Archive for America
The Twisted Focus of The Racist Hunters
Posted by: | CommentsMr. Zack Burgess of the Philadelphia Tribune is horrified that the world media did not go on a celebration frenzy when a Nigerian named Adebayo Ogunlesi recently purchased London’s Gatwick Airport for 1.455 billion pounds. Mr. Burgess is in the process of doing a story on this purchase and recently put out a query on the Internet for people to interview. He wants to interview historians and psychiatrists and educators. It is Mr. Burgess’ twisted focus that is so typical of the American Liberal Media. Mr. Burgess’ Internet solicitation made the following observation:
“We often are quick to hear and see images on television of African Americans in disparaging situations like jail, poverty, prostitution, etc. But we hardly hear about the good of our African American tycoons, lawyers, doctors, etc. Now, the question is, why did the mainstream media keep this so very, very quiet? I was even more surprised that not even the BBC covered this story, or any of the other major news networks including CNN!”
Where is Mr. Burgess going with this little inquiry? Well, he gets to the point by saying:
“I know this is rather controversial, but it’s a story that needs to be tackled. Furthermore, is this the reason the president is under such fire…because we’re not used to seeing an African American with such power outside of entertainment. How do we change such a problem that has been talked about in the African American community for years, but hasn’t been talked about enough publicly?”
Now we get it! Barack Obama is under fire because he is black – not because he is a Marxist/Socialist/ left wing radical who is systematically taking America apart. For Mr. Burgess and the political left they can’t accept that Americans might be down on Mr. Obama for what he has done and is doing. It has to be about race for them.
Mr. Burgess, you and your media friends are living under the greatest denial cloud that has ever been floated.
Let Me Ask You a Question…
Posted by: | CommentsLet’s say you have $500 that you want to loan to someone at a reasonable rate of interest. Let’s say you have narrowed your loan candidates down to two possibilities. The first possibility is to loan the money to a member of your own family. You realize the interest rate might be a little lower but you trust your family member to honor the loan and repay it.
Your second possibility is to loan the money to a rich person across town who seems to have more money than they need and they just choose to borrow money to maintain a certain standard of living. Your realize the rich person on the other side of town is a spendthrift, but they have great references and you have a lot of faith in their ability to survive difficulty and keep on trucking.
Then, on the brink of pulling the trigger of making the loan to the rich guy you learn some facts about the behavior of the the person:
1. The rich person has recently embarked on an incredible spending spree and has done it on borrowed money. As a matter of fact you learn that almost 50% of every dollar they spend is borrowed from other people, like you!
2. The rich person has been totally ignoring warnings from its lenders that the borrowed money they are spending is toxic and deadly to their long term survival. Yet, the person continues to spend in an irresponsible rush to disaster.
Armed with these new facts you decide that you don’t want to loan your $500 to the irresponsible rich person and elect to loan your money instead to your family member, who is close to home and behaves more responsibly than the rich lunatic across town.
About a year later you learn that the rich person has exhausted its resources to obtain loans and is going bankrupt. All the people who had loaned money to the rich person in previous years have evaporated.
What’s the meaning of this?
1. The United States of America is the rich person across town behaving like a lunatic.
2. You represent the foreign investors who are financing the spending spree of the lunatic and have little or no hope of being repaid the $12,000,000,000,000 of debt accumulated by the lunatic.
Here’s the question: What happens when the lunatic can no longer borrow money to to pay its bills?
Nobody seems to want to know the answer to that question and that is our national crisis.
Obamacare: The Social Security Fix
Posted by: | CommentsI’m writing this to go on record concerning this subject. In a few years when what I am going to predict is beginning to happen, I can point to this post and say: “I told you so!” That is, if I’m still alive. If Obamacare becomes law it will be the method by which the bankrupt social security system will be fixed. How is this you ask?
The impending doom for Social Security is found in the huge numbers of baby boomers who will go on Social Security/Medicare over the next 5 to 25 years. Because the abortion-on-demand movement has murdered over 50,000,000 babies since 1973, we are missing 1.5 generations of Americans who should be working and paying taxes, particularly FICA employment taxes. When the boomers retire there will not be enough people paying FICA taxes to support their Social Security payments. Big problem.
There are only two solutions to fix this potential disaster. The first is to drastically raise FICA taxes on the working population. The second is to reduce the number of people drawing Social Security checks. I predict that the people paying the FICA taxes will prefer the second method. I also believe Obamacare will provide the means to accomplish the reduction in the number of people receiving social security. How? It’s very simple: Administrative Volutary Euthenasia!
When Obamacare is in effect, the Government is going to gradually decide who deserves certain kinds of care. A 70 year old person suffering cancer will be provided hospice care, rather than expensive Chemotherapy. As the aged get sick, they will be thinned out by being denied the expensive care and treatment that might help them live a few more years. Instead they will be offered Administrative Voluntary Euthenasia. This will be Dr. Kervorkian on steroids, from coast to coast!
I am 67 as of this post. I fully expect the day to come when I am going to get sick with something and the government is going to disapprove the treatment I need based on my age and the expense of the treatment. Obamacare will prohibit me from buying it out of my own pocket and the government will help me exit this world as painlessly as possible. When you multiply this scenario millions of times it won’t be long until the Social Security recipients are drastically reduced. The result will be a ‘fix’ for Social Security.
Call me a conspiracy nut if you like, but I believe this is inevitable if Obama and the Democrats have their way.
Send In The UN!
Posted by: | CommentsDear Jim Bob,
I just heard that the United Nations is going to investigate what they describe as the US Housing Crisis. What’s this about Jim Bob?
Curious in Cleveland
Dear Curious,
I looked into this and discovered you are correct! Evidently the UN (located in New York City) is dispatching a person they identified as Raquel Rolnik, the “UN Special Rapporteur on Adequate Housing” to investigate the housing situation in New York City and other American cities.
I learned that Ms. Rolnik is an architect from Brazil and made her name there as an Urban Planner. I am sharing a video at the end of this post wherein Ms Rolnik expresses her opinion that affordable housing is a right. When you see Ms. Rolnik all of this will become very clear to you.
I also learned that one of the groups helping Ms. Rolnik with her NYC investigation is an outfit called FUREE (Families United For Racial and Economic Equality). If you’ve never heard of FUREE, just think of them as a little ACORN. One of the main concerns of FUREE is combating something called “gentrification.” Now, what is gentrification you ask? I’ll make it easy for you. Have you ever seen a slum area that is blighted, riddled with crime and generally unsafe? Then, have you ever seen a bunch of business people come in and buy up all that dangerous real estate and clean up the area? They tear down the worst, repair the salvagable parts and make the area nice and safe -- to the extent that people who actually work move back into the area and it once again becomes a thriving community.
We used to call this process Urban Renewal and it was considered a good thing. Today, it is called “gentrification” and is considered evil! Why? Because when an area undergoes ‘gentrification’ property values go up and rents increase. The destitute, unemployed people who formerly lived in the area can no longer afford to live there and are displaced.
Since the UN Special Rapporteur, Ms. Rolnik considers affordable housing a “right”, and is being led around by the FUREE group, we will no doubt hear more about this in the days ahead. The big question is this: What will the UN do when it finishes their investigation? My guess is that they will send a big report to President Obama and his ACORN roots/genes will come to life in sympathy. A logical Obama solution will be to introduce some good legislation that will force developers and others who produce “gentrification” to rent their properties at depressed rates to accomodate the rights of the displaced.
HEY! Isn’t this the same approach that caused the home loan mortgage crisis that tanked our economy? I just love liberals, don’t you?
Video of UN Special Rapporteur, Raquel Rolnik
The Difference Between Liberals and Conservatives
Posted by: | CommentsDear Jim Bob,
When I ask people about the difference between liberals and conservatives I get a lot of different answers. What’s the best way to understand this Jim Bob?
Interested in Iowa
Dear Interested,
I think the best way to understand the difference between liberals and conservatives is to take a look at their behavior. After all, behavior is the result of what we think and what we think is driven by what we believe. So, if you can simply describe what liberals do and what conservatives do it might help you understand what separates them. Here is what I’ve observed over the years.
WHAT LIBERALS DO: Liberals usually create problems where they don’t really exist. They are always trying to fix stuff that isn’t really broken. Even if something is slightly broken, their approach is to throw the whole thing out and start over with something that always involves the government doing it. It gets even more complicated when you understand that liberals will decide something SHOULD be broken even if it isn’t and try to fix that too. The Global Warming Hoax is like that. Finally, liberals rarely, if ever, trust fixing things to individuals, because they want the government to do it through taxes and more regulation. Why liberals do this is another subject.
Now, it’s important to understand that for something to be broken in the mind of a liberal, all that needs to exist is an opinion that its broken. Liberals are rarely restrained by actual facts. What they do is assemble a lot of anecdotal information and portray it as a dominant trend. They also twist facts to fit the agenda they have created to fix whatever they believe is broken. Our current health care controversy is a perfect example of how liberals operate. American health care has some problems and they are very specific problems. The liberal approach is to completely replace the entire system with a government controlled environment.
WHAT CONSERVATIVES DO: Conservatives do not try to fix things that are not broken. When something is actually broken or looks like it might become broken, a true conservative first examines the extent of the problem based on the actual reality and facts of the situation. Then, a conservative will create solutions that deal with the actual problem. Conservatives will always try to preserve the best parts of whatever they are trying to fix. Conservatives strive for improvement, not destruction. A conservative will never throw the baby out with the bath water.
So, that is basic difference between liberals and conservatives, as I see it. Hope that helps.
The Obama Schoolchild Indoctrination Furor
Posted by: | CommentsIf you haven’t heard about this volitile issue, just watch the UTube clip below. Shawn Hannity does a great job focusing the issue.
What Can be Done About Congress?
Posted by: | CommentsDear Jim Bob,
There’s a lot of things going on in America that drive me nuts, but my biggest beef is with the United States Congress. It seems these people are from a different planet. They don’t understand what it means to be an American and they pass legislation like a bunch of drunks at an endless party. Is there anything that can be done to fix that place Jim Bob?
Going Bonkers in Yonkers
Dear Bonkers,
Actually, the solution to this is very simple. Only two new laws need to be passed and the entire mess would be fixed in nothing flat. Here are the two laws that are needed:
1. The Congressional Reform Act: This law would require that Congress Persons must live under all the laws they pass for the rest of us. There would be no congressional exemptions for any legislation passed by Congress. This would eliminate their windfall retirement plan (100% of full pay for life and fully covered healthcare) and require them to retire under Social Security and Medicare like the rest of us. Included in this law should be other rules for what they can do with left-over campaign contributions (which can be millions of dollars). This money should go into the general treasury to be applied to the deficits Congress creates.
2. The Congressional Term Limits Act: This law would limit Congressional term limits to no more than ten years. This law alone would do more to fix the place that just about anything else. This new law coupled with the Reform Act, described above, would make them accountable where it matters: In their own pocket books!
So, Bonkers this is not a complicated issue. It’s very simple. The only problem is that the laws must be passed by the very same group that needs reform. Only a huge grassroots demand for this kind of legislation would give it a chance of passing. Personally, if a person running for President made these two laws a key piece of their campaign strategy they would attract a huge public following and support for their proposal.
Moon Water! Just what we’ve been waiting for.
Posted by: | CommentsDear Jim Bob,
I just read that India sent an unmanned probe to the moon with some sophisticated water detection instruments on board. They think they have found water on the moon Jim Bob. Isn’t this just great?
Dee Lirious in Delaware
Dear Dee,
I think this is just thrilling and I’m not talking about the actual water they think they found. What is thrilling is all the fuss that we are going to hear about this for years to come. People are already talking about how to harness this resource and frankly, water on the moon is about as useful as a Democrat in Texas.
Let’s say there is some water on the moon. Since the temperature up there is about 400 below zero we can safely assume its frozen solid. My question is why do we have to go the moon to get this ice. Antarctica (The south pole and vicinity) has more ice than we know what to do with and nobody has seen fit to go down there and start hacking off big chunks to float back to the dry regions of the planet. So, why are all these folks getting excited about finding water on the moon? Listen carefully and I will explain.
Liberals love to make discoveries and postulate all kinds of possible good things that can be done if they can just get enough tax money to fund their optimism. This effort by India proves that their country has as many unrealistic intellectuals as the rest of the world. The Indians are very interested in capitalizing on their big discovery and they want to take the lead in the continuing pursuit of water on the moon. I can see it now: Bollywood on ice!
I hope we have enough sense to let the Indians take on the entire responsibility for this project, but they will probably figure out a way to get our Democrat leaders to help them fund their expenses. The big question is this? What will the highest and best use for all this water on the moon be?
It is no secret that India has been looking for a new location to house all of the tech support and customer service phone banks it provides for American businesses. Now that water has been discovered on the moon, they can move those facilities where they belong.
The Best Global Warming Carbon Reduction Strategy
Posted by: | CommentsDear Jim Bob,
I know the Democrats want to pass a big carbon tax bill to help stop global warming. Is that the best strategy Jim Bob?
Gullible in New Jersey
Dear Gullible,
As you know, most Americans go to sleep each night in total fear of the Global Warming Threat. It’s real important that we do what has to be done to stop this beast in its tracks! Hardly a minute of my own life goes by that I am not fretting and wringing my hands over the threat of climate change. I keep a thermometer with me at all times to monitor hourly changes as they occur. Yesterday, for example, the high temperature was 1 degree higher than it was the day before. I am terrified of this trend.
Fortunately, I recently read what I believe to be the most effective idea to halt the global warming threat. It was published by the United Nations, so it must be the right approach. Essentially, they recommend that human beings stop reproducing themselves! Since Global Warming is caused by increased levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and human beings exhale carbon dioxide in the course of breathing, the simple solution to Global Warming is to eliminate human beings from the equation. What a simple solution. Only the United Nations could come up with such a brilliant idea.
Roger Martin, chairman of the Optimum Population Trust at the LSE, said: “It’s always been obvious that total emissions depend on the number of emitters as well as their individual emissions – the carbon tonnage can’t shoot down as we want, while the population keeps shooting up.”
Amazingly, the Democrat Socialized Medicine Act of 2009 will work well with the new UN strategy. As healthcare for the elderly is carefully rationed and their numbers are in accelerated decline, the population will be decreased significantly. No doubt increasing the number of abortions will also help reduce the population in the future. I mean, abortion on demand since the 1970’s has already spared us the extra carbon emissions of almost 50,000,000 people who don’t exist today. How wonderful is that?
So, the Global Warming threat will be unexpectedly reduced under the Obama/Democrat health strategies. The next step is obviously to copy the China policy of government enforced family size limits.
Don’t you just love this? Here’s a UTUBE CLip by Glen Beck on the Global Warming hoax:
