tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-70180900955177432342024-03-12T18:28:38.010-05:00Reality CheckGet Real.Reality Checkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12855179711595073485noreply@blogger.comBlogger108125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7018090095517743234.post-63263844163398553512016-06-21T07:45:00.001-05:002016-06-21T07:45:14.400-05:00Gun control should be about your grip and your trigger techniqueSo the Senate Democrats wanted to do some new gun laws in the wake of Orlando, despite admitting that none of their new laws would have stopped Orlando. The Democrats wanted new restrictions on law-abiding citizens so that they could feel like they'd done something.<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
And we aren't doing that in America right now. The Senate failed to pass any of the bills. Even the Republican-sponsored bill was shot down by the Democrats because it included due process protections.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The Democrats support due process for violent criminals. They just don't want anyone who honors the Second amendment to be protected by the Fourth amendment.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I do think we need new gun legislation though. We need to ban gun-free zones and waiting periods at the Federal level. Any state, city, town or establishment that disarms its citizen patrons, and then watches them get slaughtered, must be held civilly liable and criminally liable. If a waiting period gets someone killed, whoever established that waiting period is guilty as an accessory, and liable for wrongful death.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Then, and only then, will we be solving the problem.</div>
Reality Checkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12855179711595073485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7018090095517743234.post-85745482975112641732016-06-19T08:08:00.001-05:002016-06-19T08:08:55.187-05:00Exploring the liberal mindThe workings of the modern liberal mind never cease to amaze me.<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
When a militant Islamist uses a scary looking rifle to slaughter innocent people, the modern liberal wants to ban an entirely different, hugely popular, also-scary-looking rifle.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The modern liberal never responds to a tragedy like this by saying, "Why didn't somebody just shoot him sooner?". Instead of admitting that the "common-sense gun laws" at the club only apply to the victims, the modern liberal calls for more laws - laws that make people less safe, but make the liberal FEEL BETTER.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
When the perpetrator is from a reliable leftist client community, the perpetrator cannot be blamed. The modern liberal can blame literally anyone else for the slaughter of innocent partiers. Blame the gun. Blame the gun manufacturers. Blame the other white people who own the guns. Blame Republicans. Blame the second amendment. Blame the cops for probably accidentally shooting some of the victims themselves. Blame the cops for not going in soon enough.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The modern liberal, however, has been placed in a corner by the horrific massacre in Orlando. The modern liberal must decide: are all cultures equal? </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Will the modern liberal give militant Islam a pass on murdering homosexuals... because diversity? </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Will the modern liberal hate armed gays now, as he hates armed Americans in flyover country... because peace?</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Over the next few weeks, you will see countless modern liberal minds coming up with creative ways to avoid these questions. Instead, you will see liberals trying to empower our government to ban more things, while making more things mandatory... And these things will require your tax dollars, and a continued expansion of the bureaucracy that enforces these things. And not one of them will work. Not one of them would have stopped this shooting. Not one of them will stop the next one.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
But to a modern liberal, their work is done. They expressed outrage, they increased the power of the government, they didn't let any annoying facts get in their way...</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
...and by golly, they FEEL BETTER.</div>
Reality Checkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12855179711595073485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7018090095517743234.post-62049878342646777442016-06-18T08:17:00.001-05:002016-06-18T08:17:54.185-05:00It's time to get serious about keeping each other safeThe shootings in Orlando have proven several things beyond any reasonable doubt...<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
When evil attacks, the SWAT team will enter when they're ready. In Orlando, this would be about 3 hours.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
When the evil person is the only one with a gun in a locked building for 3 hours, he will kill and maim many, many people.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
If every patron in Pulse had been armed, the events at Pulse wouldn't even be on the news anymore. Suppose half of them were armed. A quarter of them. 10 percent. The psycho would have been dropped, in his tracks, before he could accomplish any of his evil, murderous goals.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
People who cannot be trusted with their own safety, or that of others, offer childlike suggestions like more laws about guns, or banning guns. This is like banning fire extinguishers during an arson spree because they are noisy and can damage stuff. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
So if you're thinking that 'banning the AR-15' or 'common-sense gun laws' are the answer, it's probably just because you can't imagine yourself standing up against evil with violence. That's okay. You need to recognize your limitations.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
But you also need to stop thinking that the rest of us are as incapable. Stay at the center of the herd with your head down, if you must.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
But don't interfere with the rest of us. We can, and will, stop evil in its tracks. All you need to do is keep your head down and say thanks.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The adults are here. We are heavily armed. </div>
Reality Checkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12855179711595073485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7018090095517743234.post-61845784849384281002013-05-12T09:41:00.000-05:002013-05-12T09:41:03.722-05:00ImpeachmentFor my liberal friends:<br />
<br />
So, President Nixon had his cronies bug some meetings of his political opponents. He then covered it up. He was threatened with impeachment, took responsibility for the actions of his underlings, and resigned. I am fine with that.<br />
<br />
If President Nixon had instead refused to send the military to rescue an embassy staff that was under attack from our sworn enemies, and the staff died, and his administration organized the sanitization of talking points to avoid blaming our sworn enemies, and then tried to cover it up, and got caught, I believe that again, he would be threatened with impeachment, would take responsibility for the actions of his underlings, and would resign. I would be fine with that too.<br />
<br />
If President Nixon had also, at the same time, sent the IRS to AUDIT his political enemies, instead of just spying on them, and he had joked about it several years ago, and the IRS was forced to apologize, again, he would have resigned. Again, I would be fine with that.<br />
<br />
So, for my liberal friends... Will Obama be man enough to resign for his crimes?<br />
<br />
Will you be fine with that?<br />
<br />
Or are you just a partisan hack?<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Reality Checkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12855179711595073485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7018090095517743234.post-87371374909767318522013-03-06T08:28:00.003-06:002013-03-06T08:28:46.553-06:00Obama administration email to Feds: make sequester as painful as promisedYep, that's right. Certain federal agencies are working hard (commendably, I might add) to reduce the impact of mandatory cuts caused by the Obama sequester on the taxpayers and citizens who need their services.<br />
<br />
However, this directly contradicts the Obama agenda of trying to blame the Republicans for Obama's sequester, because for voters to punish the Republicans for Obama's sequester, there has to be enough suffering for the mainstream media to cover.<br />
<br />
From the <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/5/email-tells-feds-make-sequester-painful-promised/" target="_blank">Washington Times</a>:<br />
<br />
<div style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; color: black; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; margin: 0px; orphans: auto; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">
In the internal email, Animal and<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Plant Health Inspection Service<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>official<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Charles Brown<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>said he asked if he could try to spread out the sequester cuts in his region to minimize the impact, and he said he was told not to do anything that would lessen the dire impacts<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Congress<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>had been warned of.</div>
<div style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; color: black; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; margin: 0px; orphans: auto; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">
“We have gone on record with a notification to<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Congress<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>and whoever else that ‘APHIS<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>would eliminate assistance to producers in 24 states in managing wildlife damage to the aquaculture industry, unless they provide<span class="Apple-converted-space"></span><span class="itxtrst itxtrstspan itxtnowrap" id="itxthook1p" style="background-color: transparent; border: 0px none; bottom: auto; color: black; display: inline ! important; float: none ! important; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-variant: normal; height: auto; left: auto; line-height: normal; margin: 0px ! important; padding: 0px ! important; position: static; right: auto; text-align: left; text-transform: none ! important; top: auto; white-space: nowrap ! important;"><span class="itxtrst itxtrstspan itxtnowrap itxtnewhookspan" id="itxthook1w" style="background-color: transparent; border-color: transparent transparent rgb(0, 204, 0); border-style: none none solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; bottom: auto; display: inline; float: none; font-family: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; height: auto; left: auto; line-height: normal; margin: 0px ! important; padding: 0px 0px 1px ! important; position: static; right: auto; text-align: left; text-decoration: underline ! important; text-transform: none ! important; top: auto; white-space: normal;"></span></span><span class="Apple-converted-space" style="color: black;"> funding </span>to cover the costs.’ So it is our opinion that however you manage that reduction, you need to make sure you are not contradicting what we said the impact would be,”<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Mr. Brown, in the internal email, said his superiors told him.</div>
<br />
So, for those of you Obama voters sitting at home, unemployed, trying to find evidence that Obama cares about you, just think about the skyrocketing gas prices, the fact that there are no jobs available, and don't forget the record high stock market!<br />
Then reread the paragraph above. Obama wants to make sure that you FEEL the sequester. It needs to HURT.<br />
<br />
That way, the press will blame the Republicans, and you'll believe it - and you'll be more likely to go to the polls in 2014 to solidify his power.Reality Checkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12855179711595073485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7018090095517743234.post-33518620968160510952013-03-06T08:11:00.000-06:002013-03-06T08:11:39.655-06:00Obama: "I'm not a dictator"Today, the <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324678604578342453770687898.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_MIDDLETopOpinion" target="_blank">WSJ</a> points out a fascinating conversation between a CNN reporter and our President:<br />
<br />
<blockquote style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-style: solid; border-left-width: 1px; color: black; display: block; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 1.4em; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0px 3em 1.3em 89px; orphans: auto; padding: 0px 0px 0px 8px; position: relative; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">
<strong style="font-style: normal; font-weight: bold;">Yellin:<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></strong>Mr. President, to your question, what could you do--first of all, couldn't you just have them down here and refuse to let them leave the room until you have a deal?</blockquote>
<blockquote style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-style: solid; border-left-width: 1px; color: black; display: block; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 1.4em; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0px 3em 1.3em 89px; orphans: auto; padding: 0px 0px 0px 8px; position: relative; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">
<strong style="font-style: normal; font-weight: bold;">Obama:</strong><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>I mean, Jessica, I am not a dictator. I'm the President. So, ultimately, if Mitch McConnell or John Boehner say, we need to go to catch a plane, I can't have Secret Service block the doorway, right?</blockquote>
Why isn't Ms. Yellin asking the President to compromise? Why isn't she urging him that any deal is better than inaction, even if he doesn't get what he wants? Why isn't he being encouraged to 'move to the center'?<br />
<br />
Well, it's because 'compromise' and 'move to the center' is code for 'do what the liberals want'. Compromising with Republicans takes things in a direction that CNN finds totally unbearable. Hence, the idea just never seems to come up. Reality Checkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12855179711595073485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7018090095517743234.post-81080235370384165292013-03-02T10:10:00.003-06:002013-03-02T10:10:54.908-06:00Mayor Bloomberg thinks telecommuting is dumbThanks to <a href="http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Bloomberg-Telecommuting-Dumb-Marissa-Mayer-Yahoo-Working-from-Home-194318371.html" target="_blank">NBC New York</a>, we learn that Mayor Bloomberg thinks telecommuting is dumb. Wow. Let me make sure I understand the big picture here.<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>Bloomberg taxes vehicles coming into the city, to reduce traffic, emissions, noise, and a lot of other things that are bad for people and nature.</li>
<li>Bloomberg wants everyone who works for every New York company to come to the office.</li>
</ul>
No, that can't be right. Maybe it's like this:<br />
<ul>
<li> Bloomberg taxes vehicles coming into the city, to increase taxes. He does this under the auspice of reducing traffic,
emissions, noise, and a lot of other things that are bad for people and
nature.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Bloomberg wants everyone who works for every New York company to come to the office, to maximize the taxes that are paid.</li>
</ul>
That actually makes sense. For a Democrat. How could this guy ever have been a Republican? I'm all for a big tent, but the Republican Party really needs a way to eject guys like him who are just nowhere near our part of the circus.Reality Checkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12855179711595073485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7018090095517743234.post-29254457524345475202013-02-24T10:47:00.000-06:002013-02-24T10:47:07.647-06:00Free Healthcare for EveryoneSo, for the people who voted for Obama so that they could get free healthcare, I was wondering how you like your new government provided plan. Is it everything you'd hoped for? Is everything covered that you expect to be covered? Does your doctor like working with your new insurance? Is everything cheaper now?<br />
<br />
If, on the other hand, you didn't get free healthcare, it might not be a mistake - you might be too rich to get it. If you don't have insurance, but you have to pay a big penalty next year, that's also probably not a mistake - you're just probably rich enough to pay for other people's health insurance even though you don't need any. If your boss raised your insurance premiums, it's not his fault - it's just that because he pays you such a huge amount, the government knows that you can pay for a lot of this yourself, and we might have leftover money for people who aren't as rich as you.<br />
<br />
That's how it works! Congratulations on your new-found wealth. I bet that before today you didn't even realize how well-to-do you really were. Never take it for granted again.Reality Checkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12855179711595073485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7018090095517743234.post-79697581898607046742013-02-24T10:41:00.001-06:002013-02-24T10:41:07.195-06:00I might have observed that gas prices are higher!I seem to remember that when gas prices rose during the Bush administration, the liberal media traced the cause to a series of secret meetings between Dick Cheney and oil company CEOs. So, what is the cause of the recent increase in gas prices under the Obama administration? Is the Obama administration allowing these secret meetings to continue? If so, where is the outrage? Maybe Joe Biden is having secret meetings - I think we all agree that if this is the case, they should stop immediately.<br />
<br />
I think that liberals who are forced to pay higher gas prices should do what they did when Obama fell down on his promise about closing Guantanamo - they withheld their votes until he closed it like he said he would. They should do the same thing here - vote Republican until Obama lowers these gas prices.<br />
<br />
After all, he's rich - plus he has somebody to fill up his limos and jets with a credit card that is paid for by the taxpayers. So, he might not even KNOW that gas prices are high - a lot of rich people don't notice that sort of thing. He's too busy fulfilling his campaign promises, like closing Guantanamo. Reality Checkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12855179711595073485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7018090095517743234.post-2354387436113232632013-02-22T08:24:00.000-06:002013-02-22T08:27:33.692-06:00To the Republicans who stayed home last NovemberThe election of 2012 was a rare occurrence - President Obama was the first President since George Washington to be re-elected with fewer votes than he got the first time around. This happened in spite of the admission by at least one Obama supporter that she voted for Obama 6 times last year in Ohio.<br />
<br />
So, if you are a Republican, and you did not vote for Romney because he wasn't aligned with you on your favorite issue... How's Obama doing on your favorite issue? Do us all a favor... Remember this the next time around. They vote up to 6 times for their guy. We need to at least show up and vote once.<br />
<br />
You see, the thing about a Republican president is, no matter what his position on the issues, he kinda has to listen to the other Republicans (like you) to stay in power. And politicians want to stay in power. Do you feel like Obama is listening to your position on your pet issue? Probably not. He doesn't need you.<br />
<br />
And you're part of the reason he's President again - whether Romney's too rich for you, too white for you, too male for you, too religious for you, or just from Massachusetts - By staying home, you turned Melowese Richardson's 6 votes for Obama into 7.<br />
<br />
Thanks.<br />
<br />Reality Checkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12855179711595073485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7018090095517743234.post-64087403794324706012013-02-22T08:02:00.000-06:002013-02-22T08:07:37.446-06:00Liberals and the commitment to equalityI couldn't help but notice that when President Obama jetted off to a pricey golf resort for his vacation, the press complained. They complained about not being allowed to take pictures of the $1,000 per hour golf lessons, or the round with Tiger Woods.<br />
<br />
They did not complain about the 'inequality' - you'll notice that people from the President's old neighborhood in Chicago don't play with Tiger Woods much.<br />
<br />
So, we can now see that liberals only oppose 'inequality' when their political opponents have the advantage. This is an important observation, because that's how it's done in places like Cuba and North Korea. The SUBJECTS are equal. The leaders play golf with celebrities. They pay for their $1,000 per hour golf lessons with money siphoned from the subjects.<br />
<br />
To be clear - this is not where America is headed. This is where America currently IS.Reality Checkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12855179711595073485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7018090095517743234.post-56142629199042119072013-02-20T19:46:00.003-06:002013-02-20T19:46:47.113-06:00A simple solution to gun control.So that our liberal friends don't get confused, maybe we need a Constitutional Amendment that says that the right to have and carry weapons can't be interfered with. I guess I'm not picky about the exact wording. Just a thought.Reality Checkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12855179711595073485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7018090095517743234.post-43582446562627959742007-12-04T07:13:00.000-06:002007-12-04T07:41:58.408-06:00Let me see if I got this straight......so, today I read that Treasury Secretary Henry Paulsen wants to <a href="http://www.insurancebroadcasting.com/120407-1.htm">temporarily expand the tax-exempt bond programs of state and local governments</a>, so that they can refinance mortgages. Let me think about that for a minute.<br /><br />We got into this mess because banks were lending to people that they shouldn't have, or lending more than borrowers could pay. It caused a high enough foreclosure rate that nobody could sell mortgage-backed securities because the buyers didn't know what they were worth.<br /><br />Now, it will be tax-free municipal bonds backed by the same loan principal, lent to the same borrowers.<br /><br />If it's done under the same (or similar) terms as the original loan, haven't we just done to the municipal bond market what we did to the secondary mortgage market?<br /><br />If the new loan terms are substantially better than the old terms, aren't we penalizing people who were responsible, and have paid thousands more for a conservative, conventional 30-year fixed?<br /><br />People like me?<br /><br />I just bought a house. Big one. Nice one. I love it. But you know what? If I had taken what I currently pay on my 30-year fixed mortgage, and used that for an 80/20 interest only loan with a teaser rate, I could have afforded a much bigger, much nicer home. But I didn't do that. Wanna know why?<br /><br />Because I knew I couldn't predict the future, and I might find myself in a situation where I was being forced to refinance, and I either didn't want to (high rates), or I couldn't (no job).<br /><br />Now, it sounds like people who weren't as cautious as me are getting a do-over.<br /><br />Can I have a do-over please? I'd like to be qualified for a loan the way people were over the last few years (no income verification, liberal repayment schedule), and I'll buy a much bigger house. 80/20 interest-only with a teaser, please. Where I'm at, the housing market is still very strong, but in the event I can't sell my old house, I want to be bailed out by the government. If my circumstances change, and my payment goes up, and I can't afford the loan that I agreed to, I want to be bailed out by the government.<br /><br />And why stop at homes? Can we do this with my mutual funds, too? If I invest all of my money in a precious-metals fund, and gold stops its historic run, can the government make up the difference for me? And what about bonds? What if GMAC goes bankrupt, and my GMAC bonds are near-worthless? Can the government cover my cost? Even better, can the government cover my expected gain?<br /><br />I think you can see where I'm going with this. Taken to the extreme, these government bailouts of risk-gone-wrong are simply unsustainable.<br /><br />While I am sympathetic to those who agreed to terms that they could not understand, and to those who were manipulated by unscrupulous lenders or brokers, I simply cannot ignore reality and conclude that the government should wave its magic wand and make the problem go away.<br /><br />Here's a Reality Check: turning a private-sector problem into a government problem DOES NOT solve the problem.Reality Checkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12855179711595073485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7018090095517743234.post-17727352521755025192007-12-03T06:32:00.000-06:002007-12-03T06:46:53.788-06:00A Historic Day in TotalitarianismWow. Big news in the dictatorships of the world over the last couple of days. First of all, Russian President <a href="http://apnews.myway.com/article/20071203/D8T9LR000.html">Vladimir Putin won a sweeping victory in his election</a>, amid charges of rigged votes, coercion and intimidation. You know, like you're SUPPOSED to vote in a totalitarian state.<br /><br />Now, we move on to Venezuela, where <a href="http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8T9PU500&show_article=1">President Hugo Chavez, whom even Nancy Pelosi has publicly referred to as a thug, lost</a>.<br /><br />Yep. He LOST. He had proposed a never-look-back socialist paradise, with him at the helm for all eternity, and his people said NO THANKS. Well, about 51% of them said no. And he accepted the decision of the people. For now, anyway.<br /><br />When Putin first came on the global stage, I will admit that I was suckered. I genuinely believed that he understood that free markets were the best thing for his people, and that KGB-era stifling of creativity was a big part of the demise of the U.S.S.R. Sadly, he seems to want to have his cake and eat it too - economic entrepreneurship right up to the point of profit, at which point the government snatches your business and crushes your dreams. Let the people vote, but only if you can know, and control, the outcome.<br /><br />He's probably laughing at Chavez right now. After all, in Russia, losing by 2% is just a paperwork problem. But you know what? As hard as it is for me to admit this, this week, Chavez was the better man.Reality Checkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12855179711595073485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7018090095517743234.post-6186945601765312722007-10-29T07:21:00.000-05:002007-10-29T07:37:28.123-05:00Democrat voters get what they asked forI have to comment on <a href="http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20071028/NEWS/710280631">this article</a> about the frustration among antiwar Democrat voters. You see, they thought that the 2006 elections were 'a mandate on Iraq'. Here's an example:<br /><br /><blockquote>"Democrats aren't any better on the war issue than the Republicans. Very few would get our troops out and home and not leave any behind. A lot of candidates are backpedaling on their stance on the war and I'm not sure why. Seventy percent of Americans want this war to end."<br /></blockquote><br />Here's the problem. Everything this person has said is false, and has been fed to her by a liberal, anti-Republican media, which is why she's so confused. I can help.<br /><br />Democrats are worse on the war issue than the Republicans, because they lie about it. When they're up for reelection, they say they're opposed to it, but in reality they know that it is a war we must win, and we won't give up until we're done. We're doing it in our own self-interest, and in the hopes of a better life for all people in the Middle East. They're just not above lying about it to get your vote, lady. And they did.<br /><br />There will not be an opportunity to " get our troops out and home and not leave any behind" anytime soon. Iraq is militarily strategic, and a leader who abandons it is negligent and incompetent. Get used to it, and get over it.<br /><br />"A lot of candidates are backpedaling on their stance on the war" because you are a sucker. You're going to protest, and complain, and vote for them anyway. They know it, believe me. It's their central political strategy. I mean, c'mon, do you really think they're afraid you'll vote for a Republican? Get real.<br /><br />Actually, it's not the case that "seventy percent of Americans want this war to end". It's actually more like 100 percent. But most of us want to win first, because we don't want to die. So wake up, and understand your role. As an antiwar Democrat, you are a pawn in a power game, and you're being controlled and used by your leaders. And I can tell you like it.<br /><br />Because you're planning to vote for them yet again.<br /><br />Wake up.Reality Checkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12855179711595073485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7018090095517743234.post-6227823669123921632007-09-21T09:36:00.000-05:002007-09-21T09:53:19.197-05:00Ahmadinejad at Columbia UniversityIn my opinion, the elitist liberals at Columbia University are doing us a tremendous service by showing us exactly who they are by allowing the Kidnapper-In-Chief of Iran to speak there, while silencing the military over the 'don't ask, don't tell' policies regarding homosexuals.<br /><br />As Michael Barone <a href="http://instapundit.com/archives2/009609.php">points out</a>, they apparently don't consider the execution of homosexuals nearly as offensive as forcing homosexuals to not discuss their homosexuality while in the military.<br /><br /><a href="http://instapundit.com/archives2/009609.php">Glenn Reynolds</a> thinks it's because the Kidnapper-In-Chief is so anti-Bush. I think it's simpler than that.<br /><br />Quite simply, if you treat the SILENCING of homosexuals more harshly than you treat the EXECUTION of homosexuals, you are a hypocritical, non-thinking IDIOT.<br /><br />So, the liberal elites at Columbia are not Bush-hating, anti-American protectors of the rights of homosexuals, they are simply idiots who believe that they can be advocates of homosexuals, while they give the key to the city to someone who EXECUTES them. Again, IDIOTS. No further analysis necessary.<br /><br />Columbia's liberal elites, were they not idiots, would clearly recognize that the Iranian regime oppresses a 'protected class' - homosexuals - in the harshest possible way - summary execution. These non-idiots would then condemn the executions, and Ahmadinejad would not be allowed to speak.<br /><br />That is what they would do if they were NOT idiots. They will soon establish that they absolutely ARE idiots. Watch.Reality Checkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12855179711595073485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7018090095517743234.post-41170566788211113692007-09-16T20:01:00.001-05:002007-09-16T20:04:29.127-05:00Title for Teddy Kennedy's new book<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_TWlEkTMpj6w/Ru3SL5TIxdI/AAAAAAAAABs/oSU4nvpBOH8/s1600-h/hardyteddy3dd.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_TWlEkTMpj6w/Ru3SL5TIxdI/AAAAAAAAABs/oSU4nvpBOH8/s400/hardyteddy3dd.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5110972253936862674" border="0" /></a><a href="http://wizbangblog.com/content/2007/09/16/lets-give-ted-a-hand.php">Jay Tea at WizBang</a> is trying to help Teddy out with a title for his new book. It made me think of this, which I found a long time ago on the Internet. Wish I could figure out whose work this is...Reality Checkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12855179711595073485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7018090095517743234.post-57394039466549201892007-09-11T07:15:00.000-05:002007-09-11T07:29:54.326-05:00Never Forget.It's hard to believe that it has been 6 years. 6 years since I walked out of the shower, glanced over at the TV, saw the smoking building, saw the plane slam into Tower II, and knew we were at war.<br /><br />It's hard to believe, only because so many seem to have forgotten.<br /><br />I haven't.<br /><br />We saw an evil on that day that defied our collective imagination. We came together almost as one in the days to follow, behind a leader who, if his success exceeded everyone's wildest expectations, still could not possibly be expected to prevent another bloodthirsty, senseless attack like this.<br /><br />And yet, for the past 6 years, he has managed to do just that.<br /><br />Those of you who remember how you felt that day should recognize that because of the bravery of our servicemen, and the leadership of our Commander-In-Chief, you have only had to feel it again in your memories.<br /><br />Those of you who are irate with this President over other issues - immigration reform, Harriet Miers, Terry Schiavo, the timing of the departure of Donald Rumsfeld, etc., should take a minute and ask yourself how important issues like these were to you on September 12, 2001, when you were simply worried about the survival of your family, and of your way of life. And you should briefly thank him for keeping the demons out of your backyard, so you could worry about other things.<br /><br />Those of you who think 9/11 was an inside job are idiots, and I thank God that you are not in charge of anything. You choose to ignore an actual threat, and invent an imaginary one. You would get us all killed. You need to read <a href="http://instapundit.com/archives2/009180.php">this</a>, you need to wake up, and you need to help the rest of us in our fight to protect your right to be an idiot.<br /><br />May God bless our leaders, our brave troops, and the families of those who lost so very much that day. You are all in my prayers.<br /><br /><strong>Never forget.</strong>Reality Checkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12855179711595073485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7018090095517743234.post-10323434570119840262007-09-10T13:15:00.000-05:002007-09-10T13:46:40.932-05:00When I'm wrong about being wrong......I'll admit that, too.<br /><br />It seems that the Bin Laden video (which I haven't watched, and am trusting the media and blogosphere to report upon for me) <a href="http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2007/9/9/61032/95401">shows no video motion during ANY current events references...</a><br /><blockquote>Osama Bin Laden's widely publicized video address to the American people has a peculiarity that casts serious doubt on its authenticity: the video freezes at about 1 minute and <s>36</s> 58 seconds, and motion only resumes again at 12:30. The video then freezes again at 14:02 remains frozen until the end. <i>All references to current events, such as the 62nd anniversary of the U.S. atomic bombing of Japan, and Sarkozy and Brown being the leaders of France and the UK, respectively, occur when the video is frozen!</i> The words spoken when the video is in motion contain no references to contemporary events and could have been (and likely were) made <i>before the U.S. invasion of Iraq.</i></blockquote><br />Well. I suppose I'll have to apologize to my readers for not doing the investigation myself and watching it myself. Had I done so, I'm sure I would have noticed that whenever Caveboy spoke about something modern, that his lips weren't moving. Why no one else out in the blogosphere noticed until now is beyond me; the mainstream media, on the other hand... well, they miss this sort of stuff all the time. I have good reasons for not watching Bin Laden videos, though:<br /><br /><ul><li>Bin Laden needs to speak English when he's talking to me. I don't know Arabic, and as a result, when someone sends me a message in Arabic, I can't understand it so I don't listen to it.</li><li>I tend to boycott things I can't stand. Unfortunately, as much as I can't stand Caveboy, as an American blogger who supports the destruction of his movement, I feel compelled to blog about him occasionally (especially to speculate that he's pushing up Cacti somewhere). I used to blog about Michael Moore, too, but I ain't gonna watch his damn movies. I wouldn't give him the satisfaction. Not watchin' Bin Laden's damn movies, either.</li><li>When I'm looking at a video of a man who has purportedly been living in caves for the past 5 years, <span style="font-style: italic;">I can't stop thinking about the <span style="font-weight: bold;">smell</span>. These are not good thoughts. These are <span style="font-weight: bold;">not good smells</span>.</span><br /></li><li>Finally, I'm pretty sure that Caveboy is dead. Since he's dead, his movie is fake. I don't watch fake movies. I didn't watch this one, and I didn't watch Al Gore's fake movie either.</li></ul>Reality Checkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12855179711595073485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7018090095517743234.post-42867470275987075922007-09-08T07:24:00.000-05:002007-09-08T07:45:39.027-05:00Bin Laden's BlatherOK, so I can admit when I'm <a href="http://realityblogz.blogspot.com/2007/07/al-qaeda-roundup.html">wrong about something</a>. Apparently Bin Laden is alive, and he is sporting a younger-looking beard in his new video, to better attract the virgins. I was pretty sure he was dead, but this video is sprinkled with enough reference to recent events that it's clearly new, like since the first week of August.<br /><br />The crux of this video appears to be that he's very disappointed in the Democrats for not ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and he suggests that the easiest way for us to quell Al Qaeda's non-stop assault on our shores is for all of us to convert to Islam.<br /><br />Hey, Osama? How' bout this, babe. You stop trying to kill us, and some of us <span style="font-weight: bold;">might </span>consider it. But if you keep trying to kill us, simply because you don't approve of our culture, we will continue to hunt you and your followers down like dogs, and we will kill you first. We will keep your group impotent, unable to attack, always hiding, and always on the run. You will remain a pathetic embarrassment in the history of Islam. <br /><br />We will do this until you give up, or until you are all dead. We would prefer that you and your supporters give up, work and trade with the global community, become wealthy and self-sufficient, contribute your special goods, ideas and talents to the world marketplace, and help to protect everyone's right to worship as they please...<br /><br />...but if you decide not to, that's your call - we're just going to wipe you and your followers out, that's all. Your choice.Reality Checkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12855179711595073485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7018090095517743234.post-263040451663942302007-09-07T11:02:00.000-05:002007-09-07T11:10:43.299-05:00The "Unexpected" payroll decreaseThe Dow is down about 200 points thus far, with the only major economic news that "unexpectedly", payroll survey jobs dropped by 4000, when the consensus was an increase of 110,000 jobs.<br /><br />The consensus was wrong, because the consensus failed to consider the impact of the Democrat's plan to raise the minimum wage. Job loss wasn't "unexpected"; it was predictable, and practically guaranteed.<br /><br />You see, folks, when you raise the minimum wage, employers do not simply take the hit in operating expense, apply it to their bottom line, make less money, and move on; instead, they lay people off, give additional responsibilities to those that they keep, and keep their payroll, in raw dollars, about the same.<br /><br />So, if you were in a minimum wage job this year, and you got laid off in the past month instead of getting the raise that you heard about on Good Morning America... thank a Democrat.<br /><br />Thank the Democrat by voting Republican next time. We knew this was going to happen, and we tried to warn you. But unfortunately, you get the government you elect. You elected Democrats. You lost your job. Don't let it happen again.Reality Checkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12855179711595073485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7018090095517743234.post-9586718691978349152007-09-05T23:47:00.000-05:002007-09-05T23:59:50.766-05:00Fred is in.Fred Thompson <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0907/5665.html">made it official</a> today.<br /><br />There's just nothing like a wide-open field with no incumbent. Remember the race to replace Gray-out Davis?<br /><br />At the risk of <a href="http://realityblogz.blogspot.com/2007/06/on-race.html">repeating</a> myself, I'd say this is going to be an awful lot of fun to watch.Reality Checkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12855179711595073485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7018090095517743234.post-2366613508576935442007-09-05T20:53:00.000-05:002007-09-05T20:57:22.369-05:00Wednesday Evening Palms<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_TWlEkTMpj6w/Rt9eKWbl-xI/AAAAAAAAABk/vyhG_2iVhPU/s1600-h/IM000536.JPG"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_TWlEkTMpj6w/Rt9eKWbl-xI/AAAAAAAAABk/vyhG_2iVhPU/s400/IM000536.JPG" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5106904034374449938" border="0" /></a>The Fairmont Kei Lani, Wailea, Maui, August 2005.Reality Checkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12855179711595073485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7018090095517743234.post-20758566186323773382007-09-05T08:37:00.000-05:002007-09-05T08:40:27.394-05:00Quotable Ted<blockquote>"But don't you realize -- that's where I sail!"</blockquote><br />- Ted Kennedy (D-Chappaquiddick), regarding his <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/09/why_liberals_are_turning_on_te.html">opposition to Cape Wind</a>, a proposed clean-energy windfarm for Nantucket SoundReality Checkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12855179711595073485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7018090095517743234.post-25439995421193598062007-09-04T11:01:00.000-05:002007-09-04T11:17:42.285-05:00Market Volatility and the FedMerrill Lynch has cut estimates on several large-cap banks, and says there's a 60% probability of a recession. Now, let's be honest; saying there's a 60% chance of something is only 10% away from having no idea whatsoever. However, one would expect that given recent concerns about liquidity, that such doom-and-gloom would result in a down morning for stocks... and one would be wrong.<br /><br />At this point (just after noon Eastern), the NASDAQ is up about 1%, and the Dow is up over 30 points. Why?<br /><br />I think it's because the market is in the process of pricing in a rate cut. A big one, like 50 basis points. The catch is, I don't necessarily see that happening, nor do I think it's a good idea.<br /><br />First of all, I don't think the subprime problems are a big enough segment of our economy to warrant direct FOMC action. Second, I don't like the idea of the FOMC using policy to reduce market volatility.<br /><br />When investors get spooked, the market is supposed to go down. When the Fed starts playing with interest rates to shore up stocks, these internal corrections don't happen as often, or as thoroughly, as they should. That can get us into a speculative environment like we had in the late 90s.<br /><br />Look for no rate cut, or a 25 basis-point cut, in two weeks. Then look for a selloff. That's my prediction.Reality Checkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12855179711595073485noreply@blogger.com