Friday, February 26, 2010
This is What Happens to you when you Buck the Democratic Party Machine
The Dems in NY want the Crown Prince (Cumo) to be the next Governor and no one will stand in their way. While not a supporter of Governor Patterson, at least he tried to stand up to the State Unions and Democratic Machine.
Just what New York needs is another Party Hack in Albany.
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Political Correctness or Manners
Some people are offended by the use of the term Hoplophobiac. It is not politically correct and it is not a real medical condition. I would argue that I don't care about political correctness and while it may not be a medical condition, it is certainly a political condition.
We used to have manners in this country. Now we have political correctness.
Political Correctness is now regulating manners.
We used to say that we have freedom of speech in this country. Is Political Correctness regulating speech and opinion? Discouragement of discussing your opinion on religion or politics under the guise of political correctness certainly makes it seem that way.
Political Correctness (PC) is communal tyranny that erupted in this country in the 1980s. It was a spontaneous declaration that particular ideas, expressions and behavior, which were then legal, should be forbidden by law, and people who transgressed should be punished.
Spontaneous declaration? WHAT????
Evidence of this effect is amply demonstrated by the Soviets, who embraced Political Correctness with the Communist Revolution. Nazi Germany followed suit.
What happened to the people that were not politically correct under those regimes? If you don't know you are a victim of revisionist history being pushed by people with agendas inspired by selfishness and unrestrained by morality.
In the 80's the US decided to take a "kinder, gentler approach".
Prisons and concentration camps are now replaced with lawsuits and loss of employability. What I call "Economic Genocide."
Who is behind all of this? Well, to be politically correct, I am not allowed to name names or identify groups, but it brings us right back to "spontaneous declaration".
Is there such a thing as spontaneous declaration?
What is a spontaneous declaration? Public Opinion or Judical Manipulation, or both?
Spontaneous Declaration is the Politically Correct way of saying Public Manipulation.
Who drives public opinion? In the 80's you could say that Hollywood and the News Media, and marketing molded public opinion through relentless repetition of a theme. All corporations are evil, all gun owners are right wing hicks, government is the salvation of all social ills. Although we would like to think that the New Media of today has replaced the old guard, nobody has bothered to tell them that. The Old Media is like a poker player and is "all in" today because they haven't caught on that their bluff is being called.
Judges: Shouldn't all judical decisions be judged on Constitutional Law?
Most judges are lawyers. Lawyers are in business to make profit. Lawyers like any busniess person have to grow the busniess in the future to survive and prosper.
We are seeing the beginning of a busniess plan today that will benefit Lawyers in the future.
They have to figure out a way to repeat the tobacco settlements. They have to determine the next huge cash cow and begin to mold public opinion using the media and bench rulings to get their foot in the door for billions in legal fees and cash awards. They are heavily involved in the current political structure and will be the candidates for judical appointments in the future. They are already floating trial ballons and red herrings to the New Media to mold public opinion. Trans-fat ban anyone?
Today, we are drowning in laws; we are contorted by judicial decisions; we are driven to distraction by omnipresent lawyers in all parts of our once private lives. America has a place for laws and lawyers, but that place is modest and reasonable, not vast and unchecked. When the most important decision for our next president is whom he will appoint to the Supreme Court, the role of lawyers and the law in America is too big.
One target to go the way of "Big Tobacco" will be Big Food. Once it becomes totally acceptable to discriminate against overweight people, the stage will be set. They will then be cast as victims of a disease caused by "Big Food".
So much for spontaneous declaratoins. Most if not all "spontaneous declarations" are deliberate methodical manipulation of public discourse, through political correctness.
We are not all litigants in some vast social class-action suit. We are citizens of a republic that promises us a great deal of freedom from laws, from courts, and from lawyers.
The United States has 5% of the world's population and 66% of the world's lawyers! Tort (Legal) reform legislation has been introduced in congress several times in the last several years to limit punitive damages in ridiculous lawsuits such as "spilling hot coffee on yourself and suing the establishment that sold it to you" and also to limit punitive damages in huge medical malpractice lawsuits. This legislation has continually been blocked from even being voted on by the a certain Party. When you see that 97% of the political contributions from the American Trial Lawyers Association goes to one Party, then you realize who is responsible for our medical and product costs being so high!
Hoplophobes were created by the manipulation of public opinion through the concerted marketing effort mentioned above. Lawyers need the money from BIG Ammo and Big Firearms manufacturing.
I do not say that all people in one party are the H word. However I do contend that Progressives who do not respect the Constitution and the Second Amendment in particular are Hoplophobes. There are progressives in both parties. Most if not all of them are lawyers.
Which Current Political Party has become the Lawyers' Party.
Barack Obama is a lawyer.
Michelle Obama is a lawyer.
Hillary Clinton is a lawyer.
Bill Clinton is a lawyer.
John Edwards is a lawyer.
Elizabeth Edwards is a lawyer.
Every Democrat nominee since 1984 went to law school (although Gore did not graduate).
Every Democrat vice presidential nominee since 1976, except for Lloyd Bentsen, went to law school.
Look at leaders of the Democrat Party in Congress:
Harry Reid is a lawyer.
Nancy Pelosi is a lawyer
The ohther Party is different.
President Bush was a businessman.
Vice President Cheney was a businessman.
The leaders of the Republican Revolution:
Newt Gingrich was a history professor.
Tom Delay was an exterminator.
Dick Armey was an economist.
House Minority Leader Boehner was a plastic manufacturer.
The former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is a heart surgeon.
Who was the last Republican president who was a lawyer? Gerald Ford, who left office 31 years ago and who barely won the Republican nomination as a sitting president, running against Ronald Reagan in 1976.
The one Party is made up of real people doing real work, who are often the targets of lawyers.
The other Party is made up of lawyers. They mock and scorn men who create wealth.
The Lawyers' Party sees these sorts of people, who provide goods and services that people want, as the enemies of America. And, so we have seen the procession of official enemies, in the eyes of the Lawyers' Party, grow.
Against whom do Hillary and Obama rail? Pharmaceutical companies, oil companies, hospitals, manufacturers, fast food restaurant chains, large retail businesses, bankers, and anyone producing anything of value in our nation.
This is the natural consequence of viewing everything through the eyes of lawyers. Lawyers solve problems by successfully representing their clients, in this case the American people. Lawyers seek to have new laws passed, they seek to win lawsuits, they press appellate courts to overturn precedent, and lawyers always parse language to favor their side.
Confined to the narrow practice of law, that is fine. But it is an awful way to govern a great nation.
How to determine if you have you are not being politically correct.
Do Hoplophobes dissemble the real nature of the claim? Hmmm, on the Second Amendment? YES
Do Hoplophobes label dissenters as enemies of the truth? If gun toting rednecks is a label, then Yes.
Do Hoplophobes use hoplophobia as an excuse for crimes committed in its name? Well, if passing unconstitutional laws is a crime, then yes.
Other ways to tell.
Pay close attention when you start to hear people say things like:
People who disagree are blinded by prejudice against other cultures.
People who disagree are trouble-making bigots, which makes them enemies of the community, if not humanity, and deserving persecution.
So to the progressives out there that think the Constitution is outdated and irrelevant and to the others that have been duped into following them, I can only use good manners and say, I am sorry that the word Hoplophobia hurts your feelings. But until the thought police technology improves, I don't have to mean it. Kinda like when you took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. You said it but you didn't mean it.
We used to have manners in this country. Now we have political correctness.
Political Correctness is now regulating manners.
We used to say that we have freedom of speech in this country. Is Political Correctness regulating speech and opinion? Discouragement of discussing your opinion on religion or politics under the guise of political correctness certainly makes it seem that way.
Political Correctness (PC) is communal tyranny that erupted in this country in the 1980s. It was a spontaneous declaration that particular ideas, expressions and behavior, which were then legal, should be forbidden by law, and people who transgressed should be punished.
Spontaneous declaration? WHAT????
Evidence of this effect is amply demonstrated by the Soviets, who embraced Political Correctness with the Communist Revolution. Nazi Germany followed suit.
What happened to the people that were not politically correct under those regimes? If you don't know you are a victim of revisionist history being pushed by people with agendas inspired by selfishness and unrestrained by morality.
In the 80's the US decided to take a "kinder, gentler approach".
Prisons and concentration camps are now replaced with lawsuits and loss of employability. What I call "Economic Genocide."
Who is behind all of this? Well, to be politically correct, I am not allowed to name names or identify groups, but it brings us right back to "spontaneous declaration".
Is there such a thing as spontaneous declaration?
What is a spontaneous declaration? Public Opinion or Judical Manipulation, or both?
Spontaneous Declaration is the Politically Correct way of saying Public Manipulation.
Who drives public opinion? In the 80's you could say that Hollywood and the News Media, and marketing molded public opinion through relentless repetition of a theme. All corporations are evil, all gun owners are right wing hicks, government is the salvation of all social ills. Although we would like to think that the New Media of today has replaced the old guard, nobody has bothered to tell them that. The Old Media is like a poker player and is "all in" today because they haven't caught on that their bluff is being called.
Judges: Shouldn't all judical decisions be judged on Constitutional Law?
Most judges are lawyers. Lawyers are in business to make profit. Lawyers like any busniess person have to grow the busniess in the future to survive and prosper.
We are seeing the beginning of a busniess plan today that will benefit Lawyers in the future.
They have to figure out a way to repeat the tobacco settlements. They have to determine the next huge cash cow and begin to mold public opinion using the media and bench rulings to get their foot in the door for billions in legal fees and cash awards. They are heavily involved in the current political structure and will be the candidates for judical appointments in the future. They are already floating trial ballons and red herrings to the New Media to mold public opinion. Trans-fat ban anyone?
Today, we are drowning in laws; we are contorted by judicial decisions; we are driven to distraction by omnipresent lawyers in all parts of our once private lives. America has a place for laws and lawyers, but that place is modest and reasonable, not vast and unchecked. When the most important decision for our next president is whom he will appoint to the Supreme Court, the role of lawyers and the law in America is too big.
One target to go the way of "Big Tobacco" will be Big Food. Once it becomes totally acceptable to discriminate against overweight people, the stage will be set. They will then be cast as victims of a disease caused by "Big Food".
So much for spontaneous declaratoins. Most if not all "spontaneous declarations" are deliberate methodical manipulation of public discourse, through political correctness.
We are not all litigants in some vast social class-action suit. We are citizens of a republic that promises us a great deal of freedom from laws, from courts, and from lawyers.
The United States has 5% of the world's population and 66% of the world's lawyers! Tort (Legal) reform legislation has been introduced in congress several times in the last several years to limit punitive damages in ridiculous lawsuits such as "spilling hot coffee on yourself and suing the establishment that sold it to you" and also to limit punitive damages in huge medical malpractice lawsuits. This legislation has continually been blocked from even being voted on by the a certain Party. When you see that 97% of the political contributions from the American Trial Lawyers Association goes to one Party, then you realize who is responsible for our medical and product costs being so high!
Hoplophobes were created by the manipulation of public opinion through the concerted marketing effort mentioned above. Lawyers need the money from BIG Ammo and Big Firearms manufacturing.
I do not say that all people in one party are the H word. However I do contend that Progressives who do not respect the Constitution and the Second Amendment in particular are Hoplophobes. There are progressives in both parties. Most if not all of them are lawyers.
Which Current Political Party has become the Lawyers' Party.
Barack Obama is a lawyer.
Michelle Obama is a lawyer.
Hillary Clinton is a lawyer.
Bill Clinton is a lawyer.
John Edwards is a lawyer.
Elizabeth Edwards is a lawyer.
Every Democrat nominee since 1984 went to law school (although Gore did not graduate).
Every Democrat vice presidential nominee since 1976, except for Lloyd Bentsen, went to law school.
Look at leaders of the Democrat Party in Congress:
Harry Reid is a lawyer.
Nancy Pelosi is a lawyer
The ohther Party is different.
President Bush was a businessman.
Vice President Cheney was a businessman.
The leaders of the Republican Revolution:
Newt Gingrich was a history professor.
Tom Delay was an exterminator.
Dick Armey was an economist.
House Minority Leader Boehner was a plastic manufacturer.
The former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is a heart surgeon.
Who was the last Republican president who was a lawyer? Gerald Ford, who left office 31 years ago and who barely won the Republican nomination as a sitting president, running against Ronald Reagan in 1976.
The one Party is made up of real people doing real work, who are often the targets of lawyers.
The other Party is made up of lawyers. They mock and scorn men who create wealth.
The Lawyers' Party sees these sorts of people, who provide goods and services that people want, as the enemies of America. And, so we have seen the procession of official enemies, in the eyes of the Lawyers' Party, grow.
Against whom do Hillary and Obama rail? Pharmaceutical companies, oil companies, hospitals, manufacturers, fast food restaurant chains, large retail businesses, bankers, and anyone producing anything of value in our nation.
This is the natural consequence of viewing everything through the eyes of lawyers. Lawyers solve problems by successfully representing their clients, in this case the American people. Lawyers seek to have new laws passed, they seek to win lawsuits, they press appellate courts to overturn precedent, and lawyers always parse language to favor their side.
Confined to the narrow practice of law, that is fine. But it is an awful way to govern a great nation.
How to determine if you have you are not being politically correct.
Do Hoplophobes dissemble the real nature of the claim? Hmmm, on the Second Amendment? YES
Do Hoplophobes label dissenters as enemies of the truth? If gun toting rednecks is a label, then Yes.
Do Hoplophobes use hoplophobia as an excuse for crimes committed in its name? Well, if passing unconstitutional laws is a crime, then yes.
Other ways to tell.
Pay close attention when you start to hear people say things like:
People who disagree are blinded by prejudice against other cultures.
People who disagree are trouble-making bigots, which makes them enemies of the community, if not humanity, and deserving persecution.
So to the progressives out there that think the Constitution is outdated and irrelevant and to the others that have been duped into following them, I can only use good manners and say, I am sorry that the word Hoplophobia hurts your feelings. But until the thought police technology improves, I don't have to mean it. Kinda like when you took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. You said it but you didn't mean it.
Friday, January 29, 2010
GOOOH Get Out of Our House I met Tim Cox founder of GOOOH
I attended a GOOOH meeting Wednesday Night in Buffalo. I went in skeptical but came out understanding that the plan developed by Tim Cox is brilliant and could work.
I have met a lot of people that are fed up and frustrated with the current political situation. Tim outlines a very simple method allowing all of us to become involved instead of just complaining.
Does it mean you have to get off of the couch and participate? Yes.
Can it work? I believe so.
Will it be bashed by the current main stream media and political machines? Absolutely.
Just as in 1776, One third of the colonists were loyal to England, One Third didn't care one way or the other, and one third risked everything they had to give us what we have.
Today, 2010 One third will vote the way the Republican and Democrat party leaders tell them to vote. One third won't vote at all, and one third will vote for what they think is the lesser of two evils.
GOOOH is trying to excite the latter one third to get off the couch and do something different in an attempt to get back to a government of the people.
I have met a lot of people that are fed up and frustrated with the current political situation. Tim outlines a very simple method allowing all of us to become involved instead of just complaining.
Does it mean you have to get off of the couch and participate? Yes.
Can it work? I believe so.
Will it be bashed by the current main stream media and political machines? Absolutely.
Just as in 1776, One third of the colonists were loyal to England, One Third didn't care one way or the other, and one third risked everything they had to give us what we have.
Today, 2010 One third will vote the way the Republican and Democrat party leaders tell them to vote. One third won't vote at all, and one third will vote for what they think is the lesser of two evils.
GOOOH is trying to excite the latter one third to get off the couch and do something different in an attempt to get back to a government of the people.
Friday, December 11, 2009
Providence, E. Providence RI Hoplophobes Host Toy Gun Exchanges
You can't make this stuff up.
Children in Providence and East Providence can trade toy guns for real candy or toys on Friday and Saturday.
In Providence, children can feed their toy guns to the "Bash-O-Matic," a device designed and built by students at the New England Institute of Technology and the Rhode Island School of Design, Rhode Island Attorney General Patrick C. Lynch said.
The annual "Holiday Toy Gun Bash" will give an alternate toy to each child who relinquishes a gun from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. Saturday at Pleasant View Elementary School, 50 Obadiah Brown Road, Providence.
Lynch will speak at noon, and he and other community leaders will discuss other ways to reduce gun violence and juvenile violence. Lynch will also take on challengers in a 3-point basketball shooting contest. There will be refreshments, games, a visit from Santa Claus, music and raffles by Hot 106, as well as a K-9 demonstration and a child ID program.
The New England Institute of Technology and the Rhode Island School of Design are creating Hoplophobes on campus now!. Just wait a few years when they become involved in politics.
Get em while they are young.
Children in Providence and East Providence can trade toy guns for real candy or toys on Friday and Saturday.
In Providence, children can feed their toy guns to the "Bash-O-Matic," a device designed and built by students at the New England Institute of Technology and the Rhode Island School of Design, Rhode Island Attorney General Patrick C. Lynch said.
The annual "Holiday Toy Gun Bash" will give an alternate toy to each child who relinquishes a gun from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. Saturday at Pleasant View Elementary School, 50 Obadiah Brown Road, Providence.
Lynch will speak at noon, and he and other community leaders will discuss other ways to reduce gun violence and juvenile violence. Lynch will also take on challengers in a 3-point basketball shooting contest. There will be refreshments, games, a visit from Santa Claus, music and raffles by Hot 106, as well as a K-9 demonstration and a child ID program.
The New England Institute of Technology and the Rhode Island School of Design are creating Hoplophobes on campus now!. Just wait a few years when they become involved in politics.
Get em while they are young.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Do what I say or American business gets it. Says Obama to Congress
The Obama administration gives ultimatum to Congress.
Do what I say or business gets it.
The Obama administration is warning Congress that if it doesn't move to regulate greenhouse gases, the Environmental Protection Agency will take a "command-and-control" role over the process in a way that could hurt business. The gun to the head will be wielded by the EPA so that da BOSS has plausible deniability. People in Chicago should understand what is happening here.
Is this an example of the Executive Branch gone wild?
It was Obama's people that wrote the Bill in the first place.
It will be Obama's people that will be in charge of enforcing the bill once
passed by Congress.
It will be You and me paying the taxes that will go to the UN for distribution
to other countries.
Read
More here
Senate Set to Vote on Another Hoplophobic Judge
Here we go again.
First, there was Sonia Sotomayor. Then there was David Hamilton.
Now, we have another radical, anti-gun judge that has been nominated for the federal judiciary. His name is Louis Butler, and he is so radical, he was twice rejected by the people of Wisconsin (which is, by the way, one of the most liberal states in our union).
When Louis Butler first ran for the Wisconsin Supreme Court -- the voters rejected him by a 2-1 margin. When he was appointed to that court by Democrat Governor Jim Doyle and then stood for retention by the voters, they again rejected him. This was the first time a member of the Wisconsin Supreme Court was rejected by the voters in more than 40 years.
More importantly, Louis Butler opposes the rights of gun owners. The right to bear arms in the Wisconsin Constitution expressly notes that this right is for personal security and "any other lawful purpose." But in State v. Fischer, Judge Butler was the deciding vote in 2006 to hold that a Wisconsin statute barring carrying a concealed weapon for any purpose, at any time, including in a vehicle, does not violate this right to personal security that the voters of Wisconsin chose to expressly protect in their state constitution.
So he ignored the state constitution in order to impose his anti-gun views on the people of Wisconsin.
After the landmark U.S. Supreme Court Heller case upholding Second Amendment gun rights in 2008, Louis Butler spoke at an Obama for President fundraiser and specifically mentioned "gun control" as an issue that potential Obama appointees would impact.
"Gun control," Butler said, "may ultimately be decided, and the new appointees can tip the very balance of the court. [The] background, personal beliefs and policy decisions of the justices selected will influence how they will vote on the difficult cases before them."
There you have it. He is a radical activist who wants to move the courts -- and our country -- in a new direction. We've already had enough "hope and change" for a lifetime. We don't need another federal judge who will use his radical "personal beliefs" to reshape our society.
ACTION: Please contact your U.S. Senators and urge them to OPPOSE the nomination of Judge Louis Butler as U.S. District Judge for the Western District of Wisconsin. Butler was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee last week, and could now be voted on by the full Senate at any time.
You can use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your senators the pre-written e-mail message here.
First, there was Sonia Sotomayor. Then there was David Hamilton.
Now, we have another radical, anti-gun judge that has been nominated for the federal judiciary. His name is Louis Butler, and he is so radical, he was twice rejected by the people of Wisconsin (which is, by the way, one of the most liberal states in our union).
When Louis Butler first ran for the Wisconsin Supreme Court -- the voters rejected him by a 2-1 margin. When he was appointed to that court by Democrat Governor Jim Doyle and then stood for retention by the voters, they again rejected him. This was the first time a member of the Wisconsin Supreme Court was rejected by the voters in more than 40 years.
More importantly, Louis Butler opposes the rights of gun owners. The right to bear arms in the Wisconsin Constitution expressly notes that this right is for personal security and "any other lawful purpose." But in State v. Fischer, Judge Butler was the deciding vote in 2006 to hold that a Wisconsin statute barring carrying a concealed weapon for any purpose, at any time, including in a vehicle, does not violate this right to personal security that the voters of Wisconsin chose to expressly protect in their state constitution.
So he ignored the state constitution in order to impose his anti-gun views on the people of Wisconsin.
After the landmark U.S. Supreme Court Heller case upholding Second Amendment gun rights in 2008, Louis Butler spoke at an Obama for President fundraiser and specifically mentioned "gun control" as an issue that potential Obama appointees would impact.
"Gun control," Butler said, "may ultimately be decided, and the new appointees can tip the very balance of the court. [The] background, personal beliefs and policy decisions of the justices selected will influence how they will vote on the difficult cases before them."
There you have it. He is a radical activist who wants to move the courts -- and our country -- in a new direction. We've already had enough "hope and change" for a lifetime. We don't need another federal judge who will use his radical "personal beliefs" to reshape our society.
ACTION: Please contact your U.S. Senators and urge them to OPPOSE the nomination of Judge Louis Butler as U.S. District Judge for the Western District of Wisconsin. Butler was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee last week, and could now be voted on by the full Senate at any time.
You can use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your senators the pre-written e-mail message here.
How to spot a Haplophobe.
How to spot a Haplophobe.
A.) People who believe in moral relativism. Right and wrong are different for different people? Now they'll just say that "truth" is different for different people. As for their Agenda: Why let the truth stand in your way of our nobel cause?
B.) People that spout removing firearms from a civilized society will decrease voilence. As they live in gated communities and have a contingent of security with them at all times. (What does the security detail of Mayor Bloomberg carry?)
C.) People that are out of touch with the majority of US Citizens and consider them as commoners?
D.) People that shudder in fear when they read the words. A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. And then try to revise the meaning.
E.) All of the Above.
A.) People who believe in moral relativism. Right and wrong are different for different people? Now they'll just say that "truth" is different for different people. As for their Agenda: Why let the truth stand in your way of our nobel cause?
B.) People that spout removing firearms from a civilized society will decrease voilence. As they live in gated communities and have a contingent of security with them at all times. (What does the security detail of Mayor Bloomberg carry?)
C.) People that are out of touch with the majority of US Citizens and consider them as commoners?
D.) People that shudder in fear when they read the words. A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. And then try to revise the meaning.
E.) All of the Above.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)