Archive for the ‘Government’ category

Quran: To Burn or Not To Burn—Is That The Question?

September 8, 2010

Am I the only person shocked at the MASS of news coverage this is getting?  I am sitting in an Airport in Charleston, West Virginia and I have had the unfortunate pleasure of watching CNN for an hour and I think that 58 minutes of that hour was spent covering this issue.  They have had “religious experts” on and other similarly-situated goof-balls talking about this scheduled event.  So after trying to ignore this story, I have been forced to consider its relevance and ask myself what I think about the idea of burning 200+ Qurans on 9/11.  And I gotta say it brought up a lot of other issues.

But let’s start with the first issue–Burn?  or Not Burn?   Personally, I think that burning Qurans is a savage-like form of protesting and is being done for no other reason than to incite anger in others.  That said, do I think he has the right to burn them?–You betcha.  Do I agree with this form of “protest” or “statement?”  No, but I must say that all of this talk on television and blogs about whether Pastor Jones should be prohibited from burning them makes me think of similar situations that were treated with much more tolerance.  And after all democrats, isn’t “tolerance” one of your favorite words?  Shouldn’t you be just as “tolerant” of this activity as say:

The burning of American Flags?

Why the Supreme Court in Texas vs. Johnson  in 1989 upheld every person’s constitutionaly protected right to burn American Flags.  When Congress tried to pass a law in protest of this decision making it illegal, the Supreme Court struck again and upheld its previous ruling.  Of course, the flag burning in Texas occurred at the 1984 Republican National Convention by people outside that were umm…not Republican.  Since then numerous bills have been proposed to the Constitution to make the burning of a flag illegal but alas, the bill can never seem to pass the Senate.

How about desecrating the Flag?  How about burning images of George W. Bush?  Those things are all things the left champions as “free speech.”  Isn’t burning a book, even a religious book, a form of “expression.” But wait…

What about prayer in schools?  Well of course that is offensive.

What about roadside crosses, “in God we Trust,”  creationism, Nativity scenes—-All of that is “offenisve” and there are movements to do away with such horrible icons of a predominantly Christian society.  And of course, we can’t have Bibles in Courtrooms–that is simply nuts.  These forms of expression are somehow different, they are, um…different because um….well….um…. they just are apparently.

I’m continually amazed at the onslaught against Christianity from people playing the “I’m offended” card when those same people are saying that burning a Quran is simply outrageous.  And so, here we are debating over and over whether Pastor Jones should be stopped.

Hillariously we are told by CNN that this pastor–of a church in, where is that again…Gainesville, Florida..That this pastor of a church of, how many people…oh yeah, 50, is causing an enormous amount of hatred, dissent and division in our society.

 

Really???  Could it be that our National Media is causing the division, hatred and dissent?  Could it be that but for CNN, MSNBC, FOX, CBS, ABC and NBC that this event would have largely gone unnoticed except in Gainesville, Florida?  So thank you media for causing the problem and then blaming Pastor Jones.

I have a brilliant idea–it is kind of radical.  Let’s remember the lives lost and sacrifices made on 9/11 in a different way.  Instead of causing a First Amendment battle which necessarily causes the left to become hypocritical–let’s do one or more of the following:

1.  Thank our servicemen and women everytime we see them for the incredible sacrifice they make and have made.

2.  Spend time in prayer for those families that lost loved ones 9 years ago.

3.  Never forget that the battle against terrorism is not won overnight and will need our patience, dilligence and resolve.

and for the love of all….

4.  Elect members of Congress and Presidents that respect and stand in awe of our Military and are willing to spend our tax money protecting our borders and strengthening our Armed Forces instead of taking over our domestic industry and creating billions of dollars of entitlement programs.

That would go a lot further than a burning pile of Quran embers outside of a small church in Florida.

-Murphy

Arizona’s New National Guard Troops–And Other “Fair” Fights.

September 2, 2010

Well, it would appear that the United States Government is jumping at the chance to assist Arizona in its battle against illegal immigration.  I know, I said it… “ILLEGAL.”  I’m sorry, let me be more sensitive. 

Well, it would appear that the United States Government is jumping at the chance to assist Arizona in its quest to find an amicable solution to the issues surrounding undocumented workers that are simply trying to find a better life away from their oppressors in Mexico. 

(I just threw up in my mouth a little)

Arizona asked the government for 3,000 National Guard troops to assist them.  The response? 

30!

That’s right a whopping 30!

But that seems fair doesn’t it?  I mean there have been many battles over the years where one side outnumbered the other by such vast numbers and yet, the underdog won.

Take for example the Alamo.

Battle of the Alamo Photograph.jpg

Why that was about 200  men against about 2000 troops and after all they…oh yeah, they all perished.

Well what about the 480 B.C.Battle of Thermopylae?  There 300 Spartans and a few hundred Thespian volunteers and other fought a massive Persian army ranking in the 1000’s.  And they held firm and….oh yeah, they all perished.

Of course, there have been famous battles over the years where the underdog won.  For example, there were at least 2 major battles in the civil war where the confederacy was heavily outnumbered but won the battle nonetheless.   And after all at the end of it all…oh yeah, the Union won the war.

I have a novel idea–I know it may seem radical and crazy, but just think about it for a little bit.  Maybe the Federal Government could actually listen to the “troops on the ground” and send them what they need. 

I know, I know, I’m talking foolishness.  We all know that we are just stupid and the only person who truly knows what we need is mommy and daddy government–and especially Barack “Pookie” Obama.

How can we possibly argue with this guy?  Sorry AZ, you are on your own.

-Murphy

Obama Calls Bush Before Troop Speech: But why?

August 31, 2010

According to the New York Post, Obama made a call to former President George W. Bush today from Air Force One while heading to Ft. Bliss to address the troops regarding the Iraq troop withdrawal.  But why would he do this?

I suppose there are various reasons but let’s examine this a little more closely.

I.  Obama’s Catch 22

In today’s speech, Obama finds himself in quite the predicament.  On the one hand he has always said that Iraq was the “wrong war.”  Further, the troop surge, according to then Senator Obama was a huge mistake.  Don’t recall that–let’s take a listen.

But wait, there’s more…In February of this year VP Biden had this to say:

Ummm….wha?

So, how will Obama tell the tale today?  He can’t blast Bush without demeaning the troops objective and essentially admitting defeat.  He can’t praise the troops for winning the war because he thinks the war is wrong.  And so…what did he and President Bush talk about.

Well, we here at MKCB have tapped into the ultra-secret phone line aboard Air Force One to bring you this exclusive phone call–here is the transcript of what we are pretty sure we heard…

[ring, ring, ring]

Bush:  Former President Bush here, miss me yet?

BO:     Umm, heh, umm, no…but umm.. anyway, sorry to bother you at home Mr. Bush, President Barack Obama here, how are you today?

Bush:  [smirking] Well, Barry I kinda thought you might call today.  I’m out at the ranch clearing some trees in the back and remembered something about a self-imposed arbitrary deadline regarding troops that you mentioned last year and figured you would be calling.  What can I do for the American people today?

BO:  Well, as you know I’m giving a speech before Ft. Bliss today and my speech writers are having trouble deciding whether I should praise myself and my leadership in bringing an end to the war, blast you again as I always enjoy doing, mention the needless loss of life in pursuit of oil and your dad’s revenge or all three.  I’m kind of nervous about it [puff, puff] and thought I’d see what you thought.

Bush:  I’d like to say I’m honored, really I’d like to…but, well, it might be a good idea to praise the troops for what they have sacrificed and accomplished, thank them and their families for their sacrifice and service, remind the world that peace in this region of the middle east is vital to our interests, remind the world that a world with out Saddam Hussein is a better world and leave it at that.  But I’m just spitballin’ here.

BO:  Well, I knew this was a waste of time.  You and your right-wing rhetoric.  The problem is I have to find a way to demonize you and the Republicans, make the Democrats look good, appease the anti-military crowd and win over the troops.  And frankly, my speech writers went to Harvard and Columbia and they are just too stupid to figure this out.

Bush:  I’d like to say I really want to help ya, I’d really like to say that…but, well, if you are calling to let me know you are going to demonize me and call me stupid again, thanks for the heads up, but I don’t see the point of this call.

BO:  I guess I just needed to do this and leak it to the press so that they would think I was somehow being nice to you right before I blast you.  Truth is, every time I’m around the military I get scared.  I’m afraid they know how much I loathe them.

Bush:  [smirking] Ohhhh, I’m sure they don’t know.  You just go up there, be yourself, and I’m sure the typical results will follow.  Your poll numbers and the stock market will go down.  Heh, heh!  Just ribbin’ ya Barry–have a great speech.

BO:  Ummm, yeah, okay I guess I…

[click]

BO:  (stupid hick)

-Murphy

Obama: “Things Could Be Worse”

July 1, 2010

Okay first of all–go to minute 47 of this hour long feature film and watch for about a minute–then you are prepared to read on…

So here we have our President saying that the way we know that the stimulus worked is because things could be worse.  And, of course, if you think about it, he is right.  I mean the argument that things could be better without it makes no sense whatsoever because, um… well… it just doesn’t.  Look stop fighting the logic of this administration because you obviously misunderstand the points they are trying to make.

For example, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said that unemployment checks are creating jobs.  What?  You don’t get that?  Jeez…do I have to do all the thinking around here?

You see, when unemployed people get money, they spend it.  By spending money they are buying goods that are produced by people.  By buying those goods, people have to be employed to make more.  See?  Unemployment is good for the economy.

So you still don’t get it?  Well  I’ll try and explain it by using some other examples.

  1. Al and Tipper Gore have a good marriage when Al is happy.
  2. Al gets an inappropriate massage to release his shakra so that he can be happy.
  3. Getting an inappropriate massage is good for Al and Tipper’s marriage. 

See?  No?  Let me try another one.

  1. Cooking fish in oil is healthier than cooking fish in butter
  2. BP spilled zillions of barrells of oil into the Gulf of Mexico.
  3. Fish in the Gulf are now covered with oil.
  4. Fish covered in oil can be cooked “as is.”
  5. Spilling oil into the Gulf is healthy.

It is so easy.  Okay 1 more then hopefully you will get it.

  1. Tiger Woods is worth $900 million to $1 billion dollars
  2. Tiger Woods cheated on his wife a billion times.
  3. Tiger Woods’ wife is getting $750 million in the divorce
  4. Cheating worked because her take could have been worse.

Now do you get it?  NO!!???? I give up on you guys, seriously.

-Murphy

Veteran’s Day 2009-A Humble Word of Thanks

November 11, 2009

Veteran’s Day was originally Armistice Day–proclaimed by U.S. President Woodrow Wilson.  Congress passed a resolution in 1926 requesting another proclamation to observe November 11 and on May 13, 1938, Congress made November 11 a legal holiday, “to be dedicated to the cause of world peace and to be thereafter celebrated and known as ‘Armistice Day.’  In 1953 a civilian named Al King (a shoe store owner in Emporia, Kansas) began a campaign to turn Armistice Day into “all” Veterans’ Day.  With the help of his representative, Ed Rees, a bill was pushed through Congress and President Dwight Eisenhower fittingly signed it into law on May 26, 1954.  Ever since, its purpose has been to honor those who have served in our Military and to honor those still serving.

THOSE WHO HAVE SERVED:

To the brave men and women who have faithfully served our Nation bringing an end to WWII, bravely fighting a horrific fight in Korea and Vietnam to preserve freedom around the world, liberating Countries from dictatorships, preserving peace in the Middle East and standing strong against tyranny and communism, I humbly thank you for your service.  I thank you for doing a job many Americans cannot or will not.  I thank you for allowing me the freedom to raise my children in a society free of tyranny and oppression.  I thank you for shedding blood and tears in foreign lands and rarely and tragically sometimes here at home.

While the John Kerry’s and Code Pinks and Move-On.org’s and leftists here in America criticize your actions, mock your purposes and rant against your missions, you persevere and fight harder to protect the very freedoms those individuals exercise even when they exercise them in a manner that dishonors your service.  I am sorry that there are those who call themselves Americans that do not appreciate the sacrifice you have given.  I am sorry that there are those on American soil that are able to choose where they worship, where they study, where they eat, what they read, what they drive, where they go and what they do with little resistance from their government and yet fail to recognize that it is you that have preserved those freedoms they exercise.  I am sorry that there are those in our Government who seemingly refuse to recognize the victories you have obtained and the purposes you have served.  I am sorry for every single citizen that has not taken the time to thank you from the bottom of their heart.

I pray God’s richest blessings on your life for the tireless way in which you have stared adversity in the face and fought against it to protect all of us.  Thank you for your service.

THOSE WHO CONTINUE TO SERVE:

To the brave men and women continuing to serve in our Military overseas and at home-thank you for your continued service.  Thank you for remaining faithful to our Nation and continuing the fight to preserve freedoms in the Middle East and to protect the world from terrorism.  Thank you for performing under intense and extreme circumstances and proudly wearing our flag into these important conflicts.

I am sorry that our President and your Commander is willing to play golf 24 times in a year but cannot make a decision to honor the request of the General to send more assistance to your fight.  I am sorry that our President and your Commander is worried more about whether he acknowledges some buddies at a conference than whether he acknowledges the brave soldiers who needlessly lost their lives at Ft. Hood.  I am sorry that we at home elected a man to your Commanding position that neither honors your service nor cares about your success.  But know this–the American people care and we pray for your safety and we recognize the great debt we owe you and your families for the sacrifices you are making and will make.  You are the heroes of my children and myself.  I realize fully that I am able to sit in this air-conditioned office high above the Houston streets and type these words without fear of arrest or persecution because of what you are doing. 

I pray for your safety, your mission and your quick return home to your families and loved ones.  Thank you for your service!

-Murphy

 

 

 

 

 

“Consumer Option” vs. “Public Option” Redefines English Language

October 30, 2009

Our fearless leader of the House of Representatives has really outdone herself this time.  Today she produced a 1,900 page health care reform bill with no “public option.”  Errr…well…um I mean there is one it now called the “consumer option.”  Many of you know that she redefined the terms of this government takeover of our health care system a few days ago by simply “rebranding” the public option.  Now it doesn’t sound so darn socialismy (new word–just go with it).

But little did she know that she would start a revolution of the English Language.  Webster turned over in his grave this week as tens of tens of people rallied behind Madam Pelosi and took the lead to redefine many other areas of our language that just seemed a little well…negative.  So thank you Madam Speaker for your ingenuity, brilliance and trend-making abilities.  In conformity with rebranding the socialistic takeover of 1/6 of our economy from “Public” to “Consumer” here are a few more “rebranding” techniques currently in circulation:

1.  New Brand:  CHOCOLATE CAKE

CowPie.jpg image by triple789

Old Brand:  Cow Pie

2.  New Brand:  ART DECO

  Old Brand:  Toxic Mold

3.  New Brand:  STREET AFICIONADO

  Old Brand:  Homeless Person

4.  New Brand:  RELIGIOUS EXTROVERT

  Old Brand:  Terrorist

5.  New Brand:  MR. HOTTIE

  Old Brand:  Satan, Prince of Darkness, The Evil One, etc…

and finally…

6.  New Brand:  CONSUMERISTS

   Old Name:  Democrats, Socialists, Liberals, Jack…
 
 
“when I see a bird that walks like a duck and swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, I call that bird a duck.”
 
                                                 -James Whitcomb Riley
 
Murphy

ACORN’s Guide To A Better America

September 16, 2009

Ah, ACORN–just the name brings forth images of life, rebirth, a new beginning, a game of war between neighborhood kids that nearly put each other’s eyes out by hurling the little rock-hard seeds at each other.  Oh the memories.

In that same spirit of hope, and change, and new life, here is an organization that went to the people and organized them and helped them see the craziness of voting for an elephant and instead voting for a Kanye West, er I mean a Democrat. 

So what is ACORN?  According to its website it is:  “the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, is the nation’s largest community organization of low- and moderate-income families, working together for social justice and stronger communities.”

They fight for things like health care for all citizens, raising the minimum wage, attacking “predatory” lenders who would seek to foreclose on loans, stopping lenders from “tricking” low-income people into signing up for loans with high interest rates (you can bet they spent the loan money though), “confronting the global economic crisis” and forcing communities to provide “affordable” housing so that all low-income families can “become homeowners.”

Despite being non-partisan–here is a short paragraph found on their website:

“Ever since right-wing conservatives got wind of ACORN’s record-setting voter registration drive, their attempts to discredit the work and create an atmosphere of chaos and intimidation have multiplied daily against the organization. Rather than compete for the votes of these new voters, they have resorted to lies and smears to distract voters from the serious issues facing the United States as Election Day draws near.  Now, ACORN is fighting back against the attacks, engineered by the McCain Campaign and the Republican National Committee.”

Funny–I didn’t know that conservatives were competing with a non-partisan organization with the angelic mission of simply registering poor voters.  I guess that ACORN assumes that all poor people are Democrats–which is odd when you consider that all of the Democrat-led entitlements have failed to pull them out of poverty.

So what is ACORN’s vision for America–well they haven’t yet published their annual reports for 2007 or 2008 but a look at the 2006 report reveals the following:

1.  NO MORE WAL-MART–this is hilarious really when you consider that the vast majority of people who shop at Wal-Mart are low-income families because of the tremendous price break they get there versus small boutique stores.  The Annual Report says:  “ACORN worked with the Wal-Mart Alliance for Reform Now (WARN) to stop the construction of Wal-Mart stores in Orlando, Sarasota, Plant City, and Temple Terrace, Fla. Also in Florida, the Orange County Commission enacted an ACORN–backed one-year moratorium barring big box retailers from building new stores in the county.”

2.  Every Neighborhood Gets A Grocery Store:  What???  See this:  ACORN obtained “a $5 million city subsidy for the building of a supermarket in a neglected Las Vegas, Nev., neighborhood.”

3.  Healthcare For All:  “ACORN continued our fight to win health care access for low and moderate income families. In San Francisco, ACORN was part of a successful coalition effort to pass an ordinance providing health care for every city resident. ACORN chapters in San Diego, Calif., and Columbus, Ohio, also helped eliminate over $700,000 in medical debt and over $1.2 million in liens for patients unfairly denied reduced cost “charity care” at local hospitals. Chicago ACORN worked with allies to stop a large hospital chain from closing an acute care hospital serving low-income city residents.”

4.  Free Pass for Illegal Immigrants:  “ACORN members joined the largest mass movement our country has seen in decades as we participated in immigrant rights marches around the nation to demand comprehensive federal immigration reform and a legal path to citizenship. These events helped block federal legislation making it a felony to aid undocumented immigrants or to be undocumented in the U.S., and set the stage for a renewed push for immigration reform in 2007.”

and of course, my favorite:

5.  Legalized Prostitution:

And you know–the ACORN does not fall far from the tree.

-Murphy

WordPress.com Political Blogger Alliance

The “NEW” 10 Shortest Books In The World

September 16, 2009

In light of recent events its time once again to update our list of the Worlds 10 Shortest Books.  Thanks to our staff here at MKCB we have scanned the globe for you.  We know how hard it is to read a good book with all that goes on in your daily life, so we have compile this list so you can grab a book, take a restroom break, finish the book and thereby kill two birds with one stone.

For your reading pleasure, here is our updated list of the Worlds 10 Shortest Books:

1.  MY RELEVANCE IN THE WORLD by Jimmy Carter

2.  DIETS I’VE TRIED AND SPONSORED THAT ACTUALLY WORK by Oprah Winfrey

3.  THE DEMOCRATS THAT NEVER ACCUSED BUSH OF LYING:  A History from 2001-Present byMSNBC News

4.  BEAUTY SECRETS FROM THE HILL by Nancy Pelosi

5.  ANTHOLOGY: A Collection of Interesting Portions of Books Written by Jimmy Carter

6.  INTEGRITY, HUMILITY, AND A LOVE FOR OUR COUNTRY a collection of writings from members of ACORN

7.  LEGITIMATE BUSINESS TRIPS TO ARGENTINA by Mark Sanford

8.  MICHIGAN’S BOOMING ECONOMY by Gov. Jennifer Granholm

9.  EFFICIENCY: A History of the U.S. Government-Run Industries that Thrive  by the Congressional Budget Office

10.  VICTORYThe Storied Wins of the Houston Texan Football Team  by Bud Adams

AND THIS JUST IN–BONUS BOOK:

11.  THE TRUTH ABOUT THE, ER I MEAN “MY” HEALTH CARE PLAN  by President Barack Obama

WordPress.com Political Blogger Alliance

-Murphy

Czar, Czar Wherever You Are!

August 19, 2009

With all of the Czar’s being appointed by our President I decided to do a little fact checking into this radical way of ruling our government.  First, when I googled “Czar” in Google Images-the image above is the first one you see.  Of course this image was there as well:

So—that really doesn’t help me understand what he is doing—-or does it?  Nope, it doesn’t-moving on…

The first picture however, took me to a blog post about taking over the government called “How to Run a Country and Get Away With It.”  Interestingly this post was published in October of 2007!  So wait just a minute, either I am having a Shelia Jackson Lee Moment or am I right that the President took office in 2009?  It just seems like he has been there forever.

So what is this all about.  The author states that “Appointing a Czar is a handy way of deflecting bad publicity on a difficult issue. Drugs, for example have been a hot issue for a long time and have caused successive governments major difficulties. Appoint a Czar and these problems simply go away.”  The author by the way is talking about the UK.  He correctly points out that:

“Firstly, any successes could be claimed as government successes as the results came out in police reports and therefore “ the new crime policies are working”. Secondly any failures can be attributed to the failure of the Czar himself and not the government. And finally, any police excesses, despite the fact that you have encouraged tough policies, can be targeted at individual police forces or crime units and therefore the government also looks liberal and humanitarian. It’s a win-win situation. Power without responsibility, perfect!”

Excellent points!  And admittedly, that may be the reasons that George Bush, Clinton and George Bush appointed such individuals.  However, in those three cases it was only a handful of “czars” that were appointed and in reality–any failures of such individuals were heaped on the President by the media anyway.

So why has Obama appointed over 3 dozen!  Let’s look to the Constitution–I’m sure it allows for such things:

Well obviously that is too dang hard to read–but let’s assume for a moment that this language is in there somewhere around say Article II, section 2:

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.”

So, I suppose he can appoint Czars in one of two ways–either with the Advice and Consent of the Senate–oops–he hasn’t done that—or as “otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law.”  Hmmmm… I wonder of such a law exists?

Well as luck would have it there is a law for the Drug Czar–so maybe Bush and Clinton and Bush weren’t doing something so bad after all.  The Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 1998 allows for the appointment of a director.  Under Obama that person is Gil Kerlikowske.

But how about the others?

Say…Carol Browner the “Energy Czar“—she of course headed the EPA under Clinton and on her last day in office, oversaw the destruction of agency computer files in brazen violation of a federal judge’s order requiring the agency to preserve its records. 

How about Todd Stern the “Climate Change Czar” or Special Envoy on Climate Change (potato, potahhto).  He was actually appointed by Hilary Clinton–the Secretary of State.  What????

How about Adolfo Carrion, Jr, the “Urban Czar“-a specialist in Cash and Carry scandals.  Great choice.

Or the others:

Tech Czar-Aneesh Chopra(who answers your calls as a level 2 specialist whenever your Comcast digital service acts up)

Government Performance Czar-Jeffrey Zients (who will answer your calls in the order in which they were received–your wait time is now 19288 minutes)

Infotech Czar-Vivek Kundra(who is a level 3 specialist and will take your call when Aneesh Chopra cannot figure out why you cannot access the Internet)

Health Czar-Nancy Ann DeParle(a former shoplifter and ineffective at doing anything by praising Obama for his ridiculous Health Care bill)

Bailout Czar or Tarp Czar-Herb Allison (that has worked very well–don’t you think?

Guantanamo Closure Czar-Daniel Fried (wonder what he is getting paid to take the political hit that this hasn’t happened yet?

I could go on for days, there is a Stimulus Oversight Czar, Border Czar, Counterterrorism Czar (not Jack Bauer), Regulatory Czar, Pay Czar, Car Czar, Economic Czars, Intelligence Czar, Great Lakes Czar (what??), Copyright Czar (seriously?), Food Car, Water Czar, War Czar, Domestic Violence Czar etc…..

None of these individuals have the authority to force any company or person or agency to do anything–at least not legally.  So why, why appoint all of these individuals–well if you look through history you will see that every leader that has appointed numerous individuals to carry out their bidding under the title of “Head” or “Director” or “Czar” did so as a way to grab power where the Country’s laws didn’t otherwise allow for such a power grab.

In America–lest you forget–we have a balance of power–these individuals cannot have any unless Congress allows it and there is a legal reason for it–such as the Drug Czar.

Russian Czars brutalized people–especially the Jews in Russia.  Hitler appointed numerous Leaders of the High Command to rule the Nazi party and carry out his policies and commands–including genocide.

Our Founding Fathers put our system in place for a reason–I guess that along with Health care, Cap and Trade, Stimulus, Obama just thinks that the Constitution should be trashed.

You know its bad when a Democratic Senator thinks it is unconstitutional.  But then again, that is Senator Byrd and after all–he used to be in the KKK, so his objection is skewed a bit.

I guess I should just be quiet–after all this is just all part of “Hope and Change.”

-Murphy

The Queen of Socialism Calls Dissenters “Un-American”

August 10, 2009

Apparently, shouting out your views against Health Care is Un-American.  That is what Nancy Pelosi states in her USA Today opinion article.  How is it that Ms. Pelosi can write an opinion article in USA Today supporting socialized medicine, but Republican congressmen are having trouble sending out fliers to their constituency because Ms. Pelosi won’t approve the language being used to tell the truth about this radical takeover of our health care industry? 

Ms. Pelosi, (Lord help me I never thought I’d do THIS)-I suggest you take some advice from ….

(can I say it?)….

Hillary Clinton:

Sorry folks, I know that listening to that cackle will make asbestos melt, but I guess it doesn’t apply when people are against Democrats and their policies.  It apparently only applies when you are condemning George Bush.

One day I’ll get these silly rules straight.  I keep looking to the Constitution, but obviously the Rules are written somewhere else.

-Murphy