The Angry Republic

The Generic Republican made me do it!

2011-08-10T10:54:00.002-04:00

Try as you might, you cannot escape the fact that another presidential election is coming.

You could attempt to do what I tried to do: take 6 months and tune out of politics by spending your time weaving baskets and raising lamas. BUT YOU CANNOT HIDE- forever. Sooner or later a person will drag you back into politics. It could be a Postman, or a Milkman, or the Cheeseman, dropping off a big slab of free government cheese; someone will pop by your house and ask: “Hey, who do you think will win the 2012 election?” With that one question, you will be sucked right back into politics like a moth to a flame. A moth, by the way, who flies too close to the flame, singes his wings, and lands helplessly on the floor, only to become an improvised “cat toy” for some pussy. (Ok, maybe that was a little too dramatic. But you get the picture.)

Every Democrat MUST ask themselves if they feel that President Obama has made things better? Yes, the popular thing to do is blame Bush for everything. However, even the dumbest of the dumb will have to admit: If President Obama cannot stabilize this country in 4 years, what good would it do to give him 4 MORE years? If you are a democrat, and you have decided that President Obama isn’t fixing things, be prepared! You will be called a racist. (Unless you are a Black person; in which case, you will be called an Uncle Tom.)

Republicans do not have it easy, either. We must try and pick which person, out of the current collection of idiots, will cause the least amount of damage to the country.

I have come to the conclusion that the best person conservatives could run in the 2012 election is…

The Generic Republican.

Now, I know you are probably thinking that maybe I have taken too many painkillers, but hear me out. To date, the Generic Republican has said nothing, or done anything; to piss people off. The Tea Party seems to like the Generic Republican. Moderates MUST be voting for the Generic Republican, and even the Left has not attacked the Generic Republican like they went after Sarah Palin and Mitt Romney. The Generic Republican BEATS President Obama in every poll taken, (even liberal polls,) so this is clearly the best route.

With President Obama being such a GREAT campaigner, the Generic Republican will not be able to stand there, quietly; forever. (Though, that might be the BEST way to go.) Eventually, this dark silhouette will have to say something. I have thought long and hard about this, and I think I have found an answer. Instead of paying 100 million bucks for attack ads, why don’t we give that 100 million to Morgan Freeman to be the voice of the Generic Republican?

Maybe we could get Sam Elliott to voice the GR.

Or how about the guy who was the voice of Dark Vader in Star Wars: James Earl Jones? Could you picture James Earl Jones saying: “Obama- Obama, who’s your daddy?” (Ok, maybe we shouldn’t have him say that, but it would be cool.)

Let’s examine where we are right now…

Our shadow figure, (with no distinguishing features,) who has the voice of Morgan Freeman, Sam Elliott, or James Earl Jones, who already BEATS President Obama in every poll taken (and he hasn’t said anything yet to piss people off); without a doubt, our Generic Republican has the BEST shot of winning the 2012 election.

Yes, there are some legal questions that must be answered. First, and foremost: Can a generic human, (with no face) EVEN run for president? This is a great question and it is true, in history; we have never had a “faceless” president. But that doesn’t mean that it is impossible. Consider this: in several State elections, a very popular person has died before the election. Even though this person is dead, people wrote in the dead person’s name on the ballot (or, in some cases the dead person’s name was already on the ballot.) And a DEAD person has won the election. So if a DEAD person can win an election, why can’t a faceless shadow person also win?

There is one constitutional rule that could stand in our way: a presidential candidate MUST be 35 years old, and must show his Birth Certificate. (Oh..Wait.. What the hell am I talking about? I guess you DO NOT have to show your Birth Certificate UNLESS Donald Trump asks to see it.) And, since The Donald is on our side, we should have no problems here. However, with a little touch-up on photo shop, and we should be good to go.

With all these hurtles crossed, that leaves just one problem: When we win the election, who will actually RUN the country? Let’s face it; having a Generic Human run for office was a trip and tons of fun. But we cannot have a faceless shadow person actually lead our great nation? (Though, again; that might be the BEST way to go.)

No, we will actually need a regular human, (who has a face) to run the country.

But WHO should it be?

How about all of them?

There are things I like about Ron Paul, but I do not like all of his ideals. Mitt Romney might be able to help with the economy. Newt could focus on the size of government. There is something I like about each one of these people. Yet, by themselves, they are “so-so.” However, together…

We will have the FIRST- “Collective President.”

Let’s face it; many on the Left claimed that it was Dick Cheney and BIG business that pulled President Bush’s strings. Also, there are those on the right who claim that George Soros and the SEIU are the puppet masters of President Obama.

We will be the FIRST to admit that one man, one woman, doesn’t fill the presidency. We will have the first “collective president.” (Plus, we would have the first female president, along with the first Mormon, second Black, and if we tossed in Jeb Bush; we would have the third “Bush family” president.

YES, the “collective” faceless Generic Republican is clearly the way to go in 2012.

There, with that problem solved; and it only took me 5 pain killers, now I can get back to weaving baskets and raising lamas. Did you know that by shaving one lama’s back, I can earn 3 bucks for the fur? That’s enough money to buy a loaf of bread. Plus, the Cheeseman just dropped off my free slab of government cheese.

“Toasted cheese sandwiches, anyone?”

Dam, life is good..!!

Strange Days, let the freaking Aliens pass the US budget

2011-08-01T20:29:00.002-04:00

Strange days- when nothing seems the way it should be.
You journey through the day as if you’re walking in a dream,
all the time wondering when reality is going to kick in.
David Harris
http://www.poemhunter.com/poem/strange-days-3/

YES…
I have been gone from the Internet for awhile. I do apologize to the people who may have been worried that something happened to me. It was rude of me to just cut off ties with the blogging world; giving no explanation for a leave. You must understand that I have never been very good with long; publicized “goodbyes.” My style is better suited to fading in, and fading out with no announcement.

No…
I was not thrown in prison for being an evil conservative, and living high off the hog from money obtained from POOR people. (Nor did I push any old ladies in wheelchairs off huge cliffs.) Also, I am not a hack who works for Murdoch, and had to rush to Europe when the s**t hit the fan. Neither was I part of the team that killed Osama bin Laden. (Just wanted to put those puppies to bed.)

I am just a blogging idiot who got tired of fighting the same political battles, (with only few exceptions) with the same people. Don’t get me wrong, I love talking with you folks out there; but I found myself typing the SAME thing- over and over, and it became- WORK. It just was not fun anymore. So I went back to using my computer for what it was originally meant for. (Downloading Pornography.)

However, while I was watching the reality show: The Pork House, (It’s a show about three guys who BBQ pigs. Hey, don’t knock it. Last week they showed us all how to pull pork.) Anyway, they had the nerve to break into the show so that the president could give some kind of speech. You would think that the president would have the decency to wait until 11 pm to give his speech. But no… The president’s speech was about some kind of stupid debt crisis, and the total crash of the US government. (Big freaking deal. The US government has been on the verge of a “big crash” ever since I was old enough to follow politics. What’s new?)

So I was stuck, trapped like a rat. Almost every channel that I tried, President Obama was there. (Well, except for the Travel Channel and the Hitler Channel.) So, I had little choice but to listen. Or, of course, I could have watched people buy a house on the HG channel. (I chose the president’s speech.)

First off…

I have been waiting, for some time, for a NEW Ronald Reagan to appear in politics, and Thank God we have found him. Barack Obama is the new Reagan. Not only is Team Obama pointing out “fun facts” from the Reagan years, President Obama is now quoting Reagan. This is a good thing. It is good because maybe, somehow, either by accident or osmosis, if they are studying Reagan; THEY MIGHT JUST LEARN SOMETHING.

It’s true..

For example, no one ever taught me that you should NEVER buy your wife (and / or girlfriend) a mop for her birthday. I just learned this fact by study and observation. So too, Team Obama may learn from Reagan.

Next, politicians make me want to yak. (Slang for puke- chuck- vomit.) Republican politicians have allowed the debt ceiling to be raised several dozen times in the last few decades, even when the republicans held the White House and Congress, they had no problem raising those debt ceilings. BUT NOW… “Oh, no, NOW we can’t allow the debt ceiling to be raised. If we do, we would give up on all of our principals.” So, it was ok to raise the debt ceiling while a member of the Republican Party is in charge, but now; no way??

I hate to bring “bigotry” into this topic, but what other reason could explain why republicans refuse to raise the debt ceiling for President Obama? Clearly, republicans HATE people from Hawaii.

Shame on the republicans. There is NO WAY that they have the votes in the Senate to pass a balanced budget amendment. Even if they did, President Obama will veto it. So, they are pissing around, acting like they are doing something BIG. (But in reality, they are doing nothing.) Weak minding people will congratulate these republicans for doing nothing. Meanwhile, the stock market could react negatively, and world banks could lower our credit rating, which could cause large- global companies to rethink about investing in America.

Sadly, the democrats are not any better. President Obama, when he was a Senator, voted against raising the debt ceiling while GW Bush was in office. So how can any democrat say; (with a straight face) that it is terrible that republicans are not rushing to sign a debt ceiling bill? “You guys did the same f**king thing. So shut your cry-baby faces, and grow a pair.” And, for the record, stop scaring old people and the military into thinking that they will not get their checks. THEY ARE GOING TO GET THEIR CHECKS.

Both sides have done the same thing. Since the 1950’s, the “out of power party” uses this debt ceiling raise to get goodies for their party. Both Democrats and republicans have done it. And yes, the other party always bitches about it and claims that “the end is near, if we do not act quickly.”

This is what pisses me off the most; using FEAR to scare the general public into thinking that Armageddon is around the corner, if we do not act quickly. Republicans used this tactic during President Bush to get congress to sign the TARP Fund. Democrats liked this idea and decided to scare the crap out of us by saying “the end is near” if we do not pass the stimulus bill. Now democrats are using fear to get the debt ceiling increased. Stop all the scare tactics, do your freaking jobs.

Stop and think of this…

Raising the debt ceiling is nothing more than calculating a budget. You are figuring what money you will need to pay for past debts and interest; plus your future budget this year. Taken down to its basics, raising the debt ceiling is nothing more than passing a budget. With that in mind, the US Congress, (and the President) were able to pass budgets during World War’s 1 and 2. We passed many budgets during the Great Depression. Hell, even President Lincoln found a way to pass budgets during the Civil War, during a time when Lincoln lost all of the tax money that was coming from the South. Somehow, Lincoln still found a way to get budgets passed.

We have found a way to pass budgets during the worst times in American history. Yet this collection of assholes, which we elected into office, cannot seem to do their job. Shame, shame, shame.

We all know what will happen here.

Both sides will pretend that they are “fighting for us little people.” They will sign some half-assed, watered-down deal; and they will rush to the TV microphones to tell us all “what a great job they did.” (Then they will head off for an extended vacation.) Might I suggest a great vacation in the Bermuda Triangle? (Hurricane season, anyone..??)

Just sign a stupid bill, you know you are going to sign a piss-poor bill anyway. Please skip the lecture about “what a great job you did for us little people,” and go on your GREAT Bermuda Triangle vacation.

This will allow democrats to get back to blaming Bush for everything that has gone wrong. (Why did Amy Winehouse die? Because of that F**king George Bush.)

And I, The Angry Republican, can get back to watching stuff that really matters on TV: “Ancient Aliens” on The History Channel.

Strange Days my friends, let the freaking Aliens pass the US budget

Obama- his speech MOVED me

2011-01-26T08:41:00.000-05:00

Obama- his speech MOVED me, goodbye conservatives

After listening to President Obama last night, I can no longer be a conservative anymore.

You might be tempted to ask how I can be a conservative for 30 years and just switch overnight..??

Simple...

I was “moved.”

President Obama “moved” me.

We SHOULD help those people who do not, or cannot help themselves..!!

Health Insurance

If a person has cancer, or if they need a heart transplant, or if they need a new gizzard. “We the people” should GET these poor souls a NEW gizzard.

(Well, when I say “we the people”, I do not mean that “you and I” should reach into OUR pockets and pay money for someone’s new gizzard. RICH people will buy this new gizzard for those who cannot afford it.) We will tax the RICH more money and buy new gizzards for everyone.

All of this got me thinking...

We could give people health insurance, but what good is the insurance if you do not have food..??

YOU COULD HAVE A BRAND NEW HEART AND GIZZARD, but without food...

You will die.

We need to get FREE food to everyone who needs it.

LET'S GIVE EVERYONE, EVEN PEOPLE WHO ARE RICH- Free food.

What is more basic to life than food..??

People are dying..!!

How can you be a cheap idiot who provides FREE health insurance, then you send the person off with NO freaking food..??

The government should just go after the BIG- rich people like: Halliburton and the Banks, and tax the hell out of them to get people FREE food.

You might say: “..AR, we already have Food Stamps and Welfare for the poor. Why do we need more FREE stuff..??”

That would be true. But we also have Medicaid and Medicare for the poor to get them the medical help that they need. You are missing the point that is being made by my NEW adopted party: The Democrats.

“We need to get more FREE stuff to people, because Americans are suffering.” People are dying..!! Don’t question it, you heartless bastard, just freaking do it.

I will probably NOT be taken seriously, I MUST prove my worth to the democrat party. I am here to help.

“What good is it to have the government buy a new heart, or gizzard, and stick it into a person; if they are going to eat crappy food AND DESTROY THAT NEW GIZZARD that we just paid for..??”

The responsible thing to do would be to protect our investment of new human organs.

Might I suggest “Food Police.”

Nothing big, maybe just 50 million people hired as the US Food Police. This would create NEW jobs.

We could dress the Food Police in some kind of uniform. Maybe brown shirts with some kind of fancy- official looking patch and badge. NO GUNS..!! The Food Police will carry night sticks and tasers. (Oh, wait. The left HATES tasers. Scrap that.)

The Food Police will check your house and see what kind of foods you are consuming. They will follow you to work and make sure that you are eating GOOD food. Foods like mangos and broccoli. Lots of veggies and fruits. Veggie burgers and tofurkey are fine to eat. (Tofurkey- a fake turkey made of tofu.)

The Food Police will keep you healthy so that “we the people” will not have to buy you a new gizzard, or a liver transplant.

However, what good is having a new heart, or gizzard transplant, and a belly full of food; if you have no place to call home..??

What is more basic than a home? It is the American dream..!!

People are dying..!!

I cannot believe that you sick bastards would give a person FREE health insurance, FREE food; but then toss them out into the street with no home..??

“We the people” should buy everyone a new home. A home that will last a lifetime..!! What better gift could we give?

(NOTE) when I say “we”, I do not mean “me.” I ain’t buying nothing. I mean “those people.” The RICH people should buy all of us new homes.

We should give everyone a FREE car.

What good is having a new heart, a full belly, and a nice new home; if you are stuck in that house and cannot go anywhere..??

OK, I realize that “some people” (those dam conservatives, cheap idiots) might suggest that people use mass transit and that the US government cannot afford to buy everyone a new car.

Brain- dead republicans..!!

Does the bus go anywhere near where YOU want to go? NO..!! Does the bus arrive at places when you need to be there? NO..??

Everyone should have a free car, and you should buy them one.

People are dying..!!

The world’s richest country SHOULD be able to provide it’s people with FOOD. Everyone should have FREE food. You will die without food.

The world’s “superpower” should give every American health insurance.

Every American should have a house.

Every American should have a FREE car.

What good is any of this stuff if you have no clothes..?? You cannot go out and do anything if you have no clothes. The government should buy everyone new clothes.

What good is a new FREE house if you have no appliances..?? You will need to cook the FREE government food? You will need to wash the FREE government clothes..??

If you have FREE government appliances, you will need FREE government electricity and gas to run these things.

WOW...

We are going to need a lot of RICH people in America to pay for all of this FREE government stuff.

What if there isn’t enough rich people in America to pay for all of this FREE stuff..?? Or what if the rich people leave America for lower tax rates somewhere else..??

I hope that the government doesn’t come after me for more tax money. I work hard and I sure as hell can’t afford higher taxes.

I don’t want to leave America..!!

I love this place..!!

But I can barely afford my needs and wants now. How can I pay for the needs and wants of others..??

This ticks me off..!!

I work hard. I have all my life.

I give to charities.

We already have Welfare and Food Stamps for people who are down on their luck.

We have Medicaid and Medicare for the poor people.

What about MY needs..??

Just because I work, I get no FREE stuff. I am punished with higher taxes for working.

But if I get fired from my job, I become eligible for FREE stuff..??

That makes a lot of freaking sense..??

What’s my incentive to get up and go to work every da...

Wait, what just happened here..??

I no longer feel “warm and fuzzy” from President Obama’s speech..??

I now feel angry.

I feel like an Angry Republican.

(So, that is how it all happened, all those years ago.)

Now I remember...

In the 1970's, when I was a liberal; I thought it would be GREAT to give people FREE stuff. Because, that would be the nice thing to do.

However, logic asks: when do you stop giving people FREE stuff?

You are going to give people free Health Insurance, but you are NOT going to give them free FOOD..?? What kind of sick human being are you..??

If you give people FREE food and FREE health insurance, wouldn’t you also want to give them a place to live? You cold bastard..!!

Where does it end..??

When does liberalism and progressive idealism end..??

When all of the RICH people, and all of the companies that provide JOBS, leaves America and there is no one left to pay for the FREE government services.

That is when it ends.

“..The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money..” Margaret Thatcher

Coming this weekend

Thanks for reading

The Angry Republic

Keith Olbermann Fired? Must be a conspiracy

2011-01-21T22:12:00.002-05:00

As a writer, I try very hard to “walk a mile in another man’s shoes.” It saves wear and tear on my shoes, and they last much longer.

(See, what I did there? You thought I was going to talk about integrity. My ability to see both sides of a story. Instead, I talked about how cheap I am.)

None the less, while I am wearing your shoes, (to save wearing out my shoes) I do catch a glimpse of what it must be like; TO BE YOU.

It’s gotta be tough to be a progressive right now. After all, it was those evil conservatives and their hate speech who caused that Arizona kid to kill people. AND WHICH TV HOST GETS FIRED?

Glenn Beck….No.

Rush Limbaugh…No.

Keith Olbermann…

Keith Olbermann gets fired..??

What the hell is going on in this crazy world? Those Neo-Cons are taking over, everywhere. This has got to have something to do with Comcast merging with NBC Universal. I bet you Comcast is in bed with those conservative Neo-con assholes. This is a conspiracy.

(OK, let me put my shoes back on, your shoes do not fit- RIGHT.)

If a progressive would have read my editorial that was published in November, 2010; when Olbermann was suspended, this new event wouldn’t be a shock to you.

In that editorial, I explain exactly why liberals should look for a new TV network to call home, and I talk about a possible network they could seek out.

Today, I wanted to talk about “WHY” Keith Olbermann was fired (or he quit, was let go, or mutual termination of a 4 year contract, etc. However they want to describe it.)

Many liberals might be tempted to blame the recent deal for Comcast to merge with NBC Universal; which operates MSNBC and CNBC.

To my knowledge, Comcast is neither a Right- nor Left leaning company. In my humble opinion, Comcast entered into this deal to pick up Universal. Think about all the Hollywood movies that have been made, which fall under the Universal banner. If you own an “On Demand” movie service, it might be nice to have a hand in Universal. And Comcast was probably interested in NBC, which could be a diamond in the rough. CNBC and MSNBC were just part of the package, and Comcast probably has no immediate plans for each.

How can I say this, why am I so sure that Comcast isn’t a Right-wing outfit, and why would you believe me?

Simple…

Look at the MSNBC lineup, after Keith Olbermann is gone:

5pm- Chris Matthews- (Same as it ever was)
If Comcast were a conservative outfit, you would see at least one conservative face in that crowd. Hell, with the addition of the “Young Turks”, I believe MSNBC is now leaning even MORE Left.

6pm- Cenk Uygur of the Web show "The Young Turks" will now take over this timeslot. Cenk is so progressive that he makes some liberals cringe.

7pm- Repeat of Chris Matthews (I think?)

8pm- Lawrence O’Donnell will take over the Keith Olbermann spot. In my opinion, O’Donnell is much more partisan than Olbermann ever was. He even called himself a socialist.

9pm- Rachel Maddow

10pm- Ed Shultz

No, this has nothing to do with the politics of Comcast. It has everything to do with the routing out of “troublesome” people.

Jeff Zucker, the “head cheese” of programming at NBC and MSNBC was also, along with Olbermann, let go from his duties. Zucker was behind the Conan O’Brian / Jay Leno mess which took place last year. Critics in the business have been very objective towards Zucker’s leadership, and many site Zucker as the reason for low rating at NBC’s networks.

Which leads us to why Keith Olbermann was fired (or had a mutual parting of ways with MSNBC.)

It is no secret that Olbermann fights with his bosses. He fought with management at ESPN, which caused his departure at that network. Keith walked out on his first job at MSNBC, and has had problems with MSNBC President- Phil Griffin, over the past few years.

Some companies and bosses, like GE and Jeff Zucker, are willing to tolerate a demanding individual, but Comcast isn’t willing to do this. They weeded out the two people that they felt that they would have problems with. (Zucker and Olbermann.)

Some people, like the web site- The Wrap (dotcom) believes Olbermann left MSNBC on his own accord to start his own web site; similar to The Huffington Post. If this were true, surely Keith Olbermann could have run a web site while still doing his TV show. Glenn Beck runs two web sites (Glenn Beck dotcom, and The Blaze) Beck does a 3 hour radio show, and a 1 hour TV show everyday, plus personal appearances.

Keith Olbermann isn’t a dumb guy, he should have been able to chew gum and walk at the same time? This, to me, is a cover story to explain why Olbermann left MSNBC, which helps soften his ego. But clearly, Olbermann saw the writing on the wall, and knew his time was limited.

Jeff Bercovici, a blogger at Forbes, completely disagrees with me. Jeff believes that Comcast is a conservative company, and Jeff lists a connection between Comcast and News Corp / Fox News. Jeff believes that Olbermann was fired solely because Comcast is a conservative outfit.

If this were true Jeff, why would Comcast keep Maddow? Or O’Donnell? Or add a show for The Young Turks? Wouldn’t Comcast stick at least ONE conservative host into MSNBC’s lineup?

John Gibson would LOVE to have a TV show again. Tucker Carlson is searching for a primetime show. There has to be at least two dozen conservative broadcasters who would jump at the chance to have a conservative show on MSNBC. If Comcast were a conservative company, who wanted to drastically change MSNBC, they would have waited until they had a few conservative shows developed, then they would have dropped two of the MSNBC liberal shows and added their conservative shows.

No, in my opinion; Comcast weeded out two people that they figured they would have problems with. (Keith and Zucker.) I believe that they have no immediate plans for MSNBC and will run it with the schedule listed above (for a while.) They are probably most interested in the Hollywood movies listed under Universal and the NBC network.

As far as a “link” between News Corp / Fox News and Comcast...

Sure, there is a link. Comcast is, after all; a cable TV provider, at its core. Comcast HAS to deal with News Corp because Murdoch operates, at least, 4 TV networks: Fox, Fox News, Fox business, FX. Comcast has a link between ABC Disney. Comcast has had a “link” and dealings with Ted Turner (who owns or used to own) TBS, Turner classic movies, CNN, Headline news, etc.

Being in the cable TV business; you are going to have “links” and ties with all of the networks that your cable outfit displays. To site just one “link” (Fox News) is dishonest. And to site ONE GUY who was fired from Comcast, who now claims that he was fired because Fox wanted him fired, because he spoke out about Bill O’Reilly; is just plain silly. My God, everyone at MSNBC would be fired if that were true. They all have spoken out about O’Reilly.

Keith Olbermann was fired (or given a “heads-up” that he should leave) because Comcast did not want to deal with his ugly business persona. It had nothing to do with Keith’s politics because Comcast is keeping all the other liberal hosts.

Will Comcast keep MSNBC a liberal network, over the long haul..??

I can’t say for sure. I believe Comcast will go after CNN in ratings. In the future, Comcast may drop any show that isn’t doing well against CNN, during a particular timeslot.

If I am right, and my first editorial on this subject is spot-on, then liberals need to find a new TV home. (And I list a few new TV homes at that editorial.)

If I am wrong, and Comcast is an evil conservative company bent on destroying the liberal paradise called: MSNBC; then progressives will need to find a new home.

Either way, MSNBC might not be a good place for progressives to call: HOME.

Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republic

Darwinism, talking monkeys, the mud puddle of LIFE, and YOU must obey

2011-01-02T21:35:00.002-05:00

A country where students can challenge the Constitution, students can question the wisdom of great American Presidents, and can openly rebuke religion, however they cannot challenge Global Warming or Darwinism; this country has definitely lost its way.

UPDATE^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

The Founder of Greenpeace believes that Global Warming is natural- NOT man made. (Something that we have talked about for years, here on this web site.)

LINK- A GREAT story, from- The Blaze

Remember when a group of long- haired weirdo's began to question if the earth was the center of the known universe?

At the time, the popular belief was that Earth was the center of it all and the sun, the stars, and all the heavens moved around us.

These wild- eyed men claimed the earth was just another object flying around the sun.

Religion took the blame for this one. (Keeping mankind in the dark.) The blame is somewhat unjust, as it was religion that was paying for the research of Galileo and Copernicus- as a way of "finding God" through research.

Just 600 years ago, mankind believed the earth was flat. If you sailed out too far in the ocean, you would fall off the edge.

A few people believed the earth was round and they were willing to risk their lives to prove this theory.

In each case: When "popular belief" proves to be incorrect over time, there are "people" who have a vested interest in maintaining that false belief.

In the case of the earth being the center of the universe, religion is blamed because "God would have made the Earth important."

Keeping you from sailing across a "round" earth were Kingdoms that benefited from current trade routes across land. (Besides- you will fall off the earth if you sail out too far..!!)

Today- there are many people who benefit in the Global Warming Theory and Darwinism. They have a vested interest in maintaining this popular belief.

There is no room for wild eyed, longhaired scientists and philosophers to question Global Warming and Darwinism.

1,000 years ago- mankind KNEW the earth was the center of the universe.

600 years ago- mankind KNEW the earth was flat.

Today- mankind KNOWS life started in a bubbling mud puddle and a hand full of apes received "intelligence", while no other ape ever did? No other creature ever "evolved" intelligence.

Imagine what you will KNOW- tomorrow..??

I have no bones about giving a student a well-rounded education. However, the FORCED, (without challenge) education of Global Warming and Darwinism- has no place in a free society.

It borders on indoctrination.

A student…

A teacher- should have the right to question why one monkey gained intelligence, when the other monkey (from the same region) never did.

"If mankind is causing the earth to warm up, what caused the earth to warm up 19,000 years ago, when man was NOT burning fossil fuels?"

In America today, a teacher could be in trouble for questioning Darwinism or Global Warming.

Just like the flat-earthers from 600 years ago: "You must believe that you descended from a monkey, who was formed from a mud puddle. And you are causing the earth to warm up.

You cannot question it.

A teacher will be removed from pubic schools if they question the POWERFUL popular belief that a couple of monkeys gain intelligence.

A student will receive lower grades if they challenge the Global Warming Theory.

Just except it.

Because that is the way it is in the FREE United States.

Not so fast there, Bubba…

In the land of the free, there is still some freedom.

A force that Democrats will have to deal with in the future:

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal has signed into law- The Louisiana Science Education Act.

This Act will allow Louisiana teachers to present contrary evidence against Global Warming, Darwinism, and many other "popular beliefs."

For the first time in a long time, students and teachers will be aloud to think outside the box.

A country where students can challenge the Constitution, students can question the wisdom of great American Presidents, and can openly rebuke religion, however they cannot challenge Global Warming or Darwinism; this country has definitely lost its way.

(Read that last paragraph again. It is so freaking ironic; it almost makes you laugh.)

This Louisiana Education Act is refreshing.

Beware of what liberals accuse you of, for they are surely masters of that evil activity

2010-12-29T18:54:00.003-05:00

Just in case you are living the GREEN life, and you have turned off your TV to save the earth. Maybe you do not read the newspapers, and you only fire up your computer once a week to see if the rest of us are still alive (out here.) Maybe you do not know what happened last week?

Or, maybe you have rationalized all of the events of last week, and basically “parrot” everything that you hear. You, yourself; never really have an opinion on things?

Either way; last week we had a tragic event take place: a deranged individual killed 6 people and wounded others in Tucson Arizona. Most of us rational people felt sick about the event, and asked questions like: “How could someone do this? Could the police have stopped this? Were there warning signs?”

Some liberals do not THINK like us normal- rational people do. These liberals heard about this horrible event in Arizona and thought: “I hate Glenn Beck, I hate Sarah Palin. How can I make this killing in Arizona a political event and blame Rush, Beck, and Palin? I know, I will say that because Beck, Rush, and Palin speak out about President Obama, and say hurtful things, it caused this kid to kill people in Arizona. Where can I find a microphone to float my theory, into the news, about evil republicans and their evil hate speech, and how republicans killed those people in Arizona?”

Liberals had no problem finding a microphone. All of the news organizations piled on to help promote the theory that Jared, the Arizona killer, was moved to KILL because of conservative talk radio. Even Fox News had Geraldo Rivera pushing the theory.

There was one problem…

Not one person was even sure if this kid listened to talk radio, or if he attended any of Glenn Beck’s shows, or if he was a Tea Party member, or if he was a republican who listens to Rush?

Liberals quickly fixed this lack of information by putting together a FAKE voter registration for Jared, which claimed that he was a republican. This is, of course, a very serious crime: forging State documents for public view could get someone a long jail sentence. When this document was found out to be a fake, liberals didn’t seem concerned about the crime that just took place in front of our eyes, and continued with their assault on the Tea Party: “If Sarah Palin would go away, if Rush would tone it down, if guns were illegal; Jared would have NEVER killed anyone.”

Again, there is one problem with this theory…

Jared didn’t listen to conservative talk radio. Jared didn’t attend Tea Party rallies, and as far as guns being outlawed, remember Jared would have no problems finding guns because he bought illegal drugs. I, having some experience in buying illegal drugs, (decades ago, when I was a- utopia searching liberal- who got stoned) I know that anyone who buys illegal drugs also knows where to get illegal guns. Maybe your drug dealer doesn’t actually sell guns, but he will know someone who does.

So, even if guns were illegal, Jared could have gotten a gun from his drug dealer. And, (more important) Jared wasn’t moved to kill by conservative Talk Radio.

Just when things were quieting down, a man was arrested in Tucson for death threats. It seems that during a Town Hall meeting, a Tea Party member: Trent Humphies; stated that all suggestions on new gun restrictions SHOULD be held off until all the dead were buried. Not liking what Trent just said, a self-proclaimed liberal, named: James Eric Fuller- stood up in the crowd, took a picture of Tea Party member- Trent, and told Trent: “You’re DEAD.”

Now, I am not sure how you define “hate speech”, however; standing up at a meeting and telling a Tea Party member “You’re DEAD” is a very hateful thing to say.

Before you think that I am about to make “political hay” from a tragedy, let me say this: I do not blame MSNBC because James Fuller told a Tea Party member that “You’re DEAD.” I do not blame Keith Olbermann or Maddow because this man is so angry. Fuller was one of the victims in the Arizona shooting. The guy is grieving, he is emotional, and anything that Chris Matthews said did not force Fuller to act violent. I do not want MSNBC to be censored, in fact; I like having MSNBC there because they give me endless amounts of material to write about.

But that is the difference between a conservative like me, and the liberals who tried to turn death and tragedy into a political event. Hence, the title of my editorial:

“..Beware of what liberals accuse you of, for they are surely masters of that evil activity..”

Above- a still picture from the movie “Death of a President”, where Bush is assassinated.

What pissed me off the most about the disgusting display by liberals over the Arizona shooting, and blaming republicans for the killer’s actions; is that we had to watch liberals assault President Bush for 8 years. From creating a movie showing President Bush being shot and killed (Movie: “Death of a President), to liberals writing a book called: “How to assassinate President Bush.” (If you liberals do not believe me, do a Google search on the book or the movie, it is true. You liberals wrote this stuff.) Could you imagine a conservative writing a book called: How to assassinate President Obama?

Liberals here at this web site called President Bush a liar, a murderer, and a war criminal. Bush has never been charged in a court of law for lying, or war crimes; so calling Bush a war criminal or a liar is HATE SPEECH because none of this has ever been proven. Worse yet, calling Bush a war criminal could cause a sick minded person to take justice into his own hands (if I use YOUR theory.)

Liberals do not see the nasty things that they are doing, yet they accuse us conservatives of the same act. Why is it OK for you to talk trash about President Bush, but we cannot do the same for President Obama?

The point of this editorial, which I hope to reach, is that there is nothing new in modern political dialogue. (And, a side note would be: you whiney ass liberals dished it out for 8 years during President Bush, now you know what it feels like to be the receiver.)

Same as it ever was

A brief American history lesson: The man who would be president- Alexander Hamilton

I call Hamilton “the man who would be president” not necessarily because I agree with him politically, but because he probably would have been elected as president sooner or later, except that he ended up DEAD.

How did he die, you might ask?

Alexander Hamilton (then- Secretary of the Treasury) died in a gun duel with Vice President Aaron Burr.

These two Founding Fathers could not agree on the political direction of America. They fought heated debates. There was bad blood between each family. And they wrote “hateful” speeches against each other. The only thing that Burr and Hamilton could agree on is the way to solve this political debate: for one of them to die.

So they stood back to back in a field in New Jersey, they took ten paces from each other, they turned and they fired at each other.

A witness to the duel made this statement, later on: “Three died that day. Hamilton died from Burr’s gunfire. Burr’s political life died, and he lived out the rest of his life in exile. And the American Federalist Party, all died that day, in a field in New Jersey.”

The Hamilton- Burr duel is a mere exclamation point in long-line of heated political debate in American politics. To say that political rhetoric is any more heated today than it was during the time of the Founding Fathers is to reveal your lack of knowledge in history.

Granted, Burr never called Hamilton: “Hitler.” (Primarily because Hitler wasn’t born until 100 years after Hamilton’s death.) Yet, they did liken each other to the King of England. (Which carried a lot of weight in those days. It is kind of like calling someone- Hitler.)

Please, remember this…

Freedom of speech is NOT truly free, if you must be careful of what you say.

(Which means..)

If you must be careful of what you say, then there is no freedom of speech.

If Glenn Beck says something that is untrue of George Soros, Soros can sue Beck. The American court system solves the problem of liars in the media. (Notice, Soros has yet to sue Beck for any statement Beck has made.)

If Rush Limbaugh says “I hope Obama fails”, he hasn’t really said anything hateful. It is Rush’s opinion that the country would be better off if President Obama’s policies fail.

Shame on all of the people who tried to make a tragedy into a chance to score political points, as we now know politics had nothing to do with the killings in Arizona.

Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republic

Interested in talking monkeys, the mud puddle of life, and Darwinism? Please check out my editorial on the subject. LINK

The new Bill of Rights

2010-12-24T09:05:00.000-05:00

Is everything today, negative..?? Sometimes the news headlines can scare the crap out of you.

New York City is contemplating whether to ban table salt from all city restaurants. Many of us Americans are still in withdrawal from the banning of trans-fats in restaurants. (There’s nothing better than a “freedom fry” cooked in synthetic lard. What’s that big deal? There is a hospital around each corner, chuck full of artery stints.)

If many global warming people had their way, you would be told what size car you can drive, how warm (or cool) you could keep your house, what you can eat, and when you are legally allowed to pass gas.

Yes folks, I know...

It would seem that this time in which we live in is filled with negative ideas.

How can anyone be happy upon hearing about all the things that they can NO LONGER do..??

However, there is HOPE in all this CHANGE.

You might remember Barack Obama talking about the Bill of Rights when he was running for president? Remember Obama explaining how the Bill of Rights is a negative document, filled with stuff that people CANNOT do.

President Obama has talked about the need for a NEW Bill of Rights which would be positive. This new Bill of Rights would talk about all the things that you have a “Right to do.”

Well, here at The Angry Republic, we have inside people who got a hold of a draft copy of the NEW Bill of Rights, and I would like to share it with you, today.

(This is so exciting..!! I love having an exclusive..!!)

The NEW American Bill of Rights

Article 1

You have the right to other people’s “stuff.”

Life is unfair, and some people have MORE “stuff” than you do. To make life more fair, you now have the right to take your neighbor’s stuff. (NOTE) The framers of this Bill had thought about allowing you to go to your neighbor’s house and take the stuff that you feel that you deserve. However, it would be difficult to tell who is a thief, and who is exercising their constitutional right to take “stuff.” Therefore, we will continue with the current taxation system that is in place. (ALSO NOTE) If you look around your neighborhood and you have MORE STUFF than your neighbors do, then you are excluded from this Right.

Article 2

You have the Right to have free health insurance.

(NOTE) You do NOT have a right to FREE Health Insurance if we (the government) believe that you make too much money, or we do not like you, or some glitch takes place in the government computer system.

Article 3

(NOTE) Article 3 is being left blank at this time. In the future, when democrats need votes to win an election, they will suggest that “Americans have a Right to FREE food.” Democrats will tell Americans that 100,000 people die everyday because they didn’t have FREE government food. When gullible Americans elect the democrats, Article 3 will be offered. FREE government food.

Article 4

(NOTE) Article 4 is being left blank at this time. Future democrats will need a way to win elections. Democrats will tell people that every American “has a Right to FREE housing.” Then, after you have elected the democrats, they will spend several years fighting with each other over the details of Article 4, (just like with the current Health Care Bill) and some piss-poor, watered down version will appear here, in the future.

Article 5

You have the Right to have pride.

Every American has a right to be proud. If a person says anything that makes you “feel bad” about yourself, that person will be jailed for one year. During incarceration, the “pride killing” criminal will be subjected to sensibility counseling and forced to watch the movie: “All about Steve”, featuring Sandra Bullock. (NOTE) Article 5 does not end free speech in America. However, if you choose to use free speech, you could go to jail, IF; any other person “feels bad” after you spoke, and; providing that they have a better lawyer than you do.

Article 6

You have a Right to work.

It is unfair that some people have a job and others do not. It is unfair that some people have better jobs, and other people cook hamburgers. By taking down everyone from those “high levels” in employment, we can make the bottom level jobs seem better than what they actually are.

People will “feel” better.

With the health care bill, we can attack doctors and nurse’s paychecks and lower them under the guise of “saving the taxpayer’s money”, or we will call it: “health reform.” We have already gone after business executive’s high pay using guilt and high taxation. The rest of you “high earners”, we are coming for you. (NOTE) Article 6 does not include lawyers and people working in Hollywood. Since you folks usually vote democrat, you are free to earn as much as you like.

(ALSO NOTE) Article 6 only applies to people who “want to work.” If you do not want to work, stay home and refer to Articles 1, 2, 3, 4, and 8.

Article 7

You have a Right to win.

Everyone wants to win.

Unfortunately, most of you poor bastards will spend your entire life losing. You will lose at the casino, and you will never win a lottery. Your luck will not be any better with sports, you will lose races, football games, tennis; you will lose virtually everything that you hold dear in life.

This is a sad prospect, and it makes one wonder why you poor bastards keep breathing?

To counter this emotion, the government will enact the National Lottery.

The “National Lottery” is free to everyone who is standing within the USA borders, and everyone will win- something.

To be entered into the National Lottery, all you have to do is show up at any of the thousands of National Lottery locations and allow us to implant a small tracking.. (aaahh, computer chip) into your skull. This computer chip is completely harmless, and bears the markings of 666 on it’s cover. This computer chip will allow the government to find you and give you your lottery prize when you win, and the government will be able to track where you go, who you hang around with, and what type of “stuff” that you are reading. (For your own safety.)

Every minute, 8 people will win a lottery prize. This means that within 70 years, everyone in America will win this lottery. So you will be a winner, eventually. (NOTE) if you die early in life, you might not win the lottery, in which case you will probably not care about this lottery; being that you are dead.)

Prizes range from a potato peeler, to an autographed copy of President Obama’s new book: “The Greatest President EVER”.

Or you could win an all expense paid trip (for one) to Intercourse Pennsylvania, the heart of Amish Country.

Article 8

You have the Right to sit in your house and keep your f**king mouth shout.

Let face it, every time that you leave your house, you cause the streets to be over crowded, you pollute the earth, and you are always demanding things like “Rights.”

It would be much better for everyone if you would just stay home.

Article 8 states that you have the right to stay home and isolate yourself, cutting yourself off from the rest of society as a whole. The government will take care of (food, clothing, shelter) anyone who chooses to exercise their constitutional rights under Article 8. However, if you venture outside of your house, or make contact with anyone; you will lose your Article 8 rights. (NOTE) Article 8 does not apply to lawyers, democrat politicians, or Hollywood celebrities; who are free to roam around the planet and speak their minds.

Article 9

You have the Right to be right.

Even a broken clock is right twice a day. You should also have the same rights as a broken clock.

Every American will have two chances to be right, no matter how wrong they are. Facts be dammed, the truth is unimportant. You will be right- twice. However, once you have used up your two “rights”, you will go back to being wrong. (NOTE) Hollywood Actors, lawyers, and Labor Union leaders are excluded from Article 9, because they donate millions of dollars to the Democrat Party.

This concludes the NEW Bill of Rights. (That is, until the 2012 election, when democrats will need to get your vote. God only knows how many MORE Rights may be added to this Bill of Rights if democrats are trailing in the 2012 election.)

Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republic

If one person has a RIGHT to something he did not earn, of necessity it requires that another person not have a right to something that he did earn.

True rights, such as those in our Constitution, or those considered to be natural or human rights, exist simultaneously among people. That means exercise of a right by one person does not diminish those held by another. In other words, my rights to speech or travel impose no obligations on another except those of non-interference.

For Congress to guarantee a right to health care, or any other good or service, whether a person can afford it or not, it must diminish someone else’s rights, namely their rights to their earnings.

Walter E. Williams

Thanks for reading

The Angry Republic

Naughty or Nice list for 2010

2010-12-20T21:05:00.002-05:00

It is time again for our annual “Naughty or Nice” Christmas list. (That is, of course, total BS. We have never done a naughty or nice list, ever. But it just sounds better if we act like it is a long standing tradition.)

As we have done for many, many years in the past (again, a boat load of crap) it is time to countdown the famous people who have done something this year, which has landed these folks into the news. Then, by using our wisdom and experience (more BS), we will tell you if this person (or thing) has been naughty, or nice, or indifferent. (Indifferent- neither nice, or naughty, just breathing and taking up space.)

Ok, let’s get started...

Angelina Jolie, Jennifer Aniston, and Megan Fox have all been very naughty this year.

Actually, I have no proof that any of these three women have been naughty this year. But for some reason, when I think about these women “being naughty”, it just makes me feel better. (Don’t try and figure it out, it has something to do with testosterone, I do not even understand it.)

Next up- Julian Assange

For convenience and to ease your reading experience, from this point forward, we will refer to Julian Assange as: J-Ass.

Has J-Ass been Naughty, Nice, or Indifferent?

J-Ass has been- indifferent (definitely NOT nice, closer to naughty, however J-Ass is indifferent because he is basically a blob of human flesh that is taking up space.

If J-Ass were an American, we could claim that he was being unpatriotic, or even (maybe) committing treason. But he is not an American. If we can prove that J-Ass talked a US soldier into removing secret US documents, then J-Ass is in big trouble. But that might be hard to prove. If J-Ass were leaking stories that prove that global warming is a hoax, we would be patting J-Ass on the back. If J-Ass published stories about the inter workings of the Iranian government, we would want to shake J-Ass’s hand.

However, unfortunately for us, J-Ass has made America his newest target. We were not always J-Ass’s prime meal ticket. From 2006, (when Wikileaks started) until last year, two of Wikileaks prime targets were China and corrupt governments in Africa.

The REAL villains in this Wikileaks mess are..??

Villain 1

22 year old Army Intelligence Expert Bradley Manning. As of writing this, Manning is accused of stealing hundreds of thousands of documents from US military and State Dept computers, and turning this information over to Wikileaks. If found guilty, Manning should spend a long time in a military prison. (Maybe Gitmo..??) Very Naughty.

Villain 2

Whomever is in charge of security for military and State Dept computers and files. How a 22 year old soldier could walk away with thousands of secret US files is insane? Very- very naughty..!!

Villain 3

Michael Moore and others who are running to J-Ass’s defense. Remember, J-Ass is accused of (sort of) raping TWO women.” Yes, everyone consented to the sex, however the women wanted J-Ass to wear a condom. J-Ass said he put on a condom, but he didn’t, and completed the act. Is that rape, rape? Or “sort of” rape? Who the hell knows?

One woman, who is being called “Miss A”, claims that sex with Assange was “the worst sex ever.” LINK.

This is bad news for us men. If women are able to charge us men, in a court of law, with “bad sex”, it’s all over for us. However, I digress, this is no laughing matter.

J-Ass is currently running away from the law. Assange is accused of raping two women. J-Ass is NOT a “poster-boy” for justice and “fair play” in the world. Until J-Ass appears in court to face these rape charges, J-Ass is a criminal, and Michael Moore should not be running to his aid.

(Which brings us back to...)

Villain 4

Julian Assange (J-Ass)- He is not a villain for printing the US secret documents. Yes, he could have been “nice” and refused to print them. But printing these documents doesn’t make him “naughty”, it just makes him one of the thousands of people who are trying to get (richer) quicker. However, Assange is naughty for running away from his rape charges.

Next up...

Naughty, Nice, or Indifferent.

American politicians

“Don’t ask, don’t tell” about the “Bush tax cuts”, unemployment extensions, earmarks- O- plenty in the omnibus bill, the DREAM Act, and everything else that politicians have been fighting about this fall has lead us to the conclusion that politicians are- Indifferent this year. “Same as it ever was” would be the best way to describe politics.

Whether you are a democrat or a republican (and all points beyond), there is something in this latest group of “Christmas Time” government bills that will make you happy...

And there is stuff in these bills that will piss you off.

Liberals are pissed that rich people got their tax breaks extended, and they are angry that the DREAM Act was shot down. They blame republicans for this, however 5 democrats voted against the Dream Act (or were no-votes) which is why it failed to receive the votes LINK. Liberals are happy that unemployment is being extended and “don’t ask, don’t tell” will be repealed.

Conservatives are angry over (the stuff listed above) and that the Bush tax cuts were not made permanent, but conservatives are happy that we are not raising taxes on small business owners in this economy, the “death tax” might not be increased, and the HUGE Omnibus 2011 budget bill, chuck full of 6,000 earmarks, got turned down. (For now.)

Yes, congress has given everyone a reason to smile, and a reason to give the government the middle finger.

Next...

Naughty, Nice, or Indifferent

Fox News’ Megyn Kelly has been very naughty this year.

OK, so I just recycled that same joke from the beginning of this editorial, big deal? I am trying to be “GREEN” and save the earth by recycling old jokes instead of wasting computer space and electricity on creating new jokes. So shoot me.

Naughty, Nice, or Indifferent

Larry King

Aaaah come on, this is easy. For being in the media longer than most of us have been alive. Surviving 25 years at CNN (no easy task). And for being himself, which is like no one else on TV, Larry King has been “Nice” and he will be missed. (Especially, considering what CNN has lined up to replace him.)

Next up...

Naughty, nice, or indifferent.

Hurricanes

This year was supposed to be a killer hurricane season. Remember back at mid-summer, forecasters were predicting HUGE- stronger hurricanes this year. Scientists and global warming people told us that we were going to be hit with many, many hurricanes, and guess what...

(Pssst) Na-da..!!

This is a tough one for us (at The Angry Republic) to call because it depends on your perspective. If you live along the American coastline, hurricane season was very “nice” this year. However, if you are Al Gore and his man-made global warming minions, you are depressed because this year was supposed to knock your socks off with strong hurricanes, but that didn’t happen.

Hurricane season 2010- Nice

Global Warming people- Naughty (for scaring people into thinking that huge hurricanes were coming. Then sitting back with your fingers crossed, looking for these killer storms. All, so you could say- “I told you so.”) Very naughty.

Next up...

Naughty, Nice, or Indifferent

President Obama has been VERY naughty this year.

OK, so you are a dog lover. BIG DEAL.

That is no reason to hit that poor cat IN THE FACE with a snowball.

Very, very naughty Mr. President.

Next up...

Naughty, Nice, or Indifferent

A group of Arabs, bankrolled by Saudi King Abdullah, are trying to move the Ground Zero Mosque to a site that is a mile away from ground zero. This new site is located at an abandoned hospital. Plans call for most of the hospital to be reopened with the Mosque located in a side building. LINK
If this holds true, I believe this would be a great gesture by Muslims in showing that they care for our feelings and want to work with us. We need more acts of understanding on both sides.

Yes, we have had problems with Saudi Arabia, (not to mention that most of the 9/11 terrorists were Saudi), however this act by the Saudi King is very nice.

Next up...

Naughty, Nice, or Indifferent

100 Santas playing “Roll out the barrel” on accordions...

VERY NAUGHTY..!!

Ok, now it is your turn. If know of anyone who has been nice, naughty, or just a blob of flesh, taking up space; let us know in the comment section.

Merry Christmas from AR Babonie- LINK

Evil Republicans hate US heros

2010-12-13T11:15:00.002-05:00

Who would deny benefits for the poor firefighters and police who helped during 9/11?

“Those DAM republicans. Sick bastards. I hope they all die. How could they NOT fund the poor hero’s during 9/11?”

This is a tough charge. How do you fight this? (You don’t.) You never should have to in the first place.

Let me start this out by saying that republicans couldn’t fight their way out of a wet paper bag, even if they had a knife. Whenever you stand back, silently, and allow the democrats to frame the debate, you will lose. Democrats are doing a fine job of running with this issue, and they are winning the debate. (But democrats are not telling the people the whole truth.)

Shorty after 9/11, it was decided that we (the government) would help out ALL of the hero’s who risked their lives during 9/11, with tax funded medical care. However, congress placed a time limit on when a hero could apply for this help. Hero’s, being who they are, (hero’s) they didn’t necessarily run to the government for FREE medical care. They felt fine. They didn’t have any problems. They went home.

Problem…

Today, some of these hero’s are coming up with strange cancers that cannot be explained by normal activity (smoking, foods, etc.) But, it is past the time that they can apply for this original government medical aid.

I understand what republicans are doing, I just can’t understand why republicans have chosen this issue to do it. Republicans heard us loud and clear during the last election: “Stop the dam spending.” So they are trying to be conservative and ask for committees to study this problem, and they want a detailed accounting of where the money will come from, and they want to give speeches on the matter; and they look like DAM fools. (And they are getting their asses handed to them.)

When we said “stop the dam spending”, we meant stop giving tons of money to GM, and Fanny Mae, and GE. When we said “stop the spending”, we meant stop spending 2 million dollars to study monkeys on cocaine. When we said “stop the dam spending” we meant stop spending money to build a bridge to nowhere.

We did NOT meant stop spending money on firefighters who now have cancer from saving lives during 9/11.

Do we have to spell it out for you assholes? We want you to stop spending $800 billion to bail out AIG, but it is OK to spend $8 billion to bail out hero’s like 9/11 firefighters and police. Can you understand that?

Never, never, ever say: “Duhhh, I cannot support this bill to get 9/11 firefighter’s money, because we need to study the bill.” (How freaking stupid are you?)

You say: “We will get funds to any hero who has become sick due to their activities at ground zero, during 9/11. But we cannot pass a bill that does MORE harm than good. Help is on its way. As soon as the democrats sit down and work on a bill that gets the maximum benefits to you without favoring certain labor unions and hospital systems, you WILL receive the help that you deserve.”

One thing that I have learned in politics: never sit back and be quiet on a political issue; it doesn’t go away. Bush tried this strategy and he was dogged during his entire second term. Even Rove has admitted that they should have fought back on these second term allegations.

In the game of politics, you have to be right, and you have to be louder than the next guy.

So, I was sitting here, writing, and I was watching MSNBC. (They “lean forward”, in case you didn’t know.) And Rep. Barney Frank was on, and he said that he wished he would have pushed the government into “helping” (regulating) apartments for the poor. You see, the government did such a FINE job in the house ownership market, getting houses to the poor; Rep. Barney thinks that the government could have brought some of that magic to rental units and rental homes.

God, all mighty..!! They just do not get it?

Also, which could be filed under the: “they just do not get it” category, congress wants to regulate the Internet. The Internet isn’t broken. It has been working fine without governments help all these years. But now, government wants a piece of the action. They will do it by way of the FCC.

My next posts have a lot to do with free speech and the government wanting to get its grubby hands on this freedom.

I hope that I have done the topic justice.

19 Senators who voted to censor the internet:

• Patrick J. Leahy -- Vermont

• Herb Kohl -- Wisconsin

• Jeff Sessions -- Alabama

• Dianne Feinstein -- California

• Orrin G. Hatch -- Utah

• Russ Feingold -- Wisconsin

• Chuck Grassley -- Iowa

• Arlen Specter -- Pennsylvania

• Jon Kyl -- Arizona

• Chuck Schumer -- New York

• Lindsey Graham -- South Carolina

• Dick Durbin -- Illinois

• John Cornyn -- Texas

• Benjamin L. Cardin -- Maryland

• Tom Coburn -- Oklahoma

• Sheldon Whitehouse -- Rhode Island

• Amy Klobuchar -- Minnesota

• Al Franken -- Minnesota

• Chris Coons -- Delaware

This should be a list of shame. You would think that our own elected officials would understand the First Amendment but, apparently, they have no problem turning the US into one of the small list of authoritarian countries that censors internet content it does not like (in this case, content some of its largest campaign contributors do not like). We already have laws in place to deal with infringing content, so don't buy the excuse that this law is about stopping infringement. This law takes down entire websites based on the government's say-so.

LINK- By Mike Masnick

NEXT UP...

What part of- Interpret the Constitution- do you NOT understand?

The sad shape of American courts

“..If you look at the values and the historical record, you will see that the Founding Fathers never intended guns to go unregulated..” Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer contended on Fox News Sunday.

Breyer believes that the only reason the Second Amendment appears in the Constitution is because founding father Madison feared that states would not ratify it, if it wasn’t spelled out for them. (The right to bear arms, and the Feds would not intervene with this right.)

We, the people, hire these justices to interpret the Constitution, and what do they freaking do? They disregard the Constitution, and what is written with in it; and try show that the Constitution is wrong because Madison was drunk one day and said he didn’t think every American should have guns. Or Jefferson wrote in a letter that there should be a wall of separation between church and state. So this must mean that we cannot have a Christmas tree in the city park.

It boggles my mind that these people SWEAR to uphold the Constitution, and then immediately begin to tear it apart.

Hey Justice Breyer, the law says that I cannot rape your daughter. But does this law REALLY mean that I cannot rape your daughter? What if she is horny and I am horny? Let’s dig around the correspondence between the lawmakers who wrote the rape laws and see if we can work around that silly little rape law.

Here is the good part; Justice Breyer says this:

“..Since the Founding Fathers did not foresee how modern day would change individual behavior, government bodies CAN impose regulations on guns..” (And forget what that silly little Constitution says.)

LINK- Strange days, too much weed smoking, Breyer knows Madison personally.

They are going to take away my Internet and conservative talk radio

2010-12-08T10:48:00.001-05:00

When I first put out this editorial, I may have given readers the wrong impression.

What FALSE impression would that be..?? That I might be in favor of Internet regulations or a fairness doctrine, which I am not. Both ideas scare the crap out of me. I HATE GOVERNMENT INTERFERANCE into our lives.

You have to understand me, and you will understand what this editorial was trying to say…

When life sends me lemons, I take those lemons and make up a big cheesecake. (In a round-about way.) So that is what I am trying to do here. We can always take a bad situation and make it better.

For example: Net Neutrality. The Internet isn’t broken. There is no need for the FCC to get involved. No “fix” is needed. Actually, I know of no one who is asking for net neutrality. (except for politicians.) So why do it? The only reason is to give the government more power and more ways to TAX the Internet.

Net neutrality- We conservatives have always known that Google slants left. To prove it, just Google: President GW Bush. You will receive a million hits calling Bush a criminal, liar, chicken hawk, etc. You might get a thousand hits which actually give you FACTS about Bush. To the contrary: If you Google President Obama, you will receive a millions hits giving you FACTS about Obama (with a lot of fluff), and maybe a thousand hits which question Obama’s motives.

We conservatives have learned to deal with this problem, and I see no need for government interference. Actually, it may not even be Google’s fault that search results pop up like this. After all, liberals were WAY ahead of us conservatives when it comes to electronic media; and they had more time to place references into the Internet.

So I do not want to see net neutrality, or a fairness doctrine. But if it happens, we will find a way around it.

So...

Every so often, the topic of a "fairness doctrine", OR some type of Internet regulations surfaces, and I feel a need to talk about it because I have a different take on the situation.

Here is the premise:

Democrats would like to break up a conservative "strong- hold" in AM talk radio.

However, no democrat (including President Obama) wants to be the one to get in front of a national audience and PUSH for a "free speech" killing bill in congress.

So, up pops the ugly idea of "localism."

LOCALISM- using local markets to push an agenda. Not using the national markets or create a federal bill.

Which means..??

Community Organizers (aaahh, ohhh) would rally and petition to change the programming at your local radio station.

This would be done across the country, city by city.

This is, really, the "back door" method in resurrecting the fairness doctrine.

How does it work..??

Say that your local AM radio station’s programming consists of this:

9am to noon- Glenn Beck

Noon to 3pm- Rush Limbaugh

3pm to 6pm- Sean Hannity

6pm to (8 or 9pm)- Mark Levin

(I am just giving a few examples, there are dozens of "Talkers" out there.)

OK, local groups of (liberals) would organize and protest this radio station to add "fair" programming that is more "neutral."

(The key wording here is "fair" and "neutral.")

(Free) Radio Stations MUST carry an FCC licence. Within that licence, is a clause that they MUST be fair, in dealing with politics. If they give an hour of air-time to a democratic politician, then they MUST offer an hour of air-time to a republican.

Sorry, folks. But that is the way it is.

Many people believe that when President Reagan dropped the fairness doctrine, this stopped the practice of "fairness" in broadcast. And it did on a nation level. However, on a local level, "public airwaves" (free radio) still MUST abide by this policy, or risk losing their FCC licence, if people complain.

This is where liberals have us. On a local level.

No one could EVER say that presenting 12 hours of conservative talk radio is being "neutral." Even Rush Limbaugh would slap you in the face if you ever called him a "neutral moderate."

This is the strategy. This is the plan.

There will be no big announcement about it. Localism will just happen. (Because it is "grassroots.")

You will hop into your car one day, turn on the radio, and Glenn Beck will be gone. You will check the radio dial to see if you have the wrong station. But Beck will be gone. In place of Glenn Beck, will be some local DJ taking calls on a proposed raise in garbage collection.

That’s how it will happen, folks.

One of your beloved conservative talkers will be GONE.

(OK, maybe I did put a little too much drama in there, sorry.)

I want us to do a little experiment right now. Everyone, pull out your AM radios.

What I want you to do is a slow scan of the AM radio dial in your area. Start at the bottom of the AM dial, and scan to the top. Count how many AM stations are in your area.

(OK, so you don’t want to play along, I get it.) I will tell you what you will find: If you are in a big market (big city), you might have 4 or 5 AM stations to choose from. If you are in a small market, you might have 1 or 2 AM stations.

On those AM stations will be a mix of politics, sports, financial, religious, and old music.

There is plenty of room on the AM dial for NEW political radio stations. Even in a big market.

Let’s move into the hypothetical realm for a moment:

Liberal "localism" comes to your town, and they protest your local AM Radio station that is playing 12 hours of conservative talk. If the station is FORCED by the FCC, (or they give in on their own) to the demands of "localism," they would probably try and hold onto a 6 hour block of conservative talk. (IE- Keep Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh back to back. OR- Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity back to back.) Then, the stations would offer an alterative show(s) in the mix.

Many liberals do not understand what they are fighting for.

I believe that many liberals have a misunderstanding and are ready to pump their fists into the air and proclaim: "..Yea, we will get Limbaugh off the air and get Randi Rhodes on.."

That’s NOT the way it goes.

Localism doesn’t allow you to pick which shows get aired. It only allows you to "protest for fairness."

Actually, I see very few stations dropping Rush Limbaugh. The fatalities would probably be Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, and the dozens of other talkers in the market. (But, that is not necessarily true. And I will explain later..!!)

OK, lets say that our local AM station chooses Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh for 6 hours, back to back- live. (Sorry, Hannity fans, I am just picking an example, here.)

Our local AM station DOES NOT HAVE TO put on a "liberal talk show" in place of Sean Hannity. The only thing that they HAVE to do is offer an alternative that gives the community a voice.

A local DJ- (host), who calls himself: independent, can take calls from your community, on any topic that the community feels is important, would satisfy the FCC’s "fairness."

Many liberals think that if talk radio drops Hannity or Beck, they must put in someone like: Bill Press, or Ed Shultz, or Randi Rhodes.

Not true..!!

A local DJ- host would work out fine.

(Sorry, liberals. But "localism" may not guaranty that liberal talk is brought to the airwaves.)

Remember when I talked about " the fatalities might be Beck and Hannity." Then I said: "that may not necessarily be true.." OK, here is where we get to that part:

Lets say that I am an investor. Lets say that I have wanted to open a talk radio station, BUT, my competition; the "Big Talker AM" has Beck, Rush, Hannity, and Levin.

There is no way that I can compete against that.

If I tried to offer "liberal talk", it fails every time that it is tried. So, that is no good.

There is no way to start a new political AM station, as long as "Big Talker AM" has Beck, Rush, Hannity, and Levin.

But...

If Liberals push "localism", and force "Big Talker AM" to drop Hannity and Levin from it’s line up, this is my opportunity to start that new station.

I could start that new AM station with Sean Hannity and Mark Levin. I could play Laura Ingram while "Big Talker AM" is playing Glenn Beck. And I could place a local host on the radio, while "Big Talker AM" is playing Rush.

Folks, this would benefit Talk Radio.

Jobs-

Two political AM radio stations in you community would provide twice the jobs in radio. (Sales, accounting, programming, on-air talent, etc.)

Alternatives-

Hey, I like football. But some people do not. Rush Limbaugh could talk for a half hour on football. You would now have another station to choose from, if Rush was dealing with something that you do not find interesting.

Talent, in general-

How DID Rush Limbaugh get his start..??

How did Glenn Beck get his start..??

Both started in local markets, (one station) and they grew an audience, which led them to syndication, across the country.

Today, with many AM stations playing Beck, followed by Rush, followed by Hannity, followed by Levin...

THERE IS NO ROOM for local talent to get started.

There is no room for a future "Glenn Beck" to get noticed.

Satellite Radio offers an alternative today, but you have to pay money for it.

There is a great amount of entertainment out there, and you do not hear it, because there isn’t enough hours in the day.

There is a great show called "Brian and The Judge", and you are not going to hear it, because there is no room on the air.

Mike Church puts out a fine radio show. Not enough people get to hear it.

Neal Boortz does a great show. You probably never get to hear it because your station plays: Beck, Rush, Hannity, Levin.

I even listen to Bill Press and Stephanie Miller, who do liberal talk shows. You will never get hear them, because your station plays Beck, Rush, Hannity, and Levin.

Hell, former presidential candidate Fred Thompson does a radio show, and it is funny. You will never hear it because your station plays Beck, Rush, Hannity and Levin.

There is a lot of great talkers out there, and you never get to hear them. Because there isn’t enough hours in the day for ONE station to play them.

But if there were 2 stations, or 3 stations in your area, then we could hear all of the BIG talkers.

I find it very ironic that something the liberals are trying to do: use "localism" to break up conservative talk radio, could actually HELP conservative talk radio in the long run.

Folks, when you hear about the "fairness doctrine" or localism, don’t panic. It could actually benefit talk radio.

Localism: "..Bring it on..!!"

Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republic

Making rich people slaves

2010-12-04T11:50:00.002-05:00

Stealing money from the rich

I have often wondered how democrats could have fought for slavery. How could a group of rational people defend the act of keeping Black people as slaves?

I now have my answer…

Watching democrats fight to raise taxes on business owners during this recession, has solved this puzzle. Democrats tear down a person, and make that individual “sub-human.” Democrats must have used this same tactic on Black people.

Democrats use “class-envy” to belittle people who own a business and happen to make more than 250K per year. The liberal will say things like: “The rich should be taxed higher than everyone else because they are not (human: implied) like us folks, and the billionaires do not deserve equal taxation laws because they made their money from average Americans. (Democrats fail to mention that most Americans make all their money from the rich.) And no one was twisting your arm to buy the products and services sold by these rich people.

The fairest way to go would be with equal taxation that is based on a percentage. EVERYONE would pay the same percentage. If you knew that a 3% raise in taxes would mean $200 bucks extra taken out of your paycheck, you would be less likely to vote for tax increases. You would demand that congress control spending. This system would be fair for everyone; whether you are White or Black, young or old, rich or poor; everyone would share the same- equal burden.

It is so easy to ask for taxes to be raised if it doesn’t affect you and your paycheck (directly.) Tax increases on business owners do affect you in an indirect way, but that is for another editorial.

This must be how democrats convinced southern people that slavery was OK. First, the democrats made Black people seem inferior. Then, they convinced people that Blacks wouldn’t know what to do with freedom. Democrats convinced people that Blacks would turn to crime and there would be chaos. “We cannot allow ‘THOSE’ people to have equal rights.”

Today, democrats are still doing the same thing: “We cannot allow ‘THOSE’ people (business owners) to have equal rights. (Equal tax rates.)

It is the same dam thing. Democrats separate a group of people and brainwash voters into thinking that this group of people do not deserve equal rights.

I now understand how democrats could do that to Black people because they are using the same tactic on business owners today.

AR Babonie

GOD, global warming, and a HIGH tax to save the earth

2010-11-28T11:56:00.002-05:00

I have always thought that God had a sense of humor, however I could not prove it. Sure, there were clues everywhere: Politicians who lecture us about the evils of Gay people, who later turn out to be VERY Gay themselves. Jumbo-shrimp, New Jersey, and of course- weather forecasting; all great examples of God’s wit.

Today, I have solid proof that God has a great sense of humor.

The 2010 climate change / global warming summit has come to an end in sunny, warm- Cancun, Mexico; and guess what..??

Cancun has not been this cold (54 degrees) in over one hundred years. God; you have a masterful sense of humor.

Maybe you think that this is only a “one-time event”, and this could not be proof of a “funny” God, or the act of denouncing man made climate change. Oh, no, no..

Two years ago, parts of the global warming summit had to be canceled because of a very heavy snow fall. It happens so often that people have coined the phrase: “The Gore Effect.” If Al Gore is scheduled to speak at a global warming conference, bring your winter coats because it will be cold. LINK And lets not forget about the climate scientists who hiked up to the Arctic to see for themselves the effects of Global Warming. Unfortunately, the scientists were not prepared for the changing Arctic weather, a storm rolled in and they were trapped. None of their equipment worked in the bitter cold and they had to be rescued. Maybe they didn’t know about “The Gore Effect?”

OK, maybe you do not believe in God, and therefore this stuff that I am talking about is all based (for you) on “random-chance.” There is no God-ly plan in any of this. Yes, I understand your position, but if something happens more than “once”, how can it be “random” or just by “chance?” If it keeps happening, doesn’t it deserve equal study? (Scientifically speaking, of course.)

I will get back to you “God-less” people in a moment, but first I wanted to return to the believers...

If you believe in God and prophecy, you might not find anything funny in what I am saying. (IE- My theory of God, and his sense of humor.) Is God trying to tell us something and what God has to say is no laughing matter? But what would God be saying...

“..STOP playing God, you assholes..”

OK, God might not talk that way, but you get my drift.

How could Global Warming people be playing God? Because they believe that they can regulate the world’s temperature. By wearing a sweater in the house and turning down the thermostat. Don’t forget to put a sweater on the kitty, and a few bandages on your clawed-up arms and face. (Kitty doesn’t like wearing sweaters.) Also, by plugging your Chevy Volt electric car into the wall outlet and sucking up all that Green power produced by the local coal burning power plant. Or, you can change the world’s temperature by sitting in a dark-dirty corner and breathing as little as possible. And don’t forget about adding a HUGE tax to change the world’s temperature.

These are all great ways of showing how freaking GREEN you are, but scientists are 5 steps ahead of you...

In Ohio, scientists have found a protein that slows the melting of ice. (Chemical reaction in ice raises the melting point.) These scientists can reproduce this in the lab, and they would love to try it out, on a large scale, in the Arctic. OK, I know that I say this a lot, but: “Isn’t this how EVERY scary movie starts out?” Scientists, trying to save the earth, spray their secret chemical on the Arctic ice, and guess what? It works. But it works TOO GOOD. Ice never melts, and we run out of fresh water, and the earth is plunged into an ice age. And, of course, we all die. (Except for the famous actors who are featured in this scary movie. They have sex and repopulate the earth.)

Maybe this is what the Supreme Being meant when he said: “Stop playing God.”

However, I digress back for the benefit of the non-believer. No government on EARTH would be stupid enough to allow an un-tested chemical to be used on a large scale without a comprehensive study. Your stupid “scary movie” scenario could never happen, AR Babonie.

Ooohhh, don’t be so quick to give government more credit than it is due. You have not lived long enough, my friend.

In 2005, President GW Bush decided that republicans should do “something” to act like we “care” about global warming. So, taking the advice of the left wing global warming people, Bush signed into law the mandate of ethanol additives. All gas stations will add up to 10% ethanol by Dec 31, 2010; and tax incentives would be given to companies which developed ethanol technologies. Using ethanol would help us get away from that dirty, smelly foreign oil.

Sounds GREAT, doesn’t it..??

Except, well...

No one REALLY thought about it, or tested it thoroughly. It seems that corn farmers are selling their corn to ethanol producers (because they get tax breaks) and they can make more money instead of selling the corn to food producers and cattle ranchers. (But we need corn for food, how can they do that..??) And, ethanol doesn’t burn very good in older, or smaller engines. Even Al Gore and President Obama NOW agree that corn-based ethanol wasn’t a very good idea. But, we made it THE LAW. So, screw you humans and you taxpayers. Just deal with it.

Is this what God, (or, for the non-believer) Mother Earth is trying to tell us..?? “Stop rushing these stupid global warming laws into effect without testing them. Someone could get hurt.”

Is this why Cancun has a century old record low temperature during the global warming summit?

OK, let me back up for a moment; maybe you think that I am crazy for not supporting “man made climate change” reversal efforts, however; think about this...

How will a “Cap and Trade” tax clean up the CO2 from the earth’s atmosphere? If a Cap and Trade tax will be added to any smokey factory that exceeds the CO2 emissions limit, yet the factory is not shut down; how will this stop global warming? Isn’t this just a way to raise taxes, and not really a way to stop greenhouse gas emissions?

OK, now follow me a minute here, because this is VERY important...

Didn’t you liberal- progressives just claim that the Bush tax cuts shouldn’t be kept for the rich people because we cannot afford them, and it will not affect anything because rich people will eat the new higher tax rate? Didn’t you claim that rich people will not change things like: close down factories, or lay off workers, because of a tax raise?

So why would you think that a Cap and Trade tax would cause rich companies to say: “Oh my God, they are adding a CO2 tax to our company. We MUST shut down this smokey factory and build a new multi-billion dollar GREEN facility.”

That is not going to happen, and you know that it is not going to happen. Companies will pay the tax, keep their smokey factories running, raise the costs of their products, and pass this tax on to you. So, why are you supporting a law that will not lower greenhouse emissions, will not “save the earth”, and will cause higher utility rates for the poorest Americans?

Really folks, this is why I search for humor in a topic like global warming. It is the only way that I can deal with the insanity of the situation and the proposed global warming solutions.

It really works, picture this...

God is slapping his knee and letting out a belly laugh while people are freezing during the Climate Summit, and Al Gore’s speech on global warming is canceled because it is too cold out.

Will higher taxes make the earth cooler..??

Sure it will..!!

The government will spend the new tax money to study the affects of cocaine on monkeys. (Just like they did last year, the government spent 2 millions bucks to study monkeys on cocaine.) While jacked up on coke; one monkey will confess to us on how “we all got here.” (Evolution, and all.) Knowing how we achieved human intelligence, from one cranked up monkey, and how fragile this random-chance existence is; we humans will begin to walk to work, stop taking a hot bath and showers, and wear ugly Christmas sweaters in the house.

We will save the earth. We will be an ugly group of smelly humans with big-bulky thighs, but we will keep those monkeys jacked up on cocaine for years.

Yes, high taxes will make the earth cooler, and we will be living in Utopia. Which, by the way, Utopia is an abandoned auto parts store.

Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republic

Republicans are stupid because they HATE Gay vultures

2010-11-24T20:48:00.003-05:00

I was reading some posts by fellow bloggers and I come across one post that claims Sarah Palin could not (or should not) be president because she is "stupid."

STUPID..??

Maybe if you were from an opposing viewpoint, you could say that Sarah Palin is wrong for the country because she has different points of view, or she is hypocritical, or not sincere; but "stupid"?

So, I read on to find out why these people believe that Palin is "stupid", and here is what I found...

Sarah Palin is stupid because she thought the United States had 57 states. (Oh, wait.. That was Barack Obama, sorry. Obama said that he visited all 57 states.)

OK, here it is, I have the right one now. Palin is "stupid" because she didn’t have all the facts when she claimed that police acted "stupidly" in arresting a Black college professor. Palin had to apologize for that comment later. (Oh, Wait, that too was Barack Obama. He said police acted stupidly.)

Here, I have the correct reason now, (sorry about the above confusion.)
Sarah Palin is "stupid" because she accidentally talked about supporting North Korea and its allies. (She meant to say SOUTH Korea.)

I agree with this liberal post. We CANNOT have a president who accidentally says the wrong things. Therefore, Sarah Palin cannot be president and Barack Obama MUST be impeached right now because he has accidentally said the wrong thing, many times. Both: Sarah Palin and Barack Obama MUST be "stupid" and cannot be president. They have both made mistakes.

Another reason that Sarah Palin is so "stupid", was given in the comment section of this liberal post: remember when CBS TV News Anchor Katie Couric asked Sarah Palin what "she reads", Palin froze and didn’t have an answer. This MUST mean that Palin doesn’t read anything, or that she froze up and couldn’t think, during an interview. We cannot have a person who freezes like that during an interview.

That story reminds me of a CBS News Anchor who froze up during an interview. Talk show host- Wendy Williams was asking this female News Anchor about a couple of photos which showed this News Anchor dancing.
THESE photos, to be exact.

After showing the photos, Ms. Williams made this comment to the female Anchor: "Oooo girl, you were dropping it like its hot.." The female News Anchor froze up. She looked confused, she paused, and replied: "I do not know what that means?"

Come on, who doesn’t know what the term: "Drop it like its hot" means? Who was this female News Anchor who froze up during an interview? Who was also doing some dirty dancing in front of small children? Who was trying to explain WHY she was dirty dancing in front of a small child?

It was Katie Couric. The same Katie Couric who asked Sarah Palin what she reads.

I, personally, like to give people the benefit of the doubt. Maybe Katie Couric thought that she was being insulted by Williams’ comment, and Katie Couric needed time to process the remark? Maybe that is why Couric froze up? Which, by the way, is what Sarah Palin has claimed happened during her interview with Couric. Palin thought Couric was asking: "Do you people read books up there in Alaska? What do you read?"
However, we DO NOT give people the benefit of the doubt, judging by this liberal post I read. Therefore Sarah Palin and Katie Couric are "stupid" for screwing up during an interview. And Barack Obama is "stupid" because he has made mistakes while speaking.

Using this parameter, MOST people are "stupid", (except for me, of course. And the people that I support.) "We" are not stupid, but those other people that I do not like, are "stupid."

Democrats seem to like to use this term "stupid" as a political weapon against all challengers, they have been doing it for years now. So, this caused me to find out where it’s beginning came from.

The 1950's is as far back as I am willing to go for this editorial, any further back would make this editorial a mile long.

No one would call "Ike" Eisenhower: "stupid". General Eisenhower helped win WW2 for America and it’s allies, and he was loved by republicans and democrats alike. In fact, both parties fought to get "Ike" on their side. Remember, Eisenhower, being a military man; didn’t reveal his political ideology beforehand.

When Ike decided to become a republican, the gloves came off. Democrats, careful not to call Ike "stupid", claimed that he didn’t have the political experience to lead America. (In essence, calling Ike "politically stupid.") But this backfired for the liberals. Americans began to believe that Ike’s challenger- Democrat Adlai Stevenson was an "egghead" who could not relate to the common man. Democrats ran Stevenson as the "thinking mans" candidate, but this didn’t work.

Eisenhower, who spoke directly to the common man, beat Stevenson by 55% of the popular vote. Eisenhower beat Stevenson again in his reelection bid by 58% of the popular vote, gaining his second term as president.

This could be the genesis of the modern tactic for democrats labeling their republican opponent "stupid."

Moving ahead to Kennedy / Nixon.

This one is a little different. No one called Nixon "stupid" in 1959. Instead, being that it was the FIRST televised presidential debates, they claimed that Nixon didn’t look "good" on TV. JFK had professional people style his hair and do his makeup. Nixon went on TV with no preparation, and he had a fever. Nixon was sweating, he looked nervous, he came across on TV as being pasty-white. Nixon could not be president (in 1960) because he didn’t "look" good. Kennedy "looked" better.

(Yes, I know that I am skipping a few elections, but we must move on) Gerald Ford tripped and fell down a few times, which landed him on his butt, so Ford was too clumsy to be reelected to president. Jimmy Carter never fell down, though Carter did believe in UFO’s, we need a president who doesn’t fall down.

Ronald Reagan was just a silly actor reading lines that someone gave him. Reagan was "stupid", and shouldn’t be president.

Bill Clinton was a "smart" man. (Not smart enough to keep his dick in his pants while some chubby intern was flirting with him). Not smart enough to care for his family. But he was a brilliant politician who passed the Gay Rights Bill- "Don’t ask, don’t tell." Yes, the very Bill that every Gay person HATES right now.

Al Gore was an intellectual who wrote a book about the environment. Bush was "stupid", and probably has never read any books in his life. John Kerry was much more smarter than Bush and should be president.

That last charge has always gotten to me. "Bush was stupid. Kerry and Gore were smart."

I know that this is all water under the duck’s ass now, but indulge me for a moment. It is possible to reach a few people who were told that Obama was a genius, and now they are finding out that Obama isn’t much smarter than the rest of us. These folks might be wondering what else is a lie?

Kerry, Bush, and Gore. A brief history.

Kerry went to Yale University. Bush, also went to Yale University, however Bush went on and attended Harvard Business School. Both Kerry and Bush would be considered "C" students, with Bush getting slightly higher grades than Kerry.

If we throw Al Gore into this mix, we find that Gore also attended Harvard. Gore’s grades during his first two years put him into the lower one- fifth of his class. Gore admits to watching too much TV, shooting pool, and smoking weed instead of studying. He avoided math and science during those early years because he couldn’t focus on them. To be fair and honest, Gore did study hard during his final years at Harvard and received A’s and B’s, which he then graduated with honors. Kerry and Bush, on the other hand, never buckled down like Gore did, and they both graduated as "average" students.

After college, Gore became a House member, then a Senator from Tennessee, and Vice President. Gore failed to become president.

John Kerry served in Vietnam, failed to be elected to the House, so he went to law school and became a District Attorney. Then Kerry became a Lt. Governor. From there, he became a Senator for Massachusetts. Kerry also failed to become president.

Bush failed an attempt to be a House Rep, so he went into business. Later he became Governor of Texas, and president of the United States.

So, when I look at these 3 men, I do not see how anyone could rationally say that one is "stupid", while the others are "smart." Their lives are academically and professionally very similar.

All three men ran for president. Only one of them won the office of president (not just once, but twice.)

Surely, even the most extreme liberal / progressive could see that this is the truth?

If they cannot see the truth, surely they can see that the tactic of calling republicans "stupid" doesn’t work. They basically called Ike "politically stupid", but he won the presidency (twice.) They called Reagan "stupid" and he won (twice.) They called Bush "stupid" and he won (twice.)

So, now they call Sarah Palin "stupid."

Wait a minute, what did I just prove here..??

The progressives called Ike, Reagan, and Bush "stupid", and all of these men won two-terms as president.

Now they are calling Sarah Palin "stupid".

Get my bookie on the phone, quick. I need to place a bet.

Thanks for reading The Angry Republic

You might be wondering what is up with the title of the above editorial...

Republicans are stupid because they HATE Gay vultures

There were no Gay Vultures in this story, so what is up with that..??

OK, I tried REALLY hard to fit the Gay Vultures into the above editorial, but I never found a place for them.

So I have placed the Gay Vultures here- LINK

Airport Security- Do you go for the Scope, or the Grope?

2010-11-20T12:21:00.002-05:00

Some weekends, it is tough to find something to write about. This isn’t one of those weekends.

You could write about Charlie Rangel, or the fact that some folks on the left believe that there is a conspiracy going on at Dancing with the Stars because Bristol Palin is STILL THERE? Tensions are high and some angry person sent a letter to Bristol (care of Dancing with the Stars) filled with a white powder. It could have been anthrax, it could have been “the letter of DEATH.” But it was just talcum powder.

A person could write about Sen. Jay Rockefeller, who wants to shut down MSNBC and Fox News because he has a “bug inside of him.” Here at The Angry Republic, we used one of those new airport scanners to see what kind of “bug” is inside of Sen. Rockefeller. Here is what we found.

Hey, that looks like one of those STINK bugs that was taking over DC this fall. Boy, those little suckers really dug in..!!

(Ok, stupid- childish joke, I know. Let’s continue)

You could talk about the terrorist who was tried in civilian court and dam near got away free because key witnesses were tossed out by a judge. A person could write about the past election and what “it all means” for our political future.

However, all of the topics above seem to fall down the center of political ideologies. The conservative feels one way about the issue, and the liberal will take the opposite argument.

But one topic seems to draw everyone together, (for different reasons, naturally.)

New airport security- TSA’s scope or grope method

Check this out, it will display what I am saying. This comes from the liberal home of The Huffington Post. An editorial from William Astore- Professor and retired Lt. Colonel, Air Force. (Who, by the way, gave me the idea for my title.)

Colonel Astore said this in The Huffington Post:

“..Scoping grandma and groping granddad is not making us safer or more secure. It's worse than a crime: it's a mistake. They don't fit the profile of "terrorist" to begin with; nor should they be terrorized by government technology or its glove-clad workers.

Instead of all the gadgets and the groping, let's get real. Start by asking each ticket-holder the standard questions European airport officials ask; watch how people respond. Look for unusual behavior: nervousness, evasiveness, uncertainty. Forgo "random" inspections for targeted ones. And let's do it swiftly and with authority..”

OK, I like that. I really do. However, note what “wasn’t” said, for the benefit of the progressive / liberal Huffington Post readers. Astore didn’t point to how the Israeli’s preform airport security, instead he points to Europe. And Astore said: “..(Why frisk grandma and grandpa) They don't fit the profile of a "terrorist"..”

“Profile.”
(Aughh. There it is, for all to see.) The ugly word: Profile.

Though Astore is VERY careful not to mention the word “Racial” with the word “Profile”, anyone can surely denote the direction that Astore was taking.

In doing so; in carefully choosing his words, Colonel Astore has put one foot inside the door of a progressive paradise. (The Huffington Post) And the progressives are not going after him with pitchforks and torches. It seems that progressives do not care to be seen NAKED and groped, by airport security either.

I spent some time Friday and Saturday checking out the talking heads of radio. Progressives like Fedder, Shultz, and Alex Bennet; all seem to agree that these invasive security checks are wrong.

However, a quick check of Hannity, Rush, and Gibson shows that conservatives do not like these groin checks either.

This is my kind of topic because everyone seems to agree. (Which means that there is something REALLY really wrong here, because the left and right NEVER agree on anything.)

Conservatives blame President Obama for being scoped and groped during their Thanksgiving travel.

Liberals blame the TSA or Homeland Security, and never really bring it back to President Obama.

However, most agree that “this” isn’t the way to go in a free country.

I may surprise you, (maybe not) but I am in favor of the naked machines and the groin checks at airports; ONLY as a last resort. Colonel Astore is correct; there is no need to check everyone, or even do random checks. Only a select group of people need to be searched in this manner. Most people can simply be asked a series of questions. After all, this is how we caught the “millennium bomber.” He was asked questions and appeared to be very nervous. The border guard mentioned that he was “sweating in December”, so she flagged the car to be searched, and BINGO.

The Israeli’s begin security checks the minute people arrive at the airport. They pick people out of a crowd and begin to quiz them. They have been trained to spot nervous tension, and can pull these people aside for further inspection.

I’m not saying that the Israeli’s have the “cure-all” for our situation. After all, they only have to deal with a small percentage of people compared to the amount of people flying in America. However, if we combine the methods: questions for most, shoe checks and further questions for others, and naked machines and groping for some; this might solve the problem.

We just have to get the progressives past that word: “Profile.”

It really isn’t “racial” profiling because does this guy:

Look like this guy?:

Both people are terrorists.

So it has little to do with race and more to do with religion. Yes, it would be “religious profiling.”

Most of the terrorists have changed their names to fit the Muslim religion. Many are flying out of countries which harbor terrorists. We are not even checking the “no fly list” good enough because terrorists have slipped by, and the “Christmas Bomber’s” father called authorities to say his son was dangerous. We missed all of that, somehow?

So it seems like most people are on the same page with this issue, except...

What surprises me the most is how silent the 2006 liberals are on this topic of Obama’s “grope-a-thon” at US airports?

The “2006 liberals” is the name I have given to all the liberals who started at this blog site in 2006. At first, they were very pleasant, polite people who were pleading their political case. However, they began to get more aggressive as they became comfortable with this site.

“Bush lied” and “Bush is breaking the constitution with illegal wiretaps” was their mantra. Where are the 2006 liberals today? Why are they not complaining about Obama’s illegal searches at the airport? Since I have done nothing wrong, it would seem that having a TSA agent touch my “junk” might go against the constitution?

If one of the 2006 liberals were brave enough to answer my charge, they might say that President Obama is “trying to keep us safe with testicle checks at the airport, but Bush and Cheney were evil men who enjoyed listening to our phone calls.”

But, I assume that the 2006 liberals are smart enough to know that this street runs two ways: “Bush was trying to keep us safe by intercepting terrorist’s phone calls, but Obama gets his rocks off watching grandma’s groin being grabbed by a TSA agent.”

Speaking of groin checks, if you didn’t get to see the Saturday Night Live comedy bit on the TSA, you have got to see it. I have it at the top right hand corner of my “News Site”. Just click here for the video.

So, here we are. Both the conservative and the liberal hating the same thing. Savor this moment folks, because it is rare, indeed.

And if I know anything about Americans, it is this: We can take lemons and make lemonade. (And then place a bunch of booze in that lemonade, and party.)

Most airports have some kind of lounge or bar which serves booze. Usually, down the road from the airport is a strip club for traveling salesmen. And, of course, we have these new TSA airport naked scanner machines that can see through clothes.

Why combine all the above activities into one “fun filled” room of adult entertainment?

Picture this...
You are at the airport, waiting for your plane. A friendly TSA Agent asks you a bunch of questions, and you fail the test. YOU, for failing the test, become the entertainment at the airport lounge. Customers of the lounge, after paying a cover charge, get to watch as TSA Agents grope you and place you into the naked machine Your naked image is projected on a large flat-screen TV in the lounge.

Think about it, people would be seated in the lounge, viewing pictures of your naked body. Maybe we could make it 3D?

Guys would be treated to these kinds of pictures

And women, don’t feel left out, because you would get to see this

Ok, maybe this isn’t the best idea that I have come up with. I’m sorry. If I thought about it some more, I might have come up with something better. But the cat was chasing a bug on the floor, and I got distracted.
So, I hope that this editorial answered all of your questions about being naked, booze, and airport security.

Thanks for reading The Angry Republic

AR Babonie

Neil Young’s hybrid car burns down his warehouse, loses a million bucks worth of guitars and stuff.

2010-11-20T11:30:00.001-05:00

It is amazing how things come full circle, it all started a few years ago…

Rock legion: Neil Young wrote an editorial for the Huffington Post which discussed his new “electric car”, a 1959 Lincoln Continental, which Neil spent thousands having professional people turn into a hybrid “of sorts.” It is electric, (with HUGE- expensive batteries), and a bio-fuel power plant for generating electricity.

Mr. Young was lecturing us (Huff Post readers) about how we need to get involved in “green” technology, and that hybrid cars do not have to be tiny little death traps. Actually, truth be told, Neil Young is a pioneer in this field of “larger hybrids.”

I, (AR Babonie), had to put my two cents in, and I commented on Neil’s editorial. The main point of my comment was that most people cannot afford the $5,000 bucks every 5 years for new batteries on these electric cars. (The current lifespan of electric car batteries.) Hybrids are VERY expensive and have technical problems, so isn’t it irresponsible to push people towards these vehicles; when these people are living from paycheck to paycheck?

I was attacked by the Huff Post liberals: “How dare you evil conservative condemn Neil Young. He is a good man, and he is trying to save the planet. What are you doing to save the planet?”

I informed the liberals at Huff Post that I ride a Harley Davidson motorcycle, which gets 65mpg (if I keep it under 70mph). I have a water / well system at the house; so I use water, and then return the water to the earth. We only air condition one room in the house, and only heat the rooms that we need. I keep my property “somewhat” natural with over 60 trees, which is filled with birds, deer, bunnies, woodchucks, and sometimes a bald eagle. I told the folks at Huff Post that I do not do this to “save the earth”, I do it because I am cheap. I like saving money.

Then, I reminded the Huff Post progressives what my original comment was: “isn’t it irresponsible to push people, who live from paycheck to paycheck, to buy cars, (electric or hybrid) when both types of cars have serious problems?

The Huffington Post liberals didn’t want to consider my points. I was an evil conservative who disrespected Neil Young. I was told that I hate the earth, I hate Black people, I hate bunnies, and I should just go away and die. Neil Young never commented back to me, however most celebrity “bloggers” do not comment.

Irony is a funny thing, my friends…

Fireman where called to a blaze at Neil Young’s house last week.

It seems that Mr. Young’s experimental electric Lincoln car caught fire.

The fire “may” have started in the charging system of the vehicle’s electronics. Not only was the car destroyed, but many of Neil’s private possessions were also destroyed: guitars, pictures, films, music equipment, etc. Stuff that Neil cannot easily replace because it was part of his history.

If you know anything about me, you know that I am not one to gloat when I am right. I feel bad for Neil Young; this is a terrible thing that happened. I promote pioneers on this web site because invention creates jobs. Guys like Neil Young, tinkering with a large size hybrid car, might just revolutionize the industry. So, I respect that. I think that Neil’s song: “Old man, look at my life” is one of the best modern songs written.

However, I do not agree with Young’s politics. It is wrong to push people into technology that isn’t perfected yet.

It is so easy for the progressive to say that I, the conservative, I must hate the environment, or I do not care what shape the earth is in; however, in doing so, you are not listening to what I am saying.

I wonder how many people listened to what Neil Young was saying, and disregarded my words (because I am just one of those dumb conservatives) and went out and bought an electric car; only to find that the range is about 40 miles on a charge. And that is a NEW battery. We all know that as rechargeable batteries get older, they lose their staying power.

I hope that I will have better luck today and people will listen to what I am about to say.

Today, the government allows up to 10% ethanol to be added into gas for your car. The government is considering raising that level to 15%.

No one is 100% sure of what 15% ethanol will do to your car’s engine, over time.

OK, I am going to print this line again, because some of you might be tempted to say that I hate Black people, or I hate animals, or that I flat out lie; and what I say cannot be true. So, I will print that line again with a nice little link.

No one is 100% sure of what 15% ethanol will do to your car’s engine, over time.

Here is what the government “believes”: if your car was made during 2007, or newer; you will “probably” be OK burning the ethanol mixture. However, if your car was made in 2006 or older, you “might” have problems with this ethanol blend.

People with boat motors, riding lawn mowers, push mowers, and some motorcycles are already seeing problems with the current ethanol blend. No one is really sure what a 15% ethanol blend will do to small engines? The EPA is warning people NOT to use this ethanol blend in small motors.

The problem…

Ethanol has a tendency to draw moisture. (Water) This water can build up in your gas tank and cause fuel line freezing in the winter. Also, it can cause “gaps” in the fuel line, which can cause an engine to run rough and stall. Ethanol burns hotter than gas, which can burn up engine components.
Especially in small “air-cooled” engines. (Motorcycles, push mowers, etc.)

It is important for me to tell you that I am all for alternative fuels. Bio-fuels, ethanol blends; I believe that we MUST work on these power methods, because we need to get away from foreign oil. BUT IT MUST BE BY CHOICE, not by force.

In the past, when I talked about the use of ethanol, I always assumed that in a free country, you would have a choice. At your friendly gas station, there would be several pumps. One would have kerosene, another would have diesel, others would have your different grades of regular gas; and another pump would have the ethanol mixture.

You would have a choice with this method. You could try ethanol and if your car started to run poorly, you could switch back to regular gas and save your engine from a costly repair job.

Folks, I am dead against this “forced GREEN lifestyle”, I always have been. It is not because I hate deer and bald eagles, it is because we haven’t perfected these technologies, and we need to do better planning.

Which takes us back to Neil Young and his hybrid Lincoln…

In trying to save the earth, by building an experimental hybrid, Neil Young lost many of things that he loved from his past, in a fire. He did NOT save the earth, in fact, he probably did more harm with the warehouse fire; then the pollution that he would have created if he was driving a regular car all along.

Sometimes we do not think. We are too quick to act, and react to situations.

Neil Young has the money to rebuild and replace the things that he lost.
We do not. We cannot afford to repair our motors from ethanol damage.

So I ask, what is wrong with giving people a choice?

Why can’t people be free to choose?

Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republic News Site

Tips and hints.

I had problems with two engines this season. Though I cannot prove that it is a fact that the ethanol blend caused these problems, I believe that it was caused by ethanol because I have never had these problems before.

My boat motor was stalling this summer and starting very hard. I used a product called: “Start your engine” and it solved the stalling problem. However, one of the spark plug wires burn up. This might have been a loose connection, or the fact that ethanol burns hotter, I don’t know? “Start your engine” costs about $7 bucks and you can get it at most retailers.

My snow blower would not start this season. (First time for that happening) I put in fresh gas, and added “gas stabilizer” to it. It took about 50 pulls (tries) to start it, but then it took off and seems to be running good now.

My best advice is not to give up too quick. If your engine is “gummed up” from the ethanol, and not starting; I wouldn’t worry about doing MORE damage to it. If you get to the point where you have to bring it in for repair, someone will have to tear it apart to clean it up anyway, so it doesn’t really matter whether you tried to start it one time, or 100 times. Plus, you never know, you might just clear the ethanol out, and it will start up for you.

Thanks for reading The Angry Republic

Don’t forget to check out my News site. There, you can find out about “Free groin checks, today only.”

LINK: The Angry Republic News Site

Driving Miss Nancy (Pelosi) for two more years

2010-11-14T12:01:00.000-05:00

Driving Miss Nancy (Pelosi) for two more years

Shortly before the 2010 election, a statement was made by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that amounted to this: “If democrats lose the House, I do not want to continue as the Leader.”

After Pelosi made that statement, the sky opened up. The earth stood still. Millions of Americans collectively screamed: “NOOooooo...” (Ok, that didn’t happen.)

I was closely watching the news at that time, and there were not many people asking Nancy Pelosi to reconsider. Matter of fact, there was a big red bus traveling around the country asking people to “Fire Pelosi.” Yes, I know that the bus was sponsored by republicans, however I listened to many democrats who claimed that Pelosi needed to go.

Democrats that I talked to, said: “It isn’t that I disagree with her (Pelosi’s) agenda, though I would have liked to see a public option in Obamacare; I just do not like ‘the way’ that Pelosi handles things. She is condescending to people.”

WOW, if democrats can see this trait in Pelosi, then it MUST be a serious problem. We republicans noticed Ms. Pelosi’s condescending attitude back in 2006 when Pelosi first started as Speaker. Pelosi was going to “drain the swamp of all the corrupt House members”, yet Charlie Rangel is still there..??

So, after the 2010 election, when democrats in the House got their collective asses handed to them, and there was no great cry for Pelosi to stay on as the Democratic Party Leader, Speaker Pelosi put out another statement that went something like this: “Since so many democrats want me to stay on as leader, I will do it. I will be your leader.”

The problem is, I didn’t hear a great “out-cry” of democrats wanting Pelosi to continue to lead the Democratic Party.

In fact, people were starting to look at the current Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, or Majority Whip Jim Clyburn.

Keep in mind that I, (the writer of this editorial) I am (is, are) a conservative. So I am bias about this stuff. However, I kind of like Jim Clyburn. He is too liberal for me to ever vote for him. Yet, if I compare him to Nancy Pelosi, he is miles ahead. Clyburn holds a bachelor’s degree in history and taught history in High School, before entering politics. I believe that congress NEEDS a few less lawyers, and a few more history professors. We seem to be losing our perspective on American history and we are getting weighted down by 2,000 page legal documents, (the health care bill.)

Like Nancy Pelosi, Jim Clyburn is in his seventies, so this is his: “do it now, or maybe never” moment in time. Things were looking good for Clyburn as the NEW Democratic Party Leader. He has the full backing of the Congressional Black Caucus, and backing from many democrats in the House.

However, another statement pours out of Nancy Pelosi’s mouth. A statement that made many people lose their lunch. Pelosi said: “We did not lose the House because of me.”

Uhmmm, Speaker Pelosi. Did you see the BIG red bus traveling around the country that had written on the side of it: “Fire Pelosi.” Did you see that bus, Ms. Pelosi?

Pelosi stated that: “Any party who can not capitalize on a 9.6% unemployment rate should just hang it up.” Pelosi’s meaning in that statement was that because the unemployment rate was at 9.6%, republicans were able to beat the democrats. However, Ms. Pelosi, I ask you: who is charged with DOING SOMETHING about that 9.6% unemployment? Wouldn’t that be YOU, Ms. Speaker?

Jim Clyburn’s chances to win that Leadership roll started to rise within the democratic ranks. Things were looking good for Jim Clyburn.

However, a funny thing happened...

A special “deal” was made within the Democratic Party.

This special “deal” consists of the creation of a brand new House position; never before seen in American history.

Here is the “deal”...

Nancy Pelosi will remain Queen of the Democrats, in the House.

Steny Hoyer will take the job as Minority Whip, (the “Whip” position is now currently held by Jim Clyburn.)

And poor old Jim Clyburn will step down and take the new position that Nancy Pelosi has created. This position is called: “Super Special Minority Assistant Leader.” (???) No one is quite sure WHAT Clyburn will do in this position, since it never before existed in American history? However, if he is the “assistant leader”, then he would be Nancy Pelosi’s assistant. (Maybe Rush Limbaugh was on to something last week when he joked that Clyburn could be driving the car for Nancy Pelosi- hence the term: “Driving Miss Nancy.”)

Folks, you cannot go by what people say, in Washington DC. You have to look at what they do.

Speaker Pelosi is acting like she did such a GREAT job as Speaker, that it warrants adding an assistant to help her along with her chores.

Democrats in charge just do not “get it”.

We are facing a very tough economic time, and democrats are adding a NEW paid government position in the House of Representatives, which will be funded by your tax dollars.

If this new position were created to help, (in some strange way) the American people; I might understand.

However, this new position, “ Super Special Minority Assistant Leader” (or S.S.M.A.L- “small” for short) is being created for the sole purpose to STOP other democrats from running against Pelosi.

This “new” House position does nothing to help the American people. It is the most selfish act that I have seen in a while. (And that speaks volumes when considering everyday life in DC.)

Democrats will burn up taxpayers money so that Nancy Pelosi doesn’t have to face “the will of the people” and go through a vote in the House.

This sickens me. It really does. It should piss off a few democrats too. Pelosi is acting like a Queen. Waving her majestic arm and creating a “make work” position at taxpayers expense, all the while side-stepping the will of the people.

And what of Jim Clyburn..??

I understand the nature of “going along- to get along,” and to some; Jim might be seen as a patriot. He is taking one for the TEAM, and there is no “me” in the word: T-E-A-M. (Oh, wait a minute, there is an “m” and an “e” in team? What’s up with that..??)

However, I am not the only one who would like to see Clyburn challenge Pelosi for democrat leadership in the House, he just might win. The simple fact that Pelosi has offered this “new” job to Clyburn shows that Team Pelosi wasn’t sure of a clear victory, either.

The conservative- republican inside of me wants the democrats to be lead by Ms. Pelosi until the 2012 election. She did such a fine job of losing 50 House seats to the republicans, giving them a 60 plus seat majority. If this trend continues, there might only be 3 democrats left in the House; after the 2012 election- Pelosi, Hoyer, and Clyburn.

However, the “American” inside of me believes that Speaker Pelosi needs to go somewhere, (anywhere,) if we are ever going to focus on the “will of the people.” Maybe Pelosi could buy Nixon’s old medal detector and comb the San Francisco beaches looking for treasures. Or maybe Pelosi could start a “starving artist colony” in San Fran, where artists display painting of President Bush, done in sheep’s blood; displaying the words: “Bush lied, people died.” (That would be original.)

Here is what I know...

As long as Pelosi leads the democrats in the House, republicans will pick up more seats in 2012.

The American people spoke very loudly this last election. Democrats are not listening.

Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republic News Site

Reagan- His tax man says raise taxes

2010-11-09T00:48:00.000-05:00

Reagan- His tax man says raise taxes

We are all VERY aware of the democrats tactic of blaming a “lack of communication” as the reason democrats lost the House, over 600 state and local seats across this country, and a decent amount of governorships.

YES, the smartest man to ever run for president. The “best-est” public speaker to ever BE president. Barack Obama wasn’t able to explain exactly what it is that he did during the past two years.

So, what are democrats saying? Americans were “smart” enough to elect Obama president, yet too dumb to understand what he did for 2 years. OR- Obama was really trying hard while running for president. But after winning, he let himself go. He took too many vacations, and wasn’t doing a good enough job of explaining what he had accomplished.

Either way, this doesn’t fair very well for the democrats; and I am not sure why they are trying this tactic?

This excuse is very dangerous for the democrats. It can cause the liberal pundits to believe that: “The American public didn’t reject us. Voters didn’t reject our ideas and plans. The American people are too stupid to understand all the stuff that we democrats have done for them. We must push harder.”

This could explain why Nancy Pelosi “could” still remain as the democrat leader in the House. And why democrats are STILL demanding that taxes be raised, even after hearing millions of Americans demand a cut in government spending, and no new taxes.

Along with demanding that the Bush tax cuts be pulled for the rich, democrats are claiming that David Stockman, (President Reagan’s tax man) believes that taxes MUST be raised for all.

Christine Amanour (CNN) made this statement on her show: “Their hero might be Ronald Reagan, but his tax man (Stockman) says that extending the current tax rates will finish the economy off.”

Is this true..??

Could President Reagan’s tax man be calling for tax hikes..??

Yes, it is true. But that isn’t that whole story.

David Stockman was a very young man when Reagan pick him. Matter of fact, many of Reagan’s staff wondered why Reagan chose him. Reagan did not hire Stockman for his ideas and his insight. To Reagan, Stockman was a good bean counter.

Now, what I am about to say is very important...

David Stockman opposed the Reagan tax cuts of the 1980's.

Stockman opposes most tax cuts. He is a tax and spend republican, who tries to balance both columns. There is nothing wrong with balancing the budget, but why not try and cut taxes, cut spending, and then balance out both columns?

This is important because the Reagan tax cuts were what pulled us out of the economic funk of the 1970's. And Stockman opposed these cuts.

I am not really sure how many more democrats will try and push this Stockman situation in your face to try and knock you off guard; but don’t fall for it.

There is a funny story about Reagan and Stockman. (At least, I think it is funny.)

David Stockman had a meeting with Reagan, and Stockman went over the budget figures. The meeting concluded that with the rise in military spending, and the Reagan tax cuts, they would not balance the budget for that year.

Reagan, who could never remember people’s names and called his staff: “the fella’s”; patted Stockman on the back and said: “You let me worry about that. You are doing a fine job there, fella. Now go through the spending and bring me a list of lines that we can cut.” Reagan walked out of the room, leaving Stockman sitting there with a stack of papers that Stockman had toiled over; all of which, Reagan didn’t bother to read.

If you ever get a chance to read about the inter-workings of the Reagan Administration, you should do so. He was a funny guy, and he hired the best people he could find for his staff. Reagan would sit down with these people and listen to their ideas...

Then Reagan would disregard much of what he heard and do things his way.

AR Babonie

I got THE CURE- for you

2010-11-07T07:24:00.000-05:00

A few years ago, a conservative doctor put out a book claiming that liberalism was a mental disorder. Why would people think that it is rational to take money from people who earned it, and give this begotten booty to people who didn’t earn it?

Today, a liberal scientist believes that conservatives haven’t evolved enough, because they are lacking a particular element in their genes.

It would seem that each political side has its BEST minds, doctors and scientists, working on a cure for the rest of us, so that we will someday- all think alike.

(Isn’t this how EVERY freaking scary movie starts out? Scientists working on a cure to make things better, but they create monsters instead.)

PLUS- this whole topic shuns the idea of free speech; IE- I can MAKE you think like me, through science.

However, the topic does give shelter for those who need to rationalize: “I can’t answer his questions, but I MUST be ok because the doctor / scientist said that ‘they’ have a mental disorder and haven’t evolved yet.”

So, I thought that it would be fun to look into these theories. I will take the conservative approach, (naturally), and ask:

Could there be a (pill) for liberalism..??

We are able to treat other mental illnesses. Could there be a pill that will treat liberalism?

Dr. Rossiter claims "Liberalism is a mental disorder."

I know that radio talk show host Michael Savage wrote a book that stated that liberalism is a mental disorder. But now, a professional medical and board-certified clinical psychiatrist claims it is true.

I have always wondered about liberalism, however I have always felt that liberals never truly grow up.

Here was my thinking…

Remember as a child, waking up on Christmas morning and rushing to the Christmas tree. Each child (hopefully) has about the same number and value of presents under the tree. Because if one child has a few more gifts than the other children, there will be hell to pay by the angry children claiming Santa was not fair and gave that child more. (So, since the beginning of it all, Santa has had to be careful not to favor one child over another.)

Liberals view the government as "Santa."

A guy in a red suit handing out gifts to the masses.

Don't feel bad, I too was a liberal when I was in my teens and twenties. I was an alcoholic and could never excel in my profession. I was living paycheck to paycheck and never seemed to have enough money. I felt it was unfair that "some lucky bastards" had so much more than I did. I spent two decades complaining about it and "hoping" the government would fix my life.

Then a funny thing happened…

I grew up.

I kicked the booze, the drugs and began to excel in my profession. I found that the talent I needed to climb the ladder out of poverty was already inside of me. (I just never really gave it 100% and tried.) I began to do better and spend more time doing the job that I love. I became more valuable to my employer.

That is when it happened…

I no longer need my employer. My employer needs me. (And that is when the pay increases for you.)

It is at that moment that you become a conservative. When you see people all around you who do not try. They do not care about doing a "good job." They are happy just providing an "average service."

They spend their lives waiting for someone to come along and fix their lives.

Why should the government reward those who do not try..??

We are not talking about the physically disabled or the mentally ill. We are a compassionate nation and we can help these folks.

I do not want a HUGE government that plays "Santa" with our tax money and gives it to people who waste their God given talents.

Back to Dr. Rossiter book…

Dr. Rossiter says the kind of liberalism being displayed by the two major candidates for the Democratic Party presidential nomination can only be understood as a psychological disorder.

Dr. Rossiter says the liberal agenda preys on weakness and feelings of inferiority in the population by:

-creating and reinforcing perceptions of victimization;

-satisfying infantile claims to entitlement, indulgence and compensation;

-augmenting primitive feelings of envy;

-rejecting the sovereignty of the individual, subordinating him to the will of the government.

"The roots of liberalism – and its associated madness – can be clearly identified by understanding how children develop from infancy to adulthood and how distorted development produces the irrational beliefs of the liberal mind," he says. "When the modern liberal mind whines about imaginary victims, rages against imaginary villains and seeks above all else to run the lives of persons competent to run their own lives, the neurosis of the liberal mind becomes painfully obvious."

Lyle H. Rossiter, Jr, MD received his medical and psychiatric training at the University of Chicago and served for two years as a psychiatrist in the United States Army. He is currently in private practice in the Chicago area.

Dr. Rossiter is board certified in both general and forensic psychiatry. For more than forty years he has diagnosed and treated mental disorders, with a special interest in personality pathology and its developmental origins.

This is a very interesting premise and if I get a chance to read the book, I would love to talk about it more.

If you are liberal, you should ask yourself this basic question:

"Why do I feel that someone else should pay for my expenses..??"

LINK- To read this editorial with pictures and comments, click here

Keith Olbermann Suspension PROVES- Liberals at this web site need to find a new home?

2010-11-07T06:57:00.004-05:00

OK, there are a couple of jokes that can be inserted here, let me get these jokes out of my system...

MSNBC suspends Keith Olbermann for being himself, should liberals find a new home?

YES- I have heard that NASA is looking for people to venture to Mars. And, to my best knowledge, the planet Mars has never tried socialism. So, the planet is ripe for the taking, and may benefit from the utopian dream of communism.

OR...

Should liberals find a new home?

YES, I hear that the CNN building is empty. They used to do some kind of news broadcast from the CNN building a long time ago. But now they mostly tape infomercials there today.

Alright, I got that out of my system.

Liberal / Progressives have put a lot of stock into MSNBC. It was fast becoming their adopted TV home. Keith Olbermann would “cherry pick” from the top headlines of the day, and present these headlines in a manner that appealed to progressives, each night.

Even during an election, MSNBC chose to report the event using left leaning political commentators- Maddow, Olbermann, and Matthews; along with a few “journalists.”

Then, all of a sudden, out of nowhere; Keith Olbermnn is suspended from MSNBC for donating money to democrat candidates.

OK, this calls for a “WTF?” Olbermann suspended for being- Olbermann..?? (After all, Olbermann donates his TIME promoting democrats every night. Time is money, correct..??)

Pundits from all walks of life, shriek..

“Sean Hannity has donated money to political candidates in the past, Fox never suspended him.” Well, Fox has a different policy than MSNBC has. At Fox, “news journalists” (Chris Wallace, Bret Baier, etc) cannot donate to a political candidate without permission, or mention who they would vote for. Political commentators like Hannity, Beck, and O’Reilly can do whatever they like.

But wait a minute, MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough donated to a republican candidate in the past and he never got suspended? Well, MSNBC says that Joe asked first, before he donated, Keith did not.

There is also another small problem, that needs to be addressed...

Glenn Beck repeated a statement of Keith Olbermann where Keith claims that he doesn’t vote in political elections because it would interfere with his “journalistic integrity.”

Now, that is a problem.

Had Keith referred to himself as a: “political commentator”, like Hannity and Beck do at Fox; things probably would have been OK. But the minute that Keith claims that he is a “news journalist”, all bets are off; and he now falls under the same rules that apply to Tom Brokaw, and other “so-called” news anchors at NBC.

So, legally, MSNBC has every right to do this. However, I think that it sucks; and I have another theory as to why it happened.

MY THEORY

September- 2008; MSNBC had Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann anchor both of the national conventions for the BIG 2008 presidential election. However, after fighting between Olbermann and several other MSNBC commentators, MSNBC announced that it would “fire” Olbermann and Matthews as election coverage anchors. Both were replaced by David Gregory; who anchored the actual 2008 election coverage in November, and that show took LAST place in cable ratings.

The MSNBC- 2008 election coverage was so screwed up, that Jon Stewart (of The Daily Show) asked NBC News anchor Brian Williams: “What’s going on at MSNBC? Is anyone in charge over there, or is it like (the movie) Lord of the Flies..??”

Here is my theory...

NBC is so f**ked in the brain, and they have been for many years: they actually want Olbermann, Maddow, and Mathews to do their usual liberal reporting on their nightly shows; however they want the three of them to act like “fair and balanced” reporters during the coverage of elections. (Which is terribly unfair for NBC to do.)

So, when something happens like Chris Matthews badgering republican Michele Bachmann about being in a trance, (and of course Michele asks Chris if he still has a tingle up his leg), you can plainly hear Keith Olbermann giggling in the background during the entire exchange. This pissed off the NBC brass because the video went viral, and made the corporation look goofy. So to punish SOMEONE, anyone of the three, there was little Olbermann with a tiny infraction of company policy and BINGO. The “BIG-bad NBC corporation taught those three a lesson, how dare they defy me. I am NBC.”

In my opinion, it is wrong for NBC to try and have Olbermann, Matthews, and Maddow cover election results, (or campaign conventions), then punish the three if NBC believes that they “leaned” too far to the left. That’s what these people do for a living. You can’t ask these people to drop all of that and be “fair” during an election.

I have always said that I wish people would just be honest in news. Do not tell me that you are a non-bias journalist, then report the news with a liberal slant.

(Yes, I know that I just set myself up for a debate about Fox News claiming it is “Fair and Balanced”, and we can debate that if you like.)

However, that doesn’t change the fact that NBC has been screwed up for years. From causing Lorne Michaels (who created SNL) to leave Saturday Night Live, which almost destroyed the show (Lorne did return years later and saved the show from cancellation). NBC went against Johnny Carson’s wishes to have David Letterman take over The Tonight Show when he retired, and NBC gave the Tonight Show to Jay Leno instead. Least we forget the whole debacle between Leno and Conan O’Brian; NBC does NOT have your back. NBC will not stick up for you, and it is not a safe place to call home. (Unless your name is Jerry Seinfeld or Tina Fey.)

So, to answer the original question of this editorial: yes, I think that liberal progressives need to find another home. NBC will keep screwing with these shows, and their hosts. It will not get better.

But where could they go..??

Internet TV just hasn’t taken off. The Young Turks, The Onion, Newsbusters have all tried to provide shows via the Internet, but nothing beats being on the TV.

CNBC is still under the NBC umbrella, so that is no good. CNN seems to be trying to walk an independent straight line (hah, hah.)

Comedy Central would be a perfect fit. Picture it: 8pm Matthews “Hardboiled”, 9pm- Olbermann, 10pm- Maddow, 11pm Jon Stewart, 11:30- Colbert. It would be the perfect liberal paradise.

However, Comedy Central has tried to focus on- Comedy, and probably doesn’t want to get involved in the high cost of paying three political commentators, with hundreds of staff members “checking facts” (checking FACTS, he tried to say while keeping a straight face. Yea, like that is going to happen. )

Headline News (CNN’s sister site.) HHhhhmm..

That would be my guess for a new home for progressives.

Glenn Beck got his TV start on the Headline News channel, so they are not too afraid of controversy. Right now, Headline News has Nancy Grace and Joy Behar; so I think that these shows could fit right in there.

Where ever this future place might be, I think that liberal / progressives need to find a new home. NBC is going to continue to screw with you. (And then NBC will blame you progressives when things don’t go right.)

Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republic

OK, so now what?

2010-11-03T20:37:00.002-04:00

This election made for a great night. I wanted to get on the Internet and check out what everyone was saying about the election, but there was so much to do Tuesday.

I have been very quiet about this election. You can check my past editorials and see that I barely mentioned the 2010 election. Some folks on other blog systems have asked me: “Do you not CARE about the election? Do you not want to take back the government?”

Yes, yes of course I do.

But I was considering something else...

President Obama was successfully able to blame republicans FOR EVERYTHING, during his first year in office. However, it was getting harder for democrats to blame republicans, last year. People began to realize that democrats took control of the House and Senate in 2006. President Bush cannot constitutionally WRITE legislation, so from 2006- on; it was democrats who wrote the laws, and democrats held the checkbook. And, from 2006 to the present, the country has gone downhill.

Last year, people started to wake up from the Obama induced trance.

IF- republicans took everything- both the House and Senate by large margins, it would give President Obama the ability to blame republicans for another 2 years.

Lets face it, if republicans held the house and senate, and the economy didn’t improve in the next 2 year, we could (and should) blame republicans equally for not “doing enough” to improve things. This would make it much tougher for 2012 voters to sift through “who is to blame for what?”.

However, what happened last night was perfect..!! You could not plan it any better!

We control the House. However, liberals still control the White House, and the Senate. (At the time of writing this, we were still waiting for results from Washington and Colorado. However, assuming that the 2 independent senators usually vote with democrats, and VP Biden breaks all ties; liberals, basically will still control the senate.)

With control of the House, we can stop any liberal ideas that come down the pike. If progressive decide: “Hey, health care worked out so great for us, we could get more votes if we gave people free food. Let’s tell the American public that millions of children are dying because they do not have free government food, and only we progressives can save these starving children.” If liberals try something like this, we can stop it.

Yet, because liberals still control two / thirds of the government, they cannot push all the blame on republicans. Obama will have to become responsible. For the first time since becoming president; with ownership of two / thirds of government still intact, Obama will no longer be able to blame someone else. People will not believe him if he tries.

Unfortunately, because Barack Obama is an egotistical man, and because he has no business sense; he will not change course. Big business is seen as the enemy to people like Obama. Therefore, the president will make no attempt to communicate with, or work with business to create jobs. Tax and spend will be the liberal answer to everything. “If we can add a tax here, we could spend money over there.” Cap and Trade could be the next big push coming from team Obama.

If liberals think that raising taxes during a bad economy is a great idea, we can now stop it. The liberal / progressive agenda stops now.

Let’s be honest, we cannot repeal anything until we win the White House in 2012. We can’t really “change” anything, yet. But we can stop the bleeding.

Conservatives can introduce bills that will reduce spending, reward business that expand here in America, that will add new jobs. Even if liberals veto these bills, it will give business the confidence that things “will change” in the future. And America can return to a place where you can invent, you can invest, you can create, and you can start a business without the government penalizing you with sky-high taxes for being successful.

So for me, it was a little bit selfish: I wanted my little corner of the world to became conservative. (And that happened.) However, I didn’t want the entire country to go to a complete republican majority. I want Obama held responsible for all of the mess that he has created. I want no wiggle room for the president to slither out from.

Remember, President Carter held the White House and the congress for the full 4 years of his reign. People could not blame republicans for anything because democrats had a majority during the entire 4 years of Carter. What the American public did after Carter, was toss out those democrats, and for 12 years, Americans put a republican in the White House. (Which gave us Ronald Reagan.)

Maybe I was looking at it from that prospective; “Bad medicine.” If you catch your kid smoking, you force them to smoke a whole pack of cigarettes until they cough, puke, and never want to smoke again. Let the American public see what progressives are about. Tax, tax, and spend. Let them see the face of liberalism- Harry Reid. Watch as liberals continue to punish the successful business man. Watch as progressives continue to throw bags of money at a drowning man and pat themselves on the back because they think that they “did something.” (But the man is still drowning, because all they did was throw money at the poor.)

This week proved that we can stop it. Tuesday was a great night.

OK, about my little corner of the world...

My state district Rep is now a Republican- Mike Kelly. My new senator is Republican Pat Toomey, and the governor of Pennsylvania is now Republican Tom Corbett. Even next door in Ohio they went for a republican governor- John Kasich.

So now I am surrounded by republicans. Is that a good thing? I sure hope so.

Now, it is time to thank all of the people who helped republicans win big this election.

Thanks to...

The democrats- you liberals helped more than you know. By acting like you owned Washington DC, instead of remembering that you work for us, you handed this election to us.

Thanks to...

Colbert and Stewart’s day of sanity- somehow, showing people demanding “sanity” while sitting atop a porta-potty, was very fitting. People being asked if they think that President Obama believes in Keynesian economics, and Stewart’s sanity rally spectators replied- “That’s crazy, Obama showed his Birth certificate, he’s from Hawaii.” FAIL- Keynesian economics is based on John Maynard Keynes theories of business cycles, which Obama HAS mentioned in a few of his speeches.

For many Americans, the Stewart rally took the mask off of the progressives, and was the last straw. For two years, progressives have been pretending to be intelligent, all the while calling republicans childish names; “Neo-cons are stupid, and racists, and teabagging idiots.” By the results of the 2010 election, you progressives have lost your mask. People now see you for what you are.

And a special thanks to...

The mainstream media. Because the mainstream media only reports “all that is good in Obama-land” and never reports the whole story; it caused many people to become suspicious and tune into conservative media outlets. If the MS media were more fair with their reporting, these people may have never ventured into conservative outlets.

And thanks to President Obama- because he lost his “mojo”, democrats fell out of their trance and stayed home; republicans came out in droves and voted.

It was a great day..!!

AR Babonie

Tough job for the New Speaker to Deliver

2010-11-03T19:27:00.000-04:00

By JENNIFER STEINHAUER
Published: November 3, 2010- The New York Times

In leading his party to midterm triumph, Representative John A. Boehner, the next speaker of the House, is not at the endgame. He is at the beginning of the next and harder fight.

Relying on his decades of experience with the inner workings of the House, Mr. Boehner, of Ohio, now has less than two years to show that the Republican Party is the antidote to what ails Washington, with a discordant caucus, a stagnant economy, a hostile White House with veto power and the long shadow of 1994 all looming before him.

His promises on behalf of the new House majority — reducing the size of government, creating jobs and fundamentally altering the way the Congress conducts its business — are mostly as lofty as they are unspecific, and his efforts to legislate them into reality must be done with ambitious upstarts within his own party and a fresh crop of Tea Partiers, some of whom seem to believe that it is they, not he, now running the show.

The demands on Mr. Boehner from voters are many and not all consistent.

There is a craving, polling shows, to see the current system upended, but preferably without gridlock or rancor. Voters want federal spending curtailed, but jealously guard costly entitlements. They angrily reject what is, but have no clearly articulated vision for what should be.

Indeed, Mr. Boehner and his party were delivered no clear mandate from voters, who, polls suggested, were rejecting a policy agenda more than they were rallying around one. One demand resonated loudly: the reduction of federal spending immediately, a daunting goal. Yet, among the first things that Mr. Boehner has said he will seek to accomplish are reversing cuts to the Medicare program and extending the expiring Bush-era tax cuts, steps that are hard to reconcile with a commitment to reining in the national debt.

Mr. Boehner, who will become second in line to the presidency in January, has responded to the contradictory forces that led to Republican victory with equally mixed messages.

He has given speeches about inclusiveness, then written Twitter messages denouncing compromise. He is specific about the amount of spending cuts he seeks — $100 billion — but says little about how he will get there. In speeches during a whirlwind tour of Ohio over the weekend, he promised things would be “different” in Washington, but then returned to the two-year theme of denigrating President Obama.

The best guiding documents for understanding what Mr. Boehner seeks to accomplish are the House Republican policy document titled “A Pledge to America” and his recent speech to the American Enterprise Institute in Washington. The former is a short collection of goals, some of them near-impossible in the near term (like ending government control of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the giant mortgage companies) and a few small-bore but relatively easy to accomplish, like repealing paperwork rules imposed on small businesses.

Mr. Boehner and his party have also made it clear that they will immediately try to unravel the new health care law, either by repealing pieces of it, some of which have already gone into force, or by using the appropriations process to remove financing from its key provisions.

Mr. Boehner will also be tested — perhaps as early as during the lame duck session this month, when Democrats may be eager to put the issue to bed — on the tax cut front. Democrats would like to see tax cuts extended for all but the highest income levels, while Republicans seek to make them permanent for all taxpayers.

Dragging this battle out would create tremendous headaches for the Internal Revenue Service, and the issue might be settled in the lame duck session. But Mr. Boehner learned this year, when he indicated a willingness to work with Democrats to hammer out a middle ground solution and was excoriated by some party mates, that not all Republicans cotton to compromise on the issue.

Mr. Boehner, in his speech and in the pledge, also seeks to overhaul much of the way Congress does its business, including eliminating sprawling bills that are filled with items that have nothing to do with the legislation’s main intent, as well as requiring bills to cite constitutional authority and ensuring more bipartisan debate on bills.

There is no doubt that Mr. Boehner, who was among the so-called Gang of Seven in 1994, when Republicans took control of the House and then became entangled in missteps and feuds, does not want a repeat of history.

For instance, in 1994, when Republicans captured both the House and the Senate, Speaker Newt Gingrich and the Senate leader, Bob Dole, both harbored presidential aspirations and worked less in tandem than as adversaries. That division between House and Senate Republicans played to President Bill Clinton’s advantage.

In contrast, Mr. Boehner’s relationship with his Senate counterpart, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, with whom he has worked closely in the past two years to oppose Mr. Obama’s agenda, remains strong.

Finally, there is some opportunity for bipartisan lawmaking, as Democrats and Republicans alike recognize, often privately. The pursuit of alternative energy sources, modest trade agreements, changes to the Bush administration’s signature education act and even adjustments to the tax code are all within reach.

“The big, interesting question is ‘What message does Obama take out of this election? What path does he choose?’ ” said Mr. McConnell, who said spending and debt were potential areas of common ground.
“There will be plenty of Republicans willing to help reduce both,” the senator said. “There are places where he has expressed interest in the past that would be similar to our own interests.”

Restoring Sanity, being nice to everyone, including you idiots

2010-10-31T11:36:00.005-04:00

Restoring Sanity, being nice to everyone, including you idiots

I must admit that I was moved by watching the “Rally to restore Sanity (and / or) Fear.” Stewart and Colbert have taught me that: YES- we must and can work together and tone down the rhetoric.

But, working together and calmly debating ideologies means that you can no longer call me a racist, or a teabagger, or claim that I hate Mexicans just because I want the southern border laws followed. Or say that I hate all Muslims just because I object to a Mosque being built near ground zero.

In return, I will stop calling you a piss-head because you drive a car, yet complain about other people who drive a car; because THEY are killing the earth? (Well, they have a bigger car than I do.) So you are BOTH killing the earth, you are just killing the earth- slower; and that is OK with you?

Also, I will quit calling you brain-dead because you say that you want to help the poor, but to help the poor; you want to raise taxes? My friend, if you want to help the poor, reach into your pocket and give your money to the poor. If you want to pay higher taxes, just refuse your refund check this year from your income tax. Very little of your tax money actually goes to the poor. Your tax money went to bail out the banks, which they used to give huge bonuses to their CEO’s. Your tax money is use to supply a jet for Speaker Nancy Pelosi to fly back and forth from DC to California.

However, Stewart and Colbert are right, we should debate without calling each other names.

Actually, we need each other to survive. After watching the “Sanity” rally, I find it VERY hard to say anything BAD about a liberal. I cannot cut down a democrat, and I may even say some nice things about a progressive.

Let me prove it to you that we do NEED each other...

To grow a pretty flower, (which would represent the new- budding conservative government) you would first need fertilizer. (Which would represent the past 2 years, and the democrats in power.)

You cannot have the beautiful blossoming flower, (which is conservatism) without the steaming pile of compost (which would be liberal / progressives.)

See, we truly need each other, we do not have to call each other names, and we can work together. The Stewart / Colbert rally taught me that.

It was actually a very entertaining rally. Sure, there were mistakes that happen during any LIVE show: (for example) During a song with Kid Rock and Sheryl Crow; you could hear a video tape rewinding for the (pre-taped) Rap section of the song. And during a song by Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert, the audience was supposed to participate by shouting into a microphone what city or state that they were from. But that didn’t happen right away, which left Stewart and Colbert on stage, stunned; with a poor guitar player trying to fill the void. However, this stuff happens to every live show, and didn’t effect the overall entertainment value.

I enjoyed the show, and I learned that we can all work together.

(Maybe you need one more metaphor?)

To use recycled metal to build a shinny new Ford car (again, the car represents the conservatives) you need a junk yard full of old rusty metal- (100 years of old ideas held by the democrats.) From the junk yard full of trash, rats, and rusty ideas; you can create a new conservative (car).

Think about it...

100 years of rusty ideas.

See, if you truly wanted to restore sanity, and calmly debate the issues; you could read what I am about to say without calling me a name.

It was almost 100 years ago, (1919, to be exact) that President Wilson help form the League of Nations, (which was the precursor to the United Nations.) The League of Nations was supposed to end all wars because surely; if nations just “talked” to each other, they would never fight. Oh yea, that worked out REALLY well. America has been involved in MORE wars since joining the League (the UN), than before; when America was a “lone wolf.”

100 years of rusty ideas..??

There is a birthday coming up. 1913.

1913 was the year that democrats passed the “progressive income tax.” We didn’t have a personal income tax before that period. (How did we ever survive..??)

The progressive income tax was designed to grow the federal government so that the Feds could help the poor. YET, we still have poor people today. It’s been 100 years, and we still have poor people? (What the hell is congress doing with the money?)

I know that it sounds “noble” to hear a political party “claim” that they are going to help the poor. But do they really help the poor?

I have been alive for half a century, and I have listen to democrats talk and talk about helping the poor. But we still have poor people, and some might argue that it is worse today; for the poor.

Why isn’t the liberal methods working?

Here is the best way that I can describe it:

Picture this: you are on a dock, and you see a drowning man in the water. Do you throw the drowning man a bag of money and tell him to come back next month for another bag of money? This is what democrats have been doing for 100 years. They toss a drowning man a sack of money.

I cannot speak for all conservatives, but I can tell you what I believe. You do NOT throw a bag of money at a drowning man. First, you reach out your hand and lift this man out of the environment that IS CAUSING THE MAN TO DROWN IN THE FIRST PLACE. Get this man out of the water. Get him some dry clothes and a hot meal. Then place a paint brush in the man’s hand and tell him: “Get to work, no free rides here. And, don’t fall off the dock again.”

Welfare, by design, keeps people poor. Like throwing a bag of money at a drowning man; sure the man has some pocket money, but he is still in the environment that will cause him to drown again.

Welfare is a fine program, we have to be a caring nation; but welfare cannot be a way of life. Because welfare does NOT provide a “real” life for anyone. No matter how you rationalize it. Welfare keeps people poor.

Everyone needs a job. Work builds self-confidence and shapes character. The government should be focused on job creation, and NOT focused on new ways to tax people, and better ways to toss drowning people bags of money. The social programs that we have are fine, if they were managed properly. What government should be focused on now is working with business to help incubate new business, and the creation of new jobs.

And if one member of congress suggests a new way to tax the American people, he or she should be run out of town. There is no reason to raise taxes in this economy.

Yes, the message of the Stewart / Colbert rally wasn’t lost on this old conservative. I understand what they are trying to say. If everyone would just calm down, we could discuss our differences. The problem is, the minute that I talk about lowering taxes to create jobs, you shout me down by saying that I am in bed with evil BIG business, that I hate poor people, or I am a racist.

Besides, the “sanity rally” was based on a lie. Stewart claimed that the rally would not be political, and would not take sides. Yet, Colbert’s whole comedy bit is based on making fun of conservatives. Which is political, in itself; and does take sides.

I have no problem with Colbert making fun of me. He makes me laugh. But don’t tell me, and the American people, that this rally was not political, or not taking sides.

Still, Stewart did have his moments; when showing “fear” montages, he did equally show clips from MSNBC’s Ed Shultz and Fox’s Glenn Beck. The video went back and forth, from left to right. It was fair enough.

And Stewart’s closing speech was genius. Comparing the general American public as people in cars just trying to go home. When confronted with the dilemma of a 6 lane highway being necked down to a two lane tunnel, people are mostly courteous and take turns getting into the tunnel: “No, you go ahead.” People, sitting in their cars, wave to each other: “It is your turn, you go ahead.”

Stewart is correct, in real life; most people are courteous to each other. Only on the blogs, and on political TV talk shows do we shout each other down.

But it has always been that way, and Stewart knows this. The founding fathers fought loudly with each other over the direction of this great country. Founding Father Hamilton would have been a president if it wasn’t for the fact that he was killed during a duel, with a fellow American.

You do not get much more passionate than that. Politics- to the point of DEATH, by way of a duel. But this is what Stewart fails to realize: when you love your country, and you see a group of people trying to “change” your country into something that you disagree with; you are going to get passionate. You are going to get loud.

Really, it is egotistical to think that YOUR way is the RIGHT way, and those other people need to tone it down a notch.

I am sure that liberals feel the same way when conservatives are in charge. I saw how passionate (and loud) they were when Bush was president.

Still, I cannot take away from the brilliant example that Stewart used to describe the general American public. We are sitting in our cars, stuck in traffic. It doesn’t matter if there is a “Support the NRA” bumper sticker on the back of a car, or a “Vote for Obama” sticker on a car; we smile to each other and wave to the other driver: “You go ahead.”

If the 2010 election polls are correct, Americans are waving a new group of drivers to the front of the line. Democrats have been in charge of congress for 4 years and during those 4 years, the country has gone to shit.

The American public is telling the republicans, “you go ahead.”

I just hope that the republicans understand how important this is.

Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republic

Super scary Halloween story- WARNING- Contains Alan Grayson

2010-10-27T11:33:00.001-04:00

Super scary Halloween story- WARNING- Contains Alan Grayson

Gather around kids, this story is spooky.

It seemed like a good day in Washington DC.

Better than a good day, it was a GREAT- good day, really.

The police had arrested the swine flu.

With swine flu, locked safely behind bars, it really was a GREAT- good day.

However, people should have worried; they should have been filled with fear.

For, today was Halloween and everyone in DC was running from the democrat’s Health Care Bill, to say the least.

This child from hell, (the health care bill) has destroyed many lives, including those who CREATED THIS SCARY BEAST.

2,000 pages of pure hell, which all of congress has read from front to back (Hah, hah.) This beast of a bill listed everything from vending machine food safety- to how high a new tax will be on Granny’s next oxygen machine.

It was a terrifying thing, telling people it would mean FREE health care, yet forcing people to BUY insurance, and all who gazed upon this monster, ran in fear.

Democrats who voted for this beast, now searching for reelection- claim: “I had little to do with it, I would have done it different, let me be clear.”

But, people in the community never seemed to notice. “..Why would they..??”

After all, it was a GREAT- good day, it just felt right.

A GREAT day, that is, until day turned to night.

All of the children were snuggled in their beds.

While visions of sugar plums danced in their heads.

When all of a sudden, from the lawn came such a clatter.

The children ran to the window to see what was the matter.

(Wow, this Halloween story sound familiar..??)

What they saw was so scary, the children started to run.

It was Florida’s democratic congressman: Rep. Alan Grayson.

With a DEEP, blood boiling voice, Grayson cried out in a roar:

“..I apologize to the DEAD. You K Street whore..”

The children ran to a closet, where they thought Grayson wouldn’t be.

But there was no hiding from The Grayson, he was on EVERY- TV..

“..Die quickly. K Street whore. I apologized to the dead..”

The words Grayson uttered was stuck in every child’s head.

The children huddled, as low as they could be.

One child look over, and shouted to me:

“..Kind sir, is there any way to kill this beast..?? Will he die..??”

“..Because Grayson is a democrat, “No.” Was my reply.

“..If the Grayson were a republican, there might be a way..”

“The mainstream media would swoop in to save the day.”

CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, MSNBC, THE TIMES, NEWSWEEK, and all...

Would grab their cameras, pitchforks, torches, and wait for the republican to fall.

The republican wouldn’t stand a chance.

(Anyone remember Mark Foley..??)

But, because this beast is a democrat, he will live on.

To devour your intellect, until free- thought is gone.

THE END

So, the moral of this story is:

If you are a politician, and you happen to be:

A crook

Or a crook who hides $90,000 bucks of bribe money in your freezer.

Or, you are the King of Pork and love spending tax payers money:

or you happen to be a sex pervert:

Crooked politicians, should heed my words, before joining the Fed.

Join the democrats, live forever, as the “Living Dead.”

HAPPY HALLOWEEN..!!

Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republic

(Originally posted Oct 2009, with a few modern rewrites.)

I am very offended

2010-10-25T21:31:00.002-04:00

You have offended me for the last time

I just read a story in which some people are offended that White actor: Robert Downey Jr was nominated for an award for playing a Black Man in the movie "Tropic Thunder."

Actually, Robert plays a White actor who is playing a Black man. So it isn’t Robert playing a Black man. (Although he is.) You following me on this..??

So, some people feel that a White guy playing a Black guy is a little Queer.

(I’m sorry. I didn’t mean "queer" as referring to a persons sexual preference.)

Let me try this again...

Some people are offended that a modern movie and a present day actor would actually have a White man paint his face dark and play a Black man.

Do these "offended" people have a point here? Or are they just being gay?

(OK, I screwed up again. I didn’t mean "gay" as in homosexual. I meant "gay" as in "weird.")

Oh.. Crap..??

I didn’t mean to say that "gay" was weird. I meant "gay" in the sense like they would have used the term "gay" back in the 1940's. Back when a White man could play a Black Man in a movie and no one would be offended.

OK, I didn’t mean that Black people in the 1940's were more "tolerant" than Black people today. No, I didn’t mean that at all.

What I was trying to say is that in the 1940's, you didn’t have people getting offended if a White man played a Black man or an Indian.

Hey, in the 40's, they called Native Americans: "Indians."

What the hell does that have to do with me..!!

What the #@$# could I have possibly said that would have offended a cow..??

Hey, all of you "offended" people are really starting to piss me off..!!

I can’t say anything without "offending" someone.

I have never been this "offended" in all my life..!!

Liberals being mugged by reality with Juan Williams

2010-10-24T11:25:00.004-04:00

Liberals being mugged by reality with Juan Williams

I think that this whole situation with Juan Williams being fired by National Public Radio has caused some (not all, but some) liberals to be mugged by reality. It has opened their eyes and now they can see.

How can you possibly claim to be tolerant if you fire a guy for honestly speaking his mind and saying that he sometimes feels fear if he sees Muslims getting on a plane with him.

How can you possibly claim to watch out for minorities when you FIRE the only Black reporter at NPR just because he spoke his mind? Williams didn’t lie. He did not bend the truth. All he did was tell his innermost feelings about terrorism, and how the 9/11 attacks have made him feel.

How can you fire Williams and still claim to be open-minded?

You can not, and you are not being tolerant, or looking out for minorities. The AGENDA is the most important thing. More important than any silly little Black man and any fears that he might have over sitting on a plane with Muslims.

“Let’s talk about racism, let’s talk about terrorism, we need a dialogue”, the progressives are fond of saying. Yet, when Juan Williams tries to do just that, he is clubbed in the knees and taken down. Relegated to the likes of the evil Fox News, nevermore to be seen on traditional mainstream media.

What REALLY did Juan say..?? Juan didn’t say that he hates Muslims, or that he fears Muslims being near him, everywhere. He said that the image of outward looking Muslims on a plane with him, gives him fear.

You have got to take color and race out of the equation, (which is hard to do for democrats who are obsessed with race and skin color). Everyone has been walking down a city street, and had a group of scary looking people coming towards you. This group of people are loud, rowdy, and clearly up to no good. It doesn’t matter what color their skin is, they could be Mexican, or Black, or White looking Italians; it doesn’t freaking matter what race they are. The fact that these people are in a “gang”, and they are causing problems, puts fear in your heart until you have passed them by, safely.

This situation with Juan Williams is the same thing: because radicals, who believe in Islam, and dress like Muslims, keep attacking America and blowing shit up; this causes folks like Juan Williams (and myself) to fear people who dress like the terrorists, because they might blow shit up.

You shouldn’t be mad at Juan Williams, you should be mad at the radicals who dress like Muslims, blow shit up in the name of Allah and kill people, and are giving other Muslims a bad name. The radical members of Islam are who you should be mad at, not Williams for being honest.

For the liberal / progressive; let me put this another way: if you went to an Arab country, I am sure that you would find Muslims who fear the American soldier (because the American soldier is blowing shit up.) However, not all American soldiers ARE blowing shit up. Some US soldiers are there for the rebuilding of the country and the feeding of the people. Wouldn’t it be racist for Muslims to fear ALL of the American soldiers..?? (Aaah haaa, my liberal friend, you have just been mugged by reality.)

The sad truth is that Juan Williams has been fighting for liberal causes on Fox News for YEARS. Williams, by himself, has been surrounded by 3 or 4 conservatives at a time; trying to debate the relevance of some liberal program, all the while being outnumbered by conservatives on Fox.

Juan Williams has probably done MORE to promote liberal causes than NPR, Media Matters, and Move On- combined. Because Williams doesn’t “preach to the choir”, safely talking only to people who share his ideology, he goes directly into enemy territory: Fox News.

It should also be noted that Fox News, to my knowledge, has never shut down Juan Williams, for anything that he has said.

NPR’s response to this debacle, is: “Hey, well, it is too bad that this happened during our fund raising event. We need your money to keep quality programming on the air, so send in those donations. However, we cannot have some silly little man claim that he fears Muslims. We MUST think about journalistic integrity. Why, Muslims are the best bunch of people ever, far better than those evil Christians who caused the Spanish Inquisition (about a thousand years ago). So what if a few buildings got knocked down by Muslims and some people died, or the fact that the underwear bomber, or the shoe bomber, or the Times Square bomber, or the USS Cole bomber, or the US Embassy bombers, were all Muslims. That doesn’t mean a thing.”

Yep, that’s public radio. All dressed up in “politically correct” clothes, with no place to go.

I am going to let my fellow conservative colleagues talk about the other NPR reporters and the comments that they may have made in the past, who were NOT fired by NPR. I, personally, do not listen to NPR. I have tried, but listening to NPR reminds me of listening to someone trying to read the assembly instructions to an entertainment center purchased from IKEA. (“Take pin C and place it into hole B, using a slight turning motion. Then take bracket F and use screws marked L and attach bracket F to plank R as shown.”)

However, I do want to talk about the actions of a past- “respected journalist”, and the hypocrisy of the “tolerant” liberal.

If you asked someone today who is the most trusted man in the news business, they may give you a blank-stare, then reply: “I dunno, maybe Jerry Springer.”

But if you asked that question 30 years ago, the answer would be “Walter Cronkite.”

I do not want to condemn Walter Cronkite here; anyone who reaches the pinnacle of their game should be commended.

However, Cronkite was far from being a “non-bias journalist.” In fact, Cronkite was very, very bias.

Cronkite didn’t just report the news, Cronkite helped shape the news; and we are finding more on that today.

It has been said that without President JFK and Walter Cronkite, we never would have made it to the moon. JFK’s contribution goes without saying; however, Cronkite was there reporting for CBS all of the events that went into the building of the American space program. JFK set the moon mission up and Cronkite got Americans interested in it.

I do not think that we can condemn Cronkite for showing a bias in favor of the space program. Hey, we were all into it.

It is when we dive into the reporting on the Vietnam War that the lines between “reporting” and “shaping” the news become cloudy. Documents have surfaced which allegedly show how Cronkite not only reported on anti-war protests, Cronkite showed the protesters HOW to preform their rallies, what to say, which democrat politicians to get in touch with, and what time CBS News would be there, so the anti-war protesters could put their “best face on” for the cameras.

This is a photo-grab of one such document, allegedly showing Cronkite directing a war protest rally, (the protesters name has been removed.)

This is when many hippies realized that they too, could shape the news. This is when many hippies went into journalism to “change the world.” I speak about this connection between 1960's hippies and the “revolution by way of the pen” in my editorial on “The freedom hippies”, which you can find on “Angry Republic Radio”, at this LINK. (Since you are veiwing this editorial on The Angry Republic's News site, just look to the right for the radio player.)

Cronkite directing an anti-war protest rally? Folks, this is not reporting the news.

The funny thing is, this is exactly what liberals claim that Fox News does today: stage Tea Party rallies and then report on them. BUT, this has all been done before, about 40 years ago; by liberals, CBS News, the democrats, and Walter Cronkite.

So, for NPR to fire Juan Williams because: “NPR needs to uphold journalistic standards” is laughable. THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A NON-BIAS REPORTER, EVER.

(Did I just say that..??)

I have never found a non-bias reporter. As Benjamin Franklin once said: “There is freedom of the press, as long as you own the printing press.”

Let’s face it, even what you DO NOT report, shows a bias. All news stories are important to- someone. Yet, when you are putting together your newspaper, or your TV show, you MUST choose which stories to cover, because you do not have room for all of them. You must “guess” what stories that you think people will be interested in. In dong so, you are showing a bias.

Bias has been there, always. We could go back to the Roman Empire; to the days when “scribes” wrote out each book by hand, because there was no printing press. These scribes didn’t always copy each book, word for word; and were known to do a little “re-writing” of history themselves. Since many of the books about the Roman Empire were written a hundreds years after the empire fell, written by people from nations whom the Roman Empire had conquered earlier, these books do not always show the Roman Empire in a good light. Even today, we are still trying to figure out what was real, and what was fiction, from the Roman Empire.

So I get a little pissed off when I hear liberals talking about protecting their journalistic integrity. There never has been any, and we would be better off if people would just admit this. TELL ME WHO YOU ARE AND WHAT YOU STAND FOR, don’t lie to me and claim that you have no bias; when clearly you do.

Just be honest, that is all we ask.

Which is what Juan Williams was doing.

And he was fired by the “tolerant” people at public radio.

Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republic

I HATE republicans because they HATE people

2010-10-17T10:06:00.000-04:00

I HATE republicans because they HATE people

Oxymoron- (definition) A big guy named “Guido”, who has no neck, BIG stumpy arms, and is f**king stupid.

OR...

Anyone who say: “I hate people who hate people.”

Heading into the 2010 election, we find a choir of democrats claiming that republicans are filled with hate, and this would be a reason not to vote for republicans (because we hate.) Democrats claim that republicans hate Black people, Muslims, poor people, Mexicans, etc; the list goes on.

Even I, your humble writer, was told that “I hate” Gay people because I believe that “hate crimes laws” favor one group over other groups, and therefore is unconstitutional.

Actually, I do not hate anyone. Really! I like talking to liberals and progressives because I want to know why they believe the things that they believe.

However, perception is king.

I am, what I am. (Until someone calls me a nasty name, and that name happens to “stick.”)

So, I wanted to talk about “HATE”, and to do this; I will be using elements of Feng Shui in this post, so that we can reach our spiritual “center.” (Michelle Obama reminded all of us about the evil spirits that could surround us. I do not want evil spirits surrounding this web site, so here we go...)

Republicans are filled with hate.

The opposite of hate- would be love.

If you do not like the “hate” that republicans have, then you MUST be filled with love.

If you do not agree with someone because you claim that “they” are filled with hate, you must be saying that you are “different”; therefore you must believe that you are filled with love? Correct?

So, if you are filled with “love”, how can you say anything bad about anyone?

A person who is filled with true love doesn’t just love the people who agree with them. They love all people. You would love the pretty little blue bird who sings in the trees, just as much as you love the pit bull who chews on your leg.

True love means loving all.

And if you do not “love all”, then you too, are filled with hate.

I can say this, because years ago, I found my earthly center, I am at peace, I am filled with love for all, and I believe that you are a f**king “name calling” hypocrite.

How can a group of people; who hate the oil companies and the car companies because they “pollute the earth and rip off people”, say that you shouldn’t vote for republicans because republicans hate..??

You, yourself, are hateful of the rich. (Or, at least, you have a bigoted perspective towards the rich.)

How can a group of people; who hate Wal-mart because they “treat their workers badly and buy foreign made product” say anything negative about republicans who may, or may not hate..??

I do not have this problem.

I took Michelle Obama’s advice, and began praying to remove all of the bad spirits away from me, and this web site. There are no evil spirits here.

I no longer hate anyone. I am true love. You people suck, and you might as well bend over and drop your pants because the democrats are coming for you.

That reminds me, what is MSNBC’s new motto? “Leaning forward (and taking it.)” People, do they NOT have anyone at MSNBC hip enough to explain what that new phrase means..??

This is all starting to piss me off, I almost hate this.

However, I cannot “truly” hate because I have filled my heart with love. I have found my spiritual center, and I took a multi-vitamin.

I am above hate.

Hate is below me. (And hate can blow me. There, I said it. What are YOU going to do about it..??)

When you have mastered Fung Shui, like I have; when you have centered your inner spirit by using origami...

You CANNOT hate anyone. (Except, maybe, those stupid basterds who claim that you hate. You could hate them.)

I do not hate Mexicans because I want the US border sealed. I’m not after the poor Mexican farmer who is just trying to survive. I want to stop criminals and terrorists from slipping into the country. If you took a minute to listen to us, we have talked about a better migrant worker program, and maybe making it a little easier for a Mexican to do it “the right way” and become American citizens. That’s not HATE, that is common sense.

Ohhh, but it’s Sooooo easy to run to a microphone and claim that I hate Mexicans. By doing this, you no longer have to debate me, you just call me a nasty name; like a 5 year old.

I do not hate Muslims because I would like to see the Park 51 project moved further away from ground zero. I would like it moved out of respect for the 68% of Americans who do not want a Mosque built near ground zero. That is not hate, that is common sense. If you build the Mosque there, it will cause tension between people. That is a fact.

Instead of debating me on this, you quickly call me a name. However, name-calling doesn’t solve the problem.

Name calling is not good. And “good” is what we must strive to achieve. If you were filled with LOVE, like I am; you could never call me a nasty name, you stupid asshole.

Take Michelle Obama’s advice. Pray to remove all of the evil spirits from yourself.

Learn to love, truly love all. Including the oil companies, Wal-mart, and conservatives.

OK, maybe you do not have to “love” the oil companies. That might be a little too much.

However, before you condemn me because you claim that I hate people; take a good look at yourself, because what you are showing me could not be considered “love.”

Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republic

Meanwhile, while you were reading my editorial, news continues to happen...

Back at the web site: Wikileaks, the owner and one of his TOP reporters are discussing a future story...

A story on leaked military documents about the War on Terror. (400,000 documents in all.)

Let’s look into the newsroom at Wikileaks

The Editorials

2010-10-13T11:51:00.004-04:00

WHAT IF- Republicans were in charge?

The "what if" game is played by the insane, (and very bored people with nothing better to do.)

I’m not sure which category I fall into, but I was playing the "what if" game while reading several housing foreclosure stories.

These are terribly sad stories of people losing their homes during this present crisis. You cannot help but put yourself into their shoes. "What if" this happened to me.

These sad stories are out there, but most of these stories are falling under the radar of national attention, while democrats control the government.

"What if" republicans controlled the congress, the senate, and the white house? Would these stories of people being kicked out of their homes be mostly overlooked by the mainstream media?

To answer that, one only has to look into the year 1987, President Reagan, and the "homeless" crisis. Every MM media outlet had, at least one "homeless person" story, almost every day during that year.

So I feel very confidant in saying that the mainstream media would be pushing these foreclosure stories MUCH harder if republicans controlled things.

So, I thought to myself: "What if" the mainstream media treated democrats and republicans equal? "What if" they went after Obama and the foreclosure crisis, the way that they went after Reagan and the homeless?

"What if..??"

(Hhhmm, I wonder what that would look like..??)

Family of 9 children- home- FORECLOSED. Kicked out into the streets while President Obama drinks beer.

ARPRESS REPORTING- It was a cold, sticky, dreary, lonely, bedbug infested night. Sadness fell across this ONCE great country of ours, when news broke out that a family of NINE CHILDREN had to leave their family home; all of their dreams, and their entire future; taken from them by RICH mortgage brokers.

The Earl Family were now forced to live by the charity of others. The Earl’s; once proud and independent American people, now forced to live in the bedbug infested streets. All the while, President Obama was drinking beer with his buddies, somehow detached from the rest of us, and our suffering.

Since this awful time, President Obama has sought to stop all foreclosures pending proper investigation, however; is it far, far to late?

Is it far, far, far, far, to late, late, late, late, Mr. Obama..??

OK, I cannot go on with this joke. You get the point. If this were a republican president, the foreclosure news would receive TOP billing in the mainstream media.

I cannot believe...

We were talking about media bias in the 1980's, and here it is; 30 years later, and we are still talking about the media bias towards liberalism.

However, it will change. As more and more conservatives get into journalism, (like liberals did 20 years ago) we will see a more balanced news system.

It will take some time.

After all, many of your top news outlets are run by people who grew out of the 70's hippie movement. They got into journalism to: "change the world", not necessarily to report the news.

(We have to wait for these old hippies to retire, or get fired.)

It will be some "hot-shot", young buck who has a spark of genius, and says:

"Hey, I got an idea. Instead of trying to lead people into liberalism, let’s report the news. After we report the who, what where, when, and how; let’s have a TOP liberal and a TOP conservative debate the issue, and we can present both sides."

Gee, I wonder if anyone has thought of that yet?

Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republic

LINK- Sad, sad foreclosure story

After buying a house for $500,000, and borrowing $300,000 in cash from equity on the home (now owing $800,000); the Earl (family with 9 children) couldn’t pay their mortgage and was evicted.

However, they broke into their old home and are "squatting" there, with the help of their attorney.

(One problem) Someone already bought the home and spent $40,000 to fix it up.

Do you feel sorry for them? Or not?

Is the president insane? (Or does he think that you are stupid?)

2010-10-13T10:17:00.001-04:00

If you were the president and you were set to speak at an event sponsored by the US Chamber of Commerce, would you head out and trash the US Chamber of Commerce beforehand, and claim that they are funneling foreign money to republicans, which (would be) corrupting our government system?

Hell no..!!

If you were sane, complete with all your wits, you would do one of three things first: (one) cancel the speaking event because it wouldn’t be right to speak at an event sponsored by such an evil organization (such as the Chamber of Commerce.)

(Two) Demand that a special congressional investigation begin looking into foreign money going to the RNC by way of the Chamber of Commerce.

(Three) Look ahead in your speaking engagement calendar so you do not screw up again and condemn an organization that you are scheduled to celebrate in the future.

Democrats and the president have done none of these things.

First off, as I write this, President Obama is still scheduled to speak at the US-India Business Council (Nov 6th- 9th), which is co-sponsored by India’s Business Council and the US Chamber of Commerce. So Obama will still be speaking for those EVIL people in the CC.

Second, if you had proof that republicans were getting tons of foreign cash, why would you go to the media first, AND NOT PRESS CHARGES in a US court? This doesn’t make sense? Any sane person would file the charges first, then go to the media and say: “We believe republicans are ‘blah, blah, blah’, and we have filed formal charges ‘blah, blah, blah.” Democrats didn’t do this. They rushed to the media hoping that you were stupid enough to believe without evidence.

(And three) This is not the first time that this type of thing has happened to the Obama administration. I have said this before and will repeat it often: President Obama has surrounded himself with buddies and cronies, none of which seem to have much experience running anything (IE- a business, a state, a country). So, they keep making mistakes like this.

Is President Obama insane?

No, not at all. Anyone who can win the presidency MUST have their wits.

But because Obama has surrounded himself with cronies, who lack experience, Obama comes off sometimes as acting: “stupidly.”

Ego forces the Obama administration to plow forward, after a mistake like this, hoping you are too stupid to check the facts.

Never underestimate the American people.

Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republic

Special thanks to Newsbusters and Hot Air.

The Newsbusters story

The Hot Air story

OK, Bubba; where you coming from?

2010-10-10T09:25:00.000-04:00

Actually, this week, I was in beautiful Indiana, Pennsylvania.

Picture rolling hills dotted with farmland carved out of the forest. Indiana claims to be the “Christmas Tree capital of America.” (Yes, they do have a lot of pine tree farms.)

Where is Indiana, Pa? OK, say you were heading south on I-79 towards Pittsburgh. BUT, you accidentally turned left onto RT-422 and drove for 60 miles in the wrong direction. (All the while, your GPS is telling you to “turn around, you are going the wrong way.”) If you did that, you would end up in Indiana, Pa.

Indiana is a BIG college town, however; bigger still is the two huge coal burning powerplants located outside the city.

It is not unusual to see huge billboards along the highway telling drivers to: “Stop Nancy Pelosi and President Obama’s plans to raise utility costs through taxes.”

Or, you might see a flashing electronic sign that counts down the days left until the 2010 election, so we can: “Throw these bums out who support Cap and Trade.”

You see, these huge coal burning power plants employ hundreds of people from the area. Maybe thousands of people if you count all the industries connected with these plants. People are afraid when democrats talk about attacking the coal industry. Coal is their life support system, and how they make a living.

So, you might be tempted to think that Indiana is a conservative (republican) community. You might be wrong with that thinking, remember; Pennsylvania is notoriously a “blue state.”

I talked to one old fellow, who is a life-long democrat. He said: “Usually, democrats have been pretty fair to us here, and have understood that we survive from the coal industry. But in the last 4 years, democrats have begun to attack the coal industry, which is causing me to vote republican this year. You cannot take away something, (the coal industry) without first providing another form of income.) Democrats have the cart before the horse with this cap and trade bill. I cannot support them anymore.”

In Indiana, at least; it doesn’t seem like the republicans are taking the votes away from democrats. More so, the democrats are forcing people away from their party, because of their stance on coal.

Take a second look at that picture above. Surrounding the coal power plant you will see farmland.

Isn’t that ironic? Living things growing next to a (sic) “dirty-toxic coal power plant.”

No one who lives in Indiana is complaining about these coal burning power plants.

That is the way that I see it.

Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republic

Latinos attack a Gay man, Welcome to the Kingdom of America

2010-10-09T11:40:00.001-04:00

Latinos attack a Gay man, Welcome to the Kingdom of America

Is justice blind? Or is she peeking out of that blindfold?

NEW YORK (CBS 2/ 1010WINS/ AP) – Police have arrested seven individuals ranging in age from 16 to 23 for their roles in alleged anti-gay attacks Sunday.

The alleged bloody beatings happened on Osborne Place early Sunday. Police said members of a gang known as the “Latin King Goonies” lured a 17-year-old into an unoccupied ground floor apartment.

This is a horrible, terrible crime that should have never happened. These assholes deserve the FULL punishment afforded by the law.

However, big city gangs do this kind of stuff everyday and the only reason this made the national news is because it happened to a “Gay couple.” Matter of fact, as I write this, a young Black boy is being beat, dam near to death by gang members in Compton, and it will never reach the national news. Not like this story did. You will never know about this poor Black child.

I try very hard not label things like: It was a “Latino gang that attacked”, or this was a “Gay HATE crime.” It is not easy to drop the labels, after all; I am a product of this “group mentality.”

However, we must try and break this “group think.”

This was “a gang”, (it doesn’t really matter WHAT race this gang was) and they attacked a fellow human being, (I do not care if this person was Gay, or a Mormon, or whatever.)

What is it with people, and their freaking labels..??

“..Well, it was a group of Latinos who beat up this Gay man, so we will DOUBLE the punishment and call it a HATE crime. (If you ask me, all crime is done out of HATE and disrespect for others.)

Because this was a “HATE” crime, the Latinos will get 5 years in prison. However, that poor Black boy who was beat up by Black gang members in Compton; that’s no big deal. 6 months probation will be fine..”

Help me here, I am trying to figure this out..?? The very people who call me a racist because I am a conservative, spend a lot of time labeling other people as “Black”, or Gay, or a minority.

“..5 Whites guys beat up a Black man. That is a HATE crime which deserves 10 years in prison. However, 5 Black men beat up a White guy: That is NOT done out of “HATE”, that’s no big deal. The White guy probably said something “racist.” He probably deserved the beating..”

We are turning into a “Kingdom” here in America. Except, our Kingdom isn’t ruled by one man, it is ruled by “groups.”

Gay Rights would be King.

Environmentalists would be King.

Socialists would be King.

The Tea Party would be King.

So say the King, so it shall be.

Strike a Gay man; punishment: 40 lashes with a razor- laced whip.

Strike a Black man; punishment: 20 lashes with a whip.

Strike a White man; punishment: you will have to drink 5 Slurpies from a Seven Eleven- REAL FAST, which will give you “brain freeze.” (Hey, don’t laugh, that hurts.)

So it was written by the King, so it shall be.

American justice is no longer blind.

American justice CAN no longer be blind because she MUST have at least one eye peeking out from that blindfold so she can look at what color your skin is. American justice might need to hang around with you for awhile to “get to know you”, and find out if you are Gay, or heterosexual.

Before American justice can try your case, American justice MUST place a label on you. She must place you into some category.

YOU are not a person. You are no longer an individual.

YOU are a “group.”

Don’t give me your petty little thoughts, I have no time for them. Give me your group’s “talking points.”

Which group is your master..??

Which group tells you what to think? How to feel?

Are you part of the “Gay group”?

Are you part of the Eco-Green group?

Maybe you belong to the welfare / socialist group?

Are you a member of the “Tea Party” group?

Are you one of the “poor minority” groups? (Identify your group, Sir; there are many “poor minority” groups out there.)

People, we have got to break this “group think” that was implanted into our skulls while in school.

You are an individual. You are unique. No one is exactly like you.

I will say this again...

This was a terrible crime and the gang members should pay dearly. However, justice MUST be blind.

How can a poor Black child being beat by Black gang members be any LESS “valuable” in the eyes of the law, than a poor Gay man being beat by Latino gang members..??

Justice should not care what color your skin is, or how rich or poor you are. Justice should not be concerned with who you have sex with. (It is none of the court’s business who you have sex with.)

Break the group mentality.

Be who you are.

Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republic

Thanks for reading The Angry Republic

War Crimes- Here we go again

2010-10-06T19:05:00.000-04:00

Just like we said, so it has come to pass. If you try war criminals and terrorists in civilian courts, things will get screwed up. And they did: (from- The New York Times)

“..The ruling by Judge Lewis A. Kaplan would seem to be a setback for the Obama administration’s goal of trying former detainees in civilian courts, because it would limit the kinds of evidence that prosecutors could introduce..”

No kidding..??

Now, this is what Judge Kaplan had to say about his ruling:

“..The court has not reached this conclusion lightly,” Judge Kaplan said as he read his order from the bench. “It is acutely aware of the perilous nature of the world in which we live. But the Constitution is the rock upon which our nation rests. We must follow it not only when it is convenient, but when fear and danger beckon in a different direction. To do less would diminish us and undermine the foundation upon which we stand..”

Well, dear Sir, aren’t you something special?

Tell that to President Washington who used the militia on US citizens to STOP a protest during the British and French War. (Big no-no, constitutionally speaking.)

Or tell that to President Jefferson who secretly had war ships built, (without telling congress, or allowing them to vote on their construction) so Jefferson could launch the invasion of Tripoli. (Maybe Jefferson FORGOT about that constitution?)

Or tell that to President Lincoln who did what he had to do to win the Civil War.

Read that fancy speech to FDR who did what he had to do to win WW2.

I, just like any of you out there, want my politicians to follow the constitution as best as they can. However, during a time of war, we understand that sacrifices MUST be made.

This is not some freaking video game where you send men and women off to war and command their actions by remote control. Then throw OUR SOLDIERS in jail for “war crimes” upon their return.

Hell no..!!

You pray for your brothers and sisters who are in war, and tell them that you have their back.

All of the presidents that I have listed above, all did what they felt they had to do to keep us safe. President Bush did the same. The CIA and the higher-ups felt that we had to stop future attacks, so a harsher method of interrogation was needed.

However, this “harsher method” will cause civilian courts to toss out any testimony given, which could render the trial useless, and FREE the terrorist back to the battlefield. (Or downtown NY City.

I hope President Obama will learn from this. Trying war criminals and terrorists in civilian courts is a bad, bad idea.

The WEIRD and the WILD

2010-09-26T10:45:00.003-04:00

UFO’s sited at French Creek?

Bigfoot spotted at Presque Isle State Park?

Ghostly image caught peeking out of the old Lund Boat building?

There are certain things that I WANT to believe. Unfortunately, I am one of those people who needs to see something, before I will believe it.

Hey, I am willing to give things the benefit of the doubt, but I need to see "something", any kind of a sign; before I will go "hog wild" into believing something.

Like this photo, for example...

Are these strange orbs the ghosts of Commodore Perry’s sailors who died from smallpox at Misery Bay?

I would really like to believe that because this would be PROOF that there is "life" after death.

BUT, sad to say, it was raining. It was dusk. And my camera flash caught the little raindrops as they were falling. YES, they do look like supernatural "orbs" from beyond.

However, I did have an experience that I cannot explain. Let me give you a mental picture of what happened:

It was a cold, rainy day at Presque. I had the park "virtually" to myself. (In other words, no one else was STUPID enough to be out there.)

I had just come in from a canoe trip in the lagoons, (which, the lake level is REALLY low. I have never seen it THIS low. Parts of the lagoon system are almost choked off by weeds.)

After getting out of the canoe, I headed to the camper, and sat at the desk to do some work. Through the window, looking towards the lake, I saw something, out of the corner of my eye, move from left to right. It was so REAL that I got up and went outside to see if someone was messing with the canoe. But no one was around.

Back, sitting at the desk, the same thing happened again. This time, I noticed that "it" looked brown in color.

At first, I thought it might be a deer, but it seemed to be standing upright, and not on all fours, like a deer would be.

This happened several times, and I began to write it off as me being tired. I didn’t think anymore about it.

Night was setting in, and I began to load up supplies, when I noticed something strange in the Lake Erie shoreline weeds.

I took a picture of what I saw, but the picture doesn’t really show the detail, as you would see if you were standing there, so I have to explain it.

Picture a tall group of weeds. (4 foot tall) This grouping of weeds was thick. Maybe 10 foot by 10 foot thick.)

OK, now picture all the weeds on the outside of the group standing straight up, but all of the center weeds are pushed down and bent over. It is, as if: someone JUMPED 4 feet into the air, over the outer weeds and landed in the center of this group of weeds. Then, "they" flattened all of the center weeds, causing these center weeds to bend over. Then, this "person" jumped 4 foot in the air, over the outer weeds, to not disturb them. There is no pathway in, or out of these weeds, which a deer would cause by walking in and laying down. Something flew into the center of these weeds. Pushed the center weeds down, and then flew out again.

This caused me to go: "Hmmm." Then I went back to loading the truck.

That is, until, I looked at the angle of the weeds to the site-line of the camper window. It was exactly in line of where I was seeing "something" out of the corner of my eye, when I was sitting at my desk in the camper.

OK, I will admit, this gave me the chills.

I took a picture of the "strange" weeds, but this picture doesn’t show what I am talking about, sorry. You would have to be standing there, to really see what I am talking about.

WHAT COULD IT BE..??

At first, I thought maybe the weeds got heavy from the rain, and bent over on their own. But why would the center be bent over, and not the outside weeds? That didn’t make sense.

Could a deer jump 4 feet into the air, land in the center of the weeds, and bed down in hiding?

YES, I have seen deer jump 4 feet easily. However, I have never seen a deer jump into the center of a thick patch of weeds. Usually, deer WALK into a patch of weeds and leave a trail into the weeds. (Just because I have never SEEN a deer jump into a thick group of weeds, doesn’t rule out that possibility.)

Here’s what I know...

"Something" came out of the air and landed in the center of those weeds. Either a force, that we do not understand, visited Presque and I just happened to be there.

OR; we have one clever deer who learned that if he (she) jumps into the center of a group of weeds, it is completely hidden. This would explain why, when I saw something out of the corner of my eye, it looked brown and was standing up-right. If my eye caught the movement of the deer while it was leaping, it would look like it was standing up.

The "deer theory" sounds very plausible, except for one little fact...

My camper was only 20 feet away from this group of weeds. My canoe was sitting 5 feet away from these weeds.

No wild deer, (that I know of) is going to "bed down" that close to a camper and canoe.

A "pet" deer might bed down that close to human scent. (Pet deer- a deer that no longer fears humans because it has been feed by humans.) However, because I was one of the only people out there, a pet deer would have showed itself to me by trying to get food from me. (I had cooked a couple of hamburgers outside, earlier that day.)

Now that I think of it, I do not see how it could have been a deer? A wild deer would never bed down that close to a boat, and a pet deer would have shown itself.

(Oh crap, the mystery continues.)

Folks, I do not know what it was. I saw something and logic doesn’t have an answer.

Is my story good enough for Captain Bob to tell on one of his "Ghost Walk" tours in Erie Pennsylvania?

Probably not. Who would want to know about a "supernatural deer" who fell from the sky, and crushed some weeds?

(However, I haven’t begun to talk about my adventures in Graveyard Pond.) More on that in later editorials.

Written by Rick Ray for The Angry Republic

Evil republicans vote against GAY immigrants, we will absorb an attack

2010-09-22T14:19:00.000-04:00

Evil republicans vote against GAY immigrants, we will absorb an attack

I was doing a Google search to find out if any political party, at anytime in American history, has ever nominated a non-masturbating WITCH to public office; when an Internet headline got my attention.

“Republicans BLOCK the repeal of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell”. Liberals are angry.

My first thought was: “Who was it who wrote the original bill- “don’t ask, don’t tell”? (Answer) Democrats. Liberal / democrats wrote the bill, and liberals voted the “don’t ask, don’t tell” bill into law. (Circa- Bill Clinton)

So, now liberals are mad because the bill that they wrote and the bill that they passed into law, is STILL THE LAW..??

(I think that this calls for a: “WTF”..??)

After spending 2 years calling us republicans racists, homophobes, anti-Arab, “teabaggers” (and all of the other names that they have been calling us) now democrats are surprised that we didn’t vote with them, (and help the democrats remove a law that THEY wrote and voted into law..??)

In a perfect world, and if democrats all stuck together, democrats only needed ONE republican to vote with them. That’s it..!! The only thing that democrats needed to do was just cross the aisle and convince ONE republican to vote with them. But democrats couldn’t do it. (Hell, even President Bush got Democrats onboard with the bill “No child left behind” by asking Sen. Kennedy to help write it.)

Not only couldn’t democrats get a single republican to vote with them, three democrats voted WITH the republicans, one of which was Harry Reid. (However, Harry Reid voted against Gay people for “technical reasons.” Harry LOVES Gay people and wanted to vote for them, but he just couldn’t.) What’s the technical reason why Reid couldn’t vote for Gay people: (Maybe Reid would lose his reelection bid if he did, and he is in a hell of a fight.) Sounds “technical” to me..!!

I have learned a lot from this democrat controlled congress.

First off: these idiots write bills with 2,000 pages in them, AND THEY DO NOT READ THE BILL. They just sign it. They have no idea what is in the bill?

WHY ARE WE PAYING THESE PEOPLE, IF THEY ARE NOT DOING THEIR JOBS?

This practice of not reading bills before they pass them has to stop. I ask, what do we have to do? Create a “pop quiz” about the bill and each member of congress must pass the “pop quiz” to prove that they read the bill, before they can vote on it?

We are dealing with freaking children here.

The second thing that makes me piss mad is: when congress (or the senate) HIDES agenda issues within another bill, to try and sneak it through. I do not care how busy congress claims that they are. Important issues need to be debated separately. Not lumped together and pushed through.

Yes I know that republicans do the same thing, but that doesn’t make this practice right. It has to stop.

Here is how they do it:

Democrats took a bill that would fund our troops, and they hid the repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell” inside this military funding bill. Also, democrats created the “Dream Act”, which would give US citizenship to young illegal aliens, and democrats stuck this into the military funding bill also.

Now, democrats can claim that republicans voted against military funding and republicans hate immigrants because they voted against the “Dream Act”.

Wait a minute...

Correct me if I am wrong, but who was the last president that granted amnesty to illegal aliens? Was it a democrat? Nope. It was republican President Reagan who gave citizenship to illegal aliens and he did it without a HUGE majority in the House and Senate.

Americans are very smart. Democrats HOPE that Americans are not paying attention, and we will not notice this stuff.

Here is the truth...

A military funding bill, by itself, would have passed with little problems. Nuff said.

A recent poll, (presented by Maddow on MSNBC) shows that 60 % of republicans favor the repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell.” So; by itself, the repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell” may have had a chance.

However, when you lump a military funding bill together with a Gay rights bill and an amnesty bill, there is no way that this bill would pass. Democrats knew this, and that is why they did it this way: to create a political issue. Democrats are playing politics with peoples lives. (Remember, 3 democrats also voted with the republicans, that tells you a lot.)

This topic really pisses me off, so I went back to my Google search on masturbating witches, when another news alert popped up on my Internet thingy:

During an interview with Bob Woodward in July, President Obama said, "..We can absorb a terrorist attack..”

What..?? Did President Obama just say that we can “absorb” a terrorist attack..??

Are you saying that if another city, (like New York City) gets attacked by terrorists, it’s no big deal because we will just “absorb” it..??

Now, to be fair, President Obama did say that he (we) would do all we can to stop an attack from happening, but come on?

Would this have worked for New Orleans and President Bush?

What if while New Orleans was drowning and people were standing on their rooftops, Bush said: “America will just absorb this, we will be OK.”

What a cold fish. You democrats have elected the “Tin Man” and he is searching Oz for a heart.

However, while President Obama is traversing the Yellow Brick Road, searching for a compassionate heart, is he really doing “all he can to stop another attack..??”

Have you noticed that since Obama made the announcement that the major amount of US forces were leaving, Iraq has become a little more deadly. Car bombs are now going off killing innocent people.

We have said this over and over again: you cannot announce that you are leaving, or publicly set a timetable for when you are leaving the war. The enemy will wait until you are gone and continue the fight afterwards. You have to slowly, quietly remove a few troops and gauge how this effects the war overall.

I wonder if Keith Olbermann will do a countdown on how many days it has been since Obama claimed the Iraq War was over..??

This topic also ticks me off, so I went back to my Google search on if there has ever been a non-masturbating witch in congress before? What I found was: I guess the word “masturbation” makes google search go nuts. A lot of web sites pop up which have nothing to do with witches, or congress.

So, after about 6 hours of checking those sites out, I quickly decided that most witches MUST masturbate, and that is why I am having problems with my search.

Also, no witch has ever served “openly” in congress before. So republicans could have two “firsts” with O’Donnell. (The first witch ever elected to congress. And the first congress member who doesn’t jack off.)

OK, so we nominated a witch in Delaware.

Big deal..??

Come on, it is not like Christine O’Donnell was a full-fledged, broom riding, spell casting, “eye of a newt” type of witch. (Unless you count Newt Gingrich’s eye?)

O’Donnell wasn’t even really a “real” witch. She just hung around with witches for a short time, and one of her first dates was with witches. (Perfectly normal activity that could happen to all of us. I think that I dated a few witches.)

On this “first date”, Ms. O’Donnell and a group of witches went to the movies, then had a nice little picnic near a bloody satanic alter.

No BIG deal..!!

It’s not like Ms. O’Donnell ever killed anyone on a satanic alter. If anything, O’Donnell would be considered a “good witch”, one who doesn’t masturbate. (So I am told.)

When I think back to the women I have dated, I am always relieved to find that the girl I am with has never sacrificed a human being, and doesn’t spend all day masturbating.

Have you noticed how democrats NEVER debate issues with us, instead they always attack us in a “sexual” way?

What is up with the left..??

I mean, they depicted Scott Brown as a dumb guy who drives a pick-up truck and made a big deal about him doing a semi-nude photo.

Let’s not even get into the many photoshop jobs the left has done to pictures of Sarah Palin.

They refer to the Tea Party as: “Teabaggers.”

And now they pick on the fact that O’Donnell doesn’t believe in masturbation, and back when she was a kid in high school, she knew a few witches.

Oh yea, there is a real “issues oriented” political attack for you.

Be prepared my friends. Somewhere, some liberal is working on a porno flick with a Christine O’Donnell look-alike, and I am sure this porno movie will have something to do with witches, and masturbation. (Ooohhh, how original.)

But that is the egression of progressives. It is de-evolution, really.

In a discussion about the ground zero Mosque, the left will call you a racist, then the left will go back to cutting and pasting the face of Christine O’Donnell onto the body of some naked girl. The left will giggle about this paste job, and pass it around on the Internet.

We are dealing with children.

Children with no grasp on reality.

The liberal media tells us that the recession is over.

Even little progressive bloggers at this web site proudly display generic findings that “might” indicate an economic up turn.

And yet, slipping out the back door of the White House, Obama’s economic team resigns.

It’s not what they say, folks; it’s what they do.

For two years the democrats have focused on health care (that will not kick in until 4 years from now), bailouts for billionaires, Gay rights, amnesty for illegals, and so on.

Yet, the American public just wanted Obama to focus on JOBS and the economy.

I don’t know folks, I really do not know what this president is thinking..??

You have to excuse me, I need to do a Google search on “non-masturbating witches in congress” for an editorial I am writing.

Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republic

Beware of 10/10/10, this post could save your life

2010-09-05T09:31:00.000-04:00

Beware of 10/10/10, this post could save your life

There are many dangers out there that people MUST beware of:

The new “Super bug”: this new flu virus is completely unaffected by antibiotics and could kill you dead, or worst yet; the super bug could make your face fall off.

We still need to worry about the “pig flu”; which was going to kill us all last year. (Second time’s a charm, you know..!!)

Least we forget about the “bird flu” and the “mad cows.” These two dangers are lurking around the corner, waiting for you to slip up and eat a cow, or spend too much time touching your bird.

But there is one danger that no one is talking about. An “extremely” dangerous danger that we all MUST be terrified of. Not only could this danger kill you dead, AND make your face fall off; this danger could also wipe out your entire savings.

Of course, we are talking about 10/10/10

October 10th, 2010

Ask any computer programmer and they will tell you that computers talk to each other with a series of “1's” and “0's”. How the zeros and ones are placed in order tells a computer what to do. Unfortunately for humanity, the combination in 10/10/10 is very deadly.

On October 9th, 2010 at 11:59 pm, you will still be alive. You will be sitting in your underwear, with your face in a bag of Cheese Puffs, while surfing the Interwebs, and everything will be fine...

However, when the clock switches to midnight and your computer switches the date to 10/10/10, you will be launched into a nightmarish hell.

The first thing that will happen is your computer will pop a gasket, then blow a sprocket. Your computer will begin to delete all important files, (which would include that video of Becky riding a mechanical bull, and a copy of one of Holly’s posts that you were saving for a “special moment.”) Then your computer will detonate a small thermo-nuclear device (which is contained inside your computer) and piping hot pieces of plastic will fly through the air killing everything and melting your face off.

(For YEARS, we have asked computer manufactures to STOP placing small thermo-nuclear devices inside our computers, but they wouldn’t listen to us. Greedy basterds. Now look at what we are faced with. We could lose our faces from HOT flying plastic.)

The ancient Mayans KNEW about the dangers of 10/10/10. The Mayans knew that you would be sitting in your underwear on 10/10/10, and the Mayans knew about the Cheese Puffs, and the Mayans knew that your computer would pop a gasket and kill you dead.

However, the Mayans knew how much panic would ensue if we knew our fait, so the Mayans changed their “end of the world” date to: 12/21/12. (The Mayans did this to keep us stupid and unaware of our impending doom.)

The only creatures who will survive this 10/10/10 tragedy will be:

Cockroaches (because, for some reason, cockroaches survive EVERYTHING.)

The Amish, (the Amish will survive because they shun technology and only use computers for viewing pornography, then they put the computers away in a lead-lined box).

Other survivors will include those people who happened to be far, far away from modern technology; (people on a camping trip, kids in an American High School, etc.)

Also, Glenn Beck may survive, being that he spends his evenings praying in his bomb bunker, surrounded by stacks of gold.

Folks, this is urgent..!!

Our current administration doesn’t seem concerned about 10/10/10.

President Obama and the democrats in congress are too busy planning another “stimulus” bill, to care about the end of the world and 10/10/10.

Another stimulus..?? (Because the first stimulus worked out so good..??)

Democrats believe that they should take tax money from us poor people and give it to LARGE companies, to “stimulate” jobs.

Republicans believe that YOU should KEEP more of your money and give LARGE companies a tax break, to “stimulate” jobs.

Hmmm, which seems like a better idea?

The government takes our hard earned money and gives it to rich companies? Or letting us keep MORE of our hard earned money and giving tax breaks to rich companies?

Democrats also seem VERY concerned about the environment, to worry about 10/10/10.

Liberals are now strapping bombs to their backsides and storming into The Discovery Channel demanding that humans stop having sex. (Because SEX creates those stupid little “parasitic babies.”)

OK, I know that democrats want to control everything in our lives. They want to control the size of cars that we drive, they want to raise the cost of electricity through the “cap and trade” bill so we cannot afford to use much electricity, AND NOW THEY WANT TO STOP US FROM HAVING SEX? Or they will blow up The Discovery Channel..??

Guys...

My friends on the left...

You may want to rethink this “no sex to save the planet” idea that you have because I believe that it is doomed to fail.

You are going to give me a choice between “no sex” or “No Discovery Channel” because you will blow the Discovery Channel up.

Which do you think I will choose..??

(Hey, come on, Myth Busters is the dope..!!)

Yes, clearly this current administration is doing nothing to stop 10/10/10.

Here at The Angry Republic, we have decided to take the first step in helping you save yourself and your family, from 10/10/10.

The method for solving problems that we have decided to use is currently being used in American high schools. IE- If kids are being harassed by bullies, do you punish the bullies? HELL NO. You sit the entire class down and teach them about homosexuality, (because if everyone understands homosexuality, kids will no longer bully other kids.) A special “sorry” goes out to over-weight kids, kids with glasses, and ugly kids. You will still get picked on in school because your group doesn’t have the voting block that democrats need.

Also, if kids in school are not doing well with their grades and have trouble focusing on their studies; do we pull these kids out of class and find out what is bothering each child? HELL NO, there is no time for that. We gather the whole class together and teach them about homosexuality.

If a hurricane is bearing down on a crowded school, do we evacuate the children to safety? Yes, but first we assemble the children into the auditorium to lecture them about homosexuality, (so that the big kids do not push the homosexuals down to the ground, as they are running for their lives.)

So, if this method works so well for our school system, why not use it here?

To save yourself from 10/10/10, and save you from an exploding computer that will send molted hot plastic to melt your face off and kill you dead, you MUST learn about homosexuality.

The world is full of different people. Different people who are all the same.

We are different, but we are the same.

Sure, we all have teeth and fingers and feet and three testicles. But we are also different, too.

When you look around your neighborhood you will see people delivering the mail, people delivering milk, people picking up garbage. You might see a couple dozen lawyers near your house, and that guy who sells the Shamwow. You will see all kinds of people in your neighborhood. Most of these people are homosexuals.

What are homosexuals..?? (Basic sex, 101)

Men have what is called: a penis.

Women have: a Va-Jay-Jay. (Definition) Slag for a vagina; or, an original member of the Osmond Family Band: On guitar and vocal: Va-Jay-Jay. (He was the tall one who stood to the left of Donny.)

As with life, most people are looking for what they do not have.

Men, who have a penis, are generally NOT looking for another penis, because they already have one. Most men are looking for a Va-Jay-Jay. (And, hopefully, they will also like the woman that is attached to that Va-Jay-Jay.)

However, from time to time, a person will look down at their “stuff” and say: “I have found what I am looking for, no need to look any further”, and they never learn to use, or appreciate the opposite equipment.

How do people become homosexuals?

We used to think that a male might become homosexual if they listened to show tunes, (like South Pacific and Grease). Also, if the boy’s Mother forced the child to do humiliating things that might degrade the young man’s masculinity.

Today, we no longer feel this way. Children are probably BORN homosexual. Maybe they have a different genetic make-up, or had a different experience in the womb. (Males who had a bad experience in the womb, might reject the womb. Women who had a GREAT experience in the womb would become lesbian and return to a womb.) I, myself, prefer a “womb with a view.”

(Wow, that was a long way to go for that stupid joke.)

Now that we understand homosexuality, we should be better prepared for the end of the world, our faces being removed by piping hot plastic, and 10/10/10.

However, just understanding homosexuality might not be enough to survive 10/10/10. It might help to study how the some creatures might survive 10/10/10.

Cockroaches- They crawl on their bellies and NEVER use computers.

Glenn Beck- sleeps in a cement bunker, praying, with stacks of gold surrounding him.

The Amish- They shun technology, mostly spend their days farming and having sex.

The way I figure it, we can survive 10/10/10 if we crawl on our bellies, sleep in a cement bunker while using gold for a pillow, and grow vegetables while having sex; we will all be here for 10/11/10.

(Oh crap...)

10/11/10

That’s more computer code.

I have to go find out what that...

Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republic

They say you can tell a lot about a man by how hard they play.

For thousands of years, men have chiseled out an adventurous look, bordering on dangerous.

From the two photos below, which man present an adventurous look?

And which man looks like a puss...

Well, which one looks like a girlie..

Aaahh, OK, which one doesn’t look very “manly”?

To Mosque, or not to Mosque. That is the question

2010-08-21T12:19:00.002-04:00

To Mosque, or not to Mosque. That is the question

Right now, as I write this; the Iranian President is ordering his minions to dig hundreds of graves. These graves are for Americans. (IF we attack his country.)

Why would the Iranian President FEAR that “we” would attack “his” country..??

Maybe the president of Iran is worried because he is about to fire up Iran’s FIRST nuclear power plant, against the wishes of many in the world, so the Iranian president has ordered the digging of graves for dead Americans.

Talk about “busy work.” Talk about a government wasting money on bogus jobs that really DO nothing.

In America, we were angry that President Obama spent 20 million bucks putting up signs along the highway. Signs that talked about all the jobs that were created by the “stimulus.”

In Iran, they are building graves for no one.

Maybe they could plant some pretty flowers in all those holes in the ground?

Why is the Iranian President doing this, now?

I could see this happening during the “evil” cowboy presidency of BUSH. However, Bush hasn’t been president for almost two years. President Obama, to my knowledge, has done every thing that he can to reach out to Muslims and Iran, yet they turn around and do this..??

This could be a “teachable moment” for President Obama and the left...

Some people “hate” for no other reason than the fact that they just “hate” YOU.

So, the question is no longer: “what can we do to stop ‘them’ from hating us?” We have answered that question- “There is nothing, nothing that we can do to stop them from hating us.”

So the question becomes: What are “WE” going to do about “THEM?”

I hate using terms like “we” and “them.”

I hate using those terms because there is so many of “us”, (and there is a hell of a lot of “them.”)

We are all different. Why would anyone lump all of “us” into one category?

But the Iranian President did.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad didn’t say that he would fill those empty graves with DEAD Republicans. No, he is going to fill those graves with “Americans.” He doesn’t seem to care if you are a democrat or a republican.

Will Iran fill those empty graves with Christians or Jews only? No. The graves are being built for all Americans, regardless if you believe in God or not.

The only way to save yourself is to convert to Islam. (Or, at least, do whatever the Iranian President wants.)

Beyond the question of: “What will we do about them,” begs the question: “Why do we give “them” so much power?”

You may have guessed by now, my editorial for today is on “power” and “tolerance.”

Every so often, a political issue comes up that is truly only an Americans issue. This issue wouldn’t happen in many other nations because we enjoy great freedom. But with freedom comes tolerance, because I may not like your freedom. (Or what you choose to do with your freedom.)

It is an American issue that causes Americans to become even more Americanized, by assuming that they are more American then their American counterparts, because only a non-American who doesn’t have the Americanization, would think like that.

Totally un-American. (You catch my drift..??)

So a group of Muslims want to build a Mosque at the 9/11 ground zero site. They want this Mosque to be opened on 9/11/11. (Which would be the ten year anniversary of THE DAY that members of radical Islam flew planes into the World Trade Towers and killed thousands of Americans.)

This Mosque would not be on the “actual” site of the attack on America, it is 2 blocks away. Yet, that is only 600 feet away from ground zero, which is sacred ground, which should only be used for high priced office buildings and financial trading business.

Hell, you will not even be able to SEE this Mosque from ground zero. Oh YES YOU CAN, if you are standing in the right place.

This isn’t an evil Mosque, it is a place of tolerance where all people can visit and enjoy. Oh yea, then why is opening day on the anniversary of 9/11, and why can’t we discover where the money to build this Mosque is coming from?

On and on rages the debate about the ground zero Mosque.

Is America tolerant enough to allow this type of freedom..??

Hold on now, you are way ahead of this editorial, and missing an important question...

Does America allow an “anything goes” type of freedom..??

The answer is no.

Are you “FREE” enough to sit on your porch and yell, scream, drink beer, and pass gas.

YES, (aaahhh, that is until a neighbor complains and calls the police.) Then, you will have to shut your pie hole.

Try putting a fence around your property.

To put a fence around your property, you MUST get a city / county permit. In most states, to issue the permit, you must have the permission of all neighbors who could be affected by this fence, (your fence could block my view, etc.) If one person objects to the building of this fence, your project could be halted, even though the fence would be on YOUR property.

That was just a stupid little fence, we have millions of Americans who object to this Mosque being placed so close to ground zero, and we can’t stop it. But we could stop the building of a fence..?? This logic doesn’t make sense, does it.

Maybe we should try a little experiment in “tolerance.” Maybe we should open a female strip club near ground zero. But this will not be just any strip club with naked female dancers, this strip club will be a religion. As a religion, some “members” of THIS church will attend to worship the female body. It will be nonprofit, and not pay taxes to the city or state, and it will help the poor with it’s profits. Since it will be located within the financial district of New York City, we will call it: “Frisky Business.”

The Church of “Frisky Business.”

Or maybe Fox News’ “Red Eye” TV show host- Greg Gutfeld is on to something by raising money to build a Muslim Gay Bar next to the ground zero Mosque? Let’s see how tolerant the Muslims are. (Considering that Gay Muslims are killed by other Muslims in many of their home countries.)

Would Republican Mayor Bloomberg and his minions in City Council be so tolerant of Gutfeld’s Muslim Gay Bar, or my “Church of Frisky Business” opening at ground zero..??

Probably not.

But, herein lies the problem.

Mayor Bloomberg, City Council, and local community groups HAVE given their blessings on this Mosque’s construction.

Local government- that was our “fail-safe.”

Local politicians could have stopped this Mosque from being built for a dozen different reasons, and that might have been the end of it. Yet, Bloomberg and others have chosen to make a political statement out of a tragedy.

And what is the political statement that they are trying to make..??

That America is SO tolerant, we will allow a religion to build a HUGE religious monument at ground zero, we do not care where the money is coming from, (because we are so tolerant) and we do not mind that the Mosque will be opened on the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, the very day that other members of THE SAME RELIGION destroyed NYC.

So I have to ask my friends on the Right; “Do we truly have tolerance in America.?”

And folks on the Left, I must ask; “Why do you give Muslims so much power?” Muslims do not have that much power, YOU ARE GIVING THAT POWER TO THEM. Why?

You do not give Christians that much power. You do not give any other religion the power that you give to Muslims. Why? Do you fear Muslims? Do you feel sorry for them?

Maybe you do not see things clearly because there is a curtain hiding your view? Let me remove that curtain so you can see better.

Let’s say that a few Catholic Priests were molesting children. Would you be angry at the actual Priests who did the molesting? Or would you condemn the Catholic Religion in general for hiding the affair, moving Priests around from church to church, and not doing enough to stop it?

(Aaahh, you are starting to see, because the curtain is coming free.)

Would you be angry at Muslims, in general, because they are NOT doing enough to stop the radicals within their own religion from killing innocent people and blowing shit up? Would you be angry at Muslims who do not report radicals in their Mosque, or neighborhood?

Yes, the curtain is free, and now you see.

You are giving a group of people MORE power, than you would give anyone else.

OK, just because I am a conservative, it doesn’t mean that I will take it easy on my conservative friends. (This is where I get kicked out of the “conservative club”- again.)

Tolerance

Let’s say a White guy, who is very critical of the FIRST Black President, decided to hold a BIG rally on the VERY day that Martin Luther King Jr. gave his famous “I have a dream” speech. What if this White guy, (who has been very critical of the first Black President) decided to hold that BIG rally at almost the very SAME spot as Martin Luther King Jr gave his famous speech, would that be OK..??

Should that day be held strictly for the memory of Martin Luther King Jr?

Being a conservative, and having listened to Glenn Beck, I know that Beck will treat this day with the utmost respect. This isn’t a “White against Black” rally. It isn’t a Left against Right rally. It is a “right against wrong” rally and Beck has the support of some of MLK Jr’s relatives.

But some people do not see it that way.

Some people see this as a racist White guy, who hates the first Black President, having a “Klan” rally at the sight of MLK’s famous speech.

You and I know that isn’t true, but out of respect, should Glenn Beck have picked a different day for his 8/28 project..??

Should Muslims pick a different spot to build a Mosque instead of ground zero..??

These are tough questions to answer in a free country.

Legally, both have every right to do what they are doing.

Out of respect for all people, each should probably have changed their projects a little.

The ONLY way you can have tolerance is if both sides have equal respect for each other. If one side has no respect for others, any tolerance will be short lived.

I do not believe that Muslim leaders have respect for America and our ways. Placing a Mosque this close to ground zero furthers my belief that they do not respect us.

Without mutual respect, our tolerance will only go so far.

I am totally against placing this Mosque near ground zero. I show no tolerance to someone who doesn’t respect me.

I am not alone.

60% of Americans do not like this location for a Mosque. (This would include democrats like Howard Dean and Harry Reid.) New York City construction workers are vowing to stop any construction, if this Mosque is to be built here.

In a perfect world, NYC would have been manned by good politicians who would have given this Mosque more thought before giving it the green light. That is why local elections are so important. Bloomberg is a republican, which means that voting for a person who has an “R” next to their name will not guaranty great conservative public service. (Many progressives are finding this out too, when democrat Press Secretary Gibbs told many on the left that they should have a urine test, for speaking out against Obama’s choices.)

Also in a perfect world, even if this Mosque gets built, it will sit mostly empty.

It will sit empty because American Muslims will not like what it stands for. Moderate Muslims will see the symbolism of this Mosque, and out of respect for those who died on that day, they will not patronize this Mosque and it will fail. The Mosque will close, or be sold.

This would be a even bigger symbol, and send an even more powerful message, than stopping the construction of the Mosque in the first place.

The fact that America was tolerant enough to allow this Mosque to be built near ground zero, yet the Mosque closed in several years because people had respect for each other, and didn’t like what the Mosque stood for, and they didn’t go there.

Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republic

The care and feeding of a cracker baby

2010-07-15T23:09:00.001-04:00

The care and feeding of a cracker baby

The other day, I was heading through a shopping center and I noticed a White man with a White woman and they had a Black child. They looked like a happy family and were looking through the toy section, when the Black child said: “Dad, can we get this for the swimming pool”, he was pointing to some kind of floating pool toy.

This scene didn’t cause me to take a second look because I see this type of family pairing all the time. Hell, Hollywood even made a movie about this situation called: “The Blind Side.”

However, this particular day, I happened to see two more families at the shopping center; each family had a White mother and a White father, a few White children, and one or two Black children.

This lead me to think, (in the bizarre way that I view the world)...

I do not believe that I have EVER seen a Black man and a Black woman with a White child..??

Now, I am not talking about an interracial couple, where Black and a White people pair up and have babies. No, I am talking about a pure Black man and Black woman adopting a White child. I do not believe that I have ever seen that. (I am sure that it has happened, but I have never witnessed it.)

So, to test this theory out, I went through sections of Cleveland and Pittsburgh, and guess what...

I did not see a Black family with any White children.

Enter into my story, The New Black Panther “foot soldier”- King Samir Shabazz.

King Samir doesn’t seem to like White people. (Or little White cracker babies.)

King Samir, of The New Black Panther Party, (I think I liked the “Old Black Panther party” better), King Samir said that Black people have to stop begging White people for freedom. King Samir said that you may have to: “Kill some crackers, and kill their babies too.”

Who would want to kill little cracker babies..??

When I first heard King Samir, I had to laugh. “Who the hell dresses like that today and uses the word: Cracker..??”

I mean really, it is like this guy was asleep (or on crack) for the past 40 years, woke up in the same clothes, and started talking about killing cracker babies.

(Kind of like that Austin Powers movie where comedian Mike Myers awakes from a 40 year sleep, to walk around a modern world saying things like: “Groovy baby, do I make you horney?”) The only difference here is that King Samir isn’t looking to “shag” some chick, he wants to kill little cracker babies.

So, I got to thinking, (as I usually do) that I have never seen a Black family with little White cracker babies. And King Samir wants to KILL cracker babies...

Is it possible that people like King Samir do not know how to CARE for a little White cracker baby..??

Could that be the reason..??

Well, we can easily solve that, with...

The Angry Republic’s guide to the proper care and feeding of a White Cracker Baby

(One) White cracker babies do NOT, from birth, know how to dance.

You cannot just throw a White cracker baby into the funk. (They may break a hip.) Do not start this little cracker on Jay-Z or 50 Cent, do it slowly with some Lady Gaga, or Britney. (NOTE- you can feed the cracker baby Lady Gaga’s music through headphones, so none of your neighbors think that YOU listen to the GAGA.)

(Two) Cracker babies are not “street smart”.

Cracker babies are more apt to have lunch money taken from them. Cracker babies will not be able to eat, they will get skinny like Lindsay Lohan, and die. Try hiding the lunch money on the cracker baby, then tell the cracker where the money is, later on.

(Three) food

Cracker babies eat about the same things as any other baby would. However, cracker babies can gravitate towards expensive food items like- veal. Just smack that little cracker on the head and say: “Get away from there, fool.”

(Four) Whiteness

Because of their- Whiteness; cracker babies can over-compensate for that “Whiteness” by trying to talk VERY Black. (Example- Eminem).

If your little cracker baby starts talking excessively “Black”, just slap that little cracker in the head and say: “Shut up, fool.”

The benefits of having a cracker baby.

Beyond the obvious fun of watching a little White cracker baby trying to dance, pick up women, or survive in the neighborhood without getting his ass beat up every single day; having a White cracker baby can be beneficial.

College- Getting that little cracker into college should be a breeze- that cracker can take advantage of special minority programs, or the United Negro College...

Oh, wait, that cracker is White. OK, forget about college.

Maybe that cracker will excel in sports. (Or maybe not.)

OK, maybe there is no special benefit in having a cracker baby. However, why would a Black man want to kill cracker babies?

I know that I have said this a dozen times but, I really thought that the election of Barack Obama would put all of this racism behind us.

President Obama could bring this country together, if he wanted to, with several good speeches and some positive action.

I wonder why he hasn’t done it..??

Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republic

It is Ladies Night- I am NOT sure what makes this thing stands up

2010-06-09T21:14:00.000-04:00

It is Ladies Night- I am NOT sure what makes this thing stands up

All across America, women are winning primary elections.

Which begs the questions...

Are Americans REALLY mad at democrats as a whole, or republicans in general?

Are Americans mad at White people, or Black people?

What if Americans are just plain mad at men..??

After all, we are just a collection of “angry men” looking for some “ass to kick.”

There seems to be an energy surrounding the American woman this election, an energy that I have not seen before. A confidence, of something bigger.

Women are taking over.

Women are able to speak out like never before.

Take Helen Thomas, for example...

(It was like it was yesterday) The picture is burned into my brain: President Obama was sitting there with his plate full of cupcakes, his arm was swung firmly around Helen Thomas; Ms. Thomas was giddy like a school girl. (A 89 year old school girl.)

But those were the “old days”, when women had to take a back-seat to men.

Today, Helen Thomas is able to say anything. Why, she is even able to tell a race of people to “go back to where they came from.”

I have always had a respect for elders. I believe that “LIFE” is the best teacher. When you reach the age of 80 years old, you should be able to say whatever the hell you want to say; just for the fact that you have survived- life.

But, that doesn’t mean that we have to listen to you. (And, we will not have to listen to Helen Thomas anymore because she is being dropped from- everything.)

Sure, it was fun for democrats to watch Helen Thomas badger republicans presidents, and to see her giggle while being photographed with democrat President’s Carter, Clinton, and Obama. But, at some point you had to think- “Gee, she isn’t being very objective, is she..??”

I have never understood racism. How can a person resent the State of Israel, and want Jews to “go back to where they came from”, yet claim that I, (a White conservative) am a racist because I do not care for President Obama’s political direction..??

Helen Thomas, are you going to go back to where you came from..?? Are you going to give your land back to a Native American..??

For right or for wrong, a collection of world nations (including America) believed that the Jewish people deserved a state of their own, after the World Wars. They picked the region of Jerusalem.

To pick out the Palestinians as the rightful “owners” of Jerusalem is insane and bias to the tenth power. Why not give Jerusalem back to the Italians? The Roman Empire ruled that region at one time. Or why not give Jerusalem back to the Jews because they ruled that land before the Romans?

I have said this dozens of times, and it cannot be said enough: No race of people currently live where they originally lived tens of thousands of years ago. We all wondered from somewhere else. (Yes, I am including the Native Americans and the Palestinians.) With that said, no race of people has the moral superiority to say that another group of people should “go back to where they came from.” We all came from somewhere else and took land from someone or something else, (either through war or barter.)

Hey, Helen Thomas has the right to say this stuff, however; with free speech comes the responsibility of dealing with a backlash from the things that you have said. Helen Thomas and Dan Rather are finding this out. After a lifetime of being famous as “reporters”, they will spend their remaining days on earth in some-what exclusion, with no one asking: “what do you think about this big news story”, or “what is your opinion on that?”

As Helen Thomas’ star falls, women in politics are rising up around the country this election season.

So I wanted to share a story that women will appreciate, (men will too.)

Some of you probably know, (because I have said before) that my girlfriend works with “troubled kids.” Meaning- some the kids have problems, however- mostly they come from parents who have never grown up. (The parents want to guzzle booze, down tons of drugs, and live like they are still single; which creates the “troubled kids”.)

One of my girlfriends kids is an 11 year old boy and it was time for his class to have SEX education.

(SEX education..?? At 11 years old..??)

The class was divided into male and female groups and they were brought into separate rooms. The kids were nervous and lined up like they were heading for a boot camp. My girlfriend did not attend the class because her client was a male, and they wanted no females in the male class.

After the sex class, my girlfriend’s kid looked puzzled and he had a bag filled with under arm deodorant and a sex book.

Now I have to ask women out there in “blog land”...

If you were at a nightclub, would you be attracted to a man who was carrying a plastic bag filled with under arm deodorant and a sex book..??

OK- forget that, back to the story.

My girlfriend’s kid looked confused, so my girlfriend asked: “How did it go in there?”

The 11 year old boy said: “Well, there are some things that I am confused about, but I was afraid to ask because the other boys might make fun of me.” My girlfriend, not wanting to get involved in a “sex” conversation with an 11 year old boy, said: “Well, maybe you and your father can talk about this stuff.”

However, the kid trusts my girlfriend and he blurted out: “I do not understand the vagina, but I think that I will let the girls deal with that.”

My girlfriend was trying not to laugh and was caught off-guard by his second question: “Also, I am not sure what makes it stand up?”

My girlfriend was trying to stay away from this 11 year old boy’s sexual education, but she wasn’t clear about what the kid was saying, so she asked: “What stands up?”

The boy replied: “The penis, I do not understand what makes the penis stand up?”

Stunned, my girlfriend said: “Oh, aahh; well this is another question that you and your father can talk about.”

To which, the boy proclaimed: “I bet it has something to do with the hair. Guys have hair down there, you know.”

OK, I can testify in a court of law, under oath, that this 11 year old boy was NOT thinking about SEX, before this class took place.

Like other 11 year old boys, he was thinking about pure things, like: “Death Rays that could kill alien bug creatures on the evil planet Nebulon”, or about how fast he could make a riding mower go before it flips over?

Or, what would the movie “Bambi” look like if Director: James Cameran (Avatar) directed it?

11 year old kids were thinking about stuff like this before the SEX education class.

Now he, and other 11 year olds, are thinking about penis and vaginas.

Are we reaching a little too far here..??

I understand the importance of an education, but teaching 11 years olds about sex..??

Because of pier pressure, most of these kids were afraid to ask questions, so most of them are confused in what the teachers were trying to say. “They are MORE screwed up than before..!!”

Wouldn’t it be better to take kids away from BIG groups, council them without other kids around, and gauge where their “sex education” stands? You could correct misinformation without pushing a kid further into “sex” than you have to.

I mean, how many of these kids are now curious about seeing an actual penis or vagina, when before this sex education class- they were never thinking about such things?

This whole situation makes me feel uneasy.

So, all these women who are winning these primary elections this year will have BIG problems to solve:

They will have to secure the economy

They will have to deal with the Israeli and Palestinian problem

They will have to deal with the US and Mexico border

They will have to deal with the BP oil spill

And, there is an 11 year old boy in Pennsylvania, who was thinking about football until his group sexual education class; now he wants to know what makes it “stand up?”

Are you women in politics ready for this..??

(I hope you women are because I am taking off and going fishing.)

Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republic

Did you plug the hole, Daddy- The fall of an American President

2010-06-02T20:55:00.000-04:00

Did you plug the hole, Daddy- The fall of an American President

It wasn’t that long ago that everything looked GREAT and wonderful at the White House.

(That happened to be the week that President Bush had left the White House and President Obama hadn’t moved in yet.) The White House was filled with people cleaning and fixing the place up. You know, the White House was filled with average people getting things done.

While looking at this week’s news headlines, I realized that I was witnessing the death of something.

The political death of an American president.

I hate to see the office of the president taking such a hard hit. (I know that you probably think I am joking here, being that I am a conservative, but I really do hate to see it.) When a president falls, it can taint a generation of Americans into losing respect for their government.

We need to look no further back in time then President Nixon for proof of this.

Nixon came into office with “a plan” to end the war in Vietnam. Americans saw Nixon signing into law OSHA and the EPA. Nixon open the door to conversations with China, a country that we knew little about and had great suspicions about. Gee, aren’t we glad that Nixon “opened that door to China..??” China received our jobs, and we get cheap plastic consumers products. (Chinese products like a rubber chicken that screams when you squeeze it.)

Yet, all was NOT right with the “world of Nixon.” The war in Vietnam was NOT winding down, and in fact: was being expanded. Young Americans became worried that their government could be spying on them: IE- John Lennon, Abby Hoffman, etc.

And, if you add a little scandal called: “Watergate”, you have just created a generation of Americans who will never trust their government again.

I am not trying to say that President Obama is becoming “Nixon-like” with the way that current events are unfolding. However, you cannot deny that when Arianna Huffington, Chris Matthews, Bill Maher, Peggy Noonan, James Carville, Rep Alan Grayson, Jon Stewart, (I could go on listing former Obama supporters who are now speaking out, but why?) when people like these folks begin to speak out against President Obama’s actions, (or inactions), something has gone terribly wrong.

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/05/29/noonan-where-is-the-competence/

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/05/29/rush-is-right-says-chris-matthews/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/sunday-roundup_b_593433.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/05/29/maher_obama_not_acting_like_a_real_black_president.html

Losing support from people who used to get tingles running up their legs when Obama spoke is bad enough. But when you add a little scandal like “Sestak-gate” into the mix, history could be repeating itself again.

Offering a job to Sestak to get out of the Pennsylvania Senate race against Arlen Sepcter will never amount to a crime like the Watergate break-in. (Or even listed as a crime.)

However, the cover up of this whole event could become Obama’s Watergate.

And now we have this latest Israeli / Palestinian conflict...

Does it seem to you that the Obama administration jumped quickly in condemning Israel before really looking at all the facts?

With this blockade of the Gaza Strip by Israel being challenged by Palestinian activists, I am seeing a totally different picture here. All countries have placed blockades at one time or another. America placed a blockade on Cuba to stop Russian missiles from coming into Cuba.

A blockade means nothing if you do not enforce it. Which, is what Israel did here.

To me, there is no gray area here. However, I am bias with this topic. I have always thought that radical Islam is on a highway to hell. Why would anyone join them, or defend radical members of Islam?

From here on out, the road forward for President Obama is not very easy.

If you are a liberal, I have to ask: what was it that changed your mind about President Obama?

Barack’s claim to close Gitmo and end both wars, yet we are building up the war in Afghanistan and now (maybe) entering Pakistan.

The fact that we have one of the largest environmental disasters in our lifetime (the BP oil spill) and President Obama seems “uninterested” in it.

President Obama promised a “change” in Washington. Yet, you see just as many back-room deals, dirty politics, and cronyism as before.

You thought Obama might fight for the “little guy”, yet the rich keep getting richer (and are receiving government bail-outs), while your life gets tougher.

Maybe it was a little of everything that changed your mind about President Obama.

A friend of mind, who we will call: a moderate; (she believed that we needed to go after terrorists, so she voted for Bush over Kerry in 2004. Yet, she felt that Bush handled hurricane Katrina badly and caused the financial crisis so she voted for “change” with Obama in 2008. Yet, she now has second thoughts about Obama...) My moderate friend asked me a question the other day:

“..Doesn’t it seem like Obama isn’t really interested in a second term as president? It is like his goal was to BE president, but beyond that, he doesn’t really seem to care..??”

Hearing my friend’s question, I quickly dismissed it; (after all, I run a political blog site. I study politics and history. I’m the pro at this stuff. She watches a couple of hours of cable news each week, what does she know..??)

So I corrected her:

“..President Obama has one of the biggest egos of any person we have ever had as president, of course he wants to keep winning. Just look at his face whenever someone confronts him. The expression on his face is telling: “How dare you question me..” is the look I see from Obama..”

I continued: “..The problem is, Obama lacks experience. He doesn’t know what to do. Obama has never run anything in his life. He is a great speaker, but it has always been “other people” running things while Obama was out “talking” about it. Today, people want answers and Obama doesn’t have those answers. He doesn’t know what to do about the economy, jobs, the wars, the BP oil spill..”

Hearing this, my friend look down at the floor and responded: “..Well, Obama seems like an intelligent man. He just doesn’t seem to care about winning a second term..”

Her response caused me to rethink my position. Could I be wrong..??

Did HELL freeze over..??

Then, I realized something that we both had forgotten:

Barack Obama has never finished- anything.

(Think about that for a minute.) LOOK AT HIS LIFE. Barack Obama never sticks with anything, very long.

Sure, Obama did complete his education. Most of us do complete our education. It is only a small minority of people who “drop- out” of school, college, etc.

Beyond schooling, Obama seems to get bored with whatever it is that he is doing. He looks to move on to the next goal. Obama was a lawyer for a while, but he got tired of that. So he went into community organization and he lectured at college, but that wasn’t good enough. Obama wrote a couple of books, but today he shows no interest in writing. Then he moved into State politics but left that to run for the US Senate. Which, he got bored with and ran for president.

Today, it almost seems like Obama is bored with this whole “president” stuff

Maybe my friend is correct..??

Maybe Obama is bored with being president and he is searching for his next “job.”

What would be the next goal for a man like Obama..??

President of the United Nations? No, that would be a step down, in my opinion.

Ruler of the world..?? Not likely. Obama is not “loved” in other parts of the world and some people are throwing shoes at his picture.

Maybe Obama could be “Master of the Universe.”

Hey, the universe is a big place, that would be a really BIG goal. No one has ever been “Master of the Universe” before.

However, I hear that some aliens still favor President Bush.

Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republic

The Supreme Court was lacking a vagina

2010-05-12T21:26:00.002-04:00

The Supreme Court was lacking a vagina

With the summer weather arriving, I have been away from the blogs for some time. The last time I wrote anything was for Earth Day, (and I cheated by using sections of my old material.) After being stuck indoors for much of 4 months during the winter, it is great to get out and do some stuff.

But, we have bad weather hitting the area this week, so here I am; back inside the house.

So much has happened since my last blog: The BP oil spill, the Times Square bomber, the new Arizona law, the floods near Nashville; and I did not know that you cannot wear red, white, and blue during Cinco de Mayo. I had never heard that before. I know that women are not supposed to wear white before Easter, but I had never heard anything about a new rule of not wearing the American colors during Cinco de Mayo.

But that is progress. Being progressive means that things change so FAST that you do not even know that the rules have change, until you are arrested for breaking that new rule.

But take heart my friends, we are all in this together because we are all- Americans. (Well, except if you are from Italy, or Germany, or some Asian country. You poor bastards will have to follow the laws of the land, or end up in jail. However, if you are of Hispanic descent; you don’t have to worry about our silly little laws, do as you please.)

Yet, there is news that should make everyone happy...

President Obama has picked a new Supreme Court nominee to replace a tired old White guy. Obama picked the current US Solicitor General- Elena Kagan.

You ask- what are Elena Kagan’s qualifications for being America’s TOP judge:

Kagan has been a judge for many years? (No, she has never tried a case.)

Kagan has been a lawyer for many years? (No, she has never tried a case.)

Kagan has walked into a room filled with REAL judges and handed them information about current legal cases? (Yes, that is her current job.)

Kagan went to college? (Yes, a whole bunch of colleges, BIG colleges that have $$$ signs in their names.)

Kagan did work with TOP judge Thurgood Marshall, who called Kagan- “Shorty.” (Not to be confused with “Shawty”- which means- “good looking girl.”) However, the word “Shorty” could also mean- “good looking girl.”

However, this was the 1970's and Thurgood Marshall probably meant that she was not tall.

One of Kagan’s main qualifiers to be a Supreme Court Justice is that she personally knows Barack Obama. Which is bonus if you want to be America’s TOP judge and you have never been a judge before, or even tried a case.

But by far, the main reason Kagan will be our next TOP judge is because the Supreme Court has it’s quota of testicles.

Now, when I was a young man, we were taught to not look at a persons skin color or gender, when judging a person. You should judge a person by the content of their character, not by the color of their skin (or gender.)

Today, we pick a Supreme Court nominee like you would pick a puppy. First you look at their color, then you pick them up, flip them over on their backs, and look between their legs.

I have no problem in nominating another woman to the Supreme Court, have at it. But shouldn’t this person be the BEST person for the job, regardless of what is between their legs, or the color of their skin?

Soon, you could hear a knock at your door from a friendly Census worker. Most of the 635,000 Census workers are great people, they are your friends and neighbors. However, a few Census workers are evil. A woman in Indiana was raped by a census worker, and a family in Texas was held hostage for 4 hours by 3 guys who said that they worked for the census. The ordeal ended with one family member being killed by the 3 “so-called” census workers.

The Obama administration has come up with a way to make this census visit safer:

All Census workers will be wearing a blue badge: (which would be impossible for a crook to copy.)

All official Census workers will have a black bag with the words: “US Census Worker” written in white ink on the front. (Again, impossible for a crook to duplicate, because bad people do not have the technology to copy this.)

All US Census Workers will carry “papers” on them. So you can ask the Census Worker for “their papers.” NOTE- if the Census Worker looks Hispanic, you might not want to ask them for “their papers”. (It’s a sore spot right now with Hispanics, liberals, and progressives.)

And, all official US Census Workers will only ask these questions:

Question 1- How many people live here? (1) (2) (3) (50) (not sure, what day is it?) (No one)

Question 2- What is the color of your skin: (White), (off-White), (Lilly White), (Dark), (Hispanic)- NOTE- if you are Hispanic you do not have to answer this question. You do not have to be counted like the rest of us. And you can tell the census worker to go away, if you like.

Question 3- Why is President Obama so great? (Answers) Because he went to college, Because he can speak in full sentences, Because of his audacity; (Audacity- Obama’s ability to let OTHER PEOPLE take huge risks, while he talks about it).

Question 4- what color is your underwear.

Question 5- List 3 reasons why you WILL vote for Barack Obama again.

If a person shows up at your door and they DO NOT have a black bag, a blue badge, and they ask any other questions than the ones listed above, be cautious.

GOOD NEWS- the government has passed the “Cash for Cockers” program. Similar to the “cash for clunkers” program for trading in old cars, “cash for cockers” allows you to bring in an old cocker spaniel dog that eats too much food and is gassy, and trade that dog in for a new puppy. (Unless “cash for cockers” has some kind of pornographic meaning that I am not aware of..??)

Oh..wait.. I have that wrong. It is- “cash for caulkers.” The US government has set aside 6 billion dollars so you can go out and buy a $4 dollar tube of caulking and put it around your windows. ($6 billion dollars worth of caulking, about the same amount of money that we bitched, pissed, and moaned about because we are sending that amount to help save the country of Greece.)

However, the 6 billion dollars is not just for caulking, (which would make 3m, GE, and other BIG companies very happy) “cash for caulkers” also allows you to take your perfectly good water heater and toss it out to the curb and buy another NEW water heater. (Maybe we should box up our old water heaters and send them to Greece. We could kill 2 birds with one stone.)

Speaking of killing birds...

The BP oil spill is- what it is: a tragedy. No one wants to see birds covered in oil, struggling to survive. Seems to me, we need to fix what went wrong here, but the pundits are blaming each other.

Progressives blame BP and the oil industry in general. (They do not blame themselves for using oil based products, nor are they willing to conserve oil based products on their own, using their own “free” will. They want the government to FORCE restrictions on all of us, like some S & M bondage type thing.)

Republicans blame a slow response by the Obama Administration. (Yet, republicans still say that they want less government involvement in our lives and business.)

Hey, I can understand the “blame game”, I really can. Republicans are pissed because the liberals blamed a slow response by President Bush to Hurricane Katrina and the amount of destruction there, so why not blame President Obama for this?

I can also understand why environmentalists and progressive would take advantage of this situation and claim that the BP oil spill is PROOF that we need Cap and Trade laws, no off-shore drilling, Green jobs, etc.

However, playing the blame game is for political purpose. It is taking a tragedy and using it for political gain. But that will not fix the problem.

What really went wrong...

You mean to tell me that an oil rig only has one or two ways to shut down the flow of oil in an emergency..?? You got to be freaking kidding me..??

I mean, I am no mechanical engineer, but come on..??

Let me put this into perspective...

A restaurant electric french fryer has about 4 ways to shut it down in an emergency. If the food deep fryer blows up or catches fire, you could shut it down at the power switch, OR- run to the electrical panel box and shut the breaker off, OR- the fryer has a mechanical switch that will shut itself off if the fryer get too hot, OR- hanging above the fryer is a fire suppression system that will spray a fire retardant unto the fryer if it gets too hot.

That is a stupid french fry cooker in a restaurant, and it has 4 ways to shut it down for safety. Yet, an oil rig only has 1 or 2 ways to shut down the flow of oil..??

Seriously, the Obama Administration needs to get on this right now. All future oil rigs, (and if possible: all existing rigs) should have a type of “flow restrictor / high volume shut off” on them. If the flow of oil becomes too great, the flow restrictor shuts down the pipe and must be reset by robotic sub. This “flow restrictor / high volume shut off” MUST be mechanical, it cannot rely on electricity. (Because, if the oil rig blows up, you will lose electricity.)

We have to fix what went wrong instead of blaming each other.

Our economy is based on oil. Like it or not, for better or worse; oil is the “engine” that drives our progress. From the cars that we drive, to the oil that is used to make the plastic parts in our computers; oil is everywhere.

The Angry Republic has always been an advocate for America to break away from relying on foreign oil supplies. To us, it has always been a matter of national security. It is dangerous to rely on others for your basic needs.

If becoming energy independent means adding windmills and solar panels to the American power system, so be it. But we are realistic enough to understand that you cannot replace oil, as the American engine, over night. Until a new source is found that delivers the power and the low cost that oil provides, we must utilize the oil that we have in America.

Today, that means building a safer oil rig, while exploring bio- fuels, wind mills, and solar panels.

SHOCKER- MSNBC reports- POLL, most Americans support oil drilling and the Arizona law. (The “shocker” part is the fact that MSNBC reported this.)

Hey, I just saw a documentary that claimed that the Moon has enough hydrogen to solve all of our energy problems. One shuttle- load of the Moon’s hydrogen could power New York City for one year.

Oh crap, that’s right...

We decided to drop the US shuttle program and scrap going back to the moon.

Oh well, you will have to excuse me. I need to cash in on the 6 billion dollar “cash for caulkers” program.

I need to find a good salesperson to sell me my caulk.

I think I will use the same method that we use to pick a Supreme Court Justice: I will first look at their skin color; then I will put the salesperson on their back and look between their legs.

Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republic

Happy Earth Day- peoples

2010-04-21T20:54:00.000-04:00

It is a hot, dusty world.

A dusty- hot world that is getting more dusty and more hotter every year. (Except for the last decade, which was a little cooler.)

The desert tortoise use to stroll across the American deserts with pride. Today, you would have more luck getting a date with Angelina Jolie then hitting a desert tortoise with your car.

Why..??

In 1999, when DEMOCRATIC President Bill Clinton was in office, the desert tortoise population was sky high in the Red Cliff Desert Preserve with 3,200.

But in the year 2000, when REPUBLICAN President Bush took office, the number of tortoises began to drop. Today, there are only 1,700 to be found.

Why would the turtles start kicking the bucket the minute a republican enters the White House..??

There can only be two reasons:

Humans are evil.

And...

Turtles are mostly democratic, and almost never vote republican.

What can save these poor desert creatures..??

Food..??

Education..?? (Education for the stupid humans, not the turtles.)

Answer- High taxation.

Democrats agree- Higher taxes will save the desert tortoise.

High taxes will save the earth..!!

Evil conservatives are NOT willing to pay higher taxes to save the desert tortoise, or the earth.

So, evil conservatives will not be helping us save the earth (or the turtles.)

People all over the world, to celebrate Earth Day, will be turning their lights out and sitting in the dark for one hour.

Now, there is no reason why you have to just sit in the dark for one hour and do nothing. Here at The Angry Republic, we have compiled a list of things that you can do with no electricity.

First- you are going to need candles. Do not use regular candles because of the pollution that is caused in the making of regular candles.

Get in your car and drive about 100 miles to "Bubba’s Recycled Candles." Bubba’s candles are made of 100% recycled wax. Bubba uses old toilet gasket wax to make his candles. (It has a very pungent aroma- Bubba’s toilet wax candles are: "earthy.")

Now that you have your "earthy" candles burning on "earth day", you are going to need some type of activity to occupy one hour of time.

SEX- is out of the question...

SEX- can create babies...

Babies smell bad, they are expensive, and babies grow up and KILL the earth.

PLUS, sex only lasts 2 minutes. (If you "do it right"), and you have an entire hour to fill.

Might we suggest a game of Yahtzee or Go Fish..??

This is a GREAT form of family entertainment, however, if you are spending "earth day" alone, it might be hard to play with yourself.

Might we suggest- meditation.

Meditation is a GREAT way to get in touch with your "inter-self."

You can meditate on why you are such a selfish bastard for destroying the earth. "What has the earth ever done to you..??"

The earth just sits there, spinning- like a mentally confused dog.

And you have the gull to spit, puke, and pour carbon gas on mother earth..??

OK- maybe you are NOT ready for meditation.

How about a good old fashion BBQ..??

Now, I know what you are thinking...

How can using a propane grill be environmentally good..??

Well, you are NOT going to be using a "propane grill."

Jump into you car and drive 100 miles to "Bubba’s Recycled Candles." Bubba sells 100% methane BBQ grills.

These grills are 100% environmentally safe because they burn methane gas. (Cow flatulence.)

You are NOT going to want to cook up some kind of animal meat on your new grill, because that isn’t any good for the earth.

Might we suggest some form of tofu or soybean steaks..??

"Fake- Steaks" are GREAT for the earth and you will feel good while you are cooking "fake steaks" over your methane (cow flatulence) grill.

Or maybe you would prefer to do nothing.

Maybe you could rap yourself in a "Snuggie" blanket and stare blindly out the window?

Whatever it is that choose to do with your "one hour- without power," remember to think about the earth.

The Earth- that cute little blue ball filled with metal- melting magma.

Hot magma- hot enough to burn the hair off of your backside.

So, start saving the earth..!!

Turn out those lights at 8:30pm.

Fire up your methane grill and your toilet wax candles.

Put on your "Snuggie" blanket and meditate on how much of an ass you have been.

The Earth thanks you..!!

The Angry Republican

Video Broadcast

Global Warming MUST be true. (Unless it isn’t)

Sections of this editorial were published before, on: April 2009 and May 2008.

I welcome all former democrats now joining us

2010-04-12T19:51:00.002-04:00

I welcome all former democrats now joining us

Democrat Congressman Alan Grayson, (who was featured in our SPOOKY Halloween editorial last year) happened to go walking into a Tea Party rally, recently. (Hijinks and mayhem ensue, including a video.)

Tom Tillison, a member of a Florida Tea Party, asked Rep. Grayson a question: “These people are your constituents, don’t you feel that you owe them an explanation of your recent votes?”

To which, Rep. Grayson replied: “I don’t owe them anything, they are trying to defeat me.”

“You are a US Congressman and you approach these people acting like a thug.” Tillison offered.

Grayson’s reply was...

“They are attacking me. There are 308 million people who pay my salary. Do you know what that breaks down to- per person? Pennies on the dollar.”

Grayson added...

“I took a pay cut when I took this job.”

Congressman Grayson: yes, your paycheck may come from the federal government. However, your boss is every person who lives in that Florida District that YOU (are supposed to) represent. Not the people who live in California, nor the people who live in New York City, these people are not your boss. Your employer is those people who were in that Tea Party room and they have a right to try and remove you.

The MOST telling line of all was when Grayson said: “I took a pay cut when I took this job.”

WHEN I TOOK THIS JOB.

No congressman, you did not TAKE that job, like you would except a job as a plumber, or an accountant. No sir, you have very much lost your way.

You RAN for office. You promised the people in your district that you would listen to them and represent them in Washington DC.

Sir, you did not “TAKE” the job of congressman. You BEGGED the people of Florida to vote for you.

The approval rating for congress is at its lowest level since 1992. However, we could beat that 1992 record if congressmen, like Grayson, continue to disrespect the people in their district.

It has been fashionable to blame President Bush for everything, however; those days are numbered.

Every American understands that congress has been held by the democrats since 2006. During this 4 year rule of democrats in congress, we have seen the worst economy since the Great Depression, unemployment hovering near double digits, and an over-all GLOOM about the future of America that I haven’t seen since the 1970's and President Carter.

Sure, you can blame President Bush and the republicans for their share of this- gloom, and the American people fired republican based President’s and hired Barack Obama. Yet, it’s been over a year and things do not seem much better.

Hmmm, who else is STILL around today, who was there in 2006? What group of politicians still hold power in DC, who watched as the American economy went into the toilet and did nothing to warn us, or stop it?

Oh..Yea..!! The democrat controlled congress.

The American people are about to FIRE the democrat controlled congress.

Computer search engines are a funny thing. If you do a search on: “Republican registration up”, you will get a hundred stories on how the democrats are leading republicans in voter registration. However, most of these stories are from 2009 and 2008. Lost in the middle of these left-leaning, one-year old links, are a few current stories like this, from Panama City:

“..More people are switching registration from Democrat to Republican this month, albeit not in droves. Out of 44 registration changes from March 19-26, 28 were people changing from Democrat to Republican; the next most popular switch was Democrat to no party affiliation, five. No one switched from Republican to Democrat. The remaining 11 switched to or from minor parties..”

In Ohio and Pennsylvania, we are seeing about the same thing. Small news stories about democrats switching to republicans, and these stories are being buried. No one is covering these stories.

So, I wanted to take a moment and welcome all the former democrats to our side. I am glad that you made the switch. However, you will need to be “de-brainwashed.”

First off, you MUST get rid of the “guilt.”

Yes, guilt.

My friend, you work very hard. You give to charity when you can afford it. You help people if in need. You pay your fair-share of the taxes and try not to ask anyone to pay for your way. You have nothing to feel guilty about.

Yes, I’m afraid that you fell for the oldest trick in the book. A political party, (the democrats) use GUILT as a way to get your vote. They use guilt to grow the size of government, and they will use guilt to raise taxes.

Guilt is the “tool” that democrats use to make you become a “tool”.

Democrats will use GUILT to claim that:

We must raise taxes to save the earth. (Yet you know that higher taxes will not shut down one smoky factory, or save one polar bear.)

We must raise taxes so that our children receive a better education. (Yet you see schools closing in your area because they do not have enough students. Where the hell is the money going?)

We must raise taxes to deal with immigration. (Yet, you remember that congress and President Bush passed a law and set aside funding to do just that several years ago. What happened..??)

So, I welcome all of the former democrats joining us today. You will receive no ill-will from me. We all see the light at different times in our lives and I am grateful that you are crossing over NOW, as opposed to three years from now.

Fight the power.

It is time to send the democrat congress to the unemployment line.