Sociable

Wednesday, March 15, 2006

Liberals don't have kids

Woah! 2 posts in one night ... look out!
The statement "Liberals don't have kids" may seem like a request from your humble neo-con, but it's actually a statement of fact (according to USAToday).
http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20060314/cm_usatoday/theliberalbabybust

Now, I've often joked in chat rooms that between their love of abortion and homosexuality, liberals are bound to disappear off the face of the earth through attrition alone, I didn't take into account the accelerating nature of their world-view and self-centeredness.

A liberal is an individual who is completely ME oriented. This may seem like a misnomer, after all, isn't it the liberal who wants to save the rainforests because they are concerned about the world? Isn't it the liberal who doesn't want to harm the children with second hand smoke? Isn't it the liberal who promotes minimum wage 'cause they are thinking of those poor working class folks? Isn't it the liberal who fights for affirmative action so minority students can get into Harvard?

Well, it's liberals who do those things, yes, but not for the reasons stated. Those are their clarion calls, granted, and that's what rationalization they will use, yes. But liberals are also delusional.

Liberals support affirmative action because they think Blacks, women, and Hispanics are just too stupid to get into Harvard without their help.

They support minimum wages because it makes them feel good to be attacking business owners and "helping out" the "little guy." The little guy.... how condecending can you get? It's not because they think someone who isn't working hard enough for 10 bucks an hour deserves to get paid more than his worth, it's because it makes THEM (the do-gooder-liberal) FEEL GOOD.

Liberals are ALL about making THEMSELVES feel good. Do you have any idea how many Kerry/Edwards stickers I see on the backs of cars that "flip the bird", make-fun-of, or chastise some guy on a street corner with a sign? They are loving and compassionate as long as you think they way they do, and as long as they are getting credit for being a "do-gooder." Wanna' see some true judgemental hatred? Light up a ciggarette in Boulder, Colorado! So much for compassion towards others.

So, given the fact that liberals are all about themselves, and making themselves feel good, why should it be a surprise that they don't want kids? Being a parent is about sacraficing one's self for another. When they are first born, children demand your sleep time for feedings. They demand money. They demand watching-after. They demand energy, attention, teaching, guidance, and a HUGE investment of time. A liberal is NEVER gunna' spend that much time on someone else! And the greatest deterent - after all that sweat, those tears, and that time spent - the child will leave and be self sufficient. This, NO LIBERAL can abide! Independence? Autonomy? A liberal expects any investment to be quid-pro-quo. "I raised you, so you are indebted to me for the rest of my life!"

Errily similar to their attitude regarding government, isn't it?

Liberals need dependence in order to live. They must be dependent on the government, and their kids must be dependent on them. Furthermore, liberals are relient on being GIVEN things, not giving with no outlook of return (which is what being a parent is ALL about!) So, having kids is not even in the realm of desireable situations for a liberal.

Thank God!

It all depends on what the meaning of civil war is...

Ahhhh yes, the redefinition of phrases and words continues. Mr. Orwell would be just so proud! There are, by most estimates between 10,000 and 20,000 insurgents in Iraq at any given time. These include:
  1. Saddamites - Ba'athists and other Saddam loyalists intent on wreaking havok because they are no longer a minority with absolute power.
  2. Extreme Islamofacists - those who don't like the idea of democracy, who want Iraq to be an Islamic State similar to their neighbor, Iran
  3. Terrorists - Al Queda and other terrorist groups that hate anything Western. They are in Iraq because it's easier than flying to New York and they can try to kill Americans in their own backyard.

Now, a geography lesson (and not the kind you get at Gateway High School, thank God!)
Iraq has a population of approximately 35 Million individuals - Men, women, and children.
-end of geography lesson -

To make the math easier, let's say there are 20 thousand individuals causing problems in the entire country of Iraq. We'll ignore for the moment that 13 of the 18 Iraqi provinces are entirely peaceful, are secured by solely Iraqi troops and cops, and are not in anyway involved with this "civil war." - Yes, we'll ignore those facts for sake of argument.

That means that for every ONE insurgent/terrorist/troublemaker there are 1750 peaceful Iraqis !
That's not one out of every ten, or even one hundred, but one out of nearly every TWO thousand!

So, where is this civil war the press is talking about? It's certainly not in Al Basrah, Dahuk, Ninawa, Arbil, Kirkuk, AsSulaymaniyah, Al Muthanna, or in any of six other provinces.

Civil War denotes a war in which a country is fighting itself. This "war" we are seeing is essentially 20,000 vs. 35 million, HARDLY a "civil war." The trouble makers are not even one percent of the population, not even one percent of one percent.... in short
THIS IS NO CIVIL WAR!

Monday, March 13, 2006

Wow! Fixed your nose, but now your face looks like shit!

So, the Dems and traitorous Pubs got the UAE to drop the whole port deal with the US. Congrats, guys! You've insulted and slapped in the face one of the few allies we have in the Middle East, and for what? Nothing! Nada! Nill! Zilch! Zippo! Our ports will be no more safe now than had it gone through. There won't be one more (or less) inspection, one more (or less) security guard, one more (or less) American patrolling the docks than had the deal gone through.
The only difference? We now have an ally that may think twice the next time they arrest an Al Queda suspect, an ally that might hesitate to permit our use of their airspace, an ally that might be a bit less vigilant when our ships are docked in Dubai.
Nice job! Well done! Bravo! With idiots like you protecting us, who needs Bin Laden?

Friday, March 10, 2006

The Academy speech we WANT to see!

A Tip of the hat to Dennis Prager for this EXCELLENT post!
God Bless you, Prages!

The Academy Award speech we should have heard
By Dennis Prager
Here's a speech we would like to hear from an Academy Award winner:

I thank you for this wonderful award. Receiving an Academy Award gives the recipient an almost unique opportunity to speak to hundreds of millions people around the world, so I would like take this once-in-a-lifetime moment to say this: First, I want to thank my country, the United States of America. Every one of us here has this country to thank for enabling us to live lives of unprecedented freedom and unimaginable affluence. Too many of us forget that no other country in history has offered such opportunities to people in our profession or in any other profession, for that matter. Second, I want to thank the men and women of the armed forces of the United States. While we bask in freedom and spend a good part of our lives going from party to party and award show to award show, tens of thousands of my fellow Americans are confronting a menace to our world as great as that fought by previous generations fighting Nazism and communism. At the same time, I also want to apologize to these troops for my profession not having made even one motion picture about any of the heroic American fighters in Afghanistan and Iraq. This country is fighting a war, Hollywood. You may think this war is unwise, waged under mistaken, or even false, pretenses. And as an actor in Hollywood, you are overwhelmingly likely to hate this commander in chief. But even the men and women of Hollywood must recognize that America is fighting the worst people of our time, people who hurt every group Hollywood claims to care about -- minorities, women, gays -- people who engage in the sins Hollywood most professes to oppose -- intolerance and violence -- far more than anyone else on the planet. In another era, when what many have labeled "the greatest generation" fought the German Nazis and the Japanese fascists, Hollywood made movie after movie depicting that great war and our great warriors. And Hollywood showed freedom's enemies as the cruel and vicious people they were. We have not produced one film yet depicting this war in positive terms or one depicting this generation's enemies of freedom as the cruel and vicious people they are. In fact, the only nominated film about people who slaughter children at discos, blow up weddings, and bomb pizzerias and buses filled with men, women and children is one that attempts to show these murderers in God's name as complex human beings. Just imagine how the Academy would have reacted 60 years ago to a film depicting Nazi murderers as complex human beings. We have descended far. We in Hollywood walk around thinking we are very important. That is why this year's nominated films for best picture are largely pictures with messages, pictures that relatively few people actually see. But although Hollywood was always concerned with politics, we have let ourselves be taken over by those for whom their message is more significant than the primary purposes of film -- to illuminate life and to entertain. Yes, entertain. You know, entertainment is actually a noble pursuit. Life is difficult for almost every human being on earth. And if we can offer people an elevated way to divert their attention for a couple of hours from their troubled child, their marital tensions, their ill parent, their financial woes, we have rendered the world a greater service than by making another message-film against racism in America, the least racist country in the world. My fellow actors, we walk around feeling that we are very important. But we do so only because we confuse fame with significance. We do have more fame than any other human beings in history. Far more people have heard of any actor here tonight than of any of the discoverers of any medication saving billions of lives, of any teacher of the disabled, of any nurse tending the aged, of almost any national leader. But the truth is that, as noble a calling as acting can be, all we do is make-believe: We portray other people, and we speak words written by other people. Everyone knows our names, but almost no one knows us. All they know are the characters we play. Thank you again. I hope I haven't ruined your evening.

Thanks again to you, Mr. Prager!

That was a short 45 days

So Chuck Shmuck in the Senate and his Democrat counterparts in the house decided (after they asked for and got a 45 day review period) to kill the Dubai port deal before the review was completed. These two faced bastards are TRULY pissing me off now!

The longer this situation played out and the more people learned about it, the more secure people were feeling about it. People were learning just HOW much the UAE has helped us in the war on terror, just HOW little first-hand control the Emerites would have on port seurity (namely - NONE), and they were learning that even Clinton gave ownership of California ports to the Chinese Communists. So the longer this played out, the better it looked for GW Bush.

NOW... JUST FOR POLITICAL GAIN, the Democrats want to short circuit the entire process.
What was the 45 day review process for, that they DEMANDED?
Did they finally realize that 45 days of review would make them look like the opportunistic, self-important, ignorant fools that they truly are? Of course they did. And so, in order to save their political butts (and I include the disenting Republicans here), they insult one of the FEW Arab friends we have in the region just to save their own political face.

Integrity, honor, and loyalty are now officially unwlecome in Washington DC, all that remains is the vitriolic hatred and CYOA attitude of demegogues who care NOTHING for ANYTHING except getting re-elected.