O’Malley NOT Fit To Be President
Jun 15, 2015 2016 Election, Political
Can we all agree that the reason to vote for someone to be president is NOT because they are black (the first or otherwise), they are a woman or they are a midget or Muslim or any other physical characteristic? Can we all just agree that these characteristics do not make a person a leader or worthy of the position of president? Some people voted for Obama solely because he is black and he has been a disaster. Hillary wants your vote because she is a woman. Those are not traits that one should base voting on. They are things people cannot even control.
Martin O’Malley of Maryland wants to be the president. He wants to be that so he can dictate to you how to live your life. An article in the Washington Post says O’Malley is little known and not the front runner but that he would win a swimsuit contest.
The article shows O’Malley, who is in good physical shape, coming out of the Chesapeake Bay in the middle of the winter after he participated in the Polar Bear Plunge. He is in a long pair of what might be swim trunks.
Oh my, he looks dreamy so vote for him. He is such a stud and will give the half-naked Putin a run for his money in the bare chested beefcake leader department. The article is clever in that it leads people to think the WAPO wants you to forget him as a candidate and think about how great he looks. The reality is the WAPO loves him and wants your mind to think of how wonderful it would be to have this dreamy dude in the White House.
Give me a break. Being fit is not a quality that one should use to decide on the leader of this nation. O’Malley is in great shape but he violates his oath of office, violates the Constitution (of the US and of Maryland) and he is a nanny state progressive who thinks government is your mommy and daddy. Physically fit or not he is not fit to lead this nation.
[note]Sarah Palin is in great shape and the left skewered her as some kind of Bimbo. In other words, the fact that she was (and is) in great shape was not touted by the WAPO as a plus for her in the election nor should it have been.[/note]
The people of Maryland have suffered under the rule of liberal Democrats for decades. The state has high taxes, onerous laws (Maryland law allows them to tax the RAIN), and is a huge violator of our Second Amendment right. Martin O’Malley was very instrumental in all of these things. He raised taxes scores of times so he could spend the money on things government should not be involved in as part of the progressive agenda and in an effort to support illegal things (like providing for people who are in the country illegally). O’Malley and his progressive allies passed restrictive gun laws that added even more burden. Maryland had tough (unconstitutional) gun laws and O’Malley made them worse.
There are not enough negative words in the English language to describe O’Malley. He is a slug who wants to be the dictator he was in Maryland on a national level.
Reject him (and all progressives) or you will regret it (unless you are one of the slugs living off the taxpayer).
I would prefer competent leaders who follow the Constitution and I don’t care what kind of shape they are in, what sex they are, what color, religion or heritage they are or if they use tobacco products.
As long as the person is able to lead and do so following the Constitution then I am interested in taking a closer look.
Oh, and I don’t care what party the person belongs to (though I can’t imagine finding a Democrat to fit the bill)…
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: beefcake, liar, nanny state, O'Malley, progressive, puke, slug, unqualified
Michelle Obama Has Nice Sugary Honey Buns
Sep 18, 2014 Political
Michelle Obama is on some kick to save children from obesity. While reducing childhood obesity is an honorable goal it is important to note that it is not up to the government or the First Lady or anyone else to decide what YOUR children eat.
Obama’s crusade to reduce the “bad” food kids eat has resulted in items being replaced in school vending machines (no items over 200 calories) or those machines being emptied so kids can’t buy unhealthy snacks (how many vending machine snacks have fewer than 200 calories and still have a reasonable serving size).
Funny thing though. The vending machine at the White House sells honey buns that have 590 calories, 17 grams of fat and 30 grams of sugar.
It seems to me that she could have a lot of influence in the White House and that she could have things changed so they can lead by example.
But that is not the point now is it?
She and those who work in the White House under her hubby are part of the elite. They are the ones making the rules for you serfs and they are the ones who decide how YOU have to live.
They do not follow the same rules so if they want to eat honey buns with nearly three times the number of calories allowed in any school vending machine then they are damn well entitled to that.
Do not question your overlords just do what you are told to do and you won’t be placed on some watch list.
Michelle Obama, like all progressives, wants control over you and your children.
Control is for the people not for the elitists who run them.
While I would not eat that honey bun (it has nearly half my caloric intake for the day) I do not have the right to tell anyone whether they can eat it or not. And neither does Michelle.
I have to admit though; Michelle sure has some nice looking sugary honey buns in that vending machine.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: elitists, honey buns, michelle obama, nanny state, progressivies, school, vending machine
More Nanny State Intrusion
Apr 14, 2014 Political
New rules will go into effect this July and those rules will ban all junk food from schools. We are not talking just banning the food in vending machines or in the cafeteria (the food served there) no sir, we are talking about no junk food on the premises.
This means that school children will not be able to take a candy bar or bag of chips to school whether it is part of the lunch they brought or not. It means that parents have no say at all in what goes into their children’s lunch. This is the nanny state.
It is up to parents to decide what to give their children. If the school wants to ban the vending machines or cafeteria that is the school’s business but what a child brings to eat is between the child and the parents.
I see no problem with so called junk food being part of a balanced lunch so long as that is not the only food. Chips or pretzels go well with a sandwich and children can burn those calories off. If they want to encourage children to be healthy then they should put recess back in school.
In any event, how will this square when the school wants children to sell candy bars or pizzas as part of fundraising activities? Will the girl scouts who use the school for meetings be able to sell (and eat) their cookies?
Parents and students should decide and do as they wish no matter what the school says.
It would also be good for them to refuse to participate in ANY fundraisers (regardless of what is sold) to make a point about the entire process.
Source:
The Weekly Standard
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: intrusion, junk food, nanny state, recess, schools
Bloomberg Is A Tyrant
Mar 25, 2013 Political
New York Imperial Mayor Michael Bloomberg is anti American and a tyrant. Mr. Bloomberg has gone against our Founding and the US Constitution when he made a recent statement that sometimes the government knows better AND that sometimes government should infringe on our freedoms.
“I do think there are certain times we should infringe on your freedom,” Mr. Bloomberg said, during an appearance on NBC. He made the statement during discussion of his soda ban — just shot down by the courts — and insistence that his fight to control sugary drink portion sizes in the city would go forth. Washington Times
As a veteran and a patriot let me just reply to Nanny Bloomberg this way:
THERE IS NEVER A TIME WHEN GOVERNMENT SHOULD INFRINGE ON OUR FREEDOM.
PERIOD!
Governments at all levels in this country receive their power from the people. We have a document in our history called the Declaration of Independence in which our Founders clearly stated that governments derive their power from the consent of the governed. Nowhere in that document did our Founders say there were times when it was OK for government to infringe on our freedoms.
In fact, the infringement on our freedom is one of the reasons we felt it necessary to draft the document in the first place.
Bloomberg is a very wealthy man who has a 10 million dollar home in Bermuda and eats very expensive steaks (and other foods full of the fats he banned in New York). He is now going to use millions of his own dollars to violate our Constitution and try to take our guns away because, as Bloomy would tell you, the government knows better and sometimes it should infringe on your freedom.
As I have clearly stated, there is never a time that infringing on our freedom is OK. How would one decide? Where does it end? If it is OK for government to infringe when it comes to the size of a drink, the fat in food or the firearms people own because these issues are opposed by the tyrant in charge then it will be OK for the tyrant to infringe on anything he opposes. All future tyrants would be able to use the same criteria (I don’t like it) to infringe.
What happens if Bloomberg or some future tyrant decides that he does not like interracial marriage, or homosexual relationships? What happens if the tyrant does not like video games or fast food or any number of other things?
If the previous tyrant was allowed to infringe because nanny knows best then it will never end.
Giving up any freedom will result in the further loss of freedoms. No matter how YOU feel about an issue, allowing the infringement on freedom will eventually affect YOU and an issue that matters to YOU.
People who give up their freedoms become slaves.
Bloomberg knows that and in addition to being a tyrant, he wants to be the slave master.
Stop the tyranny by opposing this little Nazi known as Bloomberg.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[jpsub]
Tags: Declaration of Independence, founders, freedom, infringe, michael bloomberg, nanny state, tyrant
Pro Choice Liberals Not So Much So
Jul 30, 2012 Political
Everyone knows that liberals are intolerant. If people do not believe what they believe then they attack and ban. They don’t like meat, you can’t eat it. They don’t like guns, you can’t have one. Don’t agree with their messiah, well you sir, are a raaaaacist……
Nanny Bloomberg in New York is a typical liberal. I know he changed from the Republican Party to an Independent but he has always been liberal. He is very happy to ban tobacco use, trans-fatty foods, salt and large drinks because he knows better than you how to live your life. And God knows he wants to ban guns…
I thought liberals claimed they were all for choice. If a woman wants to have an abortion then liberals believe she should be able to do so. Women should have that choice. Hell, they believe it so much so that they will not limit abortions. Women, according to liberals, should be able to get an abortion at any time, at any age, and at taxpayer expense. They even believe that a woman should be able to have an abortion just seconds before a baby is born and if by chance that child actually survives the attempt on its life, liberals think the woman should be able to choose to leave her baby on a table somewhere to die.
This is the kind of choice that women can make no questions asked and without any interference whatsoever.
Let the rest of us choose to consume tobacco, salt, fatty foods, or large sugary drinks and Bloomberg is right there to stop us from doing harm because he knows oh so much.
Ironically, the same Michael Bloomberg who thinks that reproductive choice is a fundamental human right (as opposed to the fundamental human right not to be murdered) does not think women should have free choice in how they feed their newborn babies (should they decide to choose life).
Yep, you can choose to abort your baby and that is a fundamental human right BUT if you want to feed your baby formula rather than breastfeeding, Nanny has something for you. Bloomberg is working to have hospitals lock up formula to force women to breastfeed and he wants a record kept with a medical reason for issuing a bottle and formula.
How about the idea of choice? How about if the woman wants to use formula?
Personally, I think breastfeeding is best for the baby. However, that is a choice that the mother (and in a perfect world the father) will take. This choice, unlike the choice of abortion, does not murder the child. Formula is just fine for babies but it is just not as good as breast milk (not to mention the bonding that takes place).
No matter, it is up to women to decide how to feed their children.
The left is not about choice, it is about control. It wants to control what you consume and how you live your life. It wants your guns because they can control you if you have no means to resist. It wants abortion because that controls certain demographics and ensures the feminist vote. It wants to control how you feed your child because it knows better than you how to raise your kid.
To them it takes a village (and the political elite) to raise a child.
No matter what, they are only pro choice when it comes to abortion. Choose to own a gun, consume tobacco, fats, salt or sugary drinks and they are out in full force to prevent you from making your own choice.
Liberal elitists like Bloomberg are dangerous and need to be stopped. We must ensure we remove these kinds of people from office and take away their ability to control us.
That is right. They can let us have our liberty or we can come take it.
The choice is theirs.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: abortion, breastfeeding, control, liberals, lies, michael bloomberg, nanny state