RightWingRocker

Never mind the pajamas … We blog in the nude!

Archive for the ‘Border SecuRWRity’ Category

Playing it Smart: Hitlery

Posted by RightWingRocker on February 8, 2008

As promised, here’s the research on Hitlery’s proposals as outlined on her web site. A few notes about this research, as this site was much easier to navigate and was much better in its presentation than that of Barack Hussein bin Obama. The numbers were very surprising, though this could be blamed either on the redundancy of Obama’s presentation OR the simple fact that Hitlery is very smart in the way she presents things so as to make it seem good for America when the reverse is true.

I grabbed a quote or two that I found interesting. These two quotes were presented in the context of ripping President Bush for his understandable opposition to embryonic stem cell research, but it doesn’t take a very close look to see the disingenuousness in the statement. Simply apply them to her position on AIDS or, more obviously, man-made global warming, and you get the picture.

[Clinton will] ban political appointees from unduly interfering with scientific conclusions and publications.

This will be true ONLY as long as those “scientific conclusions and publications” are in sync with whatever she believes (or better, believes will increase her power).

It is important to … ensure that the President receives objective, fact-based advice.

OK. I’m going to cut in early here. The quote continues below. Again, what if the President gets objective, fact-based advice (Lord knows there’s already plenty of it out there) that suggests that there is nothing to worry about with regard to “global warming”, and that it’s not necessary to do anything to try to stop something that’s either not happening at all or, at least, is not being influenced by human activity? Do you really believe she’s going to accept that as “objective, fact-based advice”? I can answer that with two words: FAT FUCKING CHANCE (OK … three words. Who’s counting anyway?)

Hillary Clinton will reverse the Bush Administration’s irresponsible politicization of science.

and we are to believe this because? We’ve had eight years of a Republican president who has done ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to reverse prior administrations’ blatant, irresponsible, and frankly disgusting politicization of science vis-a-vis AIDS and “the environment”. Are we really to believe that Hitlery, who could have influenced her ex-President husband to do just that (and didn’t) is going to change this? BULLSHIT.

And this research, unfortunately, only reviews the constitutionality (read that LEGALITY) of those things shown on her website. Her prior assaults on the First and Second Amendments and how she would continue them are curiously omitted. So, how does her platform stack up against the Constitution of the United States of America? It comes in at 68% unconstitutional. More than two thirds of the things she admits to advocating are blatantly illegal under the limitations placed upon her as president, and frankly, as Senator – the office she currently holds.

Is she more dangerous that Barack the Schlock? Not likely. Her convenient omissions would definitely play well with the socialists in Congress, particularly Pelosi and her minions. None of them give a rat’s ass after a cheese shit what the Constitution says their limitations are. Barack at least tells you what he’s about on his website, even if he never mentions it in public. There could be omissions there, but who would expect that from a guy who keeps saying the same things over and over and over? Besides, we have had eight years of a president whom we elected for that very reason, and the only real benefits were healthy tax cuts and a strong stand on terrorism. No Child Left Behind? Please.

Just more proof that no liberal is fit for office in the US government. Next up: Johnny McShitPie

RWR

Related:
Barack Obama – 84% Unconstitutional – 2/7/2008

Posted in Border SecuRWRity, Confronting Libs, Decision 2008, Liberal Bullshit, New FedeRWRalism | Leave a Comment »

A Little Research: Obama

Posted by RightWingRocker on February 7, 2008

This will be much more important when I do it for the Republicans, i know, because that will show just how screwed up they are. I started this project with Barack (the Schlock) Obama because he’s been the big surprise this year – another reason Republicans all over America are being stupid by choosing a field of Democrat wannabes for their candidate.

Obama is KICKING HITLERY’S ASS in the primaries. Not well enough to beat her, but clearly well enough to drain her resources enough to put WHOMEVER WE WANT into the White House with as little fight from the Left as possible. Instead, we send in our most left-leaning senators and governors, virtually guaranteeing either a Hitlery presidency or a liberal Republican, which is just as bad – especially considering these assholes are all claiming to be conservative. Well, it worked for da Schickmeister; might as well try it in our party. NOT.

Of course, anyone who comes to this blog with any degree of frequency knows that my biggest beef with both Democrats and Republicans is their ignorance of the limits placed upon them by the Constitution. This tidbit of research on the five remaining candidates will, as one would expect, focus on this matter.

Before I get into this, I want to explain how I arrived at my result. This was a difficult bit of research to do, given that Obama’s website is annoyingly overrun with redundancies that forced me to stop reading about halfway through it. Not my favorite thing to do, but there was plenty there (redundancy notwithstanding) to get a good clear picture of what this guy says he’s going to do. I reviewed over a hundred proposals/promises, and I cannot emphasize enough that the warnings are all right there on Obama’s campaign site. Elect this man at your own peril.

Before I get into the verdict, I’ll pay Obama a compliment. There was one thing I saw n his site that was clearly refreshing, and I think any conservative would strongly support it:

As president, Obama will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days.

Refreshing indeed. Not too shabby coming from a Donk. Sounds more like something Fred or Ron Paul would advocate.

Still, it’s nowhere near enough by any measure to elect Barack Obama to the office of President of the United States. His site also reveals that he supports Hitlerycare, something he has fought Mrs. Clinton tooth and nail over throughout this primary season. Mr. Obama, universal health care is universal health care. You’re better off just agreeing with the bitch on that one and trying to find somewhere you differ, however difficult that may be. Mr. Obama also has published a blatant and obvious lie on his website for all to see (if they decide to read it). the site asserts that Obama is:

… the only 2008 candidate to have sponsored Russ Feingold’s tough bill to reform the presidential public financing system.

Not that that’s a good thing, even if it were true that Obama, and not John McShithead were the driving force in sponsoring that bill. Here, Obama’s campaign is openly supporting the blatant repeal of the First Amendment that is McCain-Feingold (not Obama-Feingold).

With allowances made for redundant statements, Mr. Obama’s proposals came in at a whopping 84% – yes, you read that right, EIGHTY-FOUR PERCENT – unconstitutional (read that ILLEGAL). Fully eighty-four percent of what Mr. Obama wants to do as president is outside the legal boundaries of that office and/or the federal government. And that’s only stopping halfway. What’s the likelihood that the other half would be any better? I say nil. In fact, given all the repetition I endured in reading this guy’s platform, I’d say I’d most likely be reading more of the same stuff I’d already read. Not a very well-written website. At least when I endured Ron Paul’s platform, everything I read was new material when I read it.

Next in the corsshairs: Hitlery.

RWR

Posted in Alternative Media, Border SecuRWRity, Confronting Libs, Decision 2008, Liberal Bullshit, New FedeRWRalism | Leave a Comment »

From the Desk of Delftsman …

Posted by RightWingRocker on February 6, 2008

Delfts has been kinda quiet of late, but has posted a few times recently. I hope he’s doing well. Today I found this posted at his blog.

Am Your Worst Nightmare. I am a BAD American.

I believe the money I make belongs to me and my family, not some mid level governmental functionary, be it Democratic or Republican!

I believe that owning a gun doesn’t make you a killer, I believe it makes you a smart American. (Unless you own a gun and are afraid to use it.)

I believe that being a minority does not make you noble or victimized, and does not entitle you to anything.

I believe that if you are selling me a Big Mac, do it in English.

I believe everyone has a right to pray to his or her God when and where they want to.

My heroes are John Wayne, Babe Ruth, Roy Rogers, and whoever canceled Jerry Springer.

I don’t hate the rich. I don’t pity the poor.

I know wrestling is fake and I don’t waste my time watching or arguing about it.

I’ve never owned a slave, or was a slave, and I WILL NOT pay reparations for something that I didn’t do.

I haven’t burned any witches or been persecuted by the Turks and neither have you! So shut up already.

This is AMERICA, I believe if you don’t like the way things are here, go back to where you came from and change your own country!

I want to know which church it is exactly, where the Reverend Jesse Jackson preaches, where he gets his money, and why he is always part of the problem and not the solution. Can I get an AMEN on that one?

I think the cops have every right to shoot your sorry ass if you’re running from them, because if you’re not guilty, WHY are you running?

I also think the cops have the right to pull you over if you’re breaking the law, regardless of what color you are, that’s the job we’re paying them to do.

(RWR note: I further believe that if the cops are violating your constitutional rights, you have the constitutional right to use your gun against them – this is what the Second amendment is for.)

And, no, I don’t mind having my face shown on my drivers license. I think it’s good, it lets you know it’s really me.

I’m proud that the word ‘God’ is written on my money.

I believe that if you are too stupid to know how a ballot works, I don’t want you deciding who should be running the most powerful nation in the world for the next four years.

I dislike those people standing in the intersections trying to sell me stuff or trying to guilt me into making ‘donations’ to their cause.

I believe that it doesn’t take a village to raise a child, it takes two parents.

I believe ‘illegal’ is illegal no matter what the lawmakers think.

(RWR note: If lawmakers want to create laws that deem things illegal, they should make those laws simple and easy enough to read and understand without the aid of a lawyer.)

I believe the American flag should be the only one allowed to fly over American soil! If you want to fly the flag of YOUR nation at the top of a flag pole, by all means, do so, IN YOUR OWN NATION! And if the American flag is NOT your flag, then this is NOT your nation.

If this makes me a BAD American or causes you to classify me as a racist, then yes, I’m a BAD American and a racist.

If you’re a BAD American, if you share the same feelings and beliefs that I do, please, copy and post this on your web site for everyone to see.

We want our country back! GOD BLESS AMERICA!

AMEN.

Delfts always seems to hit it out of the park, doesn’t he?

RWR

Posted in Alternative Media, Border SecuRWRity, Confronting Libs, RWR in the 'Sphere | Leave a Comment »

Blogoversary Tomorrow!

Posted by RightWingRocker on January 31, 2008

Yes, I know I’ve been quiet, and it hasn’t necessarily been due to a lack of time or thoughts.  Still, I plan to keep blogging – and being as loud a voice as I can for the cause of the Founding Fathers, which seems to be in some serious jeopardy.  Realistically, four candidates remain for President of the US, and all of them are liberals, including the Republicans.

We vote here on Super Tuesday, and Fred Thompson, though withdrawn from the race, is on the ballot.  I will be casting my vote for him, both on Tuesday, and as a write-in in the November election.  Pro-Thompson advertising will continue on this site as well.

What, you say?  Rocker not vote for the Republican in an election this crucial to America’s future?  Consider the following: My vote will not influence the outcome, and we’re stuck with a useless liberal in the White House regardless.  I can cast a “statement vote” with no need to worry about its ultimate effect on the outcome.  New Jersey consistently goes to the Democrat in election after election.  The people of this state consistently elect liberal governors (the last “conservative” governor was Tom Kean), and ones that are as dangerous as Hitlery (Florio, McGreevey, Corzine).  Even Christine Todd Whitman was RINO to the max.  As as result, we already have here what Hitlery, Barack, Mitt, and McCain are trying to get for America.  The reason I stay here is family and friends.  Roots are roots.  Not much you can do at this stage of life except to do what you can to change things in the hope that there will be some benefit for your children and grandchildren.

Which is what I intend to do.  The Founding Fathers did not put their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor on the line so that we could all just sit here and piss their dream away.  It is up to ALL who cherish that dream to stand up to these liberals and win back the freedom that these men fought and died for.  I am up to the task.  I will do everything in my power to rescue this ideal from those who threaten it.  I believe in the wisdom of the American people, and that once reality sets in, the America of our Founders will be at hand.

I do believe that the time is finally here for conservatives to form ourselves a new party – one dedicated to re-establishing the freedoms that our forefathers gave us, and that the Left has taken away.  It seems to me that that will be the only way Americans will listen.  The major parties are finally devoid of all credibility when it comes to American history and ideals.  If Mitt Romney is the best the Republicans can do, then they’re just as out of touch as the Democrats.  I would suggest naming the party the “Federalist” or “Patriot” party in honor of those who stood up for freedom over two centuries ago.  THIS will be the true party of Ronald Reagan, not these idiot liberals who consistently try to portray themselves as the next Reagan when they aren’t even fit to lick his decomposing ass.

The education of America must begin now, and without delay.  I’m up to the task.  Are you?

RWR

Posted in Alternative Media, Border SecuRWRity, Confronting Libs, Decision 2008, Liberal Bullshit, New FedeRWRalism | Leave a Comment »

Fred Wants to Win

Posted by RightWingRocker on January 14, 2008

Perfect message, but just a little too late, say some South Carolinians.  I say bullshit.

If you agree with the message of the candidate, whether that candidate is Fred Thompson, Ron Paul, Rudy Giuiliani, Mitt, McCain, or even Hitlery, then you have a RESPONSIBILITY to vote that way in the primaries.  That’s what primaries are for – finding out which candidate is most in line with the beliefs and philosophies of the party’s voters.  If you think Fred’s message is perfect, then you absolutely MUST cast your primary vote that way.

Interestingly enough, Fred’s message is the one that happens to be closest to President Reagan’s (I’m bringing that up since the South Carolina debate seemed to be a contest of who could be the most Reagan-like).  Don’t you just love Rudy’s statement that he would mount a 50-state campaign to win the election just like Reagan did – made on the very same day he pulled all his staffers out of South Carolina and Michigan?  Nice 50-state campaign, you dork.  Rush often says that conservatism wins every time it’s tried, and I do believe he’s right.  Americans gravitate toward it, and its implementation is always successful.  Indeed, when a conservative president gets into trouble, it’s almost always for doing something liberal – like raise taxes.

There’s no doubt in my mind that Fred Thompson wants to win this election.  None at all.  However, his campaign staff stopped sending emails right after the Iowa caucuses.  How exactly do they expect to raise the needed funds to get anywhere?  How do they think we’re going to get the only electable conservative elected by just sitting around on their asses and doing nothing?

To the Thompson campaign, I say this:  Get off your sorry asses and get them into gear.  Fred is the last hope we have of having a conservative president take over in 2009 after 20 years of liberal bullshit in the White House.  Other than Fred, neither party offers anything but liberals.  This election should be a breeze – and the primaries should be the easy part.  Why are you idiots making such a farce out of it?

RWR

Posted in Alternative Media, Border SecuRWRity, Confronting Libs, Conservative Wins, Decision 2008, Liberal Bullshit, MSMadness, New FedeRWRalism | Leave a Comment »

Iowa: Winners and Losers

Posted by RightWingRocker on January 5, 2008

The results are in in Iowa.

With all the resources she poured into Iowa, it’s a HUGE loss for Hitlery, and just as huge a win for Barack the Schlock. Make no mistake about it, Democrats there went for the newcomer, and BIG.

On our side, Fred Thompson was the clear winner of the three conservatives in the race, and if this caucus meant anything to Duncan Hunter, he’s done.

I also don’t see this as a huge win for Mike Huckabee, as he has a following in Iowa that simply cannot be discounted. Congratulations to him on the victory, but he’s not looking at doing as well elsewhere. Romney was as big a loser as Hitlery, thank God. Mitt was counting on Iowa, and will now have to rethink his strategy.

So, the biggest winner of the day was obviously Barack Obama. Hard to say whether the bigger loser is Hitlery or Mitt, as they both had put a lot into this one, and were both counting on easy wins. Hell, even The Breck Girl edged that witch out by a few tenths of a point!

As a note here, most analyses of Huckabee will show that he generally believes in conservative principles, but he also advocates using the government as an engine for applying them, even where the Constitution doesn’t allow it. This is the reason I have not been including Huck in the “conservative” camp. Abortion is the perfect example. Huck and real conservatives like myself (yes I know every conservative considers his own brand of conservatism as the only “real” brand of conservatism, but at least those of my stripe have the Constitution to stand with) both agree that abortion is the termination of a human life that should have been protected, and I applaud his work in getting a human life amendment passed in Arkansas. While I do support a federal amendment of that nature, I do not support any language contained therein making abortion a federal crime. After all, murder isn’t a federal crime, so why should abortion be? Let the states have that jurisdiction (which can easily be included in any human life amendment, by the way). Huckabee has explicitly stated that the states shouldn’t have this power, even though the Constitution doesn’t offer it to the fed – one size fits all, the typical liberal way of doing things. The overall analysis of Huck’s lack of conservative application of his conservative beliefs is material for another post.

Here’s something Sage will love to hear: Ron Paul beat Rudy 10.1% to 3.5%. I’m liking this too, except for one little detail: Rudy didn’t bother campaigning in Iowa, so who could have expected him to perform there? This makes it hard to gauge how successful he may have been, as he obviously didn’t care much how he did there – and I have NO information on what the Paul campaign was up to in Iowa.

As for the Thompson campaign, we did do a lot of work in Iowa, and were expecting somewhere between 10 and 15% of the vote. With that accomplished, we can move on to New Hampshire understanding that we have reached our goal so far. This caucus pretty much shows that Fred is the best-chanced conservative in the race.

In the meantime, it’s on to New Hampshire. Congrats to Mike and Barack. Go Fred!

RWR

Posted in Border SecuRWRity, Decision 2008, New FedeRWRalism, RWRandom Thoughts | 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.

RWR

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.

RWR

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

Thompson on Gun Control

Posted by RightWingRocker on October 30, 2007

David over at The Gun Nut was able to get this statement from Fred Thompson on gun control, specifically the UN’s position with regard to it:

Last year, the United Nations Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights declared that international human rights law requires all nations to adopt strict gun control laws. These “minimum” provisions are much more restrictive than any of those on the books anywhere in the U.S. and would almost certainly violate the Second Amendment of our Constitution.

Besides concluding that all nations are obligated under international human rights law to control the small arms and light weapons to which its civilian population has access, the UN report remarkably denied the existence of any human right to self-defense, evidently overlooking the work of Hugo Grotius, the 17th century scholar credited as the founder of international law, who wrote, “It is to be observed that [the] Right of Self-Defence, arises directly and immediately from the Care of our own Preservation, which Nature recommends to every one. . . ,” and that this right is so primary, that it cannot be denied on the basis that it is not “expressly set forth.”

There is another disturbing aspect to this call for international global gun control. Throughout modern history, the forced disarmament of people by its government has often been accompanied or followed by that government’s commission of often massive human rights abuses. In fact, no genocide in the 20th century occurred when the victim population still possessed small arms, legally or illegally, with which to defend themselves.

So now the UN wants to disarm civilians? Where was the UN when the massacres in Rwanda occurred? What did the UN do to protect the victims of ethnic massacres in Bosnia? Disarming civilians under the guise of international human rights law will only lead to more such genocides by ensuring that civilians can never defend themselves! It would be funny if it weren’t so perverse.

Thankfully, the Framers of our Constitution recognized this potential peril to our liberty, and enshrined in our Second Amendment the more basic right of self-defense. The U.N. can say what it likes about other countries’ citizens’ possession of small arms being a violation of human rights law, but so long as the United States is a sovereign nation governed by its Constitution, its words will have no effect here. And I am glad for it.

I don’t care who you support for the presidency. This position is precisely correct, and as such is, and of right ought to be, a MINIMUM requirement for anyone wishing to hold the office of President of the United States.

America will be wise to accept no less.

RWR

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

Annoying Liberals

Posted by RightWingRocker on September 29, 2007

It’s been a while since we’ve had a liberal around for intelligent discourse. Of late, though, we have had a barking moonbat who seems to get his talking points from Cindy Sheehag, MoveOn and the “Truthers”. OK, well so much for intelligent discourse, but there’s always fun to be had slapping a lib around with the Immortal Cluebat, especially one that comes to a gun fight armed with a slingshot.

These liberals have no concept of reality. They love to tell you that constitutionalists are a dying breed, and wow, what a great thing that is. They love to tell you President Reagan was a moron, despite all his achievements while in office. They love to tell you that war is illegal. In a nutshell, to them the laughable is reality, and reality is, well, they wouldn’t know reality if it slapped them in the face.

How many liberals do you know that encourage race-baiting, giving their full support to racist statements and diatribes that come from the likes of Jesse Jackson, Louis Farrakhan, and Robert Byrd?

How many liberals do you know that champion the “rights” of millions of illegal aliens who refuse to obey our laws, organize violent gangs in our country, and have openly asserted that America is part of THEIR country that they are going to take back?

How many liberals do you know that openly believe that the purpose of government is to provide the opportunity for a livelihood and way of life for the citizens?

How many liberals do you know that are so completely taken over with Bush Derangement Syndrome that they can’t help but blame this President for everything that they see as wrong, including high gas prices?

How many liberals do you know that openly try to accuse the president of starting a war for personal gain (implying that any gains should be redistributed to the people)?

How many liberals do you know that openly advocate nationalizing everything from health care to the price of milk?

How many liberals do you know that openly advocate high taxes so that they can decide who to give the money to?

How many liberals do you know that expect the rest of us to assume that everything can and should be done by the federal government?

How many liberals do you know that treat wealthy people and their money with disdain?

How many liberals do you know that expect the federal government to run all of the schools?

How many liberals do you know that justify the imposition of their socialist agenda by invoking children?

How many liberals do you know that constantly bemoan anyone’s practice of religious freedom?

How many liberals do you know that want a centralized government to run all of the above?

These are all things about liberals that annoy me. What’s worse is that many of them come here championing these things with no idea how ridiculous they are being by doing so, and refuse to engage in a meaningful discussion of any issues. It’s all a bunch of name-calling and lying on their part.

Constitutionalists are part of a growing movement in America. A movement that is marked by recognition of the failed socialist policies of the 20th century and a desire to champion the ideals of the Founding Fathers. A great thing indeed, and lucky for us, the libs don’t even see it coming.

President Reagan was a genius, and an immensely popular one at that. Demonizing him only discredits the liberals. It’s a fool’s game to label a man a moron when he virtually single-handedly brought down the most evil empire the world had ever seen (ok ok … Marge and JP helped … ), brought a balanced budget to within reach by cutting taxes, and was smart enough to find a way to win re-election with almost a clean sweep.

Wars are going to happen. It’s a simple fact of the world. No one likes them, but when you are attacked by ruthless warriors, you must respond as ruthless warriors. The best way to prevent war is to be more prepared for it than your enemies and be prepared to prove it when they test you. Mr. Bush’s unpopularity with regard to the war is not a positive response to cronies like Cindy Sheehag who oppose the war because the guy at the helm is less of a socialist than they are, but because he stopped fighting long before it was appropriate to do so. He failed to cut off the hand that was feeding the terrorists, as an Iraqi friend of mine once suggested. This president’s willingness to answer the terrorists’ declaration of war with rockets and bombs is admirable. His failure to keep fighting as appropriate is his downfall in this regard.

Of course, no liberal will ever admit that – at least publicly; but watch the leading Donk presidential candidates put forth their plans for the War on Terror, and listen closely to what they will entail. You’re not going to be looking at a cut-n-run strategy from any of them that really want to win.

Libs are annoying. Funny, but annoying. Some of the best laughs I have ever had have come at the expense of liberals being stupid. Remember when Bill Clinton came on TV and told all of America that the Blizzard of ’96 was caused by “global warming”?? I almost suffocated that day.

Funny, but annoying.

RWR

Posted in Alternative Media, Border SecuRWRity, Confronting Libs, Conservative Wins, Funny Shit, Liberal Bullshit, New FedeRWRalism, TerrorAsses | Leave a Comment »

Idiocy Revisited

Posted by RightWingRocker on September 10, 2007

Well, surfing about this afternoon, I came across this:

What a gas!

Let’s have a little fun with this, shall we?

People are dying in a war based on inaccurate facts.

OK. Someone hand this idiot a dictionary, and quick.

Facts, by definition are NOT inaccurate. And what facts are you disputing anyway? Osama bin Laden ordered the massacre of thousands of Americans, and we are to sit idly by? Saddam Hussein offers big cash rewards to the families of suicide bombers for killing Americans, and we are supposed to just laugh it up?

These people are against disarming the likes of bin Laden and Hussein, but they have absolutely NO PROBLEM with advocating laws that disarm innocent Americans who have a legally protected right to arm themselves. What kind of fucked up logic is that???

Our government is corrupt.

Go figure. So is every other government that has existed in the history of this world. Are you going to tell me that the Bush Administration is more corrupt than the Hussein regime?? Get real.

Gas prices still keep going up.

Blame that on liberal enviro-nut regulation. Hey, if your corrupt government officials gave two shits about your gas prices, they could shave 18 cents per gallon off the price TOMORROW with ONE VOTE. Instead they complain about how Americans are selfish with their energy use. What fucking hypocrites.

Homes are being destroyed in natural disasters.

Um … What exactly is your point here? Are you trying to say that living in an area prone to, say, earthquakes, doesn’t make your home a target for destruction by mother nature? If someone builds a house in a flood zone, he runs the risk of losing his home in a flood … even if he buys flood insurance – go figure.

It’s just that damned Mother Nature. If we would all just drive hybrids, she just might stop tearing up our towns with tornadoes, floods, hurricanes, and earthquakes. Are we seeing the lunacy here yet?

Children are being abused by their families.

So what’s your answer?? Taking all the kids from their parents so the government can abuse them even more? Is there anyone left that buys this bleeding heart bullshit?

The local pedophile may be a priest.

He/she may also be a teacher, principal, bartender, automobile salesman, garbage truck driver, secretary, or dentist. What exactly is your point?

Poverty still exists even though we are the richest nation in the world.

Again, SO FUCKING WHAT? We are also the country with the most opportunity for those same impoverished people to overcome that poverty. The fact that they choose not to isn’t anyone’s fault but their own.

There is still no cure for AIDS.

Nope there isn’t – and there’s also no cure for heart disease or lung cancer, both of which are more dangerous and innocently spread than AIDS. Yet how much more attention (and unconstitutional money) does AIDS get, even though it’s spread behaviorally?

Yet another Bush could still become our President.

With your luck, it’ll be Jenna. I wonder why you’re not so worried about an anti-American socialist named Hitlery becoming president … That would be “another” Clinton, and a much more dangerous one at that.

All this and you’re still going to focus on my sexuality?

I haven’t said anything about your sexuality. Quite frankly, I couldn’t give two shits.

Someone smack this moron.

RWR

Posted in Alternative Media, Border SecuRWRity, Confronting Libs, Liberal Bullshit, RWR in the 'Sphere, RWRants, TerrorAsses | Leave a Comment »

Moonbat Monitor Socks it to Calderon

Posted by RightWingRocker on September 4, 2007

Moonbat Monitor has done it again.

In response to Farks wannabe Felipe Calderon’s assertions that Mexico has no borders, Moonbat Monitor hit back with this:

Dear Mr. Calderon,

I feel it is my duty to advise you of an invention from long ago that is still used to this very day. This amazing invention is called a “map.” On this “map” thing, you will in fact see that although there might be Mexicans here in the US, it is not in fact Mexico. You see, there are these line thingys on “maps” called “borders,” and when looking at these “borders,” you will notice your country ends at one point and ours begins. Therefore realizing this, I think it would be appropriate for you to amend or retract your statements in regards to your country never ending. They’re wrong. My map says so. And perhaps you can have one of the millions of your citizens that have invaded our country shoplift one of these fancy “maps” and send it to you so you can fully understand this concept.

Sarcastically and not so respectfully,

-Moonbat Monitor.

I couldn’t have said it better myself.

My words for Mr. Calderon are a little simpler:

If you have a problem with the US making and enforcing our own laws, shut the fuck up and declare war already. The US could use a little more land to the south, your subjects in Mexico would wind up with all the rights of real US citizens – and without the oppressive socialism they come to America to escape, and defending a border with Belize and Guatemala would be considerably easier than this long border we have right now.

Go ahead – IF you think you can win.

RWR

Update 9/7: Moonbat Monitor has been honored as an Honorable Soldier of the RWRmy for his appropriate treatment of liberals … More to come …

Posted in Alternative Media, Border SecuRWRity, Confronting Libs, Liberal Bullshit, MSMadness, New FedeRWRalism, TerrorAsses | Leave a Comment »

One Year Later

Posted by RightWingRocker on August 25, 2007

I swung by today before typing my class notes for the week and noticed I had as many hits as I would typically have had on an average blogging day – and I haven’t had an average day blogging for quite some time. I realized that a year had passed since the last time I posted about having won that bet with Freder_Frederson, and figured some people may have come by to see if I had anything to say about it.

Not that I have much to say. CENTCOM still isn’t reporting anything about a civil war raging in Iraq, Bryan has been quiet (and I do know that he’s been re-deployed somewhere, possibly even Iraq), Omar’s most recent mention of it was this past June, and it went something like this:

For over a year the media and many officials were spooking us with the exaggerated ghost of civil war.

Mohammed, also this past June:

Attacking the Askari shrine for the second time emphasizes how those who ordered the attacks have been betting their money on this tactic to spark civil war in Iraq.

So … Still no civil war in Iraq.  And, of course, still no steak dinner from Freder.  No surprise.  For Freder, the civil war started the day President Bush took the Oath of Office.

All this talk of civil war was for the purpose of discrediting the President.  Why not discredit him for laying off Iran and Syria?  Why not discredit him for refusing to secure the borders?  After all, if you want to discredit President Bush, those are two areas in which he is particularly vulnerable.

Of course, the answer to those questions is simple.  Liberals are even LESS credible on those issues than the President.  The criticism he gets from Iraqis isn’t from dethroning Saddam or failing to contain the terrorists there.  The Iraqis are all too aware that these kinds of problems were going to exist.  Iraqis complain that President Bush didn’t cut off the “insurgency” at its source (Iran and Syria), not that he dethroned Saddam.

The libs are also on the same side as the President when it comes to securing the borders.  They’re mostly for amnesty and against fencing off the Southern border.  They’re just as fucked up as the President when it comes to that as well.

Still, imagine what we would have had with a President Gore or Fuckweasel.  I shudder to think.  I’ll take ANY of the candidates running for the Republican nomination over Hitlery or Barack the Schlock, and you can rest assured that that’s where the Donks are headed – right into Hitlery’s concentration camp.  I’ll take eight years of a liberal Republican over her socialism any day – better to complain about the erosion of rights over time and have it eventually be reversible than to have to live under a Hitlery regime that could possibly convince America to give up our sacred Constitution and never go away.  If you don’t think Hitlery is capable of that, you had better look again.

She and people like Freder are the greatest threat our Constitution has faced in the history of our Republic.

RWR

Posted in Alternative Media, Border SecuRWRity, Confronting Libs, Conservative Wins, Liberal Bullshit, RWR in the 'Sphere, RWRandom Thoughts, TerrorAsses | Leave a Comment »

Yeah, Right

Posted by RightWingRocker on August 17, 2007

This pathetic old bitch says these bullets hit her house during a coalition raid.

Does she think we are a bunch of fucking idiots here???

What kind of loony-left-style pity party is she expecting???

Now, without divulging what makes this picture such a farce, will somebody PLEASE slap this moron a few times with the ClueBat???

I wish I had the time.

RWR

(h/t to him who provided the pic … he knows who he is … )

Posted in Border SecuRWRity, Liberal Bullshit | 2 Comments »

Stop Waiting for a Reagan

Posted by RightWingRocker on August 7, 2007

So says John Hawkins.

While John is absolutely right with regard to everything he has said in this piece, I have just one thing to say about it:

Regardless of whether there will be another Reagan in our lifetimes, or for that matter ever for this country, the litmus test for any candidate is and should be his proximity to President Reagan on the various issues. What would Reagan have done? Is a question every American conservative should ask when considering a candidate’s position on an issue.

Sorry, folks. I just don’t have time to say any more. Besides, what else needs to be said?

RWR

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

Wise Words at RWN

Posted by RightWingRocker on June 12, 2007

I visited this post today over at RWN, and added my input to the comment thread. I found my words particularly wise, and those of the other commentors well-meaning but missing the point.

Hawk had posted an excerpt from President Reagan’s “Tear Down This Wall” speech (one of the greatest speeches ever made by any orator), and the first comment was from a liberal troll calling himself “rmiller”.

So simple, yet one of the most subversive statements of the late 20th century.

Posted by rmiller
June 12, 2007 7:51 AM

Of course, the conservative defense of Ronaldus Maximus came right away, starting with Don_cos, normally a very reasonable and intelligent commentor, who basically accused rmiller of ulterior motives in his comment. Rmiller defended himself, and another lib rushed to his aid.

At no time, however was there a comment about the REAL issue generated by rmiller’s comment, which, while being a pretty dumb thing to say, was still thought-provoking. What about the issue of whether Reagan was right to say subversive things about a regime as evil as the USSR? That’s where my comment came in:

Subversive?

Hmm …

Subversive – a systematic attempt to overthrow or undermine a government or political system

Systematic attempt to overthrow or undermine a government or political system? Check.

So what?

The question we should all be asking ourselves in this thread after reading this negative and asinine, yet thought-provoking comment by rmiller is this:

Was President Reagan right to make subversive statements with regard to the Soviet Union?

With 20/20 hindsight as our guide, no reasonable person could possibly disagree with the assertion that President Reagan was ABSOLUTELY RIGHT in his utterance of EVERY WORD. Let the libs say the USSR would have crumbled under its own weight all they want. It didn’t happen that way, and if it did, it would only have served as more proof of the idiocy of the communist/socialist culture they advocate.

Until Americans begin to understand and espouse the concept of the Founders’ vision and denounce socialism once and for all, we are at serious risk of facing the same fate as the USSR.

A very wise commentor at my blog once said, “A man is none the less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master every four years.” We must begin immediately to dismantle the socialism that eats away at the very soul of our nation. The very freedoms we hold dear are in jeopardy.

RWR
http://www.rightwingrocker.com

Posted by RightWingRocker
June 12, 2007 7:46 PM

Ronald Reagan was the greatest president of the 20th century. His domestic policy brought forth economic growth the likes of which had never been seen before in peacetime, and his foreign policy brought down an evil empire.

I believe my response to this thread at RWN to be the appropriate defense of President Reagan – not the “yeah, well he brought down the Soviet Union so never mind what you think of him” defense.  The fact that President Reagan made subversive remarks is merely academic, especially when those subversive remarks inspired millions of people to stand up to those forcing socialism and communism into their lives.

If only Americans cared as much about their own freedom.  Who will inspire Americans to stand against the socialists here in our own land??

RWR

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

Civil War in Iraq

Posted by RightWingRocker on June 7, 2007

Well it seems Freder_Frederson finally got his civil war in Iraq.

Too bad for him it’s just terrorists fighting each other over something neither of them really controls.

Yup, the Shi’ites have been hanging in there in trying to establish something that may resemble (on some level) a free nation, and the Sunnis and al-Qaeda have obviously been so frustrated with their resolve that they’ve taken to fighting each other.

Who was it that said they wouldn’t advocate the US sending soldiers into Iraq for purposes of containing a civil war?  I say just get everyone else out of the war zone and let the terrorists all kill each other – then drop a bomb on those that are left.  For a civil war that was supposed to force us to turn tail and run, this is really awfully funny.  They’re saving us billions of dollars in ammunition and countless lives.  All in the process of annihilating themselves so that we can achieve our victory with them doing all the work for us.

Somebody please pass the popcorn.

RWR

Posted in Border SecuRWRity, Funny Shit, KABOOM!, TerrorAsses | Leave a Comment »

Answers for Ol’ BC

Posted by RightWingRocker on June 6, 2007

Ol’ BC first came to the RWRepublic in its infancy. Since then, he is without question the most loyal reader I have. Last night, he posted some interesting questions in the wake of the incredible waste of time that passed for a debate. There were, of course, largely obvious answers to all of them, so I figured, Why not …

Do the Democrats who are running REALLY think they represent the views of a majority of Americans?

Yup. They think Americans are stupid socialist idiots who not only believe that they have no clue whatsoever how to run their own lives, but that they need a Barack the Schlock or a Hitlery to run it for them. They really believe that the backlash against President Bush is because he’s a Republican and not because he’s nearly as liberal as they are. Why else would they be promising all this stuff that no one really needs or wants?

If the U.S. pulls out of Iraq, do some of these candidates REALLY think the Islamic terrorists are just going to terrorize one another and leave the non-Muslims alone?

Worse. They think the terrorists will cease to be terrorists and live quiet, happy lives sitting around campfires singing “Kum Ba Ya”. They think that only Americans are capable of greed and selfishness and that making everyone’s situation the same (poverty by force if necessary) will lead to peace. They think that they are the only people who are capable of making anyone happy, and that even the terrorists will “see the light” if only we just appease them (Neville Chamberlain was unfortunately unavailable for comment).

How are the deaths of those in the Darfur region different than the hundreds of thousands of deaths of Arabs and Kurds under Saddam Hussein?

In one very important, but nonetheless rather irrelevant way. What’s going on in Darfur is actually a bona-fide Civil War, unlike anything we’ve seen in Iraq.

Pro-choice versus Pro-life, what’s with the exceptions? If I was born in 1955 or 1975 as the result of a pregnancy by rape or incest or if my mother died during childbirth, am I less of a person than the majority of the other people? If not, why the exceptions? Is a fetus a life or not at conception? At one month? At two months? Are most pro-lifers only part time?

Every American grapples with this issue, whether pro-life or pro-child murder. No child is any less a person just because he/she is still in the womb. The reason we make exceptions has to do with violation of the rights of the mother. It’s very difficult to reconcile this. If it is clear that the mother is going to die from carrying the baby to term (an EXTREMELY RARE situation), then her God-given right to life is threatened, and we have a responsibility to protect it. How do we also protect the baby’s similar God-given right? At this time, we are in the unfortunate position of not having any idea. In the interests of preserving her family unit, and with the understanding that one of these very important people (the mother or the baby) is going to die, we make a choice as to whom we save. In choosing to save the mother, we preserve her ability to bring more children into the world in the future, and we save her family from the emotional and economic disaster that might have followed. Nonetheless, we grieve the loss of the child.

As to rape and incest, we make these allowances as a peace offering to the pro-murder crowd. Of course, it’s gotten us nowhere. The Constitution Party states that we shouldn’t be punishing the child for the sins of his/her father, but if a woman has not consented to the act, then should she be considered to have consented to the pregnancy? Conversely, doesn’t it solidify the pro-life position if the position is taken that by consenting to an act that is known to have pregnancy as a consequence, one has consented to the resulting pregnancy?? After all, that is precisely the position taken by those who advocate a woman killing her baby and simultaneously advocate forcing a father to finance a child’s life against his will should the mother choose life.

What happened to the specific powers granted to the federal government in the constitution? I missed the entire education and healthcare section. There has been a lot of talk about heaping on more and very little about rescinding any. What about all others being reserved for the states? Eerie silence.

Those specific powers are still there, along with a slew of others that have been added illegally by those elected to office with the consent of their constituents. This question is truly what the New Federalism seeks to address. America needs a wake-up call.

Do that many of the candidates REALLY think that if they grant amnesty to illegal aliens already in this country no more are going to sneak in?

Nope. They know all too well what will happen – and it’s exactly what they want. Face it, with all of their support of killing off babies that could have been voting for liberal candidates, they’re running out of people to vote for them. It’s happening a lot faster than they anticipated. Liberals need a new constituency, and if they can import one, all the better for them. Do you really think they are fighting this hard so that these people can vote for conservatives??? If these people seriously cared about bringing more people into the prosperity that is America, they’d be falling all over themselves trying to get large numbers of Israelis to move here so that the terrorists could have the land they want. Why isn’t THAT happening??

It’s not happening because Israelis generally would be voting in favor of fighting off terrorists, lowering taxes, and bringing government back to within its legal limits. They are largely well-educated and well-off. Those they are trying to get your heart to bleed over are largely neither. They’re not looking for people who will be independent. They are looking for people who will need liberals for their well-being.

Have that many of the candidates forgotten that learning English opened doors to success for millions of Germans, Italians, Israelis and scads of others for years and years?

Nope. The problem is that they don’t want those doors to be opened. They want the doors closed so that they can have their little dependency class and force you and me and the rest of America to pay for it.

Why weren’t signs and information printed in eighteen languages for all those years if it is that critical?

Because it’s not critical at all…

Could it actually hold people back and keep them living at a subsistence level?

That is precisely the point, and it’s exactly why there is a move on to force every language but English on all of us. I’m not saying that English is what makes people successful. What I’m saying is that English, by sheer luck of the draw, has been the language of successful people. To be successful in the world today, you ALMOST HAVE TO surround yourself with English-speaking people. Telling those who would otherwise do this that it’s ok not to ultimately slows their success, which is exactly what the liberals want. People who claim to be the smartest people in the world can’t possibly be stupid enough to ignore these facts.

Do people REALLY think that catering to a Palestinian state, whose sole mission in life is the eradication of Israel, is going to lead to peace in the region?

Nope. If they did, they’d be inviting scores of successful Israelis to naturalize as Americans. The real problem is that they are more ideologically inclined with the Islamofascist philosophy espoused by the terrorists than they are with the more liberty-minded philosophy of the Israelis.

How about if that Palestinian state is on land that was previously Israel and is presently adjacent to Israel?

All the more reason to eradicate it, in their opinion. These people value freedom, but only for themselves. Everyone else, including you and I, is expected to take orders from them, Constitution be damned.

Maybe I’ve been listening to Sage a little too much, but I doubt it. Just because I have this cynical outlook on liberals doesn’t mean I’m not an optimist. America’s brightest days are ahead; I’m convinced of that. Still, we must overcome these very dark times when many among us would surrender our constitutional rights and succumb to a socialist regime just because they’re too lazy or ignorant to stand up and fight.

RWR

Posted in Border SecuRWRity, Confronting Libs, Liberal Bullshit, MSMadness, New FedeRWRalism, RWR in the 'Sphere, RWRants, TerrorAsses | Leave a Comment »

This was Fun

Posted by RightWingRocker on June 5, 2007

While studying tonight, I took frequent breaks and followed John Hawkins’s LiveBlog of tonight’s Republican Debate.

What made it most fun was reading the LiveBlog without watching the debate. So John would comment on something someone said without quoting him, and I’d just be reading what he had to say about it. Hilarious!

Well come on. Any Republican debates going on now are a total waste of time and energy for the candidates and for us. Same for the Donks. What does anyone really expect to accomplish NOW? The likely primary winner on the Republican side hasn’t even joined the race, Giuliani and McCain are RINOs, Hunter and Gilmore are nobodies, so are Tommy, Sam, and Huck, and Tanc and Paul are Libertarian nutjobs who will get elected MAYBE if all the liberals in the Democrat and Republican Parties can be killed off in time for the primaries.

It’s all a big joke. We have a war on in this party. Rush is absolutely right about that. We federalist conservatives MUST win it, and BEFORE the primaries, so that there is a true winner standing for the principles of freedom and federalism that have made America great on the ticket to beat Hitlery and Barack the Schlock. This is MUCH more important than these silly irrelevant debates.

The Revolution has begun, and it WILL be televised.

It will be hard work, but saving America from those who would turn it over to the government will be well worth the effort.

RWR

Posted in Alternative Media, Border SecuRWRity, Confronting Libs, Funny Shit, Liberal Bullshit, MSMadness, New FedeRWRalism, RWRandom Thoughts, TerrorAsses | Leave a Comment »

Ken Taylor: Fred is Running

Posted by RightWingRocker on May 30, 2007

Ken Taylor, a reader over at MrM’s blog, is reporting that Fred Thompson will announce his candidacy on or about July 4th.  The post is actually dated this coming Saturday (don’t know what’s up with that), but if Fred runs, maybe we’ll get some answers to the important questions I posted for him earlier today.

I do support Fred at this point, though I do have a few concerns.  Hopefully we can get some answers to the questions so that support will have true enthusiasm.

C’mon, Fred.  What say?

RWR

Posted in Border SecuRWRity, Confronting Libs, New FedeRWRalism, RWR in the 'Sphere | Leave a Comment »