I knew that the election of this country's first affirmative action President would be the beginning of the end, but I am shocked at how fast this end is coming.
Sure, if you have nothing (especially through no fault but your own), this Marxist administration will give you anything and everything. But God help you if threaten to come within spitting distance of prosperity. Then you become their enemy, deserving of public denunciation, threats, and a 90% tax rate. Why would you want to be rich in America anymore?
The members of our armed forces swear to uphold and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Why do we accept any less from those with the power to send our troops to war? And what can we do when that enemy occupies the Capitol, hoarding our money so that the portion that does not go to pay their six-figure salaries and lifetime pensions is handed to banks so that they can loan it to the very people who earned that money in the first place?
On April 15, I'm going to join a bunch of Americans who want, among other things, to remind our runaway Congress that we do not work for them; they work for us.
Feel free to join us.
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Let Them Keep the Money
I'm outraged by all the outrage over AIG. On the surface, it looks pretty inflammatory: Execs run company into such a deplorable state that it receives obscene amounts in taxpayer funded bailout money and still receive a total of $165 million in bonuses. Who wouldn't be mad? However, it takes a hypocritical, vindictive Marxist to stay mad--specifically, a person like our President.
The Obama administration doesn't care about the money. It's not theirs; it's yours! They can always get more! No, they, and the Democrat-controlled Congress, feel threatened because AIG is operating against the left's most beloved dogma. The company is doing what Obama would never: giving the taxpayers' money back to the taxpayers.
Granted, the bailout funds never belonged to AIG in the first place. They came from you, me, that creepy guy who sits too close to you at the coffee shop... The $165 million was distributed among 418 executives, averaging a little over $390,000 per brain-dead suit. Despite their total lack of business acumen or ethics, AIG executives are both taxpayers and consumers. If Barney Frank doesn't get his way and scrawny dredlocked people wearing Che Guevara shirts don't lynch them with organic hemp, they will funnel these bonuses right back into the economy. Or into an offshore bank. The point is, tax money is going back to the taxpayers, even if those taxpayers are sleazebags. Anything besides let the government keep it, right?
And if you're angry that morally bankrupt rich people are getting even richer, first, there's plenty of room in Russia and Venezuela. Second, Greg Gutfeld is right: when the rich get poorer, we all suffer.
My next point is that the bonuses were promised to those executives by AIG. Though the government owns 80% of the company, the AIG leadership realize they're not Congress; they can't go breaking promises left and right and nobody will notice or confront them. No wonder the Obamessiah is outraged: "We can't have failed banks keeping promises to their employees when I've broken every single one of mine to the entire country!"
Let's talk about hypocrisy. Congress is outraged that AIG wasted money they didn't earn by giving it to people who arguably don't deserve it? "They ran this company into the ground! How dare they take another penny!" Hey, Nancy, Harry...replace "company" with "economy." Now you've got an idea of how this all looks to the average mortgage-paying, non-bailed-out citizen.
The Obama administration doesn't care about the money. It's not theirs; it's yours! They can always get more! No, they, and the Democrat-controlled Congress, feel threatened because AIG is operating against the left's most beloved dogma. The company is doing what Obama would never: giving the taxpayers' money back to the taxpayers.
Granted, the bailout funds never belonged to AIG in the first place. They came from you, me, that creepy guy who sits too close to you at the coffee shop... The $165 million was distributed among 418 executives, averaging a little over $390,000 per brain-dead suit. Despite their total lack of business acumen or ethics, AIG executives are both taxpayers and consumers. If Barney Frank doesn't get his way and scrawny dredlocked people wearing Che Guevara shirts don't lynch them with organic hemp, they will funnel these bonuses right back into the economy. Or into an offshore bank. The point is, tax money is going back to the taxpayers, even if those taxpayers are sleazebags. Anything besides let the government keep it, right?
And if you're angry that morally bankrupt rich people are getting even richer, first, there's plenty of room in Russia and Venezuela. Second, Greg Gutfeld is right: when the rich get poorer, we all suffer.
My next point is that the bonuses were promised to those executives by AIG. Though the government owns 80% of the company, the AIG leadership realize they're not Congress; they can't go breaking promises left and right and nobody will notice or confront them. No wonder the Obamessiah is outraged: "We can't have failed banks keeping promises to their employees when I've broken every single one of mine to the entire country!"
Let's talk about hypocrisy. Congress is outraged that AIG wasted money they didn't earn by giving it to people who arguably don't deserve it? "They ran this company into the ground! How dare they take another penny!" Hey, Nancy, Harry...replace "company" with "economy." Now you've got an idea of how this all looks to the average mortgage-paying, non-bailed-out citizen.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Making Frenemies: Obama's Foreign Policy
Things have been quiet here because I was moving (but they just keep finding me). Let's do some quick hits on items which have been in the news recently, at least from reputable journalistic organizations.
First, I can't decide whether Obama is far exceeding my expectations or vastly falling short of them. I expected a conceited, bumbling, Marxist...and got an extremely conceited, grossly incompetent (just ask Britain) radical socialist who has also broken every campaign promise within his first 50 days. Not to mention that his goals appear to be diametrically opposed: I'm going to cut wasteful government spending! Right after I sign an eight-billion dollar pork bill!
Boy, can you believe this Gordon Brown thing? Even Obama's critics (a growing group, no doubt) have to admit that he appeared the most intelligent and charming candidate in history. However, there was nothing intelligent, and especially nothing charming, about treating the visiting leader of America's greatest ally like a distant cousin you see only when he needs funds for his latest pyramid scheme and brings three large, amorous dogs with skin conditions. Like Glenn Beck, I think it would have been nice if the Obamas had presented the British Prime Minister with something that you can't buy yourself at Wal-Mart between picking up ammo and bait. You know, a one-of-a-kind, museum quality item not likely to be owned by trailer park residents or 12-year-olds. Nothing says "Thanks for supporting our nation through every war for the last two hundred years (including this one)" like the director's cut of "Psycho."
And they probably weren't even Blu-Ray.
Speaking of those unfit for their important jobs, California baby factory Nadya Suleman is going to get help (unfortunately, not that kind) caring for her litter from a non-profit nursing group. I don't think I'm alone when I say that this will bankrupt them. Also I wonder whether this or any group is volunteering to provide free childcare for a single mother with fourteen kids who had them one at a time.
Lastly, according to the London Times, one in seven Brits believes that women should be hit for dressing sexy in public. Maybe they'll enjoy those movies after all. While these survey respondents are obviously idiots, I do agree that there are cases in which women dressed like sluts should be clobbered--specifically, by me. Like if you have legs like railroad ties and you're wearing a skirt the size of a gum wrapper. Or if you have a halter top on over ribs that stick out farther than your chest and arms that look like chicken wings after the Hooters patrons are done with them. Both of these cases could be remedied with a good slap, or, if dark roots are involved, a punch in the mouth.
First, I can't decide whether Obama is far exceeding my expectations or vastly falling short of them. I expected a conceited, bumbling, Marxist...and got an extremely conceited, grossly incompetent (just ask Britain) radical socialist who has also broken every campaign promise within his first 50 days. Not to mention that his goals appear to be diametrically opposed: I'm going to cut wasteful government spending! Right after I sign an eight-billion dollar pork bill!
Boy, can you believe this Gordon Brown thing? Even Obama's critics (a growing group, no doubt) have to admit that he appeared the most intelligent and charming candidate in history. However, there was nothing intelligent, and especially nothing charming, about treating the visiting leader of America's greatest ally like a distant cousin you see only when he needs funds for his latest pyramid scheme and brings three large, amorous dogs with skin conditions. Like Glenn Beck, I think it would have been nice if the Obamas had presented the British Prime Minister with something that you can't buy yourself at Wal-Mart between picking up ammo and bait. You know, a one-of-a-kind, museum quality item not likely to be owned by trailer park residents or 12-year-olds. Nothing says "Thanks for supporting our nation through every war for the last two hundred years (including this one)" like the director's cut of "Psycho."
And they probably weren't even Blu-Ray.
Speaking of those unfit for their important jobs, California baby factory Nadya Suleman is going to get help (unfortunately, not that kind) caring for her litter from a non-profit nursing group. I don't think I'm alone when I say that this will bankrupt them. Also I wonder whether this or any group is volunteering to provide free childcare for a single mother with fourteen kids who had them one at a time.
Lastly, according to the London Times, one in seven Brits believes that women should be hit for dressing sexy in public. Maybe they'll enjoy those movies after all. While these survey respondents are obviously idiots, I do agree that there are cases in which women dressed like sluts should be clobbered--specifically, by me. Like if you have legs like railroad ties and you're wearing a skirt the size of a gum wrapper. Or if you have a halter top on over ribs that stick out farther than your chest and arms that look like chicken wings after the Hooters patrons are done with them. Both of these cases could be remedied with a good slap, or, if dark roots are involved, a punch in the mouth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)