July 4th parade + constitution = banned for life?

It seems that patriotism extremism is now on the list of items banned in some of our more liberal progressive states. The organizers of the Rhode Island Tea Party found this out when they graciously maliciously and with good intentions malice of forethought handed out copies of The United States Constitution subversive leaflets at a 4th of July parade.

How could they have been so reckless in their actions and so archaic in their suppositions to assume that Americans would be receptive to such an overt act of patriotism extremism?

Well no good deed shall go unpunished In Rhode Island or anywhere else liberals hold the seats of power.

The following article is from Helen Glovers webpage (find it here: http://www.whjjam.com/pages/helen.html):

Tea Party Banned From the 4th of July Parade
Thursday 07-09-2009 8:17am ET

As we informed you this week, the RI Tea Party float in the Bristol Fourth of July Parade was a HUGE success, with people in the crowd showing overwhelming support and enthusiasm for our cause. Although we expected a positive reception, the response of the parade watchers was beyond our wildest imaginations. We were proud to represent the freedom loving people of Rhode Island to celebrate our country's Independence!

Today, we received news from the Bristol Parade Committee that the RI Tea Party is to NEVER apply to appear in the Bristol Parade again. We were told unequivocally that our group was "horrible", "not to waste the stamp to send in an application in the future", and that the Committee never wanted "those people" of the RI Tea Party to participate in the parade in the first place.

Why would the Bristol Parade Committee have such a negative response to our float when the crowd was so overwhelmingly positive? We are told it is because some members of the RI Tea Party passed out US Constitutions to the crowd. Apparently passing out the US Constitution on Independence Day is an egregious violation of parade rules. This is despite the fact that other floats passed out solicitations for their businesses, which is against the Parade guidelines, and these businesses have NOT been told that they are banned from participating in the future.

This clear discrimination by the Parade Committee was also evident as the RI Tea Party was rejected for sound on the float and was told the morning of the Parade by one of the parade committee inspectors that she "never heard of someone being rejected for sound" before and they were "probably afraid you would say something politically incorrect."

We encourage you to contact the Bristol Parade Committee at 401 480-1608 (Jim Tavares) or by mail to the Bristol Fourth of July Committee, P.O. Box 561, Bristol, RI 02809, and let them know how you feel about their discriminatory behavior towards a group which represents Liberty, particularly in celebration of an event dedicated to our country's freedom. Letters to the editor of the Bristol Phoenix can be written to Scott Pickering, at spickering@eastbaynewspapers.com . Letters to the editor of the Providence Journal can be sent to letters@projo.com.

They will not squelch our voices! We have only just begun!

Yours in Liberty,

Marina Peterson
RI Tea Party

Glenn beck did a follow-up interview with Helen and below is the transcript found on his website: http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/196/27838/?ck=1



GLENN: Helen Glover is with us from our affiliate in Providence, Rhode Island, 920 WHJJ. Helen, tell me about the tea party that happened this July 4th?

CALLER: Good morning, Glenn. Well, you know, the tea party movement's growing across the country and certainly here in Rhode Island, one of the most liberal states in the union, there's really been a real grassroots effort to get this tea party going. One April 15th and another one in June and then we put together a float for the Bristol Fourth of July parade which by the way is the oldest parade in the country. And it was pretty much made clear to the Rhode Island tea party association that they weren't wanted in the parade to begin with and

GLENN: Why?

CALLER: Well, because apparently we're a subversive group, Glenn. We're on the terror watch list.

GLENN: Hang on, I'm looking at the picture. I'm looking at the picture. This is from the HJJ website. Is that the picture of everybody dressed in colonial clothes that looks like a giant boat?

CALLER: Yeah, it's actually the British slip the beaver that was ransacked by the colonists they Boston tea party in 1773. Now, we were told that we could not dress as Indians. I don't know why because the original colonists dressed as Indians. They said we could not do that. So we said, fine, we'll dress as patriots.

GLENN: Hold it, hold it. Is there a possibility that I mean, let's take a wild guess here on why you couldn't because it would be offensive to Native Americans?

CALLER: Well, I'm sure that was the reason. However, there were other floats with other people in the parade that were dressed as Indians. Some of them are legitimate Native Americans but others were not. But that, you know, the stipulation was only put on our float.

GLENN: Huh.

CALLER: Oh, it gets better.

GLENN: Okay.

CALLER: I asked for a PA system. I said, you know, because let's face it, they are looking for a reason to kick is out of the parade. So let's just have a PA system on the boat and play on the float and pay patriotic music because you can't go wrong with that, right? I thought.

GLENN: Right.

CALLER: Then we were told we couldn't have a PA system on the boat.

GLENN: Why?

CALLER: No reason given, but

GLENN: I'm sure all of the other floats, none of them had a PA system.

CALLER: All of the other floats if they wanted them had them.

GLENN: That's a different parade. I'm sure you are thinking of a different parade.

CALLER: That's right. Well, of course, we were also told we couldn't throw tea bags off the float because that's dangerous. It could put an eye out.

GLENN: Well, if they had knives in the tea bags. They don't know. Maybe you had some of those Chinese death stars.

CALLER: Exactly.

GLENN: They were and you were throwing the tea bags out like that. They didn't know.

CALLER: Even wet a tea bag's not going to cause bodily harm.

GLENN: Hang on just a second because I know that I have been in parades before where you are not supposed to throw out candy because it's dangerous because people run to the street and then they, you know, get hit by a, you know, a giant float.

CALLER: Completely understandable. Completely understandable and that is in the regulation that the tea party, the application that they signed and agreed to those rules, that's fine. We adhere to those rules.

GLENN: Okay. So did anybody else throw things at them?

CALLER: Of course they did. Of course they did. Lollipops off one float, flyers announcing a roller derby schedule. There were flyers to and again I can understand if they don't want somebody soliciting during a parade but there was one dairy that was allowed to hand out information if you want to sign up for home delivery of milk, eggs and the like. Apparently that was okay.

GLENN: What wasn't okay? Did you throw the tea bags at people?

CALLER: No. We didn't know.

GLENN: What was the problem?

CALLER: Glenn, I'm a rule follower and I made that very clear when I got involved with the parade and the float. I said, I don't want to be the reason you are thrown out. I obey the rules. That's just one of those quirks I have. So I said I'm not going to do anything that's against the rules. So we didn't throw anything off that float.

GLENN: And you didn't dress as Indians.

CALLER: I didn't dress as an Indian

GLENN: And you didn't have a sound system.

CALLER: But they gave us a bullhorn. And that was my other fear, Glenn, because I tend to be, kind of like you, I sometimes am not politically correct, especially on my show.

GLENN: Sure.

CALLER: So I said, you know what, maybe the safest thing is for me not to use that bullhorn. So I gave it to a few other people but they really

GLENN: That was a mistake.

CALLER: Well, they thought maybe reading some quotes from the founding fathers. But, you know, you are going along a parade route with a bullhorn. That's not the same as a PA system. You are not going to be able to understand, you know, something that Ben Franklin said that's maybe a couple of sentences long. So I thought, okay, maybe simply reciting the "Pledge of Allegiance" keeping out the subversive line one nation under God. And I thought, you know what, I'm just going to stick to real quick bullet points. You are going by in a parade, people only have a couple of seconds to absorb something. So I said something that came from the house of parliament when one of the British politicians said, "Quite frankly, sir, you've run out of our money." I thought that's a good one, no more taxes, we've been taxed enough, hold your elected officials to a higher standard, make them accountable. That was the kind of stuff I said.

GLENN: This is crazy. Stu, crazy. I mean, Helen is crazy.

CALLER: Radical stuff.

PAT: Crazy talk.

GLENN: How are you not in handcuffs?

CALLER: Well, strange as it seems when I found out we were kicked out of the parade the first thing I said was oh, no. And Marina Peterson who was the first one who got the call on this was told it wasn't because of something I said which I'm relieved at although, you know, I can stand behind anything I said. I made sure it was not political. We were thrown out of the parade because a gentleman who was not on the float, by the way, had been walking up and down the parade route for about an hour and a half with his 10 year old, 11 year old son handing out little pocket you've probably seen them, little pocket guide of the Constitution Bill of Rights.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh!

CALLER: Yes.

GLENN: What, are you crazy? That thing is so ancient and distorted. I mean, it was an updated version of the Constitution, wasn't it? It wasn't like I didn't include, like, the preamble and all the other stuff.

CALLER: No, unfortunately it was the whole shebang, the Bill of Rights, Declaration of Independence and Constitution.

GLENN: Oh, jeez.

STU: That's extremism. Do we have a warrantless wiretap?

GLENN: Hold on just a second. Are we tracing the call? We are tracing the call? Just stay on the line with me. Just talk to me. So what else is happening?

CALLER: I think the Secret Service are at the door right now.

GLENN: So they kicked you out because you were handing out the Constitution.

CALLER: I believe, Glenn, the words were, "Don't even bother wasting the stamp for an application next year. You are..." and not just kicked out, Glenn. We are banned for life. It's like double secret probation in Animal House. We are banned.

GLENN: The oldest parade in the country.

CALLER: You got it.

GLENN: For the Fourth of July.

CALLER: Banned for life.

GLENN: You are banned for life.

CALLER: Yep.

GLENN: For handing out... the Fourth of July parade... the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

CALLER: Yeah. They said

GLENN: What is the name of the organization that does this little parade?

CALLER: It is the Bristol Fourth of July parade committee. And believe me, that is a group that you know what, that is ironclad. Apparently they can make law, enforce it and you have no recourse.

GLENN: Stu, could you get a hold of the I tell you what

CALLER: Good luck.

GLENN: Have one of the producers at Fox get a hold of them and let them know that we would love to hear the explanation of this.

CALLER: Yeah, good luck. Good luck.

GLENN: Oh, no, no, no. Make sure they know if they don't appear on the show, somebody will appear for them.

CALLER: (Laughing).

GLENN: Can you do that?

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: And report back to me tomorrow. Hopefully they can find it in their schedule in the next couple of days. Helen, thank you for bringing this to our attention. You stay in touch with me and I'll let you know. I'll let you know because we'll open up the show at any time they can be on to tell us because they must have had a good excuse.

CALLER: Oh, absolutely, yes.

GLENN: And I'm sure America would love to hear it and I sure would because I can't trust you, Helen.

CALLER: Oh, no.

GLENN: You are a crazy woman.

CALLER: Absolutely.

GLENN: You were dressed up in colonial garb on a big boat in a Fourth of July parade, you know. Next thing you know, you'll be dressing up like an Indian. We can't trust you. So we'll get a hold of the parade people and we'll keep you up to speed on this.

Liar, liar, the world is not on fire.

With the vote on cap and trade looming large this week I though it would only be fair to allow Obama to tell us in his own words what is in store for us under his plan. The following video is from January of 2008. Listen closely as Obama tells us exactly what we can expect:




From the horse’s mouth: “Energy costs will necessarily skyrocket” under “my plan”. Could there be any evidence more convincing than the words of the architect of cap and trade?

The sad fact is that costs will rise across the board. Everything we eat, drink, wear, drive and use is in someway manufactured or transported by means that require energy. That means everything we eat, drink, wear drive and use will see a commensurate rise in price.

What is troubling is that even if the cap and trade plan were to go off without a hitch and meet all projections and expectations the result will allegedly be a .1 (one tenth) of a degree drop in global temperature in a 100 years. That is of course if you accept the anthropogenic global warming argument. That argument is not quite as settled as Obama would have us believe. There are almost 32,000 scientists who disagree with our esteemed leader's assessment.

The question is simply this: Is the power and money we are about to turn over to our bloated, inefficient and corrupt government going to be worth the cost (that’s right cost, as we have already determined there is no real benefit)? We lose. We are looking at adding somewhere between $2,000 and $5,000 a year in taxes to the average household in a time when we can ill afford the additional burden.

Obama now claims that we will benefit and there will be no cost to consumers. He is lying. This new position directly contradicts what he said in the above video. Listen to his own words as he said it best: “they will have to retrofit their operations that will cost money; they will pass that money on to consumers”. Enough said.

Liberals just don't understand!

Liberals just don’t understand.

For some unexplainable reason I frequently subject myself to the insane ramblings of the liberal bloggosphere. I guess it has something to do with maintaining and even keel, maybe just getting a little perspective. What puzzles me most is the inability of liberal elites to digest the concept of conservatism.

The left claims to have providence over everything that is fair and equitable; they claim to be the party of truth and justice while practicing prejudice and discrimination. When I read the writings of liberal bloggers and hear the speeches of liberal elites I can’t help but wonder how they can make such claims with impunity. It seems to me that they should lay claim to the realm of bitter diatribes and tyranny.

Before I go any further I would like to clarify this point: When I speak of liberals I do not speak of the average Democratic voter. I most certainly allow for the fact that the Democratic Party is a diverse organization with beliefs and goals as varied as the people who comprise the party. I fully understand that that the party is comprised of individuals who may or may not subscribe to the liberal dogma as stated by liberal elitists. If the generalizations I make do not apply to you as an individual then it is safe to assume I am not speaking of you.

Where conservatives have failed is in identifying themselves with the festering pustule that is the Republican Party. They have failed in conveying why conservatism is different, at a fundamental level, than liberalism. They have failed because they have allowed liberals to define conservatism.

Conservatives have allowed themselves to be cast as the party of the rich; the party of prejudice; the party of corporate corruption. These mischaracterizations have never been effectively addressed by conservative leaders. Conservatives have sat by and watched their beliefs cast in a light most unfavorable without so much as a whimper of opposition.

We have allowed the Republican Party to wither and die on the vine. It has become nothing more than a convenient symbol for liberals to rally against. The current incarnation of the Republican Party is worthy only of reproach. The stereotypes attributed to conservatives are mostly true of the Republican Party; they are absolutely true of the Democratic Party.

Liberalism seems to be defined as everything antithetical to conservatism. It is an ideology that ceases to exist in the absence of conservatism. Much as shadows ceases to exist in the absence of light.

What is conservatism?

Conservatives first and foremost believe in the undeniable force of individualism. The individual is the foundation upon which this great country was built.
Conservatives believe that the government is the antithesis of individualism. When government grows and prospers individual rights necessarily whither and die. We believe government has an important but very limited role; protector of our constitutional rights.

Liberalism sees the government as the arbiter of equity and dispenser of rights.

Conservatives see successful businesses large and small as the backbone of a strong economy and a strong nation. We see business as an extension of the rights guaranteed by the constitution and the government’s taxation and regulation of business as an impingement on those rights.

Liberals see successful businesses as malignant blights hoarding resources and attaining wealth at the expense of the proletariat. Liberals believe that the government should control and distribute wealth so as to insure fairness.

There will be winners and losers but when individuals are left to succeed or fail on their own there is true freedom; when the government is left to decide who succeeds and who fails there can be no success only parity.

Without the promise of success there is no impetus for innovation. Ideas are the fruit of dreams and dreams grow only in the fertile soil of freedom. You can only remove the specter of failure by denying a path to success. For with every opportunity to succeed there is necessarily the possibility of failure.

Liberals believe in parity over freedom. They see a world where everyone is the same where there are no losers because there are no winners. They see a utopia where the government provides for all of our needs. They aspire to create a perfect society where everyone is happy and equal.

This is a noble cause to be sure but fails to take into account human nature. When such power is wielded by a few elites there is the looming possibility of tyranny.

When the wealth of an entire nation is entrusted to a handful of men the temptation for corruption is all but irresistible. The founders understood this all too well as they revolted against that very thing.

Conservatives believe that in each and every one of us there is the ability to achieve our wildest dreams. In America there are no limits but those we impose upon ourselves. We believe that regardless of race, sex, national origin or sexual orientation there is the opportunity to realize success. We believe that if left to our own devices we can do anything, achieve anything and surpass every expectation.

Liberals believe that certain groups are incapable of success on their own and therefore must be protected through discriminatory legislation in order to succeed. Despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary this mindset persists. With the election of a black president it should be readily apparent that no goal is unattainable with hard work and persistence.

What has earned conservatives the dubious title of “racists” is the fact that we believe everyone is equal and therefore no one deserves to be given a leg up over another based on race, sex or sexual orientation. Everyone should be allowed to succeed or fail on their own merits. This is not the argument of a racist, simply a statement of common sense.

Conservatives are not anti-immigration we are anti-illegal immigration. We fully understand that this is a nation of immigrants and celebrate the diversity of this nation with great pride. It is not however a nation of illegal immigrants.

Everyone is welcome here but we ask that they abide by our laws, learn our language and contribute in an equitable fashion. Nothing worth having is free and that includes membership in this great nation.

Conservatives are not mind numbed robots who receive their marching orders from FOX News or conservative talk show hosts. We have arrived at our beliefs through diligent introspection and valuable life lessons.

Our beliefs are not subject to negotiation and polls do not determine where we stand on an issue. Compromise does not mean abandoning our core principles to make someone else happy. We will not go along to get along.

Liberals paint us as partisan and rigid. They are right. We refuse to submit to the theory that acting in a bipartisan manner means agreeing with them. Sorry.

Conservatives believe that we should be good stewards of this planet that God has given us. We believe in protecting the environment and using our resources wisely. We believe that Global Warming is at best unproven science and that no legislation should be passed based on unproven science.

Liberals believe that Man is a blight upon the earth and that all earth's ills would be cured if we just stop using oil. Liberals view Global warming as settled and are willing to destroy our economy and tax us into oblivion on nothing more substantial than a theory.

Conservatives believe that America is the greatest nation on earth and a beacon of freedom that other nations aspire to emulate.

Liberals believe that America is the cause of the world's problems and that if we were only more like Cuba everything would be alright.

Conservatives believe that doctors know best how to treat their patients and that healthcare should be the left to hospitals and private industry.

Liberals believe that the government knows best how to treat the sick and that healthcare is best left to Congress and the Senate.


Conservatives believe that this nation was founded under God and that God should be glorified. We are not ashamed of our beliefs and do not begrudge others if their beliefs differ.

Liberals believe that a moment of silence in a class room is a violation of the establishment clause but invoke the name of God on the campaign trail in the hopes of garnering votes.

They believe that God should be stripped from our government while paying to provide the Koran and prayer mats for terror suspects at taxpayer expense.

Liberal leaders deny the fact that we are a Christian nation while pandering to Islamic nations.

Liberals regularly refer to conservatives as the religious right as if it were an epithet. If they only understood us they would know we wear it as a badge of honor.

But the fact is they do not understand conservatives. They cannot understand us. We stand for something and that is a concept that is simply beyond the ability of a liberal to understand. They stand against, stand in the way, stand back and stand by but the do not stand for America.

The Failures of the Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009

The failure of the Stimulus Act of 2009 lies in the American people’s belief that their elected officials are looking out for the interest of the United States citizenship above that of their own private agendas which could not be more false.

When the stimulus was passed, President Obama made a clear statement -- it was necessary and must be passed immediately to avoid the collapse of the economy. Whether the economy would have collapsed, or if the tactic to scare the American people into the belief that it would, is cause of great debate amoungst both economists and scholars of American history. Many economists have followed markets and gain their entire lives and have studied many recessions and additionally studied those which occurred before their birth. Many of these people very verbally stated recessions fix themselves.

The Stimulus was passed before being read by those we elected to DO the reading before any agreement to the passage of a law affecting the citizens of the United States. By not reading this Stimulus package, they voted without true understanding of the bill and whether the package benefited the American people or harmed them was not known as they voted. They failed in their duties as our representatives. Our elected officials dumped the American people into the worst federal deficit since WWII. All the while, President Obama was stating it was necessary for the quick passage, they were claiming this was old business. The events leading up to the World recession and the opinion this size bill was necessary immediately – was not properly researched and its passage was deliberate for the assumption of greater power within the Presidential or “Executive branch” of government.

The bill may have been raised on Bush’s watch – but increased and passed on Obama’s watch and personally RUSHED by Obama. It allotted for many ficticious numbers and few American people realized the Act in whole was going to cost the tax payers more money than the ENTIRE Iraq war.

Obama wanted to place the earmark burden on the past administration – yet – he signed it. He told the American people – there was not one Earmark, and there were 8,000. Many pet projects of both Republicans and Democrats and much wasteful spending were approved under this Stimulus package. These should have been curbed before the passage of the Stimulus and the legislative branches failure at their job responsibility is the primary reason for the failure of this package.

Why do I consider it a failure? It was built on the lie that if it fails – it will not be Obama’s fault. That is simply not true and rather than ramble on…I will simply state that unread bill forever burdens tax payers, their children and so on down the line and the freebies? - I will state that NOTHING is free and these bailouts, stimulus plans, government healthcare plans will cause such enormous tax burdens on the taxpayers, that those already underwater will NOT see relief – their homes will still foreclose and they will still be without jobs and their savings will be lost.

It is estimated with the removal of the E-verify system for new jobs that were "promised" within the stimulus plan – that approximately 15% (or 300,000) of these jobs will be filled with illegals in this country. Most of the projects lie in three States: Texas, California and California – and they carry the highest illegal populations.

This would pump billions of American tax payer dollars into the arms of other countries as it is funneled back to the illegals families in THEIR countries. Not so? The Council n Foreign Affairs estimated in 2004 (WELL before the Stimulus bill) that illegals pumped 22.2 billion dollars back into Mexico alone. This does NOT stimulate the economy; it stimulates the economy or the illegals origins and with this particular Stimulus plan, still leaves 300,000 jobs that were not filled by LEGAL United States Citizens.

Verification of citizenship (E-verify) for jobs created by the stimulus money was removed from the Stimulus package by Senators Reid and Pelosi and President Obama.

Now with a push for Amnesty of illegals currently in the country – our drain will only increase. Illegals already receive free public schooling for their children (at the expense of children of citizens who see increases in class size across the board which has a direct correlation to testing scores) and more of a drain on our healthcare system which has proven unsuccessful PRIOR to the introduction of a government sponsored “healthcare for all” bill which all should read:

http://help.senate.gov/BAI09A84_xml.pdf

and inform YOURSELF as your representative may be too busy to read such a lengthy piece of legislation.

We cannot fix a broken system with broken parts.

That is why the Stimulus package – and the legislation that has since passed, and is being introduced is a blatant failure of this current administration.

Follow my other articles at www.viewpointright.com

A Conservative's View
*
*

Deficit grows; polls down; apparently size matters.

I found this article on MSNBC recently. The poll numbers it reported left me feeling a bit conflicted. It seems that there are glimmers of hope that the American public have begun to awaken but other signs that they are still a bit groggy.

Decide for yourself. The article is included below and excerpts are in bold:

Poll: Public increasingly concerned about deficit

NBC/WSJ survey also shows concern over intervention in private sector

WASHINGTON - As the young Obama administration spends trillions of dollars in its effort to turn around the nation’s economy and revive the U.S. auto industry, the American public is growing concerned about the size of the budget deficit and the government’s intervention into the private sector, the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll finds.

Could it be that the general populace recognizes the insanity of spending your way out of a deficit? Thus far there has been little sign that the stimulus has stimulated anything beyond a huge national debt. I hope that there is an awakening of the populace and a return of commons sense.

Nearly seven in 10 have serious reservations about the federal government’s ownership stake in General Motors. Almost 60 percent say that President Obama and Congress should worry more about keeping the deficit down — even if that means it will take longer for the economy to recover. And fewer than half of Americans have confidence in the president’s policies to improve the economy.

This gives me a least a glimmer of hope. It seems that people are not as ready for socialism as out administration had hoped. Government run businesses still have a certain stigma attached that people are not willing to let go. It also seems that the honeymoon is over and people are starting to look past the rhetoric for results and finding little substance behind the man.

Obama remains a popular figure in the poll. But these numbers on the deficit and the government’s intervention seem to mark a new period for the administration, as the public moves from welcoming his inauguration and first days in office to examining his initial actions as president.

Democratic pollster Peter D. Hart, who conducted this survey with Republican Bill McInturff, says Obama is still receiving a bouquet from Americans. “But there are a lot more thorns in the bouquet.”

And looking ahead to the items Obama wants to tackle — like reforming health care and curbing greenhouse gases — Hart observes that the bar has been raised.

“There is no more smooth sailing for the administration. They are going to have to navigate in pretty choppy waters.”

The smooth sailing has ended at least in the arena of public opinion, not so much in the halls of Washington as Republican leaders are still offering no resistance to Obama’s march to socialism. Hopefully once they realize that standing around impotent is akin to career suicide they will be spurred into action.

McInturff agrees, although he adds that the president’s continued personal popularity gives him “the latitude to ask for major action and major change.”

Personal popularity aside what Obama is asking for is the total destruction of this nation as we have come to know and love it. I hope his popularity isn’t the only requirement the American public deem necessary for such a destructive course.

Independents now split on Obama

According to the poll, 60 percent view Obama favorably, versus just 29 percent who see him in a negative light. Also, three-quarters of the public say they like him personally, and that number includes 27 percent who don’t like his policies.

But the president’s overall approval rating is at 56 percent, which is down five percentage points from April.

The drop mainly comes from independents, who backed Obama by 60 percent to 31 percent in April, but approve of him now by a 46-44 clip.

Maybe the “independants” have finally moved past the messiah complex thing and started looking at the man and his policies. Obama has spewed lofty rhetoric since the beginning but platitudes like “hope and change” only carry you so far when your policies reflect “socialism and tyranny”.

I say to the recent independent converts “welcome aboard; about damn time”.

Yet perhaps the most troubling numbers in the poll for Obama come on questions about the administration’s intervention in the private sector, especially to help save troubled General Motors.

Public sours on GM intervention, deficit

Fifty-six percent oppose Obama’s action to provide financial aid to GM, in return for a majority stock in the company. Additionally, a whopping 69 percent say they’re concerned “a great deal” or “quite a bit” about the government’s ownership of the automaker.

I am encouraged by this ray of sunshine. 69 percent is an impressive number. It should be a lot higher but given the current state of the American electorate I’ll take it. It should give Obama reason to rethink any additional government take-overs of private sector businesses. The people seem to understand that there is something fundamentally Un-American about the idea.

In an interview Tuesday with CNBC’s John Harwood, Obama maintained that these interventions didn’t begin on his watch. “When I came in … the previous administration had already put in $10 billion to shore up the auto companies and asked nothing in return,” he said.

“Now, I had three choices. I could continue giving them money without asking anything in return, I could let them liquidate in the midst of the worst recession since the Great Depression, or we could say, ‘We don't want to run your company. Would you show us a plan that allows you to stand on your own two feet, so that what we're providing is a meaningful bridge for you to get to a better future?’”

Obama concluded, “We chose option three. That's not something that we welcomed, and the sooner we can get out the better.”

As the “hope and change” platitudes wear thin so does the “Bush did it” refrain coming from our esteemed and most holy leader Lord Obama. Obama threw additional billions into the abyss knowing that these companies were going belly-up anyway. He did this with the intent of making these companies wards of the state and repaying the union cronies that helped elect him.

Also in the poll, 58 percent say the president and Congress should worry more about keeping the deficit down, even if that means that it would take longer for the economy to recover.

By comparison, only 35 percent say the bigger worry should be boosting the economy, even if that adds to the size of the deficit.

Well at least some portion of the population understands that our economy cannot recover when straddled with suffocating debt. We have the specter of inflation looming on the horizon that will effectively crush any burgeoning recovery. We have a president that seems to think everything will be alright as long as we all “believe”.

But not blaming Obama

Despite their concerns, the American public isn’t blaming Obama for some of the current problems he’s facing. Asked who was more responsible for the size of the deficit, 46 percent cited the Bush administration, 21 percent said the Democrats in Congress, 7 percent said the Republicans in Congress and just 6 percent said the Obama administration.

In addition, 72 percent believe that the current state of the economy is something Obama inherited rather than created.

We at least the main stream state run media have been effective.

Even though the public remains pessimistic about the economy — just 12 percent say they are satisfied with it — the poll does show a bit of optimism with 46 percent expecting the economy to improve in the next year.

That’s up eight points since April, and it’s the highest percentage on that particular question since January 2004.

If only optimism were enough to conquer ignorance.

Health care, Sotomayor

On the topic of health care, the poll shows that more than three-quarters believe it’s important for Americans to have a choice between a public/government insurance plan and a private one. But if a government-run option is established, 47 percent of those who hold private insurance say it’s “very” or “somewhat” likely their employer would drop their plans.

This is where I lose a little faith in the American people. 47 percent understand that they would lose choice and yet close to 75 percent want to do it anyway. I am at a loss here to explain the understanding gap.

As McInturff, the GOP pollster, puts it: “It’s hard to change the status quo when you have people who have been well served by the status quo.”

This is particularly germane in as much as I currently have adequate health care provided by my employer at no cost to me. If this were to remain the case I would be less than concerned with what the government was doing about the uninsured.

Odds are however that I will see a significant reduction in my level of care and an increase in cost. How is this equitable? How is this American?

Also, when asked how they would prefer to finance health-care reform, 59 percent oppose taxing those with generous health benefits, while 70 percent oppose taxing everyone’s health benefits.

I agree let’s not penalize those of us who have adequate health care to provide it to those who do not. What surprises me about this number is that there are 30 percent out there how think taxing my health care is a good idea. I’m going to guess they are the same ones who still think Obama can walk on water.

Click for related content

Read the full NBC/Wall Street Journal poll (.pdf)
New York Times Politics
Newsvine Politics

Regarding Obama Supreme Court pick Sonia Sotomayor, the poll finds that her numbers compare favorably to — or even exceed — John Roberts’ and Samuel Alito’s. By a 43-20 percent margin, Americans support her nomination, and 50 percent believe she’s qualified to sit on the Supreme Court.

“Her numbers … are very strong,” McInturff says.

Other odds and ends

The poll — which was taken of 1,008 adults from June 12-15, and which has an overall margin of error of plus-minus 3.1 percentage points — also contains these findings:

26 percent view Dick Cheney favorably, which is up eight points from April

Interesting – Thought the left said he was the anti-Christ.

24 percent view Nancy Pelosi favorably, which is down seven points from April

Disappointing – why does anyone view this nut bag favorably?

25 percent hold a favorable view of the Republican Party, which is an all-time low for it in the poll

Appropriate – since they have not done their job as of late.

45 percent hold a favorable view of the Democratic Party.

Scary – as they are the architects of the destruction of America.

Obama, grow a pair!

By Robert The Silent Majority

MSNBC strikes again…

Report: N. Korea tests 2 short-range missiles
Move follows powerful nuclear test that drew worldwide condemnation

SEOUL, South Korea - North Korea reportedly tested two more short-range missiles Tuesday, a day after detonating a nuclear bomb underground, pushing the regime further into a confrontation with world powers despite the threat of U.N. action.

The problem is this; they do not fear either the UN or The United States. Recent administration decisions have rendered us laughable in the eyes of our enemies and therefore not worthy of fear or respect. The UN is a toothless and inept collection of “do gooders” who, without the backing of a strong United States, amount to little more than a whining group of pansies crying “don’t hit me or I will tell my mom”.

Two missiles — one ground-to-air, the other ground-to-ship — with a range of about 80 miles were test-fired from an east coast launch pad, South Korea's Yonhap news agency reported, citing an unidentified government official.

Does anybody have any doubt that these are the missiles that will show up along the US coast hidden in a cargo ship? Just pray that the blinding flash of light you see is caused by something other than a ship launched nuclear missile. North Korea is a rouge nation that would have little sleep loss over selling their technology to the highest bidder.

Pyongyang also warned ships to stay away from waters off its western coast this week, a sign it may be gearing up for more missile tests, South Korea's coast guard said.
North Korea is "trying to test whether they can intimidate the international community" with its nuclear and missile activity, said Susan Rice, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.

Why is it they think they can get away with such intimidation? It could be the signals the US has been sending with its recent appeasement and reconciliation tour.

Why would the likes of Kim Jung IL fear a nation that is afraid to call an extremist packed with explosives blowing up innocent civilians a terrorist?

Why would he fear a nation that lacks the will to actually win a war?

Why fear a nation that spends its time debating whether or not a cold bath is torture whiles its enemies routinely lop of the heads of our soldiers.

What is it exactly that they are supposed to fear?

Are they supposed to fear tough rhetoric, trade sanctions or maybe a visit from Al Gore to admonish them on the dangers of global warming caused by nuclear blasts?

"But we are united, North Korea is isolated and pressure on North Korea will increase," Rice said. On Monday, President Barack Obama assailed Pyongyang, accusing it of engaging in "reckless" actions that have endangered the region, and the North accused Washington of hostility.

Succinctly, who gives a crap what they say.

North Korea appeared to be displaying its might following its underground atomic test that the U.N. Security Council condemned as a "clear violation" of a 2006 resolution banning the regime from developing its nuclear program.

The reason they continually test and break the rules is that they have figured out that there is no substantive penalty. So what if we enact trade restrictions the only ones who will suffer will be the innocent civilians. The war machine will trudge along just fine. They understand that the worst that will happen is we will talk them to death.

France called for new sanctions, while the U.S. and Japan pushed for strong action against North Korea for testing a bomb that Russian officials said was comparable in power to those dropped on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in World War II.

What exactly is this strong action they are pushing for?

China said it "resolutely opposed" North Korea's test and urged Pyongyang to return to talks on ending its atomic programs.

Fat chance, the time for ending the program was before they actually had a nuke. Stopping it now is like trying to refold a map or put Humpty Dumpty back together.

Russia, once a key backer of North Korea, condemned the test. Moscow's U.N. Ambassador Vitaly Churkin, the current Security Council president, said the 15-member council would begin work "quickly" on a new resolution.

But many questioned whether new punishment would have any effect on a nation already penalized by numerous sanctions and clearly dismissive of the Security Council's jurisdiction.

Somebody gets it at least. Sanctions are probably not going to produce any positive results. There has to be some substantive action against North Korea, of substance enough to be a deterrent for the Irany version of Napoleon as well.

I agree that the North Koreans are recalcitrant and very difficult to hold to any agreement that they sign up to," Britain's ambassador to the U.N., John Sawers, told the British Broadcasting Corp. "But there is a limited range of options here."

When faced with a limited range of options lets hope they do not choose inaction. Somewhere along the line, if we hope to survive as a country in this new dangerous world, we have got to grow a pair. We have got to stand up and call evil by its name and defeat it in any manner necessary.

This new era of political correctness and toothless sanctions has done nothing except produce a new generation of brash and increasingly dangerous despots. It is time for action, not more meaningless rhetoric and idiotic admonitions.

A new Nuclear Power Option

On December 17, 2008 I provided a commentary regarding my opinion on Climate Change and Global Warming.

Regardless of where you come down on the Global Warming discussion, I think many of us can agree that we need to slowly ween ourselves off of the international reliance for energy.

So, I'm going introduce as many people as I can to Hyper Power Generation. Hyperion Power Generation "was formed to bring to market the unique Hyperion (formerly Comstar) small, modular, non-weapons grade nuclear power reactor invented by Dr. Otis “Pete” Peterson at the United States’ famed Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) in New Mexico." The Hyperion nuclear power reactor is 1.5 meters across and 2 meters tall, approximately the size of a residential “hot tub”. It generates 70 Mwt, which is enough energy to power 20,000 to 25,000 average-size American homes and will last five years before needing to be refilled. This device has no mechanical parts in it that can malfunction and does not use any water as coolant. It also cannot go critical or get too hot.

This page will explain more about their technology.

This, as well as other Nuclear Power options, can provide us with the power we need without creating any emissions to further Global Warming. So the question I have to ask is, "If this is something that both conservatives and liberals could agree on, why isn't anyone talking about it?" I think this company has a great idea and I hope their time frame of 2014 will happen. I hope that we start to use their devices, in addition to other sources, to reduce our reliance on Opec, Venezuela, and Russia for our energy needs. For us to remain the dominant country in the world, we need to be self-sustaining and I believe this is one technology that will help us get there.

They don't appear to be a publicly traded company, which I both a good thing and a bad thing. Good in that they don't have to contend with stock holders and the SEC; bad in that we can't easily invest money in them.

Jed's Official blog: http://blog.360.yahoo.com/jddahl

Amnesty Internationals Selective Amnesia

We have all heard the phrase: “You can’t have your cake and eat it too…”

Apparently this is not the case in situations involving Amnesty International. For a small time conservative like me to take on the massive organization of Amnesty International with its human rights violation protests all over the world – let me start by saying – in PRINCIPLE, their cause is just.

Except – You just can’t have your cake and eat it too. You can’t denounce and call for action the removal of a brutal regime and then back track for the rights of the regime stating those who brought about the demise should be prosecuted. Amnesty International wants its cake – and it wants to keep re-baking it with a different flavor.

Let’s take for example my most talked about bad guy… Saddam Hussein (The Butcher of Baghdad.) This man parallels the evilness of Adolph Hitler and their in NO question with respects to this fact. He was a brutal dictator who took over Iraq in the mid 70’s unofficially and officially in 1979 after the suspicious death of the current leader. With his power he practiced Hitler’s acts of ethnic cleansing and wiped out an uncountable amount of Kurds who Hussein out - right butchered. Hussein viewed the ethnic cleaning of the Kurds as a top priority of his administration. This did not stop with the Kurds, but continued with the persecution of members practicing Shiism – the official religion of Iran. Hussein viewed the future of Iraq as one free of any Iranian influence.

In 1982 he murdered Shiite militants for an assassination attempt. Because of the attempt which failed, Hussein murdered 148 citizens of the city of occurance, including women and children - with no trial OR representation. One year later Masaoud Barzani led the Kurdistan Democratic Party in opposition of Hussein and eventually, Hussein viewing the threat, abducted approximately 8,000 members, including again, women and children and made them disappear. Since these abductions – most of the abductees have been found in mass burial pits in Iraq.

If you think that is bad – in the years of 1986 – 1989, Hussein ordered a mass Genocide of every living “thing” in regions along the Kurdish North. With the use mostly chemical weapons to wipe out the populations, he blamed the massacre on the United States – specifically Ronald Reagan and on Iran.

During these Genocides, Hussein wiped out groups of Shiite Marsh Arabs in Southeastern Iraq by destroying all but a minimal portion of the areas marsh’s hence, eliminating their food supply. The population went from 250,000 to 35,000 with an exact total on loss of life from starvation unknown.

Via the advice of the United States – who later for fear of rebuttal, back peddled, the Kurds and the Shiites staged an uprising. To their great loss, Hussein murdered as many as 2,000 people each day causing a mass fleeing of the people over dangerous lands that further claimed the live of hundreds of thousands innocent victims.

Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator and fully supported by the United States government until 1991. He reportedly had “rape rooms” in his castle, inflicted death by BRUTAL and TRUE torture, slaughtered political enemies and their families and much more.

Saddam’s sons were tyrants too. His son Uday oversaw for a period of time the Iraqi Olympic committee. If the athletes did not live up to expectations, he tortured them. He is even more known for his brutal rapes of women including one – where he grabbed a woman away from here husband who struck out in defense of his wife. She was raped and murdered, the husband murdered for treason. Many of those who disagreed with Uday were forced to endure the TRUE torture of the Iron Maiden where they were placed inside a small standing metal box. The person was then pierced with a sharp object slowly until the prisoner died from blood loss as the torture device was specifically designed Not to pierce organs to prolong the death. Waterboarding? Is that the same thing?

Qusay Hussein, son number two – held a much lower profile but is rumored to have ordered the executions of thousands of political prisoners to make room for new prisoners in crowded jails.

So, back to Amnesty International who is advocating for the freedom of Darfur's citizens. Human rights violations top their list now but what will they say after the regime is removed from power? Will they say that these people should not be brought to justice by the citizens of Darfur as was done in Iraq? Will they abandon atrocities and demand a trial that could set the murders FREE on technicalities?

Human rights of Iraqi citizens DID top Amnesty International’s list with Hussein too… However, once removed from office – Hussien’s rights because the focus of Amnesty Internationals quest.

Amnesty International cannot have it both ways. The Iraq war WAS AS justifiable as our attack to remove Hitler from power. It should have NOTHING to do with nukes and everything to do with Human rights. Amnesty International forgets the atrocities of this man and askes for prosecution of the Presdient who led Iraqi citizens out of the hands of a murdering tyrannt and his sons? They should THANK Bush for ending Hussein’s ATROCITIES and GENOCIDE. Maybe then, Obama will send aid to Darfur. Don't hold your breath though - human rights are not Obama's thing - taking them away is.

END OF STORY – Cake’s gone.


Take time to read my blog at www.viewpointright.com - A Conservative's View

*

Goals for 20 years

We’ve been in a recession now for 18 months, at least according to National Bureau of Economic Research. I’ve spent some time in the last few months thinking about the causes of the recession. There was a time where it was a daily exercise to discuss the causes of the recession by everyone in the country. The left and the politicians blame the evil greedy bankers; the right would blame the PC camp for advocating legislation to make getting a home mortgage easier for all; others would blame the people who got the 120% mortgages with no money down; others would blame the mortgage originators who were interested in a commission check; and yet, others blamed the GSE’s Freddie and Fannie. I’m sure you get the point; everyone blamed everyone else.

In the past I’ve voiced my opinion on whom I believe is to blame, and I genuinely believe every single person listed above was part of the problem. But I think there is one cause, one proponent, which no one has noticed that will destroy many companies and maybe even this country.

It seems to me one of the biggest failures in our current financial literacy is the inability to look into the future. Now, I’m not talking about fortunetelling or soothsaying or being able to guess what the market does. I’m talking about the ability of people to look at some action they are taking today and see what effect that will have six months from now, twelve months from now, five years from now, ten years from now, twenty years from now, thirty years from now, etc… In other wards, we do not follow the logic of causality. I’ve read several times that only about 3% of Americans have handwritten goals and that 3% has 90% of the wealth. Why? Because they have a plan. They have a plan that addresses things 15 and 20 years down the road.

This is the core ideology behind investing. When you put money into a Mutual Fund, you buy an Apartment complex, or purchase a mortgage, you do it for what you’ll gain down the road and not what you’ll gain next week. Unfortunately, we, as an investing community, have forgotten that. When I worked at Mutual of Omaha, I had a manager who didn’t care about ten years from now he cared about today. I’ve always cared about ten years from now. He would chastise and criticize me because I was willing to make a smaller sales today so that in three years I could make a bigger one, and then another bigger one, etc… I was more focused on building a relationship that would be useful in introducing me to other individuals like that person who would provide me with sales too. Obviously for a starving insurance agent, it wasn’t always the best method for paying the bills; but for a career objective agent, it was the correct way to go about building a business. The problem is that my manager wasn’t interested in the relationship that was being built or in what that would do for me, and him, down the road. He wanted big results today.

The leading reason most developers fail is because they didn’t plan for 20 years out. You see, when you are a developer or a real estate investor, you get an income. You’re income is the rent. Let’s say a developer is collecting $10,000 per month on a rental property. That developer’s income is $10,000 per month. But then tax time comes around and they get to write things off, namely their mortgage interest. They have a $9,000 per month mortgage and have $105,600 of annual interest in year one to write off. That means their net income is about $14,400 and they pay $4,320 in taxes. Since they had a positive cash flow of $1,000 per month (10,000 of rent – 9,000 for the mortgage), they collected enough money to pay the taxes. But after 19 that same developer has only $2,000 per month in mortgage interest to write off. That means they now have a $28,800 tax liability, but they still have only collected $12,000 in income. This developer now has to fork out $16,800 out of their pocket. If they don’t have, the government places a tax lien on the property and forces it into foreclosure. Why did this happen? Because the developer didn’t plan for it, and in most cases, don’t know to plan for it.

During the past fifty years, we have become more and more focused on today. How does doing this help me today? We seem to ignore what the effect of doing this today will have on us twenty years down the road. And that to me is the leading cause for the current financial mess. People got excited about getting a mortgage and didn’t consider five years down the road. Mortgage originators got excited about this weeks commission check and not the effect that giving a single mom with an $8.00 per hour job a loan for a $200,000 mortgage will have on her, or his own book of business, five years down the road (that’s be $1,186.27 in monthly payment which is more than an $8.00 per hour job can afford).

This is even true about many businesses and the government. I often ask the question, what would this country be like if the American government, during the 1950s, would’ve spent money on purchasing real estate holdings, both international and domestic. What would’ve happened if the American government, during the 1950s, would’ve invested money into other countries by buying their bonds and treasury bills? Would we be in a position where the country wouldn’t have to be taxed? Would those assets be generating enough income to fully fund our federal government today? Doubtful, but we’d be in a better position.

I look at Yahoo.com as an example. I don’t know the current debt-to-income ratio of their current holdings, but I know in 2006 Yahoo had a 1:4 ration. For every dollar of debt they had, they had 4 dollars of income via assets. What that means is before they turn on the lights, before they’ve opened the doors, before they’ve brewed the first cup of coffee, Yahoo has earned 3 net dollars per dollar of debt (they’re assets income is well into the billions). If America had a 1:4 ratio, where would that have us sitting right now?

The unfortunate reality is that each politician is so focused on getting reelected at the end of the term that they are not smart enough to look out 20 years. That is also true for businesses. Most businesses are too focused on making sure they remain profitable this year that they don’t often think too much about 20 years down the road. One of the biggest risks for publicly traded companies is the risk of a hostile take over. That occurs because people sell off stock and a competitor comes in behind them and purchases all that stock and becomes a major stockholder. As a major stockholder they can elect themselves to the board of members, and start making decisions like, who the CEO is, or for that matter, to sell the company to the competitor.

The thing all of us need to start doing is looking twenty years down the road. That doesn’t mean that the plans you write up today will necessarily happen as you think they might today, but having plans and reevaluating them once or twice a year allows you to build a plan and focus on achieving it. When you put a dollar into a mutual fund, ask why? What is this going to achieve me 20 years from now? Is it a hope or is it a fact? Is putting money into this mutual fund hopefully going to give me $4.46 twenty years from now or will it give you $4.46 twenty years from now. Did you make a contingency plan for what if? If not, why not?

Remember, 3% of the American population has hand written goals and those 3% of Americans own 90% of the wealth. If I’m 1/10th as successful because I spend a few hours a year updating my goals, then I’ll be better off than AIG, GM, and the American Government. Why don’t you do the same too?

Will Conservatives and Liberals EVER Agree?

Will Liberal and Conservatives EVER Agree?

NO.

There is just absolutely NO way these two groups will ever agree. Even if a single Liberal and a single Conservative intermingle on one or two things, the mentalities between the two groups are just so far apart on the spectrum – there is just no way, EVER, these two groups will agree.

So, being a Conservative… I will say: “Conservatives are more RIGHT than Liberals – and much more true to America.” If I were a Liberal, I would move to Europe and give up the fight, because as long as there is one Conservative to speak for the right, America will ALWAYS be a patriotic country and America will always defend its core principles when they are attacked.

I do not mean we won’t have a Liberal in office. Obviously, with a LIBERAL as our current President, it goes without saying this will always be possible. However, the fact a LIBERAL President is much more effective at dividing the middle class of America; a Liberal President will not likely see a complete take over of this Nation. Despite enormous efforts – such as the one Obama is stuffing down the throats of America right now, Americans will always hold on to their roots and their roots are NOT aligned with Liberals.

It WILL be a LONG four years. However, the fundamental beliefs that route only in THIS Country - the United States: that “Life and Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness” are not only beliefs – but a core, will eventually bring this Nation together and will always make the Conservative beliefs of this Nation, stronger. Those who say that Conservative’s are too extreme and too one sided, fail to understand that this Nation is a country of patriots and NEVER is that more apparent than when our country is attacked.

Liberalism can spread its wings in this country only when there is an overall lack of threat. When Americans feel safe, the number of Americans that listen to the Liberal view – grows. More people begin to focus less on defense, and more on factors such as: All Americans should own a home or, all Americans should be provided government assistance when they do not have a job. Then, instead of focusing on initiatives that promote GETTING a job, Liberals push through incentives and programs the act as deterrents and less Americans speak out against them. Liberal values that promote the welfare mentality will broaden in less threatening times.

People start to BELIEVE it is OK to allow a welfare check to count as income. People start to believe the Liberal who tells them it is the CREDIT CARD Company that is to blame for the $20,000 debt that a person racked up on 5 cards. Liberals say it is ok that the consumer has not even attempted to make a payment in 12 months because the consumer should hold no fiscal responsibility to those BIG, BAD, GREEDY CREDIT CARD COMPANIES.

That is the Liberal fungus that grows when America feels SAFE.

The fact that the Bush administration kept this Nation SAFE for eight years, only allowed the Liberal party to scream and be heard and BECAUSE America felt safe, they were able to pull off the election of a Liberal to the White House.

Had Bush failed at keeping America safe, had the terrorist organizations succeeded in flying more planes into buildings, blowing up more American citizens, in launching a dirty bomb, sent suicide bombers onto planes with bombs in their shoes – AMERICA would not have a Liberal in office right now. They would still have a mess of an economy, but they would not have a Liberal as President.

They would NOT have a Liberal President who instead of focusing on the safety of Americans, instead is eating $100 an ounce beef at his dinner table while penning a budget that will pass (before being read by Congress) that will catapult at least three generations into debt all the while speaking false numbers to the American people who are already beginning to say … HEY – STOP! SLOW DOWN!

You see the values Americans hold closest come out when there is threat. As evidenced with the glut of spending in Obama’s budget – the threat does NOT have to be a military threat. The dumping of debt on our children – that’s the current threat and it’s big – so Americans ARE starting to go back to their roots and hit the breaks. WE DON’T WANT TO DESTROY THE FUTURE GENERATIONS. We don’t want your overhaul of the UNITED STATES. WE ARE NOT EUROPE and we never will be. SLOW DOWN! STOP!

The American values that are growing now – are stemming from internal threat. They are Conservative values and as they grow, Americans see the destruction of the passage of a Liberal government plan. As this anger grows, patriotic views grow – Conservatism grows.

Patriotic views – The RIGHT to “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” will prevail in 2010 and again in 2012 because it dos not matter if America is attacked by outside forces or by the inside force called Liberalism. To the citizens of the United States, threat is threat, even within its own borders.

*

*Maryann Scarangello is a contributing writer to The Political Coffeehouse and her blog can be read at: www.viewpointright.com
*