Posts Tagged ‘crazy’

As Democrats Play Games With The Democratic Process, It Turns Out Republicans Can Play Games, Too

February 21, 2011

First the facts:

Madison — As the budget stalemate drags on between unions and Gov. Scott Walker over his plan to repeal most public worker union bargaining rights, the National Guard has toured at least one state prison in recent days.

Last week, a half dozen National Guard members in plainclothes toured Redgranite Correctional Institution, said Lenny Wright, president of the AFSCME Local 281, which represents the prison’s correctional officers.

Walker spokesman Cullen Werwie initially said the National Guard had not visited Redgranite, but half an hour later confirmed it had happened. He described the visit as routine, saying unit commanders regularly visit prisons to understand how they operate.

“It wasn’t any specific contingency planning,” he said, referring to any possible strike.

Wright said prior to the tour he had already told the prison warden that his union local would not strike or have its members call in sick to disrupt security at the prison. But Wright said that the National Guard members had toured the prison with its security director and that he believed the purpose of the tour was to make sure the National Guard was ready to take over in the event of a strike.

“They were in plainclothes but they were there,” Wright said.

Daniel Meehan, president of the union local at Waupun Correctional Institution, said he’d heard the National Guard visited Redgranite and another facility in recent days.

Meehan said correctional officers – likely hundreds of them – would come to the Capitol in uniform to protest the bill. He said no officers would miss work for the protest, but those on vacation would come.

Walker has said that the National Guard is ready to deploy if needed to step in for essential public safety workers who don’t show up for their jobs. A spokeswoman for the state Department of Corrections could not be reached immediately Monday for comment.

Lt. Col. Jackie Guthrie, spokeswoman for the Wisconsin National Guard, said the National Guard does routinely visit Wisconsin prisons to prepare for providing “essential services” in the event of a work stoppage. Guthrie emphasized that Walker had not called up or deployed the National Guard.

Also on Monday, Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald (R-Juneau) threatened to force a vote soon on a bill that would require voters to show ID at the polls, in a move meant to lure Democrats boycotting the Senate back to Wisconsin.

The move is the latest pressure point Republicans are talking about pushing to end a standoff over a bill that would take away union rights from most public workers. Senate Democrats vacated to Illinois on Thursday to prevent a vote on the bill, and they’ve been there ever since.

The Capitol drama is moving into its second week, as protesters again fill the rotunda and Capitol grounds. Monday’s protesters were dominated by those opposed to the bill, after a weekend on demonstrations that also drew bill supporters to Madison.

While Fitzgerald raised the possibility of passing the photo ID bill, absent Senate Democrats have their own leverage against Republicans. The bill on union rights is included in a sweeping budget repair bill that also includes a $165 million bond refinancing that must be acted on by Friday to make sure the state meets its bills in the fiscal year that runs through June 30.

Without this refinancing element, the state would have to take other steps such as cuts to health care programs to keep its budget balanced this year. Walker and other leading Republicans are holding firm despite the deadline.

“Regardless of Friday’s deadline, Governor Walker is going to balance the state budget,” Walker spokesman Cullen Werwie said in a statement. “If Senate Democrats remain out of state-. . . it will force more aggressive and painful spending cuts in the very near future.”

On Tuesday, the Senate will vote on measures to honor the Green Bay Packers and extend a dairy and livestock tax credit. Fitzgerald said the ID bill could come another day if Democrats don’t return. Without Democrats present, the Republicans have enough members to be able to hold votes on non-financial bills but not on a fiscal bill such as a budget.

Republicans took control of the Legislature and governor’s office after the November elections, and they have widely been expected to pass the bill on photo ID. It is one of the more controversial measures that will be considered, and Democrats would want to show up to make their voices heard as the two sides disagree over the extent of voter fraud and the importance of preserving voter rights.

Republicans have 19 seats in the Senate, but 20 votes are needed for bills that spend money. As written, the photo ID bill would need 20 senators present because it spends money to provide free IDs and for other purposes. But Fitzgerald said the bill could be changed to take out the spending elements.

The Senate Committee on Transportation and Elections is slated to vote on the bill Tuesday after the Senate meets. Another committee is voting Tuesday to repeal a law that requires law enforcement officers to collect data on the race of drivers for every traffic stop. Democrats approved that requirement in 2009 to help determine if agencies are engaged in racial profiling.

Fitzgerald floated the idea of passing the photo ID bill to reporters after a tense meeting of the Senate Organization Committee, which sets the Senate schedule. Senate Minority Leader Mark Miller (D-Monona) and Sen. David Hansen (D-Green Bay) joined the meeting by phone from Illinois.

“You have shut down the people’s government and that’s not acceptable,” Fitzgerald scolded the Democrats.

Just to state the facts.  It is already a fact that Wiscionsin correctional officers have used sick time as a gimmick to illegitimately boost their salaries.  So let us not kid ourselves that they’ll all be showing up with happy smiling faces to work all their shifts.  At best, there is a lot of double-time and shift-juggling going on to keep the National Guard from taking over.

Meanwhile, liberal doctors are violated their medical oaths and ethics to write bogus sick notes for thousands of teachers and yes – I don’t doubt for a second – correctional officers.

There is a vile disease going on in Wisconsin that is actually far nastier than leprosy.  It is called liberalism.  It causes irrationality and the sufferer loses all moral intelligence.  It is fatal to any society if enough people catch the contagion.

Here’s just one example out of hundreds: Oregon Democrat David Wu.  But just about every Democrat has the Kool Aid Crazy disease.

And of course it’s not acceptable.  These elected Democrats are undermining the democratic process.  In a democratic republic such as we’ve had at least until the age of Obama, you show up and you vote.  Democrats are undermining the democratic process and are in fact undermining the will of the people.

But there IS an upside to the Democrats being vile and un-American piles of slime.  It gives Republicans a chance to pass a ton of stuff.

It will give Republicans their opportunity to pass my dream bill.

I wrote this back in March of 2010 as Democrats were violating the process to ram their ObamaCare through:

Let me put it this way: if Republicans take back the country, and use reconciliation to impose the “Hunt Every Democrat Down With Dogs and Burn Them Alive” Act, do you want Republicans to be able to justify their actions by quoting Barack Obama?

I was still dreaming and scheming in June of 2010:

If people knew the truth, we would be hunting every Democrat we could find down with dogs and burning them alive.

And this is our chance.  If budget matters are involved, we can make it “The All-Volunteer Hunt Every Democrat Down With Dogs And Burn Them Alive Act.”

Pass it, Wisconsin Democrats.  I’ll be there to volunteer my dog and my burning services.  Nothing would make my dog happier:

I wrote an article titled, “Why We Need A Rottweiler For President.”  We might need our Rottweilers for other nation-saving tasks.

Mine is actually quite the impressive specimen, indeed.  The breeder liked big Rotts.  One of the three breeding males was “AKC”: 27″ at the shoulder and 125 lbs.  The other two were huge, with one looking like a power forward or a middle linebacker, and the other looking like a St. Bernard with Rottweiler markings.  I picked the middle linebacker sire, but he was bred with a big female, and my little pup actually grew bigger than the “St. Bernard” version: standing at nearly 32″ at the shoulder, actually standing a full 6′ tall on his hind legs and weighing in at in a healthy 185lbs.  And he isn’t friendly to people we don’t want him to be frindly to.  Not at all.  You will walk away having wet your pants if you come to my door unannounced.  And that’s if the door is CLOSED.  You wouldn’t walk away at all if the door was open.  We have signs, such as  “Danger: Rottweiler on duty” and “I can make it to the fence in 2.8 seconds.  Can YOU?” and “Kindly stay back – thereby refraining from donating your body parts to my dog” posted on the gate to make that point.  The mail and parcel delivery people, the meter readers, etc. know and understand that the beloved family pet is not for strangers to pet.  And he would love nothing more than to hear, “There’s one, boy – GO GIT ‘EM!”

Obviously, the Republicans aren’t actually going to pass the act I here jokingly suggest (and I’ll refrain from telling you if we’d actually show up for hunting season if they did).  But the Republicans CAN  pass A LOT of things that will make Democrats howl with outrage.  And the funniest thing of all is that it will be their own damn fault that we passed them.

This isn’t polite and high-minded civil discourse, because Democrats are no longer the kind of people one can have such discourse with.  As we see above, Democrats are now the kind of people who cheat and lie as a matter of routine.  It is nothing short of a war for America.  And it is long past time that Republicans understood that in this “game” there ARE no rules.  If they firebomb your cities, you firebomb there cities until they are afraid to firebomb your cities any more.  If they try to pass a “Fairness Doctrine” to limit conservative speech, you pass a Fairness Doctrine that will limit liberal speech; and then you monitor the airwaves for content and you yank the right to broadcast from any television station that doesn’t have as many conservatives for as much time as it has liberals.  If they try to massively expand the size of government with programs like the trillion dollar stimulus and ObamaCare, then you abolish every government department and bureaucracy that you can and you shrink the size of government twice as much as liberals expanded it.  You beat them like dirty rugs, because you know that’s exactly how they will treat you the first chance they get.  And the more you do to them when you’ve got the power, the less they’ll be able to do to you when they get power back.  And you fight them the same way they fight you.

And you keep fighting them that way until they maybe learn that Fairness Doctrines and trillion dollar stimulus and ObamaCare programs maybe aren’t such a good thing, after all.

If Democrats want to play their un-American games and start a war, then let Republicans finally play and fight to WIN.

Advertisements

Why I Blame Democrats For Gun Laws That Allow Crazies To Kill

January 11, 2011

This is in response to the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, the nineteen shooting victims, and the six murdered citizens, in Tuscon, Arizona on Saturday at the hands of someone who is clearly mentally ill.

It sounds rather crazy to have such a title to many, I’m sure.  After all, isn’t it Democrats who are constantly trying to criminalize gun ownership?  And isn’t it Republicans who are constantly trying to keep guns legal?

Yes.  Which is exactly why I blame Democrats every single iota as much as the most liberal Democrat blames Republicans for criminals or crazies with guns.

First of all, we have a constitutional RIGHT to keep and bear arms.  The 2nd Amendment:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Now, Democrats for years and years have argued that the 2nd Amendment essentially contains a typo, that “militia” should have appeared twice, but somehow the phrase “the people” got stuck in.

But “the people” really means “militia.”

So when you see “the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances,” it really doesn’t apply to citizens.  It only really applies to militias.  Militias have the right to assemble and redress the government.  You “people” just stay shut in your homes and leave the government alone.

And go through your Constitution and make the necessary corrections.  Replace every occurrence of the phrase “the people” with “militia.”  And see how many freedoms you would lose and just what an absurdly laughable interpretation the Democrats have for the 2nd Amendment.

The 2nd Amendment clearly and obviously provides militias AND the people (i.e., the citizens of the United States, you and me) with the right to keep and bear arms.  And then it all but tells the Democrats to keep their paws off our guns (“… shall not be infringed”).

But the Democrats DO infringe.  And infringe, and infringe some more.

So we run into a problem: every time Republicans – who actually care about their Constitution – do anything to restrict gun rights or gun ownership, it ends up being a net-loss for guns and for the 2nd Amendment.  And every significant act involving a gun becomes the next cause to take away guns, as the following Newsweek article exudes:

“You never want a serious crisis to go to waste,” Rahm Emanuel famously said in 2008. The same goes for a shooting spree that gravely wounds a beloved congresswoman. Congress won’t enact gun control, as it did in the wake of the assassinations of Martin Luther King and Robert F. Kennedy in 1968, but perhaps something positive can come from this.

If Republicans try to make it tougher for criminals or crazies to get their hands on guns, Democrats will use that measure to shut the door all the tighter on every single law-abiding citizen to exercise their constitutional guarantees.  As I will show later in this article.

So because of Democrat refusal to recognize the clear and obvious meaning of the 2nd Amendment, we have an impasse.  We have an impasse which prevents common-sense laws from being passed.

This is what should happen: Democrats should now and for all time recognize that every single law-abiding American in every single state and in every single town has the right to keep and bear arms.  And Republicans should in response begin to help make it tougher to get guns, so that criminals and the mentally ill do not fall through the gaping holes that the intransigence has imposed.

Unless and until that day happens, Republicans will have no choice but to fight every gun law, because they will continue to correctly see that Democrats and liberal judicial activists will continue to use every law passed to prevent “the people” from possessing guns.

Here’s the bottom line: liberals often repeat the principle stated by William Blackstone, “Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.”  Benjamin Franklin took it even further, and stated “that it is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer.”

And here here.  Even though it creates a system in which the innocent too often are denied justice as the guilty go free.

But lets ALSO acknowledge that the same Constitution also clearly affirms that it is better that ten, or a hundred criminals and psychos get their hands on guns than that just one innocent Person should be deprived.

If you liberals like the first principle, quit being a hypocrite and like the second one, too.

For me, I do not want to be forced to wait helplessly for the police to maybe never show up as vicious criminals terrorize – or do worse – to my family.  Rather, if you try to enter my home, scumbags, I’ve got something for you.

It is every bit as evil for any society to deny a person (the singular form of “the people”, by the way) to be able to defend himself, or herself, or his or her family, from violence, as it would be to convict innocent people to make sure the guilty don’t go free.

Nor let me fail to mention that the founding fathers clearly intended an armed citizenry to be a powerful obstacle against government tyranny.  That the founding fathers would want a tyrannous American government overthrown as much as they would want a tyrannous British government overthrown.

Any good gun law that truly has a chance of preventing criminals or crazies like Jared Loughner from obtaining guns necessarily would depend on a strict registration and licensing of every single gun.  And Republicans will RIGHTLY refuse any such registration and licensing until Democrats codify it into the law of the land that such a registry can NEVER EVER be used to take away our guns.

What we need to see is this: a powerful understanding of the 2nd Amendment guarantee of the right to keep and bear arms such that, if any elected official, officer of the court, sworn law enforcement officer, or government employee undermines that law, they will immediately be recognized to have violated their constitutional oath and thereby disqualify themselves for their duties as politicians, judges, lawyers, law enforcement officers, or bureaucrats.  And let the anti-gun policies which include heavy taxation and burdensome regulation be expunged.

And when that occurs, then let every gun be registered.  Let there be a listing of every individual who owns a gun(s), with every serial number and even with every ballistic sample from every gun, be taken.

If someone is convicted of a felony, or if someone’s mental condition deteriorates beyond a legal threshhold, then immediately the list is checked: ‘does this individual have a gun?’  And if so that gun is removed.

That’s the kind of system we need.  And it is the system we cannot have as long as the future question of the constitutional guarantee of gun ownership is in any way, shape or form an open question.

We’ve seen the sorts of laws Democrats have proposed being used against “the people” before in many other parts of the world.  We have seen it in tyrannous, totalitarian regimes throughout history.  First they demanded the registration of weapons; then they came and confiscated those weapons.  And no one could stand up against them, because only they had the guns.

The other thing it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out is that if we pass laws taking away the right to keep guns, only the law-abiding would follow the law.  Criminals would not follow the law;  I mean, dang, just look up the definition of “criminal.”

Therefore, until our law is clearly and completely understood to guarantee the right of gun ownership by every single law-abiding and mentally sane citizen, you will never see the kind of gun control laws that our society obviously needs.

Which is why I rightly blame Democrats for the lack of gun control laws that would prevent crazies like Jared Loughner from getting their hands on guns.

Democrats, the “living, breathing document, open to interpretation” theory of the Constitution needs to go down the drain once and for all in order for meaningful gun regulations to ever succeed.

Because this is America.

Democrats Stuck Between Crazy and Pandering on Domestic Oil

August 4, 2008

As George Stephanopoulos asked House Speaker Nancy Pelosi virtually the same question over and over again – and as Pelosi provided one disingenuous non sequitur after another – Stephanopoulos increasingly began to look as if he had just stepped in something that really stank.

Here’s a partial transcript of the encounter from the August 3, 2008 This Week:

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, HOST: You’ve been getting a lot of heat for not allowing a straight up or down vote expanding drilling off the coasts of the United States. Why won’t you permit a straight up or down vote?

NANCY PELOSI, SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: What we have presented are options that will really make a difference at the pump. Free our oil, Mr. President. We’re sitting on 700 million barrels of oil. That would have an immediate effect in ten days. What our colleagues are talking about is something that won’t have an effect for ten years and it will be 2 cents at the time. If they want to present something that’s part of an energy package, we’re talking about something. But to single shoot on something that won’t work and mislead the American people as to thinking it’s going to reduce the price at the pump, I’m just not going to be a part of it.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Except it’s not just Republicans that are calling for this. Members of your own caucus say we must have a vote. Congressman Jason Altmire, let me show our viewers right now, says, “There is going to be a vote. September 30 will not come and go without a vote on the opening the Outer Continental Shelf. The message has been delivered. The issue can’t be ignored any longer.” He says he speaks for a lot of Democrats. He’s talked to the leadership and a vote must happen.

PELOSI: Maybe it will, as part of a larger energy package. Let’s step back, call a halt and put this in perspective. What we have now is a failed energy policy by the Bush/Cheney, two oilmen in the White House. $4 a gallon gasoline at the pump. And what they’re saying is let’s have more of the same. Let’s have more of big oil making, record profits, historic profits. You see the quarterly reports that just came out, who want to be subsidized who don’t really want to compete. Let them use the subsidies to drill oil in protected areas. Instead we’re saying, free the oil. Use it, don’t lose it. There’s 68 million acres in lower 48 and 20 million more acres in Alaska where they’re permitted where they could drill anytime. This is a diversionary tactic from failed energy policies.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But if you feel you have the better arguments, why not give a straight up or down vote for drilling?

PELOSI: Because the misrepresentation is being made that this is going to reduce the price at the pump. This is again a decoy, it’s not a solution.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, if you’re right, why not let it be debated out and have the vote?

PELOSI: We have a debate every single day on this subject. What you saw in the Congress this week was the war dance of the hand maidens of the oil companies. That’s what you saw on the Republican side of the aisle. Democrats and Republicans are not right there on party lines on this issue. There are regional concerns, as well as some people concerned about what this means back home for them. But we have a planet to save. We have an economy to grow. And we can do that if we keep our balance in all of this and not just say but for drilling in unprotected and these protected areas offshore, we would have lower gas prices.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So what exactly are you trying to say? You say you might allow a vote as part of a comprehensive package, but you won’t allow a vote on —

PELOSI: We have put on the floor. Free our oil. Strong bipartisan support for that. Use it, don’t lose it. Strong bipartisan support for that. End undue speculation, strong bipartisan support for that. We’ve talked about these things. Invest in renewable energy resources so that we can increase the supply of energy for our country. Strong bipartisan support for that.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Yet you brought those measures to the floor in a way under the suspension of the rules so that it couldn’t be amended with a drilling proposal.

PELOSI: Well, we built consensus and have a strong bipartisan. This is what’s going to make a difference to reduce the dependence on foreign oil, to stop our dependence on fossil fuels in our own country. To increase the supply of energy immediately to reduce the price at the pump to protect the consumer. So this is a policy matter. This is very serious policy matter. It’s not to use a tactic of one — one tactic in order to undermine a comprehensive energy package to reduce our dependence on foreign oil which is a national security issue. To reduce our dependence on fossil fuels in our own country. Now, will we be talking about natural gas that’s cheaper, better for the environment —

STEPHANOPOULOS: But why not allow votes on all that? When you came in as Speaker you promised in your commitment book “A New Direction for America,” let me show our viewers, you said that “Bills should generally come to the floor under a procedure that allows open, full, fair debate consisting of full amendment process that grants the Minority the right to offer its alternatives.” If they want to offer a drilling proposal, why can’t they have a vote?

PELOSI: They’ll have to use their imagination as to how they can get a vote and then they may get a vote. What I am trying to, we have serious policy issues in our country. The President of the United States has presented this but for this our economy would be booming. But for this, gas would be cheaper at the pump. It’s simply not true. Even the President himself in his statement yesterday and before then has said, there is no quick fix for this by drilling.

STEPHANOPOULOS: And Senator Obama has agreed with you. He says, listen. This is not the answer. Drilling is not the answer. But he said over the weekend that he might be willing to sign onto drilling as part of a comprehensive proposal.

PELOSI: What Senator Obama said is what we want a President to say. Let’s look at all of the options. Let’s compare them. And let’s see what really does increase our supply. Protect our environment, save our economy, protect the consumer, instead of a single shot thing that does none of the above. Why we give subsidies to big oil to drill instead of letting them —

STEPHANOPOULOS: I want to move on to other issues. Just to be clear, you are saying you will not allow a single up or down vote on drilling. But you will allow a vote on a package that includes drilling?

PELOSI: No, what I’m saying to you is, as far as I’m concerned, unless there is something that — you never say never to anything. You know, people have their parliamentary options available to them. But from my standpoint, my flagship issue as Speaker of the House and 110th Congress has been to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and reverse global warming. I’m not giving the gavel — I’m not giving a gavel away to a tactic that will do neither of those things. That supports big oil at the cost and expense of the consumer.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So you’re not going to permit a vote, you may get beat, but you’re not going to permit a vote on your own?

PELOSI: Again, we take this one step at a time. But while we’re spending all of this time on a parliamentary tactic when nothing less is at stake than the planet, the air we breathe, our children breathe.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But that’s what I don’t understand. If you could get votes on everything else that you care about which you say there is strong bipartisan support, why not allow a vote on the drilling as well?

PELOSI: Because the President will not allow any of these other things to go forth. Why are we not saying to the President, why don’t you release oil from the SPR in ten days to have the price at the pump go down? Why are you opposed to any undue speculation in the oil markets? Why do you not insist that people who have leases on our land with permits ready to go use those? The oil companies don’t want competition. And what we would do by saying, go ahead, give them the subsidies. Allow them to drill in areas that are protected now, instead of where they’re allowed to drill, is to diminish all of the opportunity that we have for an electricity standard for our country. Where we set out standards that makes the competition for renewable energy resources better. Which says to the private sector, invest here because there is a standard that they have to honor. If you just say it’s drill, drill, drill, drill and we’re going to subsidize it, what is the motivation for the private sector to come in and say we’re going to support these renewable energies, wind, solar, biofuels. Plug-in cars. Natural gas and other alternatives.

Speaker Pelosi has engaged in every form of partisan gamesmanship in order to block Republicans from even having a debate over drilling measures. Apparently, that qualifies as “open, full, fair debate consisting of full amendment process that grants the Minority the right to offer its alternatives” in the Nancy Pelosi dictatorship.

According to a CNNMoney.com poll, 73% of Americans favored offshore drilling as of June 2008.

In PelosiLand, that kind of demand from the American people calls for only one thing: a five week vacation.

But Republicans aren’t having any of it:

House Republicans will be back on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives again Monday to continue the unprecedented protest that began last Friday, when dozens of Republicans joined hundreds of American citizens on the House floor to protest Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) decision to send Congress home for the rest of the summer without a vote on legislation to lower gas prices and move America toward energy independence.

President Bush doesn’t mind letting Democrats twist in the wind for the next five weeks while Americans become angrier and angrier.

Barack Obama reversed his position (what else is new?) against opening up the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to provide immediate price relief on gas prices. He had earlier said that the Strategic Reserves should only be tapped in the event of an emergency. Apparently a nine point drop in the polls over the course of a single week qualifies as an emergency where crippling $4 plus gasoline does not. Obama is hoping that taking 70 million barrels from the Reserve would reduce the price just long enough to keep the oil issue at bay until after the election.

Obama does not seem to want to take part in Nancy Pelosi’s (Captain KoolAid’s) suicide pact with the environmentalist groups. He is clearly beginning to hedge his position on offshore drilling. But we can’t depend upon this serial pandering flip flopper to follow through with whatever promises he makes any more than we can depend upon Nancy Pelosi’s mental health.

The Democrat Party finds itself stuck between a Crazy and a Panderer.