Harry Reid is no Leader

Harry Reid boldly stated this past week that the war in Iraq was lost. He threw in the towel and that is unacceptable behavior for a person who is supposed to be a leader. I am sure that Reid feels this will bring more pressure on the administration to end the war but all he has done is send a signal to our troops that their so called leaders can not lead. Democrats were big on telling us how they could lead this country much better. All I see is them leading a charge to back out of a war and tell the terrorists and the rest of the world that bin Laden was right when he stated America did not have the stomach for a long battle. Our troops have noticed how the Democrats have failed to support them and they are not happy about it.

I understand that Reid was once a boxer and this is one of the reasons he illegally accepts tickets to boxing matches in Las Vegas. He accepts tickets for which he pays nothing and he fails to report them on his financial disclosure form (unless this “error” has been since corrected). I wonder if Harry ever threw in the towel when he was down a few rounds to an opponent. I can imagine Harry in the ring boxing and he is down after the third or fourth round so he says “OK, I am losing so I quit.” This would explain why he never made it as a boxer and instead pilfers money from the American public as a sham Senator. I am willing to bet however, that Harry Reid never threw in the towel or begged for a fight to stop because he was losing.

We are not losing in Iraq but Harry wants to throw in the towel and hand the enemy a victory and this is something that should not be tolerated by someone who is supposed to lead. The problem is that Harry suffers from liberalism and that mental disorder requires him to cut and run from any adversity involving America. He is required to say he supports the troops while stabbing them in the back and he is required to blame America for all the problems in the world. Perhaps the stroke Harry suffered damaged his brain more than we have been led to believe. The problem is, how would anyone actually know?

Harry, if you want the troops home (and everyone does) the best way to get them here is to WIN. I know Democrats can only focusing on winning when it involves an election so from now on they need to look at Iraq as an election and then maybe they will try just as hard to win there as they do to keep their jobs.

Reid, you are despicable and you are a disgrace to the United States. You might have the title of leader but you are not now, nor will you ever be, any kind of leader.

Big Dog

UPDATE: This Marine calls Harry Reid a douche. I can’t disagree with the guy.

Prom King a Girl? Do We Have a Drag Queen?

There is a high school student named Cinthia Covarrubias in, where else, California who wants to be considered for Prom King. Nothing unusual about that except Cinthia is a girl who dresses and acts like a boy. She is what they call transgendered and I am sure this has caused the poor kid some confusion through the years. However, this kid is a girl and should not be allowed to run for Prom King since the King is the part played by a real boy, not a pretend one. The gay and lesbian folks think the school’s decision to allow this is is a landmark decision. These groups like landmark decisions because that usually means that we have changed one more thing in society to appease the gay crowd. If the queers keep having landmark decisions, there will not be a normal society left.

Linkfest Haven, the Blogger's Oasis

Now there will be those who send me hate mail and dare me to question gay people and chastise me for daring to suggest they have an agenda but they do. The whole idea is to change things in society so that homosexual behavior is considered normal. It is not normal and I, unlike the psychiatric community, will not be bullied into accepting this behavior as normal. I also do not expect to have to explain why I think this is abnormal and immoral. I have the right to believe what I want and all the landmark decisions in the world will not change my mind about homosexual behavior. I believe that this is a choice and people deliberately choose to engage in behavior that is immoral. There are those who say that homosexuality is encoded in people’s genes and they have no choice in the matter. I guess that is possible because genetic coding gets messed up sometimes and abnormal people are born. Nonetheless, that makes homosexuality abnormal.

The kid at this school desires to dress and act like a boy but that does not mean she should be able to do all the things real boys do. Should she be allowed to play football with all the boys? How about allowing her to shower int he same shower as the boys? I mean as long as we are deciding that we need to accommodate this kid’s problem shouldn’t we go all the way and give the gays another landmark decision? The fact is this is another episode where tradition is changed to allow gays to do what they want. You don’t really think that if a straight guy decided to run for prom queen they would allow it, do you? A straight girl would never have been able to pull this off but let the kid be gay or confused and all doors are opened. The only way a guy gets to be prom queen is if he is a drag queen. Straight folks are treated differently because we only need to reeducate America about gays until everyone accepts the behavior as normal. Not going to happen in the Dog’s House.

I will wait for the gay sympathizers to email me or comment as to why I should change my mind and how terrible I am for understanding that homosexuality is abnormal. Nothing they say will change my mind and nothing that this or any other school can tell me will convince me that they are right about this one. I also know that i will feel very sorry for the girl who wins Prom Queen if this Cinthia is elected Prom King. She will be forced to walk down with she/he and maybe have that King and Queen dance. How distasteful! Is it any wonder though? Here is what one kid at the school said about the entire mess:

But Leanne Reyes, 16, said Covarrubias had her vote.

“It’s not like the stereotype where the king has to be a jock and he’s there with the cheerleaders anymore,” said Reyes, a senior. “We live in a generation now where dudes are chicks and chicks are dudes.” My Way News

I don’t know what generation Leanne belongs to but in my generation dudes are dudes and chicks are chicks and any guy who runs around in ladies clothes or acts like a girl is a sissy or faggot. Regardless of what generation Leanne belongs to generation XX should remain a girl and generation XY should remain a boy. This will keep us from having any other problems.

The reeducation of America is under way and it begins with our youth. When they are taught to believe that things that have been traditionally wrong are now right these little things sneak in to society so that they are eventually accepted. Yesterday it was the murder of unborn children and today it is homosexual behavior. What will it be tomorrow, sex with children?

I am glad I am not a high school student today. The gay crowd should be glad about that as well because this would not happen in a school the Big Dog attended. They might talk about it but they would change their minds…

Big Dog

Trackposted to Outside the Beltway ♦ The Virtuous Republic ♦ Perri Nelson’s Website ♦ The Pet Haven Blog ♦ Shadowscope ♦ Stuck On Stupid ♦ Leaning Straight Up ♦ The Amboy Times ♦ Pursuing Holiness ♦ Pet’s Garden Blog ♦ Rightlinx ♦ third world county ♦ Woman Honor Thyself ♦ ♦ stikNstein… has no mercy ♦ Pirate’s Cove ♦ The Right Nation ♦ The Pink Flamingo ♦ Dumb Ox Daily News ♦ Right Voices ♦ Right Pundits ♦ Blog @ MoreWhat.com ♦ The Random Yak ♦ 123beta ♦ Maggie’s Notebook ♦ Adam’s Blog ♦ basil’s blog ♦ MONICA ♦ Cao’s Blog ♦ Phastidio.net ♦ The Bullwinkle Blog ♦ ♦ Jo’s Cafe ♦ Conservative Cat ♦ Conservative Thoughts ♦ Sujet- Celebrities ♦ Allie Is Wired ♦ stikNstein… has no mercy ♦ The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns ♦ The World According to Carl ♦ CORSARI D’ITALIA ♦ The Yankee Sailor ♦ Gone Hollywood
Thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

The Myth About Tax Cuts and the Rich

For Five years all we have heard with regard to tax cuts is that George Bush cut the taxes of the wealthiest 1% of the country. George Bush helped out the rich with tax cuts. George Bush and his tax cuts for the rich. To hear the Democrats tell it, George Bush only cut taxes for the wealthiest in this country. This is simply not true as the tax cuts cut down all income levels and this is true even though the wealthiest in this country pay most of the taxes. Bill Gates got the same tax cut as I did and he pays more in taxes than I will earn in my lifetime. It was just Democratic mantra, “Tax cuts for the rich” however, a funny thing happened on the way to the White House.

Democratic candidates are saying that tax cuts have helped the lower income wage earners! Imagine that, the Democrats are in agreement that tax cuts have helped the lower income folks despite telling us for five years that tax cuts only help the rich.

Although they have yet to release detailed proposals or to talk about the issue in any depth on the campaign trail, Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama, and former Senator John Edwards, said through aides that they were backing variants of the same approach, which would result in higher taxes on income, capital gains and stock dividends for upper-income people. All of them, as well Senators Christopher J. Dodd and Joseph R. Biden Jr. and Gov. Bill Richardson, have made clear that they would support keeping in place the tax cuts that have benefited the vast majority of people, roughly speaking households with income less than $200,000 or so. In that way, the Democratic stance would ensure that a substantial portion of one of Mr. Bush’s signature policies would outlast his presidency, even if his party loses the White House. NYT

The Democrats have realized that the majority of thinking people understand that tax cuts help everyone and five years of lying has not changed that. For five years the Democrats have lied about tax cuts ONLY helping the rich or being ONLY for the rich and now they are changing positions. They are now saying that the tax cuts have benefited a vast majority of households with incomes less than 200 thousand dollars a year. Tell me, how is it these Democrats can change that drastically and the storied New York Times failed to point out how many times any of these Democrats indicated that George Bush’s tax cuts were for the rich only?

In no surprise, the Democrats want to punish those who make more money. They believe that being rich (unless they are the ones who are rich) is evil and that rich people should pay more in taxes. They are trying to raise taxes on higher incomes, capital gains, and stock dividends. Why is it that people who make more money should be punished for doing so. It is not a crime that Gates built something a lot of people use. It is grossly unfair to make the rich pay any more than they already do. They pay nearly all the taxes in this country. The rich in the United States of America pay nearly all the taxes while getting the least from government programs. To require the rich to pay for everyone else is socialistic and counterproductive. Democrats will complain that all the companies are moving to other countries. Is it any wonder when our government is hostile to them and their wealthy owners?

One other thing that is disturbing. Members of Congress routinely write things into bills that allows for them not to follow the same rules as everyone else. While these stellar Democrats will spout off about wealthy people and how the wealthy should pay more taxes, they are all wealthy people. Obama had more than 900 thousand dollars in income this year, Edwards in the millions and Clinton in the millions (current members’ financial disclosure statements are available online). Each of these people have very smart accountants and strange quirky laws to keep them from paying as much as the rich people have to pay.

When John Kerry was running for president it was learned that his family paid 12% of their income in taxes. It was also learned that his wife earned 2.54 million dollars in non-taxable interest. So they paid about one third the taxes of other rich people (and half of what most of the rest of us pay) and they earned over two and a half million dollars on which they paid no taxes. All of this from a guy who said that George Bush’s tax cuts only helped the rich and when he got in to office he would increase the taxes on the rich. Maybe if he paid his fair share, there would not be a problem.

Each of these people will play class warfare. They beat the tax cut for the rich drum to death and it did not work so now they are changing plans. They are going to tell you how wonderful the tax cuts were for the lower wage earners but how unfair it was to cut the taxes of the rich. They will be lying to you just as they did when they told you tax cuts only help the rich. They will be lying to you in order to make you think that rich people are getting over on we poor folks.

The only problem is, they are all rich and they would prefer to stay that way by keeping you poor. They would also like to keep most of the money they make while removing it from the pockets of the rich people, they very ones who pay most of the taxes in this country. They will also make sure they pay the lowest amount of taxes possible, because the rules do not apply to them.

You should also keep in mind that while they say they are going after the rich they will be sneaking up behind you. They will once again take 55% of what you want to pass to your heirs. Die with a million dollars and your heirs get 450 thousand of it while the government, who did nothing to earn it, gets 550 thousand of it. That is a Democrat’s idea of fairness.

The first thing Democrats come after is your money because by keeping most people poor they maintain their control over them. People need assistance, and then they need Social Security and Medicare as they get older. These programs are designed to keep you in the grasp of the government so that they will own you until you die. This is why they oppose privatizing Social Security and why they take so mush in taxes, especially from estates. They do not want people to get older and amass wealth (except their families) because wealthy people will not depend on government run health care, or retirement. Wealthy people can do what they want, when they want and they do not have to worry about the AARP and Congress telling them what to do. There is no doubt in any person’s mind that a privatized Social Security system would be better because it would grow more money and it would belong to the individual. It would also not allow politicians to put their grubby little hands in the till and take it to spend on other things.

We can discuss Social Security and other things later, suffice it to say that Democrats do not want to do anything that would make the downtrodden masses self reliant or they would lose their voter base. Likewise, when they claim to be going after rich people for more taxes, their definition of rich drastically changes.

Watch how they change opinions this year. It has started and the relic New York Times failed to ask the questions. They say bloggers are not real journalists. Perhaps not, but we seem to ask more questions than the so-called real media.

For those who believe we have a budget deficit because of tax cuts, I would remind you that we have a problem because Congress can not control its spending. PORK is the only word you need to know. Tax cuts do not increase deficits, PORK does and that is Congresses’ fault. People like Robert Greenstein who is quoted in this article, fail to recognize that little issue. Bush has not left us in a difficult position with tax cuts. They have all (Congress and the President) left us in a difficult position because of out-of-control spending. The only irresponsible policies of the last six years are the spending policies, not the tax cut policies.

You can take that to the bank. That will be all you can take to the bank if the Democrats have their way.

Big Dog

Koo Kooky Cho

As anyone know by now the murderer of all the students at Virginia Tech was a kook. He had a history of mental illness and was deemed to be a danger to himself and others. So how does our society handle a person who was diagnosed as a menace? Leave him among the people so that when he snaps he can take a bunch of them with him.

Kooky Cho had enough presence of mind to stop between murders and mail off a package to NBC News. This package contained a written diatribe and a video tape that depicts the rambling nut talking about the deed he was about to commit. The latest reports indicate that NBC News agonized over whether to run this story but I imagine they did not agonize that greatly. They made copies of the documents and then turned them over to police. The question then became, should they air the video? There are some at VT who are extremely upset at NBC for airing the video before the dead have even been buried. There are others who said it was probably too soon but that it should eventually be aired. I don’t care if they air it or not because the TV has an off button and channel changer if you do not want to see it. But, NBC should not try telling us they had any obligation to get it out because it is news. They should not tell us how they have an obligation to report what they get. They have set a precedent in the past.

Was it not NBC that had the interview of Juanita Broaddrick in which she told of her rape by Bill Clinton? Didn’t they hold that for five weeks or so? NBC, should not ever discuss obligations to report the news as it breaks because it has already proved that it is incapable of doing so.

Edwards Reimburses Campaign for Clip-Job

John Edwards has reimbursed his campaign for the two $400 haircuts he received and that were paid for out of campaign funds. Eric Schultz, Edwards’ spokesman, said the bills were sent to the campaign inadvertently and should not have been paid. What does it say about a guy who wants to preside over budgets worth billions of dollars when he can not ensure his campaign does not pay bills that it shouldn’t? I wonder if Edwards pays bills that arrive at his home without checking to ensure they are legitimate. In households where people actually have to worry about a budget each bill is scrutinized to make sure the charges are accurate.

In other news, Edwards’ physician says that he [Edwards] underwent a physical recently and that he is in good health. The doctor attributes that to eating healthy and running four miles a day. Given the size of Edwards’ home, he only has to run from one end to the other and back each day to stay in shape.

I wrote about the $400 haircuts and some Iowa barbers have weighed in on this subject. It is an interesting read about how things are in the other America John pretends to belong to.

Big Dog

Source:
Breitbart