Free Speech Comes with a Price
Sep 22, 2007 Uncategorized
Colorado State University student newspaper, The Rocky Mountain Collegian, printed an interesting editorial that used a four letter expletive directed toward President Bush in which the editorial staff basically told the President to have sexual relations with himself.
The Rocky Mountain Collegian published an editorial on page 4 of the paper Friday which read “Taser this … F*** Bush.”
The expletive was spelled out.
The last two words were in bold type, larger than most headlines. A caption below said, “this column represents the views of the Collegian’s Editorial Board.” ABC 7 News Denver
I have no problem with this because I figure that it is a college newspaper written by the same liberal idiots whose parents show up at anti war protests. These are the children and grandchildren of the dope smoking, acid dropping hippies that littered the country with their unwashed free sex bodies and did little to actually make the place any better. These kids are nothing more than the 2007 version of liberal twits who want to make a statement, and that is just fine. I have not figured out how the taser comment fits in with Bush since he had nothing to do with a Libertarian who was tasered at a Kerry speech. They must be confused but then again, too many drugs can do that to people.
The paper though, has lost about $30,000 in advertising revenue as ads were pulled by those whose business supports the paper. I will certainly agree that the paper had a right to print this but I don’t want to hear the Dixie Chick version of events take place here. I do not want to hear this paper or its editorial board complain that their rights are being violated because people are pulling money out. Natalie Maines pulled this same crap after she ran off at the mouth and Dixie Slut record sales and air play plummeted. She failed to understand that she is free to say what she wants and that people are free to spend their money as they wish. Her complaints that she paid for speaking her mind were said as if it should be against the law to hold people accountable for their words and deeds. She was probably educated in a liberal school that failed to teach her this.
Now the School newspaper at Colorado State University will learn the same lesson. I wonder how long it will be before they print stories about how unfairly they have been treated and that advertisers had no right to pull back ads? I wonder how long it will be before they are complaining that they are paying for their right to free speech. Let me help these mindless twits, you have not paid for your free speech. The men and women in the armed forces from the beginning of our country have paid, in blood, for your free speech. Freedom is not free, cliche but true. What you folks are paying for is your act. A vile, nasty, childish act that one would not expect from any printed news source that actually has professional standards.
I wonder how long? Perhaps not very since a meeting is scheduled for this week. It might end the tenure of Collegian Editor David McSwane. But David will still just be paying for his acts, not his free speech.
Regardless of the outcome, it will take time before the revenue starts coming back in. Just ask the Dixie Chicks…
Others:
Stop the ACLU
Tags: Political Commentary
Nuclear Family; North Korean Materials in Syria
Sep 22, 2007 Uncategorized
Looks like the attack on Syria by Israel, an attack that was condemned in the Middle East, had the blessing of the United States and for very good reason. The Israelis collected evidence from the site, prior to the strike, that shows Syria had nuclear material from North Korea. This is an unsettling revelation in that it shows that terrorist states are acquiring nuclear materials and are attempting to make nuclear weapons. That would be a very dangerous development for that part of the world. It also shows that despite North Korea’s claims that it will dismantle its nuclear program, it is actually selling or giving the materials to those who would have no problem with using them.
The attack on the site killed a number of people and some are believed to be North Koreans who were there helping out. I hope that the people killed were top scientists from both countries so that they will suffer an even bigger setback. I also hope that this strike demonstrates to the state sponsors of terrorism that their actions will not be tolerated. This strike should serve as a very strong warning to Iran. Additionally, the new information should serve as a reminder that we cannot trust the North Koreans and the Syrians. We cannot trust those who are working on nuclear weapons and we cannot trust them when they condemn any attack because they are evil people who want to use nuclear weapons. I hope a lot of people important to this venture were killed and I hope this set them back quite a bit. I also hope Israel will continue to attack those who are trying to develop and use nukes.
I realize that people were upset with the attacks. I know the Democrats cannot be happy because they did not get a chance to send Joe Wilson in to discredit the nuclear angle. I too am upset that we did not send Wilson in.
He should have been there drinking mint julep tea when the place was bombed.
Tags: Political Commentary, Terrorism
If the Hsu Fits…
Sep 20, 2007 Uncategorized
The Clinton crime family has a long history of circumventing the laws of this country especially when it comes to campaign fund raising. It seems that the Clintons are always in some kind of hot water for taking money from the wrong people or for accepting more than they are allowed to under the law. They always play innocent and act as the victims in the mess and then clear it up by returning the money or donating it to charity. One has to wonder just how much illegal money they have taken in that was not discovered.
The Clintons, as well as many other campaigns, accept donations from bundlers. These are people who collect a lot of donations from many different people and then turn them all in. This practice is ripe for exploitation and it appears that many bundlers do just that. The way it works is they accept money from people, many of whom do not have the means to make such donations or have never donated money and then these bundlers (usually wealthy people) reimburse the donors. This means that the bundler has given all the money but has given the appearance that all the donations were legal. Norman Hsu was such a man.
The news broke recently about suspicious donations from Hsu in the name of others who were unlikely donors. It was discovered that Hsu was a fugitive but not before Hillary praised him and said there was no reason to suspect he was doing anything wrong. She called people making such claims racists for singling out a man with an Asian name. After the revelation of his outstanding warrant, Hillary rid herself of $850,000 and vowed to do better background checks. However, she has had this problem before.
Peter Paul is a man who raised a lot of money for Hillary when she ran for her first Senate term. He did this in hope of luring President Clinton to work for him after he left office. Paul put on a huge event that featured top name performers and a great time was had by all. That is until the Washington Post published an article showing that Paul had a felony record. Immediately Hillary and Bill went into denial and distanced themselves from Paul. Hillary stated she did not know him and would not accept his money, except for the more than a million he had earned for her. The very next week Hillary’s people were faxing Paul and asking him for $100,000. She has an interesting way of not taking money from people. Now I do not believe Paul’s record should have made a difference but to the Clinton’s it was seen as a liability.
Hillary denied having any involvement in the planning of the fund raiser and she said that she met Paul but did not know him. The personalized photos along with the thank you letters say something different. One of Hillary’s people took the fall for under reporting the campaign donations and a deal was struck. Bill Clinton reneged on his deal and Stan Lee (Spiderman Creator whose spider sense must not have been tingling that day) and Peter Paul lost a great deal of money. Paul had a video tape of his office that shows the people talking to Hillary on the phone [Hillary is on the phone, Paul is on tape] prior to the gala. The video supports Mr. Paul’s claim that Hillary was completely aware of the event and that she helped with it in violation of the law. Interestingly, this tape was under wraps for a long time in the judicial system. It looked like it might never see the light of day but now Mr. Paul has filed suit and it appears that Hillary might be headed to court to give a deposition in this case. I wonder how she will explain the lies she told about knowing Peter Paul when the video makes it clear that she was very friendly with him. Another video has her in a garden with Paul and others. She is going to have a tough time, unless of course a judge her husband appointed decides there is not enough evidence. The Clinton crime family has long arms.
One would have thought that, if she were concerned about criminal records, she would have learned after the revelations about Paul to check backgrounds. Obviously, the money clouded her judgment with regard to Norman Hsu. She learned nothing. The stories about illegal donations are mounting and yet there are still dolts in this country who excuse them away. They fail to see that isolated incidents might not be of concern (everyone makes mistakes) but a pattern of illegal activities demonstrates a willful disregard for the law. The deception employed by the Clintons seems to satisfy the curiosity of people who believe that 9/11 was an inside job despite little evidence to support such claims.
It seems that the Clinton apologists are going to be busy once again as Hillary is again forced to explain campaign donations. My friend Jay at Stop the ACLU informs us that Hillary held a fund raiser in her DC home and that a donor who gave money has indicated that she was reimbursed from her husband’s boss:
When Hillary Rodham Clinton held an intimate fund-raising event at her Washington home in late March, Pamela Layton donated $4,600, the maximum allowed by law, to Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign.
But the 37-year-old Ms. Layton says she and her husband were reimbursed by her husband’s boss for the donations. “It wasn’t personal money. It was all corporate money,†Mrs. Layton said outside her home here. “I don’t even like Hillary. I’m a Republican.â€
One could make a reasonable argument that Ms. Clinton had no knowledge of this and that bundled money is no cause for alarm. One could make that claim in light of the problems with Hsu bundled money and maybe even convince themselves that there really is no problem. However, taken in total, the history of Clinton illegalities with regard to raising money is troublesome and casts doubt on all of her fund raising efforts. How do you separate the dirty from the clean? Once a pattern is established then no matter what, all actions will be suspect. I believe we are at a saturation point where a Clinton (in this case Hillary) has cried wolf one too many times. People cannot continue to believe that she is the victim and was unaware of all these illegal activities. But then again, she claimed not to know what was going on right under Monica’s nose…
My mother used to tell me that people judge you by the company you keep and that if you hang around with low life people you will be viewed as a low life. Hillary Clinton continually fails to distance herself from the low life people who are breaking the law and she herself has engaged doing the very same thing.
I know that there are people who will not be convinced and who will claim she had no knowledge and that she was a victim just as she was when Bill had his Oval Office fling (smile, smile, wink, wink). Let me, for a moment, grant that she was totally unaware of these folks and that she somehow missed the signs. Let us forget the video of her breaking the law in direct contradiction of what she and her aide said and let us assume she is not guilty of anything in these cases.
Is this kind of unobservant, inattentive, careless, dimwit we want in the White House? If she admits to being unable to keep her campaign clean then do we want her running the country? Do we want someone with Hillary’s powers of observation looking out for us and what will she miss that might cause us harm?
No, I don’t buy it. Hillary Rodham is a lot of things but stupid is not one of them. She is cool and calculating and she knows what is going on around her. She has a great memory (despite her inability to recall under oath) and she knew that these donations were dirty. She also knew Mr. Paul and she was well aware she was breaking the law with regard to the event Peter Paul organized. Hillary and Bill have a quest for power. It is their manifest destiny to run the country and they believe that laws do not apply to them because the ends justify the means.
Hillary can claim that she never knowingly took illegal donations but I say if the Hsu fits….
Sources:
Zennie’s Zeitgeist
Peter Paul
Equal Justice Foundation
Tags: Political Commentary
As if Carter Would Know
Sep 20, 2007 Uncategorized
Former President Jimmy Carter (what were we thinking) said that Iran does not pose a threat to Israel, at least not right now. Carter indicated that it would be suicide for Iran to launch missiles at Israel and that he believes they will not. If Iran were run by a sane person one might be in agreement but sine the nut job they have running that country is certifiable, there is no telling what he will do.
The real issue is, what qualifies Carter to make such a claim? Here is a guy that let Iranian malcontents take over our embassy and then hold our people hostage for more than a year. Carter has continually made anti Semitic remarks and favors Palestine over Israel despite all the attacks that Israel has had to endure at the hands of those very people. Iran sponsors the terrorist organizations that are continually attacking Israel so how can Carter claim that Iran is no threat to that country when they are already attacking it by proxy?
The Iranian threat to launch missiles is probably one that should be taken seriously and if Iran ever gets nukes it will be a certainty. The president of Iran, AhMADinejad had already indicated that he wants to wipe Israel off the map so that is pretty much a good indicator of what he wants to do, and given the means, would do.
Carter was insignificant when he was president and he is even more insignificant now. He should sit on his porch somewhere and count his liver spots.
Source:
Breitbart
Tags: Political Commentary
Big Sister Hillary Will Be Watching
Sep 19, 2007 Uncategorized
It is no secret to thinking people that the Democratic Party wants this country to be socialist and to have government provide everything for everybody at the expense of a few. Income redistribution is the name of the game whether it is at the state or federal level. Martin O’Malley of Maryland says that he is going to raise taxes and it will actually mean that 83% of taxpayers will pay fewer taxes. This is the way the Democrats sell these things because people say, “Gee, I don’t make a fortune, this is good for me.” They do not realize that if 83% pay fewer it means 17% will be paying a whole lot more to fund the others. The people who think it is a great deal disregard the 20% sales tax increase that will hit those who are unaffected by the income tax increase. Democrats love to raise taxes (and call it reform) and that is a cold hard fact.
They also love to mandate things and to view everything as a right, as in the right to health care. Health care is not a right in any way shape or form and when others have to pay for it then it certainly is not a right. It is a matter of forcing a few to pay for the needs of many. It is not my job to pay for someone else’s health care and it is not the government’s job to “ensure” everyone is covered, and for the most part, they know that. You see, the dirty little secret is, even though they would love to have socialized medicine in this country, they have never been able to get it passed. Politicians have been promising to cover everyone for the last 40 years. Thank God we have them to get universal health care and to save Social Security every four years. This has been a campaign slogan for decades and yet, these things never get done.
Hillary says she can change that and she would rob wealthier taxpayers of 110 billion dollars in order to give everyone health care. The plan also forces people to get health care coverage whether they want it or not. The idiots in Clintonland liken this to forcing people to have car insurance. The difference is, if you do not want car insurance you can stop driving. With the [pick a Democrat running for office] plan people would not have choice and people would have to go to doctors for check ups. Hillary actually envisions the day when you would have to prove you have health insurance to get a job.
Was that a veiled message to indicate that in the future employers will not have to provide health benefits? Think about it a minute. If you have to have insurance before you can get a job then you cannot get a job and then pick up health insurance. Whether or not I have health insurance is no one’s business and that certainly should not play into a job interview. Hell, many people select jobs based on the benefits offered. With the Hillary version, it becomes easier to select a job because this little distraction is taken away.
Hillary Clinton has gone the same route as her rivals in forcing health care coverage upon people and they all express the costs to be in the billions. Keep in mind that the government never, ever, runs anything on budget. They estimate low and over run all the time and they just keep soaking taxpayers to fund the thing. Look at the plan in Massachusetts. Their cost was double the estimate before they even got it rolling. Speaking of Massachusetts, Governor Romney criticized Hillary’s plan. That is amazing because it is the same damned plan he imposed on people in his home state. Kettle, meet pot, pot, kettle…
Hillary screwed up with her socialized medicine plan in 1993 and this one is no better. She will claim that both were great and she will make people believe that her last plan was wonderful but the evil Republicans stopped her from helping the poor people and the chirren. This plan will come in phases, as do most bad laws. They will pass some broad plan that is fairly safe and then add all kinds of crap to it. There will be a number of things that are not covered and people who live unhealthy lifestyles will be probably be denied after the England model but one thing is sure, this plan will pay for abortion on demand and treatment of as many STDs as people can get.
Hillary and the rest of the Democrats should get off this kick about universal coverage. It is not a right and the fewer than 10 million (the number you get when you subtract those who can afford it and choose not to have it and the ones who have not bothered to file for already existing government programs for which they are eligible, oh and the ILLEGALS) people who actually do not have coverage can still get health care.
But if Congress is so concerned, perhaps the Congressional doctor office can start seeing the indigent.
A great post by Glenn discusses how things really work.
Tags: Political Commentary