Never mind the pajamas … We blog in the nude!

Archive for December, 2007

Merry Christmas 2007

Posted by RightWingRocker on December 24, 2007

The hustle and bustle of the holidays has begun.

Here’s wishing everyone a very Merry Christmas!



Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

The Clintonesque Mitt Romney

Posted by RightWingRocker on December 20, 2007

Remember back during one of the Bill Clinton campaigns, ol’ Bubba spoke of how he had watched black churches burn as a child, even though there was no opportunity for him to do so?

So much for Mitt Romney’s “front-runner” status. He’s all the liar Slick Willie was. Yeah, sure. He watched his old man march with Dr. King. Believe that, and I have some oceanfront property in Colorado to sell you.

Look. We had eight years of this, and voted out two more Democrats who were prone to this sort of lying. There’s a reason for that. We saw where it got us the first time, and paid the price for re-electing the crook. So certain were we that we didn’t want that, we elected a straight-shooter of a Republican, knowing full well he wasn’t the conservative we needed – pretty much because he told us the truth. Say what you want about George W. Bush; he told us what he’d do, and he delivered.

I hope America sees this for what it is and hands this idiot his walking papers. Republicans, PLEASE do not put me in a situation where I have to vote for this clown just to keep Hitlery out. Keep the pressure on for the only conservative with a chance – Fred Thompson. Thank God he’s getting some new momentum. Idiots like Romney only hurt Republican credibility by showing the useless liberal side of the party.


Posted in Confronting Libs, Liberal Bullshit, New FedeRWRalism | Leave a Comment »

The Federalist 2008: Part the First

Posted by RightWingRocker on December 16, 2007

Throughout the last nearly three years as one of the Rightosphere’s louder voices in support of the Founding Fathers’ dream, I have built much of my relevant writing around the following statement, found in the New Federalist Platform, as submitted by Reagan2020.org:

We call ourselves “Federalists” because we humbly acknowledge that our guidance derives from the original ideals and principles of federally distributed powers as explicated by The Federalist Papers. But we are “New” Federalists for two basic reasons: first, because we are well aware that the cautionary warnings of the Anti-Federalists have proven true about the central government embarking on a long crusade of usurpations and encroachments that have substantially abridged the rights of individual citizens and state and local governments; and second, because we follow in the tradition of New Federalism that was implemented under Ronald Reagan’s presidency, but has since then languished. We strive to reassert the principles of New Federalism, to roll back those abridgements and infringements of our rights as plainly set forth in our Founding Documents.

Indeed, the Federalist Papers, written largely in defense of the Constitution in the wake of much dissent with regard to the document, were very persuasive in ultimately bringing forth ratification, and the warnings of the Anti-Federalists have largely come to fruition as well. One would have to be completely blind to the situation in America today to believe otherwise.

Recently, on a thread over at RWN, I took a stand in favor of the Founders and their vision. I even posted about it. My argument is simply that conservatives are dropping the ball when they argue with liberals on the liberals’ terms. Why? Simple: These arguments were had back in the Eighteenth Century, and the Founders had the opportunity to explain themselves. The decisions about the meaning of the Constitution were made then, and the liberals of the 20th Century have succeeded in convincing an uneducated public that the Constitution says something different. It’s time to reinvigorate the enthusiasm of the American people for the true vision of the Founding Fathers by reintroducing the public discourse of their time into the public discourse of today. It only makes sense, given the liberals’ constant desire to inject the evil of the federal government more and more into our daily lives.

On the aforementioned comment thread at RWN, I successfully got liberals to take (among others) the following positions:

* That socialism is allowed in the US under the general welfare clause of Article 1, Section 8.

* That James Madison would advocate socialism and/or nationalist socialist healthcare.

* That James Madison and the Founding Fathers are irrelevant.

I prodded these guys about Madison quite heavily to get these responses, given that Madison – the biggest contributor to the Constitution from a content standpoint – would clearly NOT have advocated socialism being injected into our lives, especially to the degree that it is today. This discussion of Article 1, Section 8 was had 220 years ago, and the rationale for the wording of the article was made clear then. To ignore the discourse of the founding generation and/or call it “irrelevant” is sheer foollishness and idiocy.

The legislative power is competent to lay taxes, duties, imposts, and excises; — there is no limitation to this power, unless it be said that the clause which directs the use to which those taxes, and duties shall be applied, may be said to be a limitation: but this is no restriction of the power at all, for by this clause they are to be applied to pay the debts and provide for the common defence and general welfare of the United States; but the legislature have authority to contract debts at their discretion; they are the sole judges of what is necessary to provide for the common defence, and they only are to determine what is for the general welfare; this power therefore is neither more nor less, than a power to lay and collect taxes, imposts, and excises, at their pleasure; not only [is] the power to lay taxes unlimited, as to the amount they may require, but it is perfect and absolute to raise them in any mode they please. – Brutus #1

So the challenge to the Constitution was made then, as you can see. Madison responded as follows:

The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State. – Madison, Federalist 45

Have I not been consisitent in saying that the states have the authority to have socialism within their own systems if they so (foolishly) choose, but that the federal government does not? I have yet to find a liberal who would advocate turning the federal socialist machine over to the individual states. One size fits all is the only thing they know. Government is always the only solution, even when government is the stupidest option available (and legally, it is not available – or so say the Constitution and its primary author). To say that James Madison, who penned the above words in defense of ratification, would have supported the efforts being made today to expand upon the socialism, which he would have denounced, by extending federal powers to include control over people’s healthcare decisions is, at best, ignorance, and at worst, a deliberate lie perpetrated for the purpose of cheating the American people out of more of their tax dollars in support of another lunatic ponzi scheme.

Today, we are seeing the concerns of the Anti-Federalist coming to fruition, and it’s happening right before our very eyes (baby, what a big surprise). It’s happening, and all the liberals can do in their defense when we so clearly demonstrate that their vision is so inconsistent with that of the Founders is call the Founders “irrelevant” and/or lie about what their true positions would be. I’m sorry folks, but I just don’t buy the idea that they don’t know. I might believe that about Joe Publick and the rest of the victims of the public education system, but you had better believe those in Washington and those seeking the nod to go there know better. Trust me. They know better – and better than you’ll ever know.


Posted in Alternative Media, Confronting Libs, Conservative Wins, Liberal Bullshit, New FedeRWRalism, RWR in the 'Sphere | Leave a Comment »

DJ Gallo Gets It Right

Posted by RightWingRocker on December 14, 2007

My opinion of the whole “Mitchell Report” and this foolishness surrounding Major League Baseball and steroid use has been simple: blah blah blah. Seriously, even I have found it necessary from time to time to use them. They are very helpful in strengthening weak body systems and making life more comfortable.

The thing about this list that is truly revealing is that the percentage of great ballplayers on this list is about the same as the percentage in the game in general. In other words, you can’t convince me that these drugs in any way changed the destinies of the players involved. In other words, Barry Bonds would have STILL become the Home Run King, and “The Rocket” would have still risen to the same level of greatness. Tim Laker would have no other legitimate claim to fame.

In all seriousness, it doesn’t, never has, and never will matter what any player or group of players does to enhance performance. As a competitor, you still have to find a way to win. For true winners, losing is not an option. Can you imagine going to war and giving up just because the other side had NBC? As much as we heard about Iraq’s NBC program, we still went in, kicked ass, and took names. NBC or none, the winners won. It’s the same in baseball. So Barry’s juiced. So fucking what? I don’t see Barry Bonds walking around with a 2007 World Series ring on his finger.

Truth be told, People have to lighten up about these things, and mind their own business. If Barry Bonds feels the need to get juiced, I say let him. It’s not like this stuff is without side-effects, and it’s not like the Giants did any better because of it. DJ Gallo hits it right on the head today. Read these quotes (which you can bet are all made up). They go right to the heart of the matter.

And they’re fun to read to boot! Enjoy!


Posted in Alternative Media, Funny Shit, MSMadness, RWR Sports | Leave a Comment »

In Defense of Ron Paul

Posted by RightWingRocker on December 9, 2007

Ronald Reagan once said, “Never speak ill of another Republican.”

This should be true today more than ever before. Our party must be united against the socialist onslaught that is looming on the horizon should Hitlery Clinton find her way into the White House. Each of our candidates brings something very important to the table. Every last one of them has something special to offer. Never mind the fact that I think Fred Thompson is the guy with not only the best chance of winning in the general election, but also the one with the most realistic conservative goals.

Rudy Guiliani offers us great leadership under pressure. Mitt Romney offers the opportunity to show that not all Republicans are conservative (Rudy offers this as well). Fred Thompson offers Federalism with all its obvious advantages.

What of Ron Paul? Since his following is largely a bunch of loons trying to beef up his numbers by spamming polls, we’ll never really know what his chances really are of winning any primary or the general election. John Hawkins doesn’t even offer this candidate’s name as a positive response in his polls anymore, simply because he doesn’t have the time to be weeding out all of the re-votes that are cast by the Ron Paul crowd. This is unfortunate, because it makes it difficult for those of us who comment about these things to have good information. To the Ron Paul crowd I say this: Thanks for the enthusiasm and the 110 percent, but these tactics only hurt your candidate and those of us who honor the contribution he makes to the debate. Remember, stuffing ballot boxes and rigging elections is a Donk game (free cigarettes, anyone??).

I took some time this week and checked out Ron Paul on the issues – not by his record, but by his platform. I did this because I disagree with the way conservatives are demonizing this guy. He has very few positions that are out of sync with those of true conservatives. Ron Paul’s platform is far too involved to go into too much detail. You can read up on all of his positions by clicking “Issues” here. I’ll pick and choose what to quote.

Ron Paul: American Independence and Sovereignty

So called free trade deals and world governmental organizations like the International Criminal Court (ICC), NAFTA, GATT, WTO, and CAFTA are a threat to our independence as a nation. They transfer power from our government to unelected foreign elites.

Ron Paul is 100% right on this, and this is a position that is also 100% conservative. The UN is also included in later comments. Paul goes on to show exactly how these things threaten us, and is right on the mark on every note. He closes with this, again right on the money:

Let’s not forget the UN. It wants to impose a direct tax on us. I successfully fought this move in Congress last year, but if we are going to stop ongoing attempts of this world government body to tax us, we will need leadership from the White House.

We must withdraw from any organizations and trade deals that infringe upon the freedom and independence of the United States of America.

Ron Paul: Border Security and Immigration

The talk must stop. We must secure our borders now. A nation without secure borders is no nation at all. It makes no sense to fight terrorists abroad when our own front door is left unlocked.

Again, right on point. I’ve made my position on border security no secret here at the RWRepublic. Our own president has dropped the ball on this one, a very unfortunate thing. Our next president must clean up the mess that his many predecessors have left. Even Ronaldus Maximus cheesed on this issue, granting amnesty to countless illegals during what was the greatest presidency of the Twentieth Century. This coddling of illegal aliens has to stop, and the time has already passed. Ron Paul’s six-point plan includes physically securing the borders (hopefully this means a wall), enforcing visa rules, no amnesty, no government assistance for illegal aliens, ending birthright citizenship, and real immigration reform instead of the proposals that he correctly believes aren’t tough enough.

Ron Paul: Debt & Taxes

Working Americans like lower taxes. So do I. Lower taxes benefit all of us, creating jobs and allowing us to make more decisions for ourselves about our lives.

Whether a tax cut reduces a single mother’s payroll taxes by $40 a month or allows a business owner to save thousands in capital gains taxes and hire more employees, that tax cut is a good thing. Lower taxes allow more spending, saving, and investing which helps the economy — that means all of us.

Real conservatives have always supported low taxes and low spending.

Amen. Paul goes on to describe the real nature of spending and what really needs to be done to control it. It’s not a pretty picture, but who’s surprised by that?

Ron Paul: Education

The federal government has no constitutional authority to fund or control schools. I want to abolish the unconstitutional, wasteful Department of Education and return its functions to the states. By removing the federal subsidies that inflate costs, schools can be funded by local taxes, and parents and teachers can directly decide how best to allocate the resources.

This is hands-down the best thing any politician is saying today. It’s also the most conservative. Again, Ron Paul is right.

Ron Paul: Environment

The key to sound environmental policy is respect for private property rights. The strict enforcement of property rights corrects environmental wrongs while increasing the cost of polluting.

In a free market, no one is allowed to pollute his neighbor’s land, air, or water. If your property is being damaged, you have every right to sue the polluter, and government should protect that right. After paying damages, the polluter’s production and sale costs rise, making it unprofitable to continue doing business the same way. Currently, preemptive regulations and pay-to-pollute schemes favor those wealthy enough to perform the regulatory tap dance, while those who own the polluted land rarely receive a quick or just resolution to their problems.

Sounds great. Check this out, though, because it seems kind of shady:

In Congress, I have followed a constitutional approach to environmental action:

* I consistently vote against using tax dollars to subsidize logging in National Forests.
* I am a co-sponsor of legislation designed to encourage the development of alternative and sustainable energy. H.R. 550 extends the investment tax credit to solar energy property and qualified fuel cell property, and H.R. 1772 provides tax credits for the installation of wind energy property.
* Taxpayers for Common Sense named me a “Treasury Guardian” for my work against environmentally-harmful government spending and corporate welfare.
* I am a member of the Congressional Green Scissors Coalition, a bipartisan caucus devoted to ending taxpayer subsidies of projects that harm the environment for the benefit of special interests.

Voting against subidies. Good move. There’s no constitutional authority for that. However, “Legislation designed to encourage the development of …” – fill in the blank. There’s no constitutional authority for that, either, and therefore, NOT a constitutional approach to ANYTHING. Conservative by its tax-credit nature though it may be, it’s not as conservative as standing up for the Constitution and doing away with investment taxes in the first place. Using the tax code to control people’s behavior happens to be a liberal tactic that’s been used by the Donks for decades. Mr. Paul is wrong on this count. I’m also suspicious of anyone who works against “corporate welfare”. This term is usually used to describe tax cuts for businesses (which don’t pay taxes in the first place). It’s used by liberals to generate hate for those building businesses for profit, as if there were another reason to have a business. I’m also suspicious of anyone belonging to any “environmental” organization with the word “green” in its name. These organizations generally sing the AlGorean chants of the man-made global warming cult. I give them a wide berth – a VERY wide berth. So here we find Ron Paul to be something of an enviro-nutcase, who will abandon his Constitutionalist principles in favor of liberal policies on this issue.

Ron Paul: Health Care

Mr. Paul makes a lot of very important points about healthcare, emphasizing Congress’s role in the rise of HMOs in the management of Americans’ healthcare needs. Here’s a great quote from his page:

The federal government will not suddenly become efficient managers if universal health care is instituted.

Amen, Mr. Paul. Here’s his plan:

* Making all medical expenses tax deductible.
* Eliminating federal regulations that discourage small businesses from providing coverage.
* Giving doctors the freedom to collectively negotiate with insurance companies and drive down the cost of medical care.
* Making every American eligible for a Health Savings Account (HSA), and removing the requirement that individuals must obtain a high-deductible insurance policy before opening an HSA.
* Reform licensure requirements so that pharmacists and nurses can perform some basic functions to increase access to care and lower costs.

All of this will go a long way in making healthcare affordable and getting the government out of it. Government should have never gotten involved in the first place, and Paul is right on the money here.

Ron Paul: Health Freedom

I oppose legislation that increases the FDA’s legal powers. FDA has consistently failed to protect the public from dangerous drugs, genetically modified foods, dangerous pesticides and other chemicals in the food supply. Meanwhile they waste public funds attacking safe, healthy foods and dietary supplements

‘Nuff said. Right on the money AGAIN.

Ron Paul: Home Schooling

We must have permanency in the Department of Defense Home School Tier 1 Pilot Program, providing recruitment status parity for home school graduates. I will use my authority to prevent the Department of Education from regulating home school activities.

I will veto any legislation that creates national standards or national testing for home school parents or students. I also believe that, as long as No Child Left Behind remains law, it must include the protections for home schoolers included in sec. 9506 (enshrining home schoolers’ rights) and 9527 (guaranteeing no national curriculum).

Federal monies must never be used to undermine the rights of homeschooling parents. I will use the bully pulpit of the Presidency to encourage a culture of educational freedom throughout the nation.

My only problems with this is that it falls short of repealing No Child Left Behind. There’s also stuff that I didn’t quote that seem kind of fed-intrusive, but I can easily see how they would be unnecessary if the rest of Paul’s education agenda were to fly. Ron Paul is again right (and conservative).

Ron Paul: Life and Liberty

In 40 years of medical practice, I never once considered performing an abortion, nor did I ever find abortion necessary to save the life of a pregnant woman.

Again, conservative and right.

Ron Paul: No Taxes on Tips

A small idea, but why have income taxes at all? Paul supporters tell us that he would abolish the IRS. I haven’t seen this in his platform, but would love to have someone stand up for that. No taxes on tips is a start, but I would love to see more taxes gone.

Ron Paul: Privacy and Personal Liberty

The biggest threat to your privacy is the government. We must drastically limit the ability of government to collect and store data regarding citizens’ personal matters.

So Paul is against national ID cards and the Patriot Act. I used to agree with the Patriot Act, but have seen it (like every other government intrusion into our privacy) abused in ways people would have never imagined. Old ladies being searched in airports just to diffuse accusations of “racial profiling” is simply the wrong way to go about stopping terrorists. Paul also opposes currency transaction reports, as I do. He’s right on with this issue as well – and conservative.

Ron Paul: Property Rights and Eminent Domain

Property rights are the foundation of all rights in a free society. Without the right to own a printing press, for example, freedom of the press becomes meaningless. The next president must get federal agencies out of these schemes to deny property owners their constitutional rights to life, liberty, and property.

Without mentioning Kelo by name, Paul delivers it a stinging blow here. He also happens to be conservative – and right.

Ron Paul: Racism

A nation that once prided itself on a sense of rugged individualism has become uncomfortably obsessed with racial group identities.

The collectivist mindset is at the heart of racism.

Geez. Has this guy been reading my blog? I’ve been saying all along that racism is the inevitable result of this socialist mindset that has plagued our nation for nearly a hundred years. Again Ron Paul is conservative, and right.

Ron Paul: Socialist Security

Paul tries to walk on both sides of the fence here. Sure, he says SS benefits shouldn’t be taxed, and he says that people shouldn’t be discouraged from saving on their own, but he also talks of “keeping our promise to our seniors”. So we find another liberal position, but one supported largely by Republicans, so to anyone opposing Paul on the grounds that he’s supposedly liberal, I say, “Pot, meet kettle.”

Ron Paul: The Second Amendment

I share our Founders’ belief that in a free society each citizen must have the right to keep and bear arms. They ratified the Second Amendment knowing that this right is the guardian of every other right, and they all would be horrified by the proliferation of unconstitutional legislation that prevents law-abiding Americans from exercising this right.

He goes on to include what he has done with regard to the Second Amendment:

* H.R. 1096 includes provisions repealing the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act and the Federal Firearms License Reform Act of 1993, two invasive and unconstitutional bills.
* H.R. 1897 would end the ban on carrying a firearm in the National Park System, restoring Americans’ ability to protect themselves in potentially hazardous situations.
* H.R. 3305 would allow pilots and specially assigned law enforcement personnel to carry firearms in order to protect airline passengers, possibly preventing future 9/11-style attacks.
* H.R. 1146 would end our membership in the United Nations, protecting us from their attempts to tax our guns or disarm us entirely.

In the past, I introduced legislation to repeal the so-called “assault weapons” ban before its 2004 sunset, and I will oppose any attempts to reinstate it.

All of these things are conservative – and right, though HR 3305 would be better to simply get the government out of things altogether and let the airlines decide who will and will not be allowed to pack heat on their aircraft.

Ron Paul: War and Foreign Policy

Here, I see Ron Paul carrying water for the nutcases selling us the “inside job” conspiracies regarding 9/11. I’d have to fisk this thing one point at a time, and have said plenty already. On these matters, Paul acts like Hanoi Jane and the rest of the pinko-commie whackjobs. It’s insulting to the conservative movement. He even goes on to imply (incorrectly) that Congress did not authorize the President’s use of military force in the Middle East. Maybe he didn’t vote for it, but it did carry.

So we have here a candidate who is a little bit liberal on Socialist Security and the tax code, something of an enviro-nutcase, and WAY out there when it comes to defense matters. On ever other issue, he is a staunch conservative and a defender of the Constitution. Granted, this is all based upon his own platform that he is using to try and win people to his campaign, but he hasn’t tried to hide his nutty positions on environmentalism and the war, so as long as he would stick to these positions (except where noted), he’d be quite the ideal president.

Does this mean I’m changing camps and going Ron Paul?? Of course not. I know I’m conservative, and I know America is not. Sure, the pendulum is swinging in the right direction, but most Americans have no clue what is in the Constitution to begin with, and that’s not going to change before November 2008. Still, you can’t justifiably call the man a “moonbat”, as I’ve seen time and again around the blogosphere. Fred Thompson is still my guy. Unfortunately, Paul supporters have this nutty tendency to spam polls, so we won’t know until the primaries start exactly what the task at hand really is. Educating Americans about her Constitution and history will be a tall order indeed, but less of one should we see real widespread grassroots support for Ron Paul. He has a snowball’s chance in hell, I think, but his candidacy has forced the Republicans to show their conservative credentials. He absolutely MUST be given credit for that. Someday, someone as conservative as Ron Paul may have a chance, but America’s just not ready for that.


Posted in Border SecuRWRity, Conservative Wins, New FedeRWRalism | Leave a Comment »

Poll: Thompson Wins in Stupid Debate

Posted by RightWingRocker on December 1, 2007

No. I didn’t watch the stupid debate this week. New Years is coming up, and there’s lots of preparation with a new band and all. First gig with them, in fact. Still, I found this poll Hawk did very interesting.

Who won the debate?

Tom Tancredo: 2%
Duncan Hunter: 6%
Rudy Giuliani: 7%
John McCain: 7%
Mitt Romney: 12%
Mike Huckabee: 22%
Fred Thompson: 44%

Who lost the debate?

Duncan Hunter: 1%
Tom Tancredo: 2%
John McCain: 3%
Mike Huckabee: 4%
Fred Thompson: 6%
Mitt Romney: 21%
Rudy Giuliani: 24%
Ron Paul: 40%

One thing was missing, though. When Hawk does a poll, he often analyzes the net result (in this case, subtracting the negatives from the positives). Here is how that would have panned out:

Guiliani: -14%
Romney: -9%
Tancredo: 0%
McCain: +4%
Hunter: +5%
Huckabee: +18%
Thompson: +38%

An important note on this poll is that Ron Paul was not offered as a choice for the winner. Hawk does this because he often winds up sifting through the pro-Paul vote having to weed out duplicate votes. The Ron Paul crowd simply isn’t honest when it comes to these things, unfortunately, so we will never get an accurate assessment of what people really think of Ron Paul. This is truly unfortunate, because Ron Paul brings something very important to the debate: far-right conservatism. Conservatism largely the way it ought to be. I disagree with Mr. Paul on a few key issues, but his desire to champion the Constitution is nothing short of admirable. Every candidate from every party should be thinking along those lines – another reason I’m a Thompson voter. It would be very useful to know how Americans really feel about Ron Paul because it would give us a better idea of exactly what we face from an education standpoint. Sure, he’s nutty on the war and 9/11, but to know where Americans stand on much of the rest of his platform would be truly instructive and useful in bringing America back into the Constitutional fray.

Anyway, form what I’ve heard about the debate, it was pretty stupid, and even included a Hitlery operative planting a question or two. For Fred to have won this debate is probably something very small, but perhaps the ability to handle himself effectively on the Communist News Network may make it larger. It’s definitely something that must be considered when making a decision, and it’s my sincere hope that Fred will come through in the final analysis.


Posted in Alternative Media, Border SecuRWRity, Confronting Libs, Conservative Wins, Liberal Bullshit, MSMadness, New FedeRWRalism, RWR in the 'Sphere | Leave a Comment »