About Me

Name: NancyVidedo
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Uncle Obama's Extortion Racket

Posted by NancyVidedo on Friday, December 18, 2009 6:18:57 AM
Uncle Obama has gotten ahold of your credit card. And he's amassing charges on it that - you - not he - are liable for. You can call the fraud line, you can call the police, you can call any politician or government agency, and they will all tell you the same thing. Shut up and pay up.
 
Since misery loves company, you might feel better knowing that you're not the only one being extorted. Uncle Obama and his buddies have the credit and debit cards of every man woman and child in America. And they're charging up a bundle. So far, each of us has a $38,000 tab that we are personally liable for. And that's just the tip of the iceberg, which by the way, isn't melting.
 
Yesterday, Uncle Obama actually got the limit on your credit card increased. Yup. The House of Representatives voted to increase the overall debt limit, meaning the amount of money they can charge in your name has expanded. This, despite the fact that our national debt now exceeds the statutory debt limit that the Democrats approved last February as part of the cutely entitled Recovery Act. Which, by the way, didn't work. But the intentions were good.
 
For the 7 million Americans without jobs, this is not good news. Not to worry. The media assures us folks that Uncle Obama is going to take care of everything. 
 
Just look at all the things he's doing for us. The House yesterday approved an additional $155 billion of our tax dollars for "shovel-ready" construction projects and money to avoid layoffs of teachers, police and other public employees. Of course the small print says that in order to get any of this money you better belong to a union or be employed by the federal government. If you're Joe Blow or Suzy Homemaker you're just plain out of luck.
 
Maybe you'll sleep easier knowing that the one billion dollar charge on your credit card last Wednesday will go to preserving tropical forests overseas. Or that the $3 billion charge last month will help the Palestinians in their fight against Jewish 'occupiers.' Or that your hard earned money will soon be at work aborting babies in our nation's capitol. After all, we must do our bit to save Mother Earth, and who are we to disagree with the experts who tell us that abortion is a kickass way to do this?
 
Whatever you do, don't worry your head about the charges that are in the works for your almost worthless credit card. The increased energy charges on all of our bills in the coming months will probably only amount to a few thousand dollars for each of us. And they are totally necessary to keep the earth from melting. There is a consensus on this, so just can your objections.
 
If you start to get overwhelmed, you can cheer yourself up by watching the excellent use Uncle Obama has made of your money. Tune in to GM's latest edgy video of The Volt dancers as they whirl and cavort in some artists' idea of how to promote automobiles that are environmentally friendly. And if you would rather eat than support politically connected fat cats at GM and a select group of sensitive artists, then you're probably one of those flat earthers, totally unworthy of any of Obama's largesse.
 
Still worrying? Just stop right now. Uncle Obama has provided a great opportunity for any hungry American with mouths to feed. All you have to do is snitch on your tax-cheating neighbor. New legislation stipulates that you'll be able to appropriate a larger percentage of any taxes the government recovers based on your tip. But before you turn in your former boss or neighbor, check to make sure they aren't one of the federal employees that owe a cool $3 billion in unpaid taxes. I think they're exempt. 
 
For all the diehards out there that still worry about running up bills you can't pay, take heart. Uncle Obama has assured us that if we hurry up and agree to let the government take over health care, then we won't go bankrupt. Just make sure you don't get sick for 3 years till it kicks in.
 
For all the 'deniers' out there, just quit worrying about all the unauthorized charges Uncle Sam is making on your credit card. Sit back and relax. Take advantage of the 24/7 media coverage of how the great Tiger Woods has fallen. Schadenfreude is an excellent panacea. And if you're in luck, the commercials will be louder than the network programming. Since Congress has just ruled this a no-no, you can call yourself a lawyer and make like the government. You can extort your way to unearned wealth.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

What Has Obama Accomplished?

Posted by NancyVidedo on Friday, December 11, 2009 10:15:31 AM
 
Making the rounds of conservative talk shows lately is the question, "What has Obama accomplished so far?" The question is asked of of Obama supporters and the answers range from 'abolishing lobbyists' to 'securing world peace' to 'lowering taxes.'
 
One thing all answers have in common: They are all grounded in perception as opposed to reality.
 
Obama has accomplished the amazing feat of convincing millions of Americans that black is white, that cold is hot, that the bad economy is the fault of George W Bush, and the only things standing between America and peace on earth are those darn Republicans and greedy capitalists. 
 
As author Thomas Sowell points out in 'Is Reality Optional ?' social history in the last 30 years has been a history of replacing what worked with what sounded good. And no-where is this more evident than in the 'change' Obama is foisting on the American people.
 
The empty rhetoric of 'social justice' and 'compassion' is convincingly and successfully being used to justify ever more ludicrous social policies, which just happen to come with a huge price tag and more government control.
 
Ignored by the left and the media, however, is the inconvenient fact that every single policy promoted by Obama and passed by congress has been a dismal failure. From the jobs 'stimulus' package that has cost taxpayers a whopping $236,436 per job created - to the the 'cash for clunkers' - to the $61 billion bucks taxpayers just lost through the AIG and auto industry bailout.
 
Add in the $75 billion mortgage relief program to stem the largely government caused 'foreclosure crisis.' This program has helped a grand total of 31,000 borrowers to date, a paltry 4% of the 760,000 who have applied.  
 
Despite the dismal failures of these policies, Obama and his cohorts continue advocating more of the same. As Dr. Sowell points out, "The anointed are often wrong but never in doubt."
 
Though 80% of Americans are happy with their health insurance, Obama has declared a health care crisis. Obama and congress have devoted most of the year to imposing government run health care on all citizens, despite the fact that 61% of Americans oppose it.
 
Though evidence has recently surfaced undermining the dire claims of global warming, our elected elites continue to ignore relevant science, insisting that a massive redistribution of our wealth is needed in order to pay an imagined 'climate debt' to third world countries. Meanwhile, record unemployment and rising fees and taxes continue to devastate businesses and families across the nation. The exception are federal workers, who just got a 2% pay raise.
 
As Democrat leaders and their allies take to the airwaves denouncing corporate greed, our public servants are scrambling to enact policies that enable them to extort an ever increasing portion of the wealth created by American workers. In the process, severely undermining the rule of law and ignoring the limitations imposed by our Constitution.
 
The Obama administration has plunged America into debt to the tune of a record $12 trillion dollars. That's $39,000 owed by every man woman and child in America. And there is no end in sight. 
 
House Democrats just passed a $1.1 trillion dollar spending bill to fund the federal government. This bill includes $2 billion for 'climate' research, major spending boosts for domestic agencies and foreign aid. It also includes more than 5,200 pork barrel projects costing $3.9 billion. On top of that, Democrats are preparing to raise the federal debt ceiling by as much as $1.8 trillion before New Year’s. 
 
Obama's policies are destroying the dollar and bankrupting America. Moody's just issued a warning that our triple A rating is in danger. Our president is also in the process of ceding American sovereignty to world bodies like the United Nations and the International Criminal Court.

What Obama has accomplished is astounding. He has managed in the short space of one year to dramatically alter the historical focus on individual rights and liberties to an ephemeral concept that focuses on government primacy.
 
Due to Obama's charisma and his skill in manipulating the system and redefining words to fit transient meanings, many Americans continue to believe Obama's rhetoric, willfully ignoring the underlying reality. Their belief has taken on a religious fervor based on faith and emotion and any facts to the contrary are summarily dismissed. After all, "Obama won." 
 
Once again, Thomas Sowell says it best: "We may be entering an era where the greatest dangers to the survival of Western civilization will come from internal social deterioration. Other great civilizations have declined and collapsed. We may be the first, however, to sink slowly into the quagmire, still beaming from ear to ear in self-congratulation at how 'innovative' we are in our social policies."
 
Obama is a dangerous man. He has convinced millions of Americans that they are entitled to the fruits of another man's labor. Virtually all of his policies to date have been designed to foster a dependence on government. But what the government gives, the government can take. As millions of enslaved peoples across the globe could attest - if they were allowed. 

Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

America's Gteat Leap Forward: President Obama and Chairman Mao

Posted by NancyVidedo on Friday, December 04, 2009 7:09:55 AM
Those who ignore the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them.

When Barack Obama was campaigning for president in 2007, his backers frequently compared him to former president John F. Kennedy. After a year in office, however, President Obama's words and actions align more closely with China's despotic Chairman Mao than with JFK's. 
 
When Mao Tse Tung conquered China in 1949, his secret goal was to dominate the world. When Obama was elected President, many started referring to him as President of the World. Both Obama and Mao had carte blanche to set out a path of radical change.
 
As part of his strategy, Mao informed his top echelon, "There has to be a personality cult...it is absolutely necessary."* With the aid of the state media, Mao crafted an iconic image of himself as the savior of the common man. Propoganda was everywhere - including the fields where workers could listen to messages from Mao as they worked. Sound familiar?
 
In 1958, Mao kicked off what he called The Great Leap Forward, an extraordinarily creative intervention in China's economic development. Mao planned to abolish wages and put society on a non-cash basis. He then set about abolishing private property.
 
The ownership of tools, animals, and other means of production were taken over by the state - in the name of the people. Just as the ownership of the auto, banking and insurance industries of today have been taken over by our government.
 
Chairman Mao, in the name of the people, also took over China's health care. The 'state' determined who would receive this essential service. The elderly were moved into "houses of happiness" so that they could be looked after - by the state. Much like the proposed government takeover of America's health care today.
 
Chairman Mao's government also plunged the country into a deep debt by drastically increasing spending on the development of heavy industry. But the state-sponsored industry that developed was not only non-productive, it ended up wasting money and resources on a massive scale without producing anything of value. Much like the bloated government behemoth Obama's policies are producing today.
 
Mao, through a cult of personality and firm control of the levers of government, had the ability to impose his own version of reality on China. Just as Obama has today.

Mao believed that collectivizing agriculture would lead to a new 'utopia.' Obama's campaign promise of 'equality' for all Americans is the modern vision of Mao's utopia. Which, by the way, not only failed, but failed spectacularly.
 
One year after Mao launched China's Great Leap Forward, things in China started to go wrong. Politics increasingly took precedence over commonsense. Mao's utopian dream turned into a nightmare as the central leadership grew increasingly out of touch with reality.
 
By the spring of 1959, in theory China was awash in grain. In reality, it was not. Rural communal mess halls that had been handing out free food, ran out of food. China's grain reserves were exhausted and the famine began. 
 
Scholars have estimated that somewhere between 16.5 million and 40 million people died before Mao's experiment came to an end in 1961, making the Great Leap famine the largest in world history. Even Mao himself was forced to acknowledge that he had been wrong. Oops.
 
By late 1960, private ownership of land was reinstated and a modicum of capitalism was re-introduced. Peasants were finally given incentives to produce as much spare food as was possible by allowing them to sell their excess on the open market. Socialism had failed, yet again.
 
Chairman Mao never had to pay the price for his failed social engineering. The Chinese people paid it for him. Leaving Mao free to regroup, repair his image, and emerge back on the national scene in 1966 with yet another bold plan. The cultural revolution - which resulted in yet another failed social experiment and untold human suffering. The beat goes on.
 
The similarities between Chairman Mao and President Obama are too numerous to ignore. Like Obama, Mao's philosophy of how to 'change' China was clear from the outset. "...the country must be...destroyed and then reformed." "People like me long for the destruction because when the old universe is destroyed, a new universe will be formed. Isn't that better?" Quick - who said that? Mao, or Obama's buddy Bill Ayers? Answer: Both.
 
All of Obama's actions as president to date reflect the same mindset - the destruction of traditional values, the unwillingness to learn from history, the utter reliance on theory instead of reality. And the belief that man takes precedence over God and thus has the ability to shape reality according to man's whim.
 
Hubris and a charismatic personality allowed both Mao and Obama the freedom to implement costly social and economic 'change.' Change which is not change at all, but another futile attempt to revive the failed model of socialism. 
 
Like Mao, Obama will most likely never be held to account when the socialist, big government policies he has championed fail. And fail they must. History shows us that. The American people will, once again, be forced to pay the very real price for Obama's naive attempt to redefine reality to his own specifications.  

* Mao: The Unknown Story by Jung Chang and Jon Halliday

Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Silent Scandal

Posted by NancyVidedo on Friday, November 27, 2009 7:31:30 AM
If a scandal isn't reported by the media, does that mean it never happened?
 
For the millions of Americans who don't watch Fox News or listen to talk radio, the answer is a resounding yes.
 
Last Friday, November 20, evidence came to light that "appears to show a conspiracy to falsify data and suppress academic debate in order to exaggerate the possible threat of man-made global warming." Translation: The global warming movement rests almost entirely on the IPCC's claim to represent the "consensus" of climate science. That entire movement now stands discredited.
 
In the face of this absolutely shameful and possibly criminal revelation of chicanery, deceit and manipulation of data, the mainstream media has stuck to their decades long policy of ignoring any evidence or opinion that challenges their firm belief that the world is undergoing a climate crisis. A crisis that can only be rectified if all global citizens drastically change their behavior. 
 
Despite these revelations, the AP's science writer continued reporting on the worsening climate non-crisis, "Since the 1997 international accord to fight global warming, climate change has worsened and accelerated — beyond some of the grimmest of warnings made back then." Scary stuff, if it were true.
 
CNN chimed in, reporting their own shocking headlines: Sea Level Rise Could Cost Port Cities $28 Trillion. Remember, this 'news' story was published after evidence had come to light that credibly challenged the very facts CNN was reporting. Yawn.
 
Six days after this scandal came to light, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC and NBC had yet to make their viewers aware of what is being called "the greatest [scandal] in modern history." A scandal that could derail the whole concept of man-made global warming. And, coincidently, the $129 billion carbon market that rests on this shaky and manipulated data.
 
Also ignoring this scandal is our very own president, who announced last Wednesday that he will attend the long-anticipated, high-stakes global climate summit in Copenhagen. Obama's climate czar, Carol Browner, announced on the very same day that global warming science is "settled.' No need to even address those pesky e-mails that purport to show differently.
 
"I'm sticking with the 2,500 scientists. These people have been studying this issue for a very long time and agree this problem is real," said Ms. Browner. The 2,500 hundred scientists, by the way, are comprised mainly of United Nations bureaucrats who have a vested interest in the massive wealth re-distribution that they suggest as a solution to this non-crisis.
 
On Thursday, more evidence of climate chicanery came to light - but was again ignored by the media. Gerd Leipold, the outgoing leader of Greenpeace, admitted that his organization's recent claim that the Arctic Ice will disappear by 2030 was "a mistake." Oops.
 
Also on Thursday, information surfaced that indicates Australia, also, appears to have been tinkering with raw data in order to make "global warming' appear scarier that it really is.

Again, no mention was made in the U.S. media. Oh, CNN did finally acknowledged the issue yesterday by reporting that there was "very little context" in the e-mail evidence. CNN declined to publish any of the damning e-mails and they failed to identify any of those 'leading scientists' whose work has been shown to be a possible fraud.
 
These 'leading scientists' then continued with business as usual, issuing another dire proclamation, "Tackling climate change will help prevent millions of deaths among people who are alive now and save the world for future generations."

These same scientists then responded to the damning evidence to the contrary in the usual way. By attacking and discrediting the motives of the messenger. "We're facing an effort by special interests who are trying to confuse the public," said Richard Somerville, Distinguished Professor Emeritus at Scripps Institution of Oceanography and a lead author of the UN IPCC Fourth Assessment Report.
 
As of this writing, Fox News is the only national outlet reporting on this scandal. Website WattsUpWithThat and Canada Free Press appear to be the only media investigating the hacked e-mails that seem to show a decades long conspiracy to fudge climate data and squelch any and all opposing data and scientists.
 
The 'garbage-in, garbage-out' climate models the IPCC use as a basis to portend the end of life on earth now appear to be false. Global 'leaders' conveniently ignore the burgeoning scandal and continue to insist that unless a massive re-distribution of global wealth is immediately enacted, global warming will threaten every man woman and child on earth.

Americans can disagree on the extent of climate change and even question man's role in it. The issue at hand however, is the fact that the media, whose job is to report facts, has declined to do so. The media, with Fox News as the only exception, have bought onto Dan Rather's "fake but accurate" view of the so-called 'global-warming' crisis.
 
Father Earth, Algore sums it up best: “This is not a political issue, or a scientific issue or a psychological issue – it’s a moral issue. If anything it’s actually a spiritual issue.” There you have it. If you don't agree with the unscientific 'consensus' than you're a really stupid, bad and immoral person. The left has spoken and the media agrees. Case closed.


Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

White Pride

Posted by NancyVidedo on Monday, November 16, 2009 8:55:53 AM
I'm a proud White-Irish-American and I'd like to celebrate my unique culture and heritage. Though I personally had no part in it, my white European ancestors were the ones who founded the greatest country the world has ever known. For all of you progressives out there, I'm referring to America.
 
Yup. My white ancestors founded and conquered it. Just like countries, states and tribes have been doing since time immemorial. 

My white European ancestors then established a framework (hint: the Constitution) that allowed immigrants from all over the world a place where they could be free of tyrannical dictators and oppressive government. Its called America -and it stands for freedom. My ancestors fought and died for it and then offered it to the world.
 
Since man is not perfect, (except for Obama) there were a few hitches along the way. But hey, I'm willing to forgive the ignorant few that followed the cultural dictates of the past - the ones who posted signs saying 'No Irish Need Apply.' That bigotry was a product of the times and America finally did the right thing by abolishing it.

Of course, there are still those who choose to dwell in the past. Just last week a Nigerian rights group sent a letter to African chiefs demanding they apologize for the role they played in the slave trade. "We cannot continue to blame the white men, as Africans particularly the traditional rulers, are not blameless."
 
Personally, I believe trying to address historical grievances is counter-productive. Progressives have repeatedly stressed the importance of 'moving-on,' and I think they have a good point.
 
With the coming of Obama and the progessive agenda, all groups, countries, and cultures are deemed equal. Now its totally OK to celebrate my own group-identity. Especially since taking pride in belonging to the broader, American culture is looked upon with such disfavor. 
 
Since I'm not willing to identify myself solely by my sexual orientation, or my gender, or my politics - or as a victim, or as one of the disenfranchised, that leaves only one group with whom I totally identify: The politically incorrect group of Americans who demand to be judged strictly on merit.

Unfortunately, that's a no-no in today's political and cultural environment. I guess I'll have to be content with just celebrating the color of my skin, like everyone else does. 
 
I'm proud to be white. There, I've said it. But I'm getting confused.... A Tennessee state trooper who sent an e-mail proclaiming white pride, has just been suspended for 15 days without pay and will have to attend diversity training. Does this mean white people can't celebrate their own culture?
 
Not very long ago, before the Nazis came along, white pride was, well, pride in being white. People like myself whose ancestors were white Europeans used to take pride in the accomplishments of fellow whites. That pride was acceptable and celebrated. The tremendous influence and contributions made by white Europeans has, alas, been lumped into the discredited category of 'colonization,' which we all know is bad. Acknowledgment of white European accomplishments and culture is now deemed racist, which is worse. 
 
The fact that many of the countries that were once colonized by Britain are now worse off than when Britain was calling the shots is an inconvenient historical fact. After all, white people of European descent represent a, gasp, superior culture, and that's not allowed to be discussed or studied. Which is why courses on Western Civilization have been removed from college curriculums in favor of gay studies, Black studies, Chicano studies, women studies, etc.

Never having had the time to study diversity and multiculturalism, however, I remain somewhat confused. Hate crime laws require me to take note of the color of a persons' skin in order not to offend them, while political correctness demands I ignore a person's race and their culture when forming an opinion of them. This does not compute.  

Maybe I should join that Tennessee trooper in diversity training so I'll know for sure what I am allowed to think, feel and say. After all, I don't want my white skin and American opinions to offend anyone. 

Or better yet, why don't we all just take Martin Luther King's advice and judge people based on the content of their character instead of the color of their skin? That way we could do away with all those groups that focus on skin color, like the Congressional Black Caucus, and the Hispanic 'La Raza,' and start celebrating what we all have in common. Our very own unique American culture, in which we all can and should take tremendous pride, regardless of what color we are.

Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Headed Towards Defeat In Afghanistan

Posted by NancyVidedo on Wednesday, November 11, 2009 5:29:47 AM
The Obama administration is headed down the irrevocable path to defeat in Afghanistan, and appears to be waving the white flag in the global 'war on terror.'
 
It has now been more than seven long weeks since the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, General Stanley A. McChrystal, reported on the desperate need for more troops in Afghanistan, warning that defeating the insurgents will not be possible if the United States fails to "gain the initiative and reverse insurgent momentum" over the next 12 months.
 
McChrystal's confidential report was leaked to the Washington Post on September 21, 2009. It was met with silence from the White House. Well, not quite... On October 4, nearly two dozen House liberals introduced a bill that would prohibit an increase of troops in Afghanistan. And the Senate rejected an attempt to have the top commander in Afghanistan testify about the increasingly volatile situation.
 
As our public servants worked feverishly behind the scenes to deny support to our fighting men in Afghanistan, hundreds of terrorists armed with automatic rifles and rocket-propelled grenades stormed a pair of remote outposts near the Pakistan border, killing eight U.S. soldiers and capturing more than 20 Afghan security troops in the deadliest assault against U.S. forces in more than a year.
 
Following this attack, U.S. Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates stated that the Taliban now have the momentum in Afghanistan "because of the inability of the United States and its allies to put enough troops into the country."
 
Our President was otherwise occupied accepting the Nobel Peace Prize. The mainstream media was so excited that they kinda forgot to report Gate's dire warning. 24/7 media coverage of the latest Messiah of Peace was followed by news of the exciting Michelle Obama 'action figure.' And the President's exciting 'date night' with Michelle.

Continuing to ignore the worsening situation in Afghanistan, President Obama and the First Lady instead rolled out the red carpet while a group handed out white coats to a select group of doctors, in a staged photo-op designed to further Obama's proposed health care reform. In his televised speech, Obama expressed deep concern for the health of any Americans that aren't covered by government health care, and trotted out several heartbreaking stories to prove it. These stories were later proven false.
 
Meanwhile, our State Department addressed the terrorist problem. They just renamed terrorists "refugees."
 
Obama remained extremely busy in October, making a trip to Copenhagen to lobby for the Olympics to be held in his hometown of Chicago, and appearing on the Letterman Show. But he did take the time to stage a nice little photo-op with a midnight trip to Dover Airfield, along with photographers, to show the nation his concern for our returning war dead. (Concern that was sorely lacking for the victims of the recent Fort Hood massacre)
 
At the end of this busy month, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs informed the nation that Obama has spent "close to 20 direct hours" in meetings on Afghanistan since Gen. Stanley McChrystal's request for tens of thousands of reinforcements was submitted over two months ago.
 
Gibbs went on to say that Obama also spends "quite a bit of time" thinking about the war in Afghanistan, after it was revealed that Obama had spent more time with Oprah than with General McChrystal.
 
Our NATO allies saw that Obama was busy waging war on Fox News and the Chamber of Commerce instead of sending reinforcements to our brave warriors who are fighting and dying in Afghanistan, and started following his cue.
 
On November 6, Canada’s top general issued instructions for his officers to start making their plans to pull out of Afghanistan.
 
The UK is also drawing up plans to withdraw British troops from outlying bases in Afghanistan. And the United Nations has relocated 600 of their Afghan staff out of harms way.
 
The media remains silent on this shocking abrogation of leadership, reporting only that Obama is considering his options and weighing them, as a good President should. The New York Times now reports Obama's decision may not come until December. Meanwhile, the Taliban grow increasingly powerful and our young men in Afghanistan are left wondering if their sacrifice, and their comrades lives, have been in vain.
 
Americans are assumed to have forgotten that Barack Obama campaigned on a promise to reinforce U.S. troops in Afghanistan, which he described as a war we “have to win.” I guess he's changed his mind.
 
To my nephew Christopher, and all our brave young men in Afghanistan, I'd like to say on behalf of most Americans, that I'm so very sorry your lives are being used as political fodder. And unlike Obama, most Americans support you and will keep raising their voices in outrage at the shameless lack of support and leadership being shown by your Commander in Chief.

Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

RightBias Idiot Awards

Posted by NancyVidedo on Sunday, November 08, 2009 5:22:29 AM
TOP IDIOTS OF THE WEEK:
 
As Michigan leads the nation in unemployment and businesses are leaving the state in a massive exodus, Gov. Jennifer Granholm showed she was hard at work by proclaiming Saturday as "Shake Your Mailbox Day." She's encouraging people with roadside mailboxes to give them a good shake to help prepare for winter snowplowing.

Did you know the United States Constitution doesn't have a Preamble? Well, that's what the oh so arrogant, high and mighty MSNBC host Rachel Maddow told her audience Thursday night..

A 20-year-old Boca Raton man fell five stories from a balcony after he attempted to show someone he could climb from one story down to the next. Ouch.
 
Red-faced United Nations officials sheepishly admitted to a major security lapse after a UN guard helped Kentucky Fried Chicken's "Colonel Sanders" gain access to restricted areas.
 
MOST IDIOTIC STATEMENTS: 

WINNER:
 
Our very own President Obama wins the top spot this week. He stated at a Miami fundraiser that House Speaker "Pelosi is one of the greatest speakers of all times." $1.5 million was raised, begging the question: who are the real idiots?
 
RUNNER-UP:
 
The Chairman of the National Endowment For The Arts, Scott Johnson, actually said "Obama is the most powerful writer since Julius Caesar." (No kudos were given to Obama's ghostwriter, domestic terrorist Bill Ayers)
 
HONORABLE MENTION:
 
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , one of the 'greatest speakers of all time,' declared after the GOP sweep last week: "From our perspective, we won last night."  Looks like the left has redefined reality, once again..

Obama makes our list yet again for this whopper - he actually claimed with a straight face last week that his 'stimulus' package was responsible for saving and/or creating over 1 million jobs. His figures were quickly, and thoroughly debunked. Followed a couple days later by the news that our unemployment rate just topped 10%. Duh.   
 
Idiot Joy Behar took to the airwaves deriding conservatives as "immature bullies who smell bad and pick their noses and Obama is the smart kid in class who knows all the answers but keeps letting the bullies push him around." So there!
 
The former Police front-man told the Associated Press that he believes that Obama is a gift from Heaven, delivered to shepherd the befuddled masses to providence. "In many ways, he's sent from God," Sting said in an interview with the AP.
 
STUPID CRIMINALS:
 
A one legged man was an immediate suspect when a store attendant found one shoe missing from a shop in the western Belgian town of Maldegem. Thankfully, the shoe was recovered. The amputee is now waiting for the other shoe to drop.
 
A 22 year-old Arizona man was arrested for trying to smuggle 52 pounds of marijuana INTO Mexico.
 
A Florida man is behind bars after investigators say he got drunk and drove a stolen lawnmower into the back of a school bus.
 
A robber who smuggled a bag of his own excrement into a courtroom and threw it at the jury has been sentenced to 31 years in jail, for both his robbery and his poo-flinging.
 
JUST PLAIN WEIRD:
 
Surgeons in Rotterdam, Holland, removed 78 different items of cutlery from Margaret Daalmans's stomach after she came to hospital complaining of stomach pains - giving new definition to fans of Heavy Metal.
 
A Sicilian builder transferred from prison to house arrest tried to get himself locked up again to escape arguments with his wife at home.

A 29-year-old man who claimed he was attacked and stabbed by three people - skinheads or Hispanic males - confessed Monday night that he stabbed himself because he didn't want to go to work. He probably thought ObamaCare had already passed.

A 112 year-old Somali man married a 17 year-old girl. "I didn't force her, but used my experience to convince her of my love, and then we agreed to marry." The bride’s family said she was "happy with her new husband."
 
A devout Muslim woman from Pakistan who wed a fellow countryman who did not share her faith tried to stab him to death as he slept in their Staten Island home because she claimed he forced her to drink alcohol, eat pork and dress provocatively. That dirty dog!

A passenger enjoying a civilian joyride accidentally cut the trip short when he ejected himself from the plane after grabbing the eject lever while trying to brace himself. Oops.
 
Till next week, keep smiling,
Nancy Morgan
Tags: idiots  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

How To Become A 'Citizen Of The World'

Posted by NancyVidedo on Tuesday, November 03, 2009 5:41:05 AM
In the summer of 2008, then presidential candidate Barack Obama delivered  a historic campaign speech in Germany. With the Berlin Wall as a back drop, Obama proudly informed the masses that he was not there as a candidate, but as "...a fellow citizen of the world."
 
The crowd went crazy and the world rejoiced. Finally, the United States was ready to join the community of man.  
 
In what former U.S. ambassador to the UN John Bolton calls our first post-American President, Obama has bestowed instant cachet on the growing ranks of Americans who revel in the thought of being the first in their own social set to be considered cutting edge 'citizens of the world.' Especially since joining this community of global citizens confers upon them automatic (albeit, unearned) virtue, along with instant and unassailable moral stature.  
 
For those of you who just aren't with it, (like Christians, conservatives and a few Republicans) here are the latest, up to the minute, details on how to gain inclusion in this trendy and politically correct group.
 
To become a 'citizen of the world,' you must first and foremost declare your support for the disenfranchised. Preferably in front of a camera in a very public forum. Just pick a group of victims upon whom you will bestow your empathy and support. The only caveat being that they reside in underdeveloped countries ruled by misunderstood men of good will like Uganda, or Cuba, or Somalia, or...well, you get my drift. Oh, and make sure everyone understands that these victims are only victims because of George W. Bush and/or America.

Next, you must ardently advocate the spending of other people's money in order to help these poor victims. If you're one of the fortunate 'non-rich,' (meaning your income is under $250,000 and/or you receive a government check every month)  then a straight party line vote for the Democrats, frequent letters to the editor and a catchy bumper sticker are strongly recommended.  In addition, you must make yourself available for the occasional photo-op or rally, and vocalize your support for all of Obama's policies to every-one you know. (T-shirts are a very cool way to do this.)
 
If you're unfortunate enough and greedy enough to have an annual income over $250,000, your membership entrance requirements are a bit more stringent. The good news is, you can skip right over victims and concentrate on vital issues like global warming or the evils of capitalism.
 
For all you rich guys out there, its recommended that you use whatever influence you have to advocate for whichever policy Obama is currently trying to foist on the American public. Bumper stickers won't do it, guys. You need to atone big time.
 
Not to worry, just contact DNC.org and they will give you a list of organizations you should  support. And since you've made all that money on the backs of the poor, social justice requires that you give back some of your own money, instead of merely advocating the expenditure of other people's money.
 
A list of approved recipient groups will be provided free of charge. It is recommended that you give early and often. ACORN is the most needy cause as of this writing. But whatever group you decide to donate your bucks to, rest assured, Obama is in the process of making those donations tax deductible.
 
If you happen to be filthy rich and/or an elected official, different rules apply. In order to be considered a citizen of the world, all you have to do is believe (faking belief  is totally OK) in Obama's vision of utopia. You must believe, or at least profess to believe, that world peace is possible, that the earth is melting, that diplomacy trumps war and that America is the cause of all the world's problems. Other that that, the only real requirement is a constant and sustained effort to ensure that global governance trumps American sovereignty. 
 
Hat-tip: it wouldn't hurt if you make known that yours was one of the Swiss bank accounts the Obama administration recently forced the Swiss to disclose. That alone will ensure you are recognized by the right people.
 
There you have it, fellow comrades. If you have followed the above steps, we want to officially welcome you as a new 'citizen of the world.' Take a load off. You are now eligible to engage in global groupthink, which means that you will never again be forced to make any moral, financial or life decisions on your own. More membership perks are already in the works, and you guys will be the first to benefit! Kumbaya.


Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Rednecks

Posted by NancyVidedo on Thursday, October 29, 2009 5:39:49 AM
In a much publicized rant that sent chills up the legs of millions of liberals, oops, progressives, Janeane Garofalo emphatically exercised her opinion of the millions of 'tea-party' protestors: "This is about hating a black man in the White House. This is racism, straight up. Its is nothing but a bunch of tea-bagging rednecks." 
 
Anyone who has read Thomas Sowell's Black Rednecks and White Liberals, knows that Garofalo's statement is either demonstrably false, or just plain racist.
 
Sowell, a fellow at The Hoover Institution and a prolific author (who happens to be black himself) actually documents the origins and evolution of the redneck culture. He makes the excellent, and unchallenged point that the inner-city culture celebrated by many blacks today is, in fact, derived directly from the redneck culture - which had its origins in England.
 
People migrating to America's south from the largely fringe areas of England, the Scottish Highlands and Ireland brought with them certain cultural values: Proneness to violence, aversion to work, neglect of education, sexual promiscuity, improvidence, drunkenness, lack of entrepreneurship, lively music and dance, style of religious oratory, touchy pride, boastful self-dramatization and vanity. These traits describe what came to be known as the redneck culture, and the people who exhibited these traits were labeled rednecks or crackers.
 
During the civil war era, 90% of blacks in America lived in the south. They adopted many of the traits associated with this 'redneck culture,' which they then spread across America as they migrated after the civil war.  As Dr. Sowell so persuasively argues, these cultural differences were the actual basis of what we today label racism. Originally, what we now consider racism was an objection to cultural differences, not skin color.
 
Fast forward to the 1960's. Along came the liberals. Social do-gooders who ushered in the welfare state and altered the criminal justice system to conform to their own version of social justice. This allowed many of these counter-productive cultural traits to flourish. Among both blacks and whites.
 
Many of the traits that are associated with the redneck culture have since died out in England, and many parts of the south. But many of the black Americans who chose to follow the media anointed spokespersons for blacks, Revs. $harpton and Jackson, have kept the redneck culture alive in many parts of America's inner-cities and ghettos. They mistakenly believe they are celebrating their own African-American culture.

Anyone who dares object to these negative cultural traits is routinely accused of racism. Which is apparently a worse offense than allowing and fostering generations of blacks to adopt racism against all whites. (As author David Horowitz outlines so well in his book, Hating Whitey.)
 
So Janeane, for the sake of the social justice you so ardently advocate, I expect you should publicly apologize to all blacks for calling them rednecks. You were not just dissing conservatives, you were dissing millions of black Americans, many of whom were among the tea-party protestors. As this video clearly shows.
 
Three very public mea culpas should be sufficient. As atonement, we suggest you attend Hillsdale College for a full semester. Being one of the only two colleges in America that accept no federal funds, you will be exposed to courses on American History, the glories of Western Civilization and the value of capitalism. And a refreshing lack of liberal orthodoxy.
 
We won't hold our breaths. Most conservatives remain grounded in facts and reality. The same  reality the left continually redefines to suit their own purposes. We know that as long as one is a vocal supporter of leftist ideology, no explanations, facts, or mea culpas are required. Almost makes me want to be a liberal.


Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for RightBias.com
She migrated to South Carolina years ago and is a fan of the refreshing and superior cultural traits exhibited by the majority of southerners and, unfortunately, not outlined in above article due to space constraints.
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Seduction Of Lindsey Graham

Posted by NancyVidedo on Saturday, October 17, 2009 6:31:17 AM
According to most conservatives in South Carolina, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) has officially gone over to the dark side. Under the guise of 'bipartisanship,' Graham has signed on to one of the left's most ambitious plans to impose a socialist agenda in America - government control of the formerly free market through implementation of cap-and trade, the 1,400 plus page Waxman-Markey bill approved earlier this year by the House.
 
The main (scientifically unproven) premise of cap and trade is that the earth is melting and government must step in to save the world. Of course, it will be expensive, but hey, this is Mother Earth we're talking about. And its urgent and essential that the government immediately establish a $700 billion "market" for business to buy and sell "steadily declining number of permits for creating carbon emissions."
 
In a New York Times Op-Ed Graham co-authored with Sen. John Kerry cutely entitled 'Yes We Can' (get it?) Sen Graham states "..we agree that climate change is real and threatens our economy and national security." Huh?
 
Conservatives disagree. Conservatives, real conservatives, believe the fact based studies based on science that stand in direct opposition to the dire reports issued by bureaucrats at the United Nations and embraced as fact by the left.
 
Conservative think tank, Heritage Foundation, outlines the additional costs that will be imposed on every American family if cap and trade is enacted. Residential electricity costs will zoom up by 90%, nearly 1.9 million jobs will be lost by 2012 overall, and the economy will lose nearly $10 trillion in gross domestic product by 2035. Just what the economy needs, right?
 
Lindsey Graham was elected to serve as United States Senator in 2002. He was easily re-elected in 2008, largely due to the support of conservatives. Conservatives like founder and past president of the low country's South Strand Republicans, John Bonsignor. John and his wife campaigned hard for Graham, based on their belief that Graham would govern as a conservative. Meaning, lower taxes and less government.
 
"Graham is disappointing," states Bonsignor, "He campaigned as a conservative but his record is moderate left." When asked if he would vote for Graham now, Bonsignor stated emphatically, "No," citing Lindsey's support for Sotomayor, his support for TARP funds, and the final straw, his support for cap and trade.
 
Sen. Graham's own website states, "Graham is known as a leader who never abandons his independence or strays from the conservative reform agenda." This is no longer true.
 
Graham has been seduced by the left. He has adopted one of their most successful tactics, promising one thing while delivering quite the opposite. Though its impossible to know what is in another man's heart, actions always speak louder than words. And Graham's actions clearly show that he has signed on to the leftist agenda. Possibly hoping to earn the coveted 'maverick' label and media kudos formerly enjoyed by his good buddy John McCain. But he is doing his own party no good.
 
Graham has come to exemplify the growing disconnect between conservatives and the Republican party. He believes he knows best, and if the people that elected him disagree, he tells them to just "chill out," as he did at a recent townhall meeting in Greenville. The same townhall meeting where one of his constituents called him a traitor.
 
That townhall received little media attention. What did receive national media coverage was Graham's recent interview where he attacked Glenn Beck, the left's favorite target. "Glenn Beck does not represent the thinking of the Republican Party," Graham stated. How he knows this is a mystery, as he went on to say he never watches the Glenn Beck Show. Go figure.
 
Graham may be right about one thing: Glenn Beck clearly represents the thinking of conservatives, not the GOP. And Sen. Lindsey Graham is now willingly spouting the talking points of the left and abandoning the conservative principles that got him elected. He has been seduced by the left and his reward is ever more national face time and political influence.
 
Enjoy the ride, Lindsey. More and more South Carolinians, this author included, are comparing you with our real conservative Senator, Jim DeMint, and you're coming up way short. Keep in mind that we have long memories while the fawning media currently singing your praises have short ones. Your love affair with the left, whether it be seduction or statutory rape, betrays the conservative principles that you claimed to hold. And we don't like it one bit.

Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina.
This article was first published by American Thinker on October 16, 2009
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Dirty Old Men

Posted by NancyVidedo on Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:00:50 AM
Only in America can the lecherous leanings and extra-marital shenanigans of a dirty old man result in ratings gold and a national conversation.

The David Letterman Show scored its highest ratings yet as he aired his sexual proclivities in public under the guise of apologizing to his wife for betraying her with a variety of casual sexual partners. Partners, who, by the way, could have lost their jobs on Letterman's whim if they somehow displeased him. Or if Letterman ran out of Viagra.
 
Under the new rules implemented by self anointed elites, if a person is a celebrity, the normal rules of decent conduct are suspended. Unless, of course, the celebrity is a conservative. If only Senator "wide stance" Livingston were a Democrat, he'd have a restroom named in his honor. And probably his own personal peephole to boot.
 
Instead, as a member of the left, Letterman is accorded membership in the most valued and largest growing group in America. He is now an official 'victim.' And shame on those little tarts who used him in order to advance their own careers or merely to scratch a transient sexual itch.
 
Letterman's only sin appears to be his timing. He should have waited another week or so before stealing the headlines from pedophile rapist Roman Polanski. Whoppi Goldberg was right in the middle of convincing America that rape isn't rape and Hollywood had already garnered over 100 celebrity signatures calling for his release before Letterman rudely shifted the national conversation to his own sexual peccadilloes. Poor Roman.

The groundswell of elite support in favor of excusing Polanski for drugging and raping a 13 year-old girl 30 years ago could very well have resulted in freeing Polanski. Now, the fickleness and short attention spans of elite leftists may mean that Polanski may actually have to face the consequences of his past actions, instead of just getting his own star on Warsaw's 'walk of fame.' Life just isn't fair.
 
Former Boy President Bill Clinton can attest to that. After all, even though he was re-elected President after he made his historic seminal deposit on intern Monica Lewinsky's blue dress, he knows in his heart that the all the fuss was merely the result of a vast right wing conspiracy. The same right wing conspiracy that is now demanding that Roman Polanski be held accountable for the crime of which he was convicted. What meanies! 

The vast right wing conspiracy just doesn't get it. Sex, anywhere, anytime, and with anyone, is now defined as 'empowerment.' Parading naked through the streets of San Francisco as cops stand idly by is considered a right. A right exclusive to gay men, but a right, nonetheless.
 
Pesky conservatives are only showing their ignorance when they object to the public swapping of spit between two men, or the sexual harassment of sweet young things by powerful men. And dirty old men have the right to express themselves sexually and publicly, without censure. As long as they continue to parrot the leftist agenda, that is.
 
I wouldn't be surprised if Obama's advisors are currently suggesting that he engage in sex with a subordinate. After all, that would immediately shift the nation's attention to the left's favorite topic instead of focusing on why Obama is ignoring our young fighting men in Afghanistan. But maybe, just maybe, Obama is more scared of Michelle than he is of the vast right wing conspiracy and the Taliban. Ya think?


Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Why I Became A Conservative

Posted by NancyVidedo on Friday, October 02, 2009 7:00:59 AM
In early 1992, I heard five words that were to drastically alter the course of my life. H. Ross Perot was on TV. He held up a toilet seat and said "The government paid $700.00 for this toilet seat." He then stated, "And this is public knowledge." Huh?
 
Perot then went on to outline more fascinating nuggets of information I had absolutely no knowledge of. He pulled out charts and graphs and proceeded to inform me of a world of facts to which I had never been exposed.
 
Having long prided myself on being informed, I decided to educate myself on all this "public knowledge." What I found appalled and angered me. And changed my life forever.
 
For the first time in my life, I picked up a National Review magazine and started reading. I moved on to the Washington Times, American Spectator and various other conservative publications I had never been aware of before. The more I read, the angrier I got.
 
I had always assumed that if something was on TV or in the newspapers, it was correct. I always assumed that our elected officials knew better than I how to address the problems of our nation. I always assumed that my friends' opinions were more valid and informed than mine. I was 39 years old and just finding out how incredibly naive I was.
 
Having lived in Los Angeles since my teens, I was never exposed to any other than the liberal point of view. I made the mistake of assuming it was the only valid view, just as millions of other Americans still do.
 
I had adopted the views of the herd, assuming that since everyone felt that way, it was the right way to feel. Besides, I was too busy living my life to spend the time necessary to form my own views independently of my peers. I had taken the easy way out, accepting and spouting the currently fashionable talking points as my own. And patting myself on the back for being informed and knowledgeable. Ouch.
 
After reveling in government approved and politically correct self esteem for so many years, the descent into humility was painful. How naive was I to have blindly accepted so many premises without question? How ignorant was I to have advocated certain positions based on face value and cheap sound bites? How stupid was I to have allowed others to manipulate and exploit my ignorance? The answer: Pretty darn stupid.
 
The anger I felt stemmed from finally realizing that no matter how thin the pancake, there are always two sides. And I had only been exposed to one. That didn't set right. I felt I had been lied to my whole life. I responded by making it my mission to inform everyone I knew of the astonishing revelations I was finding on a daily basis. That was another big mistake.
 
I assumed everyone in my world would be just as appalled as I to find that things were not as they seemed. I studied, I amassed facts, I quoted sources, and I lectured. And I got yet another lesson in humility. Instead of applauding my efforts, my family, my friends, my husband and my co-workers sent me to the woodshed.
 
I soon realized that my facts took a back seat to their emotions. I found that the conservative point of view had been judged invalid years before I became aware of it. The case was already closed. Hadn't I heard? 
 
I persisted. "But how can you dispute these facts?" I railed. I quickly found out. Liberals demolished my factual arguments by demonizing me, thus relieving themselves of the need to entertain or debate any facts that challenged their world view.
 
Being stubborn as well as stupid, I continued my quest to inform one and all of the error of their way of thinking. With predictable results. Soon, everyone in my world informed me that there must be something wrong with me. Eventually, I started to believe them, and finally decided to keep my opinions to myself.
 
I tried. For three years, I consciously tried to keep my mouth shut. I tried to go along to get along. I failed. Long story short: I lost my husband. I no longer speak with my feminist mother and my liberal siblings.

Having continued to read voraciously about all things conservative, I was exposed to the role Christianity played in our country's founding. After further research and soul searching, I eventually became a Christian. Learning to have faith in Christ enabled me to have faith in myself - and faith in my traditional and conservative views.
 
Eight years after my epiphany, and 33 years after moving to Los Angeles, I sold my home and business. I said good-bye to the few friends and family I still had, and left Los Angeles for good. I knew there had to be a place in the world where I could be myself without ticking everyone off.
 
After a lot of searching, I finally found it. Its called Murrells Inlet, South Carolina. Here in this little fishing village, I have found peace and happiness. I can identify myself as a conservative without having to go stand in the corner. Here in South Carolina, I am normal. I am also the luckiest of women.

Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Color Me Racist

Posted by NancyVidedo on Thursday, September 17, 2009 6:00:39 AM
Its now official. I'm a racist. No less than a former president of the United States has declared that if I oppose the takeover of 17% of our economy under the guise of health care reform, I hate black people.
 
According to President Carter, U.S. Rep. Joe Wilson's objection to a 'misstatement' in President Obama's speech to Congress last week was an act "based on racism" and rooted in fears of a black president. And a Rasmussen survey shows that fully 12% of Americans agree with him.
 
The old media has chimed in, with the left's favorite columnist, Maureen Dowd, going a step further. Rep. Joe Wilson said, "You lie' to Obama. But Maureen Dowd heard, "You lie, boy." Boy being one of the many politically incorrect words the left has decided is an indicator of racism. Point made. Case closed.
 
Another columnist, E. Danielle Egan, has joined the growing chorus. In the Philadelphia Enquirer, Egan blithely dismissed the app. 2 million protestors who turned out last weekend to protest Obama's policies, writing them off as illegitimate.  "So I have decided it's time that what I've been watching be called what I believe it is: racism." She continues, "The level of rage being expressed is different and out of sync with what we know from the past." I guess she was visiting Atlantis during the Bush years, or something. 

And just in case anyone has missed the point, ABC has devoted a full story to the racist motives of the Obama protestors.
 
So there. The media and political elite have spoken. Any opposition to Obama means the protestor is a bad person. A person unable to see beyond the color of his skin. A racist. (Isn't that called profiling?)

Conveniently for these elites, they have also decided that responding to ignorant racists is quite beneath them. Being a racist is bad, therefore there is absolutely no need to respond to the underlying complaint. Whew. 
 
This is the ultimate free pass. It almost makes me wish I had been born black. Then  I could make any claims I want, without any facts to back them up, and still maintain the moral high ground.  I could blame every bad decision I ever made on racism and, best of all, put my opponents in the impossible situation of trying to prove a negative. 

I would gain membership in the ever growing class of 'victims', which automatically grants me immunity from the normal rules of civilized behavior. 
 
The fact that Joe Wilson was quite correct in branding Obama a liar is not the point. By diverting the issue to racial animus, Obama's 'misstatement' is conveniently overlooked. This is called a win-win situation.
 
Wilson's audacity in branding Obama a liar has caused a national firestorm. The left is in high dudgeon, quickly spinning the truth of Wilson's (admittedly disrespectful) assertion into a condemnation of his integrity, topping it off with the unprecedented act of issuing a formal rebuke from the House. Bad boy! (Can I say that?) 
 
Not mentioned in this national brou haha is Sen Reid's Dec 15, 2004 statement, where he called called President Bush a liar.  "President Bush is a liar. He betrayed Nevada and he betrayed the country."

I guess its OK to call white guys liars. Even when they can't come up with any specific lie. Its just something everyone knows. Bush lied. Strangely enough, I've never been taken up on my challenge to pay $100.00 to anyone who can cite a specific lie that Bush told. I digress.
 
Also not included in the conversation the left is successfully controlling, is President Obama's statement last week branding Kanye West a *******. But, hey, West is black...this is starting to get confusing.
 
I'm in awe of the left. Though they have admitted not knowing the details of the 1,000 plus pages of the Obama health care 'reform', they have managed to divine what is in my heart. And the hearts of millions of others. And it's called racism.
 
Despite having elected a black president, the left would have us believe that the millions of whites who voted for Obama still hate black people. They would have us believe that, even though we can't see it, racism is still a dominant force in America. Its just evolved into the silent 'institutional' kind of racism that no one can quantify. But its still there. I guess we just have to take their word for it. If we dare question their premise, we're racists. Game, set and match.

Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

What Socialism Is

Posted by NancyVidedo on Saturday, September 05, 2009 5:25:50 AM
When a word comes too close to actually identifying an inconvenient reality, secular progressives spring into action. The offending word is either redefined or reduced its first letter, thereby signifying that polite society will no longer accept it. You've heard of the N word, the B word (think Hillary) and now comes the S word.
 
By its abbreviation, the S word, formerly known as socialism, infers a negative connotation. A negative connotation richly deserved due to the incontrovertible fact that socialism has failed every where it has been tried.  
 
In a nutshell, socialism is an economic system where property is held in common, not individually, and its ideal is a centrally directed economy. Socialism entails the substitution of group decision making for individual choice. In this case, the 'group' making the decisions are the 32 (and counting) unelected and unaccountable czars Obama is anointing.
 
The origins of socialist thought come directly from Aristotle. Aristotle believed that since only actions aiming at a perceived benefit to others were, to his mind, morally approved, then actions solely for personal gain (capitalism) must be bad.
 
This theory of Aristotle's is the basic premise of the Obama administration. By claiming the 'moral high ground' of the 'greater good' Obama and his minions have free reign to radically alter both our system of government and the hundreds of years of tradition it represents.
 
Under the guise of altruism and the greater good, Obama has launched a full scale attack on capitalism. The very capitalism that has fed the world for decades. The capitalism that has produced the highest standard of living in the freest and most productive country in the world. But, according to the ruling elite, capitalism is bad, because it entails, gasp, 'profit'. And every progressive worth his salt knows profit is only possible on the backs of less fortunate. Right?
 
Obama and the secular progressives who now determine policy in America pride themselves on being the intellectual representatives of modern thought and thus superior in knowledge, wisdom and moral virtue than those who hold traditional values (conservatives). They believe their duty is to offer new ideas to the public and deride whatever is conventional and/or traditional. Newness, not truth, is their main value.*

The fly in Obama's ointment is the fact that the system of socialism isn't very good at creating wealth. Only individuals do that. But hey, socialism is 'ethically superior' and that's what counts. Right?
 
Obama was voted into office based on his skill at selling abstract ideas like equality and justice. Millions of Americans bought into his spiel. Most likely the very same Americans who buy lottery tickets. Against all reason, they were led to believe that the government can provide them a free lunch. And there will be no cost to them. And best of all, these moochers can also claim the moral high ground. After all, they are victims of rich capitalists. And that's not fair! And its not their fault that they haven't won life's lottery. 
 
The problem with their premise can be reduced to two words. Free will. God gave us free will - the ability to fail or succeed based on the choices we make. Obama proposes to do away with free will and vest those decisions in a central government.

Losers can now breathe a sigh of relief. Whew. Now, instead of losers, they're much valued victims. And the new socialist society Obama and friends are in the process of implementing has a moral duty to shield them from the consequences of their bad choices. But best of all, socialism allows life's losers the moral high ground as they systematically plunder the fruits of another man's labor.

This is socialism. This is what President Obama wants America to be. But students of history insist on asking the question: How long can a society survive that rewards failure and punishes success? Unfortunately, America will get an answer to that question if Obama is allowed to continue transforming our country into his 'new and improved' idea of a socialist utopia. 



* Hayek's 'The Errors of Socialism'

Nancy Morgan is a cloumnist and news editor for RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Who's Minding The Store?

Posted by NancyVidedo on Friday, August 28, 2009 5:46:24 AM
Its impossible to turn on the television these days without being subjected to President Obama pitching one thing or another. In addition to the obsessive 24/7 media coverage of his dog, his wife and his latest sound bite, we also have our President appearing several times a day to lecture the American people on the virtues of being a good father and the virtues of volunteering. (Through a government agency, that is.)
 
Inquiring minds want to know: While Obama spends the majority of his time doing press conferences, town hall meetings and government service announcements, in between vacations and highly publicized jaunts to foreign countries, who's actually running the store?
 
Who is writing the speeches that Obama is so skilled in delivering? Who is formulating the policy Obama is so masterfully promoting? Who is handling the war in Iraq and Afghanistan? Who is handling the economy? And when, exactly, does our President find the time to run the affairs of state when it appears the majority of his time is spent in front of cameras?
 
Glenn Beck of Fox News is the only journalist asking these questions. And the answers he is finding are alarming. All this week, Beck is investigating the unelected, unaccountable 'czars'- the ultra-radical individuals Obama has placed in every segment of the federal government.
 
These czars have carte blanche to implement policy. They have the enforcement power of the federal government but none of the oversight or accountability. And, unreported by the old media, these 'czars' are pushing America down a path towards one world government and outright socialism. (Or fascism, since fascism includes a charismatic leader.)
 
Van Jones - Green Jobs Czar:
Van Jones has admitted a "commitment to Marxist policies". He is a self-proclaimed revolutionary communist and, in his words, he is dedicated to "mobilizing young people into militant action." Van Jones is a board member of the Apollo Alliance which helped write the stimulus bill. Now he has the power to determine where $500 million of our tax dollars he 'smuggled' into the stimulus bill will go.
 
John Holdren - Science Czar:
Holdren looks on forced abortions and sterilization as legitimate population control measures. He points out that there is no mention in the Constitution of the right to have any number of children. As in - no right to reproduce, ostensibly without the approval of the federal government.
 
Cass Sunstein - Regulatory Czar:
This loon actually proposed a ban on hunting and eating meat. Sunstein is in favor of dogs being allowed attorneys. Oh, and he is an ardent believer in taxes, saying, "without taxes there would be no liberty". He also believes that there is "no liberty without dependency."  Huh? 
 
Ezekiel Emanuel - Health Care Advisor:
Ezekial quantifies life depending on age. In other words, a baby isn't a baby until it has received two years of care and feeding. Emanuel thinks we need to ration basic, guaranteed care to only those who can fully participate in society. According to him, a teenager has the same value as 17 elderly people. This guy actually believes the 'the greater good' should trump the Hippocratic Oath.

Carol Browner - Global Warming Czar:
Carol has her work cut out for her. Her job is to achieve her stated goal of global governance, using the non-crisis of 'global warming'. And she has the vast power and influence of the EPA to do it.
 
Mark Lloyd - FCC Diversity Czar:
In Mr. Lloyd's own words: "It should be clear my focus is not on freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is a distraction." Under the rubric of diversity, this czar proposes to do away with private ownership of media. Oh, and he is also a big fan of left-wing thug dictator, Hugo Chavez.
 
These are just a few of the guys whispering into Obama's ears. These radicals are the ones in charge of formulating policy, regulations and dictates. And they all have several things in common. They share our President's view of America as an evil oppressor, they are all anti-capitalist and they are all determined to seize power through unconstitutional means. By fiat, instead of by votes. 

The policies they are proposing to Obama are all uniformly designed to shift power away from the individual and to the federal government. Despite the fact that our founding fathers voted down (several times) a strong and all powerful federal government. This is the 'change' Obama is dedicated to implementing. Scared yet? 


Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous123456Next »