About Me

Name: NancyVidedo
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

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

Thank-You, Fox News

Posted by NancyVidedo on Saturday, August 22, 2009 7:26:57 AM
Thank-you, Fox News. Thank you for reporting the news other networks ignore. Thanks for not condescending to the great unwashed by informing us how we should think on a given subject.
 
Thank-you for not adopting the patronizing, elitist attitudes that have become de rigueur on most other networks. Thank-you for recognizing that Americans have the right to information from both sides of the aisle and are fully capable of making up their own minds on issues, given enough facts.
 
Thanks, Fox, for actually questioning the incessant spin coming from Camp Obama. No one else is. If not for your reporting, most Americans would still be unaware of the depth of 'change' our president is proposing. Even though the old media succeeded in getting Obama elected, thanks to you, Americans are finally being given access to information they should have had before they voted. Better late than never.
 
Thank-you, Fox, for caring more about journalism than about access to self-anointed elites, and cocktail party invites from the inside the beltway crowd. You have succeeded without giving in to the politically correct crowd. That's no mean feat. You have decided to play by the old, traditional rules instead of the oh, so fashionable, new improved ones the progressives have adopted. Very cool, guys. I know how hard it is these days to march to your own drummer instead of aligning yourself with the majority.
 
Thank you, FNC, for daring to veer from the decades old template by airing Glenn Beck during the news hour. And thank-you, Glenn, for providing information no-one else dares to report. You're the man, Glenn. The fact that you drive the left crazy means you're doing something right.
 
Thanks, Fox, for daring to be the first to actually report the conservative point of view without automatically assigning it to the fringe category. As a conservative columnist, I appreciate the risk you took. As an American, I'm tickled pink to see that it has paid off. The fact that your ratings continue to grow proves you are serving an untapped market.

The old media still hasn't realized this market exists. I predict they will continue to deny this market reality until they fold. Which should be pretty soon now, unless Obama succeeds in socializing the media.
 
Until you came along, Fox, conservative views were treated as invalid and unworthy of debate. Now you are setting the national debate and the other networks are being forced to follow along. Albeit, unwillingly. Happily, their sneering condescension is apparent to all and isn't scoring any points with the majority of Americans in fly-over country.
 
Until you came along, Fox, the old media was able to set the agenda. An agenda most now agree is based on emotion and ideology rather than facts. You've been the prime purveyor of essential facts, facts Americans need in order to make informed decisions. No wonder you're under attack - you are forcing Americans to confront reality, a reality that, until recently, the left was able to define. To America's detriment.
 
Thank-you, Fox, for not treating me like a dummy. God bless you all and keep up the good work. You're the only major network that has enough sense, and enough faith in American citizens to allow them to interpret the news for themselves. And Shepard, I hear they have an opening at CNN.


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

Elite Meltdown

Posted by NancyVidedo on Monday, August 17, 2009 6:58:19 AM
The face-off between the ruling elite and 'we the people' continues to unfold, as Democrat politicians hold townhall meetings across the country to build support for the Obama administration's latest power grab, misleadingly labeled 'health care reform.'
 
The faux outrage politicians manufacture on demand has been replaced by real outrage. Outrage at the American people for failing to understand the nuances, the broad outline of a 1,000 page plus bill that most politicians haven't even read. Hey, that's what staff is for, explained new Democrat, Arlen Spector.
 
Peons from fly-over country are daring to challenge the carefully scripted and (deliberately?) misleading talking points. Talking points which, by the way, have been endorsed by the media. Don't these guys read the New York Times?
 
Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are using the standard liberal tactic of diverting attention from the issue by demonizing the dissenter, in this case, the American people. According to Pelosi and Reid, voicing objections to the federal government's take over of 17% of the formerly free market economy is 'un-American.' Harry Reid has gone a step further, tarring dissenters as 'evil mongers.'

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs has blithely dismissed the burgeoning dissent by informing one and all that these 'townhalls are not representative of America.' Obama, meanwhile, is trying to divert the issue by blaming the 'headline hungry television networks', accusing them of 'inflaming an ugly backlash.'
 
Unused to any opposition that can't be spun to their advantage, or ignored, Democrats are desperately trying to convince Americans that the tidal wave of opposition is not genuine. Used to viewing every issue in political terms, our elected officials are actually convinced that the disruptive townhalls are merely the product of an evil conservative cabal. After all, every person these lawmakers know agree with them on this issue. Its called the 'inside the beltway syndrome.'
 
Despite a new $12 million ad campaign designed to soothe Americans into relying on misplaced compassion instead of common sense, pesky Joe Six-Pack and Susy Homemaker still don't get it. And adding insult to injury, American citizens are starting to question where all the money is coming from to run these ads. And by the way, who's signing the paychecks for the new army of health care advocates who are being paid $12 to $13 an hour for their support? Inquiring minds want to know.
 
Answers to these questions are not forthcoming. Like the classic case of a wife catching her husband in bed with another woman, the question has become, "Who are you going to believe? Me, or the evidence of your own eyes?"
 
Obama, in his latest finger-pointing lecture to the great unwashed, assured the masses that the proposed 'public option'  won't put private insurers out of business. When confronted with his own words to the contrary in 2007,  he dismissed the discrepancy as a 'mis-statement'. Oops. Time to move on. Time to focus on the real villains.
 
Identifying a common enemy is another tried and true tactic liberals employ when it gets too hot in the kitchen. But the historically favorite villain, those dastardly drug companies, have already made their deal with the government health plan. And blaming the insurance companies won't work either, since they're on board, too. The only villain left is the American people.
 
Not all Americans, Obama and the media assure us. No, the real villain can be traced to the 'hate groups' that have suddenly, and conveniently emerged. As reported by ABC: "Experts say a sharp growth in so-called militia groups that helped spawn a wave of domestic terrorism in the 1990s –  are now using YouTube, rock music and the Internet to recruit members and spread hate and fear - and shouldn't be ignored."
 
These hate groups, we are assured by the ultra liberal Southern Poverty Law Center, are protesting President Obama, not his health care plan. Not only that, they are putting his life in danger. Headlines inform us: 'Fear For Obama's Safety Grows As Hate Groups Thrive On Racial Backlash.'
 
This is a media twofer. Obama is the now the victim instead of the oppressor. And dissenters are racist rednecks.

The only problem is, Americans aren't buying it. They're suffering from the political equivalent of the 'battered woman syndrome.' Americans have been deceived and beaten up by the government so many times lately, that, even though they still love Obama, they're taking steps to distance themselves from what has become  an increasingly dangerous relationship. Flowers, new cars, and soothing words are no longer effective. Even the race card isn't ringing their bells.
 
Liberals have finally succeeded in persuading Americans to look at the broad picture instead of inconvenient details. The kicker is, as more Americans see the broad picture, they see the unprecedented devolution of power to the federal government. They see the loss of America's traditional reliance on individuals instead of government. They see the loss of personal liberty and freedom of choice. And they don't like it.
This article was originally published in American Thinker on August 16, 2009.

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

Obama Has Saved America!

Posted by NancyVidedo on Monday, August 10, 2009 1:01:26 PM
Thank God! Oops, I mean, thank Obama. The economic crisis is almost over, the 'war on terror' is a thing of the past and, by his own words, Obama and his administration have saved America from catastrophe.
 
President Obama used the occasion of a 1/10 of 1% drop in the nation's unemployment rate to claim both success and validation for his economic policies. He has valiantly brought America back from the brink of the economic chaos that was caused by his predecessor. But as is often the case with Obama, the devil is in the details.
 
In July, 247,000 jobs were lost. Inquiring minds question how the unemployment rate could experience even a slight drop when the stats show Americans are still losing their jobs. John Lott gives us the answer:
 
"The reason is simple -- the number of people who stopped looking for work rose dramatically.  637,000 additional people no longer consider themselves looking for work. This is by far the largest drop in the number of people who consider themselves in the labor force during the last year - almost twice the 358,000 increase in the people who left the labor force during June."

Using Lott's calculations, our actual unemployment rate stands at 16.3%, not the trumpeted 9.4%. Obama would have us believe this is good news. Our president would also have us believe his claim that the $1.2 trillion health care reform proposal is just the ticket to jump start the economy. (Hey, didn''t he just say he already jump started the economy?) I digress...

Now I'm not an expert, but I question how adding unsustainable debt to a record deficit to supposedly fix a non-problem is going to deliver us from financial Armageddon. But Obama says he can add 12 million illegal aliens and app. 25 million uninsured Americans to government health care rolls and this will somehow result in cost savings.

Oh, and despite his own words to the contrary in 2007, Obama now assures us that the public option proposal most assuredly won't put private insurers out of business. Whew.
Since we all know Obama doesn't lie, Americans will, once again, just have to accept the word of our Organizer in Chief. Hey, he's entitled to some slack. After all, he just ended the war on terror.

That's right. A mere six months after taking office, Obama has officially ended the war on terror. From now on, Obama has decreed that we're only at war with Al Qaeda. All our brave warriors in Afghanistan can relax now that global jihad has been vanquished.
 
How did Obama accomplish this amazing feat? He did it in the Democrat's time honored way. He merely redefined the terms. 
 
'Jihad', 'war on terror' and 'global war' are no longer acceptable terms. They have been banished from the polite society the liberals, oops progressives have claimed as their own exclusive province. Case closed.

When I look back at all of Obama's accomplishments of the last six months, I feel pretty stupid for not voting for him. Had I know he had the unique ability to actually redefine reality to his own specifications, I wouldn't have spent so much time dwelling on his criminal cohorts, his socialist buddies and his terrorist 'acquaintances'. I would have had blind faith in him and not pointed out his utter lack of any real accomplishments, experience or character. Boy, do I feel silly.
 
I've decided that I'm finally going to jump on the Obama bandwagon - right after I check out the pig that just flew right by my window.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Rise Of Joe Six-Pack

Posted by NancyVidedo on Thursday, August 06, 2009 3:38:13 PM
After years of perfecting and feigning faux outrage, many politicians are now starting to experience the real thing. But don't expect to see it. This outrage can only be manifested behind closed doors - because the outrage is directed at Americans. Those pesky Americans who are showing up in droves at townhall meeting across the country. Those pesky little people from flyover country who actually dare, DARE to question the (accepted) wisdom of their elected officials.
 
For many years, politicians have used semantics and non-answers to deflect attention from ugly or inconvenient facts. But, lo and behold, Joe six-pack is starting to fight back.
 
This Joe six-pack is a perfect example. (Video) He had the audacity to challenge the House Majority Leader yesterday at a news conference. "Why does the President want to shove a healthcare bill down our throats in three to four weeks when he took SIX MONTHS to pick out what kind of dog he wanted for his kids???" The kicker - this Joe six-pack is a Democrat. The response? Rep. Hoyer has restricted his next townhall to 'invitation only'.
 
The occasion is the proposed 'reform' of health care. A reform that even the CBO says would break the bank. A reform that is being touted as a solution to a 'crisis', despite figures showing 82% of Americans are happy with their coverage.
 
As politicians break for the August recess and go home to 'listen' to their constituents before voting for this 'reform', they're encountering, gasp, resistance, outrage and anger.
 
Representative Tim Bishop temporarily suspended holding “town hall” style meetings after Suffolk County Police had to escort him back to his car amid a throng of rowdy protesters who turned out for a meeting in Setauket last month.
 
Last Sunday, Kathleen Sebelius and Sen. Arlen Specter got a taste of the tough sell lawmakers are facing over health care as audience members booed and jeered them during a town hall meeting. Booed them? How dare they!! Their fake smiles remained intact but their body language was a joy to watch.
 
In Austin, Texas, Rep. Lloyd Doggett's townhall erupted into a frenzy as he was met with constituents who made clear they don't want ObamaCare.

After seeing the writing on the wall, Congressman Vic Snyder (D. Ark.) came up with an ingenious solution to these angry protests. He held his townhall meeting in a hospital, considerately pointing out that an "angry protest" would not be appropriate at a hospital where sick kids are being treated. The angry crowd heckled him anyway.
 
Treating this uprising as a temporary aberration instead of a genuine sign of concern on the part of millions of Americans, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs suggested that the opposition is being organized by a small group seeking to create "manufactured anger."
 
The DNC quickly followed suit, accusing Republicans of "fueling mob rule by encouraging protesters of Democratic lawmakers and the Obama administration across the country."

In a classic case of projection and cognitive dissonance, Democrats have united in depicting the anger of Joe Six Pack and Susy Homemaker as "angry mobs duped into hostile actions by special interest groups." Those are their talking points, and they're sticking with them. Case closed and no further debate required.

Insteading of addressing legitimate and inconvenient questions, Democrats continue to employ the classic liberal tactic of impugning the motives of  dissenters, as shown so skillfully by Sen. Barbara Boxer yesterday. She claimed the 'well-dressed' protestors at townhall meeting are out to 'hurt our president',  (assuming that only poorly dressed Americans are legitimate?) Hey, when the facts aren't on your side, deflect the issue into emotion and class warfare.  

Speaker Pelosi neatly summed up the political elite's reaction to the genuine outrage being demonstrated across the country. When asked if she thought that those protests were a sign of genuine grass roots opposition to the Obama health care plan. Pelosi replied, "I think they're Astroturf." For graduates of government schools, that's a cute soundbite signifying the protests are, well, fake. Case closed. 
Got that America. We're Astroturf. But Pelosi has a point. We've been walked on for so long that you can't blame our elected officials for believing we're merely Astroturf.

The good news is, history shows that when given enough rope, the left ends up hanging themselves. As they are now doing. On Astroturf.  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous123456Next »