About Me

Name: Speedicut
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Roll

Random Unedited Thoughts

Normally I take my time and edit myself as I write to produce something coherent for you, my fans. Today I'm going to wing it:

Michelle Bachmann appears to be separating herself from the pack of usual suspects in the Repub party.  If she keeps this up, she'll have a great shot at being nominated for President in 3 years.  She is serious and dedicated from what I can tell.  We on the Right don't like to bring sex, race or social standing into the subject at hand when discussing individuals (the Left is enthrall to that grouping POV) BUT politics does take that into account so any special aspect of a candidate counts. In this case, being a woman and a mom will certainly enhance her chances with women voters.  I believe she has a plan - it seems that daily she is putting her opinion out there on important subject matters.  Bachmann is responding to her customers and not pandering.  I like that. She is smart and methodical.

Palin is planning something, I guess.  A lot of people criticize her for quitting the Governorship of Alaska.  I didn't think it helped her chances much.  But, what IF she has a long range master plan?  Many people doubt her intelligence if not her cunning.  I'm going to give her the benefit of the doubt and say she looked ahead at neverending lawsuits from the Left aimed at taking her down as Gov. so she pre-emptively struck by resigning.  Her plan is to make a pile of cash, gather her own army, and make a run for Prez is 3 years.  She also is taking foreign affairs seriously and has new advisors: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2346199/posts. 

Bachmann and Palin will most likely run on a Repub ticket unless things go the way of my wildest dreams and they run as Conservative Party or Constitutional Party nominees.  I would prefer a powerful Conservative Party to emerge but I would derive great satisfaction in watching the Repub bigwigs surrender their swords to us cons.  I could live with cons running the Repub party again, I guess.  The next two elections will tell us something about whether the cons are serious and stick together to rid the party of the Lindsey Grahams.  There is no excuse whatsoever for a Southern State or a Western State to elect Olympia Snowe type Repubs.  As Will Ferrell would say, "It's mindbottling". 

I can't wait to watch for NY23 next week. Let's keep our fingers crossed. 

Michael Medved really irritates me.  I used to really enjoy him but he's really smug and obstinate on some matters.  He constantly reviles 3rd party candidates and 3rd party voters because he says it only wastes votes and hurts Repubs.  I will agree totally that it hurts Repubs.  I disagree that it wastes votes.  I also want him to know that hurting Repubs is not a bad thing. So he's just wrong on voting one's conscience.  Typical Party Loyalist.  Anyway, NOW he says that he likes it that Hoffman may win as a con.  Why?  Because Hoffman can win.  Huh?  Medved usually says that no one should vote 3rd party because no one will vote 3rd party therefore it is a waste.  Now that MANY people will vote 3rd party, Medved is on board because as he has said, "Hoffman can actually win".  You get it?  Don't vote for someone who will lose.  Wow. Brilliant and ethical that.

I'm getting the sinking feeling that Obama and 'em are dedicated to overwhelming the system and devaluing the dollar so bad that the weak Americans will turn to any form of govt that promises relief and security.  I was hoping that it was just that they sincerely wanted to transfer wealth and were too stupid to know what would happen but I don't think so anymore.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (12) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Big Race - Business Is Booming

The election of a black man to the office of President of the United States of America was supposed to bring racial healing, a new way of politics, and lots of hugs amongst people who differ on myriad social issues.  After only ten months racial tension is as high as it was during the civil rights struggles in the late 50's and into the 60's.  On the Right there are those who lack respect for Mr. Obama from the get-go.  Some Republicans are just bigots and some are Birthers.  But they are surely a small percentage - the same unwelcome bunch that is part of every group.  Conservatives always criticize anyone who espouses socialist, marxist, communist, fascist ideals for America.  They feel strongly that capitalism and a democratic republic should not be dismantled.  So their beef with Mr. Obama, who just happens to be black, is legitimate. The members of the Republican party object to President Obama on purely political grounds.  They don't really care about ideals but they know enough to point to the President and yell, "See?! He'll get us all killed!  Vote for us instead!"  So even their objections are legitimate.  They don't care what color a politician's skin is - they just want to win offices. 

 It is the Left that loves to inject race into political, business, or social issues.  They name call the Republicans and conservatives "racists", "bigots", "rednecks" and worse when the Right tries to argue or debate about the direction the country is being taken.  The Left does this all the time so it's nothing new.  There are bigots and racists on the Left of course, ever been to Philly or West Virginia?  But these are just the publicly racist folk.  The Left is made up mostly of members who suffer from soft-bigotry.  They are Liberals - black, white, hispanic, asian, etc who have low standards for blacks at any level, including President.  They believe that blacks, unlike everyone else, cannot stand up to criticism and don't have the wherewithal to make it in America without the Left's generosity. They figuratively pat black folk on the head when blacks do little more than show up.  Most on the Left don't realize they're racist but they have been going out of their way in 2009 to project their hatred onto those on the Right. 

The Left continuously claims that we should all have a nice long dialogue to heal racial wounds.  However, once the conversation gets started it soon gets stopped cold by calling the folk on the Right a derogatory name.  Then its back to square one.  Black on black racial hatred rears its ugly head as well.  Juan Williams was told to get back on the porch by Warren Ballentine on Bill O'Reilly's show.  Ballentine went on to brag about it on Twitter and his radio show.  Ironically, Ballantine had been debating Williams about whether Rush Limbaugh uses race to stir things up.  Ballentine, Howard Dean, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Sheila Jackson Lee, quite a few members of the DinoMedia and the other usual suspects are working hard for Big Race and business is booming.  They are making sure the racial fire stays stoked rather than take advantage of this historical time to actually move forward for good.  Sharpton and Jesse Jackson were two of the first "authentic" blacks to question the authenticity of Mr. Obama in the first place. Once they realized which way the wind was blowing they made Mr. Obama Soul Brother Number 2 (James Brown being eternally Number 1). Now, any objection to President Obama is automatically a racial problem.  Mr. Obama being elected has made race relations worse than ever.

As far as the Right should be concerned, the time for talking and reaching out should be over.  It is a waste of time to try to "heal" racial issues with people who have a paranoid point of view and are vested in NEVER reconciling.  It's like the Israelis constantly being forced to work with Palestinians and other Muslem nations. The best way to garner more support from minorities is the same way that the Right appeals to whites - just stick to the principles of individual freedom, self-determination, personal responsibility, and charity that comes from the people and not the government. 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (11) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Liberal Calls Juan Williams a Porch Monkey

Last night on the O'Reilly factor, attorney and radio host Warren Ballentine told Juan Williams "It it it it's it's okay, Juan, you can go back to the porch, Juan, you can go back...".  Ironically, Ballentine was arguing that Rush Limbaugh was a racist and Juan was saying that Ballentine should go do some research in regards specifically to the origin of "Barack the Magic N*gro".  Now, this is a unique debating style because it shuts down debate. Very clever and a typical tactic of the Left.  They've developed this savvy maneuver out of necessity because logic, reason and facts are rarely on their side.
 
Here's the clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdC5c_l4kcE
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

"shape shifting"

I claim this term, "shape shifting" in the name of Queen Isabella!  Just kidding.  For the record I do claim to be the first human to refer to evolution theory as "shape shifting".  Yes, yes, I know it's clever and catchy.  Feel free to use it but just remember whence it came.  Do I NOT believe in evolution?  Oh the HORROR.  Do I think that evolution and God cannot coexist?  Eh.  I don't really care.  On the one hand, I would think that God, being God, could finish the job of making man in his Image right quick.  Unless He was a caveman at some point?  Well.  On the other hand, I don't think it is unreasonable to think that man has gotten better over the years, excepting Bill Maher.  It's just that changing from one animal to another without Dr. 90210's skills is difficult to swallow with my smaller than our ape ancestors' jaw. Now, they tell me I don't understand evolution.  The current explanation is that just because a man came from a slimeball does not mean that he changed shapes.  Huh?  Ok. So we evolved from one thing to another but it's not the same as changing from one thing to another?  Right. Clear as mud, Spanky.  I'm really just yanking the prehensil tails of the Christian-bashing smug folks who think they believe and understand science but can't figure out cycles in nature or when life begins for humans.  Enjoy peppering your debates with the monkeys by using the term "shape shifting".  It will drive them bananas.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (5) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Empire Whines Back

What is the problem with Intellectuals lately?  We had them gated off but they have escaped, criticizing the commoners for voicing their opinions about what kind of country in which we want to live.  Progressives (oh the irony of that moniker) and other Dem/libs just flat out call us commoners "stupid", "liar" and "hateful".  It's their go-to move instead of arguing the issue with facts and reason.  We'll excuse them because it would be like criticizing hyenas for sucking eggs.  Bill Maher says (mostly rightly) that the Right has no Intellectual leaders. There are a few on the right who say the same thing. Lindsey "Truman Capote" Graham,  Richard Posner, David Brooks, et al bemoan the dearth of Intellectual discourse. 
 
First, we should clarify what "Intellectual" means to Intellectuals and what it means to normal people.  Most of us are intelligent, educated, and well-informed.  We know what's what.  Just because we don't sit around reading the NYT book reviews or the latest tomes on science and philosophy doesn't mean we are not intellectual.  The Intellectual's notion of "Intellectual" is that you work in a field where you isolate yourself, study, dream, write like James Joyce (except it is supposed to be NON-fiction) and then get together with your ilk and bandy about the ideas up with which you have come.  If this process goes on long enough - and it always does - you lose touch with the common folk; that is to say The Majority.
 
Let's go back to the beginning of this glorious country.  We had men like Washington, Franklin, Madison, Adams, and Jefferson.  I'll wait for today's Intellectuals to tell me these men were NOT Intellectuals.  (insert theme from Jeopardy here).  No?  Okay. These men not only thought Great Thoughts and held Lofty Ideals;  they wrote them down on paper and acted on them.  Plus, these men not only thought Great Thoughts and held Lofty Ideals - they also knew how to pick up a hammer, plow a field, fix a sink (if they had actually had them) tabulate the costs of groceries and balance ONE set of books for their respective businesses. In other words, they were brilliant AND useful. 
 
Today's Intellectuals are soft.  Locke, Rousseau, Hume, Spinoza and 'em, good or bad - right or wrong, were all in agreement on common sense truisms in every person's life.  Sometimes, a fist in the face will get the bad guy to see things differently.  A man can get as drunk as he wants BUT he should pay for his own drinks.  If you have a wife, you pay for her needs.  Build your own house, make the most of your abilities.  An agreement is an agreement.  Do what you say you're going to do.  If you mess up you should own up.  The founders all accepted these notions as common rules to live by.
 
Not so today's Intellectuals and politicians. They have had no reckoning put upon them.  They have too much time on their hands and have lead us astray.  They campaign instead of govern.  On the opposite side are the normal people, Dems, Repubs, Indies, Mods, whatever, who just want accountability of those whom we have voted into office.  Until we get the foundation fixed there is no time or money for the shiny new stuff like Healthcare for All and other gigantic bailout programs.  When the normal people speak out about what we want - which is EXACTLY what the Founding Intellectuals wanted - the modern Intellectuals call us common, low brow,  and pedantic. 
 
In their smugness, the Intellectuals tell us we have no new ideas.  This is why Intellectuals are mostly useless.  They don't know that THERE ARE NO NEW THINGS UNDER THE SUN. I'll bet 90% of native born Americans have heard this saying.  Most humans know this instinctively.  Intellectuals are seldom direct so what they are really saying is:
 
       We love this idea of universal free stuff; we have no reason to believe it will work like we say it will; we deep down know that we are not really progressive since it's been tried before; and we are putting all of our faith on humans behaving as we wish them to behave.
 
Some pols on the Right agree with those on the Left.  Lindsay Capote Graham is one of them.  He says we should calm down and talk about things.  Well, the problem is that the Left uses brass knuckles and the Right wants to have a college debate, you know, with rules and stuff.  So, finally, we commoners have had enough.  We've taken it upon ourselves - which we should have been paying attention all along - and gone back and read the Founders writings.  We've rediscovered our voice.  So we're out of practice and get loud - too bad.  If you want us to stop shouting then show us some respect.  Quit doing things behind our backs and lying to our faces.  We honestly want to debate ideas, whether practical or lofty.  But you have to be upfront with us and trust us. 
 
Meanwhile, we're going to ignore the effete Intellectuals and get to fixing the country.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (6) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Roman Holiday

Hey Hollywood and Roman Polanski - here's a question for ya:  What if the girl was a Polish Jew in a concentration camp and the child molestor was a Nazi Prison guard?  Would that help clear your fogged minds?!!
 
What is wrong with y'all?!! 
 
I suppose they'll make a movie out of it next portraying the Rapist as victim.  Sheesh.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (3) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Magnanimity of Me

Well, I'm back.  I think it's time.  TH and Hugh Hewitt have paid enough for their Republican-nous. I don't want to deprive the rest of ye from my talent;)  I used to write under the names Darrick the Red and ScarletPimpernel. I've kept myself busy watching things unfold just the way the Saint Crispen Day's Society predicted.  But I don't want to gloat.  Those of you who pulled the lever for McCain out of fear of Obama are on the money as well - he's a scary President.  Our main difference was that we didn't want to reward the Stupid Party again for putting up a Me-too Repub.  But the past is the past.  Let us work together to fix things while we still can. 
 
Hey, I just found an article I wrote 3 years ago in which I referred to Obama as Danny Obama and stated that he had the same qualifications to be President as Dan Quayle.  Except that Dan Quayle actually likes America. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (5) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »