The Long Version

Retired broadcast journalist. Blogging helps scratch the itch. Recovering exRepublican – Sober and still Conservative.

Posts Tagged ‘United States

The Patterns of Deceit

leave a comment »

Press Secretary Jay CarneyIn 2011 Jay Carney, White House press secretary, told reporters President Obama had never met his uncle Onyango “Omar” Obama, an illegal immigrant to the US, and a man the President wrote about in his book Dreams From My Father.

Today, Jay Carney acknowledged the President had not only met his uncle but actually stayed with him for several weeks when attending Harvard.  Why this sudden admission to an act that was flatly denied 2 years ago?

During a deportation hearing for Uncle Obama recently, Omar stated under oath that the President had stayed with him after he arrived in Cambridge to attend law school while then law student Barack Obama looked for an apartment of his own.

Carney stated, “When Omar Obama said the other day, and there were reports that he said the other day, that President Obama, back when he was a law school student had stayed with him in Cambridge, I thought it was the right thing to do to go ask him,” Carney said. “Nobody had asked him in the past and he said that he in fact had met Omar Obama when he moved to Cambridge for law school, that he stayed with him for a brief period of time, until his — the president’s — apartment was ready. After that, they saw each other once every few months while the president was in Cambridge and after law school they gradually fell out of touch.”

When asked why they had said differently back in 2011 Carney confessed, “Back when this arose, folks looked at the record, including the president’s book, and there was no evidence that they had met and that was what was conveyed. Nobody spoke to the president.” Nobody spoke to the President?  Well, if you didn’t speak to the president then you don’t know.  The answer in 2011 should have been I don’t know if the president knows or has met Omar Obama, but I’ll check with him when I get the chance and get back to you.  Right?  Wouldn’t that be the proper way to handle that question without directly asking the president?

No, not with this administration. If anything comes up that looks like it could harm the reputation of this President the first rule of engagement is to deny.  Just lie.

This isn’t a huge story. This isn’t an implication of guilt on the President or an indictment or a smoking gun.  In fact the story is hardly worth repeating. So I don’t want to be misinterpreted as making this into something bigger than it is.

The only reason I bring it up is because it represents a consistent pattern with this administration. They are notorious now for stating untruths, which are later discovered, only to be met with a shrug and that incredulous look only Jay Carney can provide that says, “Really? You’re asking me about that? Really??

Behavioral patterns tell stories with greater depth and clarity than words ever could.

The patterns exhibited by this administration over the past five years are very concerning.

 

The Affordable Car Act (NO I did not misspell Car)

leave a comment »

The U.S. government has just passed a new law entitled “The Affordable CAR Act” declaring that every citizen MUST purchase a new car by April, 2014.

Lightning-McQueenThese ‘affordable’ cars will cost an average of $54,000-$155,000 each. This does not include taxes, tags, registration, fuel, maintenance, or repair costs.

This law has been passed because, until now, typically only wealthy and financially responsible people have been able to purchase cars. This new law ensures that every American can now have an ‘affordable’ car of their own, because everyone is ‘entitled’ to a new car. If you purchase your car before the end of the year, you will receive four ‘free’ tires (does not include mounting).

In order to make sure everyone purchases an ‘affordable car,’ the cost of owning a car will increase on average of 250-400% per year. This way, wealthy people will pay more for something that other people don’t want or can’t afford to maintain. But, to be fair, people who can’t afford to maintain their car will be regularly fined and children (under the age of 26) can use their parents car(s) to drive until they turn 27, after which date they must purchase their own car.

If you already have a car, you can keep it (unless it has more than 150 miles on it). If you don’t want or don’t need a car, you are required to buy one anyway. If you refuse to buy one or can’t afford one, you will be regularly fined $800 until you purchase one, or face imprisonment. If you cannot (or don’t want to) purchase an ‘affordable car’ from a private business, you can buy a starter car from the U.S. government ‘affordable car exchange.’  Such a car will have the basic necessities and will only cost ‘slightly more’ than a similar car purchased from a private business. Plus, since your tax dollars will subsidize the purchase of a car from the U. S. government’s ‘affordable car exchange,’ it will appear that you are getting a *good deal.

Failure to use the car will also result in fines. People living in areas with no access to roads are not exempt. Pre-existing conditions such as age, motion sickness, experience, knowledge, or lack of desire are not acceptable excuses for not using your car.

A government review board will decide everything, including when, where, how often, and for what purposes you can use your car, along with how many people can ride in your car. The board will also determine if one is too old or healthy enough to be able to use their car, and will also decide if your car has out lived its usefulness or if you must purchase specific accessories like spinning rims or a newer and more expensive car.

2013_mercedes-benz_s-class-pic-2731401808886937759

In fairness, those that can afford luxury cars will be required to purchase one. The government will also decide the color of each car. Failure to comply with these rules will result in fines and possible imprisonment.

Government officials and their staff are **exempt from this new law. They are important and too busy running our lives to bother with the hassles and common folkishness of car shopping.  They and their families receive cars free, delivered to them at  tax payer expense.  This includes lifetime maintenance and automatic adjustments for fuel charges.

ENJOY YOUR NEW RIDE!

*Our good deals are made possible by the former Cash for Clunkers program.

**Unions, bankers, and mega companies with a history of large political affiliations/donations, Muslims, and Amish are also exempt.

(S A T I R E by S. Soloman that has been altered from boats to cars, with revisions and additions by TheLongVersion.)

Another Judicial Blow to Freedom

with 2 comments

New Mexico Supreme Court justicesThe New Mexico Supreme Court struck a blow to personal and religious freedom in the name of tolerance and the idea that “compromise is the price of citizenship”.

A photography shop refused to provide services to photograph a commitment ceremony for a same-sex couple.  Their refusal was based on their personal religious convictions regarding marriage.

Rather than go find another photographer, the couple decided to file a discrimination claim.  The claim made its way up to the New Mexico Supreme Court, which ruled in favor of the same-sex couple and against the photographers.

The Court in essence has ruled that Christians, Muslims, Orthodox Jews, and others must surrender the faithful practice of their religion in the name of citizenship.

Justice Richard Bosson wrote in his concurring opinion:

At its heart, this case teaches that at some point in our lives all of us must compromise, if only a little, to accommodate the contrasting values of others…. That compromise is part of the glue that holds us together as a nation, the tolerance that lubricates the varied moving parts of us as a people…. In short, I would say to the Huguenins [Photography shop owners], with the utmost respect: it is the price of citizenship.

But as Erick Erickson of Red State points out:

…the tolerance is one way. In the name of tolerance, Mrs. Huguenin can be compelled by state power on pain of punishment to provide her services to Ms. Willock [couple member] against Mrs. Huguenin’s several thousand-year old orthodox religious beliefs, but Ms. Willock is under no obligation to simply tolerate those who disagree with her and find someone who is happy to provide the service.

Now let’s look at the unintended consequences (or perhaps not so unintended) that are sure to come if this ruling is not struck down by the SCOTUS which most assuredly will be asked to hear this case.  Imagine now, other couples or any one that is LGBT and equally as vindictive as this one in New Mexico, who decides to make it a point to seek out Christian establishments which may feel equally strong about their religious convictions and when services are refused, WHAM the precedent is in place to sue them into submission or out of business.

85% of the American public, men, women, black, white, hispanic, conservatives, moderates, and even liberals agree that Christians should not be forced to provide goods and services to couples seeking gay marriages.  This isn’t a divided topic.

One sided tolerance isn’t tolerance at all.

It’s prejudice.

Germany 1938 and Egypt 2013

leave a comment »

The altar of St. George Coptic orthodox church in Assuit after it has been attacked by Muslim Brotherhood

The altar of St. George Coptic orthodox church in Assuit after it has been attacked by Muslim Brotherhood

If you’re watching the major networks for news on Egypt you probably don’t know that the Muslim Brotherhood supporters have ransacked, damaged, destroyed, or burned nearly 50 Christian churches, kidnapped and killed Christians, and are blaming it on the military crackdown and state of emergency.

The most shocking part of this story, aside from the horrific violence, obviously, is that in the U.S. where 70% of the population labels themselves Christian, a country with much of it’s foundation rooted in Christianity, no major mainstream media outlets are providing major coverage of what is happening in Egypt if they are giving it any coverage at all.  Most Americans and American churches are not informed on what is happening to their Christian brothers and sisters in Egypt.

All that is being reported is the violent clash between police, the military, and the protesters.

Why? Is the killing of Christians and destruction of their places of worship not news? Do these news agencies not know this is happening or that it’s connected to the uprising and protests?

Coptic Christians in the country are living in fear as they watch the levels of violence against Christians rise each day.  Do they face the same fate the Jewish population of Egypt did during World War II? In the 1940s there the population of Jews in Egypt was 100,000 strong. Today, it is reported there are less than 100 Jews in the country. The population of Egypt is estimated to be about 84 million and, until recently, at least 10 percent of that population was Christian.

For anyone with a knowledge of Pre-World War 2 history what is taking place in Egypt will look very similar to what happened one night in Germany in 1938 when German military and civilians ransacked and burned Jewish businesses and homes.  That night known as Kristallnacht or Crystal Night, the night of broken glass.NYT frontpage Kristallnacht

Much like Kristallnacht was used to blame Germany’s problems on the communists, Christian churches are being destroyed and Christians are being blamed for Egypt’s problems.

I encourage you to do just a little bit of study about pre-world war 2 Germany to see some startling parallels, and the mindset that allows this kind of thing to happen in the first place. Kristallnacht is a good place to start.

just google it.

STORY UPDATE 8/19/13

The Christian Science Monitor published a report suggesting at least some of the attacks were premeditated, with Christian homes and shops in one village being marked with red graffiti, “vowing to protect Morsi’s electoral legitimacy with ‘blood’” and mosque minarets blaring accusations that Christians were behind the Cairo killings.

In Minya, one Christian resident told the AP that Islamists had “painted a red X on Muslim stores and a black X on Christian stores.”

Christian Science Monitor Correspondent Kristen Chick writes from the village of Al Nazla that Islamists were spreading rumors that Christians were behind the mass protests which led to the July 3 ousting of Muslim Brotherhood-aligned President Mohammed Morsi.

Detroit For Dummys

with one comment

Detroit, Michigan.

My family nearly moved there in the late 60’s.  My father was offered a very good job, salary, and benefits with one caveat; that he pick up and move his family to the Motor City.  I don’t know all the reasons behind my dad’s decision to turn that high paying job down, but he did and we stayed in Happy Valley (that would be Utah County).

Detroit became the largest municipality to declare bankruptcy in the United States this past week.

How did a city that once held the highest per capita income rate in the nation, become a ghost of its once great self?

I’ll let Steven Crowder explain.

 

Why is this country so blind to the blatant results of decades of governance by the left?  Detroit is just one unavoidable example of the failures of leftist ideology when it comes to governing.  Do we have to wait for California to follow suit?

 

Written by DCL

July 22, 2013 at 4:50 pm

Why the Immigration Bill is a Slap in the Face to Equal Rights

with one comment

Eric Holder on Immigration ReformIt’s hard to hold back the feelings of revulsion as I watch the US Attorney General, Eric Holder, talk about equal rights and civil rights in conjunction with the immigration bill being crafted on Capital Hill.

He hits on all the key “buzz phrase talking points” like; mechanism to earn citizenship, coming out of the shadows, a matter of civil and human rights, equal opportunity…

Sounds reasonable until you realize this man has no clue what the definition of civil rights or human rights even is let alone equal opportunity. But it sounds so reasonable…

No matter what kind of reasonable vocabulary they attach to the immigration bill, as it stands today, it is nothing more than amnesty for 11 to 20 million illegal aliens. Depending on whose numbers you agree with.

How can amnesty from justice for those who willingly and knowingly broke the law be equated with civil rights?

I guess first you have to understand what civil rights do? Civil rights insure protection from discrimination so all of us can have an equal chance to make the most of our lives. Civil rights however, DO NOT insure protection FROM the law.

When have we as Americans ever in our history sought to reward those who break our laws? How does earning citizenship in any form begin by sneaking across the border and living off the books? That, in my understanding of principle and what’s right, is simply stealing from those who abide by the laws.

And what about those who are currently in line to become citizens of this nation, who have done it the right way? What about those who have spent thousands even tens of thousands of dollars to gain entrance into this country as a legal US citizen? HOw can they possibly see this bill as an “equal rights” issue? What’s equal about one person paying their way and another getting a freebie? This is nothing but a slap in their face and a mockery of the process they so patiently went through.

While I can sympathize with the plight of the person or family who illegally entered the United States because they realized the system in their own country simply did not work and they desired something more. But disregard for the law by those who would break it and those who are supposed to uphold it creates a level of disrespect for law altogether. Until our own government respects the laws that are on the books, how can we really expect anyone else to respect them?

We don’t respect our own law. We haven’t placed a value on citizenship. We haven’t placed a value on being here in this country and being a citizen. The people crossing the borders illegally are not people coming here because they want to be Americans or because they want to assimilate. Nobody’s talking about teaching them the principles of being an American and from what we are seeing in their actions and words they don’t want that.
There was a time when the majority of immigrants to this country came here for the principles of freedom and liberty and the desire to become Americans not hyphenated-Americans.

Joe Kerry is an example of that type of immigrant. Joe’s family came to the US from North Korea. They loved the American principles they had heard about and longed for. Joe doesn’t speak Korean. He can understand it but he can’t speak it because his parents would not teach it to him. They said, “you’re going to speak English and you’re going to be an American and you’re going to make something of yourself.”

What has happened to that culture? No one is holding up our melting pot culture.

You are being misled by many of your elected representatives about this immigration bill. If you want to know why you’ll need to go no further than the end of the money trail. It leads to big business who is in bed with this big government and want to continue the flow of cheap labor that comes with immigrants who can’t speak the language but are willing to do whatever they can to feed their families. This goes to the heart of many of our political problems today. Big money is being dangled like a carrot and Republicans and Democrats alike are so addicted to the big business bucks that they are willing to toss principle aside and make believe no one will get hurt.

But they are lying to themselves just as surely as they are lying to the people of this country. This bill as written by the gang of 8, will hurt not only every law-abiding citizen, but it will eventually hurt those who are at the crux of the legislation. The immigrants. If amnesty is not written out of this bill this country will change in a way no one is prepared for or would wish for.

Mark my words.

Written by DCL

June 17, 2013 at 10:04 pm

Another Case for Term Limits?

leave a comment »

As testimony from individuals and organizations claiming to be harassed by the IRS during their application process for tax exempt status continues on Capital Hill continues Congressmen Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) made a statement that proves a person CAN be in Washington DC too long.  To the point where political loyalties acquired over time belie common sense and common justice.

Roll Tape

Representative McDermott’s partisan and accusatory remarks do little more than label him a hardcore political hack. One the citizens of Washington would do well to assess closely come time for his reelection.  Representative Paul Ryan then followed McDermott by figuratively stamping the words Political Hack on the forehead of the Congressman from Washington.

Shame on Jim McDermott (D).  Shame on the “Old Guard” mentality of incumbents of both parties.  I was once an opponent of term limits.  My opposition faded long ago due to examples just like this one…

Written by DCL

June 5, 2013 at 8:47 pm

This Won’t Be the First Time

with 2 comments

“A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself within. The essential cause of Rome’s decline lay in her people, her morals, her class struggle, her failing trade, her bureaucratic despotism, her stifling taxes, her consuming wars.”–Will Durant

If the United States were the first in history to experience a debt crisis with deficits that are about to bring this nation to its financial knees, government officials might have some excuse for what they’ve done.

The most frustrating thing about this mess is that our elected leaders knew where this would end from the beginning and if they didn’t know they have no business running a lemonade stand let alone a nation.  If it’s ignorance that got us here we have a bone to pick with our education system and its failure to teach history.  Because historical precedents for what we are now experiencing are many and should be part of every high school curriculum

Every country that has spent beyond its means has spiraled to disaster. The crash the US is about to experience has been experienced many times before.

Rome anyone?

FallOfRomeThree successive Roman emperors, Caligula, Claudius, and Nero, all emptied their treasuries to pay for lavish ceremonial feasts, luxurious villas, elaborate temples, servants who never served, and bribes to the army and praetorian guard to ensure loyalty. When the money ran out, these arrogant rulers raised taxes, seized the assets of wealthy citizens, or expanded the money supply by remitting old coins using more base metal and less gold and silver.

What they got from this manipulation was severe inflation. In one thirty-year period during the third century A.D., the price of wheat rose 100,000 percent! A loaf of bread that cost the equivalent of $2.00 at the start of the period cost $2.000 at the end. By the time Rome collapsed high taxes had already destroyed Roman commerce. Cities and towns were reduced to ruin by lack of investment in their maintenance, the population was impoverished and dwindling, and riots and rebellion were commonplace.

Thirteen hundred years later, Spain, which had been one of the mightiest countries in Europe, began running huge deficits to pay for wars, a bloated civil service, and endemic corruption. By the end of the sixteenth century, revenues covered only half the state’s spending. Sound Familiar? Repeated currency devaluations, growing inflation, and a murderous tax burden killed off Spanish industry and agriculture. Impoverished, Spain lost its global influence as its empire contracted to a fraction of former size.

America In Ruins

Some economists think if the U.S. is very, very lucky it can fix its debt/deficit and suffer no more in the process than Great Britain has in the last thirty years. Great Britain’s economy didn’t so much crash as run aground. In 1976, the British government had to ask the IMF for help in servicing its debt, an acute embarrassment to the once mighty kingdom. In 1979, with inflation nearing 14%, British elected Margaret Thatcher to right the ship. Her platform stressed fiscal conservatism, lower taxes, and a reduced public sector. Thatcher’s unpleasant task was to remind Brits that though the public might make unlimited demands on the government for services, the government’s resources were still finite.

If the United States has its own Margaret Thatcher, We haven’t elected him or her to national office yet.

One thing is certain in these troubling times: What we do now will determine what happens to us later, both as individuals and as a nation. Little time remains for us to act, and, even then, our actions must be decisive, bold and radical if they are to prove effective. Forestalling the demise of our country requires the commitment and participation of all of us.

And it has to start now.

Written by DCL

March 4, 2013 at 12:55 pm

The Gun Control Letter Sent to Obama You Won’t See On Mainstream Media

leave a comment »

The gun control debate is accelerating.

On one side historical background, statistical evidence, and an amendment to the constitution of the United States.

On the other side raw emotion.

Evan Todd, a survivor of the Columbine school shooting in 1999, penned a letter to President Obama outlining in great detail his thoughts on gun control and how they were shaped by his experience.  Todd was shot by one of the gunmen that day and watched as 12 of his fellow students and a teacher were murdered.  His letter covers key aspects of the current gun control debate and why the arguments coming from the left are ineffective and dangerous to the rights of all American citizens.

Here is the letter.  Don’t expect to read, see, or hear about it in any major news publication or network and don’t expect to see a reply from the President.  This simply doesn’t comply with the narrative they have put forward about guns and gun control.  It would derail their propaganda machine.

Mr. President,

As a student who was shot and wounded during the Columbine massacre, I have a few thoughts on the current gun debate. In regards to your gun control initiatives:

Universal Background Checks

First, a universal background check will have many devastating effects. It will arguably have the opposite impact of what you propose. If adopted, criminals will know that they can not pass a background check legally, so they will resort to other avenues. With the conditions being set by this initiative, it will create a large black market for weapons and will support more criminal activity and funnel additional money into the hands of thugs, criminals, and people who will do harm to American citizens.

Second, universal background checks will create a huge bureaucracy that will cost an enormous amount of tax payers dollars and will straddle us with more debt. We cannot afford it now, let alone create another function of government that will have a huge monthly bill attached to it.

Third, is a universal background check system possible without universal gun registration? If so, please define it for us. Universal registration can easily be used for universal confiscation. I am not at all implying that you, sir, would try such a measure, but we do need to think about our actions through the lens of time.

It is not impossible to think that a tyrant, to the likes of Mao, Castro, Che, Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, and others, could possibly rise to power in America. It could be five, ten, twenty, or one hundred years from now — but future generations have the natural right to protect themselves from tyrannical government just as much as we currently do. It is safe to assume that this liberty that our forefathers secured has been a thorn in the side of would-be tyrants ever since the Second Amendment was adopted.

Ban on Military-Style Assault Weapons

The evidence is very clear pertaining to the inadequacies of the assault weapons ban. It had little to no effect when it was in place from 1994 until 2004. It was during this time that I personally witnessed two fellow students murder twelve of my classmates and one teacher. The assault weapons ban did not deter these two murderers, nor did the other thirty-something laws that they broke.

Gun ownership is at an all time high. And although tragedies like Columbine and Newtown are exploited by ideologues and special-interest lobbying groups, crime is at an all time low. The people have spoken. Gun store shelves have been emptied. Gun shows are breaking attendance records. Gun manufacturers are sold out and back ordered. Shortages on ammo and firearms are countrywide. The American people have spoken and are telling you that our Second Amendment shall not be infringed.

10-Round Limit for Magazines

Virginia Tech was the site of the deadliest school shooting in U.S. history. Seung-Hui Cho used two of the smallest caliber hand guns manufactured and a handful of ten round magazines. There are no substantial facts that prove that limited magazines would make any difference at all.
Second, this is just another law that endangers law-abiding citizens. I’ve heard you ask, “why does someone need 30 bullets to kill a deer?”

Let me ask you this: Why would you prefer criminals to have the ability to out-gun law-abiding citizens? Under this policy, criminals will still have their 30-round magazines, but the average American will not. Whose side are you on?

Lastly, when did they government get into the business of regulating “needs?” This is yet another example of government overreaching and straying from its intended purpose.

Selling to Criminals

Mr. President, these are your words: “And finally, Congress needs to help, rather than hinder, law enforcement as it does its job. We should get tougher on people who buy guns with the express purpose of turning around and selling them to criminals. And we should severely punish anybody who helps them do this.”

Why don’t we start with Eric Holder and thoroughly investigate the Fast and Furious program?

Furthermore, the vast majority of these mass murderers bought their weapons legally and jumped through all the hoops —  because they were determined to murder. Adding more hoops and red tape will not stop these types of people. It doesn’t now — so what makes you think it will in the future? Criminals who cannot buy guns legally just resort to the black market.

Criminals and murderers will always find a way.

Critical Examination

Mr. President, in theory, your initiatives and proposals sound warm and fuzzy — but in reality they are far from what we need. Your initiatives seem to punish law-abiding American citizens and enable the murderers, thugs, and other lowlifes who wish to do harm to others.

Let me be clear: These ideas are the worst possible initiatives if you seriously care about saving lives and also upholding your oath of office. There is no dictate, law, or regulation that will stop bad things from happening — and you know that. Yet you continue to push the rhetoric. Why?

You said, “If we can save just one person it is worth it.” Well here are a few ideas that will save more that one individual:

First, forget all of your current initiatives and 23 purposed executive orders. They will do nothing more than impede law-abiding citizens and breach the intent of the Constitution. Each initiative steals freedom, grants more power to an already-overreaching government, and empowers and enables criminals to run amok.

Second, press Congress to repeal the “Gun Free Zone Act.” Don’t allow America’s teachers and students to be endangered one-day more. These parents and teachers have the natural right to defend themselves and not be looked at as criminals. There is no reason teachers must disarm themselves to perform their jobs. There is also no reason a parent or volunteer should be disarmed when they cross the school line.

This is your chance to correct history and restore liberty. This simple act of restoring freedom will deter would-be murderers and for those who try, they will be met with resistance.

Mr. President, do the right thing, restore freedom, and save lives. Show the American people that you stand with them and not with thugs and criminals.

Respectfully,

Severely Concerned Citizen, Evan M. Todd

Tyranny Style

leave a comment »

In the whole history of the human race…Tyranny has never come to live with any people with a placard on his breast bearing his name.

He always comes in deep disguise, sometimes proclaiming an endowment of freedom [or rights], sometimes promising to help the unfortunate and downtrodden, not by creating something for those who do not have, but by robbing those who have.

But Tyranny is always a wolf in sheep’s clothing, and he always ends by devouring the whole flock, saving none.

– J. Rueben Clark, July 1935