Right News and Views

Obama is a powerful speaker but I’m not so sure he is a powerful thinker. As a liberal, of course, he’s ignorant. But ignorance alone does not mean one is unintelligent. I’ve met highly intelligent people who are nevertheless liberal and fail to understand how life works.

This fact is especially scary when the liberal intends to tamper with healthcare. According to this New York Post article, Obama said “the time has come for universal, affordable health care in America.” Can I get free housing, food, and entertainment expense money with that, too? His plan is outlined in the article and here, ignoring the already well documented problems with similar plans in effect in Europe, is what is wrong with it:

1. It redistributes wealth. It’s wrong to pick another mans pockets- no matter how noble a cause you are fighting for it does not give you the right to be a thief. Period.

2. It forces businesses to share in the cost of their employees healthcare – to meet this expense, some employees will loose their jobs, will not get salary increases, etc. This says nothing about the harm to businesses themselves in terms of lost capitol for expansion, being able to attract the right employees, etc. In short, this will damage the economy.

3. It would prohibit insurance companies from refusing coverage because of pre-existing conditions. Life is rough- but government will fix it for you! Whatever…

4. If you already have coverage, Obama claims the only change for you is that your premiums will be less. How nice of him to leave out the fact that your taxes will go up and more than make up for whatever premium decrease you may experience.

Amazingly, Obama admitted that the overall cost of the program would be high. But that’s okay because he has a way to pay for it. He claimed he would “ask” all but small businesses to support his plan. “Ask” is something our government does not do- it forces. Ask implies that I can say “kiss off.” But I digress.

Obama then launched into the class-warfare mantra. “And we also will repeal the temporary Bush tax cut for the wealthiest taxpayers.” It’s not the fault of the rich that people don’t have healthcare.

Obama claims that the current system leaves 45 million people - 9 million of them children - without health insurance. He said that “goes against the nation’s basic instincts.” It does? How the Founding Fathers left that out of the Constitution I don’t know!

But Obama continues. “That is not who we are,” he said. “We are not a country that rewards hard work and perseverance with bankruptcies and foreclosures,” said Obama. “We are not a country that allows major challenges to go unsolved and unaddressed while our people suffer needlessly.”

That’s true- we are certainly not a country that rewards hard work and perseverance- we punish it by high taxes. The rewards, instead, go to those who do not work and screw up their own lives. I’ve got a solution for health care myself- it’s called “get a job that offers benefits or get on your spouses plan.”

Lastly, if we “are not a country that allows major challenges to go unsolved and unaddressed while our people suffer needlessly,” then how about cutting taxes in half, allowing me to control my own retirement (death to Social Security!), and focusing on winning the war on terror? How about that, Obama? Can you do that?

Nancy Pelosi now thinks she is a scientist as well as the Secretary of State and an ambassador. According to myway.com, The misguided Representative from one of the most liberal districts in America said she “saw firsthand evidence that climate change is a reality; there is just no denying it.” Sure there is- it’s called the scientific method.

In typical liberal fashion she blames humanity for the “problem,” whatever that may be. “It wasn’t caused by the people of Greenland - it was caused by the behavior of the rest of the world,” she said, failing to offer any evidence whatsoever that man is responsible for the changes to the environment.

Further, if we are somehow changing the very atmosphere of our planet, a colossal presumption of arrogance as to our own significance, then we’ll adapt. We always have- and we always will.

Fortunately, Bush is still in the White House and any radical and damaging policy to US interests will be vetoed. Still, in two years we could find our economy wrecked by the carelessness and shortsightedness of such liberal policies.

Read this and learn why.

Beginning Wednesday of next week fellow 451 Press blogger Bijhan Al-Attack (www.politiclafrenzy.com) and I will team up to bring you the real deal on the presidential candidates. Al Attack will cover the Democratic candidates and yours truly will cover the Republicans. So be sure to tune in for some super in-depth analysis as well as personal observations on those who would be president.

And be sure to check out Al-Attack’s announcement of the same where he pays homage to our mutual appreciation of comics! ‘Nuff said!*

*Another Stan Lee reference

From K-12 I was forced, thankfully, to learn loads of information; from difference between a verb and a noun to the leading causes of World War II. And, while our understanding of history often changes as new facts come to light, denying an historical event outright in the face of not only overwhelming but irrefutable evidence is ridiculous.

According to this Daily Mail piece, not only are teachers dropping discussion of the most monstrously evil nightmare of the 20th Century but they also avoid discussing the Crusades because “lessons often contradict what is taught in local mosques.” Oh, my- how terrible! There should be a heck of a lot more lessons taught that contradict what is spewed out of certain mosques. Like, oh, I don’t know- how it is okay to strap a bomb onto yourself and blow up innocent people. If we can’t fight the basic propaganda that threatens to falsify historical fact then how can we be expected to fight the big battles?

I say ram historical facts down student throats no matter what they or their parents believe.

Chief Warrant Officer Jim Funk has something to say to the media in the United States. Actually, it’s more like a knock-out punch in the face.

The introduction goes like this:

“Hello media, do you know you indirectly kill American soldiers every day? You inspire and report the enemy’s objective every day. You are the enemy’s greatest weapon. The enemy cannot beat us on the battlefield so all he does is try to wreak enough havoc and have you report it every day. With you and the enemy using each other, you continually break the will of the American public and American government.”

And, unless you are a leftist, white-flag-waving liberal you’ll love the rest of it, too.

My latest column concerns Memorial Day and the story of a Little Rock, AR teacher who taught her students a big lesson on the first day of school.

Whatever you do this weekend remember that the freedoms you exercise, that your family enjoys, that your country promises you were fought for through war. Blood spilled, sweat dripped, and many suffered and died so that we can do whatever we choose to do on our three day weekend. With all that extra time, take a moment in reflective and sincere contemplation of just how much we owe to our veterans.

You’re taxed when you earn, when you spend, when you build, when you own a home, when you die, etc., etc., etc. I’m surprised our government does not tax us on the very air we breathe.

According to this cnet piece, there are only a few months left on a moratorium that restricts state governments from taxing our Internet access and the House recently began the debate over whether the ban should be made justly permanent or allowed to lapse so taxpayers can suffer even more.

If we were not already ripped off to the tune of nearly 50% of our incomes a net access tax would not be so bad. But I frankly don’t care if out state governments are struggling (as many claim) to make their budgets. Indeed, I think it is wonderful that they have to be careful about what they spend.

Write your Senators and Representative and stop government from taking even more away from you.

I shudder to link to Michael Moore’s website, but I just must point out that the audience was not clapping for Moore but rather against Bush.

“When it was over, they gave it a standing ovation that seemed to go on for nearly 15 minutes!” Poor, infantile “sicko.”

Bill Clinton’s wife seems to think she’s in charge of the US military and has requested that the Defense Department develop Iraq retreat plans if it has not already done so.

If this is to be done then it is the decision of George W. Bush to make – it is not the job of the junior senator from New York.

Comments and her letter can be viewed here.

John Murtha (you remember, the guy caught on tape who was clearly willing – at some point – to accept bribe money) escaped from a reprimand thanks to his party who promised to run “the most ethical congress in history.”

Murtha (who has hurt who knows how many families thanks to his well-known love of throwing vast sums of taxpayers dollars away on pork) threatened Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) when Rogers tried, sadly unsuccessfully, to save taxpayers $23 million Murtha was bent on lavishing on his own district to help himself get reelected.

Rogers claimed that Murtha, angry that his high and mighty self was challenged in his desire to burn away other peoples money, said “you will not get any earmarks now and forever.” Rogers, backed by the usually spineless House GOP leaders, said Murtha’s threat violated congressional ethics rules. Murtha disregarding ethics? No way!

Frankly, if Murtha would threaten every member of the house that way and truly not let anybody have any earmarks (including himself) then that would be great. Think of how much money we would save. But to target a single Representative in reprisal is against their rules. Rules, it seems, Democrats are content to ignore as they give one of their own a free pass.

Most ethical congress indeed…

That Michael Moore enjoys a shred of credibility from even the most extreme left-wing nut jobs is a testament to his ability to obtain attention for himself when none is warranted.

I was forced to endure Roger and me back in college. Basically, Moore hated not only GM (who he blamed for Flint, Michigans economic woes), but also the United States. Government policies and social attitudes, he believed, were what allowed GM to pick up and move and cut off a huge portion of Flints workers from their jobs, thereby resulting in a local recession or depression.

While nobody likes such a situation it is nevertheless a reality of life. Ah, but if you have a communist government running everything then GM would have been forced to stay in Flint. The single excepting to this being a completely and utterly disasterous idea is that, had GM been forced to stay, Moore would have been kept in merciful obscurity. But, unless you are Michael Moore, communism has enough evidence against it to prove its disasterous impact on human life.

Moore’s newest joke for the American people (as if his first love-fest with communism wasn’t funny enough) is Sicko. This “documentary” claims that Cuba’s health care system is superior to the United States. I imagine that most Americans are wise enough to realize that they would not even have to do any research before declaring this an obvious and laughable fiction.

This piece by Rich Lowry provides all the details.

Bob Kerrey is a former Democratic senator from Nebraska. He also served as a member on the 9/11 Commission. In his piece, The Left’s Iraq Muddle, Kerrey lays out the facts concerning Iraq. He makes the case that we must not abandon Iraq and that it is indeed the major theater in the War on Terror. He also notes that “the demand for self-government was and remains strong in Iraq despite all our mistakes and the violent efforts of al Qaeda, Sunni insurgents and Shiite militias to disrupt it.”

Not only common sense but uncommonly good sense- and from a Democrat, no less.

I could not help but get the feeling that Debra Dickerson falsely “proves” what she is trying to disprove in her piece entitled Michelle Obama’s sacrifice. And that is that women are not capable of making their own decisions. Clearly, they are- and have been – able to make their own decisions for a long time. But since Michelle Obama’s decision does not mesh with what Dickerson thinks she ought to do then we get a sexist screed.

There is a lot wrong with this piece- but I’ve selected just a few of my personal favorites to quote.

Inanity 1: “But until more women who want to work feel free to do just that, they’ll continue to be mere appendages of their men, and the American workplace will remain just as family-unfriendly as it is now.”

How insulting. My wife is not an appendage- she is my partner in life and best friend and would no doubt be insulted if called an appendage. If I need something proofed before I submit it to my editor, I’ll ask her. She has a talent for seeing details I miss. If she needs something very heavy lifted she will call me. I have more testosterone than she does. One of us is not better than the other, but we are different. Despite these differences we are very happy together.

And don’t get me started on decrying as “family-unfriendly” the workplace- which is little more than code for “more government regulation is the answer.”

Inanity 2: “Any day now, Michelle Obama’s handlers will have her glued into one of those Sunday-go-to-meeting Baptist grandma crown hats while smiling vapidly for hours at a time. When, of course, she’s not staring moonstruck, à la Nancy Reagan, at her moon doggie god-husband who’s not one bit smarter than she is.”

How insulting, though to which Obama I’m not sure, as one of them has to be smarter than the other. It may be Michelle or it may be her husband (I neither know nor care) but one of them surely has a higher IQ than the other. The odds of their sharing the same IQ is slim to none. Now, my wife is clearly a lot smarter than I am. She has a genius level IQ. I don’t and that is an obvious fact. I’m not a fool, mind you (I married her, didn’t I?) but I’m outclassed by her when it comes to intelligence. But that’s okay- I outclass her in other areas. The point is that we complement each other’s weaknesses. And, despite these weaknesses, we are very happy together.

Inanity 3: “Most important, though, I hope Michelle will bring feminism to black women.”

“Feminism” and “feminist” are mentioned 12 times in her piece and, if it the same kind of feminism my wife derides (man bashing, man blaming, “poor, pitiful little me because of all the big, bad, mean men in the world”) then feminism is the last thing any woman needs, black, white, yellow, whatever. So Michelle Obama should do what Michelle Obama wants to do. It is between she and her husband what each do to be very happy together.

The point - if you don’t like your place in the world then change it. But don’t deride others for their personal family decisions and the place they choose to be- which is by their spouse and family more so than any other “place” they have to be.

I like this piece by Jerome J. Schmitt. The only problem with it is that some liberal will go out and compile a similar list noting all the bad things Republicans have done, all the while ignoring the central point of the column - that it is not Republicans who have called for or supported the idea of reparations.

Slavery was a monstrous evil and racism is the sure sign of an immature mind at best or and poisoned mind at worst. Reparations, however, would do nothing but to erase the progress we’ve already made in race relations in our country.

Giving anybody welfare for extended periods of time or supporting them during their retirement when they failed to plan for it themselves burns me up. But if you select a specific group – in this case African Americans – to shower with my hard-earned tax dollars for sins no living person is either guilty of or suffered under then you commit a gross injustice. In many peoples hearts you will create racism where none exists and enflame to fury the peoples in whom it already does exist.

Reparations are, therefore, little more than a recipe for disaster.