Scenario one:
You're down at the sea shore looking for sand dollars.
You pass by conch shells, snail shells and clam shells until you come to a sand dollar which you pick up.
Scenario two:
You see a Chevrolet. Then you see a Ford.
They look a lot alike. They even share many chemical bonds.
You conclude that they must come from the same place.
Scenario three:
You have a thousand dollars in your pocket with which you plan to buy $1,000.00 worth of computer gear.
Someone comes along and takes $350.00 of it, leaving you with only $750.00. You can't afford to buy your computer gear.
You conclude that they must be entitled to it and go on your merry way.
Scenario four:
Your neighbor buys a new car. He earns 3 times what you earn.
You want a new car, too...the same kind.
Since you can't afford it, you figure the rest of the people should help you buy one.
After all, you need to get to work...it's your right.
Scenario five:
You don't ever want to get sick, have an accident or suffer any pain.
You conclude that everybody else should work to guarantee that you never get sick, never have an accident and never suffer any pain.
You are, after all, entitled to a perfect life.
Scenario six:
You take a DNA sample from a woman.
You take another DNA sample from the fetus she is carrying in her womb.
You conclude that, even though the DNA is different, they are the same "person" and therefore each should be allowed to do whatever he/she wants to the other.
Scenario four:
You are suffering from shingles.
Just barely touching your belly hurts, and rubbing the belly is out of the question due to the pain.
You need to drive to the doctor.
You can't because the law requires you to fasten your seat belt when you drive.
Keeps you safe.
Is there a liberal out there who can get the point AND understand these scenarios (senaria?)?
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
Monday, March 5, 2012
WE HAD TO BUILD IT...WE JUST HAD TO.
General Motors has temporarily suspended production of its Volt electric car, the company announced Friday.
GM, which is based in Detroit, announced to employees at one of its facilities that it was halting production of the beleaguered electric car for five weeks and temporarily laying off 1,300 employees.
Republicans have argued that the Volt was being pushed by the Obama administration for political reasons instead of consumer demand.
“Is the commitment to the American public or is the commitment to clean energy, that we are going to get there any way we can?” Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.) asked in a hearing in the House in January about the Volt's reported battery fires.
“When the market is ready … it won’t have to be subsidized,” Kelly said.
Chevy has sought to give a boost to the public image of the Volt, releasing a commercial in January tying the Volt to the effort to reduce dependence on foreign oil.
"This isn’t just the car we wanted to build,” a narrator says in the commercial over footage of Volts being manufactured in Hamtramck, Mich. “This is the car America had to build.”
Article by Keith Laing
Shocking...just shocking.
And after all of that government help, too.
Money well spent, no?
GM, which is based in Detroit, announced to employees at one of its facilities that it was halting production of the beleaguered electric car for five weeks and temporarily laying off 1,300 employees.
Republicans have argued that the Volt was being pushed by the Obama administration for political reasons instead of consumer demand.
“Is the commitment to the American public or is the commitment to clean energy, that we are going to get there any way we can?” Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.) asked in a hearing in the House in January about the Volt's reported battery fires.
“When the market is ready … it won’t have to be subsidized,” Kelly said.
Chevy has sought to give a boost to the public image of the Volt, releasing a commercial in January tying the Volt to the effort to reduce dependence on foreign oil.
"This isn’t just the car we wanted to build,” a narrator says in the commercial over footage of Volts being manufactured in Hamtramck, Mich. “This is the car America had to build.”
Article by Keith Laing
Shocking...just shocking.
And after all of that government help, too.
Money well spent, no?
Sunday, March 4, 2012
Saturday, March 3, 2012
I WANT IT BUT I DON'T WANT TO PAY FOR IT!
I want a new car.
But new cars cost $20,000.00 or more. On a five year loan, that's over $4,000.00 per year PLUS INTEREST!
That's just too much for me to pay.
Since I believe I have a right to a new car, and no one should judge me for wanting one, I think the government should pay for it.
Imagine! I would never have to pay for my car again. You, the other tax payers, would pay for it for me!
You are such nice people.
On a related subject, what does a woman have to do to be considered a "slut?"
Is there some standard by which a woman might earn "slut" classification?
If so, what is that standard?
Would an unmarried woman who engaged in intercourse seven times a week be considered a "slut?"
What if she engaged in intercourse seven times a week with four different men? Would that qualify her for "sluthood?"
What if she used contraception?
Would that disqualify her for "sluthood?"
What if she said, "I want contraception for my seven sexual encounters every week, but contraception costs me $3,000.00 per year! (What kind of contraception costs $3,000.00 per year anyway?)
"Hey! I'm a student! I can't afford $3,000.00 per year for contraception! I think the government should pay for both my education AND my contraception!"
Turns out, that's exactly what she DID say. (But it was probably just a fluke.)
Since I've had "permanant contraception," the government has no need to pay for mine.
So, I think they should pay for my new car, instead.
Of course, it should be "green" (even though the one above is obviously blue).
But new cars cost $20,000.00 or more. On a five year loan, that's over $4,000.00 per year PLUS INTEREST!
That's just too much for me to pay.
Since I believe I have a right to a new car, and no one should judge me for wanting one, I think the government should pay for it.
Imagine! I would never have to pay for my car again. You, the other tax payers, would pay for it for me!
You are such nice people.
On a related subject, what does a woman have to do to be considered a "slut?"
Is there some standard by which a woman might earn "slut" classification?
If so, what is that standard?
Would an unmarried woman who engaged in intercourse seven times a week be considered a "slut?"
What if she engaged in intercourse seven times a week with four different men? Would that qualify her for "sluthood?"
What if she used contraception?
Would that disqualify her for "sluthood?"
What if she said, "I want contraception for my seven sexual encounters every week, but contraception costs me $3,000.00 per year! (What kind of contraception costs $3,000.00 per year anyway?)
"Hey! I'm a student! I can't afford $3,000.00 per year for contraception! I think the government should pay for both my education AND my contraception!"
Turns out, that's exactly what she DID say. (But it was probably just a fluke.)
Since I've had "permanant contraception," the government has no need to pay for mine.
So, I think they should pay for my new car, instead.
Of course, it should be "green" (even though the one above is obviously blue).
Friday, March 2, 2012
FOOD FOR THOUGHT
Isn't It Ironic?
The food stamp program, managed by the Department of Agriculture, is pleased to be distributing food stamps to more than 46 million people in the USA.
Meanwhile, the Park Service, also managed by the Department of Agriculture, threatens to prosecute those who "Feed Wild Animals," because the animals may grow dependent upon us and not take care of themselves.
Some people cannot see the irony in this. Nor can they see the implications thereof.
Those people are called liberals.
The food stamp program, managed by the Department of Agriculture, is pleased to be distributing food stamps to more than 46 million people in the USA.
Meanwhile, the Park Service, also managed by the Department of Agriculture, threatens to prosecute those who "Feed Wild Animals," because the animals may grow dependent upon us and not take care of themselves.
Some people cannot see the irony in this. Nor can they see the implications thereof.
Those people are called liberals.
Thursday, March 1, 2012
INTERNET PUBLISHER AND WRITER DIES AT AGE 43
I was standing in the campus bookstore when the news came over the radio that John F. Kennedy had been shot.
I never liked Kennedy, neither his politics nor his lifestyle. But when the guy standing next to me remarked, "I hope the (expletive not included) dies," I turned to him and said, "Whether you liked him or not, this is not the way to get rid of him."
It astonished me that someone could be so cold and heartless as to think the way this guy was thinking.
Liberal blogs and tweets are all over the Internet celebrating the death of one of the bravest, hard-hitting journalists this electronic era has known.
Celebrating!
And you know what? I am not the least bit surprised. That's the way liberals think, and you can't breed that out of them. Their hate gene is fused with their life gene, and if they are alive, they are hate filled.
My side bar has a couple of links to some of his work. I recommend them to you.
When you think of Andrew Breitbart, think of the expose of ACORN. Think of his work to reveal the anti-social antics of SEIU.
But whatever you think of him, remember that his rights were the same as yours, and he had every right to be and to do the work of his being.
If President BO were to suddenly and unexpectedly die from natural causes, I would mourn his passing.
Why?
Because, although he and I disagree on every political stance, he is a human being and I respect human life, even his.
My prayers are for the grace of God to cover his loved ones and his associates in this difficult time.
Farewell, Mr. Breitbart. I am blessed for having had you among us.
Note: If you came here to post hate comments in the comments section, your comments will be summarily deleted. Go somewhere else. This is neither the time nor the place.
I never liked Kennedy, neither his politics nor his lifestyle. But when the guy standing next to me remarked, "I hope the (expletive not included) dies," I turned to him and said, "Whether you liked him or not, this is not the way to get rid of him."
It astonished me that someone could be so cold and heartless as to think the way this guy was thinking.
Liberal blogs and tweets are all over the Internet celebrating the death of one of the bravest, hard-hitting journalists this electronic era has known.
Celebrating!
And you know what? I am not the least bit surprised. That's the way liberals think, and you can't breed that out of them. Their hate gene is fused with their life gene, and if they are alive, they are hate filled.
My side bar has a couple of links to some of his work. I recommend them to you.
When you think of Andrew Breitbart, think of the expose of ACORN. Think of his work to reveal the anti-social antics of SEIU.
But whatever you think of him, remember that his rights were the same as yours, and he had every right to be and to do the work of his being.
If President BO were to suddenly and unexpectedly die from natural causes, I would mourn his passing.
Why?
Because, although he and I disagree on every political stance, he is a human being and I respect human life, even his.
My prayers are for the grace of God to cover his loved ones and his associates in this difficult time.
Farewell, Mr. Breitbart. I am blessed for having had you among us.
Note: If you came here to post hate comments in the comments section, your comments will be summarily deleted. Go somewhere else. This is neither the time nor the place.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)






