RightWingRocker

Default Judgment for Plaintiffs against Oblahma

2012-01-30T02:27:00.004-05:00

The correct definition of the term natural born citizen has prevailed in Georgia.

By not showing up or providing the ordered documentation, Oblahma has legally admitted:
1. That he is not a natural born citizen, as is constitutionally required to hold the office of President of the United States,
2. That the birth certificate he submitted in April is fraudulent,
3. That his social security number is stolen,

ALL BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.

Default judgment was filed, and the court's recommendation will be to remove Oblahma from the Georgia ballot.

Don't hold your breath. The Georgia Secretary of State has the final word. He's a Republican, and is no doubt afraid of being called a racist.

What this case does do is open the door for citizens in the other 49 states to bring up similar charges, and have this judgment entered into evidence. Don't expect that to go anywhere either, as both Democrats and Republicans are all socialist nutbags who don't want their candidates scrutinized in this fashion. Don't believe me? Listen to the clamor surrounding the idea that Marco Rubio might be chosen as a possible VP candidate, despite his ineligibility as stated in the Twelfth Amendment.

Get ready for four more years of this bullshit, regardless of who wins.

RWR

Obama Ordered to Appear in Court

2012-01-23T18:41:00.004-05:00

A judge in Atlanta, Georgia has ordered President Obama to show up at a hearing concerning a complaint filed by a citizen of the state who contends that Mr. Obama is not a natural-born citizen and therefore should be removed from the ballot in the Georgia Presidential primary.

On Friday, Deputy Chief Judge Michael Malihi denied a motion for dismissal of a subpoena that requires the President to attend. The hearing is set for Thursday.

If this judge applies the same standard to the term "natural born citizen" as the Founding Fathers did, Obama will not be on the Georgia ballot in November. Of course, all Foster (nutjob extraordinaire) can do is cry racism.

The fact that racism is the only thing these people can come up with should tell you something: They've run out of legitimate arguments. There's a reason that Rush Limbaugh defines a racist as "anyone winning an argument with a liberal".

It's been proven here. Natural born US citizenship requires two things: 1. Birth on US soil, and 2. two American citizen parents. Not only was Obama's mother not old enough per Hawaii law at the time to confer citizenship upon Barack, but his father was a British subject. To prove natural born citizenship, Obama must furnish proof not only of his birth in Hawaii (which is still being challenged), but of his parents' US citizenship. He must prove that his mother was a US citizen (which is known to be true - all he has to do is furnish the proof), and that his father was as well. This last is going to be the huge sticking point. It is known that the senior Obama was born in the then-British province of Kenya, and that he was active in Kenyan politics after the junior Obama's birth. No US naturalization documentation has ever been produced.

So now standing up for the implementation of the Constitution is akin to racism. Yeah, ok Skippy. All you have to do is look at his headlines to know this clown is either a hate-America communist or a very convincing satire troll.

Sadly, there are too many of the former to believe he's the latter.

We've said it time and again, and it looks like it bears repeating: If Obama can prove he meets the standard, we will accept him as a legitimate President. Until then, no way. I'd also love to know exactly how a bunch of Herman Cain, J.C. Watts, and Alan Keyes supporters are being called racist. Something to think about, isn't it? I voted for Keyes in the last election, and never gave a single thought to the man's race. I wonder how many people voted for Obama for the simple reason of his race. Is that a legitimate reason to vote for a person to lead your nation? Something to think about, isn't it? Who are the real racists?

You go, Malihi! Give 'em hell!

RWR

Update: Here is the case that is to be made. Exactly the case we have been making. Finally! - RWR

Gary Johnson, Debt Limits, and LOTE Foolishness

2011-12-29T01:08:00.016-05:00

Gary Johnson announced today that he's going to run for President on the Libertarian Party ticket (provided he could win their primaries). My assessment: fat fucking chance.

Gary Johnson is no more a Libertarian than FDR. This clown rated BELOW Newt Gingrich on my conservative percentage scale, coming in at a whopping 64%.

If Newt Gingrich can't convince me at 76%, how the hell will Gary Johnson do it at 64%? If he can't convince me, still technically a Republican, how will he convince a full-blown Libertarian? What a fucking joke.

In other news, O-BLAH-ma wants to raise the debt limit by another $1.2 trillion. More proof that he is not only woefully inept, but also criminally insane. In this election season where the Republican Party would have to nominate Mickey Mouse in order to lose in the general, it appears they are about to do just that - AGAIN!!!!

With the only conservative getting any sort of attention (Ron Paul) having more than enough baggage to hold him down while Obama spanks his sorry ass in November, you can count on four more years of either Obama or Newt-ack McRomney. Count on Romney to win the primaries. He is the one that has been anointed by the party this time around, and his chances of beating the Schlock are slim to none. It's 2008 all over again.

Since the Republican Party clearly wants nothing to do with the White House, and similarly wants nothing to do with conservatives, how long so you think will it take for the nose-holders to come around? I'm betting on NEVER, as they are hard-headed to the point of being so busy blaming conservatives for standing their ground ("a vote for someone other than the Republican nominee is a vote for Obama") that they will continue to be James Madison's worst nightmare.

To the LOTE voter, I say this: The time to come around is NOW. If you want a real leader to EVER get into the White House willing to govern according to the Constitution, you will have to make your move now, and either leave the party or get on with the task of taking it over, as you keep saying you want to do ("change it from within", you keep telling us). Let Obama, Gingrich, Romney, et al get elected, and there may not be a Constitution by 2016. It could easily be argued that there isn't one now.

As long as you keep voting for these clowns, the party will continue to give you ONLY these clowns as options, and demonize the Cains, the Pauls, and any truly worthwhile candidates that may come down the pike.

Where was your party when Herman Cain, the only conservative-talking candidate with any chance at all of winning, was being assaulted by the Left? Where were YOU when he needed your help to get around that stupidity? Furthermore, where will you be when, inevitably, Ron Paul is demonized for once allowing some bigot to publish an article in his magazine, then continuing to allow the same? If you won't defend Cain when he didn't do anything wrong, and now you are left with Ron Paul, who is going to believe you would even think to defend Paul for something he DID do that was wrong? Of course, to you it doesn't matter because Ron Paul doesn't have the Party's support, so to your eyes, he can't win anyway - but where were you for Cain, who could have EASILY run away with ALL OF IT, Party be damned?

So now we are stuck with Ron Paul as the last hope for the Constitution.

That truly sucks, and it's all thanks to the LOTE voter. I wonder if your typical LOTE voter would understand the clear logic in the following:

A vote for a liberal Republican in the primaries is two votes for Obama in the general.

Somehow I doubt it.

Get ready for another four years of The Interloper.

RWR

Criminalizing the Internet

2011-12-15T12:16:00.002-05:00

EVERY American, freedom-loving or not, had better line up on this one.

The article is self-explanatory, though it does leave out the fact that it kills jobs and only creates jobs for oppressive government regulators.

Enough already!

RWR

Gingrich: Conservative Enough?

2011-12-14T17:05:00.004-05:00

Uhh ... how about ...

No.

He's John McCain all over again. Figure about 76% conservative by my usual method of estimation. McCain came in at 77%.

Do you even want to think about where Romney would come in?

Phht.

I would vote for Ron Paul just to keep these clowns out!

RWR

Blago Going to Jail

2011-12-08T00:14:00.002-05:00

Blagojevich is going to jail.

Add him to the list of Illinois politicians in the can.

Now for Hitlery and the Schlock ...

RWR

A Quick Note on the Herman Cain "Scandal"

2011-11-04T14:48:00.002-05:00

I'm not sure where the libs are getting off going after Herman Cain because he has not responded to allegations that haven't even been made, but let's face it: They are clearly afraid of him. How else could this foolishness be explained?

These are the same people who defended Bill Clinton and his "slick willie" for eight years, even after it had been proven that he had engaged in far worse than Mr. Cain is currently not even being accused of, including lying about it under oath (an imprisonable offense). For his actions, Clinton was disbarred and impeached. And the liberals had his back the whole way. I can still hear James Carville echoing in my head saying, "It's just sex. This whole thing is PAWTISAN!". Please.

These same people are out there acting as if Herman Cain has done something terribly awful, even though no one has come forth with an allegation of any kind.

These people are desperate. The fact that Cain is scaring the communists to this degree has gained him some favor with me, though I don't think it's yet enough to abandon my bid for President of the United States. Still, if he gets the Republican nomination, I will have to consider voting for him. After all, if he pisses the liberals off this much without even taking office, we could be in for a lot of fun over the next four years once he does.

Whether it's Cain or Rocker in the White House, Oblahma is toast.

RWR

Answers for the Debate and a Reader

2011-10-13T17:06:00.007-05:00

We got a question for the campaign in on the last post. I will address that today as well as the questions from the recent Republican debate.

Regular reader TomJW presented the following question:

Will you tackle the dismantling of entitlement programs first or eliminate nearly all the the spending that comes after defense or entitlements?

As I mentioned earlier, the best way to do this would be to dismantle the newest illegal programs first. Each would be placed into the hands of the states for its final fate to be determined. States would be responsible for deciding whether the program should at the state level be continued, altered, or dismantled altogether. My objective here is to place these programs into the hands of those who are legally responsible for the things they were put into place to accomplish, not to necessarily do away with them. If the people of New York want a particular program, for example, they should be able to have it without interfering with the right of the people of New Hampshire to not have it if they so choose.

Before continuing to the debate, I must address the 9-9-9 tax plan put forth by Herman Cain. While it is better than the status quo, it fails to accomplish one very important and necessary objective: removing the power of direct taxation from the federal government. Nine percent flat corporate tax, nine percent flat personal tax, and nine percent retail tax ... Think about it. There are already corporate and personal taxes in place. Does it make sense to allow the federal government to continue to tax given its track record of abuse? I say no. Cain's tax plan doesn't do anything to divest the federal government of its power to tax. In fact, it adds a new consumption tax to the mix - yet another potential abuse for the federal government.

Best to stick with my tax plan, which taxes the states instead of the people directly. Each state would pay a portion of the federal budget equal to its percentage of the population. It's simple, it's fair, and it takes the power to tax away from those who have so flagrantly abused it.

Now on to the debate:

Question 1 (to Herman Cain): When Standard & Poor's downgraded American credit, they noted not only the economic difficulties, but the political dysfunction. So we begin this evening with the question: What would you do specifically to end the paralysis in Washington?

The political dysfunction has nothing to do with paralysis in Washington. Quite the contrary, it has to do with the wrong things succeeding in passing. Political dysfunction starts with power-hungry politicians who are too busy lining their own pockets and amassing power to bother to obey the basic law of the land, and ends with economic difficulties and downgraded credit ratings. As President, I will do the only thing I can do: use my veto pen to keep this in check. If the Congress wants to pass an illegal law that violates any aspect of the Constitution, it will have to override my veto in order to do so. There is much more the people of this country can do than that.

Each American must read the Constitution and insist, under penalty of electoral defeat and/or the exercise of Second Amendment rights, that it be followed to the letter. The people have much more control over this than any president.

Governor Perry, are you prepared -- even though you've said that you want to make Washington inconsequential -- to go to Washington and, as Ronald Reagan did, compromise on spending cuts and taxes in order to produce results?

When it comes to the Constitution, there will be no compromise from my office. If an expense or a tax is constitutional, it will be supported if it is necessary, if it is neither constitutional nor necessary, it will be vetoed. No dog-and-pony shows, no "showdowns". Either Congress sends me legal and constitutional bills for my approval, or they will be forced to override my veto, period.

Governor Romney. The paralysis there, and everybody's concerned about it. What specifically would you be prepared to do to make the country moving again on addressing its problems?

It's not gong to be enough to get the country moving again. It won't do anyone a bit of good to get the country moving in the wrong direction. By electing me, voters will be doing more to address America's problems than they have in nearly a hundred years. The only thing any president can legally do is see to the things that are outlined for him in the Constitution, and stand firm against things that violate that Constitution. The rest is up to the people.

So it's essential to deal with Democrats and be prepared to compromise on the big issues of our time?

If the Democrats (or the Republicans, for that matter) are prepared to implement the Constitution instead of stomping on it year in and year out, I'll consider "dealing with them". The problem is that the major parties and their illegal big government agendas ARE the big issues of our time. Until those issues are addressed, there would be no compromise from me. Any compromise I make will be within the boundaries set forth in the Constitution.

Governor Perry, this plan that you would like to lay out, because Governor Romney has said you have had two months to produce a plan, an economic plan, he's had a 59 point plan, what is the plan? What will you say specifically?

I have a three point plan. 1. Cut spending and work to eliminate programs the federal government should not be involved in, 2. Cut taxes and divest the federal government of the power to tax the people directly, and 3. Restore the rights of the American people and let their genius take over. There's a fourth point as well, and that is to do everything I can to put into place the means to keep the federal government out of people's business for good.

Bachmann, three years after the financial meltdown, Main Street continues to suffer. People have lost their jobs, they've lost their homes, they've lost their faith in the future. But Wall Street is thriving. The banks not only got bailed out by the government, they have made huge profits, they've paid themselves huge bonuses.

Do you think it's right that no Wall Street executives have gone to jail for the damage they did to the economy?

I'm not sure about Wall street executives not having gone to jail for the damage they did to the economy, but I would love to know whether anyone thinks it is right that no presidents, senators, or congressmen have ever gone to jail for the damage they have done to the economy, which is just as bad. Do you really expect Americans to believe that earning profits and making bonuses as rewards for keeping people employed is worse than breaking the law by not only offering bailouts, but requiring businesses to accept them whether they need or want them or not? If you are going to lock up the beneficiary of the problem, you had better make sure you are locking up the cause as well.

Speaker Gingrich, it sounds like Congresswoman Bachmann does not believe that Wall Street is to blame for the financial mess. You've said that the current protests on Wall Street are, in your words, "the natural product of Obama's class warfare."

Does this mean that these people who are out there protesting on Wall Street, across the country, have no grievance?

They are barking up the wrong tree. Gingrich is right when he says these people are the natural product of class warfare, but he acts as if Obama invented it. It goes back much further. If the whole point of Affirmative Action wasn't to get class warfare started, it sure has been its effect. These people's grievance is with the micromanagement of the economy by the federal government. Anyone with some risk capital can become a Wall Street investor, and anyone with a job an earn some risk capital.

What does that tell you about the protesters? It tells you that many of them probably don't have a legitimate gripe with Wall Street at all. There are some protesters making good points, but there are many out there who are just venting jealousy that some people have more money than they do. Well in all honesty, I'm not financially wealthy. My wealth lies in my heart, and I'm quite all right with that. The federal government could satisfy the legitimate protesters there by simply reinstating the gold standard, which would also go a long way in stabilizing the economy. Of course, that would divest them of a significant amount of power, so don't expect to see it happen under any Democrat or Republican administration.

GINGRICH:The fact is, in both the Bush and the Obama administrations, the fix has been in. And I think it's perfectly reasonable for people to be angry. But let's be clear who put the fix in: The fix was put in by the federal government.

And if you want to put people in jail -- I want to second what Michele said -- you ought to start with Barney Frank and Chris Dodd and let's look at the politicians who created the environment, the politicians who profited from the environment, and the politicians who put this country in trouble.

ROSE: Clearly you're not saying they should go to jail?

If Charlie Rose is talking about putting Wall Street executives and investors in jail, then lock up Frank and Dodd with them. As far as politicians who profited from nutty environmentalism and who put this country in trouble, Gingrich would be wise to keep his trap shut, as his own suggestion would result in his incarceration.

Senator Santorum, I want to turn to jobs, because you've said that when you were growing up in a steel town in Pennsylvania, 21 percent of the country was involved in manufacturing. Now it's down to 9 percent. Can those jobs ever return? And what would you do to create jobs now?

Cutting taxes and divesting Washington of the power to tax directly would force states to tax responsibly, as the states with responsible, fair, and consistent tax codes will recover, and any that are oppressive will not. States with oppressive tax codes will face the wrath of their people, and either replace those tax codes with ones that are responsible, fair, and consistent, or be forced out of office. That's the way it's supposed to be. As far as jobs returning is concerned, it depends on the market for those goods and services. If there is a market for those jobs, there will be people to fill them. If there isn't, then there won't. There isn't anything a president can do directly to create jobs. The Constitution doesn't allow that sort of government meddling in people's lives, for good or for bad.

Governor Huntsman. From the Erie Canal to the Internet, innovation is what has always fueled economic recoveries. So shouldn't the focus now not be on trying to create the innovative jobs of tomorrow? And what do you think those are?

I'm running for President of the United States, not of Microsoft. The innovative jobs of tomorrow are not going to arrive until the government stops fueling economic disaster. What those jobs may be is not my concern as President of the United States. What is my concern is whether something the government is doing may be getting in the way of a successful economy, and doing what I can to put a stop to anything that is. Governments are at best evil, and therefore cannot and should not be relied upon to do good things. The important thing is to get the government to stop trying to fix the economy, and let the people, who are good, take care of that. Those wealthy studs on Wall Street could wind up with some competition when that happens.

Speaker Gingrich, Medicare is going broke. Consider the fact that half of all Medicare spending is done in the last two years of life, and research that has been done right here at Dartmouth by "The Dartmouth Atlas" would suggest that much of this money is going to treatments and interventions that do nothing to prolong life or to improve it. In fact, some of it does the opposite.

Do you consider this wasteful spending? And, if so, should the government do anything about it?

What the government should do is get out of the business of deciding whether treatments are "wasteful spending". The fact that the government wouldn't know the difference between wasteful spending and non-wasteful spending isn't even the issue. The issue is the blatant illegality of the government getting involved in people's personal health decisions in the first place. There is no provision in the Constitution that allows for a program like Medicare to be instituted by the federal government. If a given state has a constitutional provision allowing it, then let them take it on. Otherwise, it needs to go away and be replaced with something paid for directly by those who use it.

Getting rid of Medicare is likely going to be a three-step process. The first step would be to transfer Medicaid authority to states with legal provisions for it. The remainder of the states would follow a two-step process by which people over a certain age would continue on the program if they so chose, while people under a certain age would be able to seek private sector options. This makes sense, and unlike Medicare, it's legal.

Congresswoman Bachmann, of course no one wants the government to come between a doctor and a patient. But do you think that Americans are getting the most for their money in Medicare spending? And how can we make sure that the money that is being spent is being spent on the treatments and the preventive treatments that do the most?

No. To make sure, see my previous answer. Put it all back into the hands of the people who pay for it directly and get the federal government out of it.

I want to talk about advisers and appointees. Tell me, Governor Huntsman, whose advice do you seek on economic issues? And who -- what's the profile of the kind of person you'd like to have advising you in your White House?

Art Laffer was probably the most effective economic advisor to any president. The kind of person I would like to have advising me as President would be someone like James Madison. Thankfully, he published some of the best advice available during his lifetime, and we should all heed it.

So what we have today, Charlie, we've got a professional governing class of people on one end and then you've got private- sector people on the other.

ROSE: And so what would you do about that to change that, to attract those kind of people so that they would be willing to serve a cross-section of people from every gender...

There's nothing I can do. That is entirely up to the people of the United States of America. If private sector people want private sector people to serve, they will simply have to demand it under penalty of losing their vote. Nearly 100% of the American people voted in the last election for candidates they wouldn't support for dog catcher. If you want your party to stop offering you John McCain or Barack Obama, it is imperative that you stop voting for John McCain or Barack Obama. There really isn't anything more to it than that.

When you mention a flat tax, does that mean that you look with some favor upon 9-9-9 that Herman Cain mentioned at the beginning of this conversation?

I only support a flat tax if by flat tax you mean every citizen is taxed at the same rate. I would also be ok with having a standard level that was untaxable. However, the better plan is the one that takes the power of direct taxation away from those who have abused it for so long. My plan does exactly that.

[Whom] do you turn to for political advice and for economic advice?

Our Founding Fathers. Jefferson, Madison, Adams, Washington. Can't go wrong with them.

What would you do differently than what President Bush, Henry Paulson, and Ben Bernanke did in 2008?

I would implement a fair and responsible budget and get started in paying off some debt. It's important that we see that the cause of those crises is out of control borrowing and debt. Our best defense against having it happen here is to reverse our own similar trend.

Would you get the federal government out of housing? Yes?

Yes.

No Freddie -- no Freddie Mac, no Fannie Mae, nothing?

Exactly. They were all started in violation of the law anyway.

RONALD REAGAN, 40TH PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The single most important question facing us tonight is, do we reduce deficits and interest rates by raising revenue from those who are not now paying their fair share? Or do we accept a bigger budget deficits, higher interest rates, and higher unemployment simply because we disagree on certain features of a legislative package which offers hope for millions of Americans at home, on the farm, and in the workplace?

Do you agree with the former president?

In 1980, I might have. Today, the single most important question facing us is whether we want to re-orient ourselves back onto the path set forth by our Founding Fathers, or just scrap the whole thing and become another future failed socialist country. The reason for America's success over the last two hundred-plus years has nothing to do with what the government did, it's what the government did not do. Look at history and you will see America's biggest failures occurring at places and times when the government stepped in and did something it should not have. I don't even have to get into specifics. We all have seen it in our own lives.

And if, in fact, they can't find an agreement, you are going to have a trigger with automatic cuts, including defense.

So doesn't that demand some kind of compromise, as Reagan suggested?

No. It demands standing firm on the things that make legal and economical sense. What good is it if they agree on something that's bad for the country and her Constitution?

... some mix of revenues and cuts or these draconian automatic spending cuts that would include defense, which of those two, if that is the choice, would you prefer?

First of all, taxes must be cut to increase revenues, accompanied by spending cuts, especially in areas where the law does not allow the federal government to be involved.

right now, the president has a jobs bill.

That bill is the perfect example of something bad for America that should be stood hard and firm against. If Congress were to pass that bill and send it to my desk, they had better have the votes to override my veto if they want it to become law.

The American people want to see growth and jobs, and they believe that the right way to do it is by cutting back on the scale of government, and they're right.

ROSE: Without any increase in revenue?

Charlie, when you say "increase in revenue", you are talking about tax increases. Tax increases do not increase revenue. Check the books. Presidents Kennedy, Reagan, and Bush all instituted tax cuts that resulted in increased revenues. Increases in the deficit were the result of spending more than the increase in collected revenues, which is yet more reason the government should be cut back to its bare minimum.

It imposes a 9 percent business flat tax, a 9 percent personal flat tax, and a 9 percent national sales tax.

See my earlier comments.

A competitive agenda of yours would be what?

Getting the government out of the business of trying to micromanage the economy would have the greatest effect.

So which Federal Reserve chairman over the last 40 years do you think has been most successful and might serve as a model for that appointment

The Federal Reserve is a joke. As such, there is more reason to consider shutting it down than who would serve as a model for an appointment there. Bozo the Clown could do as well as anyone else there for all it's worth.

Businesses like mine have great difficulty obtaining credit. What specifically would you do to make bank lending more accessible to small businesses?

Nothing. It's not part of the job I seek. You would probably be better off starting your business without borrowing money. Borrowing money is a recipe for economic disaster on all levels.

taxpayers stand to lose half a billion dollars in the collapse of Solyndra, which is a solar energy firm that was a centerpiece of the Obama green jobs initiative. Do you think there were inadequate safeguards there, or do you think this is just the risk we run when the government gets involved in subsidizing new industries and technologies?

It's the risk you run when you refuse to play by the rules. The government isn't legally allowed to do that.

is the American dream of owning a home no longer a realistic dream, and is it too easy in America?

If the government gets out of the way, the sky is the limit.

If the payroll tax cut is not extended, that would mean a tax increase for all Americans. What would be the consequences of that?

Ditch the payroll tax altogether too.

Is this acceptable (high poverty rates)? And what would you do to close that gap?

No, but it is not the place of government to intervene. What I would do is get the government out of the business of trying to deal with a problem that it is neither properly equipped to deal with, nor legally authorized to.

I want to talk for a moment, as a last impression, a sense of what it is about you that you want to say here and let the American people know about you and your sense of recognizing their own pain, as well as their hope?

I have never experienced wealth. This economy hit me hard. That is their pain too. I also believe that the return to the Founders' plan is the answer. That is America's only hope, and Americans relate to that as well. I am not a politician. I run my campaign from a dingy basement in New Jersey. I don't spend money on commercials or attack ads. I am who I am, and if the people want someone who will stand firmly in favor of the Constitution and the men who created it, they will vote for me. If they don't, then the America they get is the America they get. They have no one to blame but themselves if their hopes are destroyed by the continuation of these big government shenanigans.

Very tedious, but I am pretty sure I got the job done.

Comments are welcome.

RWR

Questions Please

2011-10-07T15:13:00.002-05:00

It's time to open the floor for questions. As I have promised to keep my personal matters out of my presidency and govern exclusively by the US Constitution, it will not be necessary to ask me anything personal. All questions should relevant to that end.

Here we go!

RWR

The Campaign Begins

2011-10-05T15:20:00.006-05:00

OK folks. Here's the deal:

No one running for President is really any good.

Furthermore, Republicans are so obsessed with beating Obama, they've completely abandoned the concept of implementing a successful, constitutional, and beneficial agenda. Want proof? Watch the way they've all been fawning over Chris Christie wanting him to run. Chris Christie as President would be little better than Obama in the White House - pretty much what you got with George Bush. Are we REALLY missing Mr. Bush so much that we would want him back again? Christie is Bush and Al Gore combined. In fact, you could probably get both Bush and Gore into one of his suits! Just a little humor there, Mr. Governor!

Don't get me wrong. Chris hasn't done a bad job here in New Jersey. We've long needed someone to stand up to big unions here and he's done that. Still, the economic tailspin continues. That means there's still too much government in Trenton - and it's NOT because there's so much governor!

Today, I am announcing my candidacy for President of the United States. I seek the Republican nomination, but am willing to run under the Federalist banner as well. It's time Americans got the Constitutional government they have always deserved.

I plan to run a very different kid of campaign. I have no plans to travel all over the country shaking hands and kissing babies. I just can't afford it - and neither can the taxpayers or the people I intend to represent. I will not run ads on television or radio. I will not be encouraging people to give up their precious time with their families or at their jobs to campaign for me. Those who believe in Federalism will surely be willing to spread the word on their own terms, as it is truly the only hope for America.

I will not be attending debates or visiting with foreign leaders. These people have nothing to do with America's true needs, and their opinions mean nothing beyond whether they will cooperate with us. I don't have to travel to their capitals to get those answers. If they want to see me face to face, I am more than willing to visit with them on our soil and at their expense.

I will acquire transcripts of the major parties' debates and answer ALL of the relevant questions here on my blog. I will answer questions honestly regarding other candidates instead of demonizing them in an effort to improve my chances of winning.

If elected, I will implement the Federalist Platform to the best of my ability. I know that I will likely face a hostile Congress and Supreme Court, but in situations involving differences, I will force them to override my veto. My personal opinions on matters will be subservient to the will of the Founding Fathers and their Constitution.

A major tenet of Federalist philosophy is the dismantling of illegal government programs. These will be dismantled in reverse order (meaning newest first). The newest programs would be the easiest to eliminate, since older programs and those using them would be entrenched more deeply. Each program would be released to the authority of the states, where final decisions regarding their fate would be made.

A further tenet of modern Federalist philosophy is the elimination of federal debt. In order to accomplish maximum debt reduction, tax codes must be adjusted so as to maximize revenues instead of to punish success. Initially, taxes would be cut to 1984 levels until the tax code set forth here on my blog could be finalized. This would increase revenues and provide funds necessary for paying down the debt. It should be anticipated that it would take approximately two years to implement the new tax code.

While a robust and state-of-the-art military is essential to American security, our presence overseas is neither needed nor wanted by many we seek to protect there. Therefore, those nations desiring our help will be asked to pay for it. If they don't want our help, they can simply choose not to pay the bill. If they cannot afford it, they will need to dismantle some socialism and cut some taxes to raise the money. Our nation's interests would be much better served with our soldiers guarding our own borders and fighting those who have chosen to fight us. Military action taken during my term will be taken with the purpose of defeating the enemy and coming home. Should a new enemy surface as a result of our departure, we will destroy that enemy as well - and come home. Forward bases overseas would be kept only as needed and only for purposes of protecting US citizens and those who pay for the protection.

It will not be enough to simply have a Federalist president. Americans will need to read the Federalist Platform and elect people who agree to implement it. We will need officials who are not only friendly to our beliefs, but who are willing to stand up for them.

I thank you for your time. God Bless America!

RWR

Ol' BC ... Prophet

2011-09-28T20:36:00.003-05:00

Dateline January 21, 2011:

I posted a piece just to celebrate that the Phillies had brought back the amazing Clifton Phifer Lee, pitcher extraordinaire.

Fast forward to now:

He's had an amazing season, having been named Pitcher of the Month TWICE in the same season. Were it not for a tough July, Cliff's ERA could be below 1. I sure hope Reuben Amaro enjoyed the shit pie Cliff fed him every five days this season. He even hit two home runs, even calling the one he hit at Dodger Stadium in Los Angeles. Cliff Lee is truly one of the finest to ever take the mound.

But the real news this season in this amazing guy's achievements is a comment from Ol' BC on that very post this past January:

The Phillies just won their 100th game.

As I write tonight, the Phillies are down a run in the 8th. They have won 101 games, tying the franchise record set twice in the 70s. Not only did Cliff Lee contribute to a 100-win season, but get this:

CLIFF LEE WAS THE STARTER AND THE WINNING PITCHER MONDAY WHEN THE PHILLIES RECORDED THEIR 100TH WIN.

That's right. Ol' BC not only predicted a 100 win season for the Phillies, but also backed into predicting the winning pitcher.

I'm definitely looking forward to the postseason. It's going to be a lot of fun.

I attended three minor league games this season, and my teams were 1-1 with a rainout. If, like me, you love the game but money is tight, I highly recommend the minor league experience. Whether you go to an independent league or a franchise, you can't beat the value. At our local ballpark (Camden, NJ), parking is 5 bucks and the most expensive seat in the house is $13. Food and drinks are also fair.

As for the political scene, I'm just hanging out and observing the foolishness. I shake my head every day not only at the Democrat stupidity of the day, but also at the Republican stupid response to it. It's not looking good for 2012, folks. Get ready to be stuck with another liberal loser to vote for.

Then just bend over ... here it comes again.

GO PHILS!

RWR

Hurricane Irene

2011-08-29T09:58:00.003-05:00

OK, so the plan to destroy the world with a giant hurricane has failed again. Hell, I couldn't even knock out my own power with this one. Only got some water in my basement.

I even tried to point to storm at New England to try to take out the libs in Massachusetts and Connecticut to no avail. We couldn't even bring about significant damage to New York City. Guys, if we are going to do this, we really have to work harder.

So ...

Let's make sure the next storm really works. Get bigger SUVs and run them more often so that we can make the air dirty and destroy more ozone and cause bigger hurricanes. Make sure you get as much as possible in the way of tax cuts so that the destruction is greater and more widespread.

Seriously, we're really starting to look like wimps here. Where the hell is George Bush when you need him? The kind of hurricane he caused in New Orleans with his tax cuts is what we really need to do to destroy the planet.

Let's get it on!

RWR

Thoughts for Today ...

2011-08-26T08:36:00.008-05:00

I've been quiet through some pretty important shit of late, none of which I have any really good excuses for. It's not like business has been particularly booming (though I can't say it's been particularly dead either). Anyway, here are some thoughts to get everyone caught up.

1. Jim Thome

Congratulations to Big Jim on his 600th home run. I saw it live, though I missed #599 in his previous at-bat. That's right. Jim Thome hit home runs 599 and 600 consecutively. That's big right there. Where I come from, Jim Thome will always be a Philadelphia Phillie, even though everyone knows his heart is in Cleveland. On that same note, congratulations to Jim on his having the opportunity to go back to Cleveland. It is my sincere hope that Jim's homecoming is a pleasant one, and that the Indians' season is everything they want it to be with Jim (except winning the World Series this year, which ain't gonna happen). Jim is one of the very best people the game has ever seen, and with his place in Cooperstown already sealed up, it's only fair that he get to play out his last years in the game where it all started out. Good going, Jim. We'll see you in the World Series.

GO PHILS!

2. The Earthquake

Yes. I did indeed feel the earthquake. Somewhere around 2PM on Tuesday afternoon, I was at my parents' house after a drive with my daughter at the wheel, sitting in a comfy chair. It was very strange. At first it felt like I was riding a wave in a boat, then it was more of a shaking sensation. All I could do was look around trying to figure out what was happening, when my mother asked what was happening. I just responded, "It's like the whole house is shaking." We deduced that there must have been a small earthquake, as there is a fault line here in New Jersey. The neighbor called just as my daughter was explaining what she had experienced in the living room. We put on the news and got the story. Cell phone service was out, and no one was answering the phone at home, so we headed out (this time I did the driving). All seemed fine here in southern New Jersey, so we began making efforts to contact people we knew closer to the epicenter. Everyone is fine, and the big question around here has become, "Did you feel the earthquake?"

I can definitely say I did. For the first time in my life, this week I experienced an earthquake.

3. The Debt Limit

Well what did you think was going to happen? Did you really believe the Republicans were going to get anywhere with this? They are part of the problem (the other part being the Democrats). If you keep doing what you've always done, you will keep getting what you've always got. Unless the GOP brass decides to make significant changes that they won't make due to having to divest themselves of power, there's just no way holding the nose and voting Republican is going to stop the Left any more than voting Democrat will.

'Nuff said.

4. Irene

It's been a very long time since I've experienced a real hurricane. By the time shit like that gets to my neck of the woods, it's a severely weakened tropical storm that isn't threatening a whole lot. Shows scheduled for the weekend have been rescheduled already, and preparations are being made for the possibility of being hit head-on with a Category 2. Not what you get in Florida by any measure, but definitely more than we're used to around here. This just isn't the "major natural disaster" neck of the woods. Our biggest natural fear around here is the Nor'easter, which pales in comparison to anything like a mid-western twister or a Category 5 hurricane or a California earthquake. With a Nor'easter, you get a shitload of rain or snow dumped on you in a short period of time. Short-term pain in the ass, but very little serious long-term damage like you see with the others. Think Blizzard of '96.

5. Freder Frederson

Six years. Still no sign of Freder. Phht.

6. Cliff Lee

Not the best July ever, but Cliff Lee is showing everyone why trading him after the 2009 season may have been a bad idea. The prize was great, to be sure, but boy are we ever seeing now what the cost may have been with regard to the 2010 season. I correctly predicted that would be the case, and right about now, Reuben Amaro is seeing why. Not only is Cliff Lee pitching his ass off and making Roy Halladay look like a little leaguer, but he's making contributions with the bat that make Chase Utley look like batting practice. OK, so those may be exaggerations to some degree, but it is undeniable that Cliff Lee is currently the best all-around player taking the mound anywhere in Major League Baseball (Wilson Valdez notwithstanding hahaha). At rehearsal the other night, the scuttlebutt was all about how trading him in the first place was a mistake. That's right. The job Cliff is doing has made many Philly baseball fans forget Roy Halladay's incredible historic achievements last season! I'm not going to jump on that bandwagon per se. I knew trading Cliff was a mistake the day it happened, but come on folks. The prize is still in town. The Four Aces rotation is tearing up the scene just like everyone thought it would, and with the callup of Vance Worley due to Blanton's injury, it might was well be the Five Aces rotation. That kid is kicking some serious ass!

Anyway, thanks a million times to Cliff for coming back. My season is made - World Championship or not. I'm already gearing up to possibly be the one who paints his number 3433 on the wall in his honor at Citizens Bank Park.

I'll be powering down completely here for the storm sometime later tonight, and most likely won't be on blog again until after Irene passes. Comments are welcome as always.

RWR

Afterthought: I'd love suggestions on how to improve the platform for 2012. Drop them here in the comments please! - RWR

Great Euphemism for You Know Who

2011-08-22T20:03:00.004-05:00

I was sputtering about the blogosphere tonight and came across this post by my blog-father, Emperor Misha, in which he dropped a euphemism I hadn't seen for the Impostor-in-Chief. I loved it so much, it sparked some memories of others I had seen, including one or two we've seen or used here. So for a start, here are some of them:

"Obambi"
"The One"
"Oh-BLAH-Ma"
"Yo-mama"
"Barack the Schlock"
"Pogo Boy" (inside joke ...)
"Chairman Zero"
"Stuttering Clusterfuck of a Miserable Failure" (Emperor Misha)

Now for the fun part. If you remember one or more that's not here, or want to go ahead and add to the list, drop it in the comment area. I'm down for a few good laughs!

RWR

RWR Federal Tax Plan

2011-07-27T18:52:00.001-05:00

The liberals in Washington will never do this, because it would require they relinquish control of taxation completely. Any plan that removes power from Washington, DC and places it in the hands of the States and the People is fine by me.

Check THIS out, and see what your Congressman or Senator thinks about it:

First of all, SCRAP THE CURRENT FEDERAL INCOME TAX CODE ALTOGETHER. Its purpose is obviously not to bring in revenue for purposes of paying for the federal government. If it were, there would be no deficits or national debt. The purpose of the current federal income tax is to control the behavior of the people. Every tax break or loophole is meant to encourage people to do something, and every new tax is meant to discourage people from doing something. Just look at who gets the breaks and the higher taxes for proof.

Here's how you get the politicians in Washington, DC to stop trying to control people AND force fiscal responsibility on both the federal government and the several States:

1. The federal government must put forth a balanced budget. Every dime paid must be collected in taxes. No deficits or overspending of any kind allowed.

2. Based on the figures from the most recent census, each state pays a percentage of the amount of the federal budget based exclusively upon its percentage of the population. For example, Alabama has 1.53 percent of the population. That state would therefore be responsible for 1.53 percent of the total federal budget. Texas has 8.04 percent of the total population. Texas would therefore pay 8.04 percent of the tax.

3. Each state decides on its own exactly how to come up with the money. If New Jersey wants to have a special tax on imported crude oil for purposes of paying its share of the federal tax, then so be it. If California wants to tax fruit, then so be it. If Massachusetts wants to simply incorporate the additional tax into its income tax, then so be it. Each State would have its own opportunity to design its own collection method based on its own economic strengths. What works for a rancher in Oklahoma may not work for a pineapple farmer in Hawaii.

4. Any surplus must be refunded to the states in the same proportion as it was collected, or applied to existing debt, if applicable.

5. All existing debt must be paid off within five years of implementation.

Of course, in the words of a great musician friend of mine, "They won't do that. It sounds too much like right".

RWR

Cross-posted at The Second American Revolution.

New Thoughts on Herman Cain

2011-07-21T22:57:00.015-05:00

I'm not sure where the reminder came from, but somehow I remembered that Herman Cain had written a piece correctly lambasting American Socialism as "gutless", and that I had covered it here. I ran a little search of the blog, and sure enough, I found it, though the link to his article is better found here. Five and a half years ago, we actually had some good insight into the thinking of Herman Cain. I reread his article, and found the following points useful in election-time decision-making:

Regarding what he regards as "gutless socialism":

* Congressional liberals lack the guts to tell the public their true intentions.
* Enactment of the Sixteenth Amendment
* The Socialist Security system
* Automatic withholding of taxes
* Liberals in state legislatures are attacking capitalism through overt assaults on our free-market system
* Executives have been called to Congress to justify their companies’ profits
* The use of rhetoric that attempts to disguise their socialistic ideology

Regarding his thoughts on solutions:

National security is and must remain our top national priority. But replacing the income tax code, restructuring Social Security, restraining government spending and increasing economic literacy among the public must also be top priorities to end the march toward socialism.

Sounds good to me.

On the negative side, Cain does seem to have some excess love for big business. That's what makes him a Republican, of course. The question is whether he is more of a loyal Republican or more of a Federalist Tea-partier (as he is being portrayed). He certainly does have the proper appeal of a man who has not been corrupted by the system. That has both advantages and disadvantages, of course. The obvious disadvantage is the lack of any sort of voting record to go on, forcing us to go exclusively by his words and associations. The obvious advantage is that he has no experience with doing the wrong things or caving to liberal threats. He hasn't been tested in this area yet, but those who have are failing dismally. Time to try something different. The question remains whether Herman Cain (or any other Republican or Democrat) is the answer.

This leaves us with very little to go on save for things he has written (peruse this stuff for a pretty extensive look into his mind) and positions outlined on his campaign site. Here are some points from the latter:

On National Security

The primary duty of the President of the United States is to protect our people. In fact, it is the principal duty of a limited federal government. They must ensure that our military and all of our security agencies are strong and capable.

This is a good position, and his other words on the subject are just as strong.

On Government Spending

Though it might not be politically popular to modernize and eliminate some of our entitlement programs, responsible leaders should be willing to do it all the same. They must be prepared to make tough choices and learn to simply say "no." This can only happen when our elected officials stop being politicians and start being leaders. Simply put: there is no “Department of Happy” in Washington, D.C.

Not bad here, but he could and should go further.

On Illegal Aliens

We must secure our borders, enforce our laws and promote the existing path to citizenship. Protecting our nation’s sovereignty should be a paramount concern of those elected to lead us, not an afterthought or a reaction once the problem becomes even worse. Further, taking a stand on the issue does not mean one lacks compassion, but instead, that one respects the rule of law and the importance of not becoming a lawless nation.

Very strong, indeed.

On Energy

Subsidies on agricultural products, like ethanol-producing corn, have become a mechanism for the government to pick and choose industries it favors, while doing little to enhance our ability to harness real alternative energy resources. Instead, we must allow all forms of energy the ability to develop in a free market system.

Alternative energy sources, such as wind, solar, nuclear and hydroelectric are certainly part of the solution long term, but private industry must take the lead for true innovation to be a bigger part of our future energy needs. If alternative energy sources are found to be inexpensive, safe and plentiful, then American consumers will choose to purchase them. Let the markets decide which forms of energy fuel our cars, heat our homes and which ones will keep America working.

In an earlier set of thoughts on Mr. Cain, I mentioned that he was likely to have some government involvement in whatever alternative to the status quo he would support. If this campaign site is to be believed, this may not be the case. These words are very refreshing if he means them.

On the Economy

Currently, the federal government taxes too much and too often. Meaningful tax reform should be implemented immediately to alleviate that suffocating tax burden placed on businesses and individuals in America. This means across-the-board tax cuts to provide long-term relief, including reducing the capital gains tax, suspending taxes on repatriated profits and permanently eliminating the death tax.

This falls WAY short of what he said in the "Gutless Socialism" piece, and though it's a step in the right direction, this in no way goes far enough. I do wonder what Mr. Cain would think of the idea of a tax paid by the states on behalf of the people, as I have often suggested (not on blog - maybe a post sometime soon), based upon suggestions in the New Federalist Platform found at reagan2020.org.

On Health Care

The majority of Americans agree: it's time to repeal and replace Obamacare with patient-centered, free market reforms. It's time to institute legitimate tort reforms that let doctors practice medicine without fear of frivolous lawsuits. Loser pay laws would be a great start! That is, require those who lose frivolous lawsuits to pay the legal expenses of those found not guilty. Additionally, loosening the restrictions on Health Savings Accounts would help to empower Americans to save and invest their own money to expand their options for health care.

Or just get the government out of the health care business altogether. Again, while Cain is offering a move in the right direction, he again falls short of what could and should be done.

On Entitlements

The federal government has imposed expensive and often counter-productive social and welfare programs on the states and the people. It is time to admit the mistakes, and get the federal government out of the way. This will allow states, cities, churches, charities and businesses to offer a helping hand instead of a handout where they live. People closest to the problems are the best ones to solve the problems effectively.

Yup. These programs, like Oblahmacare, also happen to be ILLEGAL. It would be nice to see someone who swears he is "crazy about the Constitution" actually bring this important fact to the fore. What Cain wants to do here is excellent, but he leaves out one of the most important and persuasive reasons for doing it.

On Regulation

Eliminating the burdens of cumbersome federal regulations would provide an immediate boost for our weakened economy. It would signal to businesses and investors that the federal government intends to get out of the business of over regulating. Where regulations are required the states will do their job. Consumers and investors do not need nanny-state federal regulations to save them from themselves.

These regulations also happen to be illegal, and he should drive that point home. "The states will do their job" - THAT is what Federalism is all about!

On Education

A critical component of improving education in our country is to decentralize the federal government's control over it. Children are best served when the teachers, parents and principals are making the day-to-day decisions, coupled with the leadership of local municipalities, school boards and states. What might work for a third grader in Oklahoma might not work for a third grader in Hawaii.

The federal government had no business getting involved in the first place. Again, federal education programs are ILLEGAL. Yet again, Cain fails to make this important point when putting forth a good idea.

On Faith

Our Founding Fathers recognized a higher power in the formation of this nation when they said in the Declaration of Independence that all men are created equal and that they are “endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights.”

'Nuff said.

In reviewing the stuff I showed here, it's easy to want to jump on the Herman Cain bandwagon. His status with me has improved considerably, but I will want to read more of his work and scrutinize it more closely before making that call. Remember that people who aspire to high office are quickly and easily corrupted. Choosing a candidate is serious business, especially with what can and should be an automatic win for conservatives this time around. If the Republicans continue to pass over conservatives as they have been doing of late in White House elections, we may be looking unnecessarily at four more years of Oblahma. Get conservatives with a backbone throughout Washington, DC, and America actually has a chance.

Is Herman Cain conservative enough to be considered a Federalist? That is up to those who believe and vote according to that platform. Just make sure you do the legwork. Four more years of Oblahma (or a liberal Republican), and we may be looking at an armed rebellion.

RWR

Backbone for the GOP?

2011-07-19T11:04:00.003-05:00

Maybe.

Still, not really an opportunity to develop any level of trust for these guys, but if they are able to successfully implement any sort of "Cut, Cap, and Balance", it will be a great thing.

The problem with this is that it's most likely all a bunch of grandstanding. The Republicans are out there doing this because they know it is not only the right thing to do, but that Americans are voting in favor of this stuff in droves (and rightly so). With Oblahma screaming out that he will veto it, it positions them perfectly for the presidential election in 2012.

Think about it and consider history - especially recent history. If Oblahma vetoes this bill and there aren't enough votes to override (which you can be sure there won't be), the economy (and Oblahma) will be so far in the tank by Election Day 2012 there won't be an option to re-elect Oblahma. The Republicans take the White House, and then go on their own spending spree.

Should the bill survive the veto, the Republicans can take credit for the improved economy that will result, easily take the White House (reminding everyone of Oblahma's veto), and then go on their own spending spree. After all, there will be plenty of money with the improved economy.

Don't get me wrong. I applaud the Republicans for doing this (though God knows what illegal bullshit is buried deep inside this thing). At a minimum, it's a positive change in character (at least the visible side) for the GOP. Holding firm on the debt limit will also be key. Only time will tell if it represents an actual move to the right. Their candidate for POTUS will be a very telling choice.

RWR

Note: I'm taking a closer look at Herman Cain. Currently thinking the Republicans could do far worse. More on that when I get some time.

Independence Day 2011

2011-07-04T11:11:00.003-05:00

Today we humbly honor the sacrifices made by our Founding Fathers so that we could be free of big intrusive governments.

If only people would do the same today ...

Let the fireworks begin!

RWR

Trying to Have it Both Ways

2011-06-29T23:22:00.001-05:00

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. (non-)President Barack Obama called on Wednesday for new steps to spur job growth and tax hikes on the rich, hardening a stance that will likely complicate deficit reduction talks with Republicans.

If there were ever proof this moron has no clue whatsoever, this would be it.

This clown wants to spur "job growth" and "tax hikes on the rich", two things that simply do not happen together.

Mr. Obama, I will give you the answer in simple terms. "The rich", as you call them, create jobs. They do it with expendable income. The more they have, the more jobs they can create. The more you confiscate from them in taxes, the less expendable income they have, thus stifling job growth.

You can't have it both ways.

What a fucking moron.

RWR

TIME Magazine's Factual Falsehoods

2011-06-28T21:28:00.005-05:00

I was pretty pissed when I got to reading the TIME article about the Constitution. I put it down.

Luckily, someone had the patience to read it and brought forth thirteen factual errors and the kind of proof that we are known for here. Thank you Aaron Worthing.

He had originally tried to show everything that was wrong with the piece, but let's face it - if it came from TIME, you'd be at it for years. Here are the thirteen factual errors posted by Worthing:

1. The Constitution does not limit the Federal Government.
2. The Constitution is not law.
3. The Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment emancipated the slaves.
4. The Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment granted the right to vote to African Americans.
5. The original Constitution declared that black people were to be counted as three-fifths of a person.
6. That the original, unamended Constitution prohibited women from voting.
7. Inter arma enim silent leges translates as “in time of war, the Constitution is silent.”
8. The War Powers Act allows the president to unilaterally wage war for sixty days.
9. We have only declared war five times.
10. Alexander Hamilton wanted a king for America.
11. Social Security is a debt within the meaning of Section Four of the Fourteenth Amendment.
12. Naturalization depends on your birth.
13. The Obamacare mandate is a tax.

He gets pretty thorough in his explanations. Complete citations and everything.

I brought up the TIME article, and found a bunch of "hard to say" thoughts, all with incredibly flimsy support. Check this out:

People on the right and left constantly ask what the framers would say about some event that is happening today. What would the framers say about whether the drones over Libya constitute a violation of Article I, Section 8, which gives Congress the power to declare war? Well, since George Washington didn't even dream that man could fly, much less use a global-positioning satellite to aim a missile, it's hard to say what he would think. What would the framers say about whether a tax on people who did not buy health insurance is an abuse of Congress's authority under the commerce clause? Well, since James Madison did not know what health insurance was and doctors back then still used leeches, it's difficult to know what he would say. And what would Thomas Jefferson, a man who owned slaves and is believed to have fathered children with at least one of them, think about a half-white, half-black American President born in Hawaii (a state that did not exist)? Again, hard to say.

I'll take them one at a "time".

What would the framers say about whether the drones over Libya constitute a violation of Article I, Section 8, which gives Congress the power to declare war? Well, since George Washington didn't even dream that man could fly, much less use a global-positioning satellite to aim a missile, it's hard to say what he would think.

George Washington may not have had much knowledge of future ballistic and weapons science, but he sure did know a lot about what justifies military action. I will concede that it is hard to say what Washington would think, but the reason given is a HUGE crock of bullshit. Washington was no proponent of military force, but raised a militia to put down a major rebellion in Western Pennsylvania with no declaration of war from Congress. He did have an opinion from a Supreme Court Justice declaring Western Pennsylvania in rebellion. He therefore did not act alone, but also did not act in accordance with any requirement that Congress declare war. Furthermore, this was a domestic military action, which Washington would clearly have thought to be less acceptable than military action abroad. Drones over Libya is a military action. The fact that US soldiers are not put at risk when drones are used, coupled with the fact that Islamic terrorists were just as big a problem then as they are now, would make the action much less problematic to Washington. He would clearly see the need, even in his day, to keep terrorists at bay. If terrorism were given as the justification, Washington would likely support it. If the justification were "humanitarian", I doubt he would.

What would the framers say about whether a tax on people who did not buy health insurance is an abuse of Congress's authority under the commerce clause? Well, since James Madison did not know what health insurance was and doctors back then still used leeches, it's difficult to know what he would say.

First of all, what has been proposed and illegally passed in Congress is NOT A TAX. It is a PENALTY; it is a FINE. Madison knew Congress's inability to levy such fines (or taxes for that matter, if you concede that point, which I do not). He wrote the Constitution, after all. If you want to know Madison's position, simply ask the question in general terms: What would the framers say about the government requiring people to purchase expensive items or services under penalty of a fine (or additional tax)? What would Madison say NOW? The question has as much to do with health insurance as the previous one has to do with modern military technology. Just as Washington's answer can be arrived at by simply asking the question in more general terms, Madison's answer comes just as easily. James Madison would NOT have approved.

Jefferson, a man who owned slaves and is believed to have fathered children with at least one of them, think about a half-white, half-black American President born in Hawaii (a state that did not exist)? Again, hard to say.

Jefferson is on record more than once as wishing for an end to slavery. For his part, he signed legislation passed by Congress at his request ending the slave trade. Jefferson's answer would clearly be one of indifference. If a natural born citizen who happened to be bi- or multi-racial became President of the United States, then so be it. After all, if he fathered any of those children (and DNA evidence eliminates all but one), I am sure he would be quite proud to attend his inauguration. Again, the answer is deceptive. Jefferson freed five slaves in his will. Unfortunately, his estate had some debt that required the sale of the rest of his slaves at that point. Hawaii is a state. Jefferson was no fool (unlike the author of the TIME article). He would gladly have approved of a biracial President born in a state he didn't know. He would NOT have approved of Barack Obama, for reasons we have shown here already. Obama is NOT a natural born citizen, and Jefferson would DEFINITELY have supported the Vattel definition. The whole concept of rights as enumerated by Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence, even as edited by the Continental Congress, is derived from Vattel's expression of natural law.

Richard Stengel is either trying to deceive Americans into believing the Founders and the Constitution are things they are not, or he's an idiot. I'm banking on the former. I can't believe anyone would be so stupid (or believe anyone to be so stupid) as to believe a thing he's written given what he wrote in the paragraph cited.

In either case, he's a fucking loser with a job that should have gone to someone else. Kudos to Aaron for putting him in his place.

RWR

Chavez Dying

2011-06-28T16:37:00.005-05:00

... evidently due to GOVERNMENT HEALTHCARE.

In this story at NetRight Daily, it's revealed that the "healthcare system" in Venezuela isn't good enough to treat Chavez's condition, so he's been taken to Cuba, where things aren't any better.

Talk about desperate ... and so SWEETLY FUCKING IRONIC!

This quote from the end of the piece sums it up quite nicely:

But in Venezuela, Hugo Chavez would have received mediocre care, and made the gamble that he would be better off in an undisclosed Cuban hospital, where he apparently is still receiving mediocre care. Single payer health systems are bad, and Hugo Chavez is now experiencing this first hand.

So sweetly fucking ironic ...

RWR

RWR Mobile

2011-06-17T22:53:00.004-05:00

Just taking a moment to announce that RightWingRocker.com is now available in a mobile version.

If your phone has Internet, you can now read through the mobile version. I'm also pretty sure there's a link for the web version if that's what you prefer. The mobile version does not support the third party comment system I use.

RWR

Vattel and the Founders

2011-06-16T21:14:00.004-05:00

You get a lot of bullshit in the blogosphere from people who swear the Founders couldn't possibly have meant that Vattel's definition of the tern "natural born citizen" should apply to the President of the United States. These people are simply ignorant of the overwhelming evidence that they meant just that.

Of course, there are no less than four Supreme Court rulings supporting Vattel. You would think, from what you hear out there, that the court had never ruled at all.

I Took The Red Pill Comments frequently at MichelleMalkin.com. On his blog, he shows more than ample evidence that the Founding Fathers would have supported Vattel.

In his post, he links this post documenting the Founders' direct connection to Vattel via quotes.

Again, people this well-versed in Vattel would clearly have known his definition. People this well-versed in Vattel would have definitely expressly defined the term for us had they not meant Vattel's definition. People quoting Vattel at every turn as a major authority on natural and international law would, without ANY doubt, have assumed his definition would prevail.

An objective and reasonable reader could come to no other conclusion.

RWR

Testing 123

2011-06-14T00:09:00.001-05:00

Testing the blogger application for android...

RWR

A Fitting Tribute to Both George and Sparky

2011-06-01T13:39:00.006-05:00

Steve Henson, writing for ThePostGame.com, wrote an amazing piece about George Anderson, whom most of us know as "Sparky". In it we learn that Sparky was laid to rest long before George was, and why. We also get an amazing look at both men, and how one so masterfully mastered the other.

Sparky Anderson
Baseball Legend

George Anderson
Just a Great Family Man
1934-2010

And so may George rest in peace knowing he was able to balance two lives that for most who live them are impossible to balance.

RWR

RWR at HuffPo

2011-05-20T11:57:00.007-05:00

Today I took a run by the Huffington Post. I usually don't go by there because I have too much work to do showing those who call themselves conservative what the word really must mean. Who has time to correct liberals on the matter, especially when they can't even figure out who or what constitutes the "radical right"? If you ask them, George Bush and Sarah Palin are radical right-wing extremists. Just imagine what happened in their puny little hearts and brains when they got a load of me ...

MUAHAHAHAHA

Never mind the post itself. The comment I start with is classic, and my response brought forth a moron who took the bait. Hook. Line. Sinker.

lvbrun

For Republican candidates running for President to have any chance of winning the primary they have to abide by 3 core principals:

1) Back the Ryan plan as the only option to solving our debt crisis
2) Back all initiatives that take rights away from women, minorities, unions
3) Oppose anything and everything that President supports

The radical extremist that now own the Republican party will stand for nothing less.

Talk about misled and foolish ...

RightWingRocker

I wish radical extremists owned the Republican Party..

1. Ryan is a wimp who doesn't even come close to addressing the problem.
2. No one, not even radicals such as myself, advocates initiatives that take rights away from women, minorities, or unions. We do advocate revoking their current unfair advantages, though.
3. If Mr. Obama does something I support, I stand by it. I gave him kudos for getting bin Laden, for example. I gave him the same for finally showing his birth certificate, and downplayed what has now been shown as demonstrable proof that the one he did show is a forgery (after all, why would he present a phony birth certificate that did not prove his eligibility?). The problem is that he does very little worth supporting.

It's a sad day in America when the very principles that made her the greatest nation in the history of the world are looked upon as "radical" and "extremist".

All we are asking for is the implementation of the Constitution's proper separation of powers and the Bill of Rights.

Socialism and its offshoots only do harm to those they seek to help. Look at history for proof. It's no mistake that at the federal level in this country, they are by their very nature illegal.

RWR
www.rightwingrocker.com

Game, set, and match, of course. Still there are those who are gluttons for punishment.

exhale09

How do you feel about Fascism and [oligarchies] and our Constitutional Rights and Freedoms?

Think they do any harm?

Anyone who's been to this blog knows I've already crushed these sorry-ass excuses for arguments.

RightWingRocker

To quote myself:

"Socialism and its offshoots only do harm to those they seek to help."

You need to read before you comment.

Thanks!

RWR
www.rightwingrocker.com

I had answered the question before it had been asked ... geez.

exhale09

I read your comment.

All ideologies when taken to the extreme do harm in my opinion. [Hence] my comment about the fascist/oligarchy the fanatical right is directing our country towards.

Many of us Americans believe that Social Concerns have to be "balanced" with Business Capitalism for a Healthy Democratic Process in our nation to continue, for the Equal opportunity benefit of ALL our people. Our Government is the mechanism that keeps that balance by following ALL the Principles and Laws of our Constitution.

When Political Parties begin to push things towards either idealogy, in "extreme" directions is when we are in danger.

The radical right wing Conservatives are pushing us HARD towards an oligarchy.
[Whom] do you think fascism or an Oligarchy and it's "off shoots" will "harm"?

There are millions of families in our country who can not find employment, because there are NO jobs to be found, for example. The have NO income from a job to live on, and feed their families on. They WANT to work. They LOVE their families and WANT to support them.

Food Stamps, school lunches for poor children, unemployment compensation are all considered "Social" programs by the right and the right is taking away those Social programs which are the only thing these families have during this economic and unemployment crisis.

Tell me, do you think if you ask those families if those Social safety net off shoots helping them EAT, are HARMING them, they will agree with you?

Sage, get me my cluebat ...

RightWingRocker

... [Hence] my comment about the fascist/oligarchy the fanatical right is directing our country towards. ...

The fanatical right is doing nothing of the sort. The fanatical right is trying (and sadly not doing very well) to REVERSE the fascism, oligarchy, socialism, etc. that are ALREADY FIRMLY IN PLACE. I have never once had the opportunity in my voting lifetime (going back to 1985) to vote for a conservative Republican for POTUS. They are all leftwing nutbags like the Democrats.

... Many of us Americans believe that Social Concerns have to be "balanced" with Business Capitalism for a Healthy Democratic Process in our nation to continue, for the Equal opportunity benefit of ALL our people. Our Government is the mechanism that keeps that balance by following ALL the Principles and Laws of our Constitution. ...

If the government followed all of the principles and laws in the Constitution, it wouldn't be involved in any of the things you mentioned. To say otherwise is to have either never read the Constitution or to desire to pervert it beyond its design.

... [Whom] do you think fascism or an Oligarchy and it's "off shoots" will "harm"? ...

Because they are in essence, effect, and intent the same thing. (Fixed this answer later - RWR)

... There are millions of families in our country who can not find employment, because there are NO jobs to be found, for example. The have NO income from a job to live on, and feed their families on. They WANT to work. They LOVE their families and WANT to support them. ...

So let them MAKE a job for themselves and EARN an income for their families. You won't get any sympathy from me on this one. I AM one of those people, and when I couldn't find a job, I simply MADE one for myself. THAT is what AMERICANS do.

... Food Stamps, school lunches for poor children, unemployment compensation are all considered "Social" programs by the right and the right is taking away those Social programs which are the only thing these families have during this economic and unemployment crisis. ...

These are all good things when provided by individual citizens and organizations that provide them voluntarily. The point is that the federal government (for very good reason) doesn't have the authority to try to provide them, and all you have to do is look at the current situation to see why.

... Tell me, do you think if you ask those families if those Social safety net off shoots helping them EAT, are HARMING them, they will agree with you? ...

Doesn't matter if they agree with me. Those safety net offshoots take away every incentive these people have to deal with these problems the right way - on their own - and deprives them of the very soul that could be their salvation. Have you so little faith in the human spirit?

The natural state of humans is to be free. These things only make them slaves. Slavery is not good for anyone, especially the slave who lives in slavery with his own consent. We fought a civil war to end it. Yes. It harms them, whether they know it or not, and whether they agree with me or not. In the words of my good friend The Old Sage, "A man is none the less a slave because he gets to choose a new master every four years."

RWR
www.rightwingrocker.com

Haven't had a response. In reviewing all of this (and admiring my prowess at blasting the bleeding heart argument out of the water yet again), I noticed that I had misread one of the questions; so I posted a correction so that all would make sense (if anything makes sense to these losers).

... Who do you think fascism or an Oligarchy and it's "off shoots" will "harm"? ...

Because they are in essence, effect, and intent the same thing.

Misread the question. Here is the corrected answer:

These things are, as I stated, the same thing at root. They hurt you. They hurt me. They hurt the very people they pretend to help. The only ones that see any benefit are those pulling the strings. Today, they have names like Obama, Ryan, Pelosi, Reid, McCain, and Boehner.

None of them is truly acting in your best interests or mine, much less the American people. They could and should be tried and convicted of treason for their blatant disregard for the Constitution.

Woe to you and all who have fallen for their tricks.

RWR
www.rightwingrocker.com

I honestly don't get how the principles that the Founders stood on are so "radical" after over 200 years. What is radical is the left-wing bullshit that has been foisted upon the United States over the last hundred or so. Those leaving sicko comments like those left by "exhale" have no business calling ANYONE radical, especially the very Republicans who are doing their masters' bidding. Maybe this person needs to exhale. Been inhaling too much of the Kool-aid.

As for me, call me radical if you like. Just know that in doing so you are calling the likes of Washington, Jefferson, and Madison the same. I'm not standing for anything they wouldn't have if they were standing here today.

RWR

Hawk Gets it Right

2011-05-16T21:51:00.003-05:00

Regarding enviro-nubag big government bullshit, Hawk posted this today, quoting an Australian scientist who dared tell some truth about "global warming".

He said something very profound, though in his conclusion:

It takes a lot more courage and integrity to step off the gravy train and tell the truth, even if you're going to be attacked for it.

Given Hawk's penchant for being a cheerleader for the Republican Party, I wonder if he really believes that.

RWR

Jindal Ineligible

2011-05-09T09:16:00.004-05:00

Per this Yahoo article posted Saturday regarding Bobby Jindal's recently published birth certificate:

Jindal was born in the United States to Indian immigrant parents who held green cards at the time.

Jindal is therefore ineligible to hold the office of President of the United States. A green card does not a citizen make!

RWR

KABOOM! - Osama bin Laden

2011-05-02T16:25:00.003-05:00

OK well better late than never.

By following the very military policy of the Bush Administration that he swore he would change and didn't, Barack Obama was able to bring about the death of Osama bin Laden.

Unfortunately, it didn't happen soon enough. The Saudis didn't want the body (go figure), and the US plans to bury him at sea. I have a better idea.

What say we get the willing relatives of the victims of 9/11 together for a little corpse-kicking party? They could kick his worthless flesh around for a few hours - hopefully enough to loosen it up a bit - then take it to the Bronx Zoo and let some hungry animals have a feast. Just throw whatever is left in the trash where it belongs.

Bin Laden was only a figurehead at the time of his death. Less relevant than the rats that most likely infested his hideout. Sadly, he is merely the last in a centuries-old battle between radical Islam and the peaceful people of the world. Presidents as far back as Jefferson have had to face their savagery. Someone else will come along, and we will have to kill him as well.

Probably Ahmagaynutjob. I'd gladly put a bullet between his eyes.

Congratulations are in order for Mr. Obama, for swallowing some pride and recognizing that where war is concerned, Mr. Bush had a lot more going for him. For his willingness to adopt Mr. Bush's bin Laden policy and for allowing General Patreus to mastermind the plan, he deserves kudos.

As for bin Laden, may he never find peace. There is a special place in Hell for hateful human debris such as that.

Lights out motherfucker!

RWR

Interesting Analysis

2011-04-29T01:43:00.004-05:00

I got a look at this tonight. I'll just put it up here and let you make your own call.

Feel free to comment.

RWR

More Comments on the Birth Certificate

2011-04-28T15:11:00.003-05:00

Liberals and semi-conservatives all over the blogosphere are now abuzz with different "stuff" about Mr. Obama's birth certificate. We are getting a lot of it, too:

* Great. He showed his birth certificate. Since it says he was born in Hawaii, we can now put this issue to rest.
* The serial number is later than those of two twins known to be born after him. The certificate is therefore fake.
* His father's race was shown as "African", which is not a race and would not have appeared on such a document. The certificate is therefore fake.
* Since the birth certificate shows that his father was born in Kenya, it proves hat he is not eligible to hold office.

All of these are very interesting indeed. I will address each directly.

1. Obama was born in Hawaii. We can put the issue to rest.

With regard to "putting the issue to rest" because Obama is now documented to have been born in Hawaii, I will reiterate that while a person's place of birth does make him a native born citizen, it in no way makes him a natural born citizen as the Founders would have defined it. No less than four Supreme Court rulings on the matter, including a case adjudicated by a Founder, support the position that in addition to being born on US soil, one must also be born to citizen parents in order to be considered natural born. For reasons that will be explained later, Obama is not off the hook simply for having shown this birth certificate.

2. The serial number of the birth certificate proves it to be fake.

I'm not buying into this simply because I have no idea (and I doubt those taking this position do either) how the certificates were ordered or expected to be ordered for processing. It may or may not have been mandatory that these certificates be issued in the order of the births they document. In fact, it is highly unlikely that there would have been any mandate with regard to order of issuance. Consider what would have happened in that scenario if a birth took place on a busy night and in the rush an emergency took place that would have taken priority over knowing the order of births. Having a mandate on certificate order would cause unnecessary issues within the hospital and the state. These kinds of busy nights are rare enough, but I have personally been in the labor and delivery ward in the midst of such a rush (at the birth of muy oldest daughter). If hospital employees had to be concerned with the order in which the births were reported, I couldn't even imagine how they would have gotten it all sorted out. In fact, there may very well have been a safety issue due to having to divert staff for the express purpose of keeping the birth order straight instead of attending to the births. I doubt anything with regard to the serial number has any merit.

3. His father's race is shown as "African". The document is fake.

Count on Sage to pick up on this. I would want to see another 1961 certificate from this hospital to verify it. I thought there was something strange about that being there too, but I couldn't put my finger on it. Of course, this brings us to the bottom line of why America wanted to see this document in the first place: SO THAT EACH AND EVERY ONE OF US COULD INSPECT IT AND COME TO OUR OWN CONCLUSIONS. This is what America is all about.

4. Since his father was born in Kenya, it proves Obama's ineligibility.

It proves no such thing in and of itself. However, when combined with other circumstantial evidence (or lack thereof), it does just that. This document does not show the citizenship of the father. The fact that the senior Obama was born in Kenya doesn't alone prove Obama's ineligibility at all. If Mr. Obama could produce legitimate documentation that his father had become naturalized as a US citizen prior to his birth, then he would clearly be eligible, having been born on US soil to American parents. However, given that it wasn't very long before he senior Obama moved back to Kenya and worked there as a socialist activist (and I believe he even held office there), it's quite doubtful he would have done so, only to repatriate again as a Kenyan. If it cannot be shown that the seinor Obama was naturalized (and it doesn't look like he was), then and THAT point, we can say he is ineligible. The senior Obama's birthplace only mandates that next step be taken.

It's a shame that there are Americans who are look at this document and say that it's time to put the issue to rest. It's further a shame that people would call it fake and cite bogus reasons for doing so. Let's face it, the fact that it came from Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. is reason enough to distrust it. Sage's point is very interesting, and I would love to get more information there, but for the time being, there is more than enough information in it to go to the next step, prove ineligibility, and remove this piece of socialist horse shit from the White House.

Let's get it on!

RWR

That wasn't so hard now, was it?

2011-04-27T14:02:00.006-05:00

The Interloper-in-Chief today released his birth certificate. I will start by awarding him Kudos for that.

Barack H. Obama's Birth Certificate

Now the real debate begins. Do we apply the definition of natural born citizen that the Founders intended, or do we move forward with some pissant bullshit some irrelevant fool came up with defining natural born and native born as the same thing?

I have for a long time (and not secretively) posited that Mr. Obama was most likely born in Hawaii. Today, we have proof of that. Fine. But look at the birthplace of his father - KENYA. That means that in order to prove Mr. Obama's natural born citizenship, We the People must now see the documentation that shows that the senior Obama was naturalized as a US citizen prior to August 4, 1961. It is kind of sickening to hear and/or see people saying that the Supreme Court has never ruled on the definition of natural born citizen, when clearly it has. Not only that, but it made such rulings during the presidency of James Madison himself.

Of course, the LA Times, instead of reporting the news, twisted it (full disclosure - I noticed this was a blog after writing this post, so the word "twist" may be a tad unfair).

Obama said he knows the release will not put this issue six-feet under for some birther diehards, who probably haven't a clue where their own is. With a sigh, the Democrat from Chicago says he doesn't know why this issue just won't go away. Thank goodness, this fellow is patient with his people.

For starters, I will attest today that I am NOT one of Barack Obama's "people". As far as I'm concerned, legitimately in office or not, he can go fuck himself. The things he has proposed or attempted to foist upon the American people are nothing short of shameful, and Americans who cast ballots in his favor should be ashamed of themselves. As for my own original birth certificate, it is on file at the hospital where I was born or in Trenton's records, so I know where mine is, or at least how to go about getting it in a timely fashion. Thank you very much.

That being said, we now know why Mr. Obama didn't present this when the courts demanded it (no word yet on the other documents that were subpoenaed). He clearly wanted to delay the debate long enough to do some damage to the American way of life before having to answer for this. It's quite a bit late now to remove Mr. Obama from office much before January 2013, so he will at least get his entire first term in.

So we now know that Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii (assuming the certificate is genuine, and I see no reason to believe it isn't at this point). Now Americans need to decide whether they want to change the law so that a man born of a foreign national can serve in the White House. They also will want to look at naturalization laws as they existed in 1961. It is possible that Mrs. Obama may have been too young to confer US citizenship upon her son anyway (the law may have required her to be at least 19). British law at the time also would have claimed young Barack as a British subject. Lots to go over, and if you haven't gotten serious about it, the time is now.

Being born in Hawaii isn't enough in itself, and has never been. You can thank us here for pointing that out all along.

Again, the real debate begins now. Decision time, America. Is the Constitution good enough, or isn't it?

RWR

Malkin Exposes Trump

2011-04-23T21:45:00.002-05:00

Happy Easter all!

Great post by Michelle Malkin exposing Donald Trump's SERIOUS Fourth Amendment issues.

Read it.

RWR

Budget CutsThat Will Work

2011-04-21T20:14:00.003-05:00

I did some math today, and decided that the best way to balance the budget would be to give Congress and the White House real motivation to do so. Check this out ...

* Every Member of the House and Senate is paid a salary of $174,000 per year.
* Every Majority/Minority Leader is paid an additional $38,800 in addition to his/her salary.
* The Speaker of the House gets an additional $49,500 in addition to his/her salary.
* The President gets a salary of $400,000 per year, plus a $50,000 expense account.
* The Vice President gets a salary of $230,700 per year.
* Every member of the President's cabinet is paid a salary of $199,700 per year.
* Every living past President is paid a pension of $599,100 per year.

This totals $97,492,400 per year, and does not include any money paid to Congressional staff members or other employees of the federal government who work directly with the above.

It seems to me that the nearly $100 million these clowns are making would be better spent on debt reduction. Furthermore, failure to properly balance the federal budget and eliminate the federal debt should have financial consequences. So what say none of these people gets paid a dime until the debt is paid off? Seems to me if you took away this $100 million and put it towards the debt, they'd find a way to balance the budget (including paying off the debt) in a big hurry.

RWR

Elect THIS Guy

2011-04-14T18:35:00.002-05:00

So I've been on here shooting down every so-called "conservative" with aspirations for the White House. From Paul Ryan to Rick Santorum to Michelle Bachmann, none of them are strong enough Constitutionalists for the job. Sorry LOTE voters, but it's a cold hard truth. Eventually, someone appropriate for the job has to be found. There is a good place to start, if people are willing to get on the guy's case and get him to do it.

It would be kind of tedious to get an issue-by-issue analysis of this man's positions, but so far there isn't much else in the way of choices for POTUS in 2012. Time to get him to run.

Judge Andrew Napolitano
Get him to run.

Check out this Wiki. You will like it. Undeniably Constitutionalist.

Time to put the pressure on. What do you say, your honor?

RWR

Santorum for President?

2011-04-14T18:22:00.003-05:00

OK so Rick Santorum wants to be President ...

Rick Santorum
Yet Another POUTS Wannabe

This guy's been hailed as a Tea Party guy, which I guess is all right (for him), but just like most Republicans, analysis of his record tells a much different story.

Comes in around 67%.

That means you're better off with Bachmann or Ryan.

In other words, get me my barf bag. If the RepubliClowns want conservative votes, they will have to do a lot better than this.

RWR

Big Brother Strikes Again in Chicago

2011-04-11T15:07:00.001-05:00

This is just stupid.

If I had more time, I'd tear this shit up.

What a fucking joke.

RWR

I was Invited!

2011-04-07T12:57:00.003-05:00

I was invited today to be a contributor at Blogcritics.com.

Sent samples and was approved.

It seems, however, that I will not be contributing. The email I got back from them stipulated the following:

Once you've submitted your article and saved into PENDING, the editors receive an alert which tells our editorial team that there are pending articles in the queue. From there, we will either edit and publish your story, or if there need to be further revisions, then the story will be placed back in DRAFT and you will be sent an email with revision instructions. Only AFTER you receive the automated email stating your story has been PUBLISHED can you post the article on your own blog.

Haha yeah right. My work will be subject to someone else's revision? Fuck that. I am by far the best proofreader in the Rightosphere, and I would wind up correcting the editors. And who the fuck do they think they are telling me I have to wait for them to publish first before publishing here? What a load of crap.

I am the lead blogger at TSAR and TAFP blogs. I do edit for grammar and spelling, but that's mostly to cover Sage's occasional run-ons. I do NOT stipulate where my fellow bloggers can post their work or when. It's THEIR WORK, after all.

So I responded as follows:

"Only AFTER you receive the automated email stating your story has been PUBLISHED can you post the article on your own blog."

No thanks.

My work gets published where and when I choose, and is not subject to anyone else's approval or revision.

If you have a problem with this, please remove my application immediately.

RWR
www.rightwingrocker.com

If they want my work, they get it on my terms, period.

RWR

Oblahama Seeks Second Term

2011-04-04T21:41:00.002-05:00

The Schlock is running for a second term.

I nominate Sage to oppose him ... or maybe OreoThunder.

Hell, even Alfred E. Neuman would be an improvement, as long as the usual gang of Republican idiots could be kept at bay.

RWR

Doug Powers: Send the Libs to Mars

2011-03-23T14:35:00.004-05:00

Doug Powers is awesome!

Today he notes the words of nutbag dictator Hugo Chavez:

CARACAS (Reuters) – Capitalism may be to blame for the lack of life on the planet Mars, Venezuela's socialist President Hugo Chavez said on Tuesday.

"I have always said, heard, that it would not be strange that there had been civilization on Mars, but maybe capitalism arrived there, imperialism arrived and finished off the planet," Chavez said in speech to mark World Water Day.

"Careful! Here on planet Earth where hundreds of years ago or less there were great forests, now there are deserts. Where there were rivers, there are deserts," Chavez said, sipping from a glass of water.

(as quoted by Powers. Here is the link to the actual.)

The best part is What powers says at the end of his post:

Maybe Hugo should take Sean Penn (and) all the rest of his friends and go to the planet that capitalism failed to establish a Marxist utopia. The journey itself would be worth watching. Have you ever seen how a parrot responds to weightlessness? It's hilarious.

Before you jump up today and say HELL YEAH!, take a moment and see who arrived at the station first ...

Then jump up and give Doug the HELL YEAH he deserves!

RWR

Gingrich Wants to be President

2011-03-20T20:00:00.004-05:00

Newt Gingrich
Pretend Conservative
and POTUS Wannabe

America's greatness lies in "We the People."

So says Newt Gingrich. Remember him? Yeah THAT Newt Gingrich, who sat on the park bench with Nancy Pelosi endorsing government participation in the now well-documented environmental crisis hoax.

We are a nation like no other. To remain so will require the dedicated participation of every citizen, of every neighborhood, of every background. This is the responsibility of a free people.

Yeah well even a busted clock is right twice a day. Does anyone really believe that Mr. Gingrich is gonna give a flying fuck about the participation of the free people once he takes office, which I pray today will NEVER happen?

We are excited about exploring whether there is sufficient support for my potential candidacy for President of this exceptional country.

How about NO.

Given this asshole's track record of promise one thing and deliver something different (Don't forget 1994), I think it's imperative that America send a very clear message to Mr. Gingrich:

DON'T BOTHER

RWR

Palin and Paul: Republican Frontrunners?

2011-03-17T09:38:00.003-05:00

According to WorldNetDaily, Sarah Palin and Ron Paul are tied for frontrunner status in the 2012 election. Eleven percent each. The MSM's presumed frontrunner, Mike Huckabee, came in last with two percent.

I'm not going to Fisk the entire article, but here are a few highlights and thoughts ...

Palin labeled [Mr.] Obama "The $4-Per-Gallon President," taking the commander in chief to task for allowing gasoline prices to surge.

"His war on domestic oil and gas exploration and production has caused us pain at the pump, endangered our already sluggish economic recovery, and threatened our national security," Palin said. "Energy is the building block of our economy. The president is purposely weakening that building block and weakening our country."

While Sarah Palin is nowhere near the best candidate for the job, saying stuff like this will make her look great to Americans. After all, everything she says here is spot-on. Unfortunately for those same Americans, Palin's "solution" to this problem probably isn't much better than Obama's. Great sound byte. Lousy end result.

Rep. Allen West of Florida, and former Godfather Pizza CEO Herman Cain each collected 10 percent.

In his WND column this week, Cain sounded like a presidential candidate, stating, "After a jam-packed week of nearly 20 speaking and listening events in Texas, Iowa and New Hampshire, I hear a consistent message from people. They are so concerned about the lack of leadership in the White House and Congress that they are now scared for our future."

He said, "People are also sick of this budget nonsense going on in Washington," and concluded that citizens "are viewed as sheeple. The sheeple are starving for leadership. As a man named John put it during an in-home New Hampshire event last week, November 2012 will be the 'end of an error.'"

Isn't it great how we get to hear who "sounds like" a presidential candidate? Palin with her $4-a gallon President line and Cain with "The end of an error"? Great stuff, isn't it? Neat to hear, but what about substance? Herman Cain has already been proven phony here, and Palin's not considered a winning choice either.

Tied for eighth place with 5 percent each are New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie – who has claimed he could defeat Obama in 2012 but has no interest in running – and billionaire developer Donald Trump, who recently slammed the Obama White House for ignoring his offer to build a $100 million ballroom at no cost to taxpayers.

Trump? Please.

As for Christie, he has done a surprisingly good job here in New Jersey with regard to standing up to unions and a hostile press, which would be quite refreshing in DC. Still, he's no conservative, and nowhere near conservative enough to do what needs to be done there.

This election, like the last, should be an easy win for the Republicans. In fact, it should be easier now that Americans know what Barack Obama is all about (even though Americans know very little about his past). They would have to run Mickey Mouse or Bozo the Clown for President of the United States to give Obama the win. Sadly, from the looks of this poll, just like in the last election, it appears that is exactly what they will do. If Sarah Palin and Ron Paul are the best that party has to offer, I won't be going back any day soon.

RWR

Jackson: Obama - The "Affirmative Action President"

2011-03-15T12:55:00.003-05:00

I have a good mind to run Kevin Jackson for POTUS.

He's got smarts, guts, and most of all an understanding of what's what.

He takes no bullshit and puts the truth right on the line.

Based on what I know today, this man should be the Tea Party candidate.

Check out his post from a couple weeks ago: Affirmative Action for Obama.

Or his post from today in which he chronicles the story of a baby Canadian rescued from Canada's model for Obamacare by none other than the non-Obamacare US medical system.

I think we need to look closer at this guy and if he passes muster, the campaign must commence IMMEDIATELY!

RWR

Bachmann Throws Down the Gauntlet

2011-03-12T13:22:00.005-05:00

Michelle Bachmann
Natural Born Citizen
(and willing to prove it)

Palin wannabe or not.

Lousy speaker or not.

If Michelle Bachmann runs for President of the United States, she will present her birth certificate in the first debate to prove her eligibility.

I'll tell you one thing, if I was ever to run for president of the United States, I think the first thing I would do in the first debate is offer my birth certificate so we can get that off the table.

We will all know first hand that we are dealing with a constitutionally eligible candidate in Michelle Bachmann.

Does that make her the best for the job? No. Does that mean she has my vote? No.

However, it does mean that if she does in fact win the election, she holds the office legally, at least from the perspective of her status as a natural born citizen of the United States of America.

The current occupant has yet to show anything of substance.

RWR

Cross-posted at The Second American Revolution.

A Note from OreoThunder

2011-03-05T18:59:00.001-05:00

This was in my email from OreoThunder, who has no blog, but had a message to get out:

Hey! Village Idiots picketing fallen soldiers' funerals....Yeah, I'm talking to you! Do you know WHY you are allowed to do that? BECAUSE THE DEAD SOLDIER YOU ARE DISRESPECTING GAVE HIS OR HER LIFE SO YOU WOULD HAVE THE FREEDOM TO EXPRESS YOUR STUPIDITY!

Spot on.

RWR

Obama Defies Yet Another Court

2011-03-03T18:02:00.004-05:00

And it ain't a court order about his birth certificate either.

So if this guy can't be trusted to obey a court order requiring him to simply show his vault birth certificate, what exactly makes anyone think he's going to go along with any other ruling that goes against him.

Just watch though. If he gets a ruling in his favor on any issue somewhere, you had better believe HE is going to expect YOU to obey it.

The piece at the Rottie is spot-on. Read it.

Then come on back. We may have to look at Vinson as a POTUS candidate with the backbone and chutzpah he's showing here. Obama's minions have a lot of bullets they could be using against him, and may very well be looking for a way of doing so.

Gotta thank him for standing up.

RWR

Paul Jacob Has Been Reading My Mind Again

2011-02-27T01:17:00.003-05:00

Paul Jacob has at times been a reader of this blog, and seems to have an uncanny ability to read my mind.

He has a new piece up today that is an absolute must-read.

When people have been paid above fair market value for the work they do, eventually they are going to be brought to task and have to pay the piper. This is what I've been saying.

Paul Jacob says this today:

When politicians and unions negotiate wages, both sides are monopolies of sorts. And the problem with this situation, called ‘bilateral monopoly’ by economists, is that there is no obvious natural or equilibrium price for the services.

Two things:

1. Go read the whole thing; then show it to any idiots you come across who side with these union thugs.

2. I wonder what the chances are we could get Paul Jacob to run for POTUS ... probably slim to none, but we have to start somewhere ...

RWR

Paul Ryan vs. Michelle Bachmann

2011-02-22T16:44:00.007-05:00

After hearing her speech last month as the SOTU respondent from the Tea Party, I was much less than impressed with Michele Bachmann. Her speech sounded like Republican talking points, while the Republican respondent, Paul Ryan, soundly outdid Ms. Bachmann from a Tea Party (Federalist) standpoint.

I got curious yesterday because of the hard-on people at MichelleMalkin.com were getting over Bachmann and Herman Cain, whom we have already proven to be unacceptable based upon currently available information. I do have huge concerns with regard to Bachmann, based primarily upon her poor performance on SOTU night. The points she articulated were all more Republican than Federalist, while the Republican made more Federalist points than Bachmann even attempted.

But what exactly does the record show? I analyzed Bachmann yesterday, and was actually pleasantly surprised to see that she came in at about 88% on the Federalist scale. Since I expect a candidate to come in at a minimum of 85% in order to consider voting for him or her, that was actually quite refreshing (and something of a relief). I today began to wonder where Mr. Ryan would fall, given his more compelling rhetoric on SOTU night.

Admittedly, the man has some really excellent positions, not the least of which involves "requiring all laws to cite Constitutional authorization" (hmm ... where have we heard THAT before???), but that rhetoric doesn't match his record. It better matches Bachmann's. One big plus for Ryan is an expansive record that covers a wide variety of issues. There is simply no question about where he stands on any issue or what he would do in any situation. Still, as a potential Federalist/Tea Partier, though he talks the talk better than Bachmann, he only walks the walk at about 75%.

Bachmann is head and shoulders above.

I can see where we may have to revisit Michele Bachmann. A great speaker does not a great President make, but it sure helps in getting the foot in the door, even if you have to use a teleprompter ...

RWR

Doug Powers Exposes Trump

2011-02-21T11:28:00.005-05:00

Got to love Doug Powers.

He always gets it right; and when he doesn't, he at least makes you think.

Yesterday, he exposed the political foolishness known as Donald Trump, who had so-called conservatives fawning all over him at CPAC for saying what they wanted to hear.

Of course, that's just not good enough. You can't just talk the talk, you have to walk the walk. Otherwise you get twenty years of Clinton/Bush.

You go, Doug!

RWR

State Wrestling Finalist Pussies Out

2011-02-18T16:14:00.005-05:00

No joke. It was because his opponent was a girl.

... or because he knew he was toast anyway and wanted to spare himself the embarrassment.

I've seen it happen, folks. I don't care what bullshit this kid gives you, he's nothing but a pussified piece of shit as a competitor. This girl has obviously learned what to do on the mat, and is more than prepared to win or lose. Girls have been competing in high school wrestling events in that state for twenty years. He knew that when he went out for the team.

Fact happens to be (and I've seen this as well), that girls tend to be more successful with martial arts training in general than boys. This could be because fewer girls get involved, and the ones who do are more likely to be the motivated ones with aptitude (as opposed to the scratchers and hair pullers you see in urban schools). My own daughter is a decorated martial artist, and the majority of her wins (even by percentage) have been against boys - as have ALL of her submissions. Off the mat, she is as girly a girl as any other. PeanutButterPoet and PoetryBug had five black belts between them - both truly amazing women by any measure.

Make no mistake about it. The kid's statements about "a boy engaging a girl in this manner" are nothing but bullshit excuses (Penn Jilette would have a field day with this clown). The girl would have handily kicked his ass and embarrassed him, and he knew it. Much easier to just take the forfeit.

Fuckin' pussy. Don't bother enlisting.

RWR

Thoughts on Herman Cain

2011-02-01T19:28:00.008-05:00

A recent comment from a reader named "Lee" asked for my thoughts on Herman Cain, and whom I might see as a viable candidate for the White House in 2012.

I had heard of Cain. I knew he was great at dispelling myths about conservatives and Tea Party types being "racist". I even knew his name was being floated out there as a possible candidate.

Of course, given the Republicans' absolutely dismal candidates in every presidential election of my voting lifetime (this goes back to 1988), I would never expect them to put someone worth voting for on the ballot anyway. I had high hopes for W in 2000, and didn't feel like a LOTE vote would be all that bad in 2004, but alas, it was just another four-year dictatorship completely inappropriate to the way things are supposed to be in the United States.

Of course, in those days, I was much more Republican than I am today. Read some of my older posts for proof. I was inspired by President Bush's 2005 inaugural address, and stood firm against those who said he was a bad speaker. Truth be told, Mr. Bush was, in fact, a great speaker - head and shoulders above him who illegally sits in his former office today. Sadly, a great speaker does not a great President make. After twenty years of Bush/Clinton, we aren't much better off than we would have been had we allowed Jimmy Carter another four years.

So the Tea Party likes Herman Cain? Whoopie fucking do. They couldn't even find an appropriate speaker to respond to the State of the Union. Even the Republicans beat us that night.

I googled all over the Internet to find something the man stands for, and the only place there was anything at all was (not surprisingly) WorldNetDaily. That's the same WorldNetDaily that is leading the charge to force Mr. Obama to produce documentation proving he is legally eligible for office. All I could find even there was the following:

1. He's not buying the bullshit that the Tea Party is a bunch of racists.

2. He's a problem solver.

3. He's for securing the border, enforcing border and immigration laws, and simplifying the naturalization process.

4. He's for slowing the onset of OblahmaCare and repealing it in as timely a fashion as possible (and replacing it with God knows what - the link was broken).

5. He's pro-life.

6. He's for an indefinite spending cap and drastic cuts in taxation.

7. He's for "restructuring" MediScare and Socialist Security (whatever that means).

8. He's for replacing the current tax structure with a sales tax.

9. He's for a strong military.

10. He's for maximizing use of natural resources, but also advocates "pursuing renewable fuel technologies".

He says he's a Constitutionalist as well.

OK, so what does this mean from a truly Constitutionalist perspective? Simply compare his positions to the Federalist Party Platform and it will all make sense.

Let's go through them one at a time again ...

1. He is correct in his assertion that the Tea Party is not a bunch of racists. - Check.

2. He's a problem solver. - OK fine. That's all neat and peachy. So what? If your solution to a problem isn't constitutional, then you're the same scum that is currently infesting the White House.

3. On illegals and immigration ... OK. I'll take that answer. - Check.

4. Elimination of OblahmaCare. - Check, but beware the alternative. What exactly does he plan to put in its place? Don't forget that the Republicans have decided that they have a government health "solution" as well, which is just as illegal as Oblahma's. Doing away with OblahmaCare isn't enough. We need a candidate that will stop government meddling in the affairs of the people, period.

5. Pro-life. - Check.

6. A spending cap? Whoopie fucking do. You're going to vote for a candidate who will cap spending AFTER all this illegal socialism has been added? Are you fucking kidding me? Cuts in taxation, sure, but simply capping spending indefinitely isn't going to mean squat if money is still being spent illegally.

7. "Restructuring" MediScare and Socialist Security. Unless this means handing it off to the people to administer or to the States where the State Constitutions allow, it's nothing more than the usual Donk-lite. That's not a Tea Partier; that is a REPUBLICAN.

8. Sales tax? No. Sorry, Charlie. That ain't gonna cut it. Somehow America had plenty of money before the libs decided they needed an income tax. Now people want to replace that tax with a different tax on the same people. Why not just do what we did before the libs walked in and decided they needed this huge expensive government? THAT is what makes sense.

9. Strong military. - Check.

10. I would want to know what he means by "pursuing renewable fuel technologies". To me, it sounds like the same government meddling we have now, but without handcuffing those wishing to use American resources. Doesn't sound a bit like he has any desire to divest government of its "interest" in this area.

So out of seven relevant positions, he's solidly acceptable on two.

Not what I'm looking for.

Furthermore, I would be "more than just a little" concerned about a guy who says he's "crazy about the Constitution", and in the same breath would advocate unconstitutional government healthcare, unconstitutional spending, unconstitutional socialist programs, unconstitutional taxation, and unconstitutional environmentalism.

Whom do I see as a viable candidate in 2012?

For now, it's looking a lot like "none of the above".

RWR

Bachmann? I Don't Think So

2011-01-27T13:55:00.008-05:00

I was very excited to know Michelle Bachmann would be presenting the Tea Party response to the State of the Union gag show presented by the Impostor-in-Chief. Here was a popular woman with all of Sarah Palin's outward beauty, and not so much of her baggage. I was excited about the prospect of a woman other than Palin stepping up to the plate as a voice of the Tea Party. Turns out she's just another Palin putting on a gag show of her own. This was not a Tea Party response; it was a Republican response. One reference to a Balanced Budget Amendment was all she could manage in a speech supposedly responding to what could be the most unconstitutional regime this country has ever seen. Not once did she use any of the words "unconstitutional", "illegal", "constitutionality", or even "Constitution".

While making some good points from a Republican standpoint, this was nothing more than a dog and pony show put on by what Sage appropriately calls the "controlled opposition".

* Unemployment - True words, but no useful solution such as getting the government out of the business of monitoring people's work habits. Republican talking point.
* Debt - True that the debt needs to be eliminated, but no mention whatsoever of the real need to eliminate unconstitutional spending by both parties. Republican talking point.
* Bailouts and Stimulus - Stuck to the Republican line that no one wanted this. No mention at all of its illegality under the Constitution. Yet another Republican talking point.
* Bureaucracy - Made the great point that increased bureaucracy is a bad thing, but fell far short of the real point - that there is no authorization for these bureaucracies in the Constitution. Another Republican talking point.
* Obamacare - Costs too much. Yes it does, but what about its legality under the Constitution? Not a word about it. Republican talking point.

Going on will just piss me off more. Suffice to say her speech was one long Republican talking point.

If you want to vote for Republican talking points, you are free to vote Republican. For that, we don't need a Tea Party. We don't need people who will stand up for the Constitution and then turn around and cast votes for those who can't even recognize its significance in a perfectly appropriate forum.

Paul Ryan's speech, while also decidedly Republican, came much closer to being appropriate for the objectives of the Tea Party. Not only did he mention the Constitution, but he said this:

So I'd like to share with you the principles that guide us. They are anchored in the wisdom of the founders; in the spirit of the Declaration of Independence; and in the words of the American Constitution.

They have to do with the importance of limited government; and with the blessing of self-government.

We believe government's role is both vital and limited — to defend the nation from attack and provide for the common defense ... to secure our borders ... to protect innocent life ... to uphold our laws and Constitutional rights ... to ensure domestic tranquility and equal opportunity ... and to help provide a safety net for those who cannot provide for themselves.

We believe that the government has an important role to create the conditions that promote entrepreneurship, upward mobility, and individual responsibility.

We believe, as our founders did, that "the pursuit of happiness" depends upon individual liberty; and individual liberty requires limited government.

Limited government also means effective government. When government takes on too many tasks, it usually doesn't do any of them very well. It's no coincidence that trust in government is at an all-time low now that the size of government is at an all-time high.

Drop the hogwash about safety nets and and creating conditions, and you have a pretty good excerpt for a Tea Party speech. Yes, it was Republican, but it was infinitely more Tea Party than Bachmann's.

So which of these two speakers needs less help to become more federalist? I don't think it takes much to decide. The Republican speaker here was more Tea Party oriented than the Tea Party speaker.

In the meantime, let's all hope for the best for the Tea Party. Whoever picked Bachmann for the SOTU response choked big time.

RWR

Birther Update: Limbaugh Joins the Chorus

2011-01-26T16:52:00.004-05:00

WorldNetDaily has reported that last week, El Rushbo finally started asking questions about Mr. Obama's birth certificate.

Originally, Limbaugh said, the speculation about why Obama has not released his long-form birth certificate was that he wanted to "toy" with "birthers," to illustrate that they are a bunch of "loony tune, kook right-wingers."

In the meantime, he said, numerous lawsuits challenging Obama's eligibility have been thrown out, leading to the conclusion that "he was born in Hawaii, it isn't any big deal."

But now, in the wake of Abercrombie's apparent admissions, Obama supporters, he said, still cannot produce the proof.

"This is stunning to me," Limbaugh said. "(They) still can't prove it."

Of course, the birth certificate may or may not exist.

My question is why this man is occupying the White House with so many people's blessings despite it being established and admitted fact by all involved that his father was not a US citizen, thus disqualifying him as a "natural born citizen". I suppose we need the birth certificate for that, or do we?

Rush summed it up himself pretty well:

For liberals, he said, the issue is no big deal, "It's merely a presidential, constitutional requirement."

The Constitution, as far as liberals are concerned, he said, is an "impediment to them."

There is one thing I do have to say on this, though.

Whether you think of Rush as "The Truth Detector" or just another member of the "controlled opposition", you have to give the man one thing: When he starts talking about something, people start acting on it.

I've said may times before that as Americans become more and more incensed with this man's actions (and inactions), this eligibility thing would gain ground. If enough people are dissatisfied with his "work", then you may see something happen. People even may stand up for the natural born citizen clause instead of settling for a native born citizen just to get him out.

RWR

Lee: I Never Wanted to Leave in the First Place

2011-01-21T15:29:00.001-05:00

Check out Cliff's recent statements.

Proof that loyalty still exists in the game.

Thanks, Cliff, and once again, welcome home.

RWR

RightWingRocker.com is Back

2011-01-18T21:42:00.001-05:00

Got everything set up this week to reactivate RightWingRocker.com. Set up the pointer tonight. Should be active world-wide again withing 48 hours.

Thanks for your patience everyone, and enjoy!

RWR

123UpNorth on Oblahmacare

2011-01-18T21:30:00.002-05:00

Over at MichelleMalkin.com, an amazing comment was left by Canadian commenter "123upnorth" regarding Canada's "amazing" healthcare system the libs keep telling us about:

On January 18th, 2011 at 8:29 pm, 123upnorth said:

I realize the constiutional argument is strong and should be fought and won. However, I want to implore Americans to fight the battle against healthcare not only on a consitutional basis, but based upon the grounds that the quality of healthcare within a publicly-mandated system will S.U.C.K. beyond explanation, whether or not the constiution allows for it.

I live in Canada and regularly have to travel to America for healthcare. In Canada, people don't have adequate quality of health services, nor do they have access to it. For example, approximately 15% of Canadians are without proper access to a family doctor. The majority of patients, once referred to a specialist, wait anywhere from 3 to 6 months to see the specialist.

After waiting for a specialist, a patient then has to go on a waiting list to get diagnostics, then wait for a follow up appointment with the specialist, at which time the patient will be instructed as to whether other tests are needed. If surgery is scheduled after the first round of tests, the wait for this too can be extensive. Because of the extensive waiting times, patients become more sick than otherwise would be the case if they were seen faster and their chances of beating their ailments is reduced.

In the end, to go through the process of seeking help and getting full treatment, the duration can often exceed one year. And that is if everything goes well. If tests are inconclusive, if a patient needs a second opinion etc., the total duration can exceed 18 to 24 months.

Even more depressing is the fact that we don't get to choose specialists for the most part because each family doctor only works with a few specialists in each field of treatment in their geographical region. Because there is such a shortage of family doctors, you can't switch between them to get access to another group of specialists. If you receive inferior treatment from the specialist you are directed to, it is much harder to go elsewhere and get the needed referral.

Lastly, because there is no incentive for doctors and specialist to invest in better medical treatment technologies, advancements that are introduced in the 'for profit' system in America and elsewhere aren’t made available to Canadians because they don't have to be made available. Think about it, why would a public system that has a monopoly ever invest in doing things better if they are the only option for patients?

A public system is a death trap and the only players in the trap that can side-step it and get adequate treatment are members of the privelaged class that have the connections to do so. You can already see evidence of this with all the wiavers that are being granted.

Can't argue with that!

RWR

27 States Challenging Oblahmacare

2011-01-18T20:41:00.004-05:00

With over half the country living in states that are eager to end the shenanigan known as Oblahmacare, you have to wonder. Think about this:

Libtards bitch about how we on the Right want Oblahma to fail, yet when we take action which, if successful, increases his chances of success as a president, albeit by attempting to bring about the failure of one of his biggest guarantors of failure, the "Crowning Jewel of his Administration", they fight.

The losers on the Left can't have it both ways. Either Oblahmacare and other guarantors of failure fail, or Oblahma fails. Get it? Either he fails or what he advocates fails. The question they now have to ask themselves is this:

Is it the impostor-in-chief that must succeed in order for them to be happy, or his agenda? Sadly for them, the success of their agenda guarantees failure for America and for their non-President. The only way Oblahma and America succeed is if the Libtard agenda fails.

I say, let them eat cake. HAHAHAAAHA

RWR

H/T: MichelleMalkin.

Illinois Governor - WOW

2011-01-12T16:50:00.002-05:00

The Governor of Illinois has responded to problems created by high taxes by ...

RAISING TAXES TO NEW HIGH LEVELS!

What a dumbass.

RWR

Reid: Tea Party to "Disappear"

2011-01-09T13:44:00.003-05:00

This just in from Doug Powers at MichelleMalkin.com:

According to Harry Reid, the Tea Party will disappear when the economy fully recovers.

As if the Tea Party were some economic movement.

Mr. Reid, I have some news for you. The thrust of the Tea Party is two-fold:

1) The Tea Party is an ANTI-TAX movement. This means that it will exist for as long as taxes are too high, and continue beyond that for as long as you clowns in DC continue to threaten to put or keep them there. Furthermore, it is likely to continue to exist far beyond its current scope as a preventive measure.

2) The Tea Party is a PRO-CONSTITUTION movement. This means that it will exist as long as Americans allow anti-Constitution nutbags like yourself to take office. Again, it is likely to continue beyond its current scope as a preventive measure.

As the duly elected Senator from Nevada, sir, you have a responsibility to America, to Nevada, and quite frankly to the Tea Party (given its emphasis on the Constitution) to stay within the boundaries of the Constitution as you continue to enjoy the privilege of holding that office. Your track record is demonstrably dismal.

Wishful thinking, indeed. We may have internal issues, but the Tea Party is here to stay, Harry. Get used to it.

RWR

Constitution Recited on the House Floor

2011-01-06T12:57:00.004-05:00

Well, here is a huge step in the right direction for Republicans. If this is the kind of leadership we can expect from Mr. Boehner, and he can make this reading stick, I may even endorse him as a Federalist.

Should we trust the Republicans to stick to the rules that today they are reading aloud? No, but we should give credit where it is due. Regardless of the motive, and there are many reasons they would do this that are NOT honorable (such as kissing up to us Tea Party types for show), this reading of the Constitution is something that EVERY Congress should start with. It serves as a reminder to those in its seats of the boundaries that they are expected by the People to respect.

So today, for doing the right thing, hats off to Mr. Boehner and the Republicans. As for tomorrow, we shall wait and see.

RWR

Hawaii Governor Wants the Birth Certificate

2010-12-29T17:21:00.002-05:00

Thinking that somehow proving that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii will shut up those who wish to enforce the Constitution, Hawaii governor Neil Abercrombie is pushing to have Mr. Obama's birth certificate released to the public.

Here are the problems with what he is doing:

1. Hawaii law prohibits the release of a person's vault birth certificate to "anyone who doesn't have a tangible interest". Of course, it's a complete joke that a person wishing to prove that a person is legitimately running for or serving as President of the United States doesn't have a tangible interest. If Honolulu hasn't recognized that fact by now, Neil, you are going to continue to have problems getting the certificate released. After all, I can't see many situations that present a more tangible interest than that.

2. Proving that Obama was born in Hawaii doesn't prove his eligibility at all. The Constitution requires that only a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN may hold the office of President. This means that even though you may be disproving "conspiracy theories Obama was born elsewhere", you will also be proving that he is ineligible for the office by virtue of his not having two citizen parents (see Vattel, 1814 and more).

It makes no difference whatsoever where Mr. Obama was born. Natural born citizenship requires that both parents of the person in question are citizens. Mr. Obama's father was a British subject, subject to the jurisdiction of Kenya.

Bring on the birth certificate, Neil. Bring it on.

RWR

Merry Christmas

2010-12-25T09:14:00.000-05:00

To all ...

RWR

Amaro Heals the Bite Marks

2010-12-14T14:01:00.003-05:00

Cliff Lee
Welcome Home

One year ago this very week, Phillies General Manager thanked one of the finest pitchers ever to wear red pinstripes by trading him. This really pissed me off, and I made two predictions. 1. That this trade would wind up biting him in the ass, and 2. that you would see an effort to bring Cliff Lee back to Philadelphia. I will admit to falling a little short in that I believed Lee would be back before the end of the 2010 season, but he was in fact included in a trade - just not with Philly.

I have said before that I was skeptical of the trade that brought Lee to Philly. He made a believer out of me. I was also openly skeptical of the trade that sent him away, in which Roy Halladay made his way into town. Anyone remaining skeptical of that trade after the season Halladay had would have to be a complete dumbass.

Of this deal, I am NOT skeptical. Not only do we now have the Halladay-Lee combination I dreamed of a year ago, but having retained Cole Hamels, and acquiring Roy Oswalt over the course of the season and giving up neither, we can today call Reuben Amaro a genius. At least until he pulls another stupid move.

This could well be the finest starting rotation in baseball history.

Welcome home, Cliff! YOU RULE!

RWR

RightWingRocker.com Temporarily Down

2010-11-24T08:13:00.003-05:00

Got a note from one of our more avid readers yesterday saying that the blog was down. I checked, and lo and behold, the blog was up and running just fine. What was down was the DNS entry for RightWingRocker.com. Checked in with my registrar, and apparently I didn't fork over the cash for the forwarding service when I renewed.

What I've decided to do is simply wait until I renew with my registrar in February and take care of it then. I prefer that to having to pay out twice a year. Do it all at once.

In the meantime, the site is still available via search engines and links, as well as the original Blogspot address (rightwingrocker.blogspot.com), so people can get here almost as easily. This post is mainly an FYI in case anyone wants to know why they had trouble getting here in their normal fashion.

Maybe time for a post today ... Don't forget why we celebrate Thanksgiving ... anyone want to put it in the comment area before I post the link?

RWR

Gene Simmons Military Tribute

2010-11-22T01:47:00.001-05:00

This one is for the troops ...

Rock on, Gene.

RWR

Anti-Old Glory Nutjobs Strike Again

2010-11-12T19:04:00.004-05:00

At MichelleMalkin.com, Doug Powers has brought it again.

I'm not even going to comment. Doug has said it perfectly.

Now go read it and be pissed. A 13-year old kid being told to take his flag down?

Wow.

RWR

Update: Commenter Christian Soldier reminds us of Dick Lamm's 2005 speech, in which the plan to destroy America was revealed.

Healthcare in a Nutshell

2010-11-11T15:31:00.003-05:00

This came in an email today from a reader who will today remain anonymous. It puts "healthcare" into the perfect perspective:

Let me get this straight. We're going to be "gifted" with a health care plan we are forced to purchase and fined if we don't. Written by a committee whose chairman says he doesn't understand it, passed by a Congress that hasn't read it, and whose Speaker states we will pass it to see what it says, and by a congress that exempts themselves from it, to be signed by a president who also smokes, with funding administered by a treasury chief who didn't pay his taxes, to be overseen by a surgeon general who is obese, and financed by a country that's broke.

What the hell could possibly go wrong?

Of course, the most effective argument against this joke is left out - There's nothing in the Constitution that makes it legal for Congress to even pass it.

Why don't we just stick with the basics?? Gotta admit, though - this piece was the perfect illustration of WHY the Founders didn't give Congress this sort of power.

RWR

The Emperor Calls Out Reid

2010-11-10T20:10:00.003-05:00

For nothing short of voter fraud.

I've often said that nutjobs like Reid and Pelosi can't win without "stuffing the ballot box". Who could forget the gore campaign bribing bums off the street with free cigarettes to vote for that stuffed shirt ten years ago.

The problem is that while this stuff gets press, no one pursues it in the courts.

It truly doesn't matter that these extremists commit these crimes, because for all intents and purposes, what they are doing is LEGAL. Face it, if you don't enforce a law, it becomes null and void. Just look at the Arizona border for proof, where they had to make their own laws because the federal government refused to enforce theirs. For all intents and purposes, there were no laws being enforced to stop illegal aliens from crossing the border.

So you won't see Harry Reid or anyone associated with his campaign on trial for this. It's not surprising though.

Not in the least.

RWR

OreoThunder Takes It Deep

2010-11-06T21:07:00.003-05:00

Earlier this week, I posted about the Republican takeover of the House, and the role of Constitutionalism and the Tea Party in the win. I also made some important points about where to go when the Republican Party ultimately drops the ball.

OreoThunder left a comment that took nine paragraphs to say what it took the likes of Hannity and Limbaugh multiple volumes to say. Were Harry Kalas alive today, he would have had to call it just like he would have a Michael Jack Schmidt home run ... OUTAA HEERREE!!!!! Here it is in its entirety for all to savor:

We conservatives have rallied against what we see as President Barack Obama's "wealth redistribution" policies. For us, Obama's infamous meeting with Joe the Plumber, during which the future president said he wanted to "spread the wealth around," was a defining moment.

Nearly two years into Obama's presidency, the debate about government's role in redistributing wealth continues to be a central one in American politics. Too often, however, conservatives allow this debate to center around the issue of "fairness." Liberals believe it would be "fair" if the "wealthy" were taxed more in order to support government programs intended to benefit the less fortunate. Conservatives counter that no "fairness" can exist in a society where income is forcibly taken from those who have earned it, regardless of the intent.

Such a debate will never be settled. Words such as "fair" and "wealthy" defy definition, and any argument that presupposes a shared meaning is doomed from the start. The real challenge for liberals, then, is not in convincing conservatives of the true definition of "fair" or how much income makes one "wealthy." The real challenge facing liberals is a much more basic one. In order to present a truly sound argument for redistributing wealth, liberals must focus not on distribution at all. Instead, they must solve for wealth creation.

Any government with a sufficiently armed police force has the ability to redistribute wealth. There's nothing complicated about forcing an individual to give up some or even all of his or her wealth at the threat of incarceration. That's easy. The dilemma, however, lies in doing so while at the same time maintaining an environment in which those who create wealth are motivated to continue doing so.

If wealth simply appeared out of nowhere, the liberal view of "fair" distribution would certainly have merit, especially from a purely social perspective. Who could argue that a free and abundant resource should be equally shared by all? Wealth, however, does not simply appear. It is the result of ingenuity, effort and risk-taking. If we fail to make it worthwhile -- or make it unnecessarily burdensome -- for individuals and organizations to apply ingenuity, put forth effort and take risks, there no longer exists an incentive to create wealth.

Because a policy of redistribution destroys the motivation to create wealth, such a policy cannot be sustained. There is a terminal point to a policy of wealth redistribution -- the inevitable point where wealth creation simply ceases, or at least decreases to a level that cannot support the standard of living enjoyed at the policy's inception.

Liberals must solve for wealth creation. Any policy that seeks to redistribute wealth but at the same time decreases the incentive for its creation will ultimately collapse on itself. For liberal policies to work, there must exist at the same time an increasing tax burden on wealth and an increasing incentive to create wealth. This paradox is not overcome by some vague concept of "fairness." Basic economics cannot be permanently ignored.

This liberal dilemma is an example of something we see more and more in today's political environment: a clash between social ideology and economic reality. We can even go back to the 2008 economic downturn to see this dynamic at work. A social ideology (everyone should own a home) led to government-mandated lending practices that ultimately ran headlong into economic reality (not everyone can repay a home loan). The result was economic disaster.

It is an interesting irony that the very capitalism decried by liberals is responsible for the wealth they want to redistribute under their banner of "fairness." Until, however, they can adequately solve for creation -- rather than simply call for redistribution -- their arguments amount to nothing more than hollow, irrational ranting. Perhaps this is what Winston Churchill meant when he said, "If you're 20 and not liberal you have no heart, but if you're 40 and not conservative, you have no brain."

Wow.

RWR

Republicans Take the House

2010-11-03T14:13:00.002-05:00

The Republicans have won the House back from the Donks.

Big deal? Yeah, I think this time it must be said that it is. The Republicans promised us quite a bit of Constitutionalism, and they won big for it.

Here's the problem with it, though. When the Republicans fail to deliver Constitutionalism, Americans will once again demonstrate their insanity by electing Democrats to office. The Donks may or may not promise Constitutionalism, but I can guarantee you they won't deliver it.

So conservatives must approach this soberly, and continue to build the Tea Part movement as a Constitutionalist entity in this country, not one associated with any particular political party. We must be prepared to move further to the RIGHT when throwing the Republicans out the next time it becomes necessary and possible instead of allowing America to drift back into the hands of whatever socialist entity dominates the day. We must make sure it is understood that while the Republicans can easily be seen to be to the right of Democrats, it doesn't necessarily make them far enough to the right to deliver what this country needs.

That is the essence of the problem created by yesterday's election, folks. Not "gridlock" or "compromise" or the "inability to get things done", but the challenge of focusing the American people on what is right for America instead of just voting LOTE in the hopes of keeping out or getting out whichever party is perceived worse at the time.

This is where Federalists and our agenda come into play. The Tea Party embraces most of what we embrace. It will be up to all of us to do two very important things over the next two years, and in each subsequent election cycle:

1. EDUCATE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE in the ways of the Constitution, the Founding Documents, and the Founding Fathers.

2. KEEP THE FEET TO THE FIRE of those sent to Washington to implement the Constitution, the Founding Documents, and the vision of the Founding Fathers.

As John Boehner said, this is not a time for celebration. His premise about celebrating when people get back to work, however, is the wrong one. The economy will recover long before this country even begins to recover from the damage done to her Constitution over the last hundred years. When the road to that recovery begins in earnest, THEN it will be time for some celebration - not a day before. Until then, there is far too much to be done within the Federalist movement and its sister the Tea Party movement to even contemplate celebration.

Another note to everyone: Money does not win elections. Votes win elections. Money may help get the message out, but if the people know the message is bullshit, they won't vote for it unless they feel it is the lesser of two. Taking the message of Federalism and Constitutionalism to the people hasn't taken much money thus far, and yet the candidates supported by the Tea Party largely won the day. It will not take the party bosses' money to take down the parties. What it will take is the force of the electorate. Of course, the force of the electorate also has the power to get the parties and their bosses to wise up and do the right thing, at least for a time.

Now how is that for a slogan??

Federalism/Constitutionalism/The Tea Party - The Force of the Electorate.

Has a nice ring to it - if it can be made to stick. Just make sure we're all doing our homework AND the right thing.

RWR

NPR Fires Juan Williams

2010-10-24T09:35:00.002-05:00

I really haven't spent much time watching television of late. Haven't even watched a postseason baseball game from beginning to end - and that is VERY unusual. Anyone who knows me knows I am a RABID baseball fan, and when the Phillies or any of my favorite players are involved, you can bet I'm right there. Indeed, count on me to be watching Cliff Lee obliterate the Giants in Game 1 of the World Series. Indeed I did predict that the Cliff Lee trade would end up biting Reuben Amaro in the ass. A matter of perspective given Roy Halladay's undeniably amazing performance this season, but the truth is that Cliff Lee is in the World Series and the Phillies are not.

Back to the television thing. I put on O'Reilly last night to see that NPR had fired liberal commentator Juan Williams for telling the God's-honest truth. If this doesn't prove that liberals are against that which is real and true, then nothing is.

In fact, NPR is so removed from the truth and the willingness to tell it or see it told, there's not a shred of proof that their reason for firing Williams is even true. After all, he does also work for Fox News. Perhaps their jealousy towards that network's willingness to bring a man like Williams on to bring forth a more liberal opinion than their own and disperse some of the pro-liberal bias that exists in all of the media was the real reason. How dare a "good liberal" like Juan Williams contribute to a media outlet so far to the "extreme" right? He's hurting their cause!

No, folks, it's not lost on me that Fox is really a liberal outlet too, but it's the liberals who fight each other in reality, eating their own. It's like the Nazis and the Communists of the mid-20th Century. Just as liberal, but hating each other's method of liberalism to the point of complete and utter nonsense.

This is where the Tea Party has its greatest opportunity. As the libs in the media eat their own, spending their money and yours trying to obliterate each other, we Constitutionalists can stand tall and grow and build our movement high and strong. Look how little money it has taken to get to this point. More proof that it is not the money, but the votes that win elections.

OK. That's today's rambling. I'll try to get back soon!

RWR

Why Sage May Be Right About the Tea Party

2010-09-22T00:16:00.003-05:00

This in on Yahoo today ...

What's telling about this are a few things that are not too well-known about prominent "Tea Partiers". Check this out:

Start with the movement's financial backing. The Tea Party Express, a group formed by a longtime California GOP consultant, has raised more than $5 million and financed about $2 million in advertising to help candidates.

The organization was an offshoot of a political action committee created to support John McCain's Republican presidential run in 2008, and its chief strategist is Sal Russo, a Sacramento Republican operative who has worked for nearly 50 years helping run party campaigns, including those of Govs. George Deukmejian of California and George Pataki of New York.

Still loving that "Tea Party Express"??

How about this:

Tea party candidates have also received a boost from FreedomWorks, a conservative group led by former House Republican leader Richard Armey. Its political action committee, formed last April, has raised only a fraction of what the Tea Party Express has amassed in its PAC. But Armey's group has its own influential network, and it has weighed in to support tea party candidates that did not get Tea Party Express support, such as Rand Paul in Kentucky.

OK ... So they hooked up Rand Paul. Does anyone believe Dick Armey would have supported him for any reason other than political gain?

Now I don't know enough about Meckler at this point, and work keeps me from really getting down and dirty for the time being, but she's right on the money with what she says about these two organizations. Armey is a party hack, and who in his right mind would support an organization built on a foundation of supporting McShithead?

Sage is constantly hitting the Tea Party between the eyes, not because he doesn't believe in the movement or the idea or the concept, but because those who wish to lead it are frauds.

The aforementioned information should be evidence enough, and I'd be careful about trusting Meckler as well. This is, after all, a nation built on the distrust of those who wish to lead it.

It's what America is all about.

RWR

Cross-posted at The Second American Revolution.

Ahmagaynutjob: Poverty is the Fault of Capitalism

2010-09-22T00:11:00.003-05:00

Hmmm ...

So I guess all the prosperity in Iran, as compared to, say, the United States, is because the US is capitalist?

Hmm ...

The problem with the world today isn't dumbasses like Ahmadenijad, but the stupid people who believe his bullshit.

Yeah Barack. Thanks a lot for pulling out of Iraq so this clown's no longer surrounded. Real smart move ...

Phht.

RWR

Tea Party - Irrelevant as Always ...

2010-09-17T23:18:00.005-05:00

... or not.

O'Donnell wins in Delaware.

LaMontagne Wins in New Hampshire.

Here's the rundown from the primaries.

TWENTY STATES going to court against Oblahmacare.

GOP political elites are pissed.

First off, as pertains to O'Donnell and LaMontagne, I will reserve comment on what I think of their victories until I have reviewed their respective records. However, I can't see many scenarios in which O'Donnell wouldn't have been, at a minimum, a significant improvement over Castle, who makes John McCain look like, well, John McCain. Strangely, if Castle were to look in the mirror, he might see McCain himself staring back at him, so just about anyone should have been able to beat Castle in today's climate - even Bozo the Clown.

LaMontagne? Well, I would hope our favorite New Hampshirite would be willing to comment. How about it, Sage?

Twenty states going to court over the ripoff that is Obamacare? Folks, the problem with this is that this number isn't closer to fifty. Americans really need to wise up to this fraud and what he is trying to do. Wake up soon, America, or you may wake up one day in the Union of American Socialist States (UASS). If it's not obvious by now, the the stupid people Sage speaks of are winning the day.

Probably the most telling thing about the current level of success about the Tea Party, however, is that the Republican Party elites are not happy. The only reason this would be the case is that they see their grasp on power slipping away. Sadly, they probably are subscribing to the illusion that they are losing to the Democrats because of the Tea Party, when in reality it is the Tea Party to which they are losing. Soon the communists in the Democratic Party will see the effect of the Tea Party, as they will be forced to watch as their own power base dwindles away.

Face it, folks. The Tea Party is a pretty big tent. Even Sage finds the tent too big, and he may be right. But the one thing that unites ALL Tea Party activists, regardless of their other agendas, is the reverence towards the Founding Fathers and the Constitution. Returning power to those in the Tea Party movement will bring the debate back to what it should be: whether or not the Constitution and/or the Founders' intent provide for the implementation of any specific plan or issue. THAT is what America is SUPPOSED to be about, and any move in that direction must be looked at as good.

So you Republicrats and LOTE guys out there can go right ahead and call the Tea Party irrelevant all you want. Not only does the current evidence say you are probably wrong, but that fact can only be a good thing for this country. After all, the Constitution is what the Tea Party is fighting for. All a LOTE voter is fighting for is keeping the Democrat out, regardless of the similar damage the Republican would do. That's no way to run a country.

RWR

Cross-posted at The Second American Revolution.

News Flash: RWR is Still Alive

2010-09-02T22:22:00.005-05:00

The IT business is finally moving along much faster. Time for blogging is at a premium, and much time is taken up with other matters, such as sweet sixteen parties and the like.

The music business is also picking up. A nearly completely dry 2009 and an even worse first half of 2010 seem to have yielded to some pretty nice shows. Turns out the one client was pissed at his producer and couldn't be bothered pursuing work. One of the top five most recorded bands in the history of recorded music, no less!

Anyway, we're all just chugging right along. Not much in the way of news. Glenn Beck puts on a great function in DC and Sharpton, et al go out and demonize him. YAWN. Say what you want about Glenn Beck. Liberals hate him more than they hate Hannity, Limbaugh, and Coulter combined. I wonder what their reaction is going to be when Greg Gutfeld goes primetime! They're SCREWED!

So yeah. No news. Obama pulled the rest of the troops out of Iraq. Never mind the forward bases there we're going to need when we have to go in and take Tehran. No surprises there, either. No news indeed.

Liberals hate Republicans, Republicans hate Constitutionalists, and Constitutionalists just want to be left alone.

No news there, either.

So I guess the only news is that I, your humble and excellent host, am still alive and healthy - and 20 pounds lighter than I was a mere four months ago! The numbers on the scale are still falling, though slower, but without having to give up any of life's real pleasures.

The big downer? Yeah, Sage apparently came south-side and forgot to call me. Not a surprise, but I was looking forward to again shaking his hand after over three years of no in-person contact. I imagine the hair on the top of his head isn't any longer and that on the back isn't any shorter. His email updates are always enjoyable, he's still one of the best friends I have, and his comments here are always provocative. Hey Sage, are you getting the hint here? hahaha

So yeah. I'm still alive. I'm still breathing. I'm still the same asshole the libs (and now a lot of LOTE Republicans) have come to hate ... and I'm still the Patriot the Founding Fathers would have stood up and set as an example for their countrymen.

Well thank God for that last!

RWR

Malkin Hammers McShithead - Again

2010-08-17T12:47:00.002-05:00

Michelle Malkin is giving it to McCain again.

You know, if people would have just done this about three years ago, we might not be in the mess we're in now.

Or would we?

RWR

Birtherism: The Emperor Speaks Out

2010-08-09T15:16:00.002-05:00

My blog-father, Emperor Misha, is right close to 100% of the time, and this post from Friday is no exception.

If you waste millions trying to hide something, in this case an original birth certificate, even the dumbest among people (excepting leftists, of course, but they hardly count as “people” anyway) will start assuming that there’s a reason you’re doing so. A reason such as “there might be something you’re trying to hide.”

Now go read the whole thing. It's my blog-father, after all ...

RWR

Doug Powers on Viagra for Teachers

2010-08-08T11:27:00.001-05:00

Doug Powers writes for MichelleMalkin.com from time to time, particularly when Michelle is taking time off. His style is amazingly on the mark.

Check this one out from today. Can you believe the teachers' union is fighting to force the taxpayers to provide VIAGRA????

I think Doug summed it up pretty nicely with quotes like:

Just because math is hard doesn’t mean the teacher has to be.

and

Does the teachers union know what else causes health problems? Being taxpayers who are already being soaked for every penny and watching their kids and grandkids being charged for the remainder due to irresponsible, undisciplined spending including drugs that allow Mr. Wilson in Social Studies to serve as his own kickstand.

Spot on, to say the least.

Now go read the whole thing if you haven't already. Doug and Michelle deserve the traffic.

RWR

"Sarah's Law": Whoopie Doo

2010-08-01T01:28:00.007-05:00

Yeah yeah yeah ...

These laws are just plain stupid.

If the guy can't be trusted out of prison, then why let his sorry ass out in the first place?

Meghan Kanka ... Sarah Payne ...

BOTH (and countless others) WOULD BE ALIVE TODAY IF THESE HEINOUS CRIMINALS WOULD HAVE SIMPLY BEEN KEPT IN PRISON!

Enough is enough already. If an offender has "paid his debt to society" and can be trusted in public, by all means let him out and RESTORE ALL OF HIS RIGHTS, but for God's sake, if there are people who are endangered by one of these thugs' presence in public, LEAVE HIM IN PRISON!

Furthermore, with self-defense all but illegal in England anymore (even kitchen knives have been banned), what would parents do even if their neighbor or someone with access to their kids WERE on the "Sarah's Law" list? It's actually WORSE than in New Jersey, if anyone can actually believe that!

Is this too hard to grasp? It really doesn't seem like it should be.

RWR

Hawk: Help Out St. Vinnie's

2010-07-29T14:25:00.002-05:00

Hawk dropped this in my email today:

Hello

The fine folks at The Society Of St. Vincent De Paul are holding an unbelievable raffle. The grand prize includes 4 days in New York, a $3000 shopping spree, and a meeting with Bill O'Reilly. Heck, third prize is 2 Super Bowl tickets! They're charging a $100 bucks a pop for the raffle tickets -- and of course, the money they make will go to their charity.

In order to help promote the event, they've given me some of those $100 raffle tickets to give away as I see fit. So, I decided I wanted to do something I keep encouraging everyone else to do: Give something back to the blogosphere.

So, here's the deal: Link this post.

http://rightwingnews.com/2010/07/bloggers-link-this-post-today-win-4-days-in-ny-a-3000-shopping-spree-a-meeting-with-bill-oreilly/

Then email me to let me know you've done it.

Not only will you be helping out a worthy charity, at the end of the day, I will randomly give away two of these $100 raffle tickets to blogs that linked the post. Your odds of winning a raffle ticket worth a $100 will be good and you'll be using your blog to help out a charity. Sounds like a pretty good deal to me! Hope you'll link it up.

--
All the best

John Hawkins
http://www.rightwingnews.com
http://www.linkiest.com
http://www.viralfootage.com
http://www.selfhelpquotes.net
http://townhall.com/columnists/JohnHawkins

For the record, St. Vincent DePaul is an EXCELLENT charity. My mother is involved, and I have personally seen them in action when people have come upon hard times. If you want to check them out or donate to their cause, please click here.

RWR

Another Infuriating Illegal Alien Story

2010-07-17T19:12:00.002-05:00

Although you'd think illegal aliens have a lot of balls given what they do, they aren't known to be particularly well-hung.

That's why Minnesota taxpayers fork over emergency funds to get them PENIS PUMPS!!!

If this doesn't infuriate you, I doubt anything will. I'll bet Al Frankenstein was at the front of the line looking for one for himself. Hell, if the illegals qualify ....

RWR

Second Amendment? What Second Amendment?

2010-07-02T07:39:00.001-05:00

It's people like this that should make every American's blood boil.

What Richard Daley is proposing is a CRIME.

Lock his sorry ass up, and throw away the key. Let his dead corpse rot in his cell even after he has met his maker as an example to the rest of the scumbags with no respect for the law or those the law protects.

RWR

In Memoriam: PoetryBug 1973-2010

2010-07-01T09:01:00.000-05:00

PoetryBug
1973-2010

Sadly, another good friend of the RWRepublic has been lost to an untimely passing.

PoetryBug was brought to the RWRepublic by her sister, PeanutButterPoet, who was lost to us just under a year ago.

Sadly, this past fall, PoetryBug was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. She would not have had us worry, so she told us it was a misdiagnosis. Then she disappeared for a long time.

She reemerged in February to announce the birth of her daughter. The next contact was with another of her sisters, who broke the news to me this past Monday that she had succumbed to the cancer on Fathers Day (last Sunday, June 20). She is survived by two sons, as well as the new baby daughter and PeanutButterPoet's two sons, of whom she was legal guardian. All are now in good hands with family members.

So again, we bid farewell to a close friend of the RWRepublic, just under a year after the passing of her sister. May your sister protect you in death as she did in life. Love and prayers again to all affected by her death, as well as by her life.

God speed.

RWR

SCOTUS Backs the Second Amendment

2010-06-28T10:16:00.004-05:00

There is hope, America.

Update to come ... I have a thought on this.

PROMISED UPDATE - 6/30/2010 - Look at the title of the piece: "Justices extend gun owner rights nationwide".

Talk about clueless. Supreme Court justices have no power to "extend gun owner rights". These rights are extended to us by GOD HIMSELF and are guaranteed by the Constitution. The justices' job is to merely read that document and repeat what it says, period.

RWR

Robert "Sheets" Byrd is Dead

2010-06-28T06:29:00.001-05:00

Nothing else to say really. This racist asshole didn't deserve a eulogy.

Smart thing to do will be to bury him face down so he can see where he's going.

RWR

Stupid Open Borders Liberals

2010-06-25T12:23:00.002-05:00

Michelle Malkin has a couple of posts on this moron who claims that Arizona is "a ways removed from the border". It's a wonder we aren't more effectively creaming these people given the level of knowledge they possess (or lack thereof).

AZ Senator Kyl's letter, for our own reference (h/t Michelle):

Again, we ask Sage's immortal question:

Can America be saved from stupid people?

RWR

Franken Opens Mouth, Tastes Toes

2010-06-20T18:05:00.002-05:00

Back in January of 2006, I predicted that Al Franken(stein) would run for Senate, even though he swore he wouldn't. Of course, I was right. I was also right on another prediction that I made the same day ...

Frankenstein's so loony that if the good people of Minnesota aren't already smart enough to keep him out of office, we'll have a whole lot to laugh at coming from the Senate floor.

Over at RWN, Brian Garst is reporting on Frankenstein's hilarious stupidity. Feast your eyes on this quote ...

Originalism isn't a pillar of our constitutional history. It's a talking point.

How many positions do your eyes wind up in while you are laughing at this one? Mine wound up pointing straight back into my skull at least once or twice. Read it out loud and listen to what this moron is saying ...

The intent of the Founding Fathers (who wrote the Constitution) is not a pillar of our Constitutional history.

Any American not completely insulted by this statement is a fool at best. At worst he is a traitor. The day the Founding Fathers intent becomes a "talking point" is the day we all wind up in the foxhole with Sage.

I hope he's got the ammo ready. Franken will be my first target.

RWR

Warner Todd Huston on Guns in Chicago

2010-06-20T17:51:00.002-05:00

When I first read Warner's work some time ago, I assumed that he was just another liberal Republican parroting the opinions of John Hawkins. After all, why would Hawk put opinions that far out of sync with him on his blog?

Well, as it turns out, Huston is much closer to an appropriate voice for Tea Party America than Hawkins will ever be, and Hawk does deserve some credit for putting Warner's opinions out there. In his latest, Warner does a nice little piece on illegal gun laws in Chicago. Unfortunately, like many of us who wish to uphold the Constitution, Warner winds up missing the point. I set him straight in my comment (quoted here):

Whether crime is up or down is IRRELEVANT.

Whether homicide is up or down is IRRELEVANT.

These laws aren't bans on guns per se, they are bans on self-defense in general. The Second Amendment protects this important right, and by creating illegal laws banning self-defense (and in the same act, guns), the government becomes the very criminal it pretends to be protecting the people from.

RWR
www.rightwingrocker.com

Sadly, people have a problem letting the Constitution stand for itself. As long as the Constitution guarantees the people the right to keep and bear arms, IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER whether crime is up or down as a result of some stupid law that got passed illegally. The law is still illegal, and the people have the right (and in this case the responsibility) to defy it, period.

If we are to get back to a Constitutional government, it is absolutely IMPERATIVE that the Constitution be respected as the supreme law of the land. Trying to justify or nuke a law that the Constitution disallows on any other basis is nothing but pure distraction from the fact that the law is itself illegal. The Constitution must stand alone as the justification for whatever position one takes. Let's have our arguments on that basis, please, and no other.

RWR

Happy Fathers Day

2010-06-20T09:22:00.002-05:00

So Friday night, my daughter comes up to me and has me close my eyes.

I open them, and this really cool shirt is in front of my face. I had forgotten that she would be on a camping trip this weekend, but when I heard the words "Happy Fathers Day" escape her lips, I remembered immediately. Then, of course, the most wonderful Daddy's Girl hug you could possibly imagine.

My other daughter will be around today, so I'll see what she has up her sleeve ... possible update later!

Happy Fathers Day to all you other dads out there!

RWR

Motivation ...

2010-06-08T08:53:00.002-05:00

I just haven't been motivated to the blog these days. Personal reasons.

Here's an open thread. Maybe you guys can throw some things in here to get me going ...

RWR

FTC Proposes "Reinventing" the Media

2010-06-04T09:49:00.002-05:00

Never mind the First Amendment. After all, none of those God-given rights ever meant anything to the thugs running the show in Washington. Now the FTC has published its screed, "Potential Policy Recommendations to Support the Reinvention of Journalism." Michelle has hit this one out.

Her personal opinion on the matter sums it up pretty nicely:

The worst enemy of socialism is the empowered individual. And that empowerment, comrades, comes from the unabated access to true and untainted information.

No wonder she's only a commentator on Fox ...

RWR

Wakepedia on Kagan

2010-06-03T13:15:00.000-05:00

Wakepedia posted this week the "obligatory" post on Elena Kagan.

I couldn't have put this shit better myself.

Go read it ... now.

RWR

Post 1000: Roy Halladay

2010-05-30T20:46:00.003-05:00

For only the 20th time in Major League history and the second time by a Phillies pitcher, a perfect game was pitched last night. I was skeptical of the trade that brought Halladay to Philly, especially given the cost (Cliff Lee). I would have loved to have been able to keep Cliff AND Roy, giving the Phils the ultimate 1-2 punch available in baseball today, much like the Arizona Diamondbacks had with Curt Schilling and Randy Johnson. Sadly, that was not to be.

Like Lee, Halladay made a believer out of me in pretty quick fashion. I'd love to see Lee make his way back into town, but for now, Halladay is the man. Last night, while I was working my weekend non-music job, I got word that Roy was perfect through seven innings, and immediately got the radio fired up. I monitored the game up to the bottom of the ninth, and everyone gathered around my car to catch the final inning.

Of course, the contributions of a great defensive unit can never be overlooked in a game such as this - and the Phillies lineup did NOT include Jimmy Rollins or Placido Polanco, two of their fine starting infielders. Depth is a great thing for a team to have, and this squad will be as formidable as any come playoff time.

Roy Halladay
Perfect Game
Saturday, May 29, 2010
photo: mlb.com

Congratulations to Roy and the Phightin' Phils. I guess you can all steal my fire from my 1,000th post. I'll hit on that milestone sometime soon.

In the meantime, everyone please have an amazing Memorial Day, and do not forget why we take this time out each year. It's as important now as ever.

RWR

SestakGate: Obama's Downfall?

2010-05-28T13:32:00.002-05:00

You'd think his refusal to document his natural-born citizenship status or support of criminal organizations like SEIU and ACORN would be enough to push this clown out of the White House in disgrace, but it looks like a member of his own party, in trying to secure the nomination for a Senate seat may have brought evidence of high crimes and misdemeanors to light.

Kind of funny now that there have been so many "fall guys" for Obama, that now Obama may wind up being the fall guy in a Senate race that his party will likely lose anyway!

Can't help but laugh on that one.

OT: This is post #999. Post #1000 is next. Blogger milestone baby!

RWR

RWR vs. Census Guy ...

2010-05-26T18:58:00.002-05:00

Sent in the census form a few weeks ago more or less blank (answered question #1 - that was it). So I get a visit from a census guy today ...

RWR: Four people live here. That's the only question you are legally allowed to ask.

Census Guy (writing down my answer): Thank you very much, sir.

RWR - 1
BHO - 0

Come on back for more, and you just may get a visit of your own from Mark Levin, Esq.

RWR

RetroRWR: 9/29/2008 "Kill the Bailouts"

2010-05-21T01:27:00.001-05:00

DATELINE: September 28,2008
BLOG: MichelleMalkin.com

It's amazing just how right I turned out to be.

RWR

Voters to Incumbents: Get the Fuck Out

2010-05-19T17:46:00.003-05:00

Via Yahoo News ...

Arlen Sphincter: GONE (and watch Toomey waste Sestak in the general too)
Blanche Lincoln: GONE (though beaten by someone even more liberal ...)
Trey Grayson: DENIED (Rand Paul will be taking over the Bunning seat)

The establishment's only win: Critz got to keep Murtha's seat - Only to have to try and re-win it in November, so that one's not over yet, either.

This is what the Tea Party is all about. If people in DC aren't going to follow the Constitution, the voters will replace them with people who will.

RWR

Christie Pulls No Punches

2010-05-16T18:59:00.002-05:00

All right, now. He wasn't the best choice, but you have to hand it to Governor Christie. He's not caving to the weasels in the media. Check out this video via Sharon Soon at RWN.

For once, we have someone willing to pull back some of the bullshit in Trenton. He may not get it all, but he's not only a step in the right direction, but an unapologetic step in the right direction.

You go, Chris!

RWR

A Thought on the Binoculars Scandal

2010-05-12T23:13:00.003-05:00

Get serious.

The Phillies have dominated the National League for a few years now. They're obviously going to be a target any time something could possibly be just a little bit out of the ordinary ...

I say so what if Mick Billmeyer was stealing signs. Who in baseball doesn't make the effort to try to catch a sign or two or three? Anyone who has played the game will tell you that it is PART OF THE GAME. So to the Colorado Rockies and their fans I say, STOP YOUR FUCKING WHINING. It ain't like you and your guys aren't out there doing the same thing Billmeyer was doing when you pointed out he was using binoculars.

Mick Billmeyer: Checking the Scenery?

Here's a thought for ya: Maybe ol' Mick was using the binoculars to check out some of the hot babes seated behind home plate. Lord Knows Denver is crawling with them!

Just a thought!

RWR

PJ's Open Letter to Glenn Beck

2010-05-11T10:04:00.002-05:00

Prudently Jealous referred recently to a post he did vis a vis Glenn Beck's strange demonization of those who seek proof of Obama's natural born citizenship. I took he time to read it, and as long as he doesn't mind my doing so, I've pasted it here in its entirety.

Sir,

I first off would like to say out front that I am a fan of your show. I watch your show most days, listen to a part of your radio program most days and I have read two of your books. I would like to thank you for the work you do so well. I have questions though. You do always tell us to “Question with boldness” and I’d like to do that now even though I know I won’t get through the question before you have me fixed for a nut case. I am no nut case, and these are not generally issues I ever attend to. I am no 911 truther. I’m not even really a birther. There are people out there who are. Do they not have the right to “question with boldness” as you proclaim? What is wrong with the questions? What is it about this issue that bothers you so much?

I listened to your interview with Medina of Texas and how you smeared her for the 911 issue. I listen when you berate people who question the citizenship of our current president. You call them crazy. Where is your regard for their concerns? You malign people for doubts. Truthers? Yes, I think it is a farfetched idea. However there have been governments that have done worse. Are these people allowed to voice their concerns and “question with boldness” like anyone else? They should be. Birthers? Again it may sound crazy but they have a right. I would say birthers actually have legitimate points, in that the constitution requires citizenship for our president. There is also a reason for that. Our founders, whom you like to look to for guidance, did not want someone who might have issues of allegiance. I don’t know all the ins and outs of what they believe, but I do know that an anouncement in a newspaper is not proof of citizenship. I could not bring in the newspaper anouncement from my birth as proof enough for a driver’s license! And yet for some reason when someone even raises the issue, you get your dander up and start demeaning them in a way which would make Alinsky proud!

So my questions to you are as follow: Do you indeed believe that we should “question with boldness”? Or does that only apply to the issues which you and the management at Fox News find palatable?

Please link over to The Liberty Bunker via the link above and leave plenty of comments. We need to let PJ know he's appreciated.

Also, look for The Liberty Bunker on the BlogRWRoll very soon!

RWR