Tuesday, April 30, 2013


From Hot Air

Music store owner exercises Second Amendment rights to substantial effect
Who really needs a gun anyway, right? You’re more likely to be shot with your own gun or … let’s just stop it, shall we? In Pennsylvania, the owner of a music shop found himself in a tight spot when an intruder came in, attacked him and then went after his wife. That’s a pretty bad day for anyone… including the robber.

A music store owner shot and killed a man who walked into the store and tried to attack him and his wife on Saturday afternoon in Bethel Park.

Police and medics said they were dispatched to Armen’s House of Music on Library Road at 12:17 p.m. for a reported stabbing/shooting.

Silvia Armen said her husband, Alfred Armen, came to her rescue when an intruder attacked her with a wooden night stick in the music store she and her husband own.

The police report indicates that the intruder, one Andrew Moore, first attacked Mr. Armen, injuring him. But when he went after his wife, Silvia, enough was enough. Armen drew his firearm, shot and killed the intruder. Alfred is in the hospital being treated for head injuries, but it sounds like Mrs. Armen is doing okay, mental trauma aside.

These are the stories that never get reported in the national media because they don’t support the meme being pushed by second amendment opponents. All’s well that ends well, so it remains a local story only, never mentioned on the floors of Congress. But the nearly tragic story of Mr. and Mrs. Armen’s music store boils down to one thing and one thing only:

A good guy with a gun.

Monday, April 29, 2013


The "Affordable Healthcare Act" is neither affordable nor is it about healthcare.

It will help a few, hurt far more and will tie the fiscal hands of our progeny far into the future.

That you, the American people, let this happen is a travesty and a testament to your gullibility.

Sunday, April 28, 2013

Saturday, April 27, 2013


Citizen with a gun vs bad guy with a knife.

Gun wins.

Friday, April 26, 2013


The Southern Poverty Law Center, a left leaning nonprofit that monitors groups it deems hateful and extremist, is the group that inspired Floyd Corkins to walk into the Family Research Council , a Christian organization,  intending to kill people and smear their faces with Chick-fil-A sandwiches.

Trying to get past the really demented idea of spreading Chick-Fil-A sandwiches on people (which might be considered bad taste), here is yet another example of a leftist involved in what liberals say is a right-wing, Christian activity: domestic terrorism.

The truth is, and always has been, that terrorists, foreign and domestic, tend to be liberal, leftist, and/or anti-American.

That is not an absolute, because there are really disturbed people in every venue of life. But the numbers are pretty convincing, in spite of liberals in panic mode, trying to blame conservatives for such acts.

It is my contention that we will not reduce terrorist activity until we address the issue of the hearts and minds of mankind. We are just too prone to evil as we are, and there is nothing can be done about it from a sociological perspective.

Education, in and of itself, won’t help. The best educators in the universe have not been able to curb the incidence of terrorism.

Philosophy won’t help. The world has had great philosophers since Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, and they have not succeeded in reducing terrorism.

Science won’t help. We live in the scientific age, and scientists have not found a way to assuage terrorism.

Religion, per se, won’t help. In fact, a great deal of terrorism is perpetrated by a religion that specifically and deliberately promotes terrorism as a part of its doctrine.

Psychology won’t help. This pseudo-science can neither predict nor dissuade those bent on committing terrorist acts.

So, wherein lies the answer, if not to properly address changing the hearts and minds of mankind?

Thursday, April 25, 2013


The Boston Marathon bombing was, pure and simple, an act of terrorism. That cannot be disputed.  It was a tragedy for those who lost loved ones and a travesty for those who were injured.

Many people rushed to judgement about the character and heritage of the perpetrator. But few had the crass, uncivilized gall of David Sirota of Salon.com. Here’s what he had to say:

“[R]egardless of your particular party affiliation, if you care about everything from stopping war to reducing the defense budget to protecting civil liberties to passing immigration reform, you should hope the bomber was a white domestic terrorist. Why? Because only in that case will privilege work to prevent the Boston attack from potentially undermining progress on those other issues.”

Did you get that? He wanted the bomber to be a white male! He wanted it so that certain liberal agendas could be better achieved!

Although his comment had a racial bent, his primary thrust was political.

It is true that the bombers were probably politically motivated in the sense that they had a prior ideological stance that resulted in their desire to wreak havoc on Americans. Their methods were steeped in cowardice, being unable to face counter ideology in a civilized, rational manner.

It’s not the first time national tragedies have been politicized, and it probably won’t be the last. But can’t we take the time to mourn and to care about the victims before we go to ranting about the political leanings of the bad guys?

There is a difference between making a studied prediction of the cultural background of a particular perpetrator(s) based on sound psychological profiling and totally abandoning the empathy we ought to feel for the victims in these horrid events.

To use a tragedy solely for political leverage is not much better in terms of civilized thought than the cold, calculated indifference of those who perform the terrorist acts in the first place.

The two sides of the American political spectrum do not react to these events equally.  Forbes  has shown that leftist websites politicized the Newtown shooting earlier and more often that conservative websites did.

Liberals immediately seized the opportunities to advance progressive ideas. They tend to use these terrorist events to “demonstrate” the need for more federal government intervention in Americans’ lives in the name of safety for society.

Conservatives believe these acts can only be reduced in number through the change of the attitudes of human hearts. This is a slower process, but allows for the preservation of liberty and freedom.

For instance, it can be documented  that stringent gun control laws would not have mitigated or prevented Fort Hood, Columbine, Newtown or the Boston bombing.

In the future, why don’t we resist the urge to immediately insist that the federal government take away more of our freedoms and instead concentrate on those things that will bring about the changes in hearts and minds needed to prevent these horrible, senseless acts from occurring to people in the first place?

Or is that just a fruitless pipe dream due to the universal depravity of mankind to begin with?

Wednesday, April 24, 2013

Monday, April 22, 2013


From the American Thinker:

April 20, 2013
Obama Fizzles Out
By Richard Butrick

The man is slipping from the limelight. The marquee man from MSM and Hollywood and Vine is headed for Sunset Boulevard.

Right from the start of his 2008 campaign, the MSM gave Obama the star treatment. He was their main event. He was billed as a transformational figure -- a visionary who would (1) unify the country and (2) lead us to a fairer economic prosperity and (3) bring us respect abroad in a world of lessened tensions.

In 2009 Newsweek editor Evan Thomas summed up the MSM adoration of Obama when he said, "I mean in a way Obama's standing above the country, above -- above the world, he's sort of God."

The god-factor resulted in a de facto "don't ask don't tell" pact between Obama and the media. The media didn't ask Obama to detail his hope and change and he didn't tell. Gods don't have to explain themselves. It was just hope and change -- trust me ("Just give us our orders" Chris Matthews). That gave Obama an air of mystery that simply enhanced his front-page appeal.

The mystery element has been crucial to Obama's success. It made him impervious to conventional political attacks and attacks on his person. A twenty-year association with an America-bashing Reverend Wright? His association with Ayers? His college records? How petty. How droll. These might be questions one asked of an ordinary politician, but not a man of high-minded vision who would unite us on our path to his mysterious place where all of us get a fair shot and a fair shake and leave our petty biases and prejudices behind.

Moreover, his demeanor was that of a leader above the fray and hurly-burly of beltway politics. Not only was he a man of style and grace with a captivating smile, but a seer whose political vision was neither of the hackneyed leftist or rightist variety. Obama was charting a new "centrist" course through the Scylla and Charybdis of the old antagonisms between left and right. One doesn't ask such a figure for his passport or birth certificate.

The de facto "don't ask/don't tell" pact Obama had with the media began to crumble as far back as 2011 with this outburst from HardBall Matthews

There's no Peace Corps, there is no Special Forces, there is no 50-miles hikes, there's no moon program, there's nothing to root for. What are we trying to do in this administration? Why does he want a second term? Would he tell us? What's he going to do in the second term? More of this? Is this it? Is this as good as it gets? Where are we going? Are we going to do something the second term? He has yet to tell us. He has not said one thing what he's going to do in the second term. He never tells what he's going to do with regard to reforming our healthcare systems, Medicare, Medicaid, how is he going to reform Social Security? Is he going to deal with long-term debt? How? Is he going to reform the tax system? How? Just tell us. Why are we in this fight with him? Just tell us, commander, give us our orders [italics added] and tell us where we're going,

By 2011 even [sic] Evan Thomas felt comfortable blasting his former "God."

He's not being honest about just how bad this is going to be -- no, he was partisan. He was God [bleep] Democrat! He was just, you know -- being a party guy.

Since then it has became harder and harder for MSM to spin Obama as a visionary and unifier with transformational powers in domestic or foreign policy.

(1) The great unifier?

Obama the great unifier who is above the fray of politics-as-usual? In fact, it is readily apparent that he is just the reverse. When it comes to getting out the vote, it's identity politics in spades (Okay -- choke on that). Out comes the community organizer -- resentment mongering, class warfare, evil bankers.

As Karl Rove recently wrote in a WSJ article,

President Obama likes pretending he floats above politics. In fact, he is the most compulsively partisan president in modern times. Everything he says and does is better understood through a partisan lens.

(2) Leading us to a fairer economic prosperity?

The domestic policies he has put forward so far have all the innovative cachet of a plain old tax-and-spend left-wing Democrat. They might as well be the initiatives of a Carter or even a Johnson. How does Obama's war on poverty differ from President Johnson's? Granted the level of nastiness and coercion, especially from Holder's DOJ, has risen to a Mafia-like shakedown level but the economics are basically the same. His latest "compromise" budget proposal has even drawn ire from both sides of the aisle. If his own party is willing to take him to task he has definitely lost his transformational status.

(3) Respect abroad in a world of lessened tensions?

As regards his foreign policy, which was to create "mutual respect" between the Islamic world and the U.S., even Thomas Friedman of the NYT admits that the Arab Spring and Obama support of the Muslim Brotherhood is a bust. And as for in general improving the image or status of the U.S. abroad by leading from behind -- well, it doesn't seem that Russia, China, or North Korea have quite got the respect part. What the president has accomplished is alienating and diminishing our status with former allies. To wit, the recent snub of the legacy of Margaret Thatcher which just makes him seem small and unpresidential.

It's hard to spin any of this into superstar status. It has become well-nigh impossible to see anything special or visionary about Obama's presidency. Clearly, he is on the path from being seen as a transcendent, transformational leader to being seen as a humdrum, run-of-the mill progressive with all the charisma of a Dukakis. Next we will see a cartoon from Ramirez with Obama's head sticking out of tank emblazoned with "tax-and-spend."

But the decline and fall of the MSM spin is giving some rise to the "fringe" CPA spin on Obama. The CPA thesis (spin) is that Obama, like his classmates in pre-law at Columbia (class of '83), was smitten by the Cloward-Piven-Alinskyite strategy to bring down the white-power, racist capitalist system and turn America into a socialist state. The CPA plan is that America could be destroyed from within by overwhelming the system with debt, welfare, and entitlements. This would proceed by inducing more and more of the American populace to become dependent on welfare, food stamps, disability, and unemployment. The resulting collapse of the system would trigger the crisis needed to bring in a socialist state as the saving alternative to the failed, evil capitalist system. Indeed, that may be what motivates President Obama. But all of that is dismissed by MSM as lunatic hysteria.

But the CPA spin, if anything, is beginning to seem less looney and the MSM spin of Obama, as the transformational visionary who would bring us unity at home and abroad, is looking more and more like a stupid teenage crush.

Even the thoughtful and fair-minded Ben Stein is troubled with the vision of a CPA President,

And what will become of America when Obama has disarmed us, as he openly plans to do? There will be no more glorious America. These truly may be the final days, the end times. I guess at some level, possibly a very deep level, Mr. Obama does not want America to survive. The Manchurian Candidate. I pray I am wrong.

So the MSM is stuck. The CPA spin is looney and their own spin has unraveled. For the MSM, Obama might as well be Humpty Dumpty. All the MSM horses and the MSM men can't put the spin back together again. The MSM is locked into a position where Obama is neither demon nor savior. There is no story there. They are stuck with their Beau Brummell in the White House looking more and more like just another hackneyed leftist politician of the Carter-Mondale variety who never really had anything new to offer. The MSM is left with a red face and a would-be in the attic.

Sunday, April 21, 2013

Friday, April 19, 2013


His name is Kermit Gosnell. He’s on trial for murder.

OK, now that we’ve established that, let’s take a look at some science.

Floating in space, astronauts used to have to be tethered to their space craft with a long, flexible pipe. It provided them with what they needed for life. They referred to it as an umbilical cord.

It was called an umbilical cord because it was analogous to the cord that attached a developing baby to its mother.

That cord is wonderfully made. It provides nourishment to the developing baby. It also provides an avenue of cleansing of the baby’s wast products. It allows nutrients from the mother’s blood stream to feed the baby, while filtering out many of the toxins that try to make their way into the baby. It also prevents the baby’s blood and the mother’s blood from mingling in such a way as to cause either to be rejected.

The amniotic fluid around the baby allows it to move freely, floating like an astronaut in space, attached only by the marvelous umbilical cord. The cord contains two arteries and one vein, enclosed and protected by a thick gristle-like substance called 'Wharton's Jelly'. This makes the cord slippery and allows it to move freely around your baby and avoid compression.

Every living thing is made up of molecules of DNA. Every living thing’s DNA is unique. Since a developing baby exhibits all of the characteristics of life, including growth, taking on nourishment, giving off waste, etc., it is clear that it is alive.

Furthermore, the baby’s DNA is as unique as the DNA of every other living creature. It is not fish DNA, it is not dog DNA, it is human DNA, and can be easily distinguished from every other type of plant or animal on the planet.

It is also different from the DNA of the mother.

One of the ways science can pin-point a murder suspect is through DNA. Every human being has DNA molecules that are different from every other human being in the known universe.

From all of this, we may scientifically conclude that the baby in a mother’s womb is absolutely, positively NOT a part of her body.

Therefore, the argument that abortion should be allowed because a woman should have the right to do what she wants with her own body is invalid, since the baby’s body is clearly different from and not a part of the woman’s body.

In order to get Roe v. Wade into American culture, abortion proponents had to convince the people, the courts and the legislature that post Roe v. Wade abortions would be “safe, legal and rare.”

Dr. Kermit Gosnell is accused of the murder of 7 babies because, according to testimony in the trial thus far, he ordered, executed and/or supervised the killing of the babies AFTER they had been born or the attempted abortion had failed.

The testimony being heard at the trial rivals the most heinous murders ever committed.

Limbs ripped from the bodies of live babies. Babies’ bodies sliced up and put in plastic bags or unceremoniously tossed in garbage cans. Some were even ground up in the garbage disposal.

Remember, this was AFTER the baby was delivered or the abortion failed.

The left wing liberal media now revive the same pitiful logic of the left as the conversation moves to infanticide. 

Preferring screams that are silent, they claim to want to protect children from the Kermit Gosnells by exposing them to late-term abortionists.

What leads to infanticide, according to their logic, is not abortion but the circumscribing of abortion.

“There’s certainly been a campaign on the right, to make it — to in lieu of being able to actually ban abortions, just to make it incredibly difficult to get. And this is obviously the downside of that, right? That people wind up going outside the law,” said Beltway journalist Ben Smith on MSNBC.

Gosnell didn’t depart from the culture of Roe but embodied it. For years its advocates have grown less and less fussy about the timing of the “choice” and have blasted some abortionists for acting as if some abortions are better than others.

At his bail hearing, Gosnell asked why he had even been indicted for the seven dead babies, implying that the line between a late-term abortion and an attempted late-term abortion that turns into infanticide is meaningless. “This is a targeted, elitist and racist prosecution of a doctor who’s done nothing but give [back] to the poor and the people of West Philadelphia,” says his lawyer.

“Women have no obligation to make a decision as soon as they possibly can. The only obligation women have is to take the time they need to make the decision that is right for them,” wrote Steph Herold and Susan Yanow.

And so it is with the left. Completely lacking a moral compass, and not even realizing what they are missing, they go right on with their…what other word can you think of?…evil thought processes, supported by President BO (the amateur president) who once made clear that he would not “punish” his daughter by making her give birth to the baby if it had been conceived in some inconvenient manner.

In their silence about Gosnell, the left, and their media friends, confirms their support for and defense of  the murder of babies, born and unborn.

Wednesday, April 17, 2013


A commenter on this blog, who shall remain nameless, (but whose initials are XO) has put $20.00 on the line, betting that the Boston Marathon bomber(s) is (are) a right wing nut job.

As of this writing we don't know. Regardless, the person is a terrorist. He represents neither the left or the right.

The same commenter used Timothy McVeigh to illustrate how "most" mass shooters are right wingers.

Well, let's take a look.

1..Ft. Hood: Registered Democrat - Muslim.

2.  Columbine: From a family of Democrats.

3.  Virginia Tech: Foreign national (not right-winger) - Wrote hate mail to President Bush and to his staff.

4.  Colorado Theater: Registered Democrat – Staff worker on the Obama campaign – Occupy Wall Street participant – progressive liberal.

5.  Connecticut Sandy Hook School Shooter: Registered Democrat – Anti Christian.

6.  Gabby Gifford’s shooter: Leftist – Registered Democrat.

7.  Twin Towers: Middle Easterners (not right wingers.

8.  Timothy McVeigh: A militia movement sympathizer – right winger.

9.  Terry Nichols: Anti federal government.

So, if I understand correctly, 2 out of 9 = most.

That's interesting math, at best.

Conclusion: The Boston Marathon bomber(s) must have been a right winger?


Westroads Mall shooting Omaha 2007- the rifle was stolen from the shooter's stepfather.

Chadron High shooting- weapon stolen from his uncle.

Millard South Omaha 2011- The shooter took his father's handgun to kill my former English teacher.

The DC Sniper's rifle was part of a group of firearms that were taken from a dealer in Seattle.

Kip Kinkel- Weapons were legally purchased for him by his father.

Sikh temple shooting- rifle legally purchased.

Here are some more interesting things about spree and rampage shootings in the U.S.

And one other thing.

The news media insists on referring to the bombing as a massacre.

Let's be clear: It was horrible. It was terrible. It was terrifying. It was evil. It was unjustifiable. It was murderous.

Was it a massacre?

Not by traditional standards.

These were massacres:

Little Big Horn
The Chinese massacre of 1871 (18 killed)
Ludlow 1914 (19 killed)
Rosewood, 1923 (the entire population of African-Americans in and near Rosewood, about 350)
Olowalu 1790 (100 killed)
Hanapepe: 1924 (20 killed)
Herrin 1922 (23 killed)
Lawrence 1863 (185+ killed)
Greenwood (300)
Chinese Massacare Cove (34)
Lattimer (19)
Ponce (19)
Washaw (118)
Fort Pillow (297)
Goliad (300)
Nueces (34)
Mountain Meadows (140)
Whitman (13),
Wah Mee (13)
Rock Springs (28)
Bloody Monday, Colfax, Coushatta, Thibodaus, Haun’s Mill, Centralia, and Baylor were all massacres.
And of course, 9/11 was a massacre.

I’m not certain 3 or 4 killed constitutes a massacre. It is despicable.  The families of those killed are to be sympathized and empathized with to the highest degree.

To call the Boston Marathon bombings a “massacre” requires changing the usual meaning of the word, massacre.

But that's the media for you.

I hope the perpetrator is caught, whether he is a right winger, a left winger or a Middle Easterner…wherever… I hope he is prosecuted to the Nth degree.

He’ll deserve what he gets and more.

Monday, April 15, 2013


Reporter: "How does the President justify lavish vacations and a golf trip to Florida at taxpayers' expense? Does he plan to cut back on his travels?"

 Carney: "Uhh...(think of some response that evades the question...quick!)I can tell you that, Uh, this president is focused..."

 Yeah, but how does the President justify lavish vacations and a golf trip to Florida at taxpayers' expense?

Carney: "...every day..."

Yeah, but how does the President justify lavish vacations and a golf trip to Florida at taxpayers' expense?

Carney: "...on policies that...create economic growth..."

Yeah, but how does the President justify lavish vacations and a golf trip to Florida at taxpayers' expense?

Carney: "...and helps advance job creation..."

Yeah, but does he plan to cut back on his travels?

Reporter: "The secret service told us that the tours cost $74,000.00 per week. How much is it going to cost  the President to travel later this week to Illinois?"

 Carney: "The president's the president of the United States" (No Duh!)

Yeah, but how much is it going to cost for the President to travel later this week to Illinois?

Carney: "...and he's elected to represent all of the people..."

 Yeah, but how much is it going to cost for the President to travel later this week to Illinois?

 Carney: "...and he travels around the country appropriately..."

 Yeah, but how much is it going to cost  for the President to travel later this week to Illinois?

 Carney: "...I don't have the figure on the cost of Presidential travel, it is, uhh, you know..."

 Yeah, but how much is it going to cost for the President to travel later this week to Illinois?

Carney: "...obviously something as every president deals with is that the security and staff...is uhh, a significant undertaking..." (???)

 Yeah, but how much is it going to cost for the President to travel later this week to Illinois?

Carney: "...but, uhh, the President has to travel around the country, he has to travel around the world...that is part of his job..."

 Yeah, but how much is it going to cost for the President to travel later this week to Illinois?

Reporter: "How much did it cost for him to go and play golf?"

Carney: "Uh, John, again, you'r trivializing an impact here..." ("...trivializing an impact? What is that? That means something, I'm sure.)

Yeah, but how much did it cost for him to go and play golf?

Carney: "People will lose their jobs...three quarters of a million people will lose their jobs" (That's a reason to go play golf?...Just sayin')

Yeah, but how much did it cost for him to go and play golf?

Carney: "...the law stipulates what the cost will be for each agency. Those jobs will be lost..OK?..."  (???)

Yeah, but how much did it cost for him to go and play golf?

Carney: "And, uh, you can report on White House tours, or you can find out what the impacts are out in the real world, uh, what additional impacts are...this is a real world impact here and it is unfortunate and it is an unhappy choice." (White House tours? What question is that an answer to?)

Yeah, but how much did it cost for him to go and play golf?

Carney: "The fact of the matter is, Congress made this choice. Republicans made this choice. Their option was to do what they did a few months ago and delay the sequester, to allow for time to try to negotiate a bigger deal...They chose not to because they refused to accept the principle that the well off and well connected ought to pay a little bit toward deficit reduction. That was a choice...and it was a choice that was presented to the American people as a home run...as something that was politically advantageous, in the back pocket of the Speaker of the House...it was a Tea Party victory. But the...there are consequences to that victory for the Tea Party and the consequences are what we've been discussing today."

Is there anybody with more than a third grade public school education who thinks that sequence of words even makes sense?

Talk about redirection! There were so many curves and detours in that paragraph that a snake would tie himself in knots trying to follow it.

But at least we have a clear understanding of how much it cost the American taxpayer for President BO (the amateur president) to go play golf with Tiger Woods.

Friday, April 12, 2013


Training in my new job has been extensive and time consuming, with lots to learn...even while at home.

I'll be back to blogging later this week.

Try not to miss me too much!

Monday, April 8, 2013


President BO (the amateur president) called California Attorney General, Karmalla Harris, "...clearly the best looking Attorney General by far."

That remark got him into trouble, for which he felt compelled to apologize.

You know, this political correctness stupidity has just gone too far!

You all know how much I dislike the policies of PBO (tap), but this is a little weird.

I suppose he should have said, "You are the ugliest, homeliest most nerdy looking Attorney General I have ever seen"

The apology seems to say that if you're a beautiful woman, you can't be successful, and if you are, nobody better notice!?

It does not mater which side of the political fence you're on, this was clearly intended as a compliment, and I'll just bet she was happy to take it that way.

I cannot and will not defend a single Obama policy. He's an inept, ideological mug-wart, but now the left is feeling the brunt of run-away political correctness, and I think it is time to stop!

Good grief! Women spend millions of dollars on products that are supposed to make them look good, and when they do, you'd better not mention it.

Give me an ever-lovin'-blue-eyed break!

Sunday, April 7, 2013

Thursday, April 4, 2013


You have got to be kidding me!!!

This is some kind of a cosmic, time-warp joke, right?

The Obama administration is engaged in a broad push to make more home loans available to people with weaker credit, an effort that officials say will help power the economic recovery.

After Dodd/Frank, after Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, after sub-prime lending conspired to lead to a housing bubble that gave us the economy we have suffered for years, President BO (the amateur president) wants to do it again!!!???

Is that what “fundamentally changing America” looks like?

PBO (tap)’s administration is saying that the nations much-celebrated, if unrealized, housing rebound is leaving too many people behind!!!


Richard Kovacevich, former CEO of Wells Fargo points out that without Fannie and Freddie’s involvement, the housing bubble would never have formed in the first place. Now the inept president wants to do it again!

Can you say, “bailout?” Can you say “Tax payer money poured down the drain?” Can you say, “Stupid?”

Not only that, but President BO (the amateur president) wants to let the Federal Housing Administration handle the issue.

In other words, let’s send FHA down the same street that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac went down.

Of course there is this: a full fledged government agency will become very adept at taking us right back down the housing bubble road…probably even faster than FM and FM could.

Is there no one who knows how to learn from the past?


Wednesday, April 3, 2013


President BO (the amateur president)'s Operation Guide
In 1934 we were in the middle of the Great Depression. Communist and Marxist operatives were in the USA, trying to bring us down from within. President BO (the amateur president) was a student of Communist and Marxist operatives in his young life and in his early political life. Notice the "Plan of Action" in the lower left corner.

In case it’s too small for you to read it, it says:

Plan of Action for U.S.


“Under the guise of recovery – Bust the government – Blame the capitalists for the failure – Junk the Constitution and declare a dictatorship.”

Monday, April 1, 2013


The American Dream was put in place by a group of Christian males who discovered, explored, pioneered, settled and developed the greatest republic in the history of the known universe.

The original American Dream is over.

A coalition of people of all sorts, government workers, union members, social experimentalists, environmental extremists, the media, Hollywood, uninformed young people, the eternally needy, the “make no contribution while enjoying the government cow” group and a myriad of other Ne're Do Wells, led by a man who declared that he wanted fundamentally change America, have succeeded in eliminating the recollection of what the American Dream ever was.

Pit Bulls have replaced Cocker Spaniels. Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” has replaced the U.S. Constitution. Chicago shysters have replaced men of character. World socialists have replaced principled Americans and now pull the puppet strings.

Dead people voting are preferred over live people proving who they are with picture IDs. The new standard is for people to be allowed to vote as many times as they can get away with. Our Commander-in-chief has been elevated to Mother Teresa status, and even savior status.

Fly-over values have been rendered irrelevant. Opposing viewpoints have been vilified and ridiculed. Freedom of thought and speech have been replaced by political correctness and pantywaists, and the country has been brought down without a shot being fired, a-la Nikita Khrushchev.

Instead of defending themselves, people are encouraged to call for the police when their personal space is invaded by some miscreant. It is thought better to give in to the whim of the bad guy and just wait the ten, twenty or forty-five minutes for the police to arrive, risking life, family and limb.

There is no road back, if we keep electing RINOs and leftists to office, locally, state-wide and nationally. The only hope is a generation of zealots who can see the value of true liberty and freedom. The only hope is to raise a generation of people raised on Truth, and not history rewritten.

As with our framers, there will have to be blood shed for the cause of liberty. That this generation and the last have frittered away our Republic is an anathema. There is a specter hanging over us that can only be spirited away by those willing to stand for freedom; by those willing to fight for the promise that was ours.

May God grant that such men step will forward, stand firm and insist that this land be given back to the people so that liberty and justice for all will never perish from the face of the earth.