Although it is moronic to believe that 95% of Americans will receive a tax break when less than 70% of Americans actually pay any sort of taxes, I am willing to make a more mathematically feasible campaign promise. If you vote for me, I will ensure that some select Americans will pay only 5% of their current scheduled taxes. That means you could be the lucky winner of the 95% tax reduction. Considering that your odds at winning this prize are no worse than when you play the lottery, what do you have to lose?
Vote for me, because it is as good as playing the lottery and you don't even have to spend a dollar.
Happy Halloween....
Friday, October 31, 2008
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Misleading rumors from the media.
There is a new rumor making rounds from the leading crap-news (newspaper only fit for toilet use) outfits, that Jews favor Obama. What is not reported is that McCain is the clear favorite among Americans, both Jewish and Gentile, who support the state of Israel. So are these newspapers trying to claim that most American Jews want to see Israel overrun by bloodthirsty Arab mobs? Come November 4th, we shall see.
Under the cold Soviet sun, parents were afraid of their children. The myth of Pavlik Marozov and the threat of idle table chat being repeated by children at school to unknown KGB informants, kept most people from speaking freely. At work, you never knew whether a friendly colleague was motivated by the idea of career advancement through their "usefulness" towards the secret police. The Russian Jews who immigrated to the United States remember these times, and see Obama as a threat to their newly found freedoms. They also see Obama as a threat to Israel, but from their decades of living under the iron curtain, they are likely to keep their thoughts private and not talk to surveyors.
These Russian Jews realize that without the state of Israel, their fate would be much worse. Many had the fortune to leave Soviet Union largely because of Israeli and American led international pressure. Some fled to Israel while others, being fearful of a looming war in that region, came to the United States. Wherever they have gone, their gratitude to Israel and their desire to see it prosper, remains strong. While they may not share their thoughts with reporters and survey callers, they overwhelmingly support McCain, the republican party, and will vote accordingly. Furthermore, considering the high level of this new threat, this community is more motivated to vote this year than I have ever seen.
The Lubavitch, Hasidic, and other Orthodox communities are also acutely aware of the contrasts between the two candidates for the American presidency, and they support McCain. They appropriately describe Obama and his close associates as a pack of Cossacks. They will make their voices heard as well.
I am certain that there are self hating people, born to Jewish parents, who have some pathological need to debase themselves. These pathetic embarrassments to the Jewish community recently paraded themselves at a Holocaust denial conference in Iran. They also unbelievably obtained a mainstream status from outfits like the Guardian, Associated Press, and the New York Times. They are only mainstream in their own minds and the Obamamedia propaganda networks. People have forgotten how the New York Times writers were supportive of Hitler and Nazis prior to World War II. They sure backed a winning horse then.
Another trash outfit worthy of mention is the Los Angeles Times. This entity is suppressing the release of a video featuring Obama at a reception for a PLO operative. They may hide this video, and someday burn books at a "fair speech" gathering, but their attempt at containment of this information is leaky. According to a reliable source, Obama riled the audience up with a toast, saying “Israel has no God-given right to occupy Palestine” plus there’s been “genocide against the Palestinian people by Israelis.” There are multiple blogging sites that in the past have been extremely careful to not jump to conclusions prematurely, and they weigh above statements as reliable and accurate.
On election day there will be a surprise from New York, and speaking of Jews that do not represent the New York Jewish communities or American interests, I strongly encourage to send Chuckie to the unemployment line.
Under the cold Soviet sun, parents were afraid of their children. The myth of Pavlik Marozov and the threat of idle table chat being repeated by children at school to unknown KGB informants, kept most people from speaking freely. At work, you never knew whether a friendly colleague was motivated by the idea of career advancement through their "usefulness" towards the secret police. The Russian Jews who immigrated to the United States remember these times, and see Obama as a threat to their newly found freedoms. They also see Obama as a threat to Israel, but from their decades of living under the iron curtain, they are likely to keep their thoughts private and not talk to surveyors.
These Russian Jews realize that without the state of Israel, their fate would be much worse. Many had the fortune to leave Soviet Union largely because of Israeli and American led international pressure. Some fled to Israel while others, being fearful of a looming war in that region, came to the United States. Wherever they have gone, their gratitude to Israel and their desire to see it prosper, remains strong. While they may not share their thoughts with reporters and survey callers, they overwhelmingly support McCain, the republican party, and will vote accordingly. Furthermore, considering the high level of this new threat, this community is more motivated to vote this year than I have ever seen.
The Lubavitch, Hasidic, and other Orthodox communities are also acutely aware of the contrasts between the two candidates for the American presidency, and they support McCain. They appropriately describe Obama and his close associates as a pack of Cossacks. They will make their voices heard as well.
I am certain that there are self hating people, born to Jewish parents, who have some pathological need to debase themselves. These pathetic embarrassments to the Jewish community recently paraded themselves at a Holocaust denial conference in Iran. They also unbelievably obtained a mainstream status from outfits like the Guardian, Associated Press, and the New York Times. They are only mainstream in their own minds and the Obamamedia propaganda networks. People have forgotten how the New York Times writers were supportive of Hitler and Nazis prior to World War II. They sure backed a winning horse then.
Another trash outfit worthy of mention is the Los Angeles Times. This entity is suppressing the release of a video featuring Obama at a reception for a PLO operative. They may hide this video, and someday burn books at a "fair speech" gathering, but their attempt at containment of this information is leaky. According to a reliable source, Obama riled the audience up with a toast, saying “Israel has no God-given right to occupy Palestine” plus there’s been “genocide against the Palestinian people by Israelis.” There are multiple blogging sites that in the past have been extremely careful to not jump to conclusions prematurely, and they weigh above statements as reliable and accurate.
On election day there will be a surprise from New York, and speaking of Jews that do not represent the New York Jewish communities or American interests, I strongly encourage to send Chuckie to the unemployment line.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Socialism At Work/LA Times Story.
There is an astronomical demand for a video hidden at a secure location by the staff of Los Angeles Times. This is a video of Barak Obama toasting his good friend and neighbor Khalidi. Khalidi was employed by the PLO while it was still designated a terrorist organization. This event included the typical calls for Israeli annihilation and for repeat attempts at genocide of the Jews. Good company to be around, if you are running for office in Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia,... Maybe not the greatest associates for an American candidate for political office.
The LA Times newspaper is on the verge of bankruptcy. Readers are dropping their subscriptions and advertisers are moving onto greener pastures. Requests for release of this video have been made by other newsmen and ordinary people. Yet, the LA Times have responded to these requests with arrogance, scorn, and hostility. In an email published at littlegreenfootballs, Jamie Gold chastises one of their readers for not being satisfied with "mere reporting."
There is an excellent reason why readers are no longer satisfied with how important news items are being reported. Newspapers have lost their claim to unbiased, objective reporting and ethical journalism. LA Times is clearly one of the top propaganda rags; it is highly unethical, deeply biased, completely untrustworthy. In fact, looking through the LA Times for news is about as absurd as looking for truth in the Russian toilet paper outfit called Pravda.
LA Times editors have a great opportunity to increase their sales and restore some dignity to their outfit, but they have chosen to suppress the news and do everything they can to usher in an era of socialism. I wish them all good health because that is the only thing they may be left with in the future. Contrary to promises, there is very little money in socialism. From a financial perspective there is really no future in such philosophy.
You will no doubt need this health while waiting in lines. The unemployment line will be one. The grocery line to buy potatoes will be another. Waiting for rationed goods like gasoline, will be fun too. Russians became used to waiting in long lines under the blissful tune of communism. It was their national pastime. The LA Times wish to bring about the age of socialism and all of its rewards to our nation. Who knows, maybe some day languishing in line will become an Olympic sport.
Meanwhile we continue to wait for them to do the right thing and inform the public. Release the tape!
Here is how you can help: Contact the owner of LA Times, Sam Zell.
His fax number is: 213-237-3535 ( Thank you P.J. Gladnick and OReilly factor.)
The LA Times newspaper is on the verge of bankruptcy. Readers are dropping their subscriptions and advertisers are moving onto greener pastures. Requests for release of this video have been made by other newsmen and ordinary people. Yet, the LA Times have responded to these requests with arrogance, scorn, and hostility. In an email published at littlegreenfootballs, Jamie Gold chastises one of their readers for not being satisfied with "mere reporting."
There is an excellent reason why readers are no longer satisfied with how important news items are being reported. Newspapers have lost their claim to unbiased, objective reporting and ethical journalism. LA Times is clearly one of the top propaganda rags; it is highly unethical, deeply biased, completely untrustworthy. In fact, looking through the LA Times for news is about as absurd as looking for truth in the Russian toilet paper outfit called Pravda.
LA Times editors have a great opportunity to increase their sales and restore some dignity to their outfit, but they have chosen to suppress the news and do everything they can to usher in an era of socialism. I wish them all good health because that is the only thing they may be left with in the future. Contrary to promises, there is very little money in socialism. From a financial perspective there is really no future in such philosophy.
You will no doubt need this health while waiting in lines. The unemployment line will be one. The grocery line to buy potatoes will be another. Waiting for rationed goods like gasoline, will be fun too. Russians became used to waiting in long lines under the blissful tune of communism. It was their national pastime. The LA Times wish to bring about the age of socialism and all of its rewards to our nation. Who knows, maybe some day languishing in line will become an Olympic sport.
Meanwhile we continue to wait for them to do the right thing and inform the public. Release the tape!
Here is how you can help: Contact the owner of LA Times, Sam Zell.
His fax number is: 213-237-3535 ( Thank you P.J. Gladnick and OReilly factor.)
Monday, October 27, 2008
Hipocritical, Circular Logic In The Media
There are many ways to elevate your blood pressure in the morning, and reading a sample of news briefs from the Google news page is particularly effective. A quick scan of the main news compilation shows the most promoted and, by someones standards, the most important news stories at that particular moment.
As I write this, there are over 590 major news sources such as the BBC, New York Times, Guardian, and LA Times having a self promoting orgy fest about how Alaska's largest paper has chosen to endorse their candidate Obama. These outlets quote an opinion from the Alaska Daily News, that "Governor Palin is too risky" to become the vice president of the United States. What nonsense they peddle as legitimate stories. Their obvious implication is that in a Republican state, and populated by citizens who know Governor Palin well, "they" have their doubts about her viability for the vice-presidency job and hence the viability of the entire McCain/Palin ticket. The implication is that this opinion piece represents the Alaskan populace, but in reality, "they" only represent the overpaid newspaper staff. I honestly don't know exactly how much these writers and editors earn, but for printing such trash, they earn too much. When other blatantly biased news outlets reference the Anchorage paper, they believe that somehow they are vindicating their own tainted reporting because this Alaskan paper article agrees with them. In less sophisticated circles, this would have sounded like a litany of "I told you so." The circular logic here is mind numbing. However, even among the uneducated masses, this form of circular logic is well known for being illogical, and in other words, just plain stupidity.
In reference to Anchorage Daily News, just who exactly are "they?" This paper is owned by the California Based McClatchy Co., and according to Wikipedia, The McClatchy Co. is a large publishing company that operates a number of newspapers and web sites. They are based in Sacramento, California and their original newspaper was the Sacramento Bee. Other large ticket items at this company include the Minneapolis Star Tribune, The Olympian from Washington State, and many other papers they obtained in the Knight Rider purchase. In sum, these folks operate numerous MSM newspapers and some may wonder just how large is the liberal bias at this company. Here is a quote from the McClatchy's Washington D.C. bureau chief, John Walcott, as he proudly boasts about the McClatchy's reporting during the Iraq War.
"Why, in a nutshell, was our reporting different from so much other reporting? One important reason was that we sought out the dissidents, and we listened to them, instead of serving as stenographers to high-ranking [Bush administration] officials and Iraqi exiles."
These folks are not just "liberal," they are outright subversive. Their bureau chief's moment of pride is seeking out and publishing the stories of Iraqi dissidents, at the time of war. There is another, more accurate way to characterize this behavior. Publication of propaganda pieces from the Sadr army, Al-Qaeda (in Iraq), Hezbollah, etc,... is not something to proud of. In fact it is shameful.
Although I used this above quote from the Wikipedia page, to illustrate media bias specific to McClatchy Co., there are numerous other excellent examples of such bias. The McClatchy watch site is particularly useful. Apparently, several McClatchy directors, and family members of the McClatchy clan, are large donors to Obama and the Democratic party. Would it be surprising then, that a list of 17 McClatchy newspapers, including the Anchorage Daily News, are proclaiming their endorsements of Obama?
Now I want to review the reported statement about Alaskans once again, and within the proper context I discussed above. The headline all these newspapers are clamoring about is: "Even the Sacramento Bee, endorses Obama." Now, having read this you might think: Huh? Why is this news? Pretending that such reporting is honest, is hypocrisy. Believing that printing such stories is a healthy for the news industry is dumb. Just how dumb? Try falling from 17.25 dollars per share to 2.26 dollars per share in a 52 week period, dumb.
Lastly, I wish to return to my comment about the newspaper writers and editors being overpaid. The way they operate, they will soon be unemployed. This is how capitalism, and in essence reality, eventually triumphs over ignorance, wishful thinking, and insanity. I just hope enough Americans will open their eyes in time, so that the fate of these pathetic rags will not become our nation's fate.
As I write this, there are over 590 major news sources such as the BBC, New York Times, Guardian, and LA Times having a self promoting orgy fest about how Alaska's largest paper has chosen to endorse their candidate Obama. These outlets quote an opinion from the Alaska Daily News, that "Governor Palin is too risky" to become the vice president of the United States. What nonsense they peddle as legitimate stories. Their obvious implication is that in a Republican state, and populated by citizens who know Governor Palin well, "they" have their doubts about her viability for the vice-presidency job and hence the viability of the entire McCain/Palin ticket. The implication is that this opinion piece represents the Alaskan populace, but in reality, "they" only represent the overpaid newspaper staff. I honestly don't know exactly how much these writers and editors earn, but for printing such trash, they earn too much. When other blatantly biased news outlets reference the Anchorage paper, they believe that somehow they are vindicating their own tainted reporting because this Alaskan paper article agrees with them. In less sophisticated circles, this would have sounded like a litany of "I told you so." The circular logic here is mind numbing. However, even among the uneducated masses, this form of circular logic is well known for being illogical, and in other words, just plain stupidity.
In reference to Anchorage Daily News, just who exactly are "they?" This paper is owned by the California Based McClatchy Co., and according to Wikipedia, The McClatchy Co. is a large publishing company that operates a number of newspapers and web sites. They are based in Sacramento, California and their original newspaper was the Sacramento Bee. Other large ticket items at this company include the Minneapolis Star Tribune, The Olympian from Washington State, and many other papers they obtained in the Knight Rider purchase. In sum, these folks operate numerous MSM newspapers and some may wonder just how large is the liberal bias at this company. Here is a quote from the McClatchy's Washington D.C. bureau chief, John Walcott, as he proudly boasts about the McClatchy's reporting during the Iraq War.
"Why, in a nutshell, was our reporting different from so much other reporting? One important reason was that we sought out the dissidents, and we listened to them, instead of serving as stenographers to high-ranking [Bush administration] officials and Iraqi exiles."
These folks are not just "liberal," they are outright subversive. Their bureau chief's moment of pride is seeking out and publishing the stories of Iraqi dissidents, at the time of war. There is another, more accurate way to characterize this behavior. Publication of propaganda pieces from the Sadr army, Al-Qaeda (in Iraq), Hezbollah, etc,... is not something to proud of. In fact it is shameful.
Although I used this above quote from the Wikipedia page, to illustrate media bias specific to McClatchy Co., there are numerous other excellent examples of such bias. The McClatchy watch site is particularly useful. Apparently, several McClatchy directors, and family members of the McClatchy clan, are large donors to Obama and the Democratic party. Would it be surprising then, that a list of 17 McClatchy newspapers, including the Anchorage Daily News, are proclaiming their endorsements of Obama?
Now I want to review the reported statement about Alaskans once again, and within the proper context I discussed above. The headline all these newspapers are clamoring about is: "Even the Sacramento Bee, endorses Obama." Now, having read this you might think: Huh? Why is this news? Pretending that such reporting is honest, is hypocrisy. Believing that printing such stories is a healthy for the news industry is dumb. Just how dumb? Try falling from 17.25 dollars per share to 2.26 dollars per share in a 52 week period, dumb.
Lastly, I wish to return to my comment about the newspaper writers and editors being overpaid. The way they operate, they will soon be unemployed. This is how capitalism, and in essence reality, eventually triumphs over ignorance, wishful thinking, and insanity. I just hope enough Americans will open their eyes in time, so that the fate of these pathetic rags will not become our nation's fate.
Friday, October 24, 2008
Big fat government, and reducing its carbon footprint.
Some have complained that my writing is much less entertaining than I imagine, and that I should shorten my essays. I apologize to those of you who feel this way. My expected reward for work, shall be an improvement of my writing ability. I appreciate your criticism, and will work on improving this blog, and hence its entertainment value.
What is the absolute minimalist role of government? From my perspective there is only one task that I expect my government to accomplish. It is to protect its citizens.
I expect my local government to protect me from thieves, thugs, and delusional locals. For this protection, I will gladly pay the salary of police officers that patrol the neighborhood and the cost of jailing the above mentioned perpetrators. A court system is needed to properly sort out these criminals, as well as, to judge fairly when a delusional neighbor has accused me of some wrongful conduct. Finally, there is the cost of administering these entities.
For my federal tax payments, I expect the national government to protect me from foreign thugs, thieves, and psychopaths. I also charge the federal government to go after criminals not only foreign to the United States, but also those who come from other states or have fled across state lines. Therefore I consider the army and federal law enforcement as the only legitimate roles for our central government.
All the other duties we have needlessly piled onto our government would be much better handled through private enterprise. For this reason nearly every parent that can afford it, sends kids to private schools. Some chose to move into an overpriced neighborhood so that their children can go to a good public school, but it is simply another way to pay privately for a better education. How many more of us would be able to afford private school tuition if we weren't forced to pay for public schools through taxes?
Charity is a noble accomplishment, but if our politicians wish to make themselves feel well about giving to the needy, they should give their own money. I donate to charity as well, but I do not have this luxury of donating other people's money. Welfare expansion is not what we elect our government officials to do.
Want to fund basic research and local art exhibitions? Let the voters decide what they are wish to pay for. In fact, let them contribute however much they want and to whichever project they want, and cutout the middleman.
Some believe that it is our government's role to care for the elderly. It is not; we have all contributed to our retirement plans, and we hope that our government gives some of these deposited funds back to us. Some out there believe that the majority of Americans wish to pay the cost of caring for those that never contributed to this fund. They are mistaken. A fable involving the ant who worked all summer to save up for the winter and the grasshopper who wasted his time comes to mind. This story's popularity is owed to its inherent universal truth.
This is my vision for the ideal size of our government, and I wonder if my views are the views of the American majority.
What is the absolute minimalist role of government? From my perspective there is only one task that I expect my government to accomplish. It is to protect its citizens.
I expect my local government to protect me from thieves, thugs, and delusional locals. For this protection, I will gladly pay the salary of police officers that patrol the neighborhood and the cost of jailing the above mentioned perpetrators. A court system is needed to properly sort out these criminals, as well as, to judge fairly when a delusional neighbor has accused me of some wrongful conduct. Finally, there is the cost of administering these entities.
For my federal tax payments, I expect the national government to protect me from foreign thugs, thieves, and psychopaths. I also charge the federal government to go after criminals not only foreign to the United States, but also those who come from other states or have fled across state lines. Therefore I consider the army and federal law enforcement as the only legitimate roles for our central government.
All the other duties we have needlessly piled onto our government would be much better handled through private enterprise. For this reason nearly every parent that can afford it, sends kids to private schools. Some chose to move into an overpriced neighborhood so that their children can go to a good public school, but it is simply another way to pay privately for a better education. How many more of us would be able to afford private school tuition if we weren't forced to pay for public schools through taxes?
Charity is a noble accomplishment, but if our politicians wish to make themselves feel well about giving to the needy, they should give their own money. I donate to charity as well, but I do not have this luxury of donating other people's money. Welfare expansion is not what we elect our government officials to do.
Want to fund basic research and local art exhibitions? Let the voters decide what they are wish to pay for. In fact, let them contribute however much they want and to whichever project they want, and cutout the middleman.
Some believe that it is our government's role to care for the elderly. It is not; we have all contributed to our retirement plans, and we hope that our government gives some of these deposited funds back to us. Some out there believe that the majority of Americans wish to pay the cost of caring for those that never contributed to this fund. They are mistaken. A fable involving the ant who worked all summer to save up for the winter and the grasshopper who wasted his time comes to mind. This story's popularity is owed to its inherent universal truth.
This is my vision for the ideal size of our government, and I wonder if my views are the views of the American majority.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Obama, what is best in life?
When the current Republican governor of California was asked this question in one of his movies, he replied "To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women." It seems that candidate Obama and his Democratic accomplices have their own answer to the above question. They know what is best in life, and not only for them, but for you as well. By you, I mean the tax paying citizen of the United States. Our Democrats have come up with a new plan to fix social security and it involves taking over your 401k. Apparently, these Democrats feel that they are "losing" almost 80 billion dollars each year, because some of your earned income is being diverted to a retirement account before they had a chance to tax it. It is a very interesting choice of words, because their "loss" is simply their inability to reach further into your pocket. Some of us may see this more like a thief complaining that an average day's plunder was a loss for him.
There is a plan to kill off private retirement accounts such as the 401k, and afterwards every wage earner will be obliged to contribute to a government run retirement account. This fund will be "integrated" with social security. Interesting concept, our Democrats propose. Since you, the taxpayer don't know what is best for your future, our government will manage your money for you. Will you have a say in how much money you will place into this scheme, that is additional money to what you already invest into social security? Apparently not, as you will be obliged to place 5 percent of your income into this account. Don't you worry though, because our government knows what is best for you.
This fund will be used to buy government bonds that are expected to earn 3 percent. Wow, that interest is almost half of our inflation rate. Furthermore, you will no longer receive any matching funds from your employer, into this retirement scheme. Why, you ask? People contribute to these accounts because such accounts are temporarily tax exempt. I emphasize temporarily, because you will still pay taxes on this income when you actually withdraw these funds. Employers contribute to these funds also because of the tax breaks being offered. So if you remove such incentives, employers will no longer contribute to these accounts. You, the tax payer, will still be forced to contribute. This return of 3 percent may sound pleasant when compared to the most recent market trend, but it is less than half of the 7 percent rate of return that you would earn from the average 401k account.
Some out there will think, sounds a lot like social security. We contribute a set amount to social security, we are used to such contributions, and we will become used to this. Turn your ear to the constant frantic screams from our government officials about how social security is bankrupt and how it needs to be fixed. If social security will not be waiting for you when you retire, neither will this plan. In fact, a large part of this scheme is to divert more funds into social security. These funds will evaporate, if social security fails. Fear of social security being unreliable, is another reason why so many Americans contribute to private retirement plans; they don't believe that social security will get them through their golden years.
Back to Conan and what is best in life. The House Democrats want to crush their enemies, namely the American taxpayer who wishes to manage his own retirement plan or, in their eyes, has withheld some of his tax. They want to see these enemies driven before them, I guess these enemies are the investment companies competing with our government sponsored retirement accounts. And finally they wish to hear the lamentations of their women; this might mean that when husbands die before their wives, not only will social security payments disappear but so will their other retirement accounts. This is the Democratic party platform, and their candidate for presidency's vision of the American dream. Namely, higher taxes, bigger government, loss of the individual's ability to manage their money, and to rid this country of capitalist firms. They may know what's best for them, but this is not necessarily what will be best for you.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
A difference of ideology; a difference in tactics.
Conservative bloggers such as Pat Santy have authored numerous discussions on the dangers of socialism, and how this ideology aims to destroy the individual. Democrats, such as Orson Scott Card, have also remarked on how dangerous this road taken by the Democratic party really is.
A new spotlight in the American political scene fell on the most unlikely person in our entire country: Joe Wurzelbacher, aka Joe-the-plumber. Not some Hollywood star or a famous sports figure. Not some famous billionaire or a retired general. Just your average guy, from a very ordinary neighborhood. In a story reminiscent of Lord of the Rings, this man would have happily remained off the political radar if it were not for a visit by the leading candidate for the presidency of the United States, a visit to Joe's front lawn. Joe asked candidate Obama a very straightforward question: will I pay more in taxes. All of a sudden, there were no teleprompters to turn to and candidate Obama gave one of his most honest answers during his entire campaign. He said: "Joe it is not that I want to punish your success....I think when you spread the wealth around it is good for everybody." There it is, Obama really does believe in a socialist system of governing. He really does want there to be an equality of outcome rather than an equality of opportunity. This statement was radioactive. It completely revitalized the Republican campaign and caused an incredible detour to take place in the Democratic campaign. What followed exposed the essential difference in how each party perceives what Americans want, and how each party intends to govern this country. The current Democratic party believes in the greater collective good. Joe became an obstacle in their path to glorious victory and he was punished for it. A policy of personal attacks against this very average American citizen was directed from the Obama campaign. This average middle class American became their enemy. His credentials for work were publicly questioned and he was denounced as a republican plant. Was Joe really a plumber? What business does he have being out on his front lawn anyway? Does Joe have enough education to understand and question Obama,...? The Republicans on the other hand applauded Joe and supported him. This was seen much more widely in the bloggosphere than was reported on in main newspapers. It is really difficult to hear objective reporting from the MSM these days, but that is another story. So Obama and the democrats want to destroy Joe and the Republicans are screaming: "We are Joe."
Who is this Joe and what does he represent to each party? I see him as another American citizen who is pursuing the American dream. One party wants to trample his individual rights, because he is an obstacle on their quest for power, and the other group stands with Joe and internalizes his individual pursuit of happiness. There is my take on the essential differences in ideology during this election, and how this difference has led one party to try to destroy Joe-the-plumber, while another party has chosen to fight on Joe's behalf. One party represents the collective, while the other the individual. This is why Obama cannot recall the name of the soldier whose bracelet he wore during one the debates, and he wore it despite the protest from this fallen soldier's family. This is why Biden tells such lovely stories about a local shop, but when the facts of his story are checked, the details turn out to be false. Individuals are not important to them. This is why Obama's brother lives in hovel and a school named after him has not received any of his help. On the other hand, McCain adopted children from impoverished countries and personally cares for their welfare. When visiting foreign lands, he makes certain to stop and visit our soldiers there. These individuals matter to him. He hasn't done enough to discredit some of his critics, because a personal attack on these individuals goes against McCain's core values. Come November, you will be asked to make a choice: Rights of the individual vs rights of the state.
As public spotlight was cast on Joe, this "ring of power" and burden became his to bear. A very unlikely hero for in the eyes of the Democratic Party machine, but the quintessential American for many. In answering Obama's latest headline, the one about being too far ahead of McCain for any chance of a Republican success, I will quote from The Return of the King: “It’s like in the great stories. The ones that really mattered. Full of darkness and danger they were. And sometimes you didn’t want to know the end. Because how could the end be happy? How could the world go back to the way it was when so much bad had happened? But in the end, it’s only a passing thing, this shadow. Even darkness must pass. A new day will come. And when the sun shines it will shine out the clearer. Those were the stories that stayed with you... Folk in those stories had lots of chances of turning back, only they didn’t. They kept going. Because they were holding on to something. That there’s some good in this world. And it’s worth fighting for.” Good luck John and Sarah.
A new spotlight in the American political scene fell on the most unlikely person in our entire country: Joe Wurzelbacher, aka Joe-the-plumber. Not some Hollywood star or a famous sports figure. Not some famous billionaire or a retired general. Just your average guy, from a very ordinary neighborhood. In a story reminiscent of Lord of the Rings, this man would have happily remained off the political radar if it were not for a visit by the leading candidate for the presidency of the United States, a visit to Joe's front lawn. Joe asked candidate Obama a very straightforward question: will I pay more in taxes. All of a sudden, there were no teleprompters to turn to and candidate Obama gave one of his most honest answers during his entire campaign. He said: "Joe it is not that I want to punish your success....I think when you spread the wealth around it is good for everybody." There it is, Obama really does believe in a socialist system of governing. He really does want there to be an equality of outcome rather than an equality of opportunity. This statement was radioactive. It completely revitalized the Republican campaign and caused an incredible detour to take place in the Democratic campaign. What followed exposed the essential difference in how each party perceives what Americans want, and how each party intends to govern this country. The current Democratic party believes in the greater collective good. Joe became an obstacle in their path to glorious victory and he was punished for it. A policy of personal attacks against this very average American citizen was directed from the Obama campaign. This average middle class American became their enemy. His credentials for work were publicly questioned and he was denounced as a republican plant. Was Joe really a plumber? What business does he have being out on his front lawn anyway? Does Joe have enough education to understand and question Obama,...? The Republicans on the other hand applauded Joe and supported him. This was seen much more widely in the bloggosphere than was reported on in main newspapers. It is really difficult to hear objective reporting from the MSM these days, but that is another story. So Obama and the democrats want to destroy Joe and the Republicans are screaming: "We are Joe."
Who is this Joe and what does he represent to each party? I see him as another American citizen who is pursuing the American dream. One party wants to trample his individual rights, because he is an obstacle on their quest for power, and the other group stands with Joe and internalizes his individual pursuit of happiness. There is my take on the essential differences in ideology during this election, and how this difference has led one party to try to destroy Joe-the-plumber, while another party has chosen to fight on Joe's behalf. One party represents the collective, while the other the individual. This is why Obama cannot recall the name of the soldier whose bracelet he wore during one the debates, and he wore it despite the protest from this fallen soldier's family. This is why Biden tells such lovely stories about a local shop, but when the facts of his story are checked, the details turn out to be false. Individuals are not important to them. This is why Obama's brother lives in hovel and a school named after him has not received any of his help. On the other hand, McCain adopted children from impoverished countries and personally cares for their welfare. When visiting foreign lands, he makes certain to stop and visit our soldiers there. These individuals matter to him. He hasn't done enough to discredit some of his critics, because a personal attack on these individuals goes against McCain's core values. Come November, you will be asked to make a choice: Rights of the individual vs rights of the state.
As public spotlight was cast on Joe, this "ring of power" and burden became his to bear. A very unlikely hero for in the eyes of the Democratic Party machine, but the quintessential American for many. In answering Obama's latest headline, the one about being too far ahead of McCain for any chance of a Republican success, I will quote from The Return of the King: “It’s like in the great stories. The ones that really mattered. Full of darkness and danger they were. And sometimes you didn’t want to know the end. Because how could the end be happy? How could the world go back to the way it was when so much bad had happened? But in the end, it’s only a passing thing, this shadow. Even darkness must pass. A new day will come. And when the sun shines it will shine out the clearer. Those were the stories that stayed with you... Folk in those stories had lots of chances of turning back, only they didn’t. They kept going. Because they were holding on to something. That there’s some good in this world. And it’s worth fighting for.” Good luck John and Sarah.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
