Naked Communist," by Cleon Skousen:

[From "The Naked Communist," by Cleon Skousen]

CURRENT COMMUNIST GOALS

1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.

2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.

3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.

4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.

5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.

6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.

7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.

8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev's promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.

9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.

10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.


11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)

12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.

13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.

14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office.


15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.


16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.


17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.


18. Gain control of all student newspapers.


19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.


20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policymaking positions.


21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.


22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to "eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms."


23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. "Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art."


24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.


25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.


26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."


27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a "religious crutch."


28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."


29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.


30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man."


31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the "big picture." Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.


32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture--education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.


33. Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.


34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.

35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.


36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.

37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.


38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].

39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.


40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.


41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.


42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use ["]united force["] to solve economic, political or social problems.

43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government.


44. Internationalize the Panama Canal.

45. Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction [over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction] over nations and individuals alike.

Human Rights Hypocrisy

In January 2007, masked men grabbed a 5 year old Iraqi boy named Youssif, doused him with gasoline, and burned him alive.

On September 11, 2007, he and his family arrived in the United States for plastic surgery.

Now, I hate to bring politics into a situation such as this, but I feel that it is needed. Liberal Democrats claim a monopoly on championing human rights protections. Why then, are they turning their backs on people, and not limited to, little Youssif? How many mass graves have been unearthed in Iraq? How many horror stories have been documented showing the cruelty of Saddam Hussein? And I am not talking about making people wear panties on their heads, I am talking about real and true torture, such as cutting off people's hands, having a car roll over a child's arm to earn money, or tying a man to a pole and beat him while his neighbors are forced to watch.


!*WARNING EXTREMELY GRAPHIC*!


Saddam Torture Video
Saddam Torture Video
Saddam Torture Video
Saddam Torture Video





Yet, Liberal Democrats want the US to leave the Middle East and allow these atrocities to continue, knowing full well of their existence. They say that they are against our soldiers dying in Iraq, but have no problems with our soldiers dying in Darfur. They say that the reason we are in the Middle East, is because they have oil over there. I say we are in the Middle East, because they brought terrorism over here.


Democrats need to realize, that the rest of the world does not live like we do, or, other nations that we have either liberated, or aided in their liberation. Japan brainwashed their citizens in WW II and slaughtered innocent Chinese in their conquest. War ended that. Germany executed 6 million Jews and countless others in their conquest of Europe. War ended that. After the ceasefire in Korea, South Korea was freed and flourished, while Communist North Korea suffered in poverty and dictatorship. War, led by a God fearing Republican, freed African slaves in the US.


Read the article about little Youssif and his family. Note their reaction to being in the United States:

"I feel like I'm in a dream,"

"You see America on television, but you never imagine or dream that you will ever be here." He paused, tears in his eyes.
"It's more than paradise."


To Liberals and to Democrats, this means nothing. To them, the only thing that matters, is that President Bush fails. The only thing that matters to them, is that their socialist agenda gets pushed through. The only thing more important to them, than atrocities in foreign lands, is that 1.2 million teenagers in the US, get a two dollar an hour raise in a minimum wage job while they go to school on tax payer funding, because that, will no doubt, cure the evils of the world.

Here's your Democratic Agenda in a nutshell

Well, along with socialized healthcare, pulling out of Iraq (pushing total defeatism) and pretending that there is no threat what-so-ever from jihadists.

"All of the Democratic candidates support a federal ban on anti-gay job discrimination, want to repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" policy barring gays from serving openly in the military and support civil unions that would extend marriage-like rights to same-sex couples."

So what are the "rights" that married people have over non-married people? And when will Democrats ensure that those of us who are single have those rights too?

Let's see...being married entitles the married couple to:

• Share a home
• Joint parenting/adoption
• Legal and financial benefits for taxes, retirement, property ownership, inheritance, insurance rates, family and medical care

Now let's see which of these can't be achieved legally via a Power of Attorney or other legal methods....

• Share a home (anyone is able to share a home, friends/siblings/even strangers can enter into a lease or apply for a joint mortgage...so this is NOT an issue)
• Joint parenting/adoption (well currently every state except for Florida, allows gays to apply for adoption...however, this ban in Florida is in constant challenge)
• Legal and financial benefits for taxes, retirement, property ownership, inheritance, insurance rates, family and medical care (all of the mentioned, to my knowledge, can be achieved by a completing a simple Power of Attorney form)

"A power of attorney is a document that evidences the creation of a relationship between two people who are designated as the "principal" and the "agent". The principal designates the agent in the document, and the agent is authorized to act on the principal's behalf--to stand in the shoes of the principal--for whatever business the power of attorney permits. A power of attorney can be general, so that the agent can conduct any sort of business on behalf of the principal, or it may be specific, limited to the transactions expressly provided for in the document. Third parties may treat the agent as if he or she is the principal in any transactions which the agent is authorized to conduct. Powers of attorney are commonly used in all sorts of business activities, and are very frequently executed on behalf of individuals"

And as far as the "don't ask, don't tell" policy in the military...what better policy is there? This one basis one's ability to serve simply on qualifications, skills, knowledge and experience. Is that not the best way to deter discrimination of all sorts? Why must we actually KNOW what someone's sexual preferences are or what they choose to do in the privacy of their own homes?

Seems odd to me that the gay and lesbian groups that are constantly pushing for equality would object to a policy that actually ensures it!

Traitor meets with Communist Leader

So this is supposed to what? Confirm for those who don't know already, that Sean Penn is a traitor and communist? Again, this brings up that question of treason...years ago, even during the Cold War, this "actor's" actions would have been considered treasonous and he may even have been considered an ex-patriot...preventing him from living here in America.

But, typically seen today, his actions are "hailed" as heroism and he is considered to be a "peacemaker" among many. What happened to our common sense? How can ANYONE honestly believe that Venezuela's people are better off under Chávez's control?

Apparently, Sean Penn chose to close his eyes to the fact that Chávez is not popular with the people of his nation...that he in fact, in 2002, he was ousted from power. He's received all sorts of political opposition, not only from his own military, but from the people of his nation.

Chávez has asserted tyrannical power and control over the people and much attention has been called towards examining the human rights...or lack their of, within Venezuela today. Living conditions have deteriorated and currently their "freedom of press", both television and newspapers, are being state controlled, again limiting rights of the people. The people are exposed to information and "news" (propoganda) authorized only by Chávez and his cronies.

And of course, if the above is not enough, Chávez has complete control over the economics of the nation, via his control of the oil industry and the prison system is completely appalling.

BUT...let's forget all of that...right Sean? Chávez doesn't like President Bush, so that is reason enough to visit and support the Communist tyrannt right? Sigh....disgraceful!

"Old Blood and Guts"

If only we had great men like him to lead us today....sigh....

No bloodbath in Vietnam??

According to Senator Kerry, when the US pulled out of Vietnam in 1975 there was no "bloodbath" that followed. Apparently, he's never seen the movie "The Killing Fields" nor has he ever heard of Pol Pot or his bloody ethnic-cleansing campaign.

In July 1986, the Wall Street Journal wrote, "South Vietnam was eventually conquered by the North, and Cambodia was taken over by the communist Khmer Rouge, who in trying to recreate a primitive communist agricultural society slaughtered from 1 million to 3 million Cambodians. If we take 2 million as the best estimate, then in four years the government of this small nation of 7 million alone killed 64 percent more people than died in the 10-year Vietnam War. Overall, the best estimate of those killed by the victorious communists in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia is 2,270,000."

So what constitutes a "bloodbath" in Kerry's mind? Oh but I guess we should give him some slack afterall, he did acknowledge the "re-education" camps...sigh...as if they were fun resorts in which all interred were simply on vacation enjoying margaritas under the hot Vietnamese sun all day!

Kerry, like so many other Democrats, continues to try to rewrite history according to the needs of their agenda. He supports a pull of out of US troops in Iraq, as does Hillary Clinton and pretty much EVERY Democrat in Washington. Typically, as they did in Vietnam, they desire defeat.

How can ANY American actually look to these cowards to be leaders of our nation? How can anyone trust that they will actually ensure our security? So many are so willing to vote for Democrats, who at every turn, appear to desire and support only failure.

Once upon a time TREASON was a serious crime and punishment could be death, today, however, the Democrats have completely changed the meaning of the word, as they have so many others, today it simply is regarded as "dessent"...but frankly, the act itself still has the same intended outcome, the complete destruction of America!

Bush, The Last Hawk, Won't Budge

According to Rich Lowry's commentary, President Bush is the only "hawk"willing to continue to push forward with the war in Iraq. This demonstrates to me President Bush's willingness to persevere, to not go willy-nilly like so many in Congress have done. I respect him more for not taking the easy political way out and backing down. Certainly, if he was to do so...if he was to set a withdrawl date and if he started backing out of the promises made to the Iraqi government and the Iraqi people...MANY, sadly, here in the US would approve and his currently "dismal" ratings would go up.

But...that's not why I voted for President Bush. I voted for him because I felt he would be a man of integrity and honesty. That he would care more about doing what is right, than what will make him "popular".

I distinctly remember President Bush's address to the nation immediately after 9/11 in which he stated: "Our war on terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated"

And further in the speech he stated: "Our response involves far more than instant retaliation and isolated strikes. Americans should not expect one battle, but a lengthy campaign, unlike any other we have ever seen. It may include dramatic strikes, visible on TV, and covert operations, secret even in success. We will starve terrorists of funding, turn them one against another, drive them from place to place, until there is no refuge or no rest. And we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. (Applause.) From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime."

And still further: "I will not forget this wound to our country or those who inflicted it. I will not yield; I will not rest; I will not relent in waging this struggle for freedom and security for the American people."

In the days immediately following 9/11, I placed my confidence in this President and still today I find that he continues to have it. I trust fully that he will continue to fight this war until we all can be certain that we and our future generations will be safe from malicious and evil attacks such as those that took place in New York, Pennsylvania and at the Pentagon on that fateful day.

Its incredibly dismaying, however, that so many in Congress, both Republicans and Democrats, seem to have forgotten all that was said and promised in the days after 9/11. They are so willing to allow another strike upon our nation, simply so they will have "good approval ratings"...frankly, it disgusts me and I have zero faith in all BUT, President Bush!

By standing his ground and not giving in, by continuing to support the surge in Iraq and continue the fight in the war on terror, he is proving that I did vote correctly in 2000 and 2004 and that he is indeed a man of conviction and courage. Too bad we can't say the same for the rest in Washington!

Fighting to Win or Not?

So according to this video from ABC news, we are supposed to believe that all soldiers fighting feel the same as the two young men interviewed. How about talking with the other members of the platoon? How about listening to the voices of countless others such as the voices that can be found at Vets for Freedom?

Instead, the liberal main stream media wants to continue to portray defeat. We wonder why the support for this war has seemingly dwindled?? Its because the liberal media does its best to convey Iraq as a lost cause. They do not highlight the "wins"...they do not highlight the accomplishments. It is why we have listed to the right an area called "Iraq and Afghanistan"...the links included will provided the reader with more than just the sad, desperate "losses" the liberal media continues to report, while completely ignoring the successes.

As for these soldiers and the many, many more that have volunteered, I am very grateful, of course, for their service. However, I can't say that I believe that serving an extended tour entitles them to "special honors"...I say that because in all previous wars, with exception of Vietnam, our men and women in uniform weren't even told they when they could expect to be returned home. During WWII, our boys didn't go over to Italy, fight for six months and then return home...they fought TO WIN - no matter how long it took. Many of them not returning home for three years or more.

When did volunteering for duty include "crying" about the time you are asked to serve? And again, where does personal responsibility come into play? Don't want to go to Iraq or Afghanistan...well, then its probably a good idea NOT to enlist and of course, by all means, don't re-enlist and then complain when you are asked to do the job you signed up for.

Again, don't get me wrong...I fully support our men and women in service and I respect all who have so willingly volunteered...but I have little use for those who do so only to whine about it...no one twisted their arms to join, no one placed a gun at their heads. We are in a war and as so many have said before, "war is hell"...if they expected a "free ride" or a simple way to earn money towards an education, I guess they are learning the hard way, there is no such thing!

As for those in Congress who are wishy-washy weak, I do agree with these soldiers, they have the "brains of two-year olds" and do not understand what it actually means to fight to win!

It is time we stopped playing games and started allowing our men and women to fight as they have been trained, utilizing all the fire power we have available...stop restricting them with silly "rules of engagement" and allow them to use the technology and capabilities that have made our military the best in the world and guess what? We won't have brave volunteers whinning about being in Iraq so long...as they will be able to finish the job and come home!

Rep. Ellison Compares President Bush to Hitler

Democratic Rep. Ketih Ellison, the first Muslim elected to Congress, in typical liberal fashion has lashed out at President Bush and compared him to Hitler. How does a member of Congress get away with such vitriol?

Of course, those of us with common sense, are capable of seeing this for what it is, just a malicious attack with nothing to support its accusations. How anyone can dare make such statements is not only absurd, but tells me that they do not actually comprehend the full magnitude and pure evil that Hitler forced upon the World.

To so easily compare the insane rantings and orders of excution of the most heinous crimes against humanity that Hitler was responsible for, to ANYTHING President Bush may have said or done is absolutely despicable.

Of course, Rep. Ellison will not be "called out" on this...it will get little attention and will soon be forgotten, as most of the liberal attacks have been in the past 7 years. Rep. Ellison will be given a "free" pass at his attempts to encite hate, while the rest of us are looking at Congress enacting:
Hate Crimes Bill - Matthew Shepard Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007 which will prevent anyone from speaking out against homosexual activities, but of course, will do nothing to prevent members of Congress from making such outlandish and absurd comparisons against our very own President.

Go ahead, slander the President, encite hate and anger against him...once upon a time that would have been called "treason"...but no...not today. If you are liberal and are against the president, you can not only call him whatever you please, whenever you please...you can spread propoganda and lies about him...such as MoveOn.org has done, again, enciting rage and anger. You can launch websites such as: nogw.com or Counterpunch.com to again spread more hate filled nonesense in attempts to reach impressionable youths. Call President Bush a terrorist...compare him to Hitler, speak lies to young college kids, create completely inaccurate propoganda films against him (Fahrenheit 911).

But, by all means, do not actually speak out against the immorality of sexual acts outside of marriage....do not speak of values or talk about proper sexual conduct from your church pulpit....oh no...because then you are just inciting hate...sigh....

British Nanny State

British World War Two hero, Winston Churchill is being removed from history class in Britain. Secondary school children will no longer be learning about the man who literally saved England from being conquered by Nazi Germany.

Instead, he will be replaced with teachings about the great Global Warming fraud and how to properly unroll a condom onto a pickle. Surely that will impress the next jihadist with a box truck full of fertilizer and diesel fuel.

There appears to be a connection between the decline of devout religious folks(Christians) in Britain, to an increase of an acceptance of the nanny state. It would seem that the role of government, is beginning to take the place of parents being the teachers of morality, personal responsibility, and self discipline.

66% of the UK population have no connection with any religion or church


The Nanny State, is typical of leftist ideology, where, they feel that big, overbearing government, knows what is best for the populous, opposite that of the personal responsibility and accountability those on the right of the political/social spectrum encourage. Furthermore, those on the left are all too eager to tell your children how to have sex, when to have sex, and with whom, to have sex. They decide what will be taught to your children. They decide, through social engineering, how your children should talk, act, and believe! These people on the left in Britain, have willingly decided to not teach about the very man who provided their blanket of freedom in favor of teaching more important things, like the dangers of Global Warming and drug use, which has not worked so well in the past, and more importantly, is a job better suited for parents.

Other highly influential people in world history who will no longer be discussed or introduced to impressionable 11-14 year olds include: Hitler, Gandhi, Stalin and Martin Luther King, to name a few.

Because we all know, there are no longer any threats to Western Civilization anymore. There are no more suicide bombers, no more airplane hijackings, and no more beheadings against "infidels" and Christians. There are no nations which support terrorists who wish to obtain an atomic bomb. The world is at total peace right now, due to the teachings of such modern topics, as: "Should I use Trojan brand condoms or Lifestyles?" or "Are the terms ‘mom’ and ‘dad’ to refer to family relationships since the terms could be offensive to homosexual couples with children?"

The only ones putting up any kind of resistance to this type of nonsense in the United States, are those who practice teaching their own children morality, and who are more conservative personally, socially, and politically, sadly.

Live Earth Lemon

It would appear that a great many people see through the socialist fodder known as "Live Earth," created by former Vice President, Al Gore. Live Earth is an "awareness" concept following in the footsteps of Live Aid; brainchild of musician Bob Geldof. Live Aid was the socialist answer to solving world poverty beginning in 1985. Have they solved it? Have they even came close to solving it? The answer is no.

Simply throwing money at poverty, does not cure it by any means. And, awareness alone will not either. The root causes must be attacked, broken, dismantled, and then re-built. How does giving money to a drug addict on the streets, actually "help" him? It doesn't. The term for that bleeding heart mentality is called enabling.

So now we have Live Earth. Al Gore has sounded the call to arms for his elitist Hollywood friends to help him push his delusional propaganda known as Global Warming. The same types of artsy-fartsy folks who ran to Geldof's Live Aid. But, at least Geldof's intentions had a noble cause unlike Al Gore. I honestly do not know what his intentions are (money), but I do know that he has gone completely insane after losing to George Bush in 2000. I do know that he drives in much larger cars than I do. I do know that he flys around the world in jet airplanes way more than I do. Not to mention all the flights taken by the entertainers of Live Earth, to travel to different cities on the globe. I do know, that he uses way more energy and puts more pollution in the air than I could in my lifetime. Yet it is he, who fly's around the globe giving speeches, telling others that they are killing the planet. This is called hypocrisy!

Newsweek 1975

In 1975, Newsweek ran a story beginning the fear mongering about global cooling. They said that as early as 1985, Canada, the former U.S.S.R., India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indochina and Indonesia, would be suffer from food shortages.

"The evidence in support of these predictions has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hard- pressed to keep up with it." Newsweek 1975

Now doesn't that sound familiar?!

"Last April,(1975) in the most devastating outbreak of tornadoes ever recorded, 148 twisters killed more than 300 people and caused half a billion dollars' worth of damage in 13 U.S. states."

Kind of sounds like the jump on the "more frequent and more destructive" hurricane bandwagon of today, does it not?

This next quote is great! So which is it? Cooling or warming? They seemed so sure of themselves 35 years ago, didn't they? Cooling was going wipe us out! Head for the hills!

"A survey completed last year by Dr. Murray Mitchell of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reveals a drop of half a degree in average ground temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere between 1945 and 1968. According to George Kukla of Columbia University, satellite photos indicated a sudden, large increase in Northern Hemisphere snow cover in the winter of 1971-72. And a study released last month by two NOAA scientists notes that the amount of sunshine reaching the ground in the continental U.S. diminished by 1.3% between 1964 and 1972."

Scaring Politicians

"Climatologists are pessimistic that political leaders will take any positive action to compensate for the climatic change, or even to allay its effects."

"But the scientists see few signs that government leaders anywhere are even prepared to take the simple measures of stockpiling food or of introducing the variables of climatic uncertainty into economic projections of future food supplies. The longer the planners delay, the more difficult will they find it to cope with climatic change once the results become grim reality."

Deja Vu! We are all going die, we have only 50 years left to survive! Big oil is killing us! SUV's are killing us! George Bush is killing us! We didn't sign Kyoto and that alone will kill the entire planet! The United States is evil!

So apparently we were expending too much carbon emissions and we were polluting the "universe" with out cars, trucks, planes, etc...all causing global "cooling"....oh but now that we have instituted all sorts of emissions standards across the nation and each state has their own regulations that refineries must meet, we are STILL polluting the universe, but instead of global "cooling"...its now decided to "change" global "warming!"....sigh...

The Earth changes. It has constantly changed since it's creation. It gets hot, and it gets cold. Humans have been recording Earth temperatures for 150 years. How can we possibly use 150 years worth of recorded temperatures as a guideline to predict the future?

England use to grow grapes to make wine in the 1400's, during the Medieval Warming Period. They no longer make wine in England. Why? Because the temperature is not warm enough to grow grapes! But guess what? Once upon a time, it was warm enough, however the weather has changed.

The Al Gore environmental nuts are constantly referring to our polar ice caps which are melting, as proof, that we are heating up Earth with greenhouse gasses. That humans are the cause. That rich, industrialized nations are killing everybody. Then perhaps someone can tell me why the polar ice caps on Mars are melting too? Do Martians drive SUV's? Do they have factories that create jobs?

Global Warming is a natural occurrence. Ice Ages are a natural occurrence. Sun spots and solar flares are natural occurrences too. Just to let Al Gore know...the Sun and the Moon both have their influences on the earth. Sometimes they cooperate and sometimes they counteract each other. Such influences include gravity and the heat of the sun...yes, I know, difficult concept to grasp! Sigh...

Kucinich rips Edwards

Just to demonstrate the hypocrisy and lack of "integrity" of the Democrats even further...after being "caught" on tape Hillary and Edwards are completely backpeddling and in the process are looking to cast blame and new interpretations on their discussion.

Of course, typically, in the main stream media, this is ignored. Well, not here...I will demonstrate as often as possible the lousy campaign tactics of the Democrats, in particular Hillary. She's ready to throw Edwards under the bus for the comments made, as demonstrated by her statements Friday.

Yet so many are willing to even consider her for the presidency???...God help us!

Clinton, Edwards talk of limiting debate


Don't ya just love the "elitist" attitude of some people? Apparently, the "top tier" candidates, Clinton and Edwards, believe that having other candidates participate in their presidential debates, candidates, such as Chris Dodd and Joe Biden, Congressman Dennis Kucinich, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson and former Alaska Senator Mike Gravel is simply a "waste" of time.


So in this little fupah...they were caught discussing how "we've got to cut the number" and "they're not serious." Okay...so all of those candidates mentioned above are not really serious? They just have been working their tails off doing their best to raise funds, trapsing around the country to "meet and greet" potential voters and planning their political agendas cause its all in fun??


Now, not that I am a "fan" of ANY of the candidates listed, including Hillary and John...however, where do they get the idea that they alone can make the decisions for the Democratic voters? Oh that's right...they believe they are "kings" and whatever they say goes right? They honestly believe that the Democratic voters are too stupid to make up their own minds and therefore must be told who they should listen to and who they should call "leaders" of their party.


Oh but I keep forgetting...this is the way the Democrats work, they don't want their voters or the citizens of America to actually make any decisions...they don't want to listen to their voters...they just want to control them and somehow believe that they are "better" than the average citizen. They are "smarter, more intellectual, more in tune with the world's needs and desires and of course, are are just plain superior."

In case you don't believe me...listen to this: Clinton and Edwards "chat"

I can't believe they had the audacity to not even wait until they were off stage, or better yet...how about a call later in the day??

Eliminating the "lesser" candidates for their own purposes, this is TYPICAL of the way the Clintons run their campaigns!

Democrats Push For Universal HealthCare

First off, let me clarify something that very often is left unsaid...we, in the United States all have access to "universal healthcare" already. No hospital in the nation can deny an individual needed medical attention. You may have to pay for it...but you will, nonetheless, receive the care required. Any individual in the US has a "right" to call 911 at any time to receive emergency medical attention...likewise; any individual can enter any hospital emergency room and expect to receive care in urgent circumstances. Emergency Medical Treatment & Labor Act

The hubbub about healthcare, has to do with specifically, the issuance of universal healthcare INSURANCE. Insurance...a word that most will convenienty leave off, insinuating that American's will actually not be given medical care when they are in need. Completely false, as anyone can see, by reading the EMTLA that was enacted as law in 1986!

As I mentioned above...you may be asked to pay for the medical care that you receive, however, most hospitals and doctors offices will go out of their way to arrange payment plans that are acceptable and frankly, as long as you are paying something monthly, most hospitals will not turn your account over to collections or send a derogatory mark to your credit report...check out, for instance, Kaiser Permanente's policy regarding medical financial assistance.

So now that I have cleared that up...lets talk about how wonderful "universal healthcare insurance" really is and what it would mean to have the government take hold of just one more aspect of our lives, shall we?

Personally, I have a real problem with anyone, let alone the government, dictating to me when I can receive medical care and who I can go to, to receive it. Just to demonstrate what I mean and how this would take place if we moved to a healthcare system similar to that of...say...Canada, check this out Letter from ex-Canadian citizen.

Now can anyone, after reading that, honestly tell me that universal healthcare coverage would be the answer to our medical ales? Myself, I believe we do need some reform, but reform in a few other things, such as reform of frivolous lawsuits, reform and deregulation of the insurance industry, reform of the FDA and finally reform and deregulation of the pharmaceutical industry.

I can't believe that after watching the fiasco of FEMA or NASA or the disgrace of our public school system, that anyone can say that getting the government involved is the "best solution".

If we take a look at the industries that have not been regulated or in which government has been kept out, such as technology. We can see how incredibly well the private sector can achieve progress and solve many of our current issues, much better than a bureaucratic government agency can. For instance, I am currently posting this from the luxury of my own home...sitting on my couch, laptop literally on my lap. This laptop came to me at a cost of about $850. Where as just five years ago, I, one) wouldn't have been able to find a laptop with the same technical capabilities this one has...two) would have had to pay about $1500 for one with less functionality. Obviously, you can see my point. The private sector, directed by competition, has enabled us to not only have access to greater tools, but also at a lesser price.

Now doesn't it make sense that if we got the government out of all aspects of the medical industry, we would also find similar results and indeed, medical coverage would come at a cheaper price while the technologies continue to advance?

Presidential Candidates In First Ever Gay Debate...???

They have GOT to be joking right? Apparently not! The leading Demoncrat Presidential candidates are actually going to participate in a debate that is specifically designed to meet and answer the specific "needs and concerns" of the gay and lesbian activist community.

Can you imagine what would happen if the Republican candidates announced that they were going to hold a "religious" debate?...one directed at answering questions and concerns designed specifically for say...the pro-life movement or how prayer will be brought back into the public education system?

Yet, these Democrats will get away with and will be perceived by the liberal media as all "compassionate and tolerant"..."looking out for the "best interests" of the gay community...sigh....

Then again, maybe this is just what Conservatives need...this will expose the agenda behind the Democratic Party. They are not concerned with protecting our nation, they are not concerned with the war on terror, they are not concerned with the heavy tax burdens we, the citizens, feel...oh no...they are concerned with "gay marriage"....abolishing the "don't ask, don't tell" policy of the military...they are concerned with ensuring "abortion on demand"...and on and on...its pathetic.

The gay and lesbian activist community demands that they be treated "equally" yet what they really want, much like the "feminist" movement is not equality, but superiority. They want to gain special privileges and "rights" within our society that currently others are not given. They want to ensure that they are treated with "compassion" while they laugh, spit and harrass those who are not like them. They want to push for "hate speech punishments" if you do not agree with their lifestyle choices, they want government schools to educate children about the gay lifestyle, but of course, eliminate completely any education of abstinence...sigh...

Sadly, many continue to fall for this type of "compassion and tolerance" delivered by the Democratic Party, in essence all it really is, is discrimination of those who are not gay.

With Friends Like This, Who Needs Enemies



United We Stand, Divided We Fall & A house(Party) divided against itself cannot stand.



These two quotes seem to have some relevance regarding a potential GOP split from their Republican President over the War in Iraq. Republicans facing elections in 2008 are beginning to scramble their anti-war rhetoric in an attempt to pick up some votes (Good luck). But this is the kind of thing that gives politicians a bad rep. They were elected because of their position on the issues, but then as public sentiment changes, so do the "core principles" of politicians...by some Republicans that is. They authorized the President to defend us in Iraq, but now, as their re-election year approaches, they are suddenly, changing course in order to gain votes from an increasingly agitated constituency.

I recall a line said to me from a high school teacher:

A person is smart, but people are stupid.

I am beginning to believe that this is more and more accurate.

The American people really need to wake up and realize that we are in the Middle East for the long haul. Even Hillary Clinton is losing support from her base because she has said that she will not pull the troops out of Iraq. In her favor, she is correct not to. Iran is trying to get the bomb, and what better place to have our military, than right next door to them. Who else in the world is going to stand up to Iran? The U.N.? Germany? FRANCE!?

Iran funds Hezbollah, which in turn, bombs civilians in Israel. In 1983, Hezbollah bombed the U.S. Embassy and a marine barracks in Beirut. And who can forget the hostage crisis in Iran in 1979? Iran is dangerous, cannot be trusted, and is not our friend.

More importantly, the American people must realize that the War on Terror, is not limited to Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. 911 was simply the straw that broke the camels back. This war is against radical jihadism. And like it or not, the Middle East is one of the last hotbeds of extremism and violence left in the world today. However, it's effects, are not limited to residents of the Middle East.

These people are simplistic and animalistic. Pulling out of Iraq, will allow them to think that they have beaten the US and her allies. Just as the PLO claimed a victory after Israel gave them Gaza, Iran will claim a victory if we pull out of Iraq. Of course, we all know that after Israel gave the PLO Gaza, the bombing and rocket attacks did not end.

Bin Laden himself, expressed that after we literally ran out of Somalia, that he knew that he could beat the U.S. We all have heard the phrase "It will embolden them". Well, Bin Laden was emboldened by our retreat in Somalia and that gave us 911. If we pull out of Iraq, are you ready for another 911?

Just like a dog, if you show it fear and weakness, it will attack you.

Some gutless and greedy Republicans are jumping on this turncoat bandwagon and they must know that this is not the right thing to do, even if it costs them votes. If the people cannot see this critical importance, and the politicians refuse to stand for it, then we are headed down a very dangerous path.


Contact the RNC and let them know that you are not in favor of surrender in the War against radical jihadism.

French official suggested Bush was behind September 11


"PARIS (Reuters) - A senior French politician, now a minister in President Nicolas Sarkozy's government, suggested last year that U.S. President George W. Bush might have been behind the September 11, 2001 attacks, according to a website."

French official suggested Bush was behind September 11

"Asked in an interview last November, before she became minister, whether she thought Bush might be behind the attacks, Boutin says: "I think it is possible. I think it is possible."

Boutin backs her assertion by pointing to the large number of people who visit websites that challenge the official line over the September 11 strikes against U.S. cities.

"I know that the websites that speak of this problem are websites that have the highest number of visits ... And I tell myself that this expression of the masses and of the people cannot be without any truth."

Oh, okay. So by that rational, President Bush did use a remote control to fly airplanes into buildings. Okay, now it all makes sense to me. I was beginning to wonder. Now I know, that when at least 1/3 of a population are lunatics, then they must be right!

Now I know that thermite, which was supposedly used to cut through the steel columns in the World Trade Center, can and will, defy the laws of gravity by cutting horizontally through columns, as long as a high number of people say that it does. Now I see how this all works.
Thermite

I also now understand that this idiot in France's government, should also suggest that Hitler and Tojo were correct in their ideology because they were supported by a vast majority of their citizens. If that many people support something, then they must be right! Right? I suppose that slavery was right too, because it was supported by many.

This idiot, French Housing Minister Christine Boutin, should really examine both sides of an issue, instead of simply wanting there to be a conspiracy. If she had an ounce of brain matter, a couple of hours, and just a little bit of rationalism, she could easily find out that the 911 conspiracy fanatics, are simple fools who cannot cope with what happened on 911. They simply cannot comprehend, that 19 crazed Muslims hated us so much, that they would give up their lives to kill us, that there must have been a more sinister plot involving George W. Bush, Cheney, and Haliburton. To them, it makes more sense that our leaders would kill their own people, than some crazed Muslim ideology, who to this day, will hang a couple of teenagers for being gay. Who train their children to be suicide bombers. Brainwashing Children

Who, in 2004, slaughtered 334 people in a school in Beslan Russia, 186 of them being children. Beslan School Hostage Crisis

In terms of the stability of a nation, these conspiracy nut jobs, can be just as dangerous as Muslim fanatics. But at least the Muslim nuts have some spine. If I actually believed that my government was behind 911, then I would do more than just whine about it!