And now, for something sad

You may have seen special products or charity items for the Susan G. Komen foundation recently at a number of locations. Every year, the "race for the cure" comes to California and the San Diego area, and you see the color pink everywhere. In my humble opinion, this is one of the best foundations to donate time, money and energy to, and I encourage everyone to do at least one thing to promote or support this organization.

So, each year, I find myself buying items I normally would not purchase, or would normally not pay the higher price for, because I want to be able to do something. I always support a walker in the local marathon each year, and a few years ago, I participated myself. I plan on doing the same next year.

Last night, I went to the local supermarket to pick up some items for a potluck lunch. There was a donation card pack right next to the credit card swipe machine. For one buck you fill out who your donation is in "memory of". I paid for my purchases and was surprised that the cashier did not make her pitch for a donation. So, I took a dollar out and pointed to the card.

The look on the woman's face was one of shock, then gratitude. She asked me if I really wanted to buy one, then a big smile crossed her face and she said thank you! We then chatted for a minute since there was no line. She has been a cashier for about 17 years and she has noticed that year after year (about the last 6-7 that she recalls), people donate less, and seem much more selfish and self-centered. They are often abrupt with her when they say no to a donation. She said that I was the first person who donated in her shift that day and the first who has offered rather than waited for her to say something in over a week.

Does that strike anyone as sad, yet very telling of the world today? Have we reached the point where a buck is too much to ask for? Where people cease to be charitable? Where the pain of someone else is to be ignored? I am afraid of what we as humans have become.

It's all about race, man!

I told a co-worker about 3 months ago that it would come down to this.

If you don't vote for Obama, you are a racist.

It's that simple. There is no other explanation.

The liberal media

vs.





About a year ago, I purchased a magazine subscription from some program. I forget who it was for and what it was for. The choices of magazines were pretty slim and since I am not an avid hunter, fisherman, machinist or carpenter, the best of the remaining choices was "Time" magazine. So, I signed up for I think the two year selection and soon the familiar red bordered magazine cover showed up in my mailbox.

I have been dealing with some personal issues, so I was behind on my magazine reading for the last few weeks. However, I finally had the chance to read The 9/1/08 and 9/8/08 magazines, which dealt with the two major political parties and their candidates.

If you ever wanted to see an example of media bias, you simply need to read these two selections and compare them. The Democratic party issue and discussion of Barack Obama is full of the same tired stories of Obama. His upbringing and unique family unit, his community activism, and his political ascent. His wife and family are also discussed. The various articles deal with typical Democrat issues and they gloss over any real controversy.

Now compare it to the second in the series. The Republican party issue is full of the same, tired, information the liberal media spews out. McCain, the rowdy young man. McCain, the graduate near the bottom of his class. McCain, the womanizer. McCain, the terrible husband who has a failed marriage. McCain ,the maverick in politics who is mean and grumpy and cannot get along with anyone. McCain, who is like George Bush despite the issue actually pointing out all the differences between them. Oh, and let's not forget, McCain, the POW (which does not actually mean anything to anyone). The rest of the articles deal with Republican issues and how screwed up America is right now (strongly hinting at it being ALL the fault of the Republican party).

I will a few issues that I would highlight to show some extreme differences that I found, and to make it easier for you, dear reader.

First and foremost, the article about McCain does mention his accomplishments as a public servant, but in a backhanded way. Despite examples of success in the passage of bills and reaching across the isle to work with the Democrats, the magazine constantly goes back again and again to describe McCain as uncompromising, boorish, even downright mean.

Meanwhile, Obama's experience (or lack thereof) is glossed over, focusing on his time as a community organizer and placing a lot of emphasis from the perspective of his wife. What is most amusing is that the article points to his current campaign as evidence of his "experience", and that he is able to run a pretty good campaign. Somehow, this equates to experience to lead an entire country. This argument has been used a few times in recent memory, so I guess I should not be surprised.

Second, Time discusses in detail McCain's wild youth and his family, going so far as to discuss his father and grandfather's personalities and calling his father and alcoholic. McCain is described as a brawler, a womanizer, and a party animal. His prior transgressions are laid out in detail. Meanwhile the Democratic issue says nothing of Obama's young trusts while in college, the parties he likely went to, and most notably, his admissions of drug use and participation. In fact, his past is barely examined at all, while McCain's was thoroughly explored.

Further, we hear nothing about Obama's family, save for how great his wife and kids are. Nothing about a father who abandoned him. A mother who married multiple men and who also ultimately abandoned him to pursue her career while he lived with loving grandparents. Now, I get that his Mom was a free spirit, and that she decided to pursue a career and dream in largely a man's world. Yet, while we celebrate this idea, I note how current V.P. candidate Sarah Palin is ridiculed for her choice to run for an elected position and how she is obviously "abandoning" her family for her own personal goals. And while I am thinking of this, why has this not been analyzed at all?

These are just a few examples of an obviously slanted viewpoint. And they say there is no media bias!

Barack Obama v. Sarah Palin

I started to put together something similar to this comparison on Obama and Palin. Excellent review.

The left, and Palin, unhinged, part 1

This is what it has come down to: An interview with Amy Gwin, who was a beauty pageant contestant against Sarah Palin in 1984. Guess what? She would not vote for Sarah Palin!

Wow! Talk about hard-hitting journalism, brought to you by the fools at DailyKos.

And to think this is only the first day since the announcement she was the VP pick for McCain.

Why Democrats are afraid of Sarah Palin

The news is out, there is no more secrets. The table has been set and we are finally ready to wine and dine! Sarah Palin is the VP selection for the McCain ticket. And within 5 minutes of the selection, libs on http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ were scrambling with half-baked opinions on the selection. And, as to be expected, nothing positive was found on liberal web sites all over the web. Trust me, I looked everywhere!

This is why I love election season. It's a chance for real review and debate of the identity and ideas of the major parties, with a few of the smaller parties thrown in the mix. The season is meant to represent the best of both parties, and for hope for the future. And like every season since I became interested in politics (that would be 1992, my freshman year in high school), the Democrat party is beat by clever campaigning, and ceaseless attacks on the issues Democrats want to hide. And their response is the same each time: "We won't engage in personal attacks!" (until we are behind). "We will show that we are the party for the little guy" (until the true colors of lear-jet liberals are exposed). "We will show how much better we are for the country" (until the votes are counted, and the result states otherwise).

With the pick of Sarah Palin, the Democratic party finds themselves scrambling for an answer. She is a dark-horse. A relative unknown. And certainly not the candidate the Democrats expected. So what to do now? Attack her with everything she has ever done, no matter if it is right or not, and put some SPIN on that baby!

With all that will be heard in the next few months about this obviously fearsome creature, I will provide you with what I believe are the main points that strike fear into the hearts of liberals across the country. I have ordered them in what I believe is the order of their greatest to least fears.

She is a woman- Gone are the days of the Republican party as the party of "rich, white men". Here stands a woman in position to run the country, in the event McCain is unable to, which some think is a distinct possibility. I found it interesting that on the multiple liberal sites I visit every day, most of the commenting public who supported Hillary Clinton as a candidate are opposed to this selection. This will be discussed below. Palin represents a very important voting bloc- moderate women.

She is a mother- Liberals believe a mother is something to be admired when it represents their view of them- a victim, a helpless human, someone to be pitied, a single mother. This could not be farther from the truth! Women do not embody the sad picture liberals want them to be, so why see them this way? A victim makes for good commercials and lots of expensive government programs, and who better to choose than what liberals view as the weaker sex?

When a woman is strong, independent, but holds conservative values, the fact that she is also a mother takes the words "elitist", "uncaring", and "weak" right out of the picture. Which takes most of their personal attack arguments away as well. Mothers are still revered by most of the country, and that strikes fear into the black heart of the typical liberal.

She embodies the true definition of "feminism"- This will be explained here and elsewhere. To libs, a feminist is a woman who is a working professional, possibly a mother, independent, and a Democrat. A real feminist is a woman who is what she wants to be. Sarah Palin embodies this. She is a leader, a strong person, and a mother at the same time. She embodies what liberals love in themselves and hate in conservatives. Ironically enough, they love and hate for the same reason.

She is a working mother- Multi-tasking can be mighty scary! Especially when a woman can be a mother and politician at the same time. Palin is described as a "hockey-mom", which makes her a "normal" Mother and not the elitist snob title that Cindy McCain is pegged with.

She is the mother of multiple children, including a son diagnosed with Down Syndrome- Not only can she handle a child and a career, she can handle 5 children. And the fact that one of them has a disability is a disaster for the liberal side. She elected to carry the baby to term and not go the easy way out like the abortion-loving crowd would have her do. And now, "motherly" takes on a whole new meaning. I just wonder if Barack Obama considers her baby "punishment".

She has a son in the military- One of the oldest and most tired arguments I hear is when someone is in favor of war or aggression, their children MUST serve. I never understood this argument and I believe I discussed it in a much earlier post on this blog. Children who are eligible to serve are grown adults who can make their own decisions. And when was the last time you knew someone who was a true, independent adult who patterned their life based on their parents orders in EVERY way?

I also have noted before that Chelsea Clinton was eligible to serve during Operation Desert Fox and Operation Allied Force. Why was her service not discussed during this time? Oh, that's right! Because it was the child of a Democrat! It's just more of the do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do Democrat mantra.

Democrats cannot make an issue out of this with McCain's children and now they cannot make an issue out of it with Palin's.

She lacks a lot of experience- To some, this is a big disadvantage and I laugh that Democrats have already made this an issue, saying Palin is too inexperienced to be a "heartbeat away" from the Presidency. But I say its an advantage for two reasons.

First, if they are going to play that game, it opens their candidate (who, by the way is running for PRESIDENT) up to the lack of experience debate that he has been trying to avoid. What qualifies Obama to run? He has some state legislature experience, but most of that was spent campaigning for his Senate seat. Most of his Senate time has been spent campaigning for President. Despite the supposed qualifications he has, I have yet to see concrete evidence. Instead, what I see is a lot of attempts to hide his past experiences (see Bill Ayres and most of his time spent as a Law School Professor).

Second, it gives Democrats little to scrutinize, though they are doing their best. But most of the general public who actually pays attention to elections and votes already knows that no matter what a conservative does or says, it is the wrong thing. No matter what their position, it will be spun into something negative. Which is why men like T. Boone Pickens are scrutinized for taking a position on becoming a "greener" nation, despite the calls from the left. Which is why a pro-choice conservative is considered a sell-out, despite the calls from the left to be pro-choice. The list is endless.

She does not embody the spirit of the typical "politician"- As I have stated above, she is not the typical career politician. She does not look like one, nor does she act like one. For a great reference of the other end of the spectrum, see Joe Biden.

She is attractive- Attractive means the stupid jokes about looks won't work. If you don't think this is really an issue, then ask a liberal what they think of Rush Limbaugh's comments on Chelsea Clinton's looks. Then look at Hillary Clinton and think of the comparison's that would be made if both were in the running. The side by side pictures would be present ALL THE TIME, which would be devastating to Hillary.

As it stands right now, all they will have to deal with is an attractive woman in her 40's. My guess is you will see Michelle Obama's mug plastered everywhere since she is pretty attractive herself.

She is working-class- This is Barack Obama's best card, and like John McCain's military service card, he uses it often. Joe Biden even gets into the game by discussing his blue-collar roots. John McCain comes from a fairly well-to-do family and Cindy McCain has been attacked since day one over her wealth. However, Palin is working class as well, and it makes the Republican ticket more identifiable to everyday folks.

She is pro-life- Need I really say more?

She is a member of the NRA- See the answer for "pro-life". She can handle a gun and has no regrets about it! I also think it kind of weakens the Democrats argument about gun ownership since Alaska is a rugged area and hunting and shooting game are pretty common.

She is "pro-oil"- Big oil is the ultimate enemy for the left. We all know this. But Palin has an advantage on her side. Oil drilling, production, and distribution is a big part of the Alaskan economy and even Blue-dog Democrats from oil rich states acknowledge that if it is an important part of their economy, then it is not as big of an enemy as the environmentalists would like us to believe. The important question to ask is does it really make sense to not utilize a valuable commodity of the state to benefit its citizens?

In the end, these issues will come into play and the left will try to demonize Sarah Palin anyway they can. But do not think for a second that they are not afraid of this woman.

So much for free speech

I've said it before and I will say it again . . .

Libs love free speech . . . as long as it shows conservatives in a bad light.

Libs love free speech . . . as long as it shows libs in a favorable light.

For all the griping about how the Bush administration has stomped on the constitution over the last 8 years, I have yet to see any outcry about arresting reporters standing on a public street filming Democrat lobbyists and donors.

How a "green" convention is now a little more polluted

While the planning for the Democratic National convention consists of all things "green", it seems the attendees have forgotten what it means to be green.

Perhaps the easiest way to conserve energy and live a more "green" lifestyle is to simply walk or take public transportation. Al Gore preaches it. Democrats preach it. Conservationists and environmentalists preach it. So why are they not living it?

We have already seen Al Gore's hypocrisy exposed. First, his home, then the air-conditioned, running vehicle story, and finally a huge boat for his small family that runs on efficient bio-fuel. Except, ummmm, that fuel is not found at the dock where the boat it (it would have to be trucked in).

And now, we have this- a devastating shortage of gas-guzzling, energy inefficient limousines for the convention in Denver.

The Democratic Party slogan: DO AS I SAY, NOT AS I DO

When a "change in position" is not actually a change in position

Well, it had to happen sooner or later. I cannot say that I am surprised, but I can say that I am happy.

Barack Obama may have a change of heart on off-shore drilling.

Now, compromise is great, and I am glad that he is willing to "compromise". Compromise is good and compromise is needed, and the system should work that way. But what makes me really laugh is that on EVERY liberal blog I have checked on tonight (counting 5 as of this writing), the liberal posters who shouted "no drilling, at all!" at one point are now praising this move, indicating it is not a change of position, a flip-flop, whatever you wish to call it.

So, its official. With very few exceptions, any member of the congregation of the church of Obama will accept anything he says, regardless of a prior position. And they call Republicans and conservatives "goose-steppers" . . . . .

Barack Obama- "Do as I say, not as I do"

According to Barack Obama, we all need to learn foreign languages because its embarrassing that we cannot speak a second language and so many people from other countries can.

Except he can't speak a foreign language either.

Does he even know the real reason why so many people around the world speak English? It's because it is the international language of business and prosperity. I doubt that all the people from Europe, Mexico/South America, the Middle East and the Far East speak English because they like to come here to vacation. Most of them have never even been on American soil. They learn the language because speaking it gives you an advantage. I'd put "vacationing in America" as reason number 8 or 9.

Barack Obama- "Do as I say, not as I do"

A response to HumeSkeptic at huffingtonpost

I posted a comment on the following story and was called out by HumeSkeptic- the frequent, but incorrect poster on that site.

www.Huffingtonpost.com claims to believe in free speech, but spends a ton of time censoring people that post. I myself have been censored over 20 times that I am aware of, and not for inappropriate comments or profanity.

I tried to respond to his challenge that I could not find a single person who was in favor of Iran's nuclear pursuits, but against the U.S.'s pursuit of the same. I promised myself I would limit my response to about 15 minutes, but as I state in my 3 part response, there are likely many more people than what I found in just a few minutes. Unfortunately, I do not have the site's server to acccess and comments are limited to review of the most recent entries from posters.

Be that as it may, I did find a few people.

-----------------

Well, I wish I had time and the ability to cross reference everything anyone ever said on this site. Unfortunately, we don’t have that feature and our profiles do not show all that we have commented on. So, I promised myself I would dedicate only 15 minutes to the research you demanded. This will come in 3 parts, I hope they load in order.

Gr8abz, from this article

“I agree totally. Who the hell are we to tell Iran they cannot have a nuke? It's obnoxious and arrogant. I don't get it”

And then compare to . . .

“COMPANIES BEGIN QUEST FOR OIL AND GAS OFF FLORIDA COASTS
Hey, rwe. Where are they gonna dump all that radioactive waste from all those newly constructed nuke plants? NOBODY wants that crap in their farmland. And whose gonna pay for a Nuclear America anyway? Our tax dollars?? Nuclear energy is THE MOST EXPENSIVE to safeguard and maintain. rwe -- you are either uneducated a moron or both. posted 07/05/2008 at 11:41:08”

Sounds to me like he has valid points regarding the radioactive waste, but he seems perfectly ok with Iran producing some.

Part 2
Darthdarcy, from this article

“That's exactly what Bush and Cheney and our war monger Secretary of State want to hear...
There's gonna be War and before the election mark my words...”

I compared that to a comment I found on an article from June. I went through another profile on this article list to cross-reference, since darthdarcy’s profile only shows a certain number of “latest entries”.

Here it is . . .

McCain: Build 45 new Reactors, 6/18/08
“Nuclear plants built with bonds that the Tax Payer pays for..subsidizing the entire industry..Also no one ever mentions the huge dangerous pollution associated with mining the uranium and processing it for use in the Nuclear plants...everybody forgets about that so it's not a clean technology..then there's the waste..Einstein said you can't use Nuclear energy for power due to the waste, but hey what did Einstein know..?”

And . . .

“Google Harvey Wasserman his video, Nuclear Nonsense is great and America should see it...!Harvey Wasserman Nuclear Nonsense Google that...Also here's Harvey Wasserman at Counter Punch http://www.counterpunch.org/wasserman02282007.htmlThen there's the article Wasserman wrote for Huffington post Jan. 5 2008...”

Not a great find, but I see darthdarcy arguing in favor of a policy that the Bush administration is against.

Part 3

JackND probably has it right, it is a NIMBY issue. Be that as it may, I am sure you will now spend your precious time trying to further mince what I have found, so I will debunk your response ahead of time. Nowhere do gr8abz and darthdarcy say they are for nuclear power in the U.S. if the issue of waste is resolved. In fact, they both specifically posted against the use of nuclear power.

If people actually spent time and analyzed the option, nuclear power is safe and the technology regarding waste is getting better. And to further prove my point since you like to throw around “straw man” accusations, I speak from a decent level of knowledge. My father in law worked on the decommission project of Unit 1, and his best friend and the man that married my wife and I is a lead engineer for So. Cal. Edison and still works at the plant. Libs love to talk about the advantages of solar, geothermal and wind power technology, and the improvements that have been made, so why cannot nuclear be considered?

What is right with America

As I sit in front of my computer this evening, I find myself reflecting on my day and on the state of our nation. Today, we celebrate the 232nd birthday of the greatest nation ever conceived of by man. Many of us had picnics or barbecues, attended flag raising ceremonies, or spent time with our friends and family. Millions of Americans took some time today to be thankful for all that God and the United States of America have provided for them.

After dinner, I visited my usual group of websites and blogs for my daily dose of political news and comment. I noticed a big contrast between “conservative” and “liberal” leaning websites. On conservative sites, I saw positive messages of well-wishes, hope and praise, and lots of positive comments from people all over the country. On the more liberal sites, I also saw some of the same happy and uplifting comments, but most of the comments I read on these sites were negative when it came to talk of the nation and the status of the lives of the people who took the time to leave a message.

Why is that? I believe it reaffirms my opinion that in general, liberals are not positive people. They choose to view the glass as half empty, and view the world around them with skepticism, anger, despair, and just downright negativity. Sadly, many of these poor souls don’t believe (or understand) that it is them, and them alone, that make up their own destiny, and that they awake each day with a choice- to be positive, or to be negative. Don’t believe me? Take a look at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ and then tell me what you think.

Therefore, rather than be pessimistic and miserable this evening, I am going to tell you what I think is right with America. I will give you examples from my day today, as I had the opportunity to explore some of my little corner of this nation.

This morning, I woke up a few hours later than normal. My wife and I did not have our daughter with us this year for the 4th of July, and we wanted to take advantage of extra time to sleep. I woke up in my own bed, safe and comfortable. I felt safe and comfortable because I live in a wonderful country with good people who are my neighbors. We have law and order, and it is this law and order that helps keep my family safe from many of the evils in this world. I sat up in bed and said a little prayer of thanks to my God without fear of persecution or reprisal from my government.

I then walked downstairs and said good morning to my lovely wife. A few years ago, I had the good fortune to marry a wonderful woman with the grace and blessing of my God and family because I live in a nation that allows me to select my mate and allows me to marry her not just in the eyes of the State of California, but also in the eyes of my God. She smiled at me, said good morning right back, and gave me a little kiss.

The first thing I did was to hang a new American flag that I had purchased a few days before. Our old flag was just that, old, and we wanted to get a new one. We have not had a new flag in awhile. I hung the flag holder on a porch post, unfurled a new 3x5 flag (made in the U.S.A.), and proudly displayed it outside of our home. It felt great to display this banner of freedom and opportunity right next to my front door.

My wife and I then went to the store to find some fresh corn and a few other things for our barbecue this evening. The two grocery stores in my area were all sold out of corn last night, and there was to be an early morning shipment of fruits and vegetables. My wife and I were able to browse the isles at our leisure and we purchased some food we knew to be safe to eat and healthy, thanks to a government which monitors food quality and looks out for its citizens. We purchased items grown and made by people in this country who have the ability and right to choose their own profession, and to earn a living my doing whatever they choose to do.

After we got home, we decided to go to a movie. We headed to the nearest indoor mall where it was nice and cool. Despite what the liberals in this country call a “horrible” economy, there were hundreds of shoppers enjoying a day out. All who were at the mall live in a country where capitalism makes it possible for ordinary people to start and operate a business, and to make a living offering a wide variety of products and services. No person or government official tells them they cannot open a reasonable business and operate it within the parameters of the law. The mall we visited had all of its shops open and people were browsing and buying. We saw men, women and children laughing, playing, shopping, and spending time supporting our economy. My wife and I purchased about $100 worth of food, clothes, and entertainment to about 5 different stores and a restaurant. Because of this great nation, we purchased food and clothes made in this country, and ate delicious Chinese food without leaving our small town!

The citizens of our country enjoy a very high level of freedom of speech and expression, which is somewhat rare outside of our borders. As a result, my wife and I sat in the dark and comfort of the movie theatre and watched a good movie that involved the employment and hard work of many people in this country. We were not harassed for going to watch people speak about a particular viewpoint, and we were not harmed for snacking on the candy we wanted to eat, nor were we arrested and disciplined for holding hands and giving each other a kiss in the dark.

After the movie was over, we drove back to our home. Because we live in this great country, my wife and I were able to purchase a comfortable home, in a safe city, in the best county in the State, in the best State in the Union. We were able to afford this home because we are both gainfully employed. We have jobs we enjoy (for the most part!), and because we work hard, we are paid pretty well for what we do. Inside our home, we enjoy all of the basic necessities of life and many luxuries as well.

You see, unknown to the typical liberal mind, anyone who wants to try hard enough can find a job they enjoy and can perform that job to the best of their ability and be rewarded. If they work hard, persevere, and never give up, then they too can live in a home where they can relax and be comfortable. And due to innovation, talent, creativity of the citizens of this country, we have clean running water, sanitation devices, energy to light, heat, and cool the house, and energy to run all the various appliances in our home.

Awhile after we arrived home, I went to work cleaning and prepping the barbecue. My wife started to prepare the corn and boiled the bratwurst in a broth of peppers and onions. I put some charcoal on the barbecue and started them up. We then cooked our delicious corn and bratwurst and served it with some crock-pot brown sugar beans, potato salad and lemonade. After dinner we watched a little TV, thanks again to the freedom of speech. We ended our evening watching some fireworks courtesy of our city.

Overall, it was a great day, and I enjoyed every minute of it. Unfortunately, it seems many of the posters on various websites I visited this evening chose to spend the day whining and complaining about everything under the sun. It is sad, and quite honestly, pathetic! We have gone from a nation of people who work hard and persevere to people who have become lazy, and who believe things need to be handed to them. Experiencing trials and tribulations as a way to make one stronger are a thing of the past. Instead when life does not go their way, there are many people who expect others to make it up to them. They expect the government to cure all which ails them, and they expect it to be done immediately. They insist that “someone else” is to blame for their problems. “Someone else” is the reason why they don’t succeed. “Someone else” needs to take care of them.

And in their quest to pass the blame for their trials and their failures, they seem to forget the concept of inner reflection and the belief that it is the individual which ultimately succeeds because the individual refuses to believe that they are not meant to achieve their dreams and goals.

There are many Americans who truly hate America. They spend a good portion of their life arguing against the traditions and beliefs on which this country was founded. They see religion as evil. They see law and order only as a means of oppression. They view the family unit as an old and tired concept. Freedom is something that is desired, but only as long as it serves their agenda. Otherwise, freedom is a negative idea. Further, their view of what freedom is and what it means is often perverted from what our founding father’s intended it to be. They see any opposition to their viewpoints as “elitist” or “racist”, and often use these and many other derogatory terms in an attempt to label and silence the opposition. They do not believe in the individual- instead all they see is a nanny-state government.

I agree that America is not perfect. America has a history of wrongs to other nations and to individuals. Those that govern America often let their personal beliefs and opinions cloud what should be the best course of action for the country. And this is to be expected. People by nature are weak, lazy, easily impressionable, and often want what is only the best for them. As a result, the policies and procedures that are implemented by our leaders can and do take the country in the wrong direction.

But I also know what is right with America, and today I had the opportunity to witness it first hand. I hope that there were many other people who may read this who took the time to be thankful for the opportunities this great country provides for them, and for their friends and family.

To close, I wanted to post some pictures that reflect what this day is all about. I took them while chaperoning my daughter’s troop at the 2008 Girl Scout Operation Thin Mint sendoff on the U.S.S. Midway. I believe what you are about see is inspiring and reflects the hope and promise of what this country exemplifies. Happy 232 America and God bless you!

Keith Olbermann is an idiot

When it comes to "heroes" according to the left, Keith Olbermann is right up near the top with his half-baked analysis of politics and his "worst person" (cue scary music) segment. Despite an elitist attitude and odd love for ketchup packets, the left is quick to dismiss any negative story about him as a smear tactic, and they flock to his spoken word like moths to a flame.

But when does his hard hitting analysis of events in our world demonstrate the hack he really is?
Answer- When he bashes the Bush administration for their position on a topic, then supports Obama when he supports the same thing. When I read this story today, it made me laugh at loud. I remember some of the broadcast earlier this year and was surprised at how boldly he called the Bush administration a bunch of fascists. Yet, when the beloved beacon of the left, Barack Obama supports similar legislature, it is a bold move.

Hypocrisy, they name is Olbermann.

The race card is thrown . . . Yet again . . .

I read this story today on another site and it made me laugh. I did not know that asking people to comply with health code requirements and possibly preventing free barbecue was somehow equated with slavery.

Then, it made me wonder. Have we finally arrived at the point in our society where any attempt to ensure public safety or to enforce laws is considered racist? We cannot enforce health codes, because it is racist against African-Americans. Yet, if someone had gotten sick from the barbecue, who do you think would be sued? the city- for not enforcing the health code! We cannot ask for ID's at valid police stops because it is racist against Hispanics and illegal aliens. Yet everyone knows that the vast majority of illegal aliens are Hispanic or from Central and South America. Like it or not, that is a basic fact. And last time I checked, police asking for ID's were equal opportunistic. The don't care who you are, as long as you have ID! We cannot search people of middle eastern descent at airports or who act suspicious. Yet most terrorists of modern day are of middle eastern descent.

And when things go wrong, what ALWAYS happens? The finger pointing starts and the blames begin. The government should have done more! That illegal should have been deported! This could have been prevented! And then the vicious cycle is complete because while there are calls for more to be done, anything that is attempted is knocked down, by the politically-correct-no-one-is-responsible-for-their-actions-make-cookies-for-those-who-want-to-kill-us crowd. It just does not make sense.

Do you ever wonder why you almost never hear a white person complain when they are called "crackers" or a host of other derogatory slangs, or when they accused of racism? Or how they learn to live with reverse racism, like affirmative action. Do you ever wonder why pretty much anything these days is considered racist? Why is it that rap music or derogatory comments by blacks to other African-Americans is somehow acceptable? Or how about when people like Bill Cosby tell the truth about all of the issues pertaining to the black society he is a sell out, yet when Obama preaches the same on Sunday, he is deemed as correct? Better yet, imagine what would have happened if a white politician gave the exact same speech!

I'll tell you why. Because its not a big deal. My parents raised me to not give a rip about what others thought, did, and said. Instead, I was told to worry about my own damn self. And guess what? I came out ok. I ignored the comments about my race, about my gender, my size, my religious preference, my lifestyle. And I ended up ok. Perhaps there is a lesson to be learned in that. Too bad all of the sheeple out there who allow nonsense prevail will never learn it.

The battle over who is "minority" enough

I started this post awhile back before my personal life derailed for a few days and I had to get back on track. So here it is now.

A little over a week ago, I was walking to the recycle bin to drop off some documents for shredding. I have to walk across the whole office to do so, and when I do this weekly chore, I enjoy listening to the conversations of the other unit employees. I passed the desk of this rather obnoxious, loud woman. I can always hear her from my section, down a few sections. Anyway, she was just on Cloud 9 that Obama had sealed up the nomination and was telling everyone she was voting for him. Her primary reason, because a minority needed to be in the White House.

I casually asked what part of Obama's platform she liked the most, and as is typical with most Obama supporters, she could not mention anything he stood for or accomplishments he has under his belt. She was stuck on the minority thing. I then asked if it mattered if there was a "minority" as President or as Vice President, to which she replied it did not really matter, but there was only one person of minority status in the running.

I then asked what would she think if Piyush "Bobby" Jindal ran as McCain's VP selection. She did not know who that was and I said he was a minority, specifically, he was an Indian-American. She then said that was a "racist term, they are Native Americans". I heartily laughed at that and said he was Indian, as sometimes called Asian-Indian, or from the country of India.

She then said that she would still vote for Obama. I asked why, since the "minority" issue seemed to be her only requirement. Her response- because Obama is "more of a minority". I wanted to ask her what that meant, but then again, you cannot reason with most fools.

Oh the hypocrisy!

I don't know how long this link will be up on www.Huffingtonpost.com, but this topic always makes me laugh.

Before the election season kicks off, one of the big whines that comes from the left is a call for "public financing" and to change and make more public financing laws more restrictive. Then Obama gets a lot of small donations from a lot of people, raises a ton of money, completely de-railing all of the arguments, and all of the sudden, McCain is the target because he may use public financing, for whatever the reason.

Next we will hear campaign reform regarding contributions directly to the DNC and the RNC. Why? Because the RNC is still outperforming the DNC by multiples. Until, of course, the DNC gets their act together.

Religion IS allowed in public schools, but no Christianity!

I read this story today and have a few questions for the school and for the reading populus.

What do you think would have happened had it been a christian person addressing the "christian lifestyle"?

Where is the ACLU?

If information on the religion of Islam is available in any book in the library, do they allow books from a christian perspective, or even a bible?

Sex education gone wild

I read this story and once again received confirmation that sending my daughter to a good, christian school was the right choice to make, expenses be damned!

Now, granted, this is 8th grade, and my daughter's school currently only goes through the 6th grade, but we will likely be transferring her to a christian private school until high school.

If you are not disturbed by this story and interview, please do me a favor and stay away from me and my family. If you are disturbed by the story, but wonder why we are at this point in the world, then allow me to give you my thoughts.

To me, it is real simple. Since the decline of our education system, which I think started in the early 80's, what has changed? We have taken God out of the classroom. We have taken parental choice out of the classroom and have replaced the choice with teacher discretion and teacher union backing. We have taken wrong vs. right answers out of the classroom. We have adopted a PC approach to teaching, where there are no wrong answers and no accountability. Letter grades and red pens are being replaced with smiley faces and partial credit for "thoughtful" answers. Children are no longer seen as innocent and must be inundated with a never-ending barrage of images and material pertaining to sex, drugs, inappropriate behavior, and anti-American view points. All in the name of a "better education". These things are more important than teaching kids how to read, write, perform math, and understand science. Unless of course, it is to teach evolution only.

And what has happened? Test scores are down. Kids graduate from high school without the ability to read. School violence rates increase and we have kids performing mass murder on school grounds. And the parents of these children often point the finger elsewhere, file lawsuits because the system exposes their kids as not being ready to enter the world, and other such challenges arise. Or even worse, change the way the test is written to get scores higher.

Does that make sense? A child cannot pass a test they should have been able to pass between the 8th and 10th grades, so instead of forcing that kid to study and learn, they want to make it easier? What message does that give our children? If you are dumb enough, you will get by? Is this education really better? How about you teach our kids how to read and write and develop skills necessary to compete in the real world and let the parent's give you input on this process, while they also teach their children about the horrors of the real world.

As if we needed any more reasons to build a fence

Are we ever going to really get serious about protection for our citizens? I am not talking about someone who crosses into Mexico. As far as I am concerned, your chances of death double if not triple by crossing over into ol' Mexico.

Drugs are a huge problem, and they are only getting worse. And just because most of the death occurs in Mexico, there is no reason to believe it will not get worse here, particularly int he Southwest. Anyone who honestly believes these killings are not drug related needs to get their heads out of the sand.

Won't somebody think about the children!

I have said it before, and I will say it again. The problem is not with funding, it is how the money is spent on education.

How many times do I have to say it?

$8,610.00 per kid, and still that is not enough. Classroom sizes of 22-25 children are way too large. Chaos! Pandemonium! Outright terror over the education of our children!

And yet . . .

My daughter attends a private school with grades K-6. The teachers make comparable salaries to public school teachers and have decent benefits. Each class averages about 22 students, my daughter has 23 right now in her 1st grade class. WITH daycare provided before and after school, I spend less than $6,000 per year. If I did not require after school care, it would be $4,250.00 per year. Daycare averages to about $2.00 per hour.

And what do we get for this cost? Excellent, kind and caring staff. Decent facilities with good books and learning materials. A functional library. A decent computer lab. An after school study hall program. After school programs which include playground time, an exercise program, a Spanish program, and an occasional science program. Scouting program opportunities. A school musical. At least two field trips per class, per year. And, a christian education.

The school tests better as a whole than over 90% of the other schools in the entire State. My daughter reads at a 4th + grade level and has a 4th grade math comprehension level. The kids are taught cursive in kindergarten, and they do full book reports, including notes, drafts, and an art project in the 1st grade.

Now compare that to the average educational experience of kids in our public school system.

The effects of decreased illegal immigration

I doubt you would see an article like this on any liberal site. Or in most areas of the media for that matter.

Imagine that! Illegal immigrants leave a state and crime goes down. Budget issues are relieved. Hospital waits and care are decreased. Social service costs drop. Unemployment numbers look better. It makes perfect sense, but then again, sensible discussion is hard to come by when speaking to the pro-illegal crowd.

Why trim the budget, let's just spend more in California!

I made mention of Governor Schwarzenegger and his "spend more, reduce none" practices and budget proposals a few weeks ago on this blog.


In case you have been living under a rock, our supposed "conservative, Republican" Governor has turned into a spending machine the last 1.5 years or so, and seems content with the liberal-minded, Democrat thought process on raising taxes whenever the budget calls for it. Forget about cutting pork projects out. Forget about making school districts accountable for their teachers performance and for the horrific results on the education status of our children. Let's just take money from other sources and tax more!

Today, the Governor proposed borrowing against FUTURE state lottery revenue to close the budget deficit gap. While I was thinking about the article, I reminded myself of something discussed in the 1980's when the lottery was a hot topic. Wasn't a big benefit of the lottery to provide revenue for education in the first place? How much is being sent to the budget already?The site for the paper Contra Costa Times http://www.contracostatimes.com had a great proposal to cutting the debt down (sorry, but the link is not up for the site right now). The proposed the government sell unneeded and unnecessary lands. I doubt the Governor will take a look at that proposal. Instead, he wants to find money earmarked for other purposes and use it in a general fund capacity.

Schwarzenegger has also recently backed away from the most of the sound school cut proposals, which previously trimmed bloated school district staff positions and made the school districts and teachers unions more accountable for their membership and the results in the classroom. the purpose was to help get the budget under control. Instead, he will be INCREASING funding by $1.8 billion. The article mentions that there is still a $4 billion decrease because of no pay raises.


No pay raises? What about retaining the best teachers for the best education, which usually means a good salary with benefits? Why does the teacher always seem to get the first beating when it comes to budget cuts? Those are the questions which ALWAYS arise when education is discussed. Before you pull out your hanky and shed a tear over the poor teacher, consider how the budget is actually spent. Indeed, the average pay for teachers in this state is the highest in the nation (see page 2 of link).


In case that argument is not good enough, how about pay based on results, as it is in the rest of the real world? The concept is real simple. FOR EXAMPLE: When I go in for my yearly performance review, any salary increase for the following year is based on numbers: how many cases I closed, how my file reviews went, how the employers I work for rate my work product. The math is simple: the better the numbers, the better the raise. The worse the numbers, the lower the raise, to possibly no raise at all.


A lot has been said recently about where California ranks as far as per student funding. I read a relatively even-handed report last month from San Diego's local paper, which commented on different reports and method's for determining the per-student funding. You can read it here. The article makes brief mention of school performance, which bolsters my argument over merit pay. But what the article, does not mention, and what will almost never be mentioned in any article, ANYWHERE, is what amount of the per student money actually makes it to the classroom.


The California education bureaucracy is gigantic, the biggest in the nation. And on average, almost 50 cents of every dollar (1/2 of every dollar for the readers educated in the public education system) never makes it to the classroom. I would be very interested to see the report which compares that figure to the bureaucracy costs of each state in the union. I have yet to find that report, but I can guarantee you we are one of the worst in the nation. I would also be so bold as to assert that the other state education systems which have poor student results would have the same problem.

And while I am on the subject, make one more point, then touch on a taboo subject. I understand larger classrooms = more student problems and lower testing rates, for the most part. However, if you are educating 24 as opposed to 22 students, does the difference really matter at that point? The classroom received the extra $7 grand per student, yet the results are significantly lower? That does not seem to make sense to me.

Now, the taboo subject- illegal immigration and the effect on education. When my daughter needed to enter into the education system, her mother and I discussed public versus private education. During that discussion we both agreed that the school system in the area she was living was terrible, as was the school district area North of her home, and South of her home. My area had a pretty good district. The area to the East of me was not great, as was the area South. The area East to me and North had good testing and education marks. I checked each area with State figures and testing results.

What did all of these areas have in common? The areas with schools that had poor performance and overall district problems all have high illegal populations, high Spanish to English immersion figures and very high minority populations, the majority being Hispanic. The areas with good to great districts has the opposite. You can argue that this is an over-broad opinion and that my comments are racist in nature, or flawed in some manner. And I encourage you respond and comment on how I am incorrect. But like it or not, illegal immigration is a huge problem on the education system, and I challenge any reader to point out different. If you would like, I can give specific cities and specific districts.

Does this mean all minorities are the problem? Absolutely not! Does this mean that this trend is the same all over the state? Absolutely not! There are many minority students who are exceeding and doing well, illegal or not. There are districts doing well which may have a significant number of illegal students. There are districts with large numbers of Caucasian students who are doing poorly. What I am merely pointing out is that there is the 500 lb. gorilla in the room that is illegal immigration and people don't want to address it for fear of being called a racist or a bigot. But like it or not, a good hard look at the problem shows a big issue under the surface.

The solution to our State education and budget woes does not lie with tax increases and robbing the lottery revenue. It lies with cutting unnecessary bureaucracy positions and forcing the government to live within its means. Put in enough money to actually teach kids while limiting the bureaucracy cut, put in enough money to pay infrastructure improvements and maintenance, put in enough money for health and safety services, and then see what extra projects can be completed. And on top, quit pandering to Unions!

Bernie Ward- A story about a liberal you won't see on liberal sites

When a prominent conservative is accused of a sexual crime, no matter big or small, it appears on every liberal web site, one of the top stories.

When it pertains to a prominent liberal, you really won't see it anywhere.

And people say there is no liberal bias.

When this story first broke and Ward indicated he was only using the images as research material for a book, I went on more than a few prominent liberal sites, which had entry after entry of people who cried out that Ward was being framed, or he really was just doing research, or this was just a smear job. And my favorite, bringing up the likes of Senator Larry Craig and Mark Foley, two other idiots who should have been tossed long ago.

There, I said it- get rid of Foley (done) and Craig (pending). Does that make a lib feel better tonight? Will they sleep better knowing that there is a conservative out there who agrees with you? I hope so, now let's get back to the issue at hand.

Does the fact that there are disgusting Republicans and conservatives out there detract from this animal and his antics? No, it does not!

Now that the truth has come out, we know that Ward was not storing pictures for research. He was too busy sending the images along with some naughty chat to an online dominatrix to finish that book he was writing.

Come one, come all. Who will be the first former liberal defender of this animal to admit they were wrong?

Taxes, taxes, and more taxes for California

I read this gem of a story, about some areas for proposed new taxes from our "liberal-in-a-conservative-clothing" Governor.

perhaps rather then spending more and wasting millions, Governor Schwarzenegger should actually "cut up the credit card", like he previously stated.

Open letter to El Presidente Calderon

Could not have said it better myself, so I will let Kender MacGowan say it for me.

Are YOU ready for Illegal immigrant day?

I have another post I am working on regarding the Katie Couric CBS story on "anchor-babies" born to illegal immigrants, but in the interim, I had to comment on the protests slated for tomorrow. May 1 has been transformed into an "open borders rally", starting with "The day without immigrants" which occurred a few years ago.

But first, some humor. An attempt to bring some humor to ending Cinco De Mayo celebrations.

Michelle Malkin gives a great preview and follow up.

See here for the Chicago May Day "demands" list, courtesy of your open borders advocate and windbag Jesse Jackson.

I still have one question I would like to have any open-borders advocate answer before we debate anymore. Is Mexico going to change it's own deportation and border security policies?

Not all workers are really injured . . .

Worker's Compensation issues take up the bulk of my work and free time these days. I am always fascinated when I read about injured workers who receive thousands of dollars of treatment and money for living expenses, only to wind up being declared a complete disaster medically. Then, a settlement is proposed and arranged and miracle of miracles, they are able to go right back to work doing the same occupation they were doing before, despite a supposed reputable doctor indicating they could not possibly do the work again, hence the need for a large cash settlement.

I am real big on prosecuting Worker's Compensation fraud. Unfortunately, despite their being rampant fraud in the system, most cases never make it to a prosecutor's desk, because there are so many cases to pick and choose from. Therefore, I will take the next best thing: being caught red-handed and having the perpetrator's case thrown out.

All the troops must go, except, well, maybe for a few

One of the biggest differences between the Republican nominee and the two Democrat candidates has been over the troop presence in Iraq. Both Clinton and Obama (see also here and here) have rallied their supporters into a furor by stating all the troops will be out of Iraq right after the election.

Except Obama does not really mean that.

Or maybe he does mean it, but not really like he says during his speeches.

But lets give him a break. After all, Clinton cannot guarantee it either.

Now mind you, this is just one person on his campaign staff. After all, there have been no other examples of campaign staffers for the Democrats making comments that the candidate did not endorse? That never happens, right?

But back to the topic at hand. If the polling data is correct and the American public is as opposed to the war as liberals claim they are, then why can one not stick to a troop withdrawal strategy?

My beautiful ctiy bowing to the altar of the ACLU

I was working on this story last night when I first read about it according to a local news source for San Diego. Then I found this story on Michelle Malkin's website, so I figured I would let you see her version in its complete form with links.

Truly disgusting.

Preaching and politics- are black preachers racist?

I have been listening with amusement to various talk-radio hosts (on both sides, mind you), discuss the language and comments from Reverend Wright, Barack Obama's personal spiritual advisor. Reverend Jeremiah Wright of the Trinity Church has created an enormous amount of fodder for the Clinton camp and conservatives alike with his rantings on "God-Damn"'ing
America, and for indicating that the country is ruled by rich white people only. See the video here.

James David Manning (see here for his own controversy), has also made recent headlines for calling Obama a pimp for bringing out large-breasted white women at the start of his campaign and for his views and opinions. See the You-Tube posting here. If the story does not load, see the transcript here.

Sean Hannity interviewed him and pretty much chastised him for these comments, as "non-christian" and for the fact that the woman he was referring to was a prior You-Tube video addition for which Obama had not hand in creating or posting.

While I overheard the interview on a co-workers radio, it made me think. Why are supposed Christian leaders and ministers/preachers/pastors at churches with largely to all black congregations resorting to these types of rants during their religious sermons? Has anyone out there ever heard anything similar to these ridiculous sermons at a Church that may be oriented towards largely "white" congregations?

I remember once time at the church I attended when I grew up, during a testimony meeting, one person making a political statement in opposition to the marriage amendment to the California Constitution, defining marriage as between a Man and a Woman only. A second person got up and rebutted and then someone stepped in and reminded everyone why we were there- To worship the Lord, not to make political statements.

I am sure these types of things happen at other churches from time to time, and there is no doubt that political involvement is prevalent with various churches. But I have never heard this type of language and bashing going on at any church other than a "black church".

I am sure by now some of you are thinking that "the San Diego Conservative is or may be a racist", and if you feel that way, I want to know why. I want to know why asking a legitimate question is racist. I want to know why these preachers are not racist, or if you think they are. In my opinion, they are the worst kinds of racists because they are completely open about it, and try to tie it in to a Christian perspective in the process. Even worse, the media dismisses comments like these and instead focus on those who bring them to light.

In the age of political correctness, a racist appears to be defined as "white, almost exclusively male, successful, opinionated, and a person who believes in working hard for what you reap in this world". Whenever someone of this description dares to question anything pertaining to a minority, it is racism, and the race card must be played at that instant.

Am I wrong?

I am back!

After studying for a few month's for a bar exam, I have completed my studies and will be back to posting shortly.