RightWingRocker

Never mind the pajamas … We blog in the nude!

Archive for the ‘RWR in the ‘Sphere’ Category

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 »

And Another Thing …

Posted by RightWingRocker on February 6, 2008

As I was out and about the blogosphere today, I happened upon a site that encourages people to do what I did yesterday and will probably do in November …

http://www.WriteInFred.com

Also, there has also been a wee bit of scuttlebutt about a new conservative party rising out of this mess.  I hope the advice I gave (the Reagan2020 New Federalist Platform and the 1840 Democratic Party Platform would be great places to start) is well-heeded.

Both of the above are great ideas.  Lord knows the Republicans aren’t doing their job any better than the Democrats.

RWR

Posted in Alternative Media, Confronting Libs, Decision 2008, Liberal Bullshit, New FedeRWRalism, RWR in the 'Sphere | 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 »

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 »

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 »

Who Said It?

Posted by RightWingRocker on October 20, 2007

April, one of the newer readers here, recently asked me to do this, and voila!, Delfts puts it up.

Now he’s been quiet lately – dealing with some big-time health issues – to the point that he’s now listed in the “Silent MajoRWRity” section (which does need to be worked on, as there are other voiced that have returned), but this quiz should give you really good insight into the mind of the Left. No cheating. I’ll post the answers in the near future. Leave your guesses in the comment area.

1) “We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.”

A. Karl Marx
B. Adolph Hitler
C. Joseph Stalin
D. None of the above

2) “It’s time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few…and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity.”

A. Lenin
B. Mussolini
C. Idi Amin
D. None of the Above

3) “(We)…can’t just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people.”

A. Nikita Khrushev
B. Josef Goebbels
C. Boris Yeltsin
D. None of the above

4) “We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up a little bit of their own…in order to create this common ground.”

A. Mao Tse Dung
B. Hugo Chavez
C. Kim Jong Il
D. None of the above

5) “I certainly think the free-market has failed.”

A. Karl Marx
B. Lenin
C. Molotov
D. None of the above

6) “I think it’s time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being watched.”

A. Pinochet
B. Milosevic
C. Saddam Hussein
D. None of the above

Good luck!

RWR

Posted in Alternative Media, Confronting Libs, Liberal Bullshit, RWR in the 'Sphere | 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 »

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 »

Another Liberal Wants to Bet

Posted by RightWingRocker on September 7, 2007

I guess they just don’t learn.

After that ordeal with Freder, though, I’m not all about making a bet with a liberal.  They just can’t admit defeat.  They cannot face the fact that they are wrong about so many things.

We could have Osama bin Laden sitting in the Oval Office decreeing that, starting tomorrow, all American women would have to wear burquas and quit their jobs, and they would somehow find a way to say that their cut-and-run approach to the War on Terror was successful and that America could have never won without them and their ideas.

The federal income tax rate could be at 300% for the lowest bracket of their idiotic tax ponzi scheme, and they would never admit its failure, even as the US economy would plummet into a situation that would make the Great Depression look like a walk in the park.

So betting with this idiot would have the exact same result as it did with the last idiot.  We conservatives would have to face the fact that another socialist hard-head had been proven wrong and claimed the reverse to be true.

Whoopy-fucking-do.

RWR

Posted in Alternative Media, Confronting Libs, 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 »

Moonbat Monitor Wields the ClueBat

Posted by RightWingRocker on July 15, 2007

Moonbat Monitor always kicks ass.  Since the moonbats are all afraid to come here to the RWRepublic due to the ass-kicking they so consistently get here, it seems they have chosen his place instead.

Enjoy it while it lasts, MM.  Once they realize you’ve got it, they’ll want to stay away.

In the meantime, Kudos to Moonbat Monitor for a job well done.

RWR

Posted in Confronting Libs, Liberal Bullshit, RWR in the 'Sphere | Leave a Comment »

Ron Paul: The LEAST Conservative??

Posted by RightWingRocker on June 17, 2007

John Hawkins submitted last week that Ron Paul (whom I am not supporting) is “the least conservative member of Congress running for President.” Hmm … I’d have to look into that. Maybe a little side-by-side of Paul with Hawkins’ buddy Duncan Hunter. Oh, and don’t bother following Hawkins’ link. There’s NO information there about either candidate’s voting record. For good measure, I’ll put Fred Thompson’s voting stats up as well. After all, he’s the one I currently support. Stats are from ontheissues.org, a really good site for issue-by-issue voting record research. Let’s just see who’s who here.

Issue#1: Abortion

Paul: Of 14 votes/positions, 10 Conservative – 71%
Hunter: Of 14 votes/positions, 12 Conservative – 85%
Thompson: Of 3 votes/positions, 3 Conservative – 100%

Issue #2: Budget & Economy

Paul: Of 3 votes/positions, 2 Conservative – 66%
Hunter: Of 1 vote/position, 1 Conservative – 100%
Thompson: Of 3 votes, positions, 3 Conservative – 100%

Issue #3: Civil Rights

Paul: Of 7, 4 Conservative – 57%
Hunter: Of 7, 5 Conservative – 71%
Thompson: Of 9, 7 Conservative – 77%

Issue #4: Corporations

Paul: Of 2, 0 Conservative – 0%
Hunter: Of 1, 0 Conservative – 0%
Thompson: Of 0, 0 – 0%

(note: Bankruptcy votes were not clear enough to make a proper comparison, so they were omitted)

Issue #5: Crime

Paul: Of 3, 1 Conservative – 33%
Hunter: Of 6, 3 Conservative – 50%
Thompson: Of 5, 3 Conservative – 60%

Issue #6: Drugs

Paul: Of 5, 4 Conservative – 80%
Hunter: Of 3, 1 Conservative – 33%
Thompson: Of 2, 0 Conservative – 0%

Issue #7: Education

Paul: Of 8, 5 Conservative – 62%
Hunter: Of 8, 5 Conservative – 62%
Thompson: Of 8, 7 Conservative – 87%

Issue #8: Energy & Oil

Paul: Of 10, 9 Conservative – 90%
Hunter: Of 10, 7 Conservative – 70%
Thompson: Of 6, 3 Conservative – 50%

Issue #9: Environment

Paul: Of 3, 1 Conservative – 33%
Hunter: Of 4, 4 Conservative – 100%
Thompson: Of 4, 2 Conservative – 50%

Issue #10: Families & Children

Paul: Of 2, 2 Conservative – 100%
Hunter: Of 2, 1 Conservative – 50%
Thompson: Of 1, 1 Conservative – 100%

Issue #11: Foreign Policy

Paul: Of 9, 7 Conservative – 77%
Hunter: Of 6, 4 Conservative – 66%
Thompson: Of 7, 7 Conservative – 100%

Issue #12: Free Trade

Paul: Of 8, 8 Conservative – 100%
Hunter: Of 8, 6 Conservative – 75%
Thompson: Of 7, 2 Conservative – 28%

Issue #13: Government Reform

Paul: Of 13, 13 Conservative – 100%
Hunter: Of 12, 8 Conservative – 66%
Thompson: Of 7, 2 Conservative – 87%

Issue #14: Gun Control

Paul: Of 6, 3 Conservative – 50%
Hunter: Of 3, 3 Conservative – 100%
Thompson: Of 4, 4 Conservative – 100%

Issue #15: Health Care

Paul: Of 11, 6 Conservative – 54%
Hunter: Of 11, 4 Conservative – 36%
Thompson: Of 8, 3 Conservative – 37%

Issue #16: Homeland Security

Paul: Of 17, 14 Conservative – 82%
Hunter: Of 13, 7 Conservative – 53%
Thompson: Of 9, 7 Conservative – 77%

Issue #17: Immigration

Paul: Of 6, 6 Conservative – 100%
Hunter: Of 6, 6 Conservative – 100%
Thompson: Of 3, 3 Conservative – 100%

Issue #18: Jobs

Paul: Of 4, 4 Conservative – 100%
Hunter: Of 5, 4Conservative – 80%
Thompson: Of 3, 2 Conservative – 66%

Issue #19: Socialist Security

Paul: Of 3, 3 Conservative – 100%
Hunter: Of 3, 3 Conservative – 100%
Thompson: Of 4, 3 Conservative – 75%

Issue #20: Tax Reform

Paul: Of 14, 14 Conservative – 100%
Hunter: Of 13, 13 Conservative – 100%
Thompson: Of 4, 3 Conservative – 75%

Issue #21: Technology

Paul: Of 4, 3 Conservative – 75%
Hunter: Of 5, 1 Conservative – 20%
Thompson: Of 2, 2 Conservative – 100%

Issue #22: War & Peace

Paul: Of 5, 0 Conservative – 0%
Hunter: Of 5, 5 Conservative – 100%
Thompson: Of 4, 3 Conservative – 75%

Issue #23: Welfare & Poverty

Paul: Of 4, 0 Conservative – 0%
Hunter: Of 4, 4 Conservative – 100%
Thompson: Of 4, 2 Conservative – 50%

I really expected Ron Paul to perform better in that last category. I would think any scaling back of the welfare state would be a yes vote for a Libertarian like Paul, yet he voted for $70 million in grants for just that – the welfare state. He also voted no on a number of conditions that would be placed upon welfare recipients – conditions that would make it harder to be on welfare – conditions that would have amounted to a significant scaling back of the welfare state, possibly even to the point of its phasing itself out.

I also expected Hunter and Thompson to be more conservative. Not more conservative than Paul, but I noticed in general that Hunter may, in fact, have turned out to be the most conservative, even of the three. So now with that having been said (these were mere thoughts), let’s tally the result:

Before doing this, let me emphasize that I consider Libertarians to be conservative – and MORE SO THAN REPUBLICANS. I don’t see the political spectrum as a big square upon which you could plot points in quadrants. I see it as a simple line along which you would plot your point as in a number line. Libertarians are CLEARLY to the right of Republicans, especially if you look at things this way. Call it two-dimensional if you like, but it is correct and a whole lot more accurate than any attempt to three-dimensionalize a political position. In a nutshell, it’s either conservative, or it ain’t.

In deciding what to call conservative, I considered factors such as a position’s constitutionality (which the Republicans ignore and the Libertarians obsess over) and its relevance with regard to said constitutionality and/or freedom (getting the government out of places it doesn’t belong – like your wallet). Also, Thompson’s votes, unlike Paul’s and Hunter’s, were made in the Senate, where there could be significant differences with regard to the actual vote. I tried to keep this in mind as well. Here we go …

Conservative Average

Ron Paul – 66% Conservative
Duncan Hunter – 70% Conservative
Fred Thompson – 72% Conservative

This study turned my understanding of the candidates upside-down. I had previously viewed Paul as a staunch Libertarian type who could seriously out-conservative any of the major candidates – certainly Fred Thompson, a Senator. My hypothesis at the beginning was that Paul would run away with the “most conservative” label, despite his non-support of protecting Americans from terrorists, with Thompson and Hunter coming in second and third, with second place being too close to call.

Instead, I do wind up seeing Hunter as the more conservative congressman (between himself and Ron Paul, at least – kudos to Hawk for picking up on that), with Thompson actually coming in a little more conservative than Hunter. Of course, as a Thompson supporter, this is a very pleasant surprise. To this point, my support for Thompson has been largely on the grounds that he is optimistic, ELECTABLE (Hunter and Paul are not), and a supporter of one of the most important philosophies of our culture (federalism), which has been coming under attack by powerful, greedy liberals. His open support of Federalism is a strong point that no other candidate has expressed.

And now we learn just how conservative he really is.

RWR

Posted in Alternative Media, New FedeRWRalism, RWR in the 'Sphere, RWRandom Thoughts | 2 Comments »

Opus: No Dad?

Posted by RightWingRocker on June 15, 2007

I grew up a fan of the Bloom County Comic Strip. I wish I had more access and time to its newer incarnation, “Opus”. The thing I really liked about the strip was that it was just downright silly and idiotic at times (“Real cats don’t eat lasagne.”), and Bill the Cat was the perfect antidote to a world obsessed with that annoying cartoon cat Garfield, the mere thought of whom still makes my skin crawl.

It seems this week Berkeley Breathed touched a nerve when he published this strip featuring Opus and a couple of kids. Feminazis gloated. The anti-male-bashing crowd bitched. I might have as well, except for one thing: I read the strip. I have a completely different opinion, one a bit closer to Kathleen Parker’s position in her column today. You see, Breathed did more than put up just one more overexaggeration of the dark side we all have (both male and female). He called attention to the foolishness of those who depict men (and fathers in particular) so consistently in a negative light. He expertly implemented Rush Limbaugh’s technique of “demonstrating absurdity by being absurd”, and aroused thoughts and emotions in people. Never mind what those thoughts and emotions were – everyone is going to react differently, and a cartoonist knows that – he forced Americans to THINK for a minute.

Some got the message, others didn’t. Some simply applied whatever ideology was most convenient for them, as always happens. Ultimately, and hopefully, the end result of this cartoon will be renewed debate on the merits of fatherhood. Hmm … hold on a minute while I go hug my daughter …

You know, my girls give the best “Daddy’s Girl” hugs you would ever imagine …

The merits of fatherhood, and more importantly, the fact that a bad father is more often than not better than no father at all (as long as we’re not talking abuse). In many ways, that’s my point about this week’s edition of “Opus”. Still, I think Ms. Parker said it best.

Two mommies may work out fine for some children. And some men, just like some women, are contemptible slobs or worse. But neither observation diminishes the larger truth that children need fathers, most of whom are not, in fact, the cartoonish characters we love to loathe.Breathed’s comic strip, intended or not, revealed where we have arrived as a society in our attitudes toward male role models, otherwise known as fathers: Two lesbian mommies are cool, while dad is a violent, profane, impulsive, substance-abusing slob. In such a world, we can be grateful for an existential penguin whose voice offers a counterweight to the know-nothingness of children.

Opus Penguin asked the appropriate question: “No dad?”

No dad? I couldn’t imagine.

RWR

Posted in Alternative Media, MSMadness, RWR in the 'Sphere, RWRandom Thoughts | Leave a Comment »

RWR Troll Poll: Serious or Satire?

Posted by RightWingRocker on June 14, 2007

OK. We’ve had some pretty interesting discussions here about “John Brown”, a lib-troll blogger/commentor (hasn’t commented here) who is just so far out there that I just don’t see any way he could be anything but a very clever satirist. Still, there are others who beg to differ. They think he’s serious and real.

Soooo … Have a look at John Brown’s blog, and let’s have your vote. Poll comments are enabled, so please be sure and leave them on the poll instead of in the comment area.

Serious or Satire?
Is “John Brown” of Savage Justice a satire troll or a serious liberidiot troll??
Dude. This guy is HILARIOUS! Satire for sure!!
Probably satire, but ya know there’s always a chance …
Whoa, man. Ya know I just can’t tell.
Probably a lib-troll, but who knows …
Lib-troll for sure. Only serious people can be this seriously sick (and stupid)!
 
View Result
Free Web Polls

buy semenax

Sorry. This is not coming up properly on the wordpress site. Please vote at BlogSpot. Thanks!

RWR

Posted in Funny Shit, RWR in the 'Sphere, 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 »

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 »

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 »

Thompson on Memorial Day

Posted by RightWingRocker on May 29, 2007

Students polled in a wide range of colleges and universities showed no real improvement in their historical knowledge. Some actually forgot part of what they’d learned in high school by the time they graduated — and I’m talking about some of our best-known Ivy League schools.Less than half of college seniors knew that, “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal” is from the Declaration of Independence. Less than half knew basic facts about the First Amendment. Half didn’t know that the Federalist Papers were written in support of the Constitution’s ratification. Only a quarter of seniors knew the purpose of the Monroe Doctrine.This is our quandary. Memorial Day is about remembering. It’s about remembering those who died for our country; but it’s also about remembering why they believed it was worth dying for. Too many Americans, though, have never been taught our own history and heritage. How can you remember something that you’ve never learned?

First of all, let me go on record as knowing that the above quote is from the Declaration of Independence and that it continues as follows (and this is from memory): “that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness”. This blog is my personal expression of the First Amendment, as is my religion. I know not only that the Federalist Papers were written in support of ratification of the Constitution, but that they were written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay. I also know that the Monroe Doctrine established the policy that the United States would fight any new European intrusion into the Western Hemisphere.

I also must say that I find it absolutely deplorable that any educational institution in this country would deprive any student of the knowledge of the philosophy under which this country was established and the names and backgrounds of those who implemented it.

I am further angered by those who would use a day set aside to honor the nameless soldiers who have given their lives protecting the very First Amendment that protects free speech rights to use that day to use those same free speech rights to demean those nameless soldiers.

If the typical terrorist suicide murderer’s heritage and cause are worth dying for, then why shouldn’t ours be? Is ours not superior? Is it not at a bare minimum worth learning about?

RWR

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

Not sure if this will work …

Posted by RightWingRocker on May 23, 2007

I sent the following email to Fred Thompson today. Think he’ll bite?

Hey, sir!

I’m really hoping you will run. I’m pretty close to sending my vote your way. I have a good number of questions that I’d like to post your answers to on my blog, which you can find at http://rightwingrocker.blogspot.com.

There are a few things of note there that you should read, including a few things I have posted about you, as well as my comments on the New Federalist Platform found at Reagan2020.org, which I strongly support.

My questions won’t all be easy, but I can be a very strong voice in your favor with the great answers I know you can give.

How about it??

RWR
http://www.rightwingrocker.com

It’ll be lots of fun if he goes for it.

RWR

Posted in New FedeRWRalism, RWR in the 'Sphere | Leave a Comment »