Friday, October 31, 2008

Freedom of Press in the Obama nation?

So, a reporter in Florida asked Biden a few hard questions, and here's the Obama campaign's response:

The Obama spokesperson issued this statement about the interview: "There's nothing wrong with tough questions, but reporters have the very important job of sharing the truth with the public -- not misleading the American people with false information. Senator Biden handled the interview well; however, the anchor was completely unprofessional. Senator Biden's wife is not running for elected office, and there are many other stations in the Orlando television market that would gladly conduct a respectful and factual interview with her." "This cancellation is non-negotiable, and further opportunities for your station to interview with this campaign are unlikely, at best for the duration of the remaining days until the election."

So. . .if he's president, will all press that presents an opposing viewpoint have similar responses?

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

Obama 2008

Marxism: a belief in the redistribution of wealth

Obama Direct Quote to Joe the Plumer: "I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."

A long list of people who also thought as Obama does: Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, Josef Stallin, Vladimir Lenin, Adolf Hitler, Mao ZeDong, etc. etc. etc.

Wars AMERICA fought, specifically in oposition to Marxists: World War I, World War II, Vietnam, the Cold War, the Korean War, etc. etc. etc.

America-- Let's NOT go down this road.

Thursday, October 23, 2008

Preserve the REAL American Dream: Vote NOT Obama

Voting Obama = The Death of the American Dream:

What is the American Dream? Is it the ideal that the adorable little Fivel puts forth in American Tale—that “there are no cats in America and the streets are paved with cheese”? What are the ‘streets paved of gold’ that the immigrants who built this country came for, anyway? I submit it was NOT handouts from the government.

Obama keeps saying, “look, the taxes I would raise would only affect those making over $250k/year.”—like that doesn’t really affect anyone in America! He says it like no one here cares if anyone else makes more than a certain set amount, and what’s most degrading is he says it like he thinks no one really ever PLANS on making more than that certain set amount.

He picked $250k because it sounds so high that he believes most Americans will find that number unattainable. The exact amount is SO NOT THE POINT! it’s the PRINCIPLE that’s flawed. Why? Because it takes PROPERTY from those who rightfully earned it. It’s the government stepping in and saying to a business owner, an entrepreneur, a sales person—namely, to YOU AND ME (whenever we reach the “cutoff” level), “Look, since you’re good at what you do, and you have proven you can profitably build economic benefits for your community and our country, we’re going to TAKE from you what you have earned.” The backhanded incentive is this: DON’T TRY! Don’t try to build wealth, don’t try to make a profitable business, don’t do the things that make our country ABLE to provide for its people.

It’s a dangerous road. And it’s NOT the American dream that our country was founded upon. THAT dream is Life, Liberty, and Property. We’ve recently changed “property” in our modern mantras to “Pursuit of Happiness”, but rest assured, the founding fathers spoke very specifically of PROPERTY. Why do you think our great Lady Liberty offered to take the world’s poor, their sick, their weak, their huddled masses? Yeah, we're compassionate, but there's more to it than that. It’s because these are the poeple who can build a GREAT nation. They build great nations because, when given the opportunity, they make something of it. Then they take care of the rest of those in need in our nation. These imigrants--the builders of our nation--are poor, sick, weak, and huddled in masses BECAUSE OF THE GOVERNMENTS FROM WHICH THEY COME.

These were governments like Great Britain, against whom our forefathers rebelled because they levied taxes that were a.) greater than should be born by the citizens of any nation, and b.) did not offer significant representation by those contributing the funds. These were nations like Ireland, who had failed to grant sufficient rights to potential land owners, businesses, and individuals to produce meaningful economic growth, and instead stifled such things by attempting to control the economy via the few and powerful. All of these detrimental social economic systems are part of Obama’s vision for the “New” American Dream. (You wanna read a scary book—one that tactfully and subtly articulates what Marx might call the American proletariat revolution towards 100% socialized economy? Then check out Obama’s The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts of Reclaiming the American Dream.)

Speaking of the Evil Empire--which is socialism (but that Reagan addressed under the name of Communism)—The USSR is a prime example of why NOT to make the shift that Obama proposes. IT JUST DOESN’T WORK. Planned economies promise much, but deliver SO MUCH LESS than profit-motivated businesses who have a PERSONAL VESTED INTEREST in making impactful economic decisions. Would the businesses on Wall street have risked so much, putting us in the economic mess we're in now, if we hadn't socialized quite so much--namely, to the point that they EXPECTED that if they ran into trouble, the govenment would throw them a bone (from you and me)? I think not. (Also, I think if we were going to sell our free market economy, I would have thought it would have gone for a lot more than a piddly $700 billion.)

So who DOES keep our nation thriving? The builders of our nation came from all over the world from countries like Poland, Ireland, France, Germany, and elsewhere to build a dream. They’re still coming from the Former USSR, India, Mexico and South America, China, Japan, and Africa. They’re coming for the same reason as they came before. NOT for the “free cheese” and government social care. They’re coming for the same reason I work at what I do. It's the dream of entrepreneurial opportunity that Obama and his policy makers would seek to destroy.

I own a small business (and I mean SMALL). From it’s current growth, though, I expect that by the end of 2010 (less than TWO YEARS FROM NOW), this business will easily produce more than $250,000 in revenue. Yeah—be impressed until I tell you the next part: Of that HUGE sounding AMOUNT of $250,000—given the 10% profit margin this business creates after necessary business operational expenses (and I’m not talking extravagant junkets at the 4-seasons)—my family will earn a GRAND TOTAL of $25,000 to live on from this business. And THAT IS THE MONEY OBAMA WANTS TO TAKE to fund all the grand promises he offers to those who are na├»ve enough to believe that Fivel’s little tale is really what people want from America.

Don’t buy it, America. Obama says $250k this year. First—I think there are FAR, FAR more of us that are so much closer to that figure than you realize. Second—even if YOU are not close at all, nor never hope to be, keep in mind that for you to have an income of ANY kind, it takes SOMEONE to employ you to have a business that brings in at least somewhere close to that amount. If you're a teacher or government employee, then yeah--I can see a short-sighted personal interest in building the financial strength of your employer. But would you really sail the rest of us up the river for your perceived benefit?

And, yes, I use the word "perceived" because that's ALL it is: a perception. A.) Even though Obama might say otherwise, I DON'T think you're going to see any huge salary increase. B.) Where does the money come from when all the businesses have given all they have, and there's no more to cover the need? Public school teachers, have you compared the salaries of private-school teachers to your own? Their better! Know why? FREE ENTERPRISE GET'S BETTER RESULTS THAN GOVERNMENT!!! Always has, always will. You know what kids' test scores in private institutions are? Better than public. Number of sick/personal days among students? fewer. Student morale? Higher. Students' general average contribution to society after graduation? Ha. Gotcha. I haven't actually seen a statistic on that one. Just thought I'd throw it in there as some food for thought.

So what am I proposing here regarding schools? Nothing. I'm simply articulating the point that EVEN the schools (our most socialized institution yet) benefit from free enterprise. And yes, "benefit" means even the poor, inner-city kid who could never afford school, etc. etc. . . . I won't discuss the 'workability' of such a plan as privatizing America's education here, but when a business is properly motivated to meet an objective, I fully believe that 100% of the time. . . Let me repeat so I am clear here: EVERY SINGLE TIME, IN EVERY SINGLE CIRCUMSTANCE, 100 % of the time. . . a free enterprise organization will meet that objective better than a socialized government institution. And yes--absolutely yes--I'm talking EVEN about the objective of 'looking out for others'. Private organizations do it FAR AND AWAY better than government. Compare the 100% privately operated welfare system or humanitarian aid program of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and compare it to ANY government welfare/aid program. You do the research and get 'success rates' (if you can identify what success even means to the government organization at all). Let me know what you find. I know what it will be: the private organization does it better. Hands down, better. It just always happens that way.

When you socialize, over time the ruling group will suck all the life from the golden goose of the people, and we all go hungry. And yes, I have SEEN IT in real life. This is not a myth or a theory. It really happens. I actually SAW bare store shelves and food lines in a socialist country because there was neither enough agricultural enterprise nor government subsidies to provide for the needs of the people--IT SUCKS!!! The more of the money that business can create and keep, the BETTER they can provide for you--even if those businesses are not your employer.

So, who do you trust to take care of your needs? An employer you can rely on, or a nebulous “The People” (Funny how when governments socialize, they start calling the government “the people” so we idiots can say, “oh yeah, the government didn’t just do ANYTHING—“the people” [i.e. you and I] did it.)

Finally, $250k is a STARTING number to introduce a socialist principle. What’s the number next year? $200k? $100k? $50k? It doesn’t matter.

What matters is that Obama’s government thinks it can do a better job building our American Dream than we can. On a TV broadcast of a big event, I overheard Obama jokingly address the 'misconception' that some thought he may have been born in a manger (presumably near Bethlehem). He corrected the view by alluding to his "actual" birth on Kripton (Superman’s birthplace), where he was given the mission to come rescue a world in need [paraphrased]. I’m not offended as a Christian (although I should be). I’m offended as an AMERICAN, who still believes in THE REAL AMERICAN DREAM of life, liberty, and property, (keeping in mind that Jefferson said that without access to the third, the first two disappear quickly—I’ll find you the exact quote later).

Obama's birthplace joke is Funny for a moment—until you think about what his jest implies about his vision as a leader of our country. He sees himself as a SAVIOR of a struggling nation—just as Mao did; just as Lenin and Stalin did; and just as Hitler did! (I can't wait to see what the national Obama icon/statue he'll have erected in front of all govenmnet buildings is going to look like.) Please, please, please: Don’t buy it America! You may site China as an example of successful communism, but Mao only started seeing REAL success when China opened its doors and capitalized its economy--not to mention the fact that the tribal dictatorships that existed before were even more devastating to Life, Liberty, and Property than the institution Mao brought. But even given China's growth, Life and Liberty are still very limited here [yes, I’m writing this while in China]—you can still only have one child, our church can’t officially organize or proselyte here, this blog will probably be blocked by the censors, and I have to do business with the government here, or not at all. We're NOT pre-unified China, folks. We're the land of the free and the home of the brave. We ARE one nation under God. We believe in life, liberty, and property. Let’s not regress, America! Live the REAL AMERICAN DREAM: vote NOT Obama!!!

Monday, October 13, 2008

Quote of the day

Here's the Quote of the day:

"Never argue with a stupid person. They bring you down to their level, then beat you with experience." -ha.

I read this on a forum called place where star wars geeks hang out and omment on the most random stuff imaginable. I came to this forum, because I had typed a question into "Do peanuts go bad?" I was asking this question because the taste of the really old peanuts I had just eaten made me want to confirm what I had deducted myself, (which is, yes, they absolutely go bad--and when you eat bad peanuts, the taste just stays with you. . . bleghhh.)

Anyway, so I came across this post that referred to peanut butter. The event the guy on the forum recounts reminds me a lot of something my brother, Wade, might do. What's more, it sounds like the way Wade might even say it. Funny stuff. Here's what he said on the forum:

"Had this large jar of Skippy Creamy in my cabinet for the better part of 16 months, and up to about a few months ago, it was still fine when I needed it (a hotdog here and there, or a quick PBJ). And honestly, even with the change of seasons, the climatic conditions in my apartment here in NYC are pretty stable throughout the year. Well, the other day, I had a hankerin' for a PBJ (can't remember how old the J is, but I do replace my bread accordingly!!), and I noticed that the PB on the sides of the jar were of a considerably stiffer consistency than the bulk of it in the bottom (kinda' like spackle). No biggie, just use the soft stuff, right? Well.....the best way to describe the taste is glue...or like before, kinda' like spackle. I was eventually able to wash the majority of the protein-based adhesive from the corners of my teeth, but the aftertaste lingered for a few days. Luckily, I'm single this Valentines.

"There was some separated oil, but this was just plain scary. I've had 'separated' PB before, but there had to have been a high level of toxicity in this stuff by then. Believe me, it wasn't worth the stirring.

"So learn from my debacle, unless you are certain that you will be going through a lot of peanut butter on a regular basis, you're better off getting the small or medium containers, even though the big ones are more economical. Don't let size fool you into assuming equitable stamina. Did I mention that I'm single this Valentines?"

Anyway. Dumb post, but I feel forwarned now about peanut butter.