Showing posts with label Democrats. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Democrats. Show all posts

Wednesday, September 7, 2022

Where the Leftist Central Planners Want to Force Us To Go

While small businesses, including restaurants, were locked down by government force, Democratic California Governor Gavin Newsom partied with a group at an expensive restaurant. The California Democrats have decreed gasoline-powered automobiles won't be sold in California in a little over a decade from now, while the state's power infrastructure can't handle current demand for electricity. In the county of Los Angeles, freeways can't handle existing traffic, but the "road fund" is regularly spent on buses, rail, and non-transportation projects and programs.

What the Leftist Democrats are doing in California - which they'd love to take national - might not make sense to someone who has common sense, who doesn't seek to control others. But what the power-hungry social engineering central planners are doing makes sense when you realize what they want, and they've publicly said so and/or demonstrated, is to:
  • Install most of our children into government-controlled institutions from six weeks of age into their twenties.
  • Get those children dependent on government for most of their meals, served at or distributed by the schools.
  • Move most of us into large apartment buildings, especially ones with commercial space on the first level or three.
  • Ensure those apartment units will have water and power controlled and limited by remote, and waste (like the trash you throw away) controlled, limited, and analyzed.
  • Force us out of automobiles we control into government-run mass transit.
  • Discourage entrepreneurship and small businesses so that we're all working for government or large businesses, which can be more easily controlled by government, or dependent on government redistribution of money.
  • Get most of us dependent on the state for health care.
  • Disarm private citizens when it comes to defending themselves, their family, or their property.
We can see this at the state level and with the counties and cities of San Francisco and Los Angeles. They are constantly seeking to make government bigger, more intrusive, and more controlling, and get as many of us dependent on government as they can.

They hate liberty for anyone other than their own little clique.

Resist Leftism. Defeat Leftism. Defend Liberty.

Thursday, June 9, 2022

Political Theater

Tonight, a round of performative, propagandistic, political theater kicks off, scheduled for "prime time" specifically because it is theater. It isn't an attempt to get to the truth and hold criminals accountable. Rather, it's a mere partisan political skit.

The political party that encouraged, enabled, and excused rioting and looting for months on end, that has left our borders wide open and encouraged illegal border traffic, that wants non-citizens voting, that colluded to push hoax after hoax, lie after lie, and a doomed impeachment to undermine a legitimately elected President whose success is an ongoing embarrassment in comparison the disastrous failures of, and restrictions placed on the American people by, the current President.

With all of the problems going on - war in Europe, inflation, crimes, baby formula shortages, supply chain disruptions, bare shelves, record gasoline prices, loss of energy independence, threats to "conservative" Supreme Court Justices, border failures, drug deaths, stock market struggles - they are intentionally wasting time and redirecting attention out of desperation. 

While an extremely tiny percentage of the people at the Capitol on January 6, 2020 engaged in shameful, destructive behavior, it can hardly be called an attempted coup or insurrection. People on the Right own many firearms; they didn't bring them to the Capitol that day. Because it wasn't an organized attempt at insurrection or a coup.

Instead of this symbolic performance, people are better of watching something else.

UPDATE: Michael Medved keeps asking, rhetorically, what President Trump thought was going to happen when he encouraged his supporters to march (peacefully, as Medved usually leaves out) to the Capitol after he spoke to them on January 6, 2021.

Well, Medved, how many marches on the Capitol have there been? What did the people who called for those protests think was going to happen? It's called PROTEST.

There were many thousands (tens of thousands?) of people there while he was speaking, and the crowd he was speaking to was peaceful.

Please, Medved. Stop unquestioningly accepting the narratives of the Left and swamp-dwelling Democrats. You may have been in Seattle a little too long. And how about focusing on the bad things Democrats are doing? There's plenty to talk about. If you want your terrestrial radio show to be the method for shaping the GOP into what you want it to be, why should most people bother listening?

Wednesday, May 11, 2022

A Safe and Reliable Water Supply is a Basic Element of Civilization

The Leftist Democrats controlling California and Los Angeles county are failing again. They are failing at some basic, core responsibilities.

Despite people literally fleeing the state, there is again a water "shortage" and residents are yet again being told to reduce their water usage.

Ever look west? California, including Los Angeles county, is on the world's largest body of water.

There isn't a shortage of water. There's a shortage of competent, dedicated service to the residents of California by people who are supposed to be public servants.

The Leftists running the state will blame "climate change" for their failure.

Hogwash.

Wednesday, February 2, 2022

Capital Punishment Is Justice

It is justice for some murderers to receive capital punishment; to be put to death.

Here in California, the voters have repeatedly supported this.

Many other states and the federal government carry out such sentences, yet in California, with almost 700 murderers on "Death Row," we haven't had an execution since 2006.

Our current Governor, Hairdo McGungrabber (a.k.a. Gavin Newsom), has made it clear he will not sign off on any execution. He has actively tried to ensure there will never be another execution in California.

For each person on Death Row, there was at least one person, and quite often many, who were murdered; some very painfully. Then their surviving loved ones were put through the anguish of an investigation and a trial. The murderer always or almost always denied their guilt rather than taking responsibility and apologizing, but the evidence was overwhelming. Our fellow citizens had to sit through jury duty for a trial and the penalty phase, usually being exposed to gruesome crime scene photos. They struggled and then recommended capital punishment with all twelve jurors agreeing. Then a judge considered everything and agreed.

The just thing would be to execute every person on Death Row.

Premeditated murder warrants capital punishment.

If we value human life, then premeditated murder should bring about the possibility of being punished, through due process, with execution.

It is absurd to equate a due process execution with premeditated murder. Anyone who does that reveals that they aren't serious thinkers. I understand the argument some people make that the state should not have this power, but let's be real. The state has the power to kill. If it is going to use that power at all, executing convicted murderers is a just way to use it.

The state has that power because we, the people have delegated that power to the state. The alternative is that we take it back and go back to familial clans carrying out justice.

Unfortunately, just thirteen murderers have been executed since California resumed them in the early 1990s. Which one of these shouldn't have been executed? Answer: NONE. Each one deserved it.

People like our atrocious Governor say that capital punishment isn't applied equally.

It's true that wealthy people can afford better defense teams. That's true about any crime. Shall we release all criminals from prison immediately and shut them down? (Some of the Left say yes.) What's the alternative to wealthy people having better lawyers? Requiring all defendants have a randomly assigned lawyer?

However, none of the anti-justice people can name a single one of those executed thirteen who were innocent. They were all guilty, and they all deserved to be executed.

Lethal injection isn't "cruel and unusual punishment." Some of the same people who claim it is support people who haven't murdered anyone choosing it for themselves, calling it "death with dignity." The people who wrote and adopted the "cruel and unusual" phrase into the Constitution would laugh anyone out of the room who claimed lethal injection for premeditated murder qualified as such. But I wouldn't mind going back to the way murderers were executed in the 1780s, if that's the game people want to play.

Everyone executed in California since the early 1990s, and everyone who has been on Death Row for a while, has had their cases reviewed over and over again. If they weren't guilty, that would have been discovered. Many of them have slaughtered their own spouse and children. They have morally forfeited their life.

If the state will not carry out the duty delegated to it, then the people are going to take that power back. If I'm ever on a jury in such a case, in which a family member or associate has executed a murderer, how likely do you think it will be for me to vote to convict?

I'm not alone.

Wednesday, July 21, 2021

Living Wages and Liberty with Wages

Limited-government Republicans aren't against anyone earning a living wage.

We are for individuals, regardless of their race, ethnicity, gender, religion, sexual orientation, disability, or any other personal characteristic getting paid every cent they, or their representative, can negotiate for their labor, and for working families to be able to spend more of their money how they want, rather than how someone else wants them to spend it.

Stop the invasive Big Government Politicians who increasingly want to tell women, African-Americans, Latino-Americans, LGBTQ+ Americans, disabled Americans, poor Americans, and Senior Citizens how they can and can't spend their hard-earned money and want to take more of their money away from them.

Wednesday, July 7, 2021

People Are Leaving California

For the first time in since records have been kept, which is about 120 years, people are leaving the State of California.

The population of California has literally gone down.

Really. 

This is not just a reduction in the expected increase. It isn't that California's population is growing more slowly than other states.

The actual number of California residents has decreased.

Tuesday, June 22, 2021

Understanding Terms Used by Abortion Promoters

If Roe v. Wade were to be overturned by SCOTUS, abortion law would revert back to the states. SCOTUS doesn't like to reverse itself without unanimity or at least a very strong majority.

Bet let's imagine that somehow, abortion were to become illegal somewhere in our union, with certain exceptions. It will be important to know the vocabulary of Leftist lovers of abortion. You know, like how Leftists call something a marriage even though no bride is involved, or even if no groom is involved?

You are hereby warned that the text below may contain triggers.

Tuesday, May 1, 2018

Absurdities in California

Time for the March of the Criminals and Commies again, since it is May 1. And of course it is pure coincidence that the Caravan of Wannabe Invaders came all the way to the California portion of the border and arrived at this time. Riiiiiiight. What a bunch of stupid theatrics.

Someone forgot they were supposed to be in the shadows!

Speaking of stupid cultural appropriation of kabuki theater, Larry Lopez, appearing under his stage name Nativo, is still doing a very poor imitation of Jesse Jackson. Or maybe Gloria Alred? Whichever. Larry, whose attempt to beat a criminal prosecution had him either feigning dementia eight years ago, or making a miraculous recovery since, or perhaps is still demented (I'll let you decide), made it into the Orange County Register and either the reporter was too lazy or agenda-driven to note the paper's previous coverage of Larry, or the editors decided to cover for him. It even appears to me that they have prevented comments from being made on the article.

If you're not interested, at least scroll down for a reminder that rioting has lasting negative consequences.

Monday, October 30, 2017

The State of California

[I'm bumping this up because the new gasoline tax is about to take effect.]

I was born in California and have lived my entire life in California. The state has great climate and geography, natural resources, and human resources. Unfortunately, it is ruled unchallenged by gender-confused, big government, nanny state, unionist, environut reconquistadors, or, to be redundant, Leftists. Democrats have a supermajority in the state Senate and Assembly, and our Governor is a Democrat. These are not moderate Democrats, either. They are far on the Left. Not only is San Francisco city/county led by Leftists, but so is Los Angeles County and the City of Los Angeles. L.A.’s Mayor is itching to run for Governor or even President.

Illinois is having trouble and California isn't far behind. This is what the rest of the Union faces the more Left it goes.

Here are just some of the things going on in the state right now, that are getting closer and closer to driving me and my family from our home state.

Wednesday, September 6, 2017

Without DACA Trump Will Eat Your Children!

We seem to be in a perpetual state of bad political theater, panics induced by the media-activist complex, in which each and every thing people think President Trump has done is treated like some outrage. Quite often, the objections are completely bogus or entirely partisan. Yesterday it was the bleating over DACA.

To make a long story short, DACA pertains to illegal aliens who were children when they came here, most brought by illegal alien parents. Many of them (contrary to what the mob says,  it is certainly not all) don't really know any other country as home other than the USA. That's squarely on the people who brought them here. Make no mistake about it. They are in this situation because of the people who sent or brought them here, not because of Trump. If they want to blame a politician, they should blame former President of Obama.

President Obama could have worked with his Democrat-controlled Congress to pass laws dealing with "dreamers", to give them some sort of permanent legal standing, but he didn't. Then in 2011, he correctly said it was something he couldn't do himself; Congress had to do it, because of the Constitutional separation of powers.

But in 2012 he did it himself anyway, prompting a flood of children to head for our border for a few years. It was a crises and Lord only knows how many children didn't make it or were severely abused along the way.

Obama knew damn well his unilateral Executive action was 1) unconstitutional, and 2) reversible by the next POTUS.

Most of the elected officials with their bluster in the media over the last couple of days know this, but they figure they'll rile people up anyway, and the usual activist groups are all too happy to put on a show. It's theater of the absurd. So many of these loudmouths are fakers or liars, if they're not completely ignorant of what's really going on.
It's really clear that states are going to get the courts to rule against DACA, striking it down as unconstitutional, so President Trump rightly decides to drop it and calls on Congress to pass legislation. This isn't some wild policy change, or some nefarious action. It is exactly what any President should've done. Any threat to sue President Trump over dropping DACA is an empty threat, unless someone can find a judge so bereft of integrity who is willing to issue a ruling that will be definitely be overturned.

President Trump did NOT announce that "dreamers" are going to be deported. They're all still here, you'll notice. He simply announced that he's not going to engage in the futile exercise of defending an unconstitutional order, which was supposed to be temporary anyway even according to Obama, that gives some illegal aliens privileges over others. That's it. You'd think from all of the whining that Trump had announced "dreamers" are going to be rounded up and tortured to death.

Hey, I get it. People were fleeing hellholes of corruption, crime, failed big government, and poverty and felt like they didn't have time to waste, so rather than dealing with the hassles of our legal immigration system, people came here or sent their kids here, and so you have these people who came here as kids because they didn't have a choice in the matter and are now adults with "illegal alien" status, and most of them have been socialized as Americans, and they want to go to school here, work here, etc. and being illegal aliens makes that problematic, and especially if they have to go back to their country of origin (which is unlikely unless they've been really bad criminals), it'll be a real mess for them. I understand. It sucks.

But this attitude of entitlement-that-must-not-be-questioned needs to be dropped. There are still consequences to doing things outside the law. If your parents stole a bicycle, gave it to you, and you got used to riding it, it is still your parents' fault, not the police officer, if you have trouble claiming that bike as your own.

This idea that Americas are all supposed to bend over backwards because the parents of these kids did things outside of the law is insulting. Yeah, it would be a nice thing to do to pass legislation to allow "dreamers" with clean records to stay permanently (but NOT allowing them any edge over legal immigrants and naturalized citizens). But that shouldn't be tried until the border is secure, or we'll get another flood of children being shoved across the border.

You should listen to the audio linked at the ends of this entry (if it is still there) for a good overview of what has really happened when it comes to DACA.

A few other thoughts:

Anyone who refuses to distinguish between naturalized citizens and legal immigrants on one hand, and illegal aliens on the other, can't be taken seriously when it comes to matters of law.

Saying that "dreamers" or any illegal aliens commit crimes as low rates should be answered with "They wouldn't commit any crimes here if they weren't here!!!"

What's with people using the line "But these young people don't know these countries they'd be sent back to!" First of all, very few of them are going to be sent back to those countries. Secondly, they didn't know this country when their parents dragged them here. Nobody mentions that. The difference is they are adults now and have some control over their own lives.

Then there are the people who say today's American "whites" can be held liable for the evils of the past, but these "dreamers" shouldn't suffer for parental crimes

And notice some people pleading to keep DACA make it sound like Mexico and other countries are awful places. I thought it was racist to do that? At least according to them.

While some of these "dreamers" have jobs right now, that might not always be the case. After all, some of them might think marriage unites a bride and groom, or that men and women are different, or that men can't become women and vice-versa, which according to many people makes someone unfit for employment. So maybe they should all be quizzed before being granted immunity from deportation?

The 14th Amendment is generous enough when it is interpreted to confer citizenship of a baby that drops out of a woman who is a national of another country who illegally crossed the border ten minutes ago. It doesn't apply to children born on foreign soil to citizens of that country who've never been naturalized here.
Finally, it's great to see Leftists pause from saying how oppressive, xenophobic, & racist this country is to say it would be cruel to send poor illegal aliens of "minority" ethnicity back to their country of origin.







Tuesday, August 15, 2017

The Stupidity of Identity Politics

If you would have asked me if the President of the California NAACP would be in favor of expanding the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors or against it, I would have guessed "in favor". And yet, Alice A. Huffman has a commentary in the Pink Transgender Lady (a.k.a. Los Angeles Times) advising against it, which means I agree Huffman!
State Constitutional Amendment 12, or SCA 12, would allow California voters to amend the state’s Constitution to require that L.A. County expand its Board of Supervisors from five to seven members and create an elected chief executive position with outsize powers and no accountability to the board.
That means voters all over California would get to decide the structure of the Los Angeles county leadership. The Amendment would not change things in any other county.

Currently, all legislative and executive power of the Los Angeles county government (other than whatever powers are retained by elected Department positions such as Sheriff) flows from the five-member board, and the last time an incumbent running for re-election was defeated was in 1980. Members of the board kept getting re-elected until they retired, until statewide term limits were put in place. It is those terms limits that have likely been a major inspiration for the proposed Amendment, as state legislators would very much like to have more elected positions in which to land when they are termed out of Sacramento. There are over ten million residents in the county of Los Angeles, so even if the board had two more members, each one would represent well over a million people, and there's no doubt that a new elected executive would be a Democrat staging position for Governor or President.

What caught my eye, though was that people are touting "diversity" to support and oppose the Amendment.

Monday, May 1, 2017

March of the Communists and Criminals

May 1 comes around every year, of course. Communists march as though communism hasn't killed 100,000,000 people. Criminals march and demonstate and riot while simultaneously claiming to be living in the shadows. Those who want a communist country should move to Cuba. Our immigration policy should benefit us before the illegal alien.

Previously:

Don't Base Laws For All on Rare Hard Cases

They're Making Our Point For Us

Truly Comprehensive Immigraion Reform

Monday, April 10, 2017

Wrong Turns on the California Roads

What a surprise! Unions of engineers and laborers who rely on taxpayer dollars want higher taxes and fees to "fix the roads" in California, and the Leftist Democrats who literally control the state like the idea of higher fees on automobiles and higher taxes on gasoline and diesel.

Mind you, the fuel is already taxed to build and maintain the roads, but the fund has been raided by politicians and what's left has often been spent on underused transit projects.

Over and over and over again, Californians have been taxed with promises of "fixing" one thing, only to have the money go elsewhere.

Not this time, say the Democrats, like Lucy offering Charlie Brown a chance to kick the football.

They claim that the law they just adopted will amend the state constitution to ensure these new taxes and fees will go to the roads. Ah, but 1) they sneak in "and transit"; 2) even if they stick to this, they'll simply redirect the existing taxes and fees away; 3) there's always a loophole that allows the money to be redirected.

To add to the nefarious nature of this, the increase is tied to inflation, so that means the pain for the taxpayers will never ease, and since raising fuel taxes causes inflation, it's a vicious cycle. Gas taxes go up, inflation goes up as a result (because just about every good and service we use has transportation costs), and so gas taxes go up again.

This is what happens when your state is completely controlled by Democrats. Every statewide office is held by a Democrat and the Democrats have enough of the needlessly bicameral legislature that they can do whatever they want. And they do. So as the socialists, unionists, and reconquistadors who control Los Angeles and San Fransisco run Sacramento, everyone else in the state has to bend over and take it.

Monday, November 7, 2016

Handy Dandy Vote Fraud Intimidation

ATTENTION IMMIGRANTS WHO HAVEN'T BECOME CITIZENS

ATTENTION ILLEGAL ALIENS

ATTENTION CITIZENS WHO HAVE NEVER EVEN REGISTERED TO VOTE:

IT IS ILLEGAL FOR YOU TO VOTE IN THE UNITED STATES. ONCE YOU BECOME A U.S. CITIZEN AND YOU PROPERLY REGISTER TO VOTE, YOU CAN.  BUT UNTIL THEN, YOU ARE BREAKING THE LAW IF YOU VOTE AND YOU COULD BE CRIMINALLY PROSECUTED


ATTENTION ANYONE PLANNING TO VOTE UNDER SOMEONE ELSE'S NAME OR MORE THAN ONCE:

IT IS ILLEGAL TO VOTE FRAUDULENTLY AND YOU COULD BE CRIMINALLY PROSECUTED

Monday, September 26, 2016

The Delusional Democrat Voter Returns


Hey folks, do you remember this?

Well, the same guy posted another round of stuff that Dennis Prager could write if he was trying to do a parody of a typical Leftist.
Simple question: Why is our nation so divided?
For one thing, it always has been divided. It was a massive feat to get our Constitution, and then we went through a terrible war between the states less than a century later.

Saturday, July 9, 2016

A Prime Example of a Delusional Democrat Voter

A Leftist posted this:
This nation is in trouble, so let's be clear:
Someone's been listening to Obama speeches! Trouble, eh? Hmmm. Who's been President the last 7.5 years?
If you're still talking about Hillary Clinton's emails
Dismissing what Clinton did as just about "e-mails" is like dismissing what Nixon did as "just about tapes". Actually, Nixon did far less. And fellow Republicans dropped him and he resigned. You Democrats are not calling for Clinton to drop out.
instead of the urgent need to get weapons of war out of the hands of civilians, you are part of the problem.
What exactly qualifies as a "weapon of war"? I'm guess it is a gun that is currently legal to own somewhere in the country that this guy thinks is too big. Or maybe he's talking about all firearms. Whatever. Well, considering there are millions of people - PEOPLE, meaning things that are 100-300 pounds and need shelter, food, etc. so they can't exactly stay stashed under a floorboard - who came into this country and are here illegally and we "can't" find them or stop more from coming here, then how in the world would we effectively prevent firearms from being smuggled, at great profit, into this country?!? And is this guy talking about confiscation? So he's in favor of something that would certainly lead to stand-offs, barricade situations, groups retreating into fortified armed compounds with their children, and resulting shootouts???
If you're planning to vote for a corrupt businessman whose chief concern is his bottom line with no concern for the small businesses and workers who got him there, you're part of the problem.
I'm no fan of Trump as a candidate. He might be an awful President. He might be a great one. We know Hillary Clinton is corrupt, thinks she can get away with anything, and would do harm to this Union.

And don't feign ignorance. Clinton's biggest concern is her own finances, hence the Foundation shenanigans. Trump's successes and even some of his failures at least helped many other people.
Let's not even get into his overt racism, misogyny, and avocation of violence against his opponent's supporters.
Of course you're not going to get into it because you're probably thinking of parodies of what he actually has said. For example, saying that some illegal aliens coming here are murderers and rapists is not racism. And it is fact.
If you believe your 'good book' means that civil rights and equal rights doesn't apply to gay, trans, or other historically oppresses minorities, you are part of the problem.
The Holy Bible says that there are two sexes, marriage unites the sexes, and that sex is for marriage. That has nothing to do with denying anybody any rights. And MLK Jr. was a REVEREND. I know you like to forget about stuff like that. By the way, my argument against judicial neutering of state marriage licenses didn't invoke the Bible or appeal to theology or religion.
If the congress critter you elected has voted more than once to repeal the affordable care act or defund Planned Parenthood or for lower taxes on the rich, you are part of the problem.
So if  you don't want your tax money used to slaughter innocent human beings for convenience, if you don't like being forced by the federal government to buy a service, and if you think people should be able to keep more of their own money to invest (and grow the economy) as they see fit, then that's a problem?!?
Right now we need to be united as a nation
HA!!! This is from someone who aligns with people who are constantly trying to label and divide people and treat them differently based on their skin color, national origin, religion, sexual desires, and so forth!!!
to reform ourselves into a society where there is really respect for all,
Why are we supposed to respect clumps of cells/collections of molecules? And reform... wasn't Obama going to "fundamentally transform" the USA? Is he a liar or failure?
no poverty
There will always be poverty if for no other reason than Leftists will always say people who have less wealth are poor.
where healthcare is a right
Healthcare is already a "right". Say, didn't you mention Obamacare above? But true rights do not obligate others without their consent unless a crime is involved.
education opportunities are the same for the child in the highest income neighborhood as the poorest
So you're for vouchers? Yeah, didn't think so. There's no way to achieve this other than to criminalize private education, tutoring, and to get all children out of their homes (which may be chaotic) and stick them in uniform government dorms. After all, their parents might subvert the law and give them some sort of educational advantage if they are left with their parents. Say, who runs those school districts in the "poor" neighborhoods? Around here, Leftist Democrat Unionists do. Hmmmm...
and we live in a way that values natural resources
Selling oil does value natural resources!
so we can start making real inroads against global climate change.
I don't believe he really cares because he's not living in a cave with nothing manufactured.
The good news is there is a path forward and it starts this November by getting out the vote and installing elected officials who will actually work toward a progressive future.
So, Obama wasn't it? You were screaming "Yes we can!" when he was elected. I saw you.
We cannot stay on the path we're on today and expect workable solutions.

On that we agree.

Thursday, May 5, 2016

Having Liberty With Your Equal Pay


Limited-government Republicans aren't against equal pay for women. We are for women, regardless of race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, disability, or any other personal characteristic getting paid every cent they, or their representative, can negotiate for their labor, and for women having the right to choose careers and employers, including those providing all the flexibility they want when it comes to the hours and days they work, and the amount of work they do. We also support them being able to spend more of their money how they want, rather than how someone else wants them to spend it.


Stop the invasive Big Government Politicians who increasingly want to tell African-American women, Latina-American women, lesbian/bisexual/transgender women, disabled women, poor women, and Senior Citizen women how they can and can't spend their hard-earned money and want to take more of their money away from them.

Monday, April 11, 2016

Handy Dandy Leftist Democrat Statement Generator

Leftism is based on feelings and emotion and Stage One thinking. This can make consistency difficult to achieve during something as important as a Presidential Election campaign. So to help Leftist Democrats out, I have here this Handy Dandy Leftist Democrat Statement Generator, which should be especially helpful when asked to respond to something said by a Republican.

Whatever the Republican has said, respond with...

"That's [1] and will [2] and is just another example of how Republicans are [3]. This is backed up by [4].

"Democrats, on the other hand, fight your fair share and your rights and want to ensure everyone has equal access to services even if they haven't been lucky enough to get rich."

[1]
sexist
Islamophobic
xenophobic
homophobic
intolerant
racist
bigoted
ignorant
fear mongering
partisan
A Big Lie

[2]
destroy the arts
suppress votes
destroy education
destroy the environment
starve children
give wives cancer
prompt suicides
incite hate crimes
force women into back alleys
kill people

[3]
uncaring
secretive
trying to turn back progress
stuck in the past
out-of-touch
extremist
divisive
anti-science
anti-education
anti-intellectual
anti-worker
anti-woman
mean-spirited
hate-filled
trying to oppress women and minorities
against the poor
trying to force their religion on everyone

[4]
The New York Times
TIME Magazine
MSNBC
the SPLC
the NAACP
GLAAD
NOW
the National Education Association
the APA
the AFL-CIO
the Guttmacher Institute
the United Nations

Then, move on to one of the following, if it will fit:

1. "Oh, so you're against a new federal program? That's just like opposing local fire departments. Conservatives like you opposed ending slavery, too."

2. "Bush did it too, only worse!"

3. "We tried that and it didn't work."

4. "Your opposition to Obama doesn't put food on anyone’s plate."

Thursday, February 18, 2016

Dear Progressives, Socialists, Liberals, Leftists, and Democrats

We're $19,000,000,000,000 in debt, just officially on paper and just on the federal level. This doesn't count obligations that haven't been added to the balance sheets, state debts, local government debts, etc.

Our government can't keep spending more money than we have, especially not at growing rates of the size of deficits.

"Tax the rich" you say?

All of the wealth could be confiscated from "the rich" and the debt and spending would still be a problem. In fact, it would be even more of a problem because in the following years, "the rich" would be generating less economic growth, less tax revenue, and there would be more people "in need".

The cold, hard fact is that at least one of these things must happen if our nation is going to survive:

1. Government spending has to be cut significantly, and the way government budgets going forward has to change. Slashing spending on the military will not satisfy this need.

2. The federal government has to sell off land and other assets and generate more revenue (through oil drilling, for example) on some of the land it doesn't sell.

3. We need to either birth and raise enough children or import enough immigrants (immigrants are people who come to stay, not people who come here for certain benefits and then return home) who'll end up contributing more tax revenue than they'll take. With immigration, it must be taken into account whether or not these individuals either were a net cost in USA tax revenue (through receiving foreign aid) or generated a net in USA tax revenue (through buying goods and services of American businesses) when they were living in other countries. It will be better, on a global scale, to birth our own new Americans rather than moving producing individuals from other countries to here.

I understand that Leftist policies and philosophies are in conflict with those three times in the following ways:

1. Leftism demands increasing government spending. If not directly, by insisting on more and larger government programs.

2. Leftists would rather the federal government increase its land holdings and would rather NO business use such land, especially because Leftists consider such activity an environmental threat.

3. Leftists are fine with immigration, but encourage immigrants to favor larger government. Leftists are more likely to see children as people who should be de facto wards of the state most of the time, as parasites or abusers of the environment (if only through their parents' actions), as burdens, as hindrances to the empowerment of women, as things to be aborted. All one has to do is look at western Europe, which is thoroughly Leftist, to see that the birth rate does not even replace the population.

If you care about the USA having a future the only logical solution is to adopt one, both, or all three of these conservative or traditional & limited government principles:

1. Making government smaller and more limited government.
2. Selling off government/public assets and/or access to land.
3. Making more babies and raising them to avoid consuming as many tax dollars as they generate and who will also vote for smaller, limited government.

Unless we produce it from scratch ourselves, everything we receive, whether goods or services or money, has been generated by someone else. Either we use voluntary transactions to get these things, or we use force, which means government force or crime, to get these things. Even if you are content to increase confiscation for your personal benefit, we, collectively, simply can't function if there is consistently a higher overall consumption than overall production. There will be less production if producers are punished with more confiscation and decreasing freedom to engage in, and benefit from, voluntary transactions.

Tuesday, December 29, 2015

What Are You Going to Do For Me, Bernie?


My dad came from very modest means. His father told him he was spending too much time on his studies and not enough helping with work, which mean working with his hands. My father was the first in his family to go to college, because some of his teachers strongly encouraged him to fill out scholarship paperwork. He graduated from a university and moved for work.

My mother came from a middle-class family. She went to a university, graduated, and went to work.

My parents met working (someone people should never do now thanks to sexual harassment issues). They dated and, before very long, they married - they didn't shack up for years and pop out children outside of wedlock. My mother had avoided getting pregnant before she married. My father had avoided impregnating before he married. But they wanted children and my mother was not going to abandon her children to daycare.

My father decided he needed to earn more money if he was going to support a wife and children, and that meant getting more education. He worked during the day and went to school at night. He completed his studies and changed careers, and subsequently worked his ass off, keeping his nose clean in the process as he climbed a career ladder. My parents started to have children and bought house that was a good place to raise a family, and they added on to the house as needed as the family grew.

We didn’t live a flashy life. My parents did not spend money frivolously. They emphasized good character and effective studying. We went to public schools. They avoided turning us in to entitled narcissists. We never were encouraged to have anger towards anyone who had more wealth than our family nor seek anything from the government.

I studied hard. I kept my nose clean. I avoided substance abuse and fornicating and putting myself at risk of deadly diseases or knocking a girl up. I was active in a sport, had hobbies, and got a job while still in high school.

Then I went to an affordable university. I never once walked out of class in protest, vandalized or trespassed or assaulted anyone while there, never shouted down any speakers, and I kept working at my job through my full-time studies. I graduated and immediately began working at my job full-time, but also took on some side jobs. After a few years of pounding the pavement, (because I knew I needed to make more money), I was hired in a career-potential job. I also kept my old job, working it part time, and still took on some side jobs. I was working my ass off. I was bringing in much more income than my living expenses, because I lived modestly, drove a used car, practiced good financial habits, avoided crime and substance abuse, and avoiding getting any women knocked up.

I invested my money.

Largely paying for the festivities myself, I married a woman with shared values and goals who’d also been financially responsible, avoided crime and substance abuse, and was never knocked up.  Despite significant challenges, she’d graduated from a university in four years and had gone to work full-time in skilled profession. Like me, she had avoided shacking up with anyone.

I dropped the part-time job and my wife reduced her work hours so we could actually BE married rather than living like mere roommates.

We lived modestly.

When we went ahead with our plans to start a family, as she had insisted and I agreed, she quit her job. We “splurged” on a new minivan by paying cash for it and selling off another vehicle. When market conditions were in our favor, we bought a house so our family would have a stable and otherwise suitable place to grow.

We continue to live modestly. Because we save and invest for our future, there are a many things we want to do NOW that we can’t. Our investments are entirely voluntary. We CHOOSE to invest in certain businesses. The people who work for those businesses ASKED for their jobs, and agreed to take them at the compensation that was offered. The people who buy the products and services of those businesses do so voluntarily. The only exception is when Big Government gets involved.

Now Senator Bernie Sanders, and other people who talk like him, want to punish me and my family. If not directly, they will punish me by attacking, plundering, and restricting the companies in which I invest, to buy votes from a lot of people who have lived beyond their means, who went to schools they couldn’t afford and, often, misbehaved while there, who have frittered away their money and health on substance abuse, who have stolen and assaulted, who’ve been popping out kids out of wedlock.

Why do you want to punish me, Bernie?

What are you going to do for ME Bernie?

Actually, you know what? I don’t want a President who does things for me, other than doing things for the Union of which I’m a citizen. I want a President who seeks to protect the Union from foreign enemies, who’ll prosecute interstate crime, who will veto legislation that does more harm than good, and who will make appointments/nominations of individuals who truly respect the Constitution. I don’t want a President to be my Daddy or Gandaddy or to promise me goodies.

The best thing a candidate for POTUS can say in response to “What are you going to do for me?” is “The same thing I’m going to do for everyone else; try to protect you from foreign enemies and limit government."

The President is not there to solve every problem. The federal government shouldn't even try to solves every problem. Some problems can't be solved. Some things some people call problems aren't problems at all, or are problems of their own making.

Stop looking for a politicians to clean up messes you've made. Stop trying to hire someone to be your bully to take from those who have produced. Make something of yourself.