"America is like a healthy body and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within."
--Joseph Stalin

Friday, July 29, 2011

Dealing With Democrats "An Out-of-Body Experience"

Will Malven

This evening Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell was engaged in a debate with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid over "tabling" the just passed House debt ceiling proposal, also known as Boehner 1.1. During that debate, Senator McConnell stated, "I feel like I'm having an out-of-body experience."

Senator McConnell, I feel you pain. I feel like I'm having an out-of-body experience as well.

The American people are witnessing how Democrats routinely negotiate and how much they actually care about the possibility of our nation going into default. Republicans have sent three (yes, that's 3--"The Ryan Plan," "Cut, Cap, and Balance," and "Boehner 1.1") separate pieces of legislation dealing with the debt ceiling increase while simultaneously attempting to reduce the rate of increase in government spending and the Democrats have summarily rejected each one without having the courage to debate or vote on a single one of them, yet they continue to rail about the dire consequences of "Republican inactivity."

Hello, hello, Oz? I think we've landed.

Where are the Democrat proposals? Where is Obama's proposal? Has anyone seen them? Jay Carney claimed the President had one, but declined to show it, asking one reporter in incredulity "You need to see it?" as if the very concept was alien to him (hardly surprising there in Oz) Carney's reluctance was understandable because the President "plan" doesn't exist.

Speaker Boehner confirmed this today in his closing argument in the House debate over this last proposal. He said that there was never any plan submitted by the President during the negotiations.

A frustrated and fed up Boehner said:
“I stuck my neck out a mile to get an agreement with the President of the United States. It’s time for the administration and time for our colleagues across the aisle to put something on the table.

Tell us where you are!”
Though I disagree with the Boehner plan, I feel his pain too. It is impossible to cut a deal with people who are untrustworthy and who demagogue the issues over which you are negotiating, as you are negotiating them.

The level of ad hominem vitriol spewed by Democrats during the House debate and coming from Senate Democrats is (or would be if I didn't know them better) appalling.

Never forget, liberals HATE anyone who dares to disagree with them. They don't hate what you are advocating, they actually hate you for disagreeing. It's personal and heartfelt hatred and that is what makes dealing with them or trusting them impossible. Because they hate you, they feel no compunction about lying to you.

Three times, Republicans have made good faith efforts to prevent this nation from going into default (the actual risk of that is, like all other Democrat talking points, a manufactured risk, but I'll use the term anyway) and at the same time attempt to rein in federal spending, but Democrats live in a fantasy world.

They appear to believe that the federal government can continue to spend as it has without pause and the national debt will miraculously take care of itself.

They believe that all they have to do is raise taxes on "the rich" and everything will be resolved and the Ponzi Scheme's of Roosevelt and Johnson will continue to yield unending rivers of gold to be paid to their constituents.

It is pure insanity and it only confirms what we conservatives have known and what Michael Savage asserted in his book and on his show, that liberalism is a mental disorder.

The cold hard facts cannot be changed even if Democrats click their collective heels together three times and wish it so. If they passed a 100% tax on all of those whom they have labeled "rich," it would only generate $1.6 Trillion in income. The federal government's annual deficit for this year is projected to be $1.6 Trillion (and our national debt, $14.5 Trillion).

Fine liberals say, then we have a balanced budget . . . except of course in doing so they would destroy the corporations, investors, and businessmen who employ American "workers" (yeah, I know it's a Marxist term) and thus next year there would be no federal income tax revenues . . . except for those who are employed by the federal government. The rest of us would be joining them on the dole.

This is an insane time and America is being led by an insane President from an insane Democrat Party.

Most amazing of all is Senate Majority Leader Reid's decision to send his own proposal to the House of Representatives BEFORE THE SENATE HAS VOTED ON IT.

Exactly how much of the Democrat Party's water do Democrats expect Republicans to carry? They won't even vote on their own bill.

There isn't a single man or woman remaining in the Democrat Party; they are spineless, lying, demagoguing hatemongers who haven't had the guts to pass a single budget in the last 2 1/2 years, in spite of the fact that they are required to do so by law.

Out-of-body experience Senator McConnell? That is something we can both agree on.

Dealing with Democrats is like a trip into the Twilight Zone.

Hopefully enough strongly conservative Republicans remain in the House that they can stop the Reid bill from passing and place the onus where it now belongs, squarely on the Democrat controlled Senate and President Obama's shoulders.

No quarter for Democrat liars.

Make them pony-up and put their cards on the table. Let them feel the heat for a change, and for God's sake, Republicans, STOP NEGOTIATING WITH YOURSELVES!!!!!

Long Live Our American Republic!!!

It's Not About "Winning," It's About Doing What is Right.

Will Malven

Liberals, "Establishment Republicans," and the MSM just don't seem to understand what we conservatives are fighting for, why in the face of the looming "default" (the word, in this case, itself a fraud and misnomer) the TEA party supporters refuse to agree to a "compromise" bill increasing the debt ceiling while extracting minimal--some would say chimerical--future promised cuts in spending and which will solve none of the underlying problems that have brought us to this "precipice."

This battle is NOT about "winning," as the MSM, liberal politicians, and the establishment--inside the Beltway, life-long politician--believe. It's not, or it shouldn't be about who wins the 2012 election, it is about saving this nation from complete and absolute financial meltdown.

America has spent the past fifty years on an ever accelerating spending binge the likes of which the world has never seen. We are now facing a debt of over $14 TRILLION and a proposed by the President and Democrats $16.5 TRILLION. That debt is increasing at a rate of $1.5 TRILLION/ year for the foreseeable future unless something drastic and real isn't done immediately.

Only one suggestion that has been made for dealing with the national debt has any possibility of solving this problem and that solution--suggested by Senator Rand Paul--isn't even being considered. Only his plan encompasses actual cuts in spending. None of the other plans, not Ryan's plan, not Cut, Cap, and Balance, not the Obama-Boehner negotiated plan, not Senator Harry Reid's alleged plan, none of them call for ACTUAL cuts in spending. Everyone of them resorts to the same old mystical math that exists only in Washington, D.C. in which a reduction in the rate of increase of any spending is classified as a "cut."

The current Boehner plan, the plan that the House is debating and attempting to pass today is a sham, an illusion, a band aid intended to give the appearance of being responsible without actually moving to solve the underlying problems. It is an admission that Congress and the White House are incapable of solving our fiscal problems. It is punting the ball and placing the responsibility for solving our problems to a future Congress and hoping that they will be dealing with a different, more reasonable and conservative President.

Throughout this entire folderol, Obama and the Democrats have been very clever both in the way they have negotiated and in the way they have refused to put their own plan forward. In negotiation, one of the most powerful weapons a negotiator has is silence. In tense, difficult negotiations, those in which the two parties have reached a seeming impasse, the first person who speaks, loses.

The best, the most successful negotiators know this and they use it to their advantage. They know that most people abhor a silence. It makes them uncomfortable; they feel pressure to say something and that in turn leads them alter their position just to get a response from the other party.

Republicans have been doing just this. They have been negotiating with themselves as Democrats just sit in stony silence and watch their opponents spontaneously self-destruct. I say "stony silence," but for liberals derision and wild claims made to the press are a suitable substitute. The difference between silence and derision is found in the source of liberal negotiators tactics, the mandates of the Frankfurt School, a Marxist movement which was transported to America just prior to World War II and has dominated leftist ideology and activities over the past century.

The Frankfort School tells Democrats and liberals not to offer any plan, but force the other side to present their plans and then to slap them down repeatedly and forcefully. Hence the lies and false claims that Republicans (especially those evil tea partiers) are being "unreasonable" or that Republicans are "being inflexible," or that Republicans are "endangering our economy."

Let's get the facts straight. Republicans have offered three plans, two of them have passed the House only to be reflexively slapped down by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and his caucus without even being read, considered or brought to the floor for a vote. Now somebody tell me exactly who is being "inflexible" and "unreasonable?" What is in those two plans that causes Harry and his puppet Democrats such fear that they will not even consider them, or allow them to be voted on? Could it possibly be that Harry Reid is fearful that, should a Republican plan actually reach the floor for a vote, the pressure to vote for the plan from their constituents would be so powerful that the Republican plan might actually pass and be sent up to the President?

For Democrats and President Obama this entire battle is about politics, pure and simple. If a Republican plan actually reached President Obama's desk, he would be forced to choose whether to sign it or veto it and allow the nation to default. Everything is calculated to protect Obama from being forced to make a decision . . . which should come as no surprise as Obama has avoided making the tough decisions all of his life.

Republicans . . . and I mean Boehner and the rest need to sit back and demand the Democrats and the President "put up or shut up." Neither party has ever put forward an actual plan. Neither Obama nor the Democrats have put an actual written down plan on the table for dissection, debate and discussion. All anyone has seen from them are empty generalities; promises of cuts with no details or specificity. That is because there is no Democrat plan. Reid and Obama are willing to destroy--in their own words--this economy rather than agree to any of the Republican plans. As usual for Democrats, politics trumps policy or the well-being of our nation.

Republicans have offered and passed two plans and had agreed to a third--negotiated and agreed upon--plan which, at the last minute the President chose to revise in what he knew would be an unacceptable manner, intentionally skewering any possible bi-partisan bill.

Democrats have offered . . . posturing and politically charged rhetoric.

Now those strongest conservatives, those for whom this is not about politics or about protecting their seats in Congress are under assault by those establishment Republicans for whom going along to get along has become a way of life--and a source of income.

"C'mon," they are telling the TEA partiers, "just be reasonable, trust us, agreeing to this deal is the best way for us to achieve our goal of cutting government spending. It is the best way for us to deal with the debt limit crisis and not take the blame."

"It is the WINNING strategy."

Sorry old guard, we're not interested in winning any game and by the way, the last time you came to us with a deal to cut the debt and raise the debt limit, it turned out that those "cuts" were actually increases in spending.

The old adage is "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." We're not falling for the same old smoke and mirrors this time. America has to rein in spending and we must do so with real, substantive and effective cuts in actual spending. No more funny/fuzzy math, no more promised cuts, no more deals with the devil.

The Rand plan, cutting 1% of spending every year for the next 6 years--we're talking actual cuts here, not simply reductions in spending--will return fiscal responsibility to the American budgeting process. Combined with a Balanced Budget Amendment, this proposal would offer the first--and only--chance for America to get back on track.

Mr. Boehner, Mr. Cantor, Mr. Obama, Mr. Reid, Ms. Pelosi--IT'S NOT ABOUT WINNING (unless you're talking about the American people winning) it's about doing what's right. Balancing the budget, cutting the debt and putting America back on the track of fiscal responsibility.

Get with the program!

Long Live Our American Republic!!!

Monday, July 18, 2011

Exceeding the Debt Ceiling, Failed Leadership, and Why a Balanced Budget Amendment is Necessary

Will Malven

The current debt crisis is a manufactured crisis. The current debt ceiling, like all the previous "debt ceilings" that have been raised, was set far in advance of this current crisis.

Everyone in Congress has known about the looming debt crunch for months before it became the crisis we are now facing and the sad fact about our men and women in Congress is that they have been doing this very same thing every time they have faced such a "crisis," many without any remorse or regrets. Many on the left believe in deficit spending and believe spending by government is the single most important thing it does.

In every case, Congress has known that they were spending far more money than would be available to cover the costs of their expenditures and in spite of that knowledge, they have authorized and spent it anyway.

And yet, we voters go to the polls every two year and re-elect 90% of those who behave in this irresponsible manner. We let them get away with not performing their jobs and then we reward them for their irresponsible behavior by sending them back to Congress so that they may act just as irresponsibly as they did the time before.

Is that insane or what?

The old adage says "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result." If that is the definition of insanity, then we--the electorate--are insane.

Occasionally, we snap out of our rut of irrational behavior and vote responsibly. One such occurrence was the past election, in which the electorate sent a bevy of bright, new, energized, and budget conscious Republicans to Congress to do what is manifestly right and fight against the train wreck of an insanely high and rapidly growing national debt towards which establishment members--both Democrat and Republican--are driving us.

Congress sets a debt ceiling--a firm "limit" over which they agree not to spend. Instead of doing what is necessary to stay within the bounds of that limit, Congress simply refuses to do what they should.

This is gross negligence. It is laziness--men and women refusing to do what is necessary because it is hard. And it is men and women placing their own petty politics over our national need.

The current debt ceiling crisis is not an accident, it is planned irresponsibility. The problem is that Congress is so addicted to spending tax-payer money that they are unable to contain their spending proclivities.

Now, suddenly the American electorate has sent some adults to Washington D.C. to clean up the mess. They are young, fiscally prudent, knowledgeable about our economy and what is necessary to solve our fiscal problems, and they are determined to force some fiscal discipline into the circus of Congress.

. . . And the liberal/Democrat children and their equally useless and childish liberal press are all bleating like sheep about to be sheared. They see their most sacred programs about to cut and re-prioritized and they are in a panic. They know that they will no longer be able to buy votes with tax-payer money should fiscal discipline truly come about.

These young conservatives are telling the children, "No, you don't need a bigger allowance, you need to learn to live on the overly generous one you already have."

This is not, as the liberals and old guard Republicans would have us believe, ideological rigidity, it is something far greater--a word seldom used or exercised inside the beltway--it is "responsibility." It is acting as an adult; recognizing the problem for what it is and seeking a means of solving that problem rather than simply passing it on to the next generation.

Their biggest obstacle is the establishment political class that rules Washington--the "Let's be reasonable and meet half-way" crowd.

The problem with their "half-way" is that it lies somewhere between irresponsibility and irrationality. "Half-way" means raising taxes--the word is taxes not "revenues" (which is just a euphemism for taxes)--in the middle of one of the worst recessions in our nation's history.

With unemployment at historic levels and no sign of recovery in the near future, liberals are suggesting that we increase the tax burden on those who are most likely to create jobs. Not even the most ardent Keynesians would make such a ludicrous suggestion and they love to spend money.

This is why the "Balanced Budget Amendment" has become not just a good idea, but the only hope for the survival of our nation's economy. Because Congress remains filled with people who are unwilling to cut the level of spending to which they have become addicted and because of those who are perfectly willing to demagogue anyone who dares attempt to rock the boat, it has become necessary for us to put mandatory limits on their profligacy.

If members of Congress can't contain their natural predilection to spend like drunken sailors on PCP, the option to exceed federal revenues must be taken away from them.

One of the most irrelevant arguments I keep hearing from those on the left is that a Balanced Budget Amendment is not necessary, that Congress "just needs to do its job."

One would think that after ten or twenty consecutive increases in the debt limit over the past two decades, it would have become apparent that Congress will never reach that level of responsibility without some coercive mechanism.

Of course the real reason these naysayers are opposed to a mandatory balanced budget is that it will force limits and cuts in their pet socialist programs . . . no more blank checks to "special interest groups" or "most favored" constituent groups. Failure to meet budgetary limits will force automatic across the board cuts in all programs. And that my friends is like kryptonite to liberals and Democrats.

Write or call or email your congressman and demand they act on a Balanced Budget Amendment. Let's get America's house in order.

Long Live Our American Republic!!!

Friday, July 15, 2011

McConnell's White Flag Theory of Budget Negotiation: "Let's Surrender First"

Will Malven

In 2006, during the debate over raising the debt ceiling, then Senator Barack Hussein Obama said the following:
"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally . Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better."
That is probably the only time Obama has been right in his entire political life.  It is certainly the only time he has been on the right side of any important domestic issue in his entire political life.

Because this is such a rare event, perhaps Republicans should heed the then Senator's wise words and cease negotiating with Democrats.

Now Senator McConnell is telling his fellow Republicans:
"Let's trust the President and grant him the unilateral authority to raise the debt limit the full $2.4 Trillion that he wants to carry him through to the 2012 elections provided he promises specific cuts in entitlements and the overall budget."
Say what? Mind you, it would be the first time any Democrat has recommended specific cuts to the budget and to our entitlement programs, but the promises don't have to entail actual cuts, merely promises to cut . . . promises which do not have to be kept--and won't, I guarantee you.

McConnell's plan has theoretical protections against this possibility, in that Congress may vote their disapproval of any debt limit rise the President suggests, but such a protection is chimerical, because the only need veto the act of disapproval and he's good to go. Congress will never be able to over-ride his veto on these extensions.

Incredibly, a number of real conservatives--I mean serious conservatives with serious conservative credentials are supporting this plan in the mistaken belief that forcing Democrats to make even suggested cuts to Social Security, Medicare, and other entitlements is a victory.

It seems a shallow, valueless victory if the suggestions are not serious and are never acted on.

In essence, the McConnell plan is a complete capitulation, with the added negative that in making such a suggestion, the Senator has undermined everything for which the Republicans have been working since April. With this plan, he has given President Obama and his Democrat henchmen absolute cover to deal as cynically with the budget as they wish.

I fail to see why any Republican would negotiate with the Democrat leadership under any circumstances, since any promises they make, and assertions of earnestness invariably turn out to be lies and deceptions.

Witness President Reagan's negotiated deal with Democrats back in 1982:  Democrats promised President Reagan that they would make three dollars in cuts for every one dollar of tax increase . . . they lied.  The actual deal they enacted included three dollars of tax increases for every dollar of cuts.

In 1990, the promise Democrats made to then President G.H.W. Bush in return for him setting aside his election pledge of:  "Read my lips; NO NEW TAXES," was to make two dollars of spending cuts for every dollar of tax increases . . . another lie.  The $137 Billion in tax increases went through, but actual spending increased by $22 Billion.

Given this history of the Democrat Party Leadership's dishonesty when negotiating with Republicans, and given President Obama's of broken promises and lies, I cannot for the life of me understand why anyone, especially any Republican would enter into negotiations with Democrats over budgetary matters.

Let the Democrats actually pass substantial serious reductions in spending--not at some later date, but that actually take place in the current and all future budgets, let them put it on paper and confirm it with their votes, and then agree to negotiate in good faith for an increase in the debt ceiling, if you feel you must. If you must negotiate in that manner, then tie the debt ceiling to a Balanced Budget Amendment. Force Democrats--and RINO Republicans--for once in their lives, to exercise a little budgetary discipline.

We Republicans have always advocated negotiations of international treaties out of a position of strength, why should our budgetary negotiation strategy be any different? Are we that worried about our political futures, that we would let this nation's economy be destroyed for the foreseeable future just to win an election?

I know what Mitch McConnell's answer is, what about the rest of you Republicans?

Long Live Our American Republic!!!

Monday, July 11, 2011

The Truth About the Debt Limit and Why It Should Not Be Raised

Will Malven

All right folks, let's get something straight.  A "debt limit" is an impenetrable wall (at least by intent) set up by Congress to ensure that our government cannot borrow any money beyond a preset limit.  The purpose of setting a debt limit is to impose fiscal responsibility where none exists.   It is a restriction Congress has placed on themselves should they prove incapable of restraining their own profligate tendencies to spend money like drunken sailors.

The whole purpose of setting a debt limit is to prevent yourself--or your government--from exceeding it.  If you repeatedly vote to raise the thing, it defeats the entire purpose of having one.

So I am forced to ask why the heck are Republicans engaged in this charade, being orchestrated by President Obama, of engaging in debt limit discussions in an attempt to find a means of raising the debt limit?

The hard truth . . . the truth that Democrats can't/won't see and very few Republicans are willing to face . . . is that the whole concept of a "debt limit" invalidates the idea of negotiating some sort of "budget deal" which results in its being raised.

It is a debt LIMIT, not a debt budgetary suggestion. It was put in place to prevent government from borrowing any more money.   I don't know about you, but I think that $14 Trillion in debt is quite enough.  I don't believe we should be contemplating the addition of one cent to what we already owe.

These talks should be focused solely on what needs to be cut to bring us back UNDER the debt limit, not reaching an agreement on how much to cut to lead us back to some nebulous future balanced budget at the cost of another $6-8 Trillion in additional debt.

The very best strategy for Republicans to take . . . if they had the intestinal fortitude to pursue it . . . would be to do absolutely nothing.

Republicans hold all of the cards right now.  They don't need to do a thing but sit back and watch the Democrats squirm.  The problem is self-correcting.  If our government hits the debt limit on August 2nd, if America hits the "debt limit," what will happen?

Well first, there will be no default on the national debt as the fear-mongering liberals keep asserting.  It simply will not occur except as a Democrat ploy. By the requirements of the Constitution and the 14th Amendment, our debt obligations will have to be met first--thus the alleged looming "default" will not happen unless Obama intentionally makes it happen.

After the debt is serviced, then the cutting begins automatically--across the board.

It is this, more than anything else, that has the Democrats in such a panic. They are not concerned about the welfare of the people, they are solely concerned that their well of largess--the largess they use to bribe groups to support them--is about to run dry.

They know that if the debt limit is not raised, then all of their pet programs will be cut and cut substantially.

That's what should happen. It is precisely the intent of the current law-makers' predecessors in having created a debt limit in the first place. Raising it, even under the original conditions Boehner and Cantor set, defeats the whole purpose of having one.  The Boehner proposition was flawed from the beginning.  The "I will not raise the debt ceiling until we have cuts at least equal to the amount it is being raised" argument is a weak argument.

Understand, I admire Boehner for what he has been doing, because at least he is attempting to place some very strong restraints on any further spending, but the truth is, we are spent out.  As Sarah Palin so aptly put it, "the Sugar Daddy has run out of sugar."

It is time for Republicans to stand firm.  Stand or fall on the principles in which you believe.  If the American people want to continue the policies of the liberals and thus bring down our nation's economy and reduce this once proud nation to the status of another Greece or Spain with all the commensurate misery and suffering that will accompany such a fate, then at least Republicans can say that did their best to prevent it from happening.

The facts are clear, more spending and taxing and borrowing will only lead to the further deterioration of our economy and the deconstruction of our nation as it was founded.  Liberals, for all the histrionics and bluster, cannot point to a single instance in history--this nation's or any other nation's in which the principles for which they stand have succeeded.  On the other hand, I can point out any number of occasions on which they have failed and those Republicans are pushing have succeeded.

There should be no negotiations which have the result of raising the limit.  The only thing Republicans should be negotiating is where to cut and how much to cut to bring the national budget in line with the debt limit; nothing more.

Republicans, it's time to fish or cut bait.

Long Live Our American Republic!!!

Sunday, July 10, 2011

Read My Lips, No New Taxes

Will Malven

Republican Legislators, I am TEA Party, hear me roar: NO NEW TAXES!

I state the above, just in case any or our Republican members of Congress has any doubts as to what we out here in "fly-over country" truly feel.  Americans are already paying enough in taxes, our problem is solely a spending problem and folks like Mitch McConnell and John Boehner would do well to remind themselves of that fact every time they look in the mirror.

Things are looking good--so far--within the Republican House caucus for holding firm against any "increase in revenues" (taxes for those of us who are more plain spoken) in the on-going debt limit negotiations.

However, if history has told us anything, it is that Republicans grow spines of linguini at the approach of budgetary deadlines.  For some reason, it is perfectly okay for Democrats to demagogue and remain intransigent over budgetary issues, even if it means the destruction of our nations economy, but just let a Republican attempt to remain true to his values and beliefs, and he is suddenly transformed into public enemy number one and develops "that old feeling" and begins to contemplate compromising so as not to be portrayed as the next Cruella de Vil by their "good buddies" in the MSM.

Hey Republican members of Congress, here's a clue . . . the MSM hates you for what you believe, get over it, revel in it, take pride in your accomplishment, it means you are saying the right things, supporting the right causes, and opposing those policies which are destined to be most destructive to our economy and our nation.


No matter how much good press they give you, you will remain scum in their eyes and as soon as you oppose their chosen candidate, they will attack you without mercy or restraint.  In the eyes of the MSM and your Democrat colleagues, you are evil. 

You must understand this.  In opposing their aspirations for power--which is, of course, the only purpose behind their agenda--you automatically become their hated enemy and anything they tell you to the contrary is a lie.  It is the fawning flattery of a con man on the game, the dance of a cobra about to strike.  Don't be fooled, don't allow yourself to believe their lies, they hate you for what you are.

So, the only answer is to stand on your principles and bask in the glory of their hostility, pointing out their lies and calling them when they spout them, then providing truth to counter.

I would suggest quoting Obama's laughter at the fact that the often touted and claimed "shovel-ready jobs" that were the foundation of the so-called "stimulus package" weren't so "shovel-ready."  I would suggest that pointing out that Republicans don't find the squandering of almost a TRILLION dollars of tax-payer money on a Democrat Party fantasy that helped no one but the organizations that are behind the Democrat Party, all that amusing or that the continued unemployment and suffering of the American people through this Obama Recession is a subject for humor.

And when they accuse you of wanting to cut Medicare, point out the fact that Democrats have already passed into law a $500 Billion cut in Medicare when they passed the Health Care Reform Act--against the wishes of the American people.

This is not a time for weakness, this is a time for Republicans to show continued courage.  The Democrats are on the ropes and they are terrified.  Obama is destined to go down in flames in 2012 and he will also go down as the worst, most destructive, least qualified, most incompetent President of the past century.

I will also issue this warning.  If the Republicans cave during these negotiations and vote for any increase in revenues in exchange for the modest cuts that have been bandied about (remember that a 4 Trillion cut over ten years means an increase in the national debt of another $6 Trillion before the reductions in debt even begins) there will be a third party movement and it will mean the possible destruction, not just of the Republican Party, but of our nation as we have all grown up to know it.

Long Live Our American Republic!!!

Gunwalker T-shirts Abound

First it was a comment made by Sean D. Sorrentino at the blog No Lawyers - Only Guns and Money, who asked the question,

Am I the only person on the planet that didn't get guns from the ATF?

From that was spawned the idea of a T-shirt, first offered on Sean Sorrentino's blog An NC Gun Blog.  A great idea that was soon stolen by the folks at WND World Net Daily, or as I like to call them, World Nuts Daily for their continual ventures into conspiracy theories and the whole "birther" mania.

That pretty much tells you the quality (or lack thereof) of the folks who run WND--who, incidently are charging more for their version of NC blogger's T-shirt.  Class, pure class--all of it low.

There is no excuse except greed and bad manners for a large operation like World Nut Daily to take a small, individual blogger's idea and use it as their own.  This is the sort of action I might expect from Obama, or Pelosi, but not from a perportedly "conservative" (and presumable pro-small business and entrepreneur) news organization.

The sad part is, if this story doesn't get out and the average Joe-gun owner doesn't learn the facts, WND will make a bunch of money and Sean will be left with zip.

I don't know Sean Sorrentino and up until today, have never heard of him.  I came across this story while prowling the threads at the Conservative Talk Forums website (Highly recommended--it's small and just getting off the ground, but we are dedicated conservatives) .

Support Sean and send WMD some flack for stealing Sean's idea.

Here's a couple more ideas for T-shirts:


Gun supplier of choice
for drug smugglers everywhere


Get your guns from


(2500 drug smugglers can't be wrong)

If I see these on WND, I will be taking legal action--on the otherhand, I give Sean Sorrentino full permission to use them--otherwise Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License applies.