Friday, May 22, 2009

GITMO and Motivating Terrorists

Mr. Obama made another speech the other day. How many PR speeches is that for the guy since he became President? 100? 200?

Anyway, as usual, he created several straw men and knocked them down and blamed Bush for all of life's problems, 28 times.

So the biggest political mistake Mr. Obama made as president so far, in my opinion, is rushing in and signing an order to close GITMO before having a plan or the funds to do it. Ironically, he went in without an exit strategy.

So Mr. Obama now has about 8 months left before he's going to close GITMO and move the terrorists to someplace else, but we still don't have a plan from the man on how he's going to do it.

His own Democrats refuse to fund the closing of GITMO because they want to see a plan first. I'm curious why they didn't use this same logic when they approved over $600 billion to fund Obama's healthcare reform, which there is no plan for. It's a "down payment", according to Mr. Obama.

People are arguing over why we should bring them into the USA versus somewhere else. The argument we aren't having, which I find curious, is why we are moving them out of GITMO at all. Why? Why move them from GITMO and into a Colorado super, super secure prison with sprinkles on top?

We spent millions of dollars on GITMO to house these terrorists. Mr. Obama says we must close GITMO and move them to another prison. Why? He says it's because GITMO motivates radical Muslims to become terrorists. It's bad for America's "image".

American "infidels" in Iraq and Afghanistan killing Muslims is fine, but holding a little over 200 of them at GITMO where they play soccer and do puzzles and get better food than I get really sets them off on a suicide bombing run, doesn't it?

OK, so Mr. Obama says we need to close GITMO because it creates new terrorists, right? Well, what does he think releasing CIA memos that detail the "torture" we committed on Muslims does? Does he think that makes them want to share a snow cone with us?

Mr. Obama says one thing but does another. He's very good at keeping his persona completely separate from his polices. For example, he's more Pro Abortion than Ted Kennedy or Barbara Boxer, yet he makes a speech and everyone perceives him as in-the-middle and pragmatic.

Mr. Obama would be a fantastic snake oil salesman.

Oh, by the way, Mr. Obama still has the authority to use enhanced interrogation techniques if he feels the need to after a future attack. Says one thing, does another.

Wednesday, May 6, 2009

The Union Way

The L.A. Times has a story about an L.A. teacher who had 4 complaints in 1 year filed against him from female students and colleagues over sexual harassment. He has been paid to stay home for 7 years. He gets vacation time, sick time, full pay, full benefits, and he doesn't do a minute of work.

He's only 1 of 160 employees of the L.A. Unified School District doing the same thing.

Why? Teachers union contract.
The housed are accused, among other things, of sexual contact with students, harassment, theft or drug possession. Nearly all are being paid. All told, they collect about $10 million in salaries per year -- even as the district is contemplating widespread layoffs of teachers because of a financial shortfall.
This is the insanity that is liberal policy. This is what unions do.

Tuesday, May 5, 2009

Republican Stronghold? The Plano Firefighters Association

Many times when I'm writing comments on news stories or after writing a new article on this blog, I get this kind of response, "This is Texas, not California. That couldn't happen here."


One of the problems California has is the unions control the state. I once read that California could save $15 billion with their budget if they just paid their government employees what they get in the private sector. They get paid more than the private sector and their benefits are superior. But the employees have a strong union, and Democrats are bought and paid for by the unions, so nothing changes.


Even the Obama administration is exhibiting this behavior by demanding, and even forcing, everyone to "sacrifice" when restructuring banks or car companies or firing CEOs...except for the unions. The unions haven't made any sacrifices under Obama so far. While executives of AIG get a busload of an angry mob on their front doorstep at their house, organized by the Service Employees International Union, and are vilified and even encouraged to commit suicide by a U.S. Senator, the United Auto Workers management continues to play golf on the $6.4 million dollar golf course the UAW owns.


I don't care much for unions.


Anyway, this all leads to the Plano Firefighters Association. The Dallas Morning News has a story about the growing political clout this union has in Plano politics with their practice of giving money to candidates they endorse so they can advertise.


The turnout at local elections outside of major national elections is usually pitiful in Collin County. I think it's around 4%. So with such a small number of people voting, having just a couple thousand dollars to mail out postcards or buy road signs is a huge advantage.


According to the DMN, the Plano Firefighters Association has spent over $75,000 on local elections, more than any other entity. That's a huge amount at this level in just a few years.


I went to the Plano Firefighters Association's Web site and I was shocked when I clicked on their "Political Links" button. I found a long list of Leftist political Web sites including:


Center for American Progress

Common Dreams.org

The Democratic Strategist


and my favorite...


This is the Plano Firefighters Association, folks, not Berkeley. This is the political philosophy behind a powerful organization right here in Plano influencing your elections.

You don't think Texas or Collin County or Plano can turn into California? I've got news for you, it certainly can, especially when you have someone, whose list of political Web site recommendations mirrors Michael Moore's or Janeane Garofalo's, is running a union that is willing to spend tens of thousands of dollars on local elections.

Do you think ballot initiatives over bonds or new mobility taxes are going to be completely fair when you have an organization spending thousands on misleading advertisements? Who can compete with that at this level?

I experienced this firsthand in California. The unions spent over $200 million against Arnold's reform initiatives and you had firefighters (union) and police officers (union) and teachers (union) and nurses (union) in misleading ads telling you to vote for "Prop. A" because "puppies and old ladies will die".

What's even more scary is the fact the Obama administration is going to sign a bill that will allow all unions in all states to have more power. You think Plano firefighters aren't going to use that power to increase their pay and benefits and do what unions do, extort? You don't think they aren't going to influence who gets elected?

We know how this plays out. We've been down this road before...in California, Michigan...

Monday, May 4, 2009

Blaming America - Mexico's Drug Cartels

By now you have read all about the violence on our borders (and inside our borders) created by drug cartels in Mexico. As I would expect, liberals blame the USA for this violence and corruption because we are the customers, we are the ones buying drugs, so it's very understandable, to a liberal, that this corruption and violence exists in Mexico. It's not their fault, it's our fault.

So why don't these cartels exist in Canada? Hmmm, well, errrr, ummm. Humpf.


Thursday, April 30, 2009

Local Elections Matter

Early voting for the local municipal elections began on April 27th and runs through May 5th. Election day is May 9th, Saturday.


I've been asked what my views are in regards to the candidates for Allen, Frisco, McKinney and Plano. I'm not knowledgeable enough on the candidates in Allen, Frisco and McKinney to have an opinion, but here is what I look for.


What I'm looking for are candidates who do not support new taxes for rail, do not want to increase the density of housing, are willing to make cuts in budgets outside of public safety and understand that it's important to attract companies to the suburbs.


The Arts of Collin County is also a local issue candidates are weighing in on. This $80 million dollar theatre they want to build at Custer and 121 will cost the Plano, Frisco and Allen taxpayers at least $1.5 million per year, of which Plano will be responsible for $900,000 because it's split based on population. Last year, the Richardson taxpayers picked up a $1,000,000 tab for the Eisemann Center. These theaters don't make a profit, they run a large budget deficit every single year. The taxpayers will have to pick up that bill, every single year, forever.


Would a 2,100-seat theatre be cool to have off of 121? Of course! Can we afford it right now? No, we can't. We have a multimillion dollar deficit. How can you call yourself a fiscal conservative and want to add at least $900,000 to the Plano budget when we have a deficit?


So here is how I'm voting in this election in Plano:


Plano mayor - David W. Fincannon or Phil Dyer

This one is a no-brainer, I'm voting for David. David is a free-market, less government kind of guy. He is against the new mobility taxes for rail. Phil Dyer is a true believer of rail and wants more taxes for it. David questions the spending on the Plano Centre and the ACC. Phil supports ACC. David wants more transparency from the government and questions the effectiveness of the economic incentive program. Transparency is always good. The city has raised our property taxes to create an economic incentive fund. How effective has it been at what cost?


The only viewpoint of David's that I disagree with is he seems to be more strict than me on water use.


Place 2 - Susan Plonka or Ben Harris

I'm voting for Susan. Both candidates are for ACC and regional rail taxes, but I read a quote from Ben Harris that promoted high density "nodes".


Place 8 - Greg Myer or Lee Dunlap

This is another no-brainer, I'm voting for Greg. Lee Dunlap is the only incumbent running. Lee voted to give $1 million in taxpayer money to Fehmi Karahan to help pay for a private fountain in the Shops At Legacy, despite a vocal opposition by his constituents. Lee supports raising taxes to pay for rail. Greg Myer is against it. Grey Myer said he supports more cuts to city services, citing Live Green Plano and the Plano Television Network programs as examples.


PISD Trustee Place 7 - Robert Canright or Missy Bender

I'm voting for Robert. Robert is critical of Plano's curriculum and cronyism and I agree with him. PISD is rated as Acceptable versus Frisco/Allen/Richardson's Recognized rating while Plano is spending the most per pupil out of those four. There are big questions about Plano's math curriculum where they don't teach 3rd graders math facts. There needs to be a change in PISD.


PISD Trustee Place 6 - Steve Navarre or Marilyn Hinton or Nathan Barbera or Rama Lavu

To be honest, I'm not as knowledgeable about these candidates as I would like to be, but I have read everything I can get my hands on and I'm voting for Steve because of his emphasis on transparency and accountability.


Plano City, Proposition 1 - No

Plano City, Proposition 2 - No

Plano City, Proposition 3 - No

Plano City, Proposition 4 - No

Plano City, Proposition 5 - No

Plano City, Proposition 6 - No

Plano City, Proposition 7 - YES

UPDATE - I initially stated I was going to vote NO on Prop. 7. There is misinformation about Prop. 7 and I'm guilty of forwarding that. Here is what the actual ballot says:


"The revocation of $3,500,000 general obligation bonds for an overpass project to provide grade separation at Preston Road and Legacy Drive."


The Plano Star Courier reports that this bond "...totals $3,500,000 for the renovation...", mistakingly replacing revocation for renovation. Indeed, a lot of people think this proposition is for a new bond when it actually repeals a previous bond. So I'm voting YES on it. Thanks for readers informing me on this!


Thursday, April 23, 2009

The Theocracy of the United States of America

Don't pour your motor oil into the sewer. That's common sense. When you change your car's oil, don't pour the old oil into the sewer. That's bad for our environment.


Don't throw used tires into the creek. I get that. We don't want to see old tires sitting in our creeks. It's bad for the environment, and it's ugly.


Don't throw your trash out your car window onto the side of the road. That makes Native Americans cry. It's common sense.


Don't buy fruits and vegetables at my store that aren't grown locally?

Don't buy fruits and vegetables that are out of season locally?

Don't use my clothes dryer, but use a clothes line outside to dry my clothes?

Don't purchase prepared dinners at the supermarket?

Only go shopping one day a week and map out the most efficient route?

Have fewer activities outside the home and stay home more often?

Create a compost in my backyard?

Wash my clothes in cold water only?

Don't buy bottled water?

Don't use my oven?

Don't use the Sleep mode on my computer, but shut it down?

When shopping for a home, don't buy a new home that creates "sprawl" and get a small house?

Buy clothes made locally?

Buy used clothes?


Environmentalism has become a new religion where some people are drastically changing their lifestyles for a cause that is based on faith and not proof. I don't have a problem with that when people make personal choices that affect only them. More power to you. The problem is this religion has become so widespread and so intertwined with our government, we are now living under a Theocracy. It won't be long before we have a new Inquisition where I will be put on the rack for heresy.


These fanatics believe that the Earth is warming and that man is the cause of this warming. They think that this warming is going to melt the ice caps, which will flood millions of square miles of land, create mass starvation as droughts occur across the globe, dogs and cats will be sleeping together - mass hysteria.


They believe that carbon emissions into the atmosphere are creating a "greenhouse gas" that warms the Earth. They believe there is a direct correlation between the amount of carbon emissions going into the air and the average temperature of the Earth.


What creates carbon emissions? Any engine that uses fossil fuels. That would be planes, trains and automobiles which all use gas that is created with oil. What about electricity? Well, electricity is created with power plants. Coal power plants burn coal, a fossil fuel, and that puts a lot of carbon emissions into the air. The same is true about oil power plants.


So these religious fanatics believe that the more you drive your car, the more you are warming the planet. The more electricity you use, the more emissions from power plants go into the air, the more you warm the planet.


The problem with this religion is the average temperature on Earth peaked in 1998 and has been going down since. It dropped dramatically in 2007 and in 2008, the temperatures reached 1980 levels. At last December's U.N. Global Warming conference in Poznan, Poland, 650 of the world's top climatologists stood up and said man-made global warming is a media generated myth without basis. Climatologist Dr. David Gee, Chairman of the International Geological Congress said, "For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming?"


The University of Illinois' Arctic Climate Research Center released conclusive satellite photos showing that Arctic ice is back to 1979 levels. On top of that, measurements of Antarctic ice now show that its accumulation is up 5 percent since 1980.


A recent massive Russian study states that we are beginning a new Ice Age. Based on the core samples from Russia's Vostok Station in Antarctica, we know the earth's atmosphere and temperature for the last 420,000 years. This evidence suggests that the 12,000 years of warmth we call the Holocene period is over.


So if an increase in carbon emissions is supposed to warm the planet, why has the temperature dropped since 1998 at the same time carbon emissions have increased?


When confronted with this inconvenient truth about the temperatures going down since 1998, the Global Warming believers have changed the name of their religion from "Global Warming" to "Climate Change", which the rest of us refer to as "Seasons".


The fact is carbon emissions follow the rise in temperatures, not lead it. So this whole idea that we need to cut back on carbon emissions is based on a fiction. This is more about an agenda from people on the Left who want to dictate their lifestyle choice to the rest of us. No big SUVs. No cars, take public transportation. No big shopping malls. No "sprawl". No electronics. No "Big Oil". No water parks. None of that. That is all "destroying the planet" and you need to wear hemp clothes and buy organic foods and live in green communes while singing Kumbaya, or we will all peril.


Plano is going right along with the new religion and spends hundreds of thousands of dollars of our money indoctrinating the public to "save the planet".


We have politicians who are creating legislation that will lead to a rail system in North Texas that will cost billions of dollars so it can carry a tiny number of people to take a tiny number of cars off of the roads "to save the planet".


Common sense. Don't throw tires into the creek. Don't throw your motor oil into the sewer. Buy strawberries from Australia, if you want.


So in honor of Earth Day 2008, which was yesterday, I post these quotes from the very first Earth Day in 1970:


“The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years,” he declared. “If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.” — Kenneth Watt, Ecologist, April 19, 1970


Because of increased dust, cloud cover and water vapor "...the planet will cool, the water vapor will fall and freeze, and a new Ice Age will be born," Newsweek magazine, January 26, 1970.


By 1995, "...somewhere between 75 and 85 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct." Sen. Gaylord Nelson, quoting Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, Look magazine, April 1970.


“By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate…that there won’t be any more crude oil. You’ll drive up to the pump and say, `Fill ‘er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say, `I am very sorry, there isn’t any.’” — Kenneth Watt, Ecologist


"Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.” — George Wald, Harvard Biologist

“Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.” — Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist

“By…[1975] some experts feel that food shortages will have escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of unbelievable proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the ultimate food-population collision will not occur until the decade of the 1980s.” — Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist

“It is already too late to avoid mass starvation,” — Denis Hayes, chief organizer for Earth Day

“Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions….By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.” — Peter Gunter, professor, North Texas State University

“Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support…the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half….” — Life Magazine, January 1970

“At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.” — Kenneth Watt, Ecologist

“Air pollution…is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone.” — Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist

Thursday, April 16, 2009

Red Protest vs Blue Protest

Thousands of people participated in TEA parties across the USA to protest the excessive spending of the U.S. government and the excessive taxation of the federal government, state government, city government, etc.

Some in the media are dismissing the hundreds of protests across the United States yesterday as a stunt. You get a dozen women wearing pink protesting the Iraq War and it's covered by the mainstream media as a national outcry against the war, but when hundreds of thousands of people from all walks of life show up to protest the recent actions of their government, it's a stunt. The condescension by the media is staggering.

When fiscal conservatives protest, they are portrayed as an angry mob with pitchforks. When liberals protest, it's portrayed as a national mandate against the Republican administration.

I saw several photos of the fiscal conservatives protesting and I couldn't help but notice that these photos were different than the ones I've seen of liberals protesting. Here is a comparison for you:


Liberal wearing Soviet Union sweat jacket giving out a communist newsletter.

Smiling fiscal conservative.

Liberal

Fiscal conservative

Typical liberal signs portraying the USA, and Israel, as evil Nazi imperialists

Fiscal conservative

Liberals portraying President Bush as Hitler.

Fiscal conservative

Liberals saying the United States flew airplanes into buildings, not Islamic terrorists

Fiscal conservative

Liberals

Fiscal conservatives

Liberals

Liberals teaching their kids to hate their country

Lots of anti-Semites on the Left. I have no clue why so many Jewish Americans associate themselves with a political spectrum that is so anti-Semitic.

Liberals

Liberal - at least she says Israel is a nation.

From what I saw in the coverage of the TEA parties on April 15th, I'm very proud of my fellow fiscal conservatives in how they handled themselves at these protests. We didn't see the smashing of windows, the destruction of property that is common when liberals protest the G20 or WTO or G8.

In my opinion, 2010 is likely going to be another 1994.