Framwinkle's Blog

Free speech?

2010-04-12T23:25:00.005-06:00

Aren't progressives great? Because the Tea Party movement isn't actually racist, despite the way the liberal media would like everyone to believe that it is, a number of progressive loosers are planning to crash the tea parties, bringing their own racist signs to try and blend in and make the parties look like they're racist. When you can't fight with ideas, destroy your opponents! Fantastic, isn't it? So, if you're watching MSNBC this Thursday, and you see a bunch of racist losers doing all they can to get as much camera time as possible, you'll know who they are.

Seriously, can we start calling these people evil now? I can think of no better word for this kind of behavior.

I guess we're not allowed to have dissenting opinions, so we must be destroyed. (Free speech only works in one direction, you know?) Remember when protest was supposed to be partiotic? Yeah, that was when Bush was in office. Now that Obama is in office, protest is just racist. Even Bill Cosby said so! It must be true! They can't win with ideas, so they have to try to shut us up by making us irrelevent. If they can brush us off as nothing but wacked out racists, then it doesn't matter what we say. Destroy your opponent and you don't have to answer their argument.

This is just a sign that the left truly fears the tea parties. Although they won't admit it, they know it really is a grass roots movement, and that scares them to death.

Air America kicks the bucket

2010-01-22T21:15:00.003-07:00

So Air America is finally history. Odd. I thought they died a while ago? Oh well. They've finally officially declared bankruptcy, I guess because they were no longer useful as a tool for the DNC, which is really the only reason they were ever in business in the first place.

I tried to listen to Air America a few times, just to see what they were like, and what they were saying. I think the longest I lasted was a couple weeks before I just couldn't take it anymore. It wasn't so much that I disagreed with them, or thought they were lying constantly, both of which were true. The main reason I couldn't listen was the constant anger I heard spewing from their mouths. It didn't seem to matter what they were talking about, whether it was good of bad for them, they were always angry about it. They were consumed with rage, and it showed through in everything they said, even when they were trying to be funny.

I think that's what hurt them the most. Not only were they simply a propeganda tool, but most people just don't want to listen to angry people. I don't know why anyone would ever want to live like that, or listen to those who did live like that. Obviously there were a few of like mind who did listen, because I used to know one of them, and she was angry, too. It's just not healthy, or good for ratings.

Amish won't be forced to buy health insurance. Libs upset.

2010-01-12T16:29:00.000-07:00

I just saw an interesting little article. Aparently there may be some religious exemptions made in the healthcare bill so that certain people don't have to buy insurance if they object to it on religious grounds.

Watertown Daily Times Amish families exempt from insurance mandate

Now, I'm all in favor of letting people opt out because of conflicts with their religion. We already exempt people from military service for the same reason. In fact, I wish they'd let people opt out for more reasons. But it's this bit in the article that really caught my attention.

"A professor and lawyer at Yeshiva University in New York complained last summer that exempting groups for religious reasons could run afoul of the Constitution. Marci A. Hamilton, who teaches at the University's Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, wrote at Findlaw.com in August, "If the government can tolerate a religious exemption, then it must do so evenhandedly among religious believers with the same beliefs. This is sheer favoritism for a certain class of religions, or even for one religion.""

Unconstitutional? Come now, the whole health care bill and forcing people to buy insurance is already unconstitutional. Why let a little thing like a religious exemption ruin your day? The article then goes on to say that she thought:

"....their objections to the mandate surprised her because the Amish do buy vehicle insurance, for instance."

Really? She's actually trying to equate vehicle insurance with health insurance? And she teaches at a law university? They're totally different things! I can see the Amish buying auto insurance, because it's not to insure themselves. It's to insure anyone they might hit. It's called liability insurance, and it's nothing like the health insurance they're planning to force on us. I'll bet the Amish get drivers licences, too. Oh, and there's also the little difference that, so far, auto insurance doesn't come from the government, either.

How do these people get away with this stuff?

Democrats and taxes.

2009-11-20T19:59:00.002-07:00

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=aI4IdHYuAl94

Isn't it interesting that Democrats want to raise taxes to fund a war, but are willing to go into deep debt for everything else? We're spending trillions on pork and bailouts, but can't spare $40 billion for a troop increase? Nice to see they have their priorities straight.

Tax reform?

2009-09-24T17:20:00.004-06:00

On Twitter, the White House was asking for input regarding tax reform. However, upon following the link you read this.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Tax-Reform-Subcommittee-Requests-Ideas/

"President Obama has asked the President's Economic Recovery Advisory Board (PERAB) to develop options for tax reform." .... "The mandate to the PERAB is NOT to recommend a new tax system."

As I see it, the above two statements are at odds with each other. Really, what's the point of reform if we don't get a new system? Reform to me means simplification, and you don't simplify a system that's thousands of pages long by adding more pages. That's not reform, that's just adding to the curent problem. Reform, true reform, would be throwing out most if not all of the current mess, which would essentially leave us with a new system.

Personally I'd like to see a flat tax system. Everyone paying the same percentage seems fair to me. But of course the progressives feel the need to screw the rich because "they can afford it", or something stupid like that. Ok, fine. You want to tax people at a higher rate if they earn more? We can still do that. Just cut out all the crud and loopholes. If you make A, you pay X%. If you make B, you pay Y%. If you make C, you pay Z%. The law could be a page long.

Of course, that will never happen because they're not actually interested in reform. Reform to them just means finding new ways to raise taxes while fooling the public into thinking that they're getting a deal while the rich are getting reamed. What really ends up happening is the same old, same old. Politicians will claim they're looking out for us, while actually only protecting their own special interests. They want to reform the lie to make it more believable. I won't believe any claims of "reform" until they are willing to consider a new system.

Set up by the Speaker

2009-09-17T20:29:00.001-06:00

Wow. I just watched the video of Pelosi talking about how she's worried that all the rhetoric flying around might lead to violence, and that people responsible for inciting the rhetoric should take responsibility for the problems they cause. That's a set up if I ever heard one. Do they know something we don't? Are they perhaps even expecting something? It's pretty rich, coming from a woman who implied that people going to town hall meetings were Nazis. They're the ones throwing the rhetoric around and calling people racists, but of course they won't get blamed for it. Instead, if someone does do something stupid in the near future, and people get hurt, they'll try to pin the blame on Conservatives, especially those on radio.

Tax day - Why?

2009-04-08T17:23:00.003-06:00

I'm really starting to wonder what the point is of even paying taxes anymore. The politicians certainly don't seem to need our money. They do pretty well already spending money they don't have, so what would it matter if we simply didn't pay? Would it make a difference, or even slow them down? I tend to doubt it. The only thing taxes seem to do now is give them some kind of legitimacy, and power over our lives.

Stimulus - the other white meat!

2009-01-08T19:42:00.001-07:00

Isn't this great? Thanks to the rotten economy, politicians can now spend as much as they want on pork projects, and not call them pork! They're getting ready to spend another $1 Trillion dollars, putting us another $1T in debt, and they claim it won't contain any pork at all. Come on! Who actually believes that? It will all be pork! This is their golden opportunity, because instead of calling it pork, now they get to call it 'economic stimulus'. What used to be hated as wasteful spending is now deemed necessary to save the economy! What a wonderful time to be a politition!

Thowing shoes, thowing stones.

2008-12-15T13:34:00.003-07:00

So Bush gets shoes thrown at him by an Iraqi reporter at a news conference, and what's the response I hear from liberals? "It's about time!" and "I would have used a brick!" How classy. Nice to know that unity thing Obama's been talking about is working so well, isn't it? I guess "unity" really just means, "Conservatives, shut up!"

I hope these people remember their own words the next time they feel like getting angry because someone dares to criticize Obama, using mere words instead of shoes. I certainly don't like Obama, but I don't want to throw things at him, or wish him harm. Like it or not, he will be my president, and he deserves the kind of respect that comes with that office. How sad that so many people can't give Bush that same respect.

Obama's socialism is no better than robbery.

2008-11-03T17:32:00.002-07:00

Thank you, Joe the Plumber. Joe's simple question finally brought Obama's socialistic tendancies to the forefront and shed some light on what has otherwise been a taboo subject.

Obama says he wants to "spread the wealth around", huh? Well, that's fine for him. He can do that with his own money, not mine. He started going around trying to make it seem like it wasn't a big deal by joking that he used to share his toys when he was young, or share a sandwitch with a girl he liked. And what's better than sharing? What he doesn't seem to understand is that those were his things to do with as he pleased. He can share his own things as much as he wants. He does not have the right to share someone else's things. There's a big difference between charity and what Obama has planned. Charity is voluntary. Taxes are not. What Obama is proposing is forced charity, otherwise known as robbery.

Speaking of charity, if it's so bad to be rich, then why does he have so much money? He has the opportunity to give to charity, just like everyone else, and yet he's given hardly anything, even to his own struggling reletives. If it's so important for the rich to give to the poor, he should start with himself and lead by example. That's what leaders, true leaders, do. Meanwhile, people like Bill Gates give millions upon millions in charity constantly, but still get blamed for being the problem because it's easy to make people resent other people who have more than you. That's the way Democrats work. Divide and conquer. It's an insidious ploy.

"But Obama just want's to do what Robin Hood did, taking from the rich to give to the poor. Is that so wrong?" What's wrong is how that story is portrayed. Robin Hood was taking from the rich, but the rich happened to be King John, otherwise known as the government. King John was taxing the people to death, and Robin Hood was trying to get some of it back. He was trying to enact a tax cut.

And there's even more wrong with Obama's economic policy, because you can't build the economy from the bottom up. Poor people don't emply poor people. You need rich people to employ poor people. That's how trickle down works. Rich people create jobs that employ people and that's what makes the economy go. That's what makes the poor become middle class, and the middle class become rich. Ronald Reagan talked about it as a tide to lift all boats, and it works. What Obama wants is to tie everyone down with the same anchor. The only thing his trickle up theory will produce is a bunch of equally poor people, which is of course what the Democrats want, because then they can all be dependent on the government. It makes me sick.

Now there's no hope.

2008-02-07T11:38:00.000-07:00

Romney is out of the race. It just makes me feel sick inside because now there's no one left to vote for. There are still the Congressional races, of course, but for president I'm writing in "Gadget Hackwrench" in November.