16. October 2008 by Satire V.

Barack Obamination wants us to believe that his 20-year long attendance at Jeremiah Wright’s sermons means nothing. (Other than what a fine church-going Christian he is)
He also expects us to believe that starting his Senatorial campaign in William “cop-killa” Ayers’ living room is devoid of significance as well.
If he had so little to do with these people, why does he refer to Ayers as a “Professor Of English” instead of “despicable murdering piece of garbage”? Why does he wait 20 years to suddenly notice that Race-baiter Wright is saying a few things out of line? Was he afraid of hurting their feelings?

The answer is simple, and visible to anyone not blinded by fanatacism: he had no disagreement with these disgusting anti-American pieces of subhuman slime.

Personally, I find Obama’s association with his wife disturbing enough not to vote for him. Anyone who can ignore the others is more interested in nurturing their senseless hatred of Republicans than in the “Truth” that Obamination claims to love.

Posted in Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »

16. October 2008 by Satire V.

The debate over who won the last presidential debate of this campaign will obviously go on for much longer than the actual event. The reality is that there was no clear winner, but there is likely to be an overwhelming loser.

After listening to both candidates talk about “climate change,” it is clear that America lost either way.

The loss is obviously much greater if Obama comes out on top in this election, with the high likelihood that we will have 2 of 3 of our federal government branches in the hands of the Dems. I am preparing to ride out 4 very painful years.

Speaking of the debate; it seems that Obamination showed his complete ignorance of a wide variety of subjects. From the obvious of not knowing where he was when his Senatorial campaign was kicked off, to only slightly more obscure policy areas.

The ignorance of how group insurance policies work was astounding. His suggestion that merely adding more bodies to an insurance plan will lower costs is frighteningly foolish. The more additional people that fall toward the higher risk end of actuarial tables, the higher the cost for the existing insured group. I guess the rest of us are supposed to suck up the cost of paying to add the high risk individuals he is most concerned with. More of his master wealth redistribution plan. Socialist!

He also apparently missed Economics 101 while organizing his community. Raising taxes on business causes them to cut pay, cut benefits, send jobs overseas, and raise prices. What a boon to the middle class on Main Street. Neophyte!

Well, here’s to all of us, the losers in this election, Americans. May the next four years pass quickly, and may we still be able to pull our country back from the brink when its over.

Posted in Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »

15. October 2008 by Satire V.

In Wednesday night’s debate, Obama opened himself up on taxes again and John McCain refused to take the opening.  Once again Obama has spoken proudly about taxing the rich, but also added that he would give tax breaks to businesses that create jobs in the United States.

Let’s assume for a moment that you are a business owner.  You can either keep your jobs overseas and avoid the ridiculously high tax rate in America, or you can create jobs here, pay the taxes up front, and collect on the back end.  Hmmm, money in the bank, or money in the government’s hands???  Tough decision.

John McCain should be pointing out that ANY tax on business will end up coming out of the pockets of working Americans.  If a business pays higher taxes, they are going to pass on that higher tax to you.  Some will eliminate jobs to save money.

It is clear that never having a real job has seriously affected Obamination’s ideas about how a free-market economy actually works.

Posted in Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »

15. October 2008 by Satire V.

I have to admit that I was tempted to call Obamination voters “sheep”, but after some short consideration I decided against it.
It is true that sheep will follow blindly, with little concern for the direction they are going. This doesn’t really go far enough in describing those that have decided to follow Obama.
The best parallel is probably the lemming. Following a leader that has no qualification other than a particular charisma, they throw themselves into an ocean that will be their doom.
This is how Obama’s fans behave. They don’t know where they are going, why they are going there, and when the abyss is described to them, they only run that much faster to the edge.
Ask his proponents why he should be president, and his own advisors can barely get past undefined “change”.
If Obamination wins the White House, I will do my best to stand aside and let the lemmings throw themselves from the precipice, but I worry that they could take the whole country with them.

Posted in Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »

5. October 2008 by Satire V.

John McCain must have decided sometime between rounds that he couldn’t win this fight without throwing at least a few punches.

Maybe he learned a bit from Sarahcuda’s debate performance; it’s ok to actually say that Obamimam is lying when he does. Maybe for tonight’s debate, he could bring a copy of the Congressional Record to remind Obamination that there is a record of his votes. It would also show his lack of ideas. To paraphrase Douglas Adams, Obama has written and sponsored bills in much the same way that a brick hasn’t.

I certainly hope that McCain is prepared to back up his own record with specifics this time. If he brings the examples and facts to the table, he should win the debate handily. If he is unprepared to defend his statements he will be in for trouble.

Posted in Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »

1. October 2008 by Satire V.

So far, a majority of the House of Representatives have done the right thing regarding the “credit crisis” by refusing to pass the bailout bill.  Unfortunately, there is some indication that the resolve of some members may waver given enough time.   The final result is likely to create even more such problems in the future.  Much of this problem was created by liberal policies dating back many years; that is, the encouragement of bad behavior by rewarding it.

In this case there are journalists, politicians, and even the President telling us how there won’t be credit available to those who need it.  Eventually, there will probably be something that most refer to as a “solution”, but how can an exacerbation of the root of the problem solve anything?  The problem in this case has been offering credit to everyone, regardless of ability to repay.  This has been partially due to government policies intended to encourage (pressure and threaten) lenders to give credit to everyone to make housing available to all, confusing home ownership with the American Dream.  Too much credit has been available, and there have been no positive consequences for good behavior.

The real opportunity here is to reduce available credit; creating a negative consequence for failure to pay, or late payment of bills and obligations.

If  Congress insists on spending to fix the problem the way to do it would be to make a few payments on the mortgages of responsible homeowners.  Those that took fixed-rate mortgages well within their means would be the best place to start.  This would be a great way to encourage the right kind of behavior.

Posted in Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »

27. September 2008 by Satire V.

Much has been made of the bias of the of the press the last few years.  There is absolutely no question that there is a significant bias in the press.  Although this exists on both the left and the right, there is also no question that the vast majority of it is to the left.

Much of the press makes claims to objectivity and worries over accusations of bias.  This is a blatantly disingenuous concern, as most of the members of the press are not generally concerned about unbalanced reporting, but only of being perceived as biased.  The question is, why?  Although they prescribe to a code of ethics, this code doesn’t even mention objectivity anymore and never should have.  So what are they so concerned about?

Objectivity was not the goal of the early English newspapers.  The New England Courant, published by James and then Benjamin Franklin, was far from objective.  Why should any modern newspaper or television news program be objective?  There is no mention of the objectivity of the press in the Constitution, only the freedom of it.  This constitutional right was included by the ratifiers of our Constitution to ensure that political speech challenging the government would not be suppressed.

The problem we face today is the myth of objectivity.  If we foolishly take the word of the liberal press when they make their claim of objectivity, we set ourselves up to accept a severely subjective viewpoint as objective.  What we should be demanding is a simple admission that no news organization is objective.  This way lies the nearest approximation of truth.  If each news organization was honest about its bias, we would at least know that we are listening to or reading the news coming from that slant.  The reason most news organizations and reporters don’t want you to be aware of their bias, is that you won’t accept their reporting as unadorned fact.  That might lead you to dangerous activities such as thinking for yourself; not something they want you to do.

I don’t even want objectivity from the press.  Almost no journalist is capable of removing their personal preconceptions from their reporting, so I would rather know what they believe.  How much easier if the news organization only hires those that share those beliefs and thus makes it clear to the consumer which way the wind blows.

Contrary to what most liberals claim, Fox News doesn’t make any claim to objectivity.  Their tagline is ‘fair and balanced.’  Fair to those who have 2 pounds of trash land on their driveway 7 days a week that is so liberal it almost slides off the left side onto the lawn.  Fair to travelers that are abused by CNN in most airports without their consent, and without airsick bags in the terminal.  Fair to those of us looking for news from a non-liberal point of view, and finally finding it.  Unfortunately, balance is nearly impossible to achieve in the journalistic climate of today, but at least the scale tips a little less to the far left with Fox on the air.  I congratulate them on the more honest approach.  At least I know that their view is from slightly right of center.  Talk radio is an even better source of news.  I have no doubts about where Rush Limbaugh, Laura Ingraham, Dennis Prager, and others stand.  They tell you very clearly exactly where that is.  I can listen knowing which way that news leans.

To talk radio, Fox news, and to many bloggers out there; Thank you for your honest admission of your political and social bent.

To most of the rest of the press; own up to your bias.   I don’t mind that you have it, just that you choose to hide it under the myth of objectivity.

Posted in Retruthing the Debate | Print | No Comments »

27. September 2008 by Satire V.

Dear Barack,

 America was listening to your typically selfless comments during a crucial moment for the economy.  We who understand what your economic policies would wreak, have decided that we don’t need you.  Apparently even the Democratic Party elites have no plans to get you on the horn.

Don’t waste a lot of time waiting by the phone.

Posted in Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »

18. September 2008 by Satire V.

The introduction of Sarah Palin as the Republican Vice-Presidential pick seems to have reopened the debate on abortion.  The liberals are very upset at the prospect that at least one and possibly two people that believe life is sacred should occupy the highest seats in the Executive Branch.  The lies started even before Sarah set foot on the Republican platform.  Cries that McCain intended to take away a woman’s “right” to choose and overturn Roe v. Wade were echoing from the paid slots on radio and TV.
The problem from my point of view is that we are still allowing the liberals to frame and define this debate and others.  It is time to re-inject truth into these disagreements, and we should start by correcting the language that we use to describe what abortion really is.
We don’t refer to a thug ‘performing’ a mugging or an assualt.
We don’t say that a murder was ‘performed.’
We should similarly no longer say that abortions are ‘performed.’

Let’s use the language that fits reality.  If we believe that abortion is wrong, and is the taking of an innocent life, we should use the accurate term and say that Doctors commit abortion.
When we talk about the horrific numbers of children killed in this way, we should say how many abortions are committed.

Let us be honest where they are not and use terms that, while hard to hear, are fully accurate.

Posted in Retruthing the Debate | Print | No Comments »

10. September 2008 by Satire V.

Perhaps at the first town hall debate, John McCain can ask Obama what his favorite shade is?  If there is pig in drag in the room, I think it would be the Democrat.

A better question….

Why would McDonald’s want to make the new fryer cook the CEO?

Posted in Uncategorized | Print | 1 Comment »