US Safer Under Obama?
You can file this one under either Extreme Chutzpah, or You’ve Got To Be Joking.
National security adviser: US safer under Obama.
On the heels of the North Korean flare-up that could precipitate us into a war in Asia (possibly a nuclear war), we are somehow safer under Obama.
Excuse me, Gen. Jones, but George Bush had almost eight years to prove how we were safer–no successful terrorist attacks during that time. That’s a pretty safe record. Hard to beat history, wouldn’t you agree?
But, we are safer with Obama; somehow four months of no attacks is safer than eight years of no attacks.
Only in Washington.
Vindicated, Yet Again
For the past seven years, we have been assailed with stories of how criminal and lawless the Bush Administration has acted with regard to its prosecution of the War on Terror. Specifically, the charges against Pres. Bush have included the use of wiretapping communications between people in the US and people overseas without obtaining a warrant, overstepping the Constitutionally-limited authority of the Presidency via the Patriot Act, and other charges ranging from engaging in War without the express consent of Congress to genocide.
The NY Times is featuring a story today that should put to rest the claims of criminality at least regarding warantless wiretaps by the Bush Administration. It turns out that they are legal after all. And conveniently, the ruling comes just before Obama takes office.
I predict, however, that this will be seen as selling out on the part of the Times by the rabid left in this country, in an effort to make peace with the outgoing Presidency. It will also be seen as Obama failing to implement the promised changes.
Here’s hoping Obama’s other promises come to naught.
Pres. Bush’s Farewell Speech
Here is the full video of Pres. Bush’s Farewell Speech, in two parts. We say farewell to a good man.
Part 1
Part 2
Farewell Mr. Bush. And thank you for your service to our Nation.
Unconstitutional Liberalism
You know, it’s a strange thing. The liberal voices who insist that we must change the way we do things always point to either Europe or Great Britain as models for how we should behave. The problem is that this is not a comparison of apples to apples.
Take gas consumption for example. The liberal fascists wants us to reduce our consumption of gas to match that of Europe. They think we should be paying the same prices for gas as they do in Europe, somewhere around 10 thousand dollars a gallon. Europeans actually have the lowest prices for gas on the planet; their sympathetic attitude toward radical jihadists qualifies them for the Al-Qaeda employee discount. Once they add in the taxes, well, you can see what happens.
The taxes are part of why Europeans don’t drive much. It’s also the reason they can eat really heavy, fat-filled foods and not have heart attacks. Seriously–my friends who have lived in Europe tell me that they don’t offer fat-free foods in their supermarkets. Why should they? Riding a bike everywhere burns off the calories pretty quick. Taxes are how the Europeans control behavior.
The liberals here in America think they are going to institute similar measures to control us. What they don’t understand is that Europeans have a long tradition of being second-class citizens. They lived for many years under the rule of kings, long after we threw our king out. Some gradually managed to put together new forms of government under Presidents or Prime Ministers, but they insisted that these new governments continue to act like kings. The Brits even kept their king around, just as a reminder.
The liberals want us to sign on to the Kyoto Protocol to reduce our carbon emissions, like Europe. Trouble is, high energy taxes were already forcing them to use less gas by rarely driving and were were forcing them to forgo air conditioning. Remember the heat wave France had a couple of years ago, where thousands of people died of heat exhaustion in their own homes because they couldn’t afford to pay for air conditioning? The Europeans were already using far less energy than we do as a whole, and they still can’t meet their Kyoto requirements. What on earth makes the crazy liberals think the results will be different here?
We probably can do better than we are–we could lose some weight, we could stop smoking, or ride a bike more often. But we don’t need government using tax policy to control our behavior (the FairTax would fix all that). In fact, our traditions say that government shouldn’t be dictating how we live our lives, as long as we aren’t hurting others. The Kyoto Protocol, if ratified, would become part of the law of the land equal to the Constitution–a Constitutional mandate for Government to control our behavior. Cheers to George W. Bush for rejecting it, and Jeers to John McCain for wanting to sign it.
The liberals want us to save the planet, drive less, lose weight, stop smoking, and live closely packed together in a few big cities, rather than a lot of little towns. They don’t want us to have guns. They want us to be only fashionably religious. They want us to be second-class citizens ruled by an elite monarchial government. Most of all, though, they want to be King.
Recent Comments