So once again this morning while checking the news, I see a news report about 300 "Occupy" protesters being arrested in San Diego, and once again I wondered just how long it was going to be before this group of clueless liberal nutjobs realize that they're not accomplishing anything of value with their continued lawless protests, except to prove to the nation what a bunch of idiots they really are. I'd say they're proving it to the rest of the world as well, but it seems that the rest of the world has realized that the time for the "Occupy" protests have come and gone, so they're not happening anywhere but here.
At this point one cannot help but compare this bunch of clowns with their conservative counterparts, the Tea Party. And I'll warn you right off the bat that yes, I'm a member of the local Tea Party chapter, and damned proud of it, so yes, you can expect my views to be a tad one-sided. If that bothers you, then stop reading and go look at something else on the Internet; if not, then read on.
In my humble opinion as seen from "downrange," the major difference between the beliefs of the Tea Party and the "Occupy" movement is that the Tea Party is concerned about what's happening to the nation as a whole, and they're demonstrating for the government to fix what's wrong to benefit ALL of the American people. We believe in limited Federal government, less taxation for ALL Americans, balanced budgets, personal responsibility, and a strict interpretation of the United States Constitution. In short, we want to make America the nation that our Founding Fathers envisioned, and make it a better place for ALL of us.
The liberals in the "Occupy" movement, on the other hand, don't seem to give a damn about anybody or anything except themselves. They're more concerned with getting what they think they're "entitled" to for some damned reason or another, and will do whatever they want whenever they want - and break whatever laws they want to along the way - to get what they think they deserve. They want MORE Federal intervention and control over our lives, MORE regulations, MORE taxes (so just where do you think the money to pay for the services you think you're 'entitled' to is gonna come from?), and they don't want to have to work for it. They want what they want, and they want it NOW.
To me, this sounds like nothing more than the ranting of a spoiled child who's being told 'NO' for the first time, and is pitching a fit because he isn't getting what he wants.
If you want the perfect example of the differences between the ideals, morals, and actions of the two groups, then take a look at some of the statistics concerning the demonstrations that have been held over the course of the past three years or so:
Number of days spent protesting: Tea Party, 989 "Occupy," 40
Arrests: Tea Party, 0 "Occupy," 2,511
Rapes: Tea Party, 0 "Occupy," 4
Costs: Tea Party, 0 "Occupy," $2,400,000.00
And those arrests were for robbery, rape, drug use, drug possession, assault, and trespassing - ALL of which took place either INSIDE the "occupy" camping area or inside the buildings that they illegally entered and took over.
When it comes time for the Tea Party to stage a demonstration or a protest, they go to the Town Hall, get a permit, PAY THE FEE, hold the protest, follow the rules and laws of the location in regards to where, when, and how long they can LAWFULLY assemble, and then leave. When they leave, they don't leave a mess behind them for the town to clean up.
On the other hand, when the "Occupy" groups decides it's time to protest, they show up at a location without getting any needed permits, set up camp whether the local laws prohibit it or not, impede the flow of traffic into local businesses and drive some of them out of business (like the coffee shop in NYC), trash the area that they camp in, use the bushes as bathrooms, and ignore orders from the police to depart when the city administration finally decides to ENFORCE THE LAW and throw them out. When the cops show up there's violence because the "Occupy" protesters refuse to leave, saying it's their "Constitutional right" to be there, which forces the police to move in and use force to evict them - which results in arrests. Then, once it's all over, the city is stuck cleaning up the mess that the protesters left behind.
BIG difference between the two groups, huh? And oh, yeah, about that "Constitutional right" to be there? Well, that right stops the moment you break a law, including the one that says overnight camping is illegal and/or an order to disperse from the police because you're there without a permit as required by local law. And at that point you are no longer "peaceably assembled" as the Constitution says you have the right to do, so that right no longer applies.
And the really sad thing about all this is that the "Occupy" protesters had a good idea - at first. I'm all in favor of free enterprise, but I'm also vehemently opposed to corporate greed - which is what the original "Occupy Wall Street" protest was all about. They had the right idea and they had the nation's attention, all for the right reasons - and then they ruined it when they failed to realize that it was time to go home. Instead of being a poignant statement, their protest became a joke and an embarrassment, and it only got worse with each successive "Occupy" protest. Obviously the liberals in the "Occupy" movement aren't as smart as their European counterparts, who knew when it was time to quit protesting and go home.
Now, it's to the point where the absolute best thing the liberals in the "Occupy" movement could do is to just stop protesting and move on to another strategy - but I ain't holding my breath.
They are, truly, "Rebels Without A Clue."
IHC
Sunday, January 29, 2012
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
More Empty Promises from The Great Pretender
I had a friend of mine send me an e-mail last night in which she asked me if I had watched the State of the Union address given by The Great Pretender. My reply to her was NO, I hadn't watched it and had no intention of doing so EVER. Just the mere sight of the man makes my stomach turn, and the sound of his voice would be just too much for me to bear. So no, I didn't watch the address last night, but the first thing I did this morning was read the transcript of the address. It takes less time since I don't have to sit through the applause by all of the Kool-Aid drinking simpleton liberals in Congress who think this buffoon is the greatest thing since sliced bread, and I can go back and re-read something if I need to.
And trust me, I needed to several times. Here's why.
First and foremost, NObama has been very quick to lay the blame for his failures on the shoulders of his predecessor, yet he is just as quick to take the credit for things that his predecessor either did or set in motion. He did this with the killing of Osama bin Laden in May, and he did it again last night when he mentioned the bailout of the American auto makers. He took credit for killing bin Laden when it was actually his predecessor, George W. Bush, who set the wheels in motion; NObama just happened to be the sitting President when it finally happened. And last night NObama took credit for "saving" the American auto industry by bailing out Ford, Chevy and Chrysler when in fact it was George W. Bush who first gave the auto makers the bailout; NObama simply added more money to it when the original bailout wasn't enough.
But the really disturbing thing about this claim is that part of it is an out-and-out lie, although I'm sure NObama believes it. The fact of the matter is that Ford never took a bailout; they were offered but refused, pulling through all by themselves without Federal assistance. So for NObama to claim that ANYONE bailed out and "saved" Ford is simply wrong, period. One would think that the sitting President would be smarter than to make claims such as this which can easily be proven to be a lie, but then again his whole administration has been nothing but one great big lie from the start - so why should we expect anything less?
Another thing about this speech was that it sounded more like a campaign speech than it did a State of the Union address. Correct me if I'm wrong, but a "State of the Union" address should tell us how the county is doing and why - or why not. That's not what we got last night - what we got was a campaign speech containing yet more empty promises of things he intends to do. And only then IF he gets re-elected, because any fifth grader with a calculator can tell you that NObama only has 11 months left in office, and that's not enough time to do anything of any significance, much less deliver on the promises he made last night.
And speaking of not being able to deliver, NObama hasn't been able to get Congress to pass a budget in THREE YEARS, even when the Congress was Demoncratically controlled before the Republican takeover of 2010, so why in the hell should we believe that he's gonna be able to get them to do half of the stuff he told us he was going to do last night? Unless he intends to violate the Constitution - AGAIN - and do it by Executive Decree, the answer is that he can't. Like I said, more broken promises in a meaningless campaign speech.
Then there's the direct threat he made to the Republican party in Congress. This took place when he said, "I will meet opposition with action" when referring to the grand and glorious plans he wants to set in motion. So just what, exactly, does he plan to do when Congress shoots down his proposals? Take away their lunch money? Berate them with harsh language? Or use the provisions of the NDAA that he just signed into law to label them as "suspected terrorists" and lock them away until he's out of office? The truth of the matter is that the ONLY thing he'll be able to do is piss and moan about how the mean old Republicans won't play by his rules; other than that, he can't do a damned thing - and he knows it. If not, he's dumber than I think he is.
He also tells everyone that he's tired of the inability of Congress to get things done, stating that they need to stop acting like Demoncrats or Republicans and start acting like Congressmen. Then in almost the very next breath he states, "I am a Democrat" and then proceeds to tell the Republicans that they need to do things HIS way in order for him to really believe that they're "cooperating." So much for everyone stopping being a Demoncrat or a Republican. This is a President who thinks that the Republicans are "right" and "cooperating" with him only when they do things the way HE thinks they should be done - and each time he does this, his lack of leaderhip ability and experience shines through like the sun.
Lastly, he talks about wanting to create jobs, get America back to work, and end our dependency on foreign oil. This, right after he vetoes the pipeline bill that would have contributed to all three - yet he wants us to believe what he told us last night.
In a pig's ass.
I published something a year or two ago called, "The Real Barack Obama," and now that The Great Pretender has been in office for three years that article is more relevant than ever. At the time it first came out it was nothing more than a set of predictions based on an analysis, but after three disastrous years as President, NObama has proven all of the predictions to be right on the money. This man is an egomaniac, a power-hungry man who is intent on doing things his way no matter what, even if it means destroying everything around him in the process. As long as HE gets HIS way, everything else is secondary.
In my humble opinion, Barack Hussein Obama is the biggest threat to our nation today, bar none.
And come November, I'm going to do my part to kick his skinny ass right out of the Oval Office by voting against him.
IHC
And trust me, I needed to several times. Here's why.
First and foremost, NObama has been very quick to lay the blame for his failures on the shoulders of his predecessor, yet he is just as quick to take the credit for things that his predecessor either did or set in motion. He did this with the killing of Osama bin Laden in May, and he did it again last night when he mentioned the bailout of the American auto makers. He took credit for killing bin Laden when it was actually his predecessor, George W. Bush, who set the wheels in motion; NObama just happened to be the sitting President when it finally happened. And last night NObama took credit for "saving" the American auto industry by bailing out Ford, Chevy and Chrysler when in fact it was George W. Bush who first gave the auto makers the bailout; NObama simply added more money to it when the original bailout wasn't enough.
But the really disturbing thing about this claim is that part of it is an out-and-out lie, although I'm sure NObama believes it. The fact of the matter is that Ford never took a bailout; they were offered but refused, pulling through all by themselves without Federal assistance. So for NObama to claim that ANYONE bailed out and "saved" Ford is simply wrong, period. One would think that the sitting President would be smarter than to make claims such as this which can easily be proven to be a lie, but then again his whole administration has been nothing but one great big lie from the start - so why should we expect anything less?
Another thing about this speech was that it sounded more like a campaign speech than it did a State of the Union address. Correct me if I'm wrong, but a "State of the Union" address should tell us how the county is doing and why - or why not. That's not what we got last night - what we got was a campaign speech containing yet more empty promises of things he intends to do. And only then IF he gets re-elected, because any fifth grader with a calculator can tell you that NObama only has 11 months left in office, and that's not enough time to do anything of any significance, much less deliver on the promises he made last night.
And speaking of not being able to deliver, NObama hasn't been able to get Congress to pass a budget in THREE YEARS, even when the Congress was Demoncratically controlled before the Republican takeover of 2010, so why in the hell should we believe that he's gonna be able to get them to do half of the stuff he told us he was going to do last night? Unless he intends to violate the Constitution - AGAIN - and do it by Executive Decree, the answer is that he can't. Like I said, more broken promises in a meaningless campaign speech.
Then there's the direct threat he made to the Republican party in Congress. This took place when he said, "I will meet opposition with action" when referring to the grand and glorious plans he wants to set in motion. So just what, exactly, does he plan to do when Congress shoots down his proposals? Take away their lunch money? Berate them with harsh language? Or use the provisions of the NDAA that he just signed into law to label them as "suspected terrorists" and lock them away until he's out of office? The truth of the matter is that the ONLY thing he'll be able to do is piss and moan about how the mean old Republicans won't play by his rules; other than that, he can't do a damned thing - and he knows it. If not, he's dumber than I think he is.
He also tells everyone that he's tired of the inability of Congress to get things done, stating that they need to stop acting like Demoncrats or Republicans and start acting like Congressmen. Then in almost the very next breath he states, "I am a Democrat" and then proceeds to tell the Republicans that they need to do things HIS way in order for him to really believe that they're "cooperating." So much for everyone stopping being a Demoncrat or a Republican. This is a President who thinks that the Republicans are "right" and "cooperating" with him only when they do things the way HE thinks they should be done - and each time he does this, his lack of leaderhip ability and experience shines through like the sun.
Lastly, he talks about wanting to create jobs, get America back to work, and end our dependency on foreign oil. This, right after he vetoes the pipeline bill that would have contributed to all three - yet he wants us to believe what he told us last night.
In a pig's ass.
I published something a year or two ago called, "The Real Barack Obama," and now that The Great Pretender has been in office for three years that article is more relevant than ever. At the time it first came out it was nothing more than a set of predictions based on an analysis, but after three disastrous years as President, NObama has proven all of the predictions to be right on the money. This man is an egomaniac, a power-hungry man who is intent on doing things his way no matter what, even if it means destroying everything around him in the process. As long as HE gets HIS way, everything else is secondary.
In my humble opinion, Barack Hussein Obama is the biggest threat to our nation today, bar none.
And come November, I'm going to do my part to kick his skinny ass right out of the Oval Office by voting against him.
IHC
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)