Some Seriously Taxing Issues & Michael Moore's Tutu

 It seems that government is involved in everything nowadays--from your child's education, to the food that you aren't allowed to eat, even if you want to. We pay taxes and expect services from the government, but how much is too much and where should we draw the line?

One thing that must be provided to Americans by the federal government is the infrastructure--roads, bridges, tunnels, and highways, and these must be maintained by the government with our tax money. I believe the government has the right to collect tolls for bridges and roads, but the people should have a say in the amount that we pay. It's ludicrous to think that paying $14.00 for the Verrazano Bridge toll is reasonable. We were promised that once a structure such as this bridge was paid for, the toll would be removed. With the threat of Islamic terrorism, I concede that we need to continue to pay for security for these structures, but to think the government can rake us over the coals for money that goes beyond these needs is unfair and probably illegal. And the worst thing of all is that the infrastructure of our country is crumbling and throwing more money into it hasn't helped.


Secondly, the government is responsible for our defense as a nation. I know President Obama doesn't take that too seriously, and even W. said that Islam is a religion of peace, but most Americans know otherwise. Our military should not be cut and we need to continue to keep military defense as a priority, rather than cutting back in this area. If I had my way, I'd cut back on $16.00 muffins and $8.00 coffee for our government officials who, like Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama, spend our tax dollars for their personal pleasures. I have written about this in a previous blog here.

Grand Jete

Thirdly, well, that's difficult to say. There isn't much more the government should be involved with because they have the Midas touch when it comes to running things, except instead of turning things into gold, they turn it into human waste. They do education like Michael Moore does an arabesque or grand jete. Also, we all know that the government does not create jobs, although they do provide them, as can be seen in the US Postal Service. In fact, there are so many jobs in the postal service that we are paying people not to work because there isn't enough work for them to do. Millions of taxpayer dollars is wasted at USPS every year and that's our money. Of course, we can blame it on government but the real culprit here is the union, which negotiated to protect jobs that don't need to exist. We need to remember too that government jobs do not generate more jobs, and unions do not generate more jobs--they're designed to maximize their workers salaries and benefits, often at a huge expense to management.

Michael Moore?

School teachers are also protected by unions and it practically takes an act of God to fire a teacher, even if he or she commits a crime involving their students. Since liberals like to see everything as equal, like the US is morally equivalent to Saudi Arabia, for example, teachers also have an equal situation with USPS because there is a significant number of them getting paid to sit in a "Quiet Room" and not teach. I wonder if the walls in the Quiet Room are padded to protect them from themselves.


So it should be clear that the purpose of the government in a free society is to take care of its citizens. It is not the role of government to take away their money to share with those who have less, for whatever reasons. Fact: Republicans are more generous than Democrats when giving to charities. Democrats only pretend to be the morally superior. 

My final brain flushing for today is: if we trained people who receive unemployment benefits, rather than to simply give them two years of sitting on their duffs, we would do more for them in the long term. Giving them more time to find a job has only extended the amount of time they tend to be out of work. We have spent our grand children's money on frivolous entitlements for too long and we need to become responsible again for their sake and the sake of our country. Just saying.


Tweet

It's a Surprise

 I just can't wait.  Any day now, any day, President Obama is going to share his plan with us, his peasants of his kingdom, and Louise Story, of the New York Times, is speaking on Greta's show and obviously is feeling the same tingle that Chris Matthews gets whenever Barack's name is mentioned. Story just mentioned that James Immelt, the CEO of General Electric, a guy she says is experienced with the jobs situation, and will be of great help to the Obama administration in solving this problem.  Immelt has already worked feverishly at sending jobs over to China as GE has opened a plant there and about 80 thousand jobs will be outsourced. Worse still is that he may be providing our Chinese debt-owners with important intellectual property of a military nature--specifically, aircraft information.


So why is Obama waiting until after Labor Day to tell us his plan?  Is it possible that he sees himself as a sort of Santa Claus of the country? (By the way, I never use the term 'sort of' and just had to try it out in a sentence). Or is it possible he has nothing to offer? Nothing, that is, that's different than the failed policies he already tried which have failed as badly as his presidency has failed. We shall see what Obama has to show for 3 years of regulations, Contitution trampling, and illegal alien butt-kissing-for-votes.  I believe he's having his crack staff (which they must be smoking) working on it as I write this.


Another surprise of the day is that in Wausau, Wisconsin, the socialists, er, Democrats, have forbidden Republicans to march in their Labor Day parade. The irony is not lost on me.  People who advocate entitlement programs for people who do not labor, will not allow people who do labor, and who want to cut back on entitlement programs, to march in a parade that celebrates labor. Is Wisconsin the country's most screwed up state, or what? If these leftists have their way, they will be forced to pay for the parade out of their own pockets as the law would allow for anyone to march.  Liberals are so intolerant you might just mistake them for Islamic extremists.

How airlines empty the toilet

Finally, Abdelbaset Mohmed Ali al-Megrahi, the Lockerbie bomber, a killer of 270 people, is dying of cancer for the second time in his life.  Al, as his friends call him, is supposedly in a coma and is being given his last rites by his priest--oh wait--Muslims don't do last rites; they do jihad, and they don't have priests--they have imams who tell them to hate everyone who isn't a Muslim, especially Jews.  And when these jihadists die, they go to Paradise where they get to screw around for all eternity with no less than 72 virgins who somehow regrow their hymen after they are ceremoniously boffed by Al. They also get to be served by young boys who never grow old (sounds pretty gay, if you ask me), and in Paradise, the rivers flow with wine that never gets you drunk--what a waste of good wine.  


So is Obama pressuring Libya, who we have helped rescue from the grip of Gaddafi, to release Al to us so we can give him what he deserves? No. Obama remains Obamaesque and timid. He does not want to offend anyone, particularly our enemies. 


Obama is America's big surprise--all suit and a tie to Islam. Let's surprise him in '12 and make him a community organizer again.

Tweet

Rick Perry and Islam

In less than a year and a half, the American people are going to elect a president. If we are smart, and I believe we are, the person who will be called "President" will be a Republican. If we are cautious, and I believe we tend not to be, I believe we might elect a president who will harbor sympathies for people associate with terrorist organizations that threaten our country. I am concerned that we often tend to vote with our emotions, not our intellect. Rick Perry is a handsome, presidential-looking guy and has accomplished some excellent things for Texas, including the number one priority for the state, and now the country--jobs. Of course the Democrats want to take that away from him and credit the oil industry and Obama for that success, but that's just nonsense.

But what isn't nonsense is the fact that Perry has a substantial constituency of Muslims in his state, and constituencies can often lead to strange bedfellows. I am not accusing him of being sympathetic to Islamists (that is, orthodox Muslims who follow the premises of jihad, which calls for the victory over the infidels and the establishment of a world caliphate--you know, no big deal other than our than our total destruction); what I am suggesting however, is that we need to address questions to him about how he sees Islam. Will he view Islam as Hussein Obama does: "Islam is a religion of peace--we will never be at war with Islam," kind of glossing over the fact that we already are at war with Islamic terrorism, and the views held by orthodox Muslims in this regard.  We must also recall that GW Bush made a similar statement about Islam being a religion of peace, and he also had difficulty saying the word "nuclear." 

Daniel Greenfield, in his excellent article, explores this issue along with another possible presidential candidate, Chris Christy. It's an interesting, albeit scary read.
CLICK ON THE LINK BELOW 
Rick Perry and Islam

Tweet

Shiela Jackson Lee: Deep Thoughts by a Shallow Dem

Peter King (R-NY) is the Chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security and has been holding hearings about radical Islam and terrorism in the USA. Some of the finest minds have given testimony on this topic, providing us with information about the dangers radical Islam can incur, but along with their take on the problems came a response from one of the most blathering idiots ever elected to public office--I refer to Shiela Jackson Lee (D-Tx).  The input from Rep. Lee is proof positive that a Yale education and an appointment as judge in no way guarantees the holder of such a background is necessarily a person with a fully functioning brain. In fact, one might go so far as to say that Ms. Lee is an idiot, but saying so would probably get you labelled a racist because that is the only response she and most liberals know how to use in retaliation to the truth. 

At the committee hearings, Peter King gave her five minutes floor time, which she used to request that right wing extremist groups be investigated along with the alleged 9/11 phone hacking of terror victims, an issue that seems to be coming from left field and having nothing to do with the issues at hand, but that's just my opinion. You see, prior to Jackson Lee opening her mouth and getting her silver tongue in gear, the committee was voicing real concerns about al-Shabaab, an al-Qaeda affiliate and how it is recruiting young American Somalis for jihad. These Islamic men are attending terrorist camps and at least 40 are known to have done so and died as a result of suicide bombings. But Jackson Lee was undaunted in her quest for the irrelevant and went on about Rupert Murdoch and those right wing extremists. Several weeks ago, she spoke about extreme Christian groups when the committee met to discuss Islamic conversions in the prison system.  This is when she threw a curve ball to the committee by mentioning the crazy Christian right who are such a danger to the country and are recruiting in the prisons for Jesus. And yes, Shiela Jackson Lee is also the same person who felt that hurricane names are "too white" and she would like them to have more "black sounding names." 

Recently, at a town hall meeting to discuss Obamacare, Jackson Lee was being asked a question by a cancer survivor. See her response on this video.  One can say that it doesn't get ruder than that. Of course when she spoke with Greta Sustern, she was even ruder when Greta tried to ask a question, so perhaps it does get ruder than that after all.   

Mark Levin also spoke about Jackson Lee and minces no words when he describes how she talks about how her constituents are ill informed.  She may be right since these are the people who voted for her, but I suspect they didn't know who she was, much the same way we didn't really know Obama--unfortunately, we still don't know Obama in spite of his incredible transparency--why is that, I wonder. 

Frick and Frack

I hope Shiela Jackson Lee does nothing to upset the findings or the work of the House Committee on Homeland Security. This issue is absolutely too important to pretend that it's equivalent to right wing extremism. She sees the killing of late-term abortion clinic doctors the same as the killing of 3000 people on that sunny day back in 2001. Since the 1970's there have been 8 murders of late-term abortion clinic doctors--a horrible thing in and of itself, but compare that to the 17 thousand people who have died at the hands of Islamic terrorists (and I refer to acts of sheer terrorism, not from formal Islamic wars, which are also too frequent to dismiss). Oh, and come to think of it, compare it to the 59 million babies who were murdered in abortion on demand clinics.  That's 8 doctors versus 59 million babies. Why don't liberals see something wrong with this?

Your comments are always welcome.   

Tweet