Wednesday, November 26, 2008

The Americans with No Abilities Act.

This was first printed on Moonbattery.com see the original here.

Here's a surprise: Snopes.com says the Americans With No Abilities Act isn't on the level:
WASHINGTON , DC — Congress is considering sweeping legislation which will provide new benefits for many Americans. The Americans With No Abilities Act (AWNAA) is being hailed as a major legislative goal by advocates of the millions of Americans who lack any real skills or ambition.

"Roughly 50 percent of Americans do not possess the competence and drive necessary to carve out a meaningful role for themselves in society," said California Senator Barbara Boxer. "We can no longer stand by and allow People of Inability to be ridiculed and passed over. With this legislation, employers will no longer be able to grant special favors to a small group of workers, simply because they have some idea of what they are doing."

In a Capitol Hill press conference, House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid pointed to the success of the U.S. Postal Service, which has a long-standing policy of providing opportunity without regard to performance. Approximately 74 percent of postal employees lack any job skills, making this agency the single largest U.S. employer of Persons of Inability. … At the state government level, the Department of Motor Vehicles also has a great record of hiring Persons of Inability (63%).

Under the Americans With No Abilities Act, more than 25 million "middle man" positions will be created, with important-sounding titles but little real responsibility, thus providing an illusory sense of purpose and performance.

Mandatory non-performance-based raises and promotions will be given, to guarantee upward mobility for even the most unremarkable employees. The legislation provides substantial tax breaks to corporations that promote a significant number of Persons of Inability into middle-management positions, and gives a tax credit to small and medium-sized businesses that agree to hire one clueless worker for every two talented hires.

Finally, the AWNA Act contains tough new measures to make it more difficult to discriminate against the Non-abled — banning, for example, discriminatory interview questions such as "Do you have any skills or experience which relate to this job?"

"As a Non-abled person, I can't be expected to keep up with people who have something going for them," said Mary Lou Gertz, who lost her position as a lug-nut twister at the GM plant in Flint , Michigan , due to her lack of any discernible job skills. "This new law should really help people like me." With the passage of this bill, Gertz and millions of other untalented citizens will finally see a light at the end of the tunnel.

Said Senator Ted Kennedy: "As a Senator With No Abilities, I believe the same privileges that elected officials enjoy ought to be extended to every American with no abilities. It is our duty as lawmakers to provide each and every American citizen, regardless of his or her adequacy, with some sort of space to take up in this great nation."

How crestfallen persons of inability must be to learn this invitation to Hope was a hoax. But it looks like the AWNA Act won't be needed anyway. After the government has finished nationalizing the banking and automotive industries, and then moves on to healthcare, there will be vast sectors of the economy run like the post office, the DMV, and public schools, where ability is irrelevant.

Monday, November 3, 2008

What's at stake

Beginning at 6:00 am tomorrow morning, we once again make our grand migration to the polling places in a process that we as Americans have come to take for granted. Another Presidential election, another Senate seat, another Congressional seat and here we are again, with the same old song and dance. Ladies and Gentlemen, I tell you that this is more important than just the same old routine. There are things at stake that can greatly impact our lives.

Let us begin in the 6th congressional district, right here in the Baton Rouge area. Don "Cash in on you" has been making the same lofty promises and statements that he made a few months ago when he promised to be a "conservative Democrat". That's all well and good, but his record shows that he has been every bit as liberal as we feared. He's voted against offshore drilling. He's been the deciding vote to allow cogress to adjourn without addressing the energy crisis. He's voted time and again for government programs and tax increases. Worst of all, he's been one of the driving forces behind the card check program, a law that would strip American workers of the right to a secret ballot when voting on unionization and union matters. Let's top all of this with the fact that he has endorsed Barack Hussein Obama.

In the Senate races, we have Mary Laveau , er, I mean Landrieu, who has trumpeted herself on WJBO this very evening as a centrist. A hard worker that gets things done to er, for, Louisiana. Still, in twelve years in the United States Senate, she has performed as, not a centrist, but a liberal. Granted, her official liberal rating as of 2007 was only 53.2%, still her up-to-date voting records show that she has voted on party lines with Barack Obama 81% of the time. She is a proponant of Hate Crimes legislation, marking offenses as more severe based on race creed and faith. She favors human cloning. All of this added to the fact that she is on the list of the top twenty most corrupt members of Congress published by CREW, in fact, she comes in just behind William Jefferson and his cold hard cash. For a full report on the bribery acceptance allegation against our dear Senator, try this link. Oh, and by the way, she has endorsed and was endorsed by, Barack Huussein Obama.

Now we come to the meat of my point. The Presidential race. Senator Obama has proposed a number of items that are a real threat to our way of life. Let's just lay out a few facts. I cannot take credit for this chart. It was created by a gentleman named Aaron Robichaux. He and his wife run a lawn care and landscaping business here in Louisiana. He took the time to do the math, and the research to tell us just who Barack Obama and John McCain are:



























































































































ISSUE


JOHN McCAIN OBAMA
Favors new drilling offshore US Yes No
Will appoint judges who interpret the law not make it Yes No
Served in the
US Armed Forces
Yes No
Amount of time served in the US Senate 22 YEARS 173 DAYS
Will institute a socialized national health care plan No Yes
Supports abortion throughout the pregnancy No Yes
Would pull troops out of
Iraq immediately
No Yes
Supports gun ownership rights Yes No
Supports homosexual marriage No Yes
Proposed programs will mean a huge tax increase No Yes
Voted against making English the official language No Yes
Voted to give Social Security benefits to illegals No Yes
CAPITAL GAINS TAX
McCAIN 0% on home sales up to $500,000 per home (couples).
McCain does not propose any change in existing home sales income tax.
OBAMA 28% on profit from ALL home sales.
How does this affect you? If you sell your home and make a profit, you will pay 28% of your gain on taxes.
If you are heading toward retirement and would like to down-size your home or move into a retirement community,
28% of the money you make from your home sale will go to taxes.
This proposal will adversely affect the elderly who are counting on income from their homes as part of their retirement income.

DIVIDEND TAX
McCAIN 15% (no change)
OBAMA 39.6%
How will this affect you? If you have money invested in stock market, IRA, mutual funds, college funds, life insurance,
retirement accounts, or anything that pays or reinvests dividends, you will be paying nearly 40% of the money earned
on taxes if Obama becomes president. The experts predict that 'Higher tax rates on dividends and capital gains would
crash the stock market, yet do absolutely nothing to cut the deficit.'
INCOME TAX
McCAIN
(No changes)
Income Tax
Single, 30K $ 4,500
Single, 50K $12,500
Single, 75K $18,750
Married, 60K $ 9,000
Married, 75K $18,750
Married, 125K $31,250
OBAMA
(reversion to pre-Bush tax cuts)
Single, 30K $ 8,400
Single, 50K $14,000
Single, 75K $23,250
Married, 60K $16,800
Married, 75K $21,000
Married, 125K $38,750

Under Obama, your taxes could almost double!
INHERITANCE TAX
McCAIN - 0% (No change, Bush repealed this tax)
OBAMA Restore the inheritance tax
Many families lost businesses, farms, ranches, and homes that have been in their families for generations

because they could not afford the inheritance tax. Those willing their assets to loved ones will lose them to these taxes.
NEW TAXES PROPOSED BY OBAMA
New government taxes proposed on homes more than 2,400 square feet.
New gasoline taxes (as if gas weren't high enough already)
New taxes on natural resources consumption (heating gas, water, electricity)
New taxes on retirement accounts, and last but not least....
New taxes to pay for socialized medicine so we can receive the same level of medical care as other third-world countries!!!

All of these things are frightening. We should bear in mind as we go to the polls that a vote for any of the three of these individuals is permission for them to implement this kind of "change". Higher taxes, more government programs, that's change we can believe in. Personally, I believe I'll be voting McCain, Kennedy, Cassidy.

Wednesday, October 22, 2008

Who was that masked man?

"There is not a truth existing which I fear or would wish unknown to the whole world." -Thomas Jefferson


When it comes to the subject of Barrack Hussein Obama, the media is somewhat mum on some very important issues. November 4th is less than two weeks away, and I find myself appalled at some of the things that America is not being told about one of our presidential candidates. I would think that part of the job of the news media would be to fully, and I mean fully, vetting our candidates. Instead, it falls to those of us who dig through the news to find the information that is left behind, to do the job. There are some truly troubling associations in Senator Obama's life that are being glossed over. Names you've heard, but have not been told much about. It's time to change that, after all, change is what the Obama campaign is all about, right?

I heard a joke told the other day. "How are Barrack Obama and Osama Bin Laden alike? They both have friends that attacked the pentagon." I couldn't even bring myself to laugh, because it is not a laughing matter. Barrack Obama served on the board of the Woods Foundation, with William Ayers. Their relationship was described as "friendly" by a member of the Obama campaign. Who is William Ayers, you ask? He was a member, along with his wife, Bernadine Dohrn, of the "weather underground", a group that is responsible for attacks, not just on the pentagon, but also on New York Police Headquarters. He is a domestic terrorist. William Ayers is the forerunner of Timothy McVeigh.

I know that this is a bold statement, but let us look at Mr. Ayers own words. ''I don't regret setting bombs,'' Bill Ayers said. ''I feel we didn't do enough.''. Now for a nauseating bit of irony, the article is from the New York Times dated September 11, 2001. It was a statement made by Ayers to promote his book Fugitive days. Can you imagine reading those words moments before the airplane attacks? Does it not make you ill? It should! The actions of Ayers and Dohrn are no less reprehensible, and Obama is "friendly" with this man! In fact, according to the politico, Obama started his political career with a pilgrimage to Ayers home in Chicago.

For nearly twenty years, Obama was a member of the Trinity United Church of Christ. His pastor was the controversial Rev. Jeremiah Wright, a man noted for his "Afro-centric theology". Rev. Wright was famously quoted after the September 11th attacks saying, "no, no, no! Not God Bless America, God Damn America! That's in the Bible! For killing innocent people!" He also stated that "America's chickens were coming home to roost!" What sort of message is that from the pulpit of a church! Does that glorify God? Most decidedly not! Neither does this "Black Values System" which, you will not, comes directly from Trinity United's own web site.

What about ACORN? The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. Barrack Obama's executive experience comes from being a "Community Organizer." He worked closely with ACORN. In fact, according to the Pittsburg Tribune-Review's Dateline DC column of January 14, 2007, "Since he graduated from law school, Obama's work with ACORN and the Midwest Academy has ranged from training and fundraising, to legal representation and promoting their work.” This is the same Barrack Obama that said last week that he never worked with ACORN, and also the same Barrack Obama whose campaign donated over $800,000.00 to ACORN during the primary season. Might I take this moment to point out that ACORN is under federal investigation for voter fraud during a scandal which has shown the entire offensive line for the Dallas Cowboys to be registered to vote both in Dallas and in Las Vegas, and one Mr. Mickey Mouse registered in Orlando?

I once believed that Obama was an empty suit that was being used by these people and organizations to push their agenda because of his charisma. More disturbing to me is the finding recently by National Review that these ideals truly belong to Obama, and he sought out THESE people and organizations to get his ideals off of the ground. A terrorist, a racist under the guise of a minister, and an organized fraud machine? Not to mention a slum lord like Tony Rezko. These are people that advance Obama's ideals? Ideals like "I'm glad we bombed those places, we didn't do enough" (Ayers), "God Damn America. The US of KKK A" (Wright). Are these Obama's ideals? We'll never know, because those who have a responsibility to illuminate us on such things are keeping quiet on his ideas. Who is the man behind the message of Hope and Change? Don't look too deeply. After all, that's the same message that got a man named Adolf Hitler elected chancellor of Germany.

 

Sunday, September 28, 2008

The Audacity of Hype

A co-worker of mine pointed out this article from Moonbettery.com that contains some frightening information about the Obama campaign. It's not enough that his supporters will believe anything he says, and it's not enough that the media has thrown everything they have behind him, but now he want law enforcement to regulate what is said about him. What will he do if he actually gets elected?!

Saturday, August 23, 2008

Obama - Biden


Ladies and gentlemen, the announcement has been made. Your great saviour, Barack (Middle name omitted for the sake of political correctness) Obama has chosen his running mate. At 2:00pm our time. He will announce Delaware Senator Joseph Biden as his partner on the Democratic Ticket. Really? Really, Barack? Joe Biden? Really?

Let’s take a look at some of the things that Senator Biden has said in the past, starting with this statement prior to one of the Presidential debates earlier this year. When asked if Barack Obama was ready to be President, Senator Biden said “I think he can be ready, but not yet. The White House is not the place for on the job training.” He then followed that up at the debate when asked about his quote by saying, “I stand by my statement.” Well Mr. Biden, do you stand by it now, or has the political wind changed to the point that you’ve grasped at a once in a lifetime opportunity? Let’s be frank here. Senator Obama is bad enough about his politically expedient answers. Do we really need his running mate to continue with the same theme?

Maybe Obama just wanted people to add some foreign policy sense to the ticket. Okay, how about this gem by Senator Biden. “I support immediate financial assistance to the newly elected Palestinian president. Now, I don't know what those numbers will be, and I don't know how it's going to be framed.” It’s bad enough that he’s itching to send American dollars overseas, but the newly elected Palestinian president was a member of the terrorist organization Hamas. Hamas! Senator Biden wanted to fund this man with American money? How does THAT benefit national security? What kind of message does it send to our long time ally, Israel? How do you think the American people would react if they thought you were trying to use their tax dollars to prop up a terrorist? That’s exactly what you were doing!

The Vice Presidential nomination is usually used to help balance out a presidential ticket. Has this pick done so? Well, according to National Journal's rankingsno. Obama was rated as having the most liberal voting record in the Senate, and Biden came it at number three. Only Rhode Island Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse was in between them. With this ticket, and a Democratic controlled congress, America would lean so far to the left that it would tip over into Socialism., and that’s not exaggeration. Take a look at the programs and taxes proposed by the Saviour Obama, and you’ll see redistribution of wealth, class envy, and government handouts. This is not the direction that America needs, and it is most certainly NOT change we can believe in. no. Obama was rated as having the most liberal voting record in the Senate, and Biden came it at number three. Only Rhode Island Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse was in between them. With this ticket, and a Democratic controlled congress, America would lean so far to the left that it would tip over into Socialism., and that’s not exaggeration. Take a look at the programs and taxes proposed by the Saviour Obama, and you’ll see redistribution of wealth, class envy, and government handouts. This is not the direction that America needs, and it is most certainly NOT change we can believe in.

Monday, August 4, 2008

Mary and Mary's friend Ken...

I wrote recently about our dear Senator Marie Laveau, er, Mary Landrieu, and her friend Sen. Salazar. Senator Laveau could have cast the deciding vote in comittee that lead to the extraction of crude oil from oil shale in Colorado. That said, this gentleman, Sen. Salazar, persuaded her to adhere to party lines and vote it down. This is his position on price at the pump, versus drilling.

Ken Salazar on Offshore drilling

Thanks again, Mary. You've served us well...or not.

Wednesday, July 30, 2008

Breakfast with Senator Cassidy

On Saturday, July 19th, I had the chance to sit down with State Senator William Cassidy, candidate for Congress in the 6th congressional district. The Senator and I talked over the issues at Louie's near LSU.

Louisiana Conservative: First of all, Good Morning, Senator. I’m glad we got this opportunity to sit down and talk. We’re all looking forward to watching you make this run for Congress. I just have a few questions that are on the minds of a lot of people, starting right off with one of the big “hot button issues” of the day, and that’s energy. On both sides of the aisle there are a lot of questions being asked. Some support drilling off the coast, in ANWR and anywhere that we can produce more oil, while others hesitate to drill, preferring different means. What do you think about this issue?

Senator William Cassidy: We should expand drilling. We should open up areas that are currently closed. The idea that we can encourage some states by revenue sharing is a good idea. Another thing, we also know that we can now drill in environmentally sensitive areas without the same risk of pollution that once existed. After Katrina, the losses that occurred from oil spillage were not from the rigs, it was from storage tanks floating up, it was from old infrastructure that leaked. We’re talking about new areas; we’re talking about newer infrastructure that further minimizes the risk. In a way, that benefits Louisiana. We know that in Louisiana we’re going to supply a lot of those off-shore oil drilling platforms. Our core competency includes building boats for off-shore oil, building rigs, Louisiana people to do the work and to teach others to work on the rigs. So, not only is it good for our country, it’s good for our state.

LC: One of the other areas that people are feeling the energy crunch is in the price of electricity. Another dividing issue here is nuclear energy. Where do you stand on that?

WC: Isn’t it ironic that nuclear energy has become the green energy? No carbon footprints. That’s the interesting thing about it. So, the reality is the regulatory problem with building a nuclear plant is such that it’s not feasible. We’ve got to improve the regulatory environment so that we’re able to build nuclear without pricing it out. We need to invest in it. France? Eighty percent of their electricity comes from nuclear energy. They ship electricity to the surrounding countries. They’ve clearly made a tremendous impact on the consumption of fossil fuels. We should encourage that.

LC: Being a physician yourself, these next two questions, you would seem uniquely qualified to answer. Where, in your opinion, does life begin?

WC: In utero. I’m pro-life. Life begins in utero. In some ways we acknowledge that in our laws, and in some ways we don’t. Clearly this is a problem that society has to work on, and it’s going to be hard; but, I’m an optimistic person and I’m optimistic that even people who are pro-choice say they want to limit abortion, and that shows we’ve won the moral argument. Everyone agrees that it’s not a good thing, now it’s just “how do we stop it.”

LC: The second question is that of our health care system. You hear a great deal about nationalizing the health care system. Is this really a good idea?

WC:I work for a government run health care system. I’ve been doing it for twenty years. It gives me an opportunity to serve people who are uninsured. Having said that, most of the people I treat are uninsured. People vote with their feet and move to the private sector. The private sector has been able to respond more quickly and to meet patient needs more effectively. I am strongly in favor of maintaining a privately run health care system.

LC:Some of the folks that I have talked to are particularly concerned that Congress will not renew the tax cuts that President Bush put into place. Do you feel that they should be made permanent?

WC:The power to tax is the power to destroy. If you raise taxes, you decrease productivity. That’s the bottom line. It’s always fool’s gold. You think that if you raise taxes, you’ll increase government revenue and reduce government deficits. No one likes government deficits. The fact is, though, that you reduce productivity and tax receipts are going to go down. John F. Kennedy put it best, “Times of recession are times that you decrease taxes.” George H.W. Bush did it wrong. Just as we were coming out of a recession, he increased taxes. When he did so, we deepened our recession and he lost his Presidency. So history as a guide, we should not increase those tax rates.

LC:With the reduction of taxes comes the question of spending. If we reduce the rate of tax money coming in, should we not also reduce the amount of money going out?

WC:Absolutely. Earmarks get a lot of attention. It’s kind of like going backpacking with the scouts. My son is a scout. They say, “If you watch the ounces, the pounds take care of themselves.” So with earmarks, it’s a substantial amount of money, but people say it’s a small percentage of the budget. If you’re so conscious that “this is an earmark and we don’t have the money. We have to watch that penny.” If you watch the pennies, the dollars take care of themselves. Or in the federal government you might say, if you watch the millions, the billions will be taken care of. So, we need to be so conscious about it. Not just the earmarks, but the new entitlements, etcetera. If we can’t pay for it, we shouldn’t do it.

LC:Talk radio is very near and dear to my heart, because it’s so close to what I do here. I hear a great deal on talk radio about the “fairness” doctrine. How do you feel about it?

WC:Well the fairness doctrine is obviously a return to a time when the regulated airwaves had to have equal time for different candidates. Clearly that didn’t prevent newscasters from expressing their personal opinion in subtle ways, or presenting a particular candidate in a positive or negative fashion. The fact is, with the diversity of media we have now, the fairness doctrine seems like an old legal doctrine that doesn’t need to apply to the radio waves, or the print media, or the internet. My gosh, if you can’t be on the internet now with your particular viewpoint, then you don’t have any sense of how to use technology.

LC:I just have one more major question for you, and it has been a major issue for several years. Things in Iraq seem to be starting to ease up. How do you feel about what’s going on there, and how it has been handled?

WC:Wow. It’s interesting. The Democrats have been saying that the surge wouldn’t work. The surge clearly has worked. Now they’re saying we were wrong on that, but we’ll be right on the next step. Whatever your feelings about the beginning of the war, the fact is; we’re in there now, and the surge worked. Also, I saw in the paper this morning that President Bush is announcing a plan for ultimate troop withdrawal. We’ve done that while stabilizing the country and theoretically bringing its oil supply back online for the short term future. If we’re successful, what will emerge is a country that is a bulwark against terrorism. So, our troops should be home as soon as possible, but not a day too soon. The surge has worked, and to say that we’ll have the troops home in six months no matter what is a foolish policy.

LC:Senator, I really appreciate you time today, it has been an honor and a privilege.

WC:Thanks, I enjoyed it.