The Senate of the US--and the idiot who runs it

So, the lead idiot in charge of the Senate of these (once great) United States pushed through his healthcare plan this past Saturday. Of course, it was only to "debate" the actual healthcare plan, not the actual plan itself, right? Right. The soon to be Former Senator Harry Reid knows that once the debate has passed, there's only a snowball's chance in hell (where, as an aside, I think he's headed) that the whole thing won't pass the Senate. He thinks we're all stupid--and to be true, some of us are--I mean, how else did he get re-elected? Anyway, I digress. Mr. Reid knows that by passing the bill through for debate, he can almost certainly get the entire thing passed. I mean, he has 60 friggin' votes in the Senate, he should have had it done already--but wait!! The American people are against this boondoggle, and he knows it. However, he doesn't really give a damn about any of us, because he's just that much better and smarter than we are. Didn't you know? He and Madam Pelosi are like friggin' geniuses!! (Or is that genieii?) Anyway, they know so much more than we stupid "teabaggers" and "radicals", that they will push this thing through no matter what. Frankly, I think they need to be dragged out into the open square and flogged--or tar-and-feathered, that would work too.

What we have is a majority of the populous that does not want the DMV-style healthcare that we're all doomed to have under this program, but those who work for us--that is, the legislators in the Congress and the lead Communist in the White House, they want it no matter what. The real question is, WHY??? It certainly can't be to cover the 10-15% of people who have no insurance--we could very easily put together a "safety-net" type program that would cover those that are facing bankruptcy because of healthcare costs, those that have no money and have major healthcare problems, or those that can't get coverage for whatever reason, and I don't believe that ANYONE would argue against it. There is NO REASON that the government needs to take over the ENTIRE HEALTHCARE SYSTEM--except that it gives them more power. It gives them the power over all of our lives--they can regulate food, guns, excercise, whatever, because now they control healthcare. Goodbye McDonalds, your food has no nutritional value. Wendys can stay, though. Burger King is just a memory, but you were found to have skipped your last visit to Gold's Gym, that's going to cost you. Think I'm nuts?? Just wait until they get their hooks into everything that we're doing. My examples may be hyperbole, but it's not going to be that far from the truth.

The fact is, we're facing a crisis in this country like never before. We have actual unemployment at levels not seen since the great depression--I've seen figures between 17% and 22% when they include those that can't find a full-time job who have been off the rolls for over 6 months, those that can only find part-time work when the need or want full-time, or those that have had their hours cut back because of the economy. Obeyme wants to add health insurance for everyone, and that will "save" money. Save money?? What kind of dope is this guy smoking?? I've never had drugs that good--spend money to save money?? Awesome. That means I can max out my credit cards and end up retiring off my savings, right?? Right. Fact is, Obeyme is out of his league completely. He has no concept of economics, no concept of foreign relations (and it's being proven with his last trip to China), no idea on how to fix the problems that we are all facing, and frankly--I think the man is a highly educated idiot. He may be "book smart", but he has no idea how to handle the position he's been put in. No experience running a business, no experience running anything, but he's connected. Oh yes. He's connected.

The bottom line for me, is that I am afraid of what we're going to see in the future of this country. If we don't stop spending (healthcare, cap and trade (yet another bullshit program), bailing out everyone but the taxpayers), we are going to see the value of our dollar drop to nothing--that means hyperinflation, like never seen on this continent. You think the Weimar Republic was bad? They didn't spend a FRACTION of what Obeyme and his minions have already spent. Add in what they want to spend, and this country is doomed. There is no coming out of debt that is estimated to be $24 TRILLION IN THE NEXT 10 YEARS!!! Right now we're at a lowly $12 TRILLION in debt. People don't even know what that number means, it's so bad. Ask someone what a trillion is, and you're likely to get a brand of coffee. Anyway, I have no wish for the bad things that are going to happen, but I have a bad feeling about this whole thing. Think about: food riots, blood in the streets, neighbor against neighbor, starvation on the streets of America, and that's just the beginning.

Oh--and the kicker?? It's all planned. Nobody is this stupid. Not even Harry Reid.

Healthcare and Government

So, the House passed government-run healthcare last night. Finally. Just what I was hoping for. Now, instead of some insurance bureaucrat looking over my healthcare, it will be some government idiot in an ivory tower who doesn't know shit about healthcare making decisions for me. Awesome.

Let me get this straight: Because we have somewhere between 20 and 46 million people without healthcare, the Goverment must take over the whole system? We can't just come up with something that will help those that don't have it, nope. We need to take over the whole thing. God knows how well they've done with all those other things that government has taken over. I mean, since the whole "war on poverty", we know there are no more poor people in this country, and since the "war on drugs" was initiated, we obviously have no more drug users or dealers. Government stepped in, and "oila!" No more problem. Friggin' awesome how well the government works, isn't it?

What we have here in reality is a bunch of communist idiots, led by the Lead Idiot, Obeyme. Let's take over everything so we can push our Socialist agenda of control by government. God knows how well that's worked out in the past, I mean look at those wonderful Chinese--oh wait--they've become Capitalists. Hmmm... Funny how that's worked out, I wonder what Mao would say, but we can always listen to his followers in the capital.

We'll have to see how this whole thing plays out, but one thing is for certain: Obeyme wants the US to become another 3rd world state. Welcome to Zimbabwe, everyone.

Karl Rove, and the lies of Joe Wilson and the Democrats

For the past couple of weeks all I've been hearing about on the news, and talk radio is about Karl Rove and his "deliberate outing of a CIA operative." At first, I really didn't have an opinion on this, as I didn't know if the allegation was true or not. As a patriot, my personal opinion is that anyone that deliberately "outs" an undercover operative (or "spy") deserves to be tried for treason, then shot. I'm dead serious about that. There is nothing worse than a traitor--one who would turn against his or her own country does not deserve life, plain and simple.

Since the story first came out, I've done a little checking, and here's what I've found: http://intelligence.senate.gov/iraqreport2.pdf This is the report that the Senate Intelligence Committee published concerning the intelligence community's asessments of Iraq. Note on page 39 of the report that they speak of Mr. Wilson, and how his wife suggested that he go to Niger to find out about the rumor of Iraq buying uranium from there. Note that Mr. Wilson stated that it was our Vice President Dick Cheney that sent him there. Note that in the report it states clearly that Mr. Wilson did not speak with the current President of the country, nor did he speak with the current person in charge of the mines in Niger. Note also that it states clearly that Mr. Wilson didn't file a report on his trip, but that a report was filed by others and that he was "debriefed". It also states that no report was ever given to Cheney, contrary to what Mr. Wilson has stated. Hmmm....... Well, it appears certain that Mr. Wilson is a liar, as the report clearly states things that are in direct conflict with what he has said. Should that dampen one's opinion of Mr. Wilson? I would certainly think so.

Now, there's the statement that I've been hearing about how Rove deliberately "outed" Wilson's wife Valerie Plame in "retaliation" for Wilson coming back and stating that there was no connection between Iraq and Niger. Note that it couldn't have been done in an intelligence report as one would assume, since Wilson never made a report. Nope, it was in an editorial in the New York Times that Mr. Wilson attacked the administration about this entire incident. Then, some time later, Robert Novak printed Valerie Plame's name and stated that she worked for the CIA and was Wilson's wife. Obviously, this was an attack by the administration in retailiation, right? That's what people have been saying for a couple of years now. But let's look at the facts: Karl Rove responded to a reporters question about Wilson's trip to Niger, and Rove stated that "apparently his wife works at the CIA." That's what this whole thing is about. Hmmm....... Porter Goss works for the CIA too. Did I just commit a crime? Should I have my name splashed all over by the media? I don't think so. Apparently the reporter then did some digging, discovered Plame's name, and then reported it publicly. Hmm....Seems to me that the reporter would be the one that was in trouble, right? Well, not according to the Democrats.

The fact is, Ms Plame was at one time a covert operative, but since her move to the US in 1997 she has not been under cover. In fact, she was (as several sources put it) "widely known" around Washington to work for the CIA, and obviously didn't hide when going to work. My uncle works for the CIA too, and speaks of it openly. He simply doesn't discuss his work specifics, so I presume means that Ms. Plame would be in the same scenario. It's no secret that she worked there, she just shouldn't talk about her job.

Now, it is well known that Mr. Wilson stated publicly that he wanted to see Karl Rove "frog marched out of the White House in handcuffs", and so here about a week ago he and "Chuckie" Schumer went to the airwaves to denounce Mr. Rove and his dastardly deed in "outing" his wife. It's also widely known that the Democrats hate Rove, and believe him to be the "mastermind" behind their recent butt-kickings at the polls. Therefore, I don't think one needs to be a rocket scientist to figure out why they are jumping on the bandwagon on this issue. They want to see him out, and they see this as their best chance. Add to this that Mr. Wilson was on Kerry's campaign, and this entire thing smells to high heaven. Oh, and one more thing--the law that Rove supposedly broke in "outing" Ms. Plame doesn't apply here for a number of reasons, of which I'll only state a couple: First, one has to knowingly give out the name of an UNDER COVER agent, or one that has been under cover within the past 5 years. Since Ms. Plame hadn't been under cover for more than 5 years it doesn't apply. Second, it seems to me that one would need to NAME an agent, which Rove didn't do--he stated that "apparently" the guy's wife worked for the CIA. He didn't name her, and ostensibly didn't know her name. How can one "out" an agent without stating that person's name? It's ridiculous.

Frankly this entire situation is a non-story, and anyone who will do a little bit of research can find out that it's completely made up hype. What is truly disturbing is the lack of any of the major news agencies bothering to read the report that I linked to above, and exposing Mr. Wilson for the obviously lying, democrat hack that he is. To me, it just goes to show the liberal slant to the news that they're putting out--forget the truth, here's a chance to repeat Watergate. It's sad to see where we've come.

Semper Ingenuus, Semper Liberum

The Changing Face of the Extreme Court

Today Sandra Day O'Connor announced her resignation from the Supreme Court after nearly a quarter century of service. While I haven't agreed with many of her votes, she has always seemed to me to be a reasonably decent, thoughtful justice that used the Constitution in the way that it was intended--i.e., her decisions were based on Constitutional principles and her interpretation of it. Opposed to that is Ruth Bader Ginsberg who should have never set foot in the Supreme Court, and who believes that it is the justices responsibility to take into consideration world opinion when making a decision--something that is anathema to anyone who believes in liberty and the rule of law.

No sooner had Ms. O'Connor announced her retirement than Ted Kennedy opens his fat mouth and starts dictating what kind of judge Bush needs to appoint to the vacancy, claiming that Ms. O'connor was a "mainstream conservative" and that is the kind of person that Bush needs to appoint. Well hell, Teddy, why didn't you come through sooner with your advice? God knows that we are all just waiting to hear from your wisdom again. Please.......

First of all, Ted Kennedy wouldn't know mainstream if it hit him in the nose, and the man is so far to the left that I don't think he can make a right turn. Second, where does he get off thinking that he has ANY say as to who the President appoints? Funny, it seems to me that he ran for the presidency more than once and was soundly REJECTED by the American people on several grounds, not the least of which was his little incident at Chappaquidick. Like I've said before, Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my gun--but I digress. Ted stands up in front of the camera and bloviates about how the President needs to appoint a "mainstream" judge (read that as far-left liberal), and implies that all hell will break loose if he doesn't. Well, let me say something that's way too obvious: The liberals have lost the House, the Senate, and the White House, as well as most Governorships in this country. The people of this country have spoken, and by God they should be able to choose any CONSERVATIVE, Constitution-supporting justice they want. Period. Ted Kennedy and all his liberal scum in the Senate can go straight to hell as far as I care. He and his whole family are nothing but crooks, liars, and cheats, and that includes his older brother John and his father Joe. I don't care if people think that the family is some kind of royalty, it's a fact and it's proven--and anyone who denies it is either uninformed or stupid. They have been one of the biggest crime families in the history of this country, and people still fawn over them. I don't get it.

I have said many times that I'm not a big fan of GW, for a lot of reasons. He's FAR too liberal, hasn't met a spending bill he didn't like, and has exponentially added to the size of the federal government, and has failed to stand up for conservative values. However, here he has a chance to redeem himself (a little), and seek out to find some CONSERVATIVE justices that will uphold our constitution and put them into place. The leftist senators will howl and scream, but that's just TFB. We NEED to get some judges into place that will do what they're supposed to do--interpret laws by the Constitution, and STOP SHREDDING IT by their false and activist agenda. Failure to do that will result in further encroachment on our rights, probably a dissolution of the 2nd Amendment, and further fall into the abyss of tyranny that we've been heading for in the past 40 years.

God help us.

Semper Ingenuus, Semper Liberum

I CAN'T STAND IT!!!

THE EXTREME COURT HAS DONE IT AGAIN!!! How is it possible that 5 Supreme Court justices can COMPLETELY MISINTERPRET the 5th Amendment of the Constitution to allow cities to simply take private property TO SELL IT TO PRIVATE BUSINESSES FOR PRIVATE USE!!! THE GOVERNMENT HAS NO SUCH AUTHORITY GRANTED TO IT!!! I AM INCENSED!!!

The 5th Amendment to the Constitution reads in part: "...nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." OK, that means that the government CAN take property under two distinct conditions: it must be for public use, and there must be just conpensation given to the property owner. This seems reasonable enough, if the public needs a road built or some other such thing that everyone will use to their benefit, the government should, under certain circumstances, be able to take such property while paying the owner the current value of whatever the property is. In the case linked above, homeowners were fighting a builder who wanted to put up an OFFICE COMPLEX for their own private use. The city argued that they need the tax revenue from the office building, so that was their entire justification for the case.

Now, let's think about what the impact of this ruling is: Under this ruling, if your home, church, whatever, stand in the way of a developer who wants to put in a shopping mall on your corner, the city can come in and TAKE YOUR PROPERTY!!! THIS IS A COMPLETE REVERSAL OF THE PURPOSE OF THE 5TH AMENDMENT, AND IS A SLAP IN THE FACE TO ALL WHO CHERISH LIBERTY!! Am I the only one who sees this? The Extreme Court has just effectively eliminated the right to private property. The (communist, in my opinion) justice Paul Stevens wrote "The city has carefully formulated an economic development that it believes will provide appreciable benefits to the community, including _ but by no means limited to _ new jobs and increased tax revenue,"---WHAT??? So for the benefit of adding tax revenue the city can therefore simply take over someone's private property??? WHAT ARE WE BECOMING??? He was joined in his perverted interpretation by the other communists on the court, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsberg and Breyer.

It is painfully obvious to me that the purpose of this REVISION of our Constitution is to promote the paternal government, more commonly known as Communism and his little brother Socialism. It's completely obvious that those in power want complete control, and this just another stepping stone to accomplish it. If people don't own their property, if it is simply gifted to them by the government and can be taken at any time, then the people must be dependent upon the government for everything. THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!!!

I don't know if it's possible, and I don't read anything about it in the Constitution, but we need to have some way of impeaching these radical judges that fail to interpret laws strictly from our Constitution. If we need to amend the Constitution to do so, then so be it. We also need to be able to impeach these justices that obviously can't read and iterpret simple english--things such as "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed", and "nor shall private property be taken for publice use without just compensation".

This is a complete and utter outrage, and we need people to start voicing their opinions LOUDLY.

Dick (less) Durbin and the Continued Deterioration of the Democratic Party

This past Tuesday night the "esteemed" Senate leader from Illinois made note that an FBI agent witnessed a detainee in Guantanamo Bay Cuba that had been shackled to the floor in the fetal position for 24 hours, had been nearly frozen with the air conditioner causing him to shiver violently, and had his air conditioner turned off resulting in the room temperature to go over 100 degrees. This, the Senator compared to the "Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or Pol Pot or other" regime. Hmmm.... let me get this straight. Being bound for 24 hours is the same thing as being gassed? It's at the same level as killing someone in a gulag?? It's the same thing as being tortured and left to die in the jungle?? You cannot possibly be serious Senator. To further state my point, let me put it succinctly: Senator, you should be castigated by your peers and forced to resign your seat in SHAME!!

The Nazis were guilty of approximately 9 million innocent deaths, mostly Jews, the infirm, homosexuals, gypsies, and anyone they considered to be "inferior"--that does not include the approximately 11 million others that died in the war. Stalin on the other hand, was guilty of approximately 20 million of his own people killed under his iron fist, including those with college educations, those that he considered a potential political enemy, and anyone and everyone that threatened to get in his way. Pol Pot on the other hand was "only" guilty of causing approximately 2 million deaths, so he was nowhere near the numbers of the other two, but certainly worth noting. For Mr. Dirtbag (Durbin) to compare this treatment to mass murder is contemptible at it's very least, and anyone with a shred of decency should vocally denounce this waste of skin. His voters should have him recalled.

What bothers me the most about this situation is not the hyperbole that he shows in his comparison, it's the fact that Al Jezeera and all of the other Islamic rags pick this shit up and publish it, inciting additional violence against our troops, AND THAT'S WHAT THIS IS ALL ABOUT!! DON'T TELL ME THAT YOU SUPPORT OUR TROOPS AND THEN SPOUT THIS KIND OF CRAP OVER THE AIRWAVES!! If he wants to make statements like this in private, I don't care. Even a dirtbag has the right to an opinion; however, when statements like this incite further violence against our troops, THE PERSON STATING THEM SHOULD BE HELD AS TREASONOUS, AND AS GIVING AID AND COMFORT TO OUR ENEMIES. Personally, my solution for someone being found guilty of treason is a firing squad at close range, but that's just me.

To add to this situation, I haven't heard of a SINGLE Democrat ANYWHERE come out and admonish him for saying it. NOT ONE. That MUST mean that they all agree, right? I mean, if some Republican came out and said something like this, I can guarantee I'd be saying the same thing. I can also guarantee that every left-leaning paper in the country would be calling for his head on a silver platter. What's worse, is they turn around and blame the shitstorm that's now flying on the White House!! That's right, it's Bush's fault that Durbin made the statement. What?? Oh yes, somehow the "right wing conspiracy" is what's causing all of this bad publicity--not the fact that the man made a contemptible statement in public. It's friggin' ridiculous.

The Democratic party is completely void of any new ideas on how to solve any of today's problems, so they've resorted to obstruction, accusation, obfuscation, and hyperbole. Wow. Now, that's something to be proud of, I'm sure John Kennedy would be proud--just look at what your little brother has accomplished over the past 30+ years.

Another Blow to State's and Individual Rights

Well, the Extreme Court has done it again, overstepped its bounds and continued the oppression of the States by the Federal Government. I'm speaking of the recent decision to ban medical marijuana. Now, where they think that they got their power is beyond me, it seems to me that the Constitution of this great country DOESN'T GIVE THEM THE AUTHORITY TO JUDGE THE LAWS OF A GIVEN STATE--only to (according to Article III) "controversies between two or more States;--between a State and Citizens of another State;--between Citizens of different States;--between Citizens of the same State claiming Land under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects."

This controversy originally arose because California wrote a law that allowed their citizens to grow and use their own marijuana under a doctor's recommendation, typically for pain control or control of nausea due to chemotherapy. Now, I am not proclaiming to be an advocate of marijuana, but if the citizens of the State of California decide that is what they want, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS NO AUTHORITY in the matter. NONE. Frankly, I think that the governing body of the State of California and all the other states should tell the Extreme Court justices to go take a flying leap!! SOMEBODY PLEASE GROW A SPINE AND TELL THE FEDS THAT THEY DON'T OWN THE STATES!!

In the past the Justices claimed authority to interpret the laws of a given state under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution which reads:
"The Congress shall have the Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and General Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with Indian Tribes;
etc."

So, what they would do is say that the federal government controlled commerce between the states, and since marijuana was made illegal by the federal government, they could then come into the individual states and declare any marijuana found there to be part of interstate commerce (whether it was grown in the state or not) and take control of it and throw people in jail. Of course, most of the states have followed suit and made marijuana illegal as well, so they could do the same thing. What California did, was write the law specifically to avoid falling under the "Commerce Clause" to avoid the same old BS from the federal Courts. Here now the Extreme Court seems to think that they have jurisdiction, which they DON'T. AM I THE ONLY PERSON THAT SEES THIS?? AM I THE ONLY ONE THAT BELIEVES IN STATE SOVEREIGNTY?? SCREW THE COURT!! Tell them to enforce their own law.

The truth of the matter is that nobody will go against this ruling and the continued progress of the elimination of state's rights. I don't know of a single politician that would have the balls to go on television and declare that the Supreme Court doesn't have jurisdiction in their own states' laws, because most of the sheeple (to borrow from Michael Savage) haven't been educated properly as to what their rights really are, and they would therefore declare the man to be insane and vote him out of office. In addition, those in power would go ballistic and do everything they could to villify and destroy the person that stood up for state's rights.

Frankly, I just see this as another in a long line of abuses by the feds over the states, and it started before the Civil War. Anyone who believes that the Civil War was because of slavery is either an idiot, or simply another person who has not been educated by our wonderful school system. The Civil War was over State's rights, pure and simple. Slavery was a part of it, but it wasn't the impetus for the war as so many of today's educators would like us to believe. But, that history lesson will have to wait for another time....

Semper ingenuus, Semper liberum!!

Ramasart