RightWingRocker

Never mind the pajamas … We blog in the nude!

Archive for the ‘Conservative Wins’ Category

The Future of the Thompson Conservative

Posted by RightWingRocker on January 25, 2008

Folks, this is really simple.

Fred’s taken his hat out of the game (I’d argue he took it out right after Iowa). Ron Paul is still nutty as a fruitcake. The rest of the field just isn’t conservative. John McCain? Please. If that guy’s the nominee, I’m writing my own name in on Election Day.

Still, the message of Fred Thompson’s candidacy rings true, and his influence on the debate is clear. Everyone’s trying to be Reagan, even John McCain, who Bonzo would probably punch square if the face if he were alive today to do so. Who brought Reagan conservatism to the debate? Fred Thompson. Now all the liberal Republicans are trying to out-Reagan each other. What a joke. The truth is that the Republican Party just isn’t conservative anymore. Rush has even started saying so (though I’ve been saying that about the Republican leadership – especially George W. Bush – for some time now).

So what’s a conservative to do? Who does a conservative vote for? I’ll be looking at that a bit more closely in the near future, but if I’m not satisfied, I’m voting write-in. Never mind loony third parties like the Libertarians who for all of their good ideas can’t find the votes to run a candidate for dog catcher.

Perhaps it’s time for conservatives across America to unite. Time for Reagan Federalists to invite Libertarians and the Constitutionites (who should be called the Religion Party) to the table to create the new Federalist party here in America to implement the New Federalism advocated by Reagan2020.org. If there won’t be a voice for those of us who revere the Founders’ vision in the two major parties, then maybe it’s time to take our ball and go back to Independence Hall. President Reagan often said he did not leave the Democrat Party, but rather that the party left him. The Republicans have done the same thing to us. A new party would perhaps give the Democrats victories for some time, but the end result would be better, with America knowing the truth about the Constitution and those who sacrificed so much for us to have it. It will be our job to educate America, and it will be a lot of work. Maybe a Hitlery presidency would be helpful, as was the Carter presidency of the 1970’s.

America’s best days are ahead of her. Still, the dark period that seems to be the result of the 2008 election will be a formidable obstacle to overcome.

Who’s with me?

RWR

Posted in Conservative Wins, Decision 2008, 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 »

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.

RWR

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

Thanksgiving 2007

Posted by RightWingRocker on November 22, 2007

Posting has been light lately because of a new job.  I’ve also started an internship at the school from which I recently graduated, so even a lot of evenings are being eaten up …

Still, I have no intentions of falling silent at this critical time in the history of our great Nation, and I hope all of you will hang in there and keep the RWRepublic strong.  There’s a lot to do.  Hitlery must be beaten, a Federalist must be elected, socialism must be stopped – and that’s just the beginning!

On the musical front, we just booked our New Year’s show in Atlantic City, NJ.  It’s going to be awesome.  Plus, there’s all the church work I typically do around the holidays, which is also going to happen as usual.

Today, however, we celebrate Thanksgiving, which, behind Independence Day, is probably the single most important holiday our Nation celebrates.  Wouldn’t it be nice if Americans today would learn the same simple lessons learned nearly four centuries ago??

So here are my usual Thanksgiving links.  I haven’t added any new ones for obvious reasons this year, but these are incredibly important, so enjoy!

RWR, 3/10/2005
Mike Franc, Human Events Online, 11/21/2005

Happy Thanksgiving!

RWR

Posted in Alternative Media, Conservative Wins | Leave a Comment »

Forcing Constitutional Debate at RWN

Posted by RightWingRocker on November 9, 2007

Yesterday, I spent considerable energy arguing with a bunch of liberal morons over at RWN. John correctly brought to the fore the ideology of Norman Thomas, an American socialist from the 1920’s, who basically said that Americans would never accept socialism unless its name was changed – to liberalism. Once this happened, just about any socialist concept could be applied, even here.

Thomas, who ran for President six different times, understood the power of incrementalism. He knew that a socialist agenda in America could only be pursued with the use of deception and half measures, until one day Americans would wake up in a socialized state.

Well, wasn’t that the truth?

American liberals have fallen for Thomas’s passion hook, line, and sinker. Since the post was drawn up in the face of a debate on Hitlerycare, liberal commentors jumped at the chance to defend it. Conservatives fell for their game, unfortuantely, trying to defend the country against this foolishness by arguing on the libs’ terms – in other words, trying to demonstrate why Nationalized Socialized healthcare is such a bad idea compared to why the libs thought otherwise. No one brought up its blatant unconstitutionality.

Until I entered the debate.

Go read the thread. It’s quite enlightening. Here’s the link again.

Over the course of the debate, I was able to get the libs on record as either saying or implying:

1. That socialism is allowed in the US under the general welfare clause of Article 1, Section 8,2. That socialist non-solutions are better than real free-market solutions to problems that were largely a result of socialism (e.g. healthcare regulations).

3. That the cost of lawsuits and malpractice insurance doesn’t drive up the cost of healthcare more than the price of medicine.

4. That government regulation is a good thing, especially for the healthcare industry.

5. That people with BDS are right.

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

7. That James Madison and the Founding Fathers are irrelevant.

8. That George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, and others would have a problem with acknowledging James Madison’s contributions to the US Constitution.

11. That adhering to a “rock solid” Constitution is akin to totalitariansim.

I left out 9 and 10. Seems a lib or two had a problem knowing the difference between the 9th and 10th Amendments. I just don’t want to confuse people – ya know??

The conservatives largely left me to work my magic and came to defend the Constitution after I left the thread.

This is the most important thing we conservatives can do to defend our great nation against the liberals who seek to dismantle everything that has made her great. Far too often we argue on their terms. Why? Their terms are FLAWED. Their terms are BULLSHIT. Their terms are IRRELEVANT.

As long as the Constitution is the law of the land, it must be defended against all enemies. Many of these enemies are holding public office today. These people must be defeated, regardless of their branch of government. The Founders’ vision, as enshrined in the Constitution, MUST prevail.

In order to defeat the socialist liberal onslaught that threatens our country, we must be sure to argue on Constitutional grounds. We must be prepared to use the Constitution in her defense. We must be prepared to call socialism what it is: SOCIALISM. We must be prepared to defend ourselves against these accusations of advocating totalitarianism with facts about real totalitarians and what they advocated.

This is an EASY argument. It takes little or no effort. If you want to defend the Constitution, just know it. Read it. Read the Federalist Papers – AND the Anti-Federalist Papers. Know what the Founders said in its defense. Know why the liberals are full of it and show them. If you like, give them plenty of rope and let them hang themselves as I did yesterday.

This is, I believe, the biggest problem with the way conservatives confront liberals today. There seems to be some need to debate the liberals on the facts of the argument e.g. how much nationalized socialized medicine will cost or how it will affect the choices available as opposed to whether the federal government really has any such authority to begin with. The people of the USA need to be re-educated about the Constitution and what it says, and you know damned right well the schools aren’t going to do anything about it.

If we don’t bring the Constitution back to the front lines of the fight, we are going to have serious problems winning it. If we do, we will win every time. Powerful thing, that US Constitution. Powerful thing. The perfect tribute to the minds that created it.

RWR

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

Letting the Cat out of the Bag

Posted by RightWingRocker on November 7, 2007

More than just for fun, over the last month or so, I’ve been baiting the hook for liberal assholes who want to come on here and call me a Nazi. Once I started showing the seriousness of my cause, they cowered, as expected. The following posts were part of the deal:

Annoying liberals
You’d Think They’d Be Proud
A Reasonable Liberal

and

A Few Questions

The Hitlery quiz was simply an opportunity to show exactly where she stands on things that matter to people who respect the Founders’ vision and their creation, which is today the greatest nation the world has ever experienced, despite the Left’s attempts to dismantle it.

On to the posts…

If it wasn’t obvious to you that I was getting at some underlying point about the positions taken by the Left (including Hitlery) today, it will be now. If you are sick to death of being called a Nazi for being conservative, hold your head up high today, and gloat.

Just about all of the things I pointed out and asked our liberal friends to defend were taken DIRECTLY FROM THE GERMAN NAZI PARTY PLATFORM. Some points, such as gun control, were taken from the US Constitution, just to throw people off the scent.

About two years ago (probably only Ol’ BC and Sage have been around long enough to remember this), I posted a point-by-point comparison of the Nazi Party Platform and positions typically taken by American liberals and conservatives. Of the 25 points in the platform, liberals matched on seventeen of them. Conservatives matched on three. This is how I knew I had the libs dead to rights with these posts. My only regret is that the only one to come around defending this stuff was someone who, though misguided, never resorted to being a loudmouth or an asshole. Oh, how much fun it would have been to wield the ClueBat then!

That’s right, my friends. If you took my little quiz this week and answered “a” to any of those questions, you were agreeing with the Nazis. My answers, of course, were “b” across the board.

Really. The only places American conservatives would actually agree with the Nazis (shit, even a stopped clock is right twice a day) would be:

* that only citizens of the country should hold public office,
* abolition of taxes on land (conservatives would call this “a good start”),
and
* outlawing child labor and abortion.

That’s about it, folks. Creaming the argument that conservatives are Nazis is easy. What most of us forget is that it’s even easier to make the point that our opponents are more Nazi-like than we are. This point needs to be made more often.

That’s why we call her HITLERY.

RWR

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

A Reasonable Liberal

Posted by RightWingRocker on October 19, 2007

OK, so I bait the hook for the trolls and they don’t show up. Guess the heat in the kitchen was too hot for them.

Instead, I get a reasonable liberal (read the thread on the last post). Reasonable meaning one who’s willing to actually come here and have a debate instead of just being a dickhead and a loser.

Someone has actually decided to try taking TripleNeck’s challenge.

Great.

First of all, let me say that Matt has done a great job in trying to get me to understand that there’s nothing wrong with what he believes. He has failed, though, because he hasn’t shown me that what he believes is in any way good for America, friendly to the philosophy of the Founders, or even legal under the Constitution to begin with.

Matt has admitted to being in favor of:

* Nationalized socialized healthcare
* Nationalized socialized education
* Nationalized socialized Socialist Security
* Nationalized socialized MediScare
* Illegal gun control laws
* Restricting the religious freedoms of some Christians

He has NOT:

* Encouraged race-baiting
* Championed non-existent rights for illegal aliens
* Engaged in Bush Derangement Syndrome-like bullshit
* Made any false accusations with regard to the War on Terror
* Invoked children

Areas we just can’t be sure about:

* Whether all-out socialism is really what he’s about. He said he doesn’t advocate socialism, but somehow found it quite all right to say he’s for much of the socialist agenda.
* Whether he believes the federal government should be responsible for the well-being and livelihood of the people living in the United States of America.
* Whether he holds any disdain for people with money.

I got a chuckle out of his idea that I shouldn’t refer to his party’s likely standard-bearer as “Hitlery”. My fusion of her name with that of ol’ Uncle Adolf is DELIBERATE. I do it to illustrate the truth about her ideology. If she’s allowed to do everything she wants to do (and the American people had better stand firmly in her way), you’re looking at Nazi Germany all over again. Exactly where do you think she gets away thinking stuff like Hitlerycare is ok? Even Matt, the “reasonable” liberal, supports that Nazi scheme.

I won’t beat up too terribly on Matt, though. He was a good sport and defended his positions without the usual liberal name-calling. Of course, his defense of these positions was flimsy at best, and reflected much of the usual “people shouldn’t have to be swamped with bills just because they got sick” kind of drivel. The idea that people get so swamped with bills because oppressive government regulation (largely from the fed) has made doctors so expensive seems to h ave never occurred to him.

As for the trolls, the hook remains baited. Any idiots care to take a taste??

RWR

Posted in Confronting Libs, Conservative Wins, Liberal Bullshit | 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 »

Yet Another Retard

Posted by RightWingRocker on September 18, 2007

Moonbat Monitor has more than his share of trolls. Last fall, he dealt with an idiot in his usual fashion, and did such a bang-up job he posted a special link to the post.

I didn’t realize just how long it had been since I had read it, but I clicked it tonight just for laughs. Lo and behold, another retard had surfaced. With nothing left to go on after the other commentators and I had creamed the other fool, he trumped up a phony accusation of bad grammar on my part (I had joined in the fun of ClueBatting the original retard for misspelling a word to the point he was using a homonym) obviously figuring that since the post was almost five months old, that I’d never see it.

eftwingmuthafucka left…
Thursday, 1 March 2007 11:50 am

~Just a heads up~ “RIGHTWINGROCKER”. When criticizing someone for their use of a misspelled word, you may want to consider using correct grammar to do so.

“I love the way people come around criticizing people’s intelligence and in the same breath misspelling SIMPLE WORDS to the point they’re using homonyms.”

I believe it would be “misspell SIMPLE WORDS” not “misspelling”. It concerns me that you teach seventh graders. Hopefully it’s math and not english.

All I could do was laugh. This guy criticized my correct grammar with all of the confidence of a 911Truther. He just knew he was right, even though the proof to the contrary was right there.

Enjoy my response:

You would be well-advised to take The Daily Carrier’s advice, as given to “The Capt.”

“When you find yourself in a hole, QUIT DIGGING!!!!!”

Let’s analyze my alleged failure to use “correct grammar” …

Here is what I said, even as you quoted it:

“I love the way people come around criticizing people’s intelligence and in the same breath misspelling SIMPLE WORDS to the point they’re using homonyms.”

… and your attempt at a correction …

I believe it would be “misspell SIMPLE WORDS” not “misspelling”

Actually, you can congratulate yourself for having the agility to insert your foot directly into your mouth, idiot.

Let’s have a little lesson on what is known as “parallel construction”, shall we??

What you see, if you can get yourself to understand this, is actually TWO sentences (connected by the word “and”). They are:

“I love the way people come around criticizing people’s intelligence.”

and

“I love the way people come around misspelling SIMPLE WORDS to the point they’re using homonyms.”

When adding a conjunction and combining the sentences together, you must keep the cases of the verbs the same – CRITICIZING and MISSPELLING.

So, hopefully you’re not out there educating our youth about anything to do with the language, because you obviously have no clue whatsoever.

Fuck you.

RWR

Indeed. Moonbat Monitor sure gets some loonies.

RWR

Posted in Alternative Media, Confronting Libs, Conservative Wins, Funny Shit, Liberal Bullshit, RWR in the 'Sphere | 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 »

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 »

THIS will drive the Left NUTS !!

Posted by RightWingRocker on June 13, 2007

Our new reader, Nanc put up a link or two that I checked out. A reader on a blog that she frequents had this article linked in the comment area. It doesn’t appear to have a URL of its own, so I will paste the whole article here:

Memorial To Be Dedicated June 12
Rep. Tom Lantos Will Deliver the Keynote
President George W. Bush Invited

“The world has been reluctant to acknowledge the horrors of Communism… Now at last they will be memorialized.” – Washington Times

The Victims of Communism Memorial will be dedicated on Tuesday morning, June 12, 2007, in Washington, D.C. Rep. Tom Lantos, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, will give the keynote address while Rep. Dana Rohrabacher will deliver remarks. President George W. Bush has also been invited to speak. A crowd of 1,000 including Congressional leaders, members of the diplomatic corps, ethnic leaders, foreign dignitaries, and Memorial supporters, is expected to attend the historic event.

The dedication will take place at the Memorial site at the intersection of Massachusetts Ave., N.W., New Jersey Ave., N.W., and G St., N.W., two blocks from Union Station and within view of the U.S. Capitol. A reception will follow the ceremony.

The day’s activities will conclude with a gala dinner at the J.W. Marriott Hotel, at which a Truman-Reagan Medal of Freedom will be presented to William F. Buckley, Jr., and the late Senator Henry M. (Scoop) Jackson. Senator Joe Lieberman will present the Medal of Freedom to Senator Jackson’s daughter, Anna Marie Laurence.

To make reservations for the day’s events and for further information, please contact [name deleted] at [contact information deleted].

June 12 will be an historic day for the victims of communism and for those who love liberty. We hope to see you there!

The Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, Copyright 2007

A monument in Washington memorializing the victims of communism – Just when you thought America was already in the shit from things like communism on our soil, a (hopefully) big monument goes up alerting the world to its evils. Do you think America will get it now?

Don’t hold your breath. The handouts that communists and socialists promise are far too tempting, and those who have taken advantage of those already in place have allowed themselves to become dependent upon them.

You know, this tinfoil hat just isn’t making me any more liberal. I think it’s time to retire it.

RWR

Posted in Confronting Libs, Conservative Wins, New FedeRWRalism, RWRandom Thoughts | 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 »

Ginsberg’s Latest Idiocy

Posted by RightWingRocker on April 20, 2007

Can the liberals on the Supreme Court be any more out of touch with reality?

… at stake in cases challenging abortion restrictions is a woman’s “control over her [own] destiny.” – Ruth Bader-Ginsberg

The usual pro-abortion blather. It’s as if these people believe that somehow these women get pregnant completely at random and have no say in the matter of conceiving a child in the first place. You don’t get to be a Supreme Court Justice by being stupid enough to believe that kind of bullshit, but it’s clearly what Ms. Ginsberg and her ilk want YOU to believe.

Women, it is now acknowledged, have the talent, capacity, and right “to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation.”

I wonder how this is relevant to the discussion. I further challenge anyone to show me how being a mother conflicts with “[participating] equally in the economic and social life of the Nation.” Motherhood is the very essence of the economic and social life of ANY nation. Without it, all humanity would cease to exist.

Their ability to realize their full potential … is intimately connected to “their ability to control their reproductive lives.” Thus, legal challenges to undue restrictions on abortion procedures do not seek to vindicate some generalized notion of privacy; rather, they center on a woman’s autonomy to determine her life’s course, and thus to enjoy equal citizenship stature.

Frankly, I don’t see how being a mother interferes with any of the above. Women do realize their full potential as mothers. They do the most important work in the world which, as a man, I absolutely cannot do. I don’t see how banning partial-birth abortion or, for that matter, ANY abortion, interferes with a woman’s ability to control her reproductive life. Women DO choose to have sex, after all, and KNOW the risks involved.

What she is suggesting as legitimate would be the equivalent of my running General Motors into a court battle over an accident that was my own fault. I knew the risks involved in operating a motor vehicle. I knew I could have an accident. The accident may have ruined my life, and quite a bit more so than simply giving birth and raising a child would ruin the life of a mother. Therefore, Ms. Ginsberg, your argument that a woman being able “to determine her life’s course, and thus to enjoy equal citizenship stature” is as much bullshit as my making the same claim against General Motors in the above example, not to mention an insult to mothers all across America.

I really don’t need to go on here. If this is how Ms. Ginsberg introduces her position, the rest of it can’t be any less idiotic.

Is the Left’s entire position on abortion based on the faulty premises that women don’t choose to have sex and that babies aren’t human? Can’t they come up with something substantive? They couldn’t use the libertarian argument that the government should just stay out of it, now could they? After all, that argument would be an admission that their entire socialist agenda is as much bullshit as their position on abortion.

What else is new?

RWR

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

Thinking Blogger Award

Posted by RightWingRocker on April 15, 2007

This was a sweet surprise. This morning I hit up HS MrMinority’s blog to find he’s awarded me a “Thinking Blogger Award”.

Instead of putting a long Stevie Wonder speech together, I’ll just thank MrM here for this honor. The next step in the process is to name five bloggers of my own that make me think. Here they are in no particular order (I doubt there will be any surprises):

Moonbat Monitor

Emperor Darth Misha I (The Rottie)

Van Helsing (Moonbattery)

The Old Sage (Rocker and Sage)

Jim (Parkway Rest Stop)

There are quite a few more, but I could only pick five.

RWR

If you’re one of the five I just tagged, here’s The Official Participation Rules™:

1. If, and only if, you get tagged, write a post with links to 5 blogs that make you think,
2. Link to this post so that people can easily find the exact origin of the meme,
3. Optional: Proudly display the ‘Thinking Blogger Award’ with a link to the post that you wrote.

Posted in Conservative Wins, RWRandom Thoughts | Leave a Comment »

A Win for the Second Amendment

Posted by RightWingRocker on March 11, 2007

I saw this on Friday, but was busy with touring and such.

It’s about time we had a win for the Second Amendment. I, for one, am too weary to speak of the bullshit we hear about the Second Amendment applying only to “state militias”. Governments at all levels need to get their grimy paws off of the guns of American citizens.

March 9 (Bloomberg) — A U.S. appeals court struck down a three-decade-old District of Columbia law that bans residents from keeping a handgun in their homes, saying the Constitution’s Second Amendment protects an individual right to bear arms.The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in Washington also threw out a district law requiring registered firearms to be kept disassembled or under trigger lock.

It’s the first time a federal appeals court has struck down a gun-control measure on Second Amendment grounds. Nelson Lund, a constitutional law professor at George Mason University in neighboring Virginia, said an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court is “very likely.”

This may be the first time a law has been struck down on Second Amendment grounds, but it’s DEFINITELY not the first time a law has NEEDED to be. Let’s get started on the rest, and right away.

Lawyers for the District of Columbia, which banned residents from owning handguns in 1976 for public safety reasons, argued that the amendment guarantees the right to bear arms only for members of a militia.

OK. So what if I start a militia tomorrow … how exactly do you figure I’m going to get my hands on the appropriate weaponry if you’ve banned the owning of guns? Morons. Oh yeah, and exactly how do you expect taking away people’s ability to defend themselves to improve “public safety”? Who’s the knucklehead that dreamed that one up?

Judge Karen Henderson dissented, saying that because the capital district isn’t a state, the Second Amendment doesn’t apply to it.

Here’s a good one. The Second Amendment applies only to people who live and work in the 50 states, and the unalienable rights guaranteed by the Constitutiona and the Bill of Rights (the Second Amendment in particular). It doesn’t apply to our nation’s capital? You can own weapons anywhere in the US except Washington, DC? What a fucking joke.

Most U.S. appeals courts to consider the issue have said the Second Amendment preserves state militias and doesn’t protect individual rights.

Yeah, well most U.S. appeals courts are full of shit. The Second Amendment doesn’t say anything about state militas, in case you didn’t know.

For the good of the American people, this decision must be upheld. It is truly a victory for the Constitution and the people of this great country.

RWR

Posted in Conservative Wins, Liberal Bullshit, New FedeRWRalism | Leave a Comment »

The Left’s REAL Agenda

Posted by RightWingRocker on February 28, 2007

Kim du Toit is an absolute expert on the Second Amendment.

His wife is no slouch, either.

Last week, she took on Jim Zumbo, a Hollywood idiot who took the position that the Second Amendment’s purpose is to protect hunters. She started by quoting a previous post of hers, in which she had had this to say:

Others argue that the Second Amendment was added to allow sportsman to hunt or to shoot at cups and saucers. This camp argues that it was never intended that you have arms to shoot at a person, or in your defense, it was only a protection for hobbyists and hunting enthusiasts.

This idiot (Zumbo) apparently changed his position on the “assault weapons” ban because he didn’t realize that hunters used them. What a moron.

He was rightly buried by Second Amendment supporters for his prior remarks. He was fired by OLN and Remington, for whom he had been doing shows and such. All relevant sponsors cancelled their endorsements. He really took it on the chin. Good.

So why didn’t the truth sink in?? Who knows? Mrs. dT gave him a blunt reminder:

The Second Amendment, which articulates your “right to bear arms,” has NOTHING TO DO WITH HUNTING.

This will be added to the list of random quotes I post at the top of the page. It’s one of the most important things people need to know about the Second Amendment.

The Second Amendment was instituted to empower every day people like you and me to kill those who would try to wrest our rights and freedoms from our hands. It gives us the right to own and use weapons of all sorts in an effort to protect ourselves from criminals of all sorts.

This isn’t just for defending our homes against intruders. It’s for killing agents of an oppressive government which makes illegal laws, levies illegal taxes, confiscates private property, etc. Are you getting the picture?

As I thought about this, something very dark and profound came to mind, and the direction of my post changed drastically.

Before I explain myself, there’s something from Mrs. du Toit’s post that must be brought forth, as I will need to reference

it later, and smoothly:

…we ALSO understand the order of bringing about change is the four boxes:
1. Soap
2. Ballot
3. Jury
4. Cartridge

In that order and never getting to the last until the first three boxes are completely and entirely gone from us.

You see, all this brings us to the real reason the anti-Second Amendment crowd is so vocal and pushy.

This crowd, largely socialist, communist, and “liberal”,can see quite well that people are starting to see and feel the effects of their illegal laws, punitive taxes, confiscation of property, etc. The first three “boxes” are wearing down quickly, and the point of having to use the “cartridge box” is fast approaching. The more guilt they can instill in people who choose to own guns and those who are thinking about it, the better for their cause. The fewer armed Americans there are, the easiser it will be to bring their plans to full implementation.

Face it. There are only two kinds of anti-gun loonies – (1) the kind who are out to get as many guns away from as many Americans as possible in order to make it easy to oppress those same people, and (2) the kind who have been fooled by those same loonies into believing that their intentions are honorable. These people play on people’s emotions, bringing forth images of violent crime, dead children, and, of course, everyone’s favorite anti-gun icon, Bambi. They pretend to have compassion for the innocent, weak, downtrodden, and defenseless, and in the same breath seek to increase the number of innocent, wear, downtrodden, and defenseless that they can have compassion for.

No surprise. This is the tactic liberals use for all of their foolish schemes. The dream up something that people will view as a crisis (take your pick – Animal rights, illegal aliens, failing schools, AIDS, global warming – whoops, sorry they call this “global climate change” now because they can’t conclude that it’s consistently “warming” anymore – sorry about that, insane people in asylums and the resulting bums in the street – er, “homeless” – once they closed down the asylums, pollution, and the list goes on …), figure out a way people will be so emotionally affected by it that they will spend their hard-earned money to stop it, use that money and the voices of those who they’ve fooled to shout down politicians and convince them to spend everyone else’s money on it, and from there create jobs in government for people who are trained to “solve” the applicable “crisis”.

Over time, the public sector grows at the expense of the private sector, and these people dream up ways to incorporate what used to be the private sector into the public sector. Eventually, they hope, there will be no more private sector at all, and once that has happened, their socialism has won the day.

If they’ve taken the guns, the people have no means of rising up to defend against this. Oh, and the police and military that are paid (by the oppressed) to do the bidding of the oppressors STILL WILL BE ARMED.

Now some liberidiot nutjob will probably make a stop into the comment area and ask why, if these people intend to use the military to oppress people, these same people are largely “anti-war”.

The answer is simple. They are NOT anti-war. They are simply using war as a pity scheme in the crisis scenario shown above. They use war to bring forth people’s pity for those who die in it in the hopes that people will rise up against the war. Remember that the War on Terror (and that includes the Iraq front) is a means of retaliating against those who have attacked us, as well as spreading FREEDOM in the hopes that those attempting to oppress us from without will either decline in number, leave us alone, or die. If this war were about spreading SOCIALISM, they’d have no problem with it whatsoever.

Just read any thread at DU for the proof.

The real motivation for the anti-gun crowd to be so vocal and steadfast is not that they think people shouldn’t carry guns. It’s because they believe that they are better qualified that you or I to decide who should be carrying them,and they want to be able to impose that belief upon us, whether we like it or not …

Just like they do when they take our lives (Roe v. Wade), our fortunes (the tax code), and our sacred honor (McCain-Feingold).

I say this from my “soab box”. I also proudly use my “ballot box” at every opportunity. The “jury box” is a joke because those who choose the juries represent the oppressors.

With the state things are in today, especially given the oppressive and illegal gun laws there are in this country, using the “cartridge box” cannot be all that far off. Those first three boxes are indeed nearly completely and entirely gone from us. Thus, we must remember:

We, collectively, give our government a tremendous amount of our trust. We give them the power to make and enforce laws. We give them the power to incarcerate those among us who refuse to abide by those laws. With that trust we demand only the commensurate, reciprocal trust: You may make war against us, so we retain the right and the means to make war against you. It is a permanent and perpetual stand off. It is a mutual destruction pact.

Unfortunatetly, I cannot agree with her next statement about not ever expecting to need to go to war with our own government. In fact, if Hitlery finds a way into the White House (which I thank God is highly unlikely), I’m certain it will be absolutely necessary. Our government doesn’t fear us anymore, and that is reason enough.

RWR

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

Abortion Survivor Goes Home

Posted by RightWingRocker on February 20, 2007

A baby born at just under 22 weeks gestation is going home today.

Viability? My ass.

RWR

H/T to BethW for the link.

Posted in Conservative Wins, Liberal Bullshit | Leave a Comment »