This here's the cutest puppy EVER:
And this here's his sister. She's cute too.
Friday, September 28, 2012
Thursday, September 27, 2012
47%
One of my Facebook friends recently wrote "I AM part of the 47% that Romney has said don't matter, as are most of the people I count as friends." I don't know her situation, and I respect her right to say that. But I must say that this is NOT what Mitt said. Here's a quote and reference to the comment, which Romney himself said was not elegantly stated.
"There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what," Romney could be heard saying. "There are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it."
Romney added his job as a presidential candidate was "not to worry about those people."
He said as a presidential candidate, his job was "not to worry about those people". That sounds crass and uncaring, unless you look at it in the light of a candidate in an election. He did NOT say these people do not matter. What he said was, as a presidential candidate, he's not worrying about convincing these people to vote for him. And that makes a lot of sense if you really think about it. He's accurate when he says that most of the people getting government assistance of some sort are dependent upon the government. People who are dependent upon the government are going to vote for the candidate that will continue to give them unhampered assistance. Currently that candidate is Obama. Of course they’re going to vote for Obama and that’s why Mitt is not worried about them “as a presidential candidate.” Many of these people should not be getting government assistance. Many are able to work and pay taxes, and they SHOULD be working and paying taxes.
Government assistance should be limited to those who, due to legitimate physical or mental disability, are unable to work or can work to some degree but don’t make enough to live on. I know several people who fit that description and I fully support them getting the government assistance that they get.
Unemployment assistance should be limited. People who can work but who are having difficulty finding jobs should get assistance for a limited time, and they should have to prove that they are attempting to find work. I’ve heard many stories of people who got laid off from their job and have been looking for work, but are not taking available jobs because they think the job is ‘too low’ for them. They’re holding out for a job similar to the one they lost. In the meantime, they are living off of our tax dollars. These are the people that should be cut off.
And of course there are those who are completely cheating the system and defrauding the government and taxpayers. These should not only be cut off, but they should also be incarcerated. How about the lady that won $1 Million in the lottery and continued to collect welfare? “The 24-year-old also says she deserves the financial aid because she's now saddled with expenses related to two houses.”
Our government assistance programs need to be majorly overhauled to limit who gets assistance and for how long. There should be strict requirements for qualification and more checks to ensure that people are not cheating the system.
47% of the population is not unemployed (although with Obama in office, we might get there!) 47% of the population is not physically or mentally disabled to the point that they can not work. This means that of the 47% of the population that don’t pay taxes and get government assistance, a good chunk of them are cheating those of us that do work and do pay taxes.
2 Thessalonians 3: 6 In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, we command you, brothers, to keep away from every brother who is idle and does not live according to the teaching[a] you received from us. 7 For you yourselves know how you ought to follow our example. We were not idle when we were with you, 8 nor did we eat anyone’s food without paying for it. On the contrary, we worked night and day, laboring and toiling so that we would not be a burden to any of you. 9 We did this, not because we do not have the right to such help, but in order to make ourselves a model for you to follow. 10 For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: “If a man will not work, he shall not eat.”
Thursday, September 13, 2012
Yet another 'radical' muslim uprising
Another 'radical' muslim uprising is in progress. Libya, Egypt, Yemen. It will likely spread to other dominantly islamic countries. They are attacking American Embassies. "A mob of Libyans also attacked the U.S. consulate in the eastern city of Benghazi on Tuesday, killing American Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans." ~Here's a Fox News article about the current uprising.
This means they are attacking America itself, as embassies are considered to be US soil. Even though it is happening in countries on the other side of the world, America is under attack. Again. Obama won't see it that way, though. His administration's response to the supposed reason for the uprising was an apology! Unbelievable. Well. Not really considering if Obama himself isn't a closet muslim, he's definitely a muslim sympathizer. (Read my previous posts on this topic: Is Obama A Closet Muslim? and Told Ya So!)
I put the words 'radical' in quotes because they are the furthest thing from 'radical' muslims. They are exactly what islam teaches them to be. The radical muslims would be those that claim peace and tolerance. I say claim because I think they are deceiving. Here's a post that I wrote 2 years ago, almost to the day, about another muslim uprising. It explains in more detail WHY our government, in fact most of the world, has islam backwards. Those being called radicals are more true to islam than those that are called mainstream.
You are witnessing jihad. Did you know that muslims are calling for the criminalization of speech that criticizes islam in the United States? From what I understand, Obama supports it! Throw the First Amendment out the door!
Islamic jihad is only going to get worse as time goes on, especially if we have a President that does not stand up for his country and offers appeasement to those that attack us.
This means they are attacking America itself, as embassies are considered to be US soil. Even though it is happening in countries on the other side of the world, America is under attack. Again. Obama won't see it that way, though. His administration's response to the supposed reason for the uprising was an apology! Unbelievable. Well. Not really considering if Obama himself isn't a closet muslim, he's definitely a muslim sympathizer. (Read my previous posts on this topic: Is Obama A Closet Muslim? and Told Ya So!)
The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims – as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions. Today, the 11th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, Americans are honoring our patriots and those who serve our nation as the fitting response to the enemies of democracy. Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy. We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others.(Yes, I know the apology was communicated before the attacks happened, but the Obama administration, which from what I just heard on the news approved the communication, didn't retract it for something like 9 hours after the attacks began.) According to the Obama Administration, which the Cairo Embassy represents, the movie (which I have not seen) is an "abuse of the universal right of free speech". So, they're saying expressing your opinion about islam is an abuse of the 1st Amendment. I suppose that means this post is an abuse of the 1st Amendment too. Typical liberal mindset: "You have free speech as long as you agree with what we think, otherwise you're an abuser!"
I put the words 'radical' in quotes because they are the furthest thing from 'radical' muslims. They are exactly what islam teaches them to be. The radical muslims would be those that claim peace and tolerance. I say claim because I think they are deceiving. Here's a post that I wrote 2 years ago, almost to the day, about another muslim uprising. It explains in more detail WHY our government, in fact most of the world, has islam backwards. Those being called radicals are more true to islam than those that are called mainstream.
You are witnessing jihad. Did you know that muslims are calling for the criminalization of speech that criticizes islam in the United States? From what I understand, Obama supports it! Throw the First Amendment out the door!
Islamic jihad is only going to get worse as time goes on, especially if we have a President that does not stand up for his country and offers appeasement to those that attack us.
Thursday, September 6, 2012
Democrat voter fraud on International TV
"Well isn't THAT special?" ~The Church Lady
Have you been watching the DNC? I have, some. It has cemented my opposition to Obama and the Democratic party. It is proof that the democrats will use blatant lies, deceit, trickery, falsehood, cheating. Even against their own.
Let me say up front that not ALL democrats are this way. Not all are liars, cheaters, socialists, etc. Not all are atheists. Not all are against God. Not all are for the false notion of the separation of Church and State. Not all are against Israel. In this post, and any other post I make regarding politics, if I say 'Democrats', it means the general, national Party and their published platform and beliefs.
But, the leaders of their party, and clearly at least 50% of their delegates don't think that God has any place in American culture. They obviously have not read the writings of our Founding Fathers. They want to change history and the meaning of our Founding Documents, which they say are outdated and flawed. The Democrats have shown their true colors in regard to religion and their stand towards Israel as an ally of the United Sates.
The 2012 Democratic National Platform originally stated:
I found the original text here: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/platforms.php. It has changed already on the Democrat's web site, so I downloaded it to my dropbox and local machine so I could maintain a copy of it.
The 2008 Platform stated:
The 2012 Platform has now been amended, improperly I might add, to state:
CBN News has a great article about this.
Here's their 2012 Platfom, as amended yesterday (9/5/2012): http://assets.dstatic.org/dnc-platform/2012-National-Platform.pdf
These amendments only happened after media commentators on various news channels (Primarily Fox News, I suppose!) began asking WHY did the Democratic party remove the text about God and about Jerusalem being the Capital Israel.
The funny thing is, they disenfranchised their own. Voter fraud on international TV. It was clear that there was not a 2/3 majority in the vote to amend the platform. The Chairman, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, clearly is confused about what to do. Then he disenfranchises what sounds to me like more than 50% of the delegates by, in his opinion that the ayes have it, passing the amendment. I don't think either vote had a 2/3 majority, but it clearly was close to 50/50. If I understand the convention rules, if the voice vote was not clear, as it was not, he should have moved to a ballot vote. (Note: After I posted this, I found extended video of the incident where, prior to the vote on the amendment, they voted to suspend the rules. Typical democrats. They have rules to follow but choose to over-rule them and do what they want instead.) Instead, he over-rode the clear voices of "NO" and forced adaptation of the amendment. Democrats have a long history of voter fraud, but I never thought I'd see it plain as day on international television.
Matthew 10:32 "Therefore, everyone who will acknowledge Me before men, I will also acknowledge him before My Father in heaven. 33 But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father in heaven. 34 Don't assume that I came to bring peace on the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.
Dems are showing their true colors. Then trying to hide them by being politically correct. Failing miserably. They dont want God part of this country! http://
This further proves that the Democrats will do whatever they want to get whatever they want, despite the will of the people. They did it with Obamacare too.
For comparison, here's the Republican 2012 platform: http://www.gop.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/2012GOPPlatform.pdf
Mentions of God? 10.
Supporting Israel and Jerusalem as the capitol? yes.
Have you been watching the DNC? I have, some. It has cemented my opposition to Obama and the Democratic party. It is proof that the democrats will use blatant lies, deceit, trickery, falsehood, cheating. Even against their own.
Let me say up front that not ALL democrats are this way. Not all are liars, cheaters, socialists, etc. Not all are atheists. Not all are against God. Not all are for the false notion of the separation of Church and State. Not all are against Israel. In this post, and any other post I make regarding politics, if I say 'Democrats', it means the general, national Party and their published platform and beliefs.
But, the leaders of their party, and clearly at least 50% of their delegates don't think that God has any place in American culture. They obviously have not read the writings of our Founding Fathers. They want to change history and the meaning of our Founding Documents, which they say are outdated and flawed. The Democrats have shown their true colors in regard to religion and their stand towards Israel as an ally of the United Sates.
The 2012 Democratic National Platform originally stated:
We gather to reclaim the basic bargain that built the largest middle class and the most prosperous nation on Earth – the simple principle that in America, hard work should pay off, responsibility should be rewarded, and each one of us should be able to go as far as our talent and drive take us.The ORIGINAL 2012 Democratic Platform did not mention Jerusalem at all.
I found the original text here: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/platforms.php. It has changed already on the Democrat's web site, so I downloaded it to my dropbox and local machine so I could maintain a copy of it.
The 2008 Platform stated:
We need a government that stands up for the hopes, values, and interests of working people, and gives everyone willing to work hard the chance to make the most of their God-given potential.and
All understand that it is unrealistic to expect the outcome of final status negotiations to be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949. Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel. The parties have agreed that Jerusalem is a matter for final status negotiations. It should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths.
The 2012 Platform has now been amended, improperly I might add, to state:
We must keep moving forward and doing the hard work of rebuilding a strong economy by betting on the American worker and investing in a growing middle class. We need a government that stands up for the hopes, values, and interests of working people, and gives everyone willing to work hard the chance to make the most of their God-given potential.and
Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel. The parties have agreed that Jerusalem is a matter for final status negotiations. It should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths.This is no error or oversight or mistake as the Dems are trying to spin it now. This is deliberate omission. They had to vote Tuesday to approve the platform. I presume they read it. But maybe not, since they didn't allow people to read the Obamacare law before they shoved it down our throats.
CBN News has a great article about this.
Here's their 2012 Platfom, as amended yesterday (9/5/2012): http://assets.dstatic.org/dnc-platform/2012-National-Platform.pdf
 |
| Photo from Foxnews.com |
The funny thing is, they disenfranchised their own. Voter fraud on international TV. It was clear that there was not a 2/3 majority in the vote to amend the platform. The Chairman, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, clearly is confused about what to do. Then he disenfranchises what sounds to me like more than 50% of the delegates by, in his opinion that the ayes have it, passing the amendment. I don't think either vote had a 2/3 majority, but it clearly was close to 50/50. If I understand the convention rules, if the voice vote was not clear, as it was not, he should have moved to a ballot vote. (Note: After I posted this, I found extended video of the incident where, prior to the vote on the amendment, they voted to suspend the rules. Typical democrats. They have rules to follow but choose to over-rule them and do what they want instead.) Instead, he over-rode the clear voices of "NO" and forced adaptation of the amendment. Democrats have a long history of voter fraud, but I never thought I'd see it plain as day on international television.
Matthew 10:32 "Therefore, everyone who will acknowledge Me before men, I will also acknowledge him before My Father in heaven. 33 But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father in heaven. 34 Don't assume that I came to bring peace on the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.
Dems are showing their true colors. Then trying to hide them by being politically correct. Failing miserably. They dont want God part of this country! http://
This further proves that the Democrats will do whatever they want to get whatever they want, despite the will of the people. They did it with Obamacare too.
For comparison, here's the Republican 2012 platform: http://www.gop.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/2012GOPPlatform.pdf
Mentions of God? 10.
Supporting Israel and Jerusalem as the capitol? yes.
Wednesday, September 5, 2012
Convention Fact Checking
Here's a couple articles about fact checking the RNC and DNC.
RNC ("Mitt Romney avoided major falsehoods in making his case to the American public while accepting the presidential nomination at the Republican National Convention."):
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2012-08-31/mitt-romney-fact-check-republican-convention/57467252/1
DNC ("a number of dubious or misleading claims on the first night of the Democratic National Convention"):
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2012-09-05/fact-check-democratic-national-convention/57596574/1
This one it particularly scathing: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/fact-checking-bill-clintons-speech-and-other-democrats-at-the-convention-in-charlotte/2012/09/06/55b9df68-f7e1-11e1-8b93-c4f4ab1c8d13_blog.html
Neither party is perfect, but the democrats have a long history of "dubious", "misleading", "gimmicky" and underhanded tactics.
RNC ("Mitt Romney avoided major falsehoods in making his case to the American public while accepting the presidential nomination at the Republican National Convention."):
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2012-08-31/mitt-romney-fact-check-republican-convention/57467252/1
DNC ("a number of dubious or misleading claims on the first night of the Democratic National Convention"):
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2012-09-05/fact-check-democratic-national-convention/57596574/1
This one it particularly scathing: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/fact-checking-bill-clintons-speech-and-other-democrats-at-the-convention-in-charlotte/2012/09/06/55b9df68-f7e1-11e1-8b93-c4f4ab1c8d13_blog.html
Neither party is perfect, but the democrats have a long history of "dubious", "misleading", "gimmicky" and underhanded tactics.
Obamacare in 1 sentence
I have not heard anyone put it so perfectly. So succinctly. This lady hits a home run with her description of Obamacare.
Very interesting!!!!!!
Check out this web site that is showing the prominent words spoken at the RNC. Click a word bubble to see quotes of where the word was used and who spoke it. You can even enter a word in the search box if it's not already listed. It's going to be a fascinating comparison between the RNC and DNC once they publish those results.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/08/28/us/politics/convention-word-counts.html
I keep hearing news people say that the Dems have taken the word God out of the platform. God was mentioned 95 times at the RNC according to this site. It will sure be interesting to see the results of the DNC.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/08/28/us/politics/convention-word-counts.html
I keep hearing news people say that the Dems have taken the word God out of the platform. God was mentioned 95 times at the RNC according to this site. It will sure be interesting to see the results of the DNC.
Tuesday, September 4, 2012
How I vote.
I have 3 main criteria I use to determine who I vote for.
1. Morality.
-I can not support anyone who's OK with killing babies. NO ONE has the right to take the life of an unborn baby. It's not a woman's right or anyone else's.
2. Fiscal Policy
-I have never worked for a poor person. Poor people don't employ other people. Every place I've ever worked, it has been for a successful business person or successful company. I can't support anyone that wants to punish success and make it harder for businesses to hire and retain employees. Further, I can't support someone that wants to redistribute the earnings of people who work hard for a living and give it to people that refuse to work and live off government handouts. I can't support someone who removes the work requirements from government assistance. I can't support someone that believes government spending and trillions of dollars in debt is the way to stimulate the American economy. Tax & Spend has never worked and never will. The way to improve employment conditions in the US is to make it EASIER for employers to hire, not harder! This will help both the middle class and help give the poor a boost by providing more jobs!
3. Foreign Policy
-I can not support anyone that does not support Israel. I can not support anyone that bows to other countries and apologizes for the United States of America being the greatest countries on earth. I can not support anyone who will stand by and allow evil to prosper on this planet.
I can't support anyone who's agenda is to destroy this country. To lower it to the status of countries like Cuba and Venezuela. Instead, we need to work to help raise other countries to be better, like us.
I can't support anyone who does not believe in our Constitution and thinks it's outdated and flawed. It may not be perfect, but it's the foundation of the greatest country that was ever on this planet.
I can't support anyone who continues to blame their predecessor for ongoing problems, heck, worsening problems, when they've had plenty of time to affect change for the positive and fail to do so. I hope you understand.
Are we better off than we were 4 years ago? Heck no. Here's a post I made in 2008 (http://bit.ly/PHkiY8). Things are worse now than the statistics I mention in that post. Food prices are higher. Gas prices have fluctuated, but are higher. House values are in the toilet. Unemployment?? I'll let this chart from the Bureau of Labor Statistics speak to that (click the picture to link to the web site):
Obama gets elected and BAM! Unemployment skyrockets.
Just today, the National Debt has reached $16 TRILLION dollars. Under Obama, the debt has increased more in 4 years than it did under President Bush in 8 years. "If Mr. Obama wins re-election, and his budget projections prove accurate, the National Debt will top $20 trillion in 2016, the final year of his second term. That would mean the Debt increased by 87 percent, or $9.34 trillion, during his two terms." (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57400369-503544/national-debt-has-increased-more-under-obama-than-under-bush/)
Who's better off?? I'm not. I could expand on each of those 3 points above, but what I've posted is sufficient.
I can not support Obama. He fails the test.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)