BITS AND PIECES

It has occurred to me that I haven't taken any shots at the Republicans in quite a while. Well, there are a couple of good reasons. First, the Reps have become completely inert. Oh, they bitch and moan and try their level best to be obstructionists, but truth be told, they have about as much power as a AAA battery. Maybe less. The Democrats are in total control and pushing their agenda hard. Frankly, punching up the Republicans right now is like kicking a midget- a little too easy. Secondly, the Democrats have been doing sooooo many things to comment on I can't even keep up. So here's a little mash-up of some recent events that caught my eye.

*Digging the hole even deeper*

President Obama announced yesterday that he will be sending even more troops into Afghanistan. It was a mistake to stay this long and it'll be an even bigger mistake to stay longer. I sympathize with the President on this one. His supporters want us out, his Generals want us in with both feet. Both have some great points. The fact is; we can't separate the good guys from the bad over there. Left on their own the Afghan people turn to infighting and the brutal Taliban take over. It's seems easier to me to let them form training camps or control apparatus and then blow the living crap out of them. But I'll admit, I'm not a military analyst. This war is fast becoming Obama's War and I'm dead positive he will regret taking ownership.

*She left us!*

Our beloved Governor of Michigan, Jennifer Granholm, has just gotten back from a State dinner with President Obama for India's Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and his wife, Gursharan Kaur. Ms. Granholm feasted on an "elaborate array of vegetarian dishes and listened to the National Symphony Orchestra" while her state is trying to figure out how to feed itself. I just got back from a trip up north deer hunting and I have never seen the area around Alpena look so desperate. Locals told me the deer population is way down due to starvation-of the residents. She reminds me of that scene in Jurassic Park where the T-rex rears it's head (Michigan's debt and economy) over the embankment and the lawyer takes off running leaving the kids to die. Thanks Jennifer. I guess as long as she's having elegant food and company and can jockey for a better position it's O.K.. The local press seems more concerned about her attire, but I want to know what the F*** she's doing partying while our state is burning. I'm sure some Liberal can give me the apologetic answer.

*Even more local*

Of all the things I miss the most about the old days, it's accountability. Why, it used to be that if you got caught stealing a penny bubblegum from the drug store (Wow, I sounded old there.) you could end up working for that same store for a month, mandated by your parents. Now, you can be in a position to oversee the entire Michigan Education system and watch $306 million vanish from the Detroit Public Schools and know one says a peep. Here's a lesson for all you "Reform Wall Street" types-laws and bureaucracy don't do one lick of good if the people paid to watch them aren't accountable for when they fail to stop the stealing. Everyone acts like we don't have anyone that was supposed to be watching that Den of Thieves in Detroit, but we do. It's called the Michigan State Board of Education and it's headed by one gray-haired old lady named Kathleen N. Straus. If we're not going to do a single thing to the department that is paid to watch the school system when they fail to do their job, then what's the point of having them? So they can make sure our kids know how to put a condom on while the superintendents sell off their computers? Sigh.

*Willie Horton II*

During the 1988 Presidential campaign, Democrat candidate Michael Dukakis was plagued by ads run by Republican George H.W. Bush showing a young man named Willie Horton. On October 26, 1974, in Lawrence, Massachusetts, Horton and two accomplices robbed Joseph Fournier, a 17-year-old gas station attendant, stabbing him 19 times. Mr. Fournier later died of his injuries. Mr. Horton was convicted and sent to prison. On June 6, 1986, he was released as part of a weekend furlough program but did not return. On April 3, 1987 in Oxon Hill, Maryland, Horton twice raped a local woman after pistol-whipping, knifing, binding, and gagging her fiancé. The furlough program was supported by candidate Dukakis. The style and underlining racial theme of those ads is often pointed to as examples of racism by the Republican Party. Now, a new play on that old script is emerging. Maurice Clemmons, who is black, performed a teenage crime spree in Arkansas that landed him an 108-year prison sentence. He then had his sentence commuted by Republican Presidential Candidate and Talk show host Mike Huckabee who was Arkansas's' Governor at the time. Mr. Clemmons went on to kill four white police officers in cold blood. Now, strangely, even the most Liberal Media sources have no problem showing Maurice's photo next to the four white cops. It should be very interesting to see how this will play out if Mr. Huckabee decides to run in 2012.

O.K., that's all my blood pressure can take for now. It sure is a burden having to point out week after week what our press seems unwilling, or unable to do. Fortunately, I live for this. H.C.

$12,000,000,000,000.00

Quietly, without much fanfare, (barely anyone even mentioned it in the Main Stream Media) our National Debt hit $12 trillion dollars last week. I guess they were too busy covering Adam Lambert's cancelled show. (That search uncovered hundreds of stories)

CBS was one of the very few sources to do any writing on it at all and that was only in a blog written by CBS News White House correspondent.Mark Knoller. Mr. Knoller had this to say,"The National Debt has increased about $1.6 trillion on Mr. Obama's watch, though less than $4.9 trillion run up during the presidency of George W. Bush. But the White House budget review issued in August projects that by the end of the current fiscal year on Sept 30th, the National Debt could top $14 trillion. It gets worse. The same document projects that by the end of the decade, the National Debt will hit $24.5 trillion -- exceeding the Gross Domestic Product projected for 2019 of $22.8 trillion." That's $1.6 trillion that Obama and his Californication Dems have spent in just slightly less than a year. I guess that's just not big enough news compared to an Adam Lambert story.

I would say that the Obama Administration is spending like drunken sailors-but that would be an insult to drunken sailors who couldn't spend $1.6 trillion if every single one of them were drunk their entire lives.

While it's true that Bush (hardly a fiscal conservative) ran up considerable debt over his 8 years, his $4.9 trillion will be dwarfed by an eight year total for Obama of $12.8 trillion at his current rate of spending. And keep in mind, that doesn't even include the bill for the Health Care overhaul. Also, included in Bush's total is the Medicaid part "B" prescription benefit and the TARP funds, most of which are also being spent by the Obama Administration. To get a real grip on how outlandish this is all becoming, check out the U.S. debt clock which is literally spinning out of control.

Why this isn't being covered better, I'll let all of you try to figure out. However, to keep the younger readers in my crowd from committing suicide over the debt we are passing along to them, I'll end this piece on a positive note. Even Obama can't escape the wrath of the comedians forever and SNL has finally broken from the MSM and is no longer punching with furry mittens. H.C*UPDATE* These vids keep getting removed, so I will reload them as quickly as I can find new ones. NBC is claiming copyright infringement, but I find it interesting that only select vids (like this one) are removed.

DEFINING TERRORISM

To take the simple approach, one would just look in the dictionary or on-line to find a definition of terrorism. Here, I'll save you the trouble, Webster's on-line dictionary defines terrorism as; The systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion. That's simple enough. However, as the recent Fort Hood Shooting has shown us, that definition needs a little more explaining. When does a nut-job with a gun or a bomb become a terrorist? Does he have to follow a religion? Can he be a terrorist in his own country? What's the difference between someone who's fighting to free his country from oppressors and a Patriot? Can a country itself practice terrorism? Where are the lines?

These are all questions that need answers. To help you sort these questions out I've decided to take a stab at how I would define an act of terror and what makes a terrorist.

First and foremost, I would say that every terrorist has one main thing in common. They target civilians. Notice that I italicized "target". There is a big difference between a military action that has non-targeted civilian collateral deaths and someone who blows up a shopping mall. Israel is a good example of a country that walks the fine line between the two. If Hamas attacks from within civilian housing, is it fair for Israel to blow up suspected houses knowing good and well that innocent civilians will be killed? I would say "Yes". That line, however, I believe, is crossed the minute Israel is trying to enact punishment on the Palestinian people without specifically targeting a known terrorist house. If it's a policy of "If Hamas kills five Jews, then Twenty-five Palestinians will die.", then I believe it is state-sponsored terrorism by Israel. As long as the terrorists themselves put the civilians in danger to protect themselves, then Israel is justified to commit an act of war with civilian casualties. Remember, it is Hamas that put them in danger.

But is Hamas, or for that matter any one else, a terrorist organization if they believe that they are fighting a guerrilla war with an occupier? This can get a little more complicated. First, to be fighting for the liberation of your country, in my opinion, you have to have the support of the majority of your people. Without that, every group, no matter how small, can justify attacking their country in the name of "patriotism". Civilized society allows civil decent, it does not allow every fringe group that disagrees with some policy to act out violently. The proper function of a patriot group is to persuade it's people to rise up against a government it believes has gone wrong. That group must convince a majority of people that it is right. It is the function of an oppressive government to limit demonstration and free expression. It is through those actions that they prove that they no longer have the majority of the people behind them and are no longer acting in the interest of it's people. If you are a member of a group that believes in changing it's government, has free expression, access to media, and the right to demonstrate peacefully and still cannot convince the majority of the public to get behind you, then your job is to continue to try to convince more people. You are not justified to use acts of terrorism to get your way.

Can a country be engaged in terrorism? This is the argument used by Liberals to defend the actions of people who feel, or even are, oppressed by some of the bigger, more powerful countries in the world. The truth is; they are sometimes right and most times wrong. Countries have opposing goals that are interlocked by limited resources, land, water, religion, past conquests, sketchy borders, regional conflicts and a host of other problems. War is the solution of choice for a lot of these countries. To assume that diplomacy and negotiation is always the solution is naive at best. Oppression is always the badge worn by anyone that doesn't get their way or loses the conflict. Since one side or the other will eventually win and get their way, the other side is always oppressed in their own opinion. This in and of itself cannot justify terrorism. Oppression, however, can take many forms, some inhumane and brutal, some economic and far more sublime. The ones that are brutal or inhumane will surely be easy to rally the opinion of the people against and terrorism I believe is justified in that instance. The lesser "oppression" is far harder to justify with violence unless the majority of the people are persuaded.

The world as we now know it has been a little too quick to slap the word "terrorism" on any action by an oppressed group that acts out against it's more powerful oppressors. The keys to separating these people from true terrorists is in their actions. Do they have the support of the majority of their own people and are they acting in their own country? If so, they aren't terrorists in my world. If they are targeting civilians in another country and if they haven't the support of the people in the country they're attacking, then they are terrorists. This may seem a little over simplistic, and maybe it is a simple answer for a very complex question. But I have applied this philosophy to a lot of situations and it seems to work far better than webster's definition. If any one has some input they would like to contribute, this is one discussion I would like to further flesh out. H.C.

LET THE PARTY FLIPPING BEGIN

As I said so many times after President Obama became our first black President and Congress became a solely Democrat run institution, "Enjoy your moment Democrats, it's not going to last."

Tuesday's elections in New Jersey and Virginia have proven my point. And trust me, there is a lot more to come. Most of my Democrat friends were dead-positive after the historic election of 2008 that the tide had surely moved in their favor. They were, of course, very mistaken. What they thought was a sea-change toward their way of thinking was simply the repercussions of the corruption on Wall Street and the downturn of the economy. The truth is; we live in a social conservative nation. The proof is everywhere. There are now 40 "Right-to-Carry" (a gun) states. 36 of them are "Shall Issue" states, meaning the state has to find a reason to deny your right to carry as opposed to you having to prove that you have a reason to need one. During that same period in time, twenty-nine states have enacted a constitutional ban restricting marriage to one man and one woman. Another 19 states have laws that ban gay marriage and limit marriage to one man and one woman (but it is not in their constitutions) Yet, for some unexplainable reason, all my gun enthusiast friends think they're losing the battle and my Gay friends think they're winning. I guess Liberals are just more optimistic (or delusional) and Conservatives are more pessimistic. Either way, they're both wrong.

As further proof of this, Virginia has now elected Republican Bob McDonnell for governor by a wide 18% margin.The McDonnell victory headlined a three-way sweep for the Reps of the top statewide offices in a state where Obama had won the Presidential election. New Jersey also changed sides by electing Republican Chris Christie over incumbent Democrat Jon Corzine by a 6% margin. To add even further loss to the Dem agenda, the State of Maine has now overturned it's Gay Marriage law. This was a particularly startling defeat for the Gay Rights activists, since it was on their own home turf. My advice to Gay Marriage proponents; stop trying to win in the courts instead of changing public opinion. People don't like shady tactics.

The only bright spot for the Dems came from the 23rd district of New York where Democrat Bill Owens defeated Conservative Party Member Douglas Hoffman. Note that I didn't say "Republican" Douglas Hoffman. That's because the Republican candidate dropped out. Mr. Hoffman was a 3rd Party Candidate and almost beat Mr. Owen anyway, losing by only 3% points. Even though the left tried desperately to claim this as a win against the Republicans, the truth is; he didn't have a "R" by his name.

Overall, I view this as a very good sign that the Reps are on the comeback trail. The Dems are finding out that it's a lot harder to lead than to just sit back and criticize. The history of our country is that we don't like Parties that lead from the far end of the political spectrum. The Dems are paying the price for the Californication of our government and it will come back to bite them. Turnovers in midterms elections are common and I predict we're going to see quite a few seats change hands in favor of the Reps. Sorry Dems, but I told you so. H.C.

PRESIDENT OBAMA SO FAR

Since I invested my precious vote in President Barack Obama, I feel I have every right to judge his progress and see if he has met my expectations of him. I was going to wait until his one year anniversary, but so much has happened and so much of his agenda has been put forth that I think it may be time to do an earlier assessment.

First, let me be clear on one thing so that any of you Barack fans out there don't have to bruise your little typing fingers hammering out an angry reply. I know that he can't fix all the problems created by the past administrations in just 10 months. In fact, I give him a full year to start his agenda and then another year for the actions to show results- but by the mid-term elections, the excuses had better end. That is the exact position I take on all politicians. They don't get elected by promising they can't fix things and I'm not about to give any one of them a free pass because they're good at making excuses. We have one of those politicians for a Governor here in Michigan and it wore thin 5 years ago. I also feel the need to remind those of you leaning right that it took Ronald Reagan 2 full years to reverse the damage of Jimmy Carter and since Ron is your "Great President", you should give Obama at least that long to show some of the same results. Now, with that in mind, let's see how Barack is doing so far.

*Foreign Policy*

This was on the list of reasons I voted for Obama. I had hoped for better relations overseas and so far I got it. Admittedly, they may even like him too much, for instance, by giving him a Nobel Peace Prize. But it is nice to see a little positive attitude overseas. On his dealing with dictators though I would give him a "D-". From North Korea's Kim Jong Il to Iran's Supreme Leader, the dictators of the world are playing us like fools. I believe Iran will be nuclear by the end of his first term and any one that thinks otherwise is as naive as Obama's Foreign Policy Team. Sanctions will not work and neither will diplomacy or world condemnation. The Dems have the bad habit of trusting dictators.

*The Economy*

I keep hearing that the economy is "turning around", mostly from the MSM (Main Stream Media) that desperately wants Obama's Administration to succeed. Most all of my economic professors, however, are quietly telling me that the current upswing in the markets is the result of artificial stimulation and an adjustment for the overselling during the crash. I agree with that assessment. Despite what most Liberals believe, you can't just keep printing money and handing it out. Inflation is looming and the Dollar is shrinking. Unemployment is still rising and way too much "stimulus" money is being spent to patch holes in state budgets. Sooner or later that money is going to run out and then the real work will start.

*The War in Iraq*

The MSM seems to have a serious memory problem when it comes to Iraq. Every liberal writer for every liberal newspaper is now gushing over our victory. Events like the recent bombing in Baghdad are no longer proof positive that we can't win. If G.W. were still in office Cindy Sheehan would be on every station, Code Pink would be demonstrating and every news station minus FOX would be talking about how hopeless the situation is. The fact is, things are bad there but stabilizing. The best credit I can give Prez Obama on Iraq is that he continued the plans of his generals and didn't follow the "grab defeat from the jaws of victory" plan of John Kerry and the rest of the Californication Crowd.

*The Afghan War*

The MSM also seems to have a serious memory problem when it comes to Afghanistan. The "Unwinnable War" now seems winnable to them with little else changing beyond the name of our President. This War has gotten considerably worse since Obama took over. Fanatics are encouraged by Barack's passive tones and the Democrat Party looks ready to cut and run. We only have two real choices in Afghanistan; an all-out effort and continuing presence or withdraw to attack installations and training camps when the situation allows. I'm sorry to say this but, I don't see a good option here. Perhaps after the first nuclear weapon goes off we will realize (with the rest of the world) that extreme measures are the only answer in an extreme land. Until then, the world won't tolerate what needs to be done and Obama's hands are tied. I don't fault Barack for this one, but his mouth made promises that his ass can't keep.

*Bipartisanship*

Don't make me laugh. Isolating Fox? Attacking Right Wing Radio? The only villains the Democrats ever recognize is on the other side of the aisle. Maybe if we could get the terrorists of the world to join the Republican Party, Fox News, Talk Radio or the Sarah Palin Fan Club they would finally understand that "evil" exists outside the U.S. borders. My advice to Barrack? Get some thicker skin and accept that not everyone that disagrees with you is an idiot or worse.

*Health Care*

I'm going withhold judgment until the final bill passes. So far it looks just like everything else that was created by government in committee-a complete mess with something for everyone to hate. I have one question though. Whatever happened to the "Repeal the Bush's Tax Cuts for the wealthy to pay for health care."? Suddenly that's off the table and taxing my plan is on. Remember, simply buying Catastrophic Coverage for 25 million people from the existing Health Care Providers would only cost about $75 billion a year (and that's the high figure) and wouldn't change anyone's present coverage.

*Domestic Policy*

O.K., a quick run-down. Let's see. No gun legislation on tap-good (In fact, so far our rights have expanded.) Leaving Medical Marijuana up to the states-also good. More corporate regulation-only good if it comes with a bureaucracy willing to enforce it. Nation Debt-Very, very, bad. Assorted suck-ups to the Gay Community-mostly don't care.

Overall, I would advise President Obama to focus more on the real issues and avoid things like campaigning for the Olympics. His Presidency will be defined by the Economy, the Wars and Health Care. It's always better to do a few things well than several things badly. I feel good about Barack's growing understanding of the complexities of the world but I would caution him to listen more to the Republicans when dealing with dictators and save his fellow Dem's opinions for dealing with Wall Street. Ten months isn't long enough to make much of an impact, but already Obama is worrying me on the financial front. The good news is, he does seem to be learning. Let's hope President Obama is as good student as he is a politician. H.C.

IS RUSH LIMBAUGH A RACIST?

Since the story first surfaced that Rush Limbaugh was thinking about becoming a part-owner in a NFL football team, the accusations against him have been flying. Accusations are easy to make. Especially when you don't like someone. We've all been guilty of it at one time or another. Soon your mind wanders into irrational places. Why does he always go to his car for lunch? Is there a body in the trunk? What's with all those cleaning products in his back seat? Is he building a bomb? I'll bet he beats his wife.

I'm not saying that's what everyone that dislikes Rush is doing. I'm just saying it might not be a bad idea to check ourselves and see where the evidence actually takes us. Black people, in particular, have a perception of Rush Limbaugh that is based almost solely on how the Democratic Party and Liberal Media defines him.

"Self Indoctrination" is a term I like to use to describe what has happened to a lot of people's logic. Self Indoctrination is when you have isolated yourself from any views that may challenge what you already believe. You only hang around with like-minded people, you only watch T.V. shows that reflect your values, and you only seek out information that reaffirms your beliefs. Most importantly, you only listen to what you want to hear. When you apply this philosophy to how you view people who disagree with you, it can give you a distorted perception. Put it this way, how would you like it if the only information that people had about you, came from people that hated you? I think it would be fair to say that Rush Limbaugh is defined, for most people, by people who hate him. Is that fair?

The most vocal opposition against Rush owning a football team is based on the accusation that he is a racist. I won't even get into how crazy it is that the NFL is somehow moral enough to make that judgment when it's ranks are filled with rapists, drug addicts, wife beaters, dog fighters, and drunk drivers. Even if I were to make that comparison, it wouldn't justify having a racist in it's ranks to boot. What does concern me is; who is making this judgment, based on what evidence and by who's definition of what a racist is?

I've gotten challenged myself quite a bit over the past two years for what some people see as racist remarks that I view as justifiable questions. For example, I often challenge anti-gun types with data that shows that a disproportionate amount of gun crimes are committed in mostly black populated areas of cities. Liberals freak out on me and claim that this is due to availability (not true), poverty, and a lot of social ills that are not caused by the color of their skin. On that I agree. However, when I suggest that black culture may be a contributing factor. They instantly brand me a racist. Why is that? Don't a lot of predominate black leaders say the same thing?

Quite a bit of what has come out about Rush Limbaugh is along that same vein. I listen to him regularly (although he's yet to convert me) and have never heard him say that black people were anything but the complete equal to whites in every way. Does he say they've been misled? Yes. Does he say they have become too dependent on government along with a lot of their white Democrat counterparts? Yes. Does he criticize Jesse Jackson and other black leaders. Yes.

One of the main accusations that have been levied against Rush is his "Barack the Magic Negro" parody. This parody was sung by none other than Rev. Al Sharpton. If you remember correctly, this was during the time when Jesse, Al, Rev. Wright and a host of other black leaders were calling President Obama a sell out, before he won. Did I miss the part where Al was called a racist?

The bottom line on this is; I can't look into Rush Limbaugh's heart and tell you whether or not he views blacks and whites as being inherently different. The criteria for being a racist. But I can tell you it frightens me to think that someone, even Rush, can be denied their pursuit of happiness based on someone's perception of them. Particularly when that perception is built around people that simply dislike his politics. I can see no reason that Rush Limbaugh shouldn't be allowed to own a football team or anything else that he wants to own. If he's guilt of a crime that should stop him, then let him be charged.

In conclusion, I give you this impassioned statement by Bo Snerdley, Rush's friend and trusted assistant who just so happens to be black himself.

I'm sure that some of you will dismiss him as just an "Uncle Tom", but as I said before, without the other side, it's just "Self Indoctrination". H.C.

TOO MANY ISSUES, TOO LITTLE TIME

It's time again for a summary of the past month's events that I just couldn't find the time to cover completely.

*NAMBLAWOOD*

As further evidence of what I believe is the next issue for the Hollywood/academic types (now that the Gay Rights Issue is all but done), here's is yet more proof that Hollywood wants you to believe that child/adult sex should not be a crime. Roman Polanski (yes the same Roman Polanski that I pointed out in an earlier post) was arrested in Switzerland on a 30 year old charge related to his drugging and raping a 13 year old girl and then fleeing the U.S.. Hollywood's finest promptly began a petition campaign begging for his release signed by over 100 cinema industry stars. Still think I'm off on this? Look at his photos to how see MSN portrays him compared to FOX. I think we can see who's taking Roman's side. By the way, where are the Feminists in Hollywood? Is violence against women now O.K. if it's long enough ago? If she's been bought off? If the perp happens to be a producer?

*The Nobel Peace Prize for Underachievement goes to..*

Barrack Obama of course. The choice of President Obama for this years Nobel Peace Prize brought gasps from the crowd at the assembly. It's no wonder, when the voting took place Obama had been in office a scant 12 days. Obviously, this was a vote of confidence by the committee for what they believe President Obama will do, not what he has done. No matter what they say. I personally think they should rename the prize, "The award for simply not being Bush". Because that's exactly what it really is. This has got to be really steaming up Bill Clinton who has watched Carter, Gore and now Obama sweep the award while he sits on the sidelines. For the Republicans who thought this was some kind of an outrage-calm down. No one has taking this award seriously since they gave it to the two-headed terrorist Yasser Arafat. Besides, Obama's said he hasn't done anything to deserve it and is donating the proceeds to charity. The world finally liking one of our Presidents isn't all that bad a thing ya know.

*Gay Hate Crimes*

The Democrat led U.S. House of Representative bowed to it's constituency last Thursday by voting to expand Hate Crime Laws to include sexual orientation. This is wrong (IMO) on several levels. Mostly though, it's wrong because it values some victims over others. I'm an egalitarian when it come to people. I find it criminal to value any one's life over someone elses. Black, white, gay, straight, cop, or homeless person, your mother or mine cries the same. This starts a very bad trend that I don't feel anyone, particularly Democrats who pride themselves on being for social equality, should support. BTW, it's interesting to note that the group that suffers the most deaths due to hate crimes is homeless people, not gay people. But I guess they just don't wear fashionable enough clothes to be elevated.

*Governor Granholm still clinging to Big Government*

Demonstrating exactly why Michigan is in a one state depression, Buffy the Job Slayer again shows why businesses can't stand her.


Well, that's it for now. Hopefully I'll have more time next week for a full, all out report on something or another that outrages me. Until then, take care of one another. H.C.