San Francisco Ballot Insults President Bush…

I just heard about this today and can’t believe I missed it. It is official!!

The San Francisco Chronicle confirmed on July 18, there is a proposal on the San Francisco Ballot that would rename the city’s “Oceanside Sewage Treatment Plant” after President George W Bush. It is Proposition R on the San Francisco Ballot and carries a “yes” “no” vote. It is due to the diligent hard work of the Presidential Memorial Commission of San Francisco that made this possible. As expected, all of the Republican and Conservative posts I’ve found on this find it disgraceful, insulting, degrading, and even hateful towards the great office of the President of the United States. The White House has refused to comment on such an issue. After all, most presidents are remembered with Memorials, Monuments, Dams, Bridges and Highways. Not Sewage Plants! But surprisingly it’s not just the Right Wing that disagrees with this Proposition. According to CBS 5 in San Francisco some of the workers at the plant “find it insulting”.

"It's not amusing to me, nor my folks who are true professionals," said Assistant Manager Tommy Moala. "And a lot of them have been here since the plant went online. They run it 24/7, 365 days a year."

Well it is well known that San Francisco is a safe haven for liberal lifestyles, philosophies, ideals, and of course politics. So it is not surprising to find that President Bush is as welcome there as salt in a wound. It could also be understandable that some of the workers at the plant may feel degraded working at a place named after a president they don’t identify with. And of course it is also easy to see why people like Nancy Pelosi and Cindy Sheehan and many of the other people in this city want to link the name of George W. Bush to every toilet in the city. The Los Angeles Times Reports…

“We think this is a fitting tribute to this president,” said Brian McConnell, a member of the group, whose insignia shows the presidential seal with an American eagle holding two toilet plungers. “It’s fair to say that we’re going to be cleaning up a substantial mess over the next decade or more, thanks to Bush. Environmental degradation. A war in Iraq that cost a trillion-dollars plus. It’s going to be a big job.”

Of course as twisted as I am, there might just be a different way of looking at this. I personally think the right wing conservatives should be honored with such a monument and the left wing liberals should be embarrassed. Even though I don’t always agree with President Bush, is this not a cry out to him and his party to clean up all the “crap” and “waste” the leftists liberals in San Francisco have created.
After all, the planning of, and events that led to September 11th and the war on terror happened under the previous Democratic Bill Clinton administration. Also, during this same administration did we, and the UN, not repeatedly try to negotiate with, impose sanctions on, and diplomatically resolve the ambitions of Sedam Husain? These efforts resulted in many UN resolutions which included independent inspections for weapons of mass destruction. Did not Sedam Husain repeatedly ignore these resolutions, as well as expel these inspectors because they looked in places he did not approve? Did not the Clinton administration also cut the defense budget, including massive cuts in intelligence gathering and reporting? Did not Saudi Arabia also offer to Bill Clinton Osama Bin Laden prior to the attacks on the United States? It was also under the Clinton administration that the “Dot Com” fiasco happened, the collapse of which started the economy going down even before Sept. 11th. Also it was the Clinton administration’s policies to increase home ownership that led to sub-prime lending, negative amortization loans, and under qualified loans that caused the massive bailout and economic mess we are in now.

In contrast, wasn’t it the Bush administration that inherited an economy that was declining? Wasn’t he only in office less than nine months prior to the largest terrorist attack in the US history? And wasn’t it the administration under George Bush that got the UN to approve a resolution to use force in Iraq, get overwhelming support of both houses of congress for this, as well as put together one of the worlds largest coalitions to carry this out? Didn’t this administration also restructure our defense forces so that better communications would take place? Wasn't his administration also challenged by one of this nations greatest natural disasters, hurricane Katrina?

And from San Francisco, was it not the speaker of the house Nancy Pelosi that repeatedly tried to end funding to our fighting troops overseas? Did she not fight against the military surge which is leading to a victory in Iraq? Does she not repeatedly try to prematurely pull our troops out of Iraq? The results of which would lead to defeat and demean the lives of those brave men and women who gave so much in service to our nation. This retreat would also make Iraq the perfect gift to its archenemy Iran, making it the most powerful and oil rich country in the Middle East.

With all of this in mind I believe San Francisco and the left have created, and continue to create a massive amount of waste that needs to be treated. If the right wing and President Bush are not willing to be honored as being able accomplish this, maybe Joe the Plumber would.

Read more...

Why Are They Calling The Obama Tax Plan Socialist?

All over the news you here people are referring to Barack Obama and his tax policies as socialist. I have to emphatically say THIS ABSOLUTLY JUST IS NOT TRUE!!!

After all, in his proposed tax policies he says he wants to only (and I quote) “raise the taxes on the wealthy”, “those who are making over $250,000 a year” and, “those who can afford it”. He goes on to say, (which I again quote) he wants to “lower taxes on 95% of Americans”, “especially for those lower and middle income”, “those who are less fortunate”. He wants to “level the playing field”. If these quotes of views are not accurate, can someone please leave me a comment with his correct tax plans.

It are these tax based ideas that are being labeled as socialist. Who are making these totally false accusations? Of course, the right wing capitalist pigs. Everybody knows that socialism is : “a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.”

Now it is true that many of his other proposed regulations and plans (like health care) could be called this, but definitely NOT his tax plan and I can prove it. After all, he wants to take more “from those who can afford it” because they not only have the “ability”, but as Biden said, would be “more patriotic”. He would then “spread the wealth” of these taxes to those “less fortunate”, those who “need” it. Notice the words ability and need. After all this is actually saying “From each according to his ability and to each according to his need”. This famous phrase is actually attributed to Karl Marx in 1875. Marx wrote this in a letter summarizing the principles of communism and the transition from capitalism.

GEES! I really wish they would get this right. It is not socialism; it is based on the theory of Karl Marx and is therefore Marxism.

Read more...

Don't mark his word because he meant to say...

At a press conference yesterday, Barack attempted to cover up and limit the damages of Joe Biden's comments Tuesday about the world testing the Obama presidency in the first 6 months. In the words of Senator Biden:

Read the full Biden quote

"And here's the point I want to make. Mark my words. Mark my words. It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We're about to elect a brilliant 47-year old senator president of the United States of America. Remember I said it standing here if you don't remember anything else I said. Watch, we're gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy. And he's gonna have to make some really tough - I don't know what the decision's gonna be, but I promise you it will occur. As a student of history and having served with seven presidents, I guarantee you it's gonna happen. I can give you at least four or five scenarios from where it might originate. And he's gonna need help. And the kind of help he's gonna need is, he's gonna need you, not financially to help him, we're gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it's not gonna be apparent initially, it's not gonna be apparent that we're right.”

The press conference followed a foreign policy meeting that he had with several top democratic security advisors including senators Sam Nun and Gary Hart. According to the Huffington Post this meeting was planned a couple of weeks ago with the goal of showing his team was not "so focused on the economy" that he stopped "keeping pace" with challenges pertaining to Afghanistan, Al Qaeda and Iraq.

You know, this just does not pass the smell test. Surprisingly enough, if this was planned in advance, the one person that Barack should have required to attend would be the chairman of the foreign relations committee who just so happens to be his running mate Senator Joe Biden. After all, one of the main reasons that he was picked to be the VP running mate was to lend creditability and experience to Barack's foreign policy. If he wants to show his team is not just campaigning on the current state of the economy, and is still concerned with foreign policy, shouldn't his team be present? According to his campaign, Joe Biden attended by phone and was not present. I think a preplanned campaign event like this would have including the more appropriate scheduling. Moreover wouldn't the press conference that followed have all their foreign policy talking points? In view of all of this, I believe this was a hastily conceived last second event to cover up the gaff and refocus the presses attention to what Barack wants them to see.

I just happened to listen to the press conference that followed and as Ronald Regan once said: “There you go again”. Barack once again only vaguely addressed foreign policy with a couple of lines before speaking about his plans for the economy. On the generated foreign threats guaranteed by Biden, Barack said the following which pretty much made up what he said on foreign policy. He then used this to lead into his talking points on the economy and continued attacks on John McCain and “Joe the Plumber”.

“Look, as I said before, you know, I think that Joe sometimes engages in rhetorical flourishes, but I think his core point was that the next administration is going to be tested, regardless of who it is.”

If this is true Barack, why would Joe directly address you and your presidency? Did he not say that they would test your mettle? I think Joe knows exactly what he said, and meant it. After all, in his presidential campaign he was making these same comments about you and your readiness for command. He did not address these concerns against Hilary Clinton nor John McCain.

Although, I have to give it to Barack. Like the character in Oliver Twist, he has earned the title of “The Artful Dodger”. Not only is he an artist with great ways of avoiding questions by using a dictionary full of meaningless flowery words to say nothing, but he is able to do this while picking your pocket with his income redistribution aspirations. He has constantly used this technique of misdirection throughout his campaign, and therefore I have to repeat those famous words, “There you go again”.

Read more...

Who is Biden Wanting To Be President?

In a recent address Obama's running mate, Joe Biden stated emphatically that if Obama is elected to the Presidency the Unites States would be tested with a new crisis. I don't know about the rest of America, but I do not want the US tested again.

Read more...