Follow Me On Twitter!

Friday, February 26, 2010

The Arrogance Of Barack Hussein Obama

You want arrogance? I can sum up the arrogance of this man in his own words. This is a transcript of the end of his closing statements closing out that farce yesterday called the Health Care Summit:

And the truth of the matter is, is that, politically speaking,
there may not be any reason for Republicans to want to do anything. I
mean, we can debate what our various constituencies think. I know
that -- I don't need a poll to know that most of Republican voters are
opposed to this bill and might be opposed to the kind of compromise we
could craft. So it would be very hard for you politically to do this.

But I thought it was worthwhile for us to make this effort.
We've got a lot of other things to do. I don't think, Tom, that we're
going to have another one of these because people don't have seven,
eight hours a day to work some of these things through.

What I do know is this: If we saw movement -- significant
movement, not just gestures -- then you wouldn't need to start over
because essentially everybody here knows what the issues are. And
procedurally, it could get done fairly quickly. We cannot have
another year-long debate about this.

So the question that I'm going to ask myself and I ask of all of
you is, is there enough serious effort that in a month's time or a few
weeks' time or six weeks' time, we could actually resolve something.
And if we can't, then I think we've got to go ahead and make some
decisions and then that's what elections are for. We have honest
disagreements about the vision for the country and we'll go ahead and
test those out over the next several months till November.

All right? But I very much appreciate everybody being here.
Thank you for being so thoughtful. And hopefully we'll all keep our
constituents in mind as we move forward. Thank you, everybody.


First of all, this part: "I don't need a poll to know that most of Republican voters are opposed to this bill and might be opposed to the kind of compromise we could craft."

I think the arrogance can be seen in two places here. First he doesn't need a poll? Really? So Obama is all powerful enough to already know what different segments of our society think and feel? Secondly, "Republican voters are opposed"?? Has he not seen the polls (apparently not since he doesn't need polls)? It isn't just Republican voters, it is all voters except the extreme, fringe left. Socialists, I will give him, support this bill. Right-thinking people do not.

We have honest disagreements about the vision for the country and we'll go ahead and test those out over the next several months till November.


Arrogance. The American people have already rejected this bill. Now he is asking the Democrats in congress to be sacrificial lambs and give up their offices in election defeats this November. Scott Brown should have been a wake up call. Apparently Obama's arrogance won't allow him to get that message.

Hopefully he'll remain arrogant right through November of 2012......

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Candian Universal Health Care So Good That The Canadian Premier Opts For Heart Surgery In The U.S.

Click here for story: 'My heart, my choice,' Williams says, defending decision for U.S. heart surgery

Amazing. This is the heart (no pun intended) of the story:

His doctors in Canada presented him with two options - a full or partial sternotomy, both of which would've required breaking bones, he said.

He said he spoke with and provided his medical information to a leading cardiac surgeon in New Jersey who is also from Newfoundland and Labrador. He advised him to seek treatment at the Mount Sinai Medical Center in Miami.

That's where he was treated by Dr. Joseph Lamelas, a cardiac surgeon who has performed more than 8,000 open-heart surgeries.

Williams said Lamelas made an incision under his arm that didn't require any bone breakage.

"I wanted to get in, get out fast, get back to work in a short period of time," the premier said.


Interesting. I recently had a discourse on another blog (http://4simpsons.wordpress.com/) with a commenter there, from Canada, that tried to say that health care in Canada was free (he is wrong about that), that it was high quality (also wrong about that), and that it was freely available (he was wrong about this as well).

I provided this video as evidence against what he claimed:



This commenter then went on a rant about how Steven Crowder was not reliable because he is a conservative with a bent against univerrsal health care. That somehow the actual footage that Crowder provided inaccurately portrayed the Canadian health care system.

I then provided this video for him of UFC star Brock Lesnar (note the 1:27 mark of the video). Sorry this is a link, they have embedding disabled for this video:

Click here: Brock Lesnar discusses his illness

So I have a Canadian, Steven Crowder, doing an undercover investigation about universal health care in Canada. I also have an American that was ill in Canada discussing his experience with universal health care in Canada. Yet this anonymous commenter on the internet insisted that they were lying, and that I should believe him when he told me that Canadian care was free (despite extremely high taxes to pay for it), available (despite extremely long wait times for care), and high quality.

Apparently the Canadian Premier disagrees with that. Since he came to United States and willingly paid for heart surgery out of his own pocket instead of accepting the "free" heart surgery in Canada.

For commenter Ryan at http://4simpsons.wordpress.com/ I have only one thing to say: GAME. SET. MATCH.

Monday, February 22, 2010

It Is Time Republicans Follow Conservatives And Excommunicate Arnie And Colin

Republicans need to learn a valuable lesson. It is a lesson that has repeated itself over and over again throughout history. That lesson is that when Republicans follow the conservative movement in this country, they flourish. When the start going moderate, or even liberal, then they fail.

I've said it on this blog before, the reason for this is simple. When Republicans compromise on conservative initiatives, it alienates their core supporters: conservatives. And compromising is a zero sum game because liberals are not going to vote Republican. Period.

The result of Republicans compromising and becoming moderates and liberals, is that they lose power. Both houses of congress go Democrat, as does the White House.

I say all this to set up a very simple premise. It is time for Michael Steele and the GOP to disavow any association with Arnold Schwarzenegger and Colin Powell. Steele needs to come out and just simply say that they are being stripped of their Republican membership. They don't have to go Democrat, but they can't stay Republicans.

In case you missed it over the weekend, this is why:

Click here: Arnold Schwarzenegger criticizes fellow Republicans

Of particular note:

"The tea party is not going to go anywhere. I think the tea party is all about just an expression of anger and dissatisfaction," he said.


Now Arnold can say whatever he wants, he isn't going to be running again. So it doesn't matter to him. However, how sweet would it be for the Republicans to say to him: "Look, you aren't good for the party, so we are stripping you of your Republican membership." It would a wonderful slap in the face to show Arnold that we don't appreciate the way he has behaved as a so-called Republican.

Then there is Colin Powell. First a history lesson on Powell and what he pulled prior to the election in 2008.

Click here: Sorry, But Colin Powell Is Lying

And then there was this over the weekend:

Click here: Powell rebukes Cheney, backs Obama on national security

It is time to send a message that wolves in sheep's clothing, like Powell, will not be tolerated. Powell is a Democrat, whether or not he wants to admit it. While most people that were snowed into supporting Obama are now admitting their mistake, a so-called Republican, that voted for Obama, claims to still support him?

Time for the GOP to tell Powell: "Thanks but no thanks. Please no longer call yourself a Republican. We no longer want you in the party and would appreciate it if you would stop claiming to be a Republican."

Republicans have a chance to become the relevant party. They shouldn't squander that chance by thinking they can cast aside conservatives and become wishy-washy. It is time for them to embrace the principles that Ronald Reagan set forth for the party, and it is time for the party to jettison anyone that doesn't do that embracing.

Friday, February 19, 2010

Bible Haters Can't Agree On Jesus!

I remember the first time I heard about some people's theory that Jesus was married. It was the late 80s and a movie called The Last Temptation Of Christ starring Willem Dafoe came out. A friend from church went to see it to find out what all of the hubbub was about, and said they depicted Jesus as having a love relationship with, I believe, Mary Magdalene. Not sure (I've never seen it) if they were married or just fornicating, the latter of course Jesus would never do.

Dan Brown's The DaVinci Code depicts Christ as having been married to Mary Magdalene. (Again, never seen the movie nor read the book, just going on what I've been told.) I find no scriptural evidence for this claim, but of course Brown would say that it is buried within the "code". What is interesting is that researchers have done this "coding" with other books, like Moby Dick, and have concluded that you can claim codes in just about any text if you want to. Similar to the backwards messages that inadvertently end up on recorded music.

One thing to note, there would be nothing wrong with Jesus being married. If Jesus were married it would in no way diminish his deity, nor his role as the Messiah. However, without scriptural evidence that he was married one cannot say he was. Otherwise we could make all kinds of wild assertions with no Biblical reference to back up those assertions.

The only marriage the New Testament mentions for Jesus is his marriage to the church. The church is referred to as his bride, and he is referred to as the church's bridegroom. Of course this is a spiritual marriage. Any claim that Jesus was physically married is not scriptural.

And then there is Elton John. In case you missed it Elton is now making a different claim for Christ.

Click here: Elton John says Jesus Christ was gay

Before you think Elton is breaking new ground here, this is not the first time I've heard someone claim this. An uber-liberal here at work once made this claim. (This woman is a whacko. She eats meat but thinks that animals are humans too. She attends a Christian-based denomination, but makes a claim like this.) Her reasoning was that he spent all this time with 12 other guys, without mention of women among them.

Obviously, neither this whacko at work nor Elton John (okay he is a whacko too) know scripture. First of all, her claim of no women being involved with the apostles is wrong! Simon Peter was married! (Mark 1:29,30) (This also shoots holes in the Catholic belief that Simon Peter was the first pope, since popes can't be married.) Second, Christ specifically taught against homosexuality!

Some will claim that Christ never taught against homosexuality, but that it was Paul in his letters to churches that said homosexuality was a sin. (Romans 1:26,27 and I Cor. 6:9,10) This should be good enough because Paul was an inspired writer of the Bible. But Christ, who was with God and was God (John chapter 1 teaches this) gave us his words in the Old Testament that homosexuality was an abomination to him (Lev. 18:22).

Further, Christ taught against fornication. (There are too many anti-fornication teachings by Christ to list, look them up.) In most cases, when Jesus mentions fornication the Greek word translated there actually means "sexual sin". We've already seen that Jesus, as God, finds homosexuality to be an abomination and therefore would be included in sexual sins, along with bestiality and adultery.

To claim that Christ was a homosexual is to claim there is no hope of salvation. Jesus is the only way to salvation (John 14:6), but only because he was the sinless sacrifice for our sins. If he were a homosexual then he would be a sinner and therefore couldn't be the Messiah.

What is really funny though is how these Bible bashers (Dan Brown, Elton John, whacko lady at work) can't even agree on their bashing. Either Jesus was heterosexual and married. Or he was homosexual. He cannot be both.

True believers know the truth, that Jesus was single and not a homosexual.

Thursday, February 11, 2010

Obama: Tax Increase On Middle Class Possible

Unbelievable.

Click here: Obama ‘Agnostic’ on Deficit Cuts, Won’t Prejudge Tax Increases

Here is my favorite part:

“Our real problem is not the spike in spending last year, or the lost, even the lost revenues last year, as significant as those are,” he said. “The real problem has to do with the fact that there is a just a mismatch between the amount of money coming in and the amount of money going out. And that is going to require some big, tough choices that, so far, the political system has been unable to deal with.”


Really? The real problem is there is a mismatch between what is coming in and what is coming out? DUH! And they try to say this guy is intelligent.

New Aerial Photos From WTC Collapse On 9/11/2001

Newly released images of the collapse of the World Trade Center have just be released. These pictures were captured from overhead police helicopters. Here is the link, and a couple of the shots:

Click here: Dramatic images of World Trade Centre collapse on 9/11 released for first time





The release of these photos is ironic considering the main story up on the Drudge Report today:

Click here: Iran is now a 'nuclear state' says Ahmadinejad as thousands take to the streets

Take those photos and that headline together and can you see what the world is facing today. Why do I support the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? Take a look at those photos and that headline. That is why.

And you can save your stupid arguments about Iraq having nothing to do with 9/11. Bologna. 9/11 happened because we had ignored the global threat that Islamoterrorism had become for far too long. And with a terrorist in power, like Ahmadinejad, and Saddam Hussein before him, a nation like Iran is a threat to its neighbors and the world alike.

So you can be a blind, ignorant peacenik, like Obama, and think we can make the world love us by hugging them. Or you can be a right-thinking, lucid person, like Ronald Reagan was, who realizes that strength is where real security lies. Regardless, we should pull the troops out of Iraq when the time is right and march them right to Tehran. Ahmadinejad at the end of a rope would be a good thing for the world.

If wanting to invade Iran makes me a "chickenhawk", as the idiotic left is so fond of calling pro-war non-soldiers, then so be it. I wear that name proudly because supporting what I support is the right thing to support.

AND PROUD OF IT!

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

Perverts And Technology Do Not Mix!

Any cool new technology will quickly be used for evil by perverts. Example, not long after the invent of videotape and camcorders, perverts were flooding the market with every type of pornography they could think to videotape. Of course it also shows that there is a marketplace full of perverts willing to buy such a product.

I read an article a few years ago predicting that Blu-ray would win out over HD-DVD. (If those terms are foreign to you, do some googling.) Why? Because the porn industry had come on board with Blu-ray. The porn industry is widely credited with VHS winning out over Beta back in the days of that battle.

Let's not get started on perverts and the internet.

Well it didn't take long for a new security technology to be abused by, you guessed it, perverts. Maybe you've heard of the full body scanners they want to install at airports. They are controversial because these scanners basically look through your clothing. Here is a sample.

The potential for abuse of this technology is obvious to me. For example, you are traveling with your family. Your family includes young children. One of the screeners with access to this thing is a child pornography-addicted pedophile. Suddenly images of your young children end up on the internet.

It doesn't even have to be relate to children. Security snapshots of your wife could end up widely distributed on the internet by pornography perverts. And if you are a famous person you could be especially susceptible to having unauthorized security images saved and exploited.

"It would never happen!", you say. "These things are intended to keep us safe!", you argue. Well guess what? It has already happened.


Click here for story: Shahrukh Khan's Nude Scans Circulated at Heathrow Airport!

Perverts and technology do not mix.

Monday, February 08, 2010

Flap Over Tim Tebow Superbowl Ad Shows Pro-Abortion Side's True Colors

I've heard it for years. When discussing the abortion issue with someone from the opposing viewpoint they eventually say: "I am not pro-abortion, I am pro-choice. I'd prefer if there were no abortions, but I think a woman should have the right to choose." I've always thought this was a phony argument, that the person saying it wasn't truly sincere. Now I know that is exactly the case.

If you haven't heard, there was a lot of controversy over the last couple of weeks because of a 30 second Superbowl ad by Focus On The Family. It stars University of Florida Quarterback Tim Tebow, a Heisman trophy winner, and his mother. Here is the ad:



Does that ad really warrant all that controversy? They never mention abortion. They never mention pro-life. All they do is direct you to the Focus On The Family website to learn more about the Tebows' story. Even if it is a story that makes an argument for life, why all the flap about this 30 second spot running during the Superbowl? Here is a taste:

Feminists tied in knots over Tebow ad
Planned Parenthood responds to Tim Tebow's Super Bowl ad
The Anti-Choice Network.
An advocacy ad stirs a national debate

A local sports radio host, Mike Valenti, went on the attack last week on this issue as well. I would link podcasts, but the lies he spread went far enough. I'll just say that Valenti's use of the word "homophobic" apparently means that anyone that opposes gay marriage is a homophobe.

But he does highlight an interesting issue.

What we have going on here are really two issues. First, Focus On The Family is an anti-gay marriage group. Second, pro-choice folks only count it as choice if the choice is abortion.

Mike Valenti's "Focus On The Family are a homophobic group" rant raises the first real issue behind the controversy. Since Focus On The Family has been an outspoken anti-gay marriage group, then everything they stand for must be bashed. Focus On The Family could have tried running a pro-puppy ad, and gay groups would have protested. The hatred towards those that disagree with their (gay groups) agenda is palpable.

Also, apparently the pro-choice movement isn't so pro-choice after all. Despite most pro-choice advocates' claim that they aren't pro-abortion, the only choice that counts to them is abortion. If you choose life, or if you advocate the message of choosing life, then you must be stopped.

This doesn't even make sense. No where in the Tebows' story do they ever make the claim that abortion should be illegal. All they are doing is making the argument that choosing life over abortion is the more desirable choice. Isn't this what pro-choicers argue all the time? "I want to see abortions reduced as well, but it should be a 'safe', legal option for women."

Yet take measures to reduce the number of abortions and the pro-choicers come out of the woodwork to protest. Pro-choicers aren't pro-choice at all, they are pro-abortion. This is the claim that those of us on the pro-life side of the ledger have made for years. This Tebow controversy has proven that to be true beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Now, if the group that is pushing the choice for life is also anti-gay marriage, then whoa, look out.

This really was much ado about nothing. In the end the ad was completely innocuous. The flap was more anti-Focus On The Family than anything else. After all, disagree with the liberal viewpoint and the left wants to revoke your 1st amendment rights.

The National Organization For (Unaborted) Women

Friday, February 05, 2010

I Don't Like To Gloat

But I will in this case.

Click here for story: Obama admits health care may die on Hill

The feeling this gave me was the same feeling I got in 1994 when the local paper ran the headline: Universal Health Care: Dead

Many people will argue that we need health care reform. I disagree. We need tort reform. We will not control costs until we get that reform.

The wrong kind of change is worse than no change. Therefore, I am going to continue to gloat that Obamacare, thanks to Scott Brown's election, is dead.

My First Open Letter To President Obama

Dear President Obama,

First, you have no idea how difficult it is for me to type those words. From 93-2000 I don't think I once uttered "Clinton" and "President" in the same sentence. But I digress.

Mr. President, I am writing to ask you to do me a favor. Understand, I didn't vote for you. I didn't vote for "the other one" (John McCain) either, as I cast my vote for Sarah Palin to be Vice President. But again, I digress. Please though do me this one favor. After a year in office please stop blaming President Bush for the failures of your administration.

While President Bush did fight two wars, and while he did over spend on a Medicare prescription drug program, and while he did give tax cuts to all Americans, our current problems are not entirely his fault.

First, Bush started TARP, something I opposed and still oppose. You then bailed out auto companies and over spent on a pork program you erroneously called "stimulus".

Second, while unemployment plummeted despite you telling us it wouldn't with the stimulus package, the stock market actually recovered last year to get back to 10,600. Up from a low of under 8,500. Yesterday it closed at 10,002, and is under 10,000 as I type this.

Third, Bush did fund two wars. (This is spending I support, as I feel it is the only real role for the federal government.) Yet despite you claiming you were going to end those wars you've continued to fund them.

Fourth, Bush gave all Americans a tax cut. You claimed you would give the middle class a tax cut. I am still waiting.

Now, on the first bullet, TARP has largely been paid back. Your auto bailouts continue to hemorrhage, and the stimulus might as well have just flushed $800 billion down the toilet. I say that because your goal was to prevent unemployment from going over 8%. Nice try. You can't blame Bush for that.

On the second point, the market is now yours. While you could argue you inherited a depressed market you can no longer blame Bush for the market. The market is tanking again under your watch. The lower it goes the more blame you deserve for it. You can't blame Bush for that.

On the third point, what gives? Either you are against the war spending and pull the troops home immediately. Or you admit Bush was right in those wars and continue to fund them. You can't have it both ways. This has been in your power for over a year. The fact that the wars are still costing money is your fault. You can't blame Bush for that.

On the fourth point, tax cuts across the board are the best way to stimulate the economy! That is why we recovered from the economic meltdown in the aftermath of 9/11. The Bush tax cuts have nothing to do with our current situation. You can't blame Bush for that.

As far as the surpluses go, if your spending increase were merely within $200 billion of our 2000 budget then you'd have an argument. It concerns me that you think the American people are that stupid. Okay, some of them probably are. But not all of us.

Dear Mr. President, just stop it. Blaming Bush may have had some traction in your first few months in office, but our current crisis is all on you. After all, your presidential campaign of hope and change claimed to have all the answers. That is what largely got you elected. Where are all those answers now?

Sincerely,
A Very Concerned American Citizen
LoneWolfArcher

P.S. I thank God every night for Scott Brown.

Appendix A: This chart says it all.

Thursday, February 04, 2010

Shout Out To theblogprof

theblogprof always has great posts over at his blog. On this one he hits a home-run right out of the park.

Click here: Terri Schiavo was brutally murdered: brain scanners show some alert minds in 'vegetative state' patients

If you don't remember the Terri Schiavo case then do some internet searching. It was very very sad, and very very complex. At the center of the debate over Terri was this: When you are in doubt about a person's wishes, and if there is a chance the person is aware, then you must error on the side of life.

In Terri's case, as theblogprof points out, the evil parties involved (her husband, his lawyer and the judge) erred on the side of death. Terri was starved to death, and dehydrated.

What I've never understood were the "experts" that claimed she had no brain function. Can someone explain to me how you can have no brain function yet still have involuntary body functions like a heartbeat, respiration, digestion, etc? Those experts were on the husband's dole, of that I am convinced.

Great work over at theblogprof's blog.

Blogging, Readers, and Popular Posts

One thing that has enthralled me over the course of the last year is watching traffic to this blog. While this year has seen a dramatic increase in visitors to the blog, it has been very interesting seeing which posts draw in the most visitors.

I wrote a review of the movie "The Last Supper", and that post is quite popular. It is in the top 5 posts that gets hits from search engines. The movie isn't really about the Biblical last supper. It is about a group of fanatic liberals that kill extreme conservatives, at dinner. Thus their last supper.

Here is the post: Movie Review: The Last Supper

Another popular post on this blog is actually a collection of posts. With titles like "Keith Olbermann Is An Idiot", these posts tend to generate hits because that (idiot with the name of a person) tends to be a common search engine entry. Here are those posts:

Keith Olbermann Is An Idiot
Bono Is An Idiot
Algore Not Just An Idiot, But A Liar Too
Barbara Boxer Is An Idiot
Matt Damon Is An Idiot
Will Ferrell Is An Idiot
Ode To Craig T. Nelson
Further Proof That Arlen Specter Is An Idiot
Note: The Craig T. Nelson post is included, even though it is praising Nelson. Apparently a lot of people type Craig T. Nelson Idiot into search engines, and my post comes up.

Another popular post is my book review of C.S. Lewis' The Pilgrim's Regress. Here is the post:

Book Review: C.S. Lewis' The Pilgrim's Regress

Along those lines, my posts about misquoted or misinterpreted/misused scriptures generate a lot of hits. Here they are:

Blessed Are The Peacemakers
Often Misquoted/Misused Bible Verses: I Corinthians 13:13

This one on the farce that is global warming also gets a lot of hits:

Warming, Sun Spots, Cooling, And Lack Of Sun Spots, OH MY!!

All of those are relatively popular past posts, but no post has generated as many hits as this last post. Ironically, this post isn't political in nature. Nor is it religious. But this post generates multiple hits each day. And though the book has been out for a while now, it continues to be a very popular search. It is my review of Andre Agassi's autobiography Open. You can find the post here:

Andre Agassi's Open

It is heartening to know that things you write are being read by others. This is what causes me to continue to write on this blog. Thanks to all of my regular readers, and the one time visitors alike. I hope to continue to do what I do here on a regular basis.