Tuesday, December 29, 2009

Nail Biting - Bad for you!!

Dang, I do many of these bad habits myself - except smoking - I don't personally smoke, but fully support those who do. No one is subjected to more public disdain and unfair laws than smokers! I get the "no smoking on an airplane" but not in public and definitely not in a PRIVATE RESTAURANT or BAR. If an owner of a bar wants to allow smoking he should be able to. Period. It's all BS. Plus they tax the hell out of cigarettes and cigars so the Liberals should love them and give their users more freedom. Alas, this is not the case.

5 Habits to break in 2010

Everyone, and I mean everyone, has a bad habit (or three), and even if you’re not the resolution type, making one change this year can do wonders for your health, looks and self-esteem. Here are five common not-so-great habits, and how to break ’em for good.

1.) Bad habit: Nail Biting

Stop now: Biting your nails makes for ugly hands and over time can interfere with normal nail growth, damage the outer layer of your teeth, and cause nail deformities such as split nails. Harmful bacteria such as staphylococcus also live underneath nails—and you don't want to chew on that.

Break it: Go for a professional manicure once every 2 or 3 weeks, suggests Angelica Kaner, PhD, a clinical professor at Yale University Medical School, because when your nails look pretty, you'll be less likely to snack on them. At the very least, keep your nails trimmed short—you'll have less nail to bite, and that harmful bacteria has less space to grow. Nail biting is also a nervous habit that is often an expression of some deeper anxiety. "Ask yourself why you're feeling anxious," Kaner says. You can also try substituting a new, healthy behavior—instead of biting your nails, rub in a cuticle cream or oil.

Save money with home manicures


2.) Bad habit: Forgetting to Floss

Flossing helps prevent gum disease and keeps your teeth and gums looking good, but it may also stave off non-mouth-related diseases: A 2005 study in the journal Circulation showed that older adults with higher levels of four gum disease-causing bacteria in their mouths also tend to have thicker carotid arteries, which raise the risk of stroke and heart attack. That's scary business, because 90% of dentists say that most patients don't floss regularly.

Break it: Buy a floss-holding device, such as the Flossmate Floss Holder to make the process easier and faster. In an Indiana University study, 50% of previous nonflossers were doing so regularly 6 months after introducing floss to their routine; 85% of the new flossers used a holding device—only 15% preferred doing without the aid. Then incorporate flossing into your morning routine before or after brushing.

Surprising habits that protect your pearly whites


3) Bad habit: Late Night Fridge Raiding

Eating late at night in itself isn't bad for you, but chances are you're eating cold pizza instead of apple slices. Adding those extra calories does the late-night damage, according to a 2005 Oregon Health & Science University study. Snacking late at night can also exacerbate symptoms for those prone to heartburn, as lying down after eating makes it easier for stomach acid to flow into the esophagus.

Break it Boredom, not hunger, is of the root cause of late-night eating, says Pamela Peeke, MD, author of Fit to Live. Once the craving hits, focus on an activity that engages you until it's time to go to sleep, such as e-mail, a crossword puzzle, or meditation. It's also common for people to chow down while watching TV. In fact, a study from the Smell and Taste Treatment and Research Foundation in Chicago found that people who were allowed to eat as many potato chips as they wanted ate 44% more chips while watching Letterman than while not watching TV. Keep your hands busy while you watch by folding laundry, using your BlackBerry, or knitting—that way you won't be tempted to break out the Ruffles.

Ate too much? Erase the damage with this simple plan.


4) Bad habit: Smoking

We don't need to remind you of all the health risks associated with smoking (heart attack, lung cancer, emphysema, and cancer of the mouth, throat, stomach, bladder, kidney, and cervix), but here's one you might not have considered: money. Lots of it. The cost of one pack plus taxes averages $4.49, so if you smoke a pack a day, you're turning a whopping $1,639 a year into nothing but smoke, ashes, and nice black spots on your formerly pretty pink lungs.

Break it: Ask your doctor about drugs that can help kick-start your quitting process and help you combat cravings and withdrawal. For instance, Zyban, an antidepressant, helps reduce psychological withdrawal symptoms such as frustration, restlessness, anxiety, and irritability. Chantix blocks the effects of nicotine on your brain, which helps reduce cravings. According to a study, 44% of smokers were able to quit after 12 weeks using Chantix, and another study showed that Zyban was nearly twice as effective as a nicotine patch in helping smokers quit.

11 biggest health sins


5) Bad habit: Sun Worshipping

Blame it on Coco Chanel—before she returned golden brown from a Mediterranean vacation in the 1920s, pale skin was in. But until the Morticia Addams look comes back in style, stick to self-tanning lotion: The sun's UV rays damage your skin's DNA, increasing your risk of skin cancer (not to mention sunspots, sagging skin, and wrinkles). In fact, as much as 90% of wrinkles, brown spots, and sagging are caused by sun damage, according to the American Skin Association.

Break it: Wear sunscreen daily on the parts of your body that are exposed to the sun, even during winter. The skin cancer foundation recommends applying 1 ounce of SPF 15 sunscreen with UVA and UVB protection to your entire body 30 minutes before going outside on a typical day, and then reapply every 2 hours. If you're spending the day outdoors, wear a wide-brimmed hat and cover exposed skin with clothing, preferably with built-in sunscreen.

Monday, June 29, 2009

Compare the Quotes... see how we vote...

"The main plank in the National Socialist program is to abolish the liberalistic concept of the individual and the Marxist concept of humanity and to substitute for them the folk community, rooted in the soil and bound together by the bond of its common blood." [Adolph Hitler]

"Comrades! We must abolish the cult of the individual decisively, once and for all." [Nikita Khrushchev]

"We must stop thinking of the individual and start thinking about what is best for society." [Hillary Clinton, 1993]

www.finallyequal.com

Tuesday, June 23, 2009

“American People Will Never Knowingly Adopt Socialism”

"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under
the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist
program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without
knowing how it happened."


conservopunk

Norman Thomas
(1884-1968) six-time U.S. Presidential candidate for the Socialist Party of America

Source:
1948 - from an interview during the presidential campaign

Thursday, June 11, 2009

LOWER TAXES NOW

It used to be that to make the big money you had to start a business or get a job competing in the private sector. If you chose government work it was not as lucrative, but the benefits would be your reward for working in the public sector. The trade-off – lower salaries for better benefits.

How times have changed. Now (and for the foreseeable future) it seems the PUBLIC sector is the place to be for big salaries, while the private sector, burdened with high taxation and a slow economy, suffer. This sector is where the money comes from. This sector is where wealth is created. Consider:


conservopunk

GOVERNMENT FACTS

Local government in Orange County (Orlando) FL spends $7 billion annually

The 27 year old chief of staff to the Mayor makes $131,000 a year
The library director makes $192,000 a year
The toll authority director makes $246,000 a year

The average private sector wage in Orange County is $38,000

God Bless America.

www.reason.com
www.lowertaxesnow.org

Tuesday, June 9, 2009

Couldn't be any simpler

Professor in classroom

An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before but had once failed an entire class.

That class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.

The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on socialism. All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would receive an A.

After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B.

The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy.

As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.

The second test average was a D! No one was happy.

When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.

The scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.

All failed, to their great surprise, and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.


Couldn't be any simpler than that.

Letter to the Editor

I wrote this letter in response to a "blame America first" ZING post by a misguided liberal:

conservopunk

Wednesday, June 3, 2009

Remember "Bloom County?"

From Mike B.

You've no doubt heard about how Judge Sotomayor said she hoped a wise Latina judge would make a better decision than a white male judge. The
Obama spin is that she mis-spoke. See Rich Lowry's amusing column on this. http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1910164.html

Anyway, her hearings will have a section where she tries to back away from the statement somehow. That reminded me of an exchange in the comic strip
Bloom County. I couldn't find the script but someone had the quote:

Opus the Penguin, Vice-Presidential candidate for the Meadow Party was brought before a Congressional Committee on charges of being a liberal -

"Mr Opus, is it true that you said in a speech during your last campaign that, were you elected, you would 'grind the rich into free meatloaf for the poor'?"

After frantic shaking of his head,
Opus replied "Ah, those silly days of youth, we were all so wild then. What I meant to say was, 'Good jobs at good wages'."

Expect
Sotomayor to sound like Opus next month...

Photobucket

Thursday, May 28, 2009

AMERICAN HISTORY 101

http://www.wimp.com/thegovernment/

this is great!! show your kids. (and your less than informed adult friends)

Friday, May 22, 2009

Unlevel Playing Field.

So, when liberals burn American flags, smear the military and compare Bush to Hitler, it's free speech.

When conservatives protest excessive taxation & govt spending its offensive.

Got it.

Karl Rove is RIGHT (and correct too)!

Flip-Flops and Governance

Our president isn't quite as advertised.


Barack Obama inherited a set of national-security policies that he rejected during the campaign but now embraces as president. This is a stunning and welcome about-face.

For example, President Obama kept George W. Bush's military tribunals for terror detainees after calling them an "enormous failure" and a "legal black hole." His campaign claimed last summer that "court systems . . . are capable of convicting terrorists." Upon entering office, he found out they aren't.

He insisted in an interview with NBC in 2007 that Congress mandate "consequences" for "a failure to meet various benchmarks and milestones" on aid to Iraq. Earlier this month he fought off legislatively mandated benchmarks in the $97 billion funding bill for Iraq and Afghanistan.

Mr. Obama agreed on April 23 to American Civil Liberties Union demands to release investigative photos of detainee abuse. Now's he reversed himself. Pentagon officials apparently convinced him that releasing the photos would increase the risk to U.S. troops and civilian personnel.

Throughout his presidential campaign, Mr. Obama excoriated Mr. Bush's counterinsurgency strategy in Iraq, insisting it could not succeed. Earlier this year, facing increasing violence in Afghanistan, Mr. Obama rejected warnings of a "quagmire" and ordered more troops to that country. He isn't calling it a "surge" but that's what it is. He is applying in Afghanistan the counterinsurgency strategy Mr. Bush used in Iraq.

As a candidate, Mr. Obama promised to end the Iraq war by withdrawing all troops by March 2009. As president, he set a slower pace of drawdown. He has also said he will leave as many as 50,000 Americans troops there.

These reversals are both praiseworthy and evidence that, when it comes to national security, being briefed on terror threats as president is a lot different than placating MoveOn.org and Code Pink activists as a candidate. The realities of governing trump the realities of campaigning.

We are also seeing Mr. Obama reverse himself on the domestic front, but this time in a manner that will do more harm than good.

Mr. Obama campaigned on "responsible fiscal policies," arguing in a speech on the Senate floor in 2006 that the "rising debt is a hidden domestic enemy." In his acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention, he pledged to "go through the federal budget line by line, eliminating programs that no longer work." Even now, he says he'll "cut the deficit . . . by half by the end of his first term in office" and is "rooting out waste and abuse" in the budget.

However, Mr. Obama's fiscally conservative words are betrayed by his liberal actions. He offers an orgy of spending and a bacchanal of debt. His budget plans a 25% increase in the federal government's share of the GDP, a doubling of the national debt in five years, and a near tripling of it in 10 years.

On health care, Mr. Obama's election ads decried "government-run health care" as "extreme," saying it would lead to "higher costs." Now he is promoting a plan that would result in a de facto government-run health-care system. Even the Washington Post questions it, saying, "It is difficult to imagine . . . benefits from a government-run system."

Making adjustments in office is one thing. Constantly governing in direct opposition to what you said as a candidate is something else. Mr. Obama's flip-flops on national security have been wise; on the domestic front, they have been harmful.

In both cases, though, we have learned something about Mr. Obama. What animated him during the campaign is what historian Forrest McDonald once called "the projection of appealing images." All politicians want to project an appealing image. What Mr. McDonald warned against is focusing on this so much that an appealing image "becomes a self-sustaining end unto itself." Such an approach can work in a campaign, as Mr. Obama discovered. But it can also complicate life once elected, as he is finding out.

Mr. Obama's appealing campaign images turned out to have been fleeting. He ran hard to the left on national security to win the nomination, only to discover the campaign commitments he made were shallow and at odds with America's security interests.

Mr. Obama ran hard to the center on economic issues to win the general election. He has since discovered his campaign commitments were obstacles to ramming through the most ideologically liberal economic agenda since the Great Society.

Mr. Obama either had very little grasp of what governing would involve or, if he did, he used words meant to mislead the public. Neither option is particularly encouraging. America now has a president quite different from the person who advertised himself for the job last year. Over time, those things can catch up to a politician.

Mr. Rove is the former senior adviser and deputy chief of staff to President George W. Bush.

A Typical Email to conservOpunk!

Warm thanks to those on the Left who for the last 6 years undermined our national security efforts by screaming at the top of their lungs that we must close Gitmo without thinking about the consequences (for 2 of those years we heard this from the Left's Cheerleader in Chief while as a naive candidate - Hilary's words, not mine).
I am so glad that for 6 years we had to endure derision from the elites and their cohorts claiming that arguments about the importance of certain measures furthering national security were simply "talking points from the knuckle-dragging neo-cons" and that according to them there was no substance to a reasonable debate about the issue - nope, only yelling was allowed - yelling at those of us who understand the threat posed by these terrorists picked up on foreign soil.
Well, this admission by the administration may be called "practical" and "well thought out" by the press - but let's be honest. The Gitmo policy and the tribunals and warrantless wiretapping of foreign commo from known terrorists into the US worked and that's why Obama has not dumped them. And if Obama's practical side thinks they work now and will in the future, then this is an admission by extension that Bush policies did IN FACT keep us safe for the last 6 years (which is a far cry from the string of terror attacks we endured in the 90s under Clinton - since looking back at what previous administrations "inherited" is so in vogue now).
So, now that Gitmo is no longer the political whipping post for the Bush administration, maybe cooler heads will prevail - but the emboldening of our enemies and the lasting damage to our CIA agents' and Gitmo soldiers' morale by those who attacked them from the Left incessantly for 6 years will not go away so soon.
Even if the detention center at Gitmo is eventually closed (which is doubtful because no one wants trained terrorists pulled from a battlefield in their backyard), the Left has no leg left to stand on and scream from regarding this issue.
Hopefully the Left will now stop playing politics with national security. Coming next...Senator Harry Reid (D-We Lost) will retract his 2007 statements that the Iraq war was lost (made before the surge even started) - hah! not really, like those Japanese soldiers found in caves on Pacific Islands in the 80s who thought WWII was still ongoing, Harry (Reid) still thinks we lost the Iraq War.
---------------------------------------
Oh, and a quick 2d topic - just today a federal judge made a ruling, the AP reports:

In his opinion, Bates said he agreed with the Bush administration that "the president has the authority to detain persons that the president determines planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, and persons who harbored those responsible for those attacks.

"The president also has the authority to detain persons who are or were part of Taliban or al-Qaida forces or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed (i.e., directly participated in) a belligerent act in aid of such enemy armed forces," Bates wrote.

But he said the Bush administration went beyond the law of war by including in its definition those who "supported" enemy forces.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090520/ap_on_re_us/us_guantanamo_detainees;_ylt=Ar1sbWFf87qgcir_3cWnkLGWwvIE;_ylu=X3oDMTJxY2R2ODdpBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkwNTIwL3VzX2d1YW50YW5hbW9fZGV0YWluZWVzBGNwb3MDMgRwb3MDMgRzZWMDeW5fdG9wX3N0b3JpZXMEc2xrA2p1ZGdlc2F5c3VzYw

Oops, my bad, I accidentally changed the President's name, it should read this way:

In his opinion, Bates said he agreed with the Obama administration that "the president has the authority to detain persons that the president determines planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, and persons who harbored those responsible for those attacks.

But he said the Obama administration went beyond the law of war by including in its definition those who "supported" enemy forces. (OMG - the ACLU, Moveon.org, Jon Stewart, et al better march on DC now, wearing those orange jumpsuits of course - that warmonger is overreaching and shredding the Constitution!!!!!! Oh, wait, it's Obama, so I'm sure they're okay with it)

(I'm not holding my breath waiting to see any protests like this during Obama's reign from the double standard, no principled Left)

(On a personal note: I thought about tempering some of what I say here - but no, I, and other like thinkers, had to sit back for 6 years and get yelled at by every quarter of our society, and what I have in this email comes no where near the verbal grenades that were tossed at those of us who support the troops and the mission and the policies)

Joe Marino
5/21/09

Thursday, April 30, 2009

OH... MY... GOD... Facts about Obama from the AP!

FACT CHECK: Obama disowns deficit he helped shape

WASHINGTON (AP) — "That wasn't me," President Barack Obama said on his 100th day in office, disclaiming responsibility for the huge budget deficit waiting for him on Day One.

It actually was him — and the other Democrats controlling Congress the previous two years — who shaped a budget so out of balance.

And as a presidential candidate and president-elect, he backed the twilight Bush-era stimulus plan that made the deficit deeper, all before he took over and promoted spending plans that have made it much deeper still.

Photobucket

Obama met citizens at an Arnold, Mo., high school Wednesday in advance of his prime-time news conference. Both forums were a platform to review his progress at the 100-day mark and look ahead.

At various times, he brought an air of certainty to ambitions that are far from cast in stone.

His assertion that his proposed budget "will cut the deficit in half by the end of my first term" is an eyeball-roller among many economists, given the uncharted terrain of trillion-dollar deficits and economic calamity that the government is negotiating.

His vow that the recovery plan will "double the supply of renewable energy" will require a congressional mandate that won't be easy to achieve.

And he promised vast savings from increased spending on preventive health care in the face of doubts that such an effort, however laudable it might be for public welfare, can pay for itself, let alone yield huge savings.

A look at some of his claims Wednesday:

OBAMA: "Number one, we inherited a $1.3 trillion deficit.... That wasn't me. Number two, there is almost uniform consensus among economists that in the middle of the biggest crisis, financial crisis, since the Great Depression, we had to take extraordinary steps. So you've got a lot of Republican economists who agree that we had to do a stimulus package and we had to do something about the banks. Those are one-time charges, and they're big, and they'll make our deficits go up over the next two years." — in Missouri.

THE FACTS:

Congress controls the purse strings, not the president, and it was under Democratic control for Obama's last two years as Illinois senator. Obama supported the emergency bailout package in President George W. Bush's final months — a package Democratic leaders wanted to make bigger.

To be sure, Obama opposed the Iraq war, a drain on federal coffers for six years before he became president. But with one major exception, he voted in support of Iraq war spending.

The economy has worsened under Obama, though from forces surely in play before he became president, and he can credibly claim to have inherited a grim situation.

Still, his response to the crisis goes well beyond "one-time charges."

He's persuaded Congress to expand children's health insurance, education spending, health information technology and more. He's moving ahead on a variety of big-ticket items on health care, the environment, energy and transportation that, if achieved, will be more enduring than bank bailouts and aid for homeowners.

The nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimated his policy proposals would add a net $428 billion to the deficit over four years, even accounting for his spending reduction goals. Now, the deficit is nearly quadrupling to $1.75 trillion.

___

OBAMA: "I think one basic principle that we know is that the more we do on the (disease) prevention side, the more we can obtain serious savings down the road. ... If we're making those investments, we will save huge amounts of money in the long term." — in Missouri.

THE FACTS: It sounds believable that preventing illness should be cheaper than treating it, and indeed that's the case with steps like preventing smoking and improving diets and exercise. But during the 2008 campaign, when Obama and other presidential candidates were touting a focus on preventive care, the New England Journal of Medicine cautioned that "sweeping statements about the cost-saving potential of prevention, however, are overreaching." It said that "although some preventive measures do save money, the vast majority reviewed in the health economics literature do not."

And a study released in December by the Congressional Budget Office found that increasing preventive care "could improve people's health but would probably generate either modest reductions in the overall costs of health care or increases in such spending within a 10-year budgetary time frame."

Associated Press writer Kevin Freking contributed to this report.

Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Uh Oh. good John Lott piece

JOHN LOTT: Uh Oh…Team Obama Claims Americans Use TOO MUCH Health Care

By John R. Lott, Jr.
Senior Research Scientist, University of Maryland/Author, “Freedomnomics”

“If you got health insurance, then you can keep it . . . and we won’t do anything about that,” at least that was what President Obama promised during the campaign last year. Well, add that to a very long list of broken campaign promises, including: cutting government spending, reducing the deficit, and “no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase.”

Just as bad, on Friday it was revealed that Obama and the Democrats have no problem pushing through Senate votes on these radical health care changes that strip away normal procedural protections for those who oppose such changes.

Last Sunday on “Meet the Press,” Larry Summers, Obama’s chief economic adviser, let the cat out of the bag on health care. In explaining why universal health care wasn’t going to increase the deficit, Summers said that people are just getting too much unnecessary care. Summers claimed: “whether it’s tonsillectomies or hysterectomies . . . procedures are done three times as frequently [in some parts of the country than others] and there’s no benefit in terms of the health of the population. And by doing the right kind of cost-effectiveness, by making the right kinds of investments and protection, some experts that we — estimate that we could take as much as $700 billion a year out of our health care system.”

This sure seems like rationing. Total health care expenditures in the United States in 2008 came to $2.4 trillion, implying that Summers believes that the proper government regulations can cut health care expenditures by almost 30 percent. That would cut back health care a lot. Summers softened the blow by saying that right now the government wouldn’t have to cut expenditures by more than a third of that $700 billion.

Tonsillectomies have primarily been done because of acute or chronic throat pain. Where different people are willing to draw the line between pain and surgery is a choice that we have traditionally left up to patients, but unless you know something about the patient’s preferences it is hard to claim that a surgery was a “mistake.”

The selective use of statistics by Summers and others in the Obama administration is startling. In 2000, New York had 501 abortions per 1,000 live births, Wyoming had 1. New York had 31 abortions per 1,000 women, Wyoming had fewer than 1. Abortion procedures rarely involve the health of the mother. Yet, presumably, Summers wouldn’t argue that these gaps, which are 10 to 167 times greater than the 3-to-1 ratio that so upsets him for other procedures, imply that abortions should be rationed.

It’s strange that the Democratic Party, a group that doesn’t think the government should intervene between a doctor and a woman when it comes to determining whether or not to have an abortion, appears to have no problem in telling doctors whether they can perform “tonsillectomies or hysterectomies.”

Ironically, the Obama administration isn’t confident enough that they can simply explain to people what medical procedures they should have. If people are getting costly, unnecessary procedures, don’t you think that the insurance companies would already have learned about it? For anyone who thinks that insurance companies are too stingy, the Obama administration has a news flash: insurance companies have been paying for too much health care.

But the Obama administration apparently doesn’t think that they can simply convince people of the value of their advice. Sadly, Summers and the rest of the Obama administration have no problem forcing people to do what they think best.

Yet, not only is Obama going to break his promise on interfering with these decisions, he has no problem with forcing this change on people. Democrats have apparently figured out a way to pass health care legislation without mustering the 60 votes normally needed to pass things in the Senate. To do this, health care won’t be voted on as a separate piece of legislation, but as part of the budget. The proposals also won’t be voted on in the Senate when the budget legislation is first brought up, but only after the final budget bill has gone through the process of “reconciliation” with the House.

Possibly Americans should ask Canadians and Brits –- people who have long suffered from rationing — how happy they are with central government decisions on eliminating “unnecessary” health care.

John Lott is a senior research scientist at the University of Maryland and the author of Freedomnomics. John Lott’s ree pieces for FOX News can be found here and here.

Friday, April 17, 2009

All for AMERICA song

All for America

The butcher and the baker the biker and the Quaker

Soldiers, Lawmakers “Of thee I sing”

Collectivism left behind for Free Markets & Free Minds

It was the blessing for all mankind: “Let Freedom Ring”

Much to their surprise

We held our fire ‘til the whites of their eyes

We tore at tyranny’s disguise

Now finally we realize

We did it all for America

The Constitution’s not a “living thing” Thatcher, Reagan, JFK & Dr. King

Fought till everyone heard freedom’s ring, and individual’s rights

Reject oppressive policy. The Truth is never easy

Wrap yourselves in Liberty. Fight that fight!

God they did beseech

Thought of their mother’s when they took that beach

Freedom’s still not out of reach

It takes more than a pretty speech

They did it all for America

It’s God’s Will

To be the “shining city upon the hill”

Until we all fulfill

the promise on the dollar bill


We are all for America


© 2009 Tony O’Donnell


conservopunk

Thursday, April 16, 2009

Unbiased coverage from CNN (sarcasm)

A quick snapshot (on just one day) to better illustrate the liberal bias in the Mainstream Media. A CNN reporter covers the Chicago Tea Party. Amazing! So much for non-bias coverage.

CNN Reporter: "What does liberty have to do with taxes?" ha! classic! Why can't you be happy with your $400 a year? I have not seen a better illustration of what Democrats believe vs what Republicans believe.


YOU TUBE VIDEO HERE

So, when liberals burn American flags, smear the military and compare Bush to Hitler, it's free speech. When conservatives protest excessive taxation & spending its offensive. Got it.

Tuesday, April 14, 2009

TEA PARTY DAY? Questions Answered.

A friend asked me specifically what I will be protesting tomorrow on APR 15 tax day, at the "Tea Party" here in Tallahassee.

Sent:
Tuesday, April 14, 2009 9:55:11 AM
Subject: Re: Tea Party (answering your question)

We are protesting the overall burden of immoral (yes it is a moral issue) Federal, State and Local taxation which goes beyond the legitimate role of government.

We are protesting our President's continued use of shell game figures to declare they are "cutting the deficit in half" after he multiplies it BY FOUR.

We are protesting the administrations words vs deed. Words: flowery feel good rhetoric. Deeds: payback to the Democrat constituencies. (UAW, NEA, Trial Lawyers, Environmentalists etc.) "We support the military" yet they slash their budget and even advocated eliminating their govt funded medical benefits.

We are protesting BOTH attempts to bail out a US car company, spending BILLIONS, only to see them end up in Bankruptcy anyway (which they should have been in the first place). This restructuring will only continue a failed business model 1. cars that don't sell & 2. 90,000 employees, and nearly 2 million former employees who will have their pensions and benefits paid for the rest of their lives at our expense. Look in the eyes of the person who planned on retiring this year, only to see his 401K cut in half, and explain why citizens tax dollars should be used for this purpose.

Finally, we are protesting because (As I say) "punk can come from the right" Since "the man" is now a huge federal bureaucracy, to oppose their current power grab is punk indeed.

FREE SPEECH!

Mark Levin beautifully illustrates the main point of Federalism and the 10th Amendment: MOBILITY. If you live in a place that does not suit the needs of you and your family, you are free to MOVE to another state in the Union. If the Federal Govt makes every state virtually the same, then you have no recourse.

This is the last word as far as I am concerned and should be a non-partisan issue. (of course it isn't, as Liberals are ideologues who will never admit to being wrong even when staring at a mountain of facts).

the Governor of Texas follows Jindal, Palin and other level headed, common sense driven state leaders:



Awesome.

CD out soon. "Punk can come from the Right"

OBama LOGO

Tuesday, April 7, 2009

Democrats will never learn

Photobucket

SIMPLE TRUTHS:

Which organizations plant the most trees in this country?
Paper Companies

How many times does the word Democracy appear in the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution? ZERO http://www.wimp.com/thegovernment/

What percentage of Americans work for corporations?
20% 80% of private sector jobs are in small business

What percentage of the country is developed?
5.2%

Which political party runs the 10 poorest cities in America?
Democrats. 10 out of 10 are run by Democrats and have been for 50 years.

How many times have Republicans cut funding for programs designed to help the poor?
ZERO
Federal law mandates an automatic annual increase in funding for poverty programs.

What percentage of oil & natural gas wells are done by so-called "BIG OIL" ?
10% 90% of the oil and natural gas wells developed in the United States are done by small, independent businesses

What percentage of Income Taxes do the top 5% of earners pay?
54%

Photobucket

Under the Bush tax cut the U.S. treasury took in the highest amount in federal taxes in our history.

Photobucket

Millionaire donations to Democrats out pace those given to the GOP by a ratio of 12 to 1. The average donation to the Republican National Committee is $50

How much to date has LBJ’s “War on Poverty” cost?
$40 Trillion. Poverty not only still exists but is much worse in many places. Imagine that money in the free market and how many of the poor could have been lifted from poverty!

Which political party was created to end slavery in the United States?
the Republican Party

Just the increase in the amount of coal that China will burn by 2020 will send as much CO2 into the atmosphere as 3 billion Ford Expeditions each driven 15,000 miles a year.

What percentage of Los Angeles outstanding homicide warrants are for illegal aliens?
95% (appx 1400 warrants)

79% of all service workers are native-born, as are 68% of all workers in jobs requiring no more than a high school education. Illegal aliens do not “do the jobs Americans won’t do.”

How many paid Soviet agents worked in the U.S. State Dept during the McCarthy hearings? More than 300.
With the Venona Project’s declassification of Soviet cables, it is now known that more than 300 paid Soviet agents were employed in the U.S. state department. (Proving Joe McCarthy correct – Alger Hiss and the Rosenberg’s guilty).

Which U.S. President spent the most funds on AIDS relief to Africa?
George W. Bush (nearly 4x of any other)

aids chart