This is a test post…it will be deleted, not that anyone cares. I’m testing blogging from Flock.
Blogged with the Flock Browser
Testing out Flock
June 30th, 2009Coming soon
February 12th, 2009I’ve basically taken a break since Oclowna won the election, but it’s time to get back in the thick of it. These jerks are stealing our liberties right under our noses! I know no one reads this, but I’m coming back. The site looks weird, yes, but I’m working on that and it will be back to the old pre-election EJ soon, my brothers!
The deafening silence
November 18th, 2008Since the election I have been remiss in by blogging. One reason is that I’m still just bummed out about the result. The election took a lot of steam out of me and it will take some time to regenerate it. The other reason is that I am trying to write 50,000 words by the end of the month for the National Novel Writing Month which ends on November 30, so all my free writing time is there. I didn’t get started until the 13th, so I’m behind the curve, but I feel confident I can get it done.
I guess what I’m saying is that there likely will be few updates until December, so forgive the lack of output and remember that I’m not quitting, just recuperating.
Emerging from the rubble
November 11th, 2008This is my first post-election entry. The election was not pretty, but the aftermath has seen some of the ugliest moments in recent US history. Democrats may be poor losers, but they’re downright nasty winners.
Take, for example, Obama’s first press conference as President-elect. After mentioning that he had consulted with previous Presidents, he inserted a snarky comment about not holding a seance with Nancy Reagan. Leave aside that he totally bungled the reference (the Reagans reportedly consulted astrologers, but Hillary Clinton held the seance to contact Eleanor Roosevelt), the comment was uncalled for.
Senator, you are the President-elect, and it’s high time you started acting Presidential.
Next was the announcement that he would immediately reinstated the domestic drilling ban - the one he opposed a scant month ago. The man isn’t even waiting for his inauguration to break his promises. Of course, the dropping price of gas has taken the fire out of the public’s desire for domestic drilling, but the spectre of dependence on foreign oil sources remains, and to offhandedly dismiss the weightiness of this issue is irresponsible.
Not that anyone will care. The Obamaniacs are still indulging in their pagan idolatry of the man and the press is metaphorically servicing the man, all while patting themselves on the back for the role they played in shattering the racially-reinforced glass ceiling of American politics. Conservatives are unorganized at the moment, reeling from the electoral blast that caused an ideological diaspora. We are wandering in the wilderness with no political leadership. Even Sarah Palin is in retreat to her home state.
So what is the good news?
The good news is that the much vaunted notion of a centrist Republican party has been completely shattered. The Neville Chamberlain, country club wing of the party has been completely rebuked. Their notion that going after undecideds was the key to victory is completely discredited. Newt Gingrich is making a comeback as he makes a run for RNC leadership. And there is a significant portion of the US population that is not excited about the impending changes to our nation.
The old cliche of it being darkest before the dawn is as relevant now as ever.
The people are looking for a leader, and one will emerge. I’m not sure who it will be. Perhaps Palin, or Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal. One this is certain - it WON’T be a maverick, centrist appeaser who goes after Democrats, and that’s about the best news there is.
Except for the fact that God is in control of all this, and He is the one who is REALLY making history. Never forget that.
Stop the presses!
October 30th, 2008Of all the crazy, shocking and important political stories this year, one stands above all the rest. A giant in the world of entertainment has pronounced her opinion on the race, and it may well destroy the dreams of the GOP…
Grace Jones doesn’t like Sarah Palin.
Her exact quote: “I can’t stand Sarah Palin. I bet a woman like that has no sense of humour.” Well, I bet you’re right, Grace, and your hunch that she ain’t funny is about as sound a reason to hate as any of your hatemonger fellow travelers on the left have employed. But honestly, I’ve never associated Grace Jones with funny. Adjectives like scary, weird, bizarre, untalented, and gut-wrenching are more appropriate.
But the bigger question is, who the hell cares? So bloody what? Grace Jones, the star of A View to a Kill and the warbler of a handful of ear-splitting 80s dance tunes is news? Would she get press if she came out against Obama?
I wonder what the positions of RuPaul and Randee of the Redwoods are? America needs to know!
My question to Senator Obama
October 29th, 2008Here at the last minute, the press is feigning objectivity in a feeble attempt to curry favor with those of us whose trust they have used as metaphorical toilet paper and at whom they have sneered haughtily, all the time claiming to being diligent in their pursuit of the truth. To wit: Wolf Blitzer is soliciting questions from the unwashed to pose to D-Ill Senator for his sure to be hard-hitting interview this Friday. Well, I took the bait and sent a question that will most definitely be dumped in the “to be suppressed until after November 4″ bin.
Mr. Blitzer,
I understand that you are soliciting questions for Senator Obama, some of which you plan to ask him Friday. I have to admit, sir, that my faith in the media when it comes to serious inquiry of Obama is poor. Rather, I have seen some of the most shameful, toothless questioning that would be more in character if asked of a celebrity on Oscar night. It is my sincere hope that you will call Senator Obama to task. Here is my question:
Senator Obama, you have stated repeatedly that you were eight years old when William Ayres and Bernardine Dohrn planned and perpetrated attacks on this nation as domestic enemies. You state this as if it absolves you in regard to your association with these people. I am four years younger than you, and I knew who Ayres, Dohrn, Mark Rudd, and Terry Robbins were when I was in high school. I would never have associated with these people in any regard knowing what I learned about them merely through casual research. Explain why you chose to associate with Ayres, and if you claim not to have been aware of his actions as an adult (when you actually consorted with him) why you should be trusted with the Presidency, given your ignorance of the well-documented activities of your notorious neighbor.
Not one mainstream reporter has had the temerity to pose this question (the closest was Stephanopolous, who almost got kicked out of the Washington Press Club for daring to doubt Obama). We’ll see how big Mr. Blitzer’s cojones are come Friday…
My wager is BB equivalent.
UPDATE - In my question to Blitzer, I made the mistake of identifying Mark Rudd as Paul Rudd, the actor. I resubmitted the question with the following paragraph added:
CLARIFICATION: I previously submitted this question during a short work break and made the mistake of identifying Mark Rudd, former SDS leader and WU member as Paul Rudd, a current actor with the same surname. Trust me, I know the difference. I would hope, should you use this question, that you would focus on the valid substance therein and not the pettiness of pointing out a hasty typographical mistake.
My prediction is that if this question does make it, Blitzer and Obama will avoid the substance of the issue and, instead, harp on the typographical slip up. This is a typical media tactic and will give them and opportunity to discredit the questioner rather than deal with the substance of the query.
We shall see.
Photo of the week
October 29th, 2008Here’s a sign from a Sarah Palin rally in Fredericksburg, VA. The text reads:
Hello, my name is Joe the Plumber
and yes we are related
we’re AMERICAN!
laugh at his dream
and you’re laughing at mine too!
The man holding the sign is black. Prejudiced media types would assume he is a staunch Obama supporter based solely on his skin color. He may have been a few weeks ago, I have no idea, but either way, the sneering that D-Ill Senator and Dopey Joe the Senator did at Toledo’s own Joe Wurzelbacher struck a chord with him and others.
It’s safe to assume the following:
- The man is named Joe
- He’s a plumber
- He aspires to rise in his profession to the point where he wants to own his own business
- He sees the Democrat team as a threat to that
- He doesn’t see the Republican team that way
- He considers his personal circumstance more important than his racial kinship with Obama
God bless you Joe, and all those like you. You are who makes America great.
Hat tip: Common Cents via Michelle Malkin
Obamunism manifested
October 29th, 2008A few weeks ago my wife’s wallet was stolen out of her purse while she was at work. All evidence points to the housekeeper who was the only person in the area and who didn’t show up for work the next day. A few days later, a desk clerk at a hotel stole my brother’s (and several other guests’) credit card number and went on a spending spree.
In both instances, a low skilled person in an entry-level position felt quite justified in taking from people who had more than they and in enriching themselves, albeit temporarily and in relatively small amounts, at the expense of another. Neither my wife nor my brother were on the hook for the fraudulent charges, but they spent a good deal of time and money working to prevent damage to their names and credit histories. Neither of them are rich by a long shot. Neither makes anywhere D-Ill Senator’s much vaunted income level of $250,000, yet to the perpetrators, they were quite wealthy and, as such, there was no problem in taking their money and/or property. They enacted their own version of “spreading the wealth.”
It’s a fair assumption that both of these criminals are voting for Obama. I have no concrete proof, but I’d be willing to stake my income for the year that it’s the case. Their actions are merely a manifestation of the actions that Obama is planning to take should he become president. They have no compunction about taking that which belongs to someone of greater means and appropriating it for themselves, according to their needs, or more accurately, wants. This is the appeal of Obama and his thinly-veiled Socialistic, nay Marxist, ideology.
I am not suggesting that Obama would sanction thievery, at least not the petty theft described above, but his notion of spreading the wealth is right in line with the justification that the petty thief uses to legitimize his/her actions. Obama’s plan to take from those who have and give it to those who have not is the exact same thinking as that which went through the minds of the human trash that robbed my family members.
Election day is less than a week away, and a number of Americans are all too ready to stick it to the rich by pulling a lever for a man who will take great pride in legally robbing people. My prayer is that the nation will reject the creed of the petty thief that D-Ill Senator is propounding under the aegis of change.
I just don’t believe America is a nation of crooks. I can’t beleive that. Not until they prove me wrong.
95% ain’t as much as it used to be
October 16th, 2008OK, the last debate is over and Obama has officially claimed that he will give 95% of Americans a tax cut at least a thousand times. The last time I heard a democrat promise that he would cut my taxes, he wasn’t in office for a month when he came on TV saying that he had worked harder on this issue than anything he had ever done, and not only could he not cut taxes, but he was going to raise them.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on the American population.
In this instance, Obama is Bill Clinton redux. In fact, if he’s elected I predict it will take less time for him to annouce a higher tax increase than Clinton, who took the top marginal rate from 31 to 39.6. The Bush tax cuts (which all Democrats hate) brought that rate down to 35 - still higher than pre-Clinton. Come March, look for an Obama administration to propose a top marginal tax rate of at least 40, and as a bonus, ratcheting down the brackets so that people who have seen NO INCREASE IN INCOME are suddenly bumped into a higher bracket. That’s how a Democrat defines “not raising taxes on 95% of Americans.” He didn’t raise taxes, he just spread the wealth around.
Last night, D-Ill Senator said that 100% of John McCain’s ads are negative. Anyone who has seen any of McCain’s ads knows that’s not true - it’s closer to 60%. If Obama defines 60% as 100% when it comes to McCain’s ads, what percentage of Americans is he really discussing when he bandies about 95%? Probably less than 50%
It used to be that the American dream was work hard and earn more money based on your performance. Obama’s dream is taking from those who can “afford it” (as if they all have piles of cash tucked away somewhere) and giving it to those who have done nothing to deserve it. That’s economic suicide.
If Obama is elected, there’s a 95% chance that we’ll have a recession…and that’s 95% in REAL numbers.
How to make tonight’s debate interesting
October 15th, 2008
Hat tip: Cracked
