The State of the Black Union?

Is this for real? Did President Obama really address the "State of the Black Union?" Apparently so, and he told those present that "tough times for America often mean tougher times for African Americans."

The first question I have is what is the "Black Union?" I know the regular "Union" is made up of 50 states and various territories. I thought that the regular "Union" included blacks, whites and every other citizen of the U.S. whether home or abroad. So what is this "Black Union?" What geographical territory does it include and what do I need to do to join? Is Robert Downey, Jr. a part of the "Black Union?" He has as much African American ancestry as President Obama (if you are insulted by the last two sentences, were you also insulted by the movie "White Chicks?").

And when President Obama gives his next State of the Union address, should I be worried about which "Union" he is talking about?

My second question is how are tough economic times tougher for a black family than a white family? Is it easier for white parents when they lose their jobs and can't find new jobs and can't make their mortgage payments and get thrown out on the street and have their cars repossessed than for black parents? Is the weather somehow colder for black families when they are evicted? Is watching your kids have to go without new clothes somehow easier for white parents than black parents?

The fact is, life is tough for everyone and when a President tells one suffering group that they have it rougher than another suffering group he is simply being divisive for his own political gain.

The Racebaiter Evens the Score

Do you think the New York Post breaking the story on "Reverand" Al Sharpton's tax evasion has anything to do with the latest racebaiting attack Sharpton has launched against the Post. The sick thing is how willingly many morons accept Sharpton's interpretation that the cartoon has something to do with race just because it involves a chimpanzee.

A Moron's Attempt at Reasoning
Chimpanzee + Stimulus Bill = Racism against President Obama. The problem with this reasoning is the "Stimulus" Bill was drafted by the plaster faced Nancy Pelosi and edited by the two faced Harry Reid.

The same morons are appalled at Robert Downey, Jr.'s "blackface" character in Tropic Thunder, but think two black guys portraying ditzy, blonde "White Chicks" is hilarious.

The Death Star was Destroyed

Shortly after the election of President Obama, Sean Hannity started talking about "conservatism” going into “exile." The phrase makes me think of Luke Skywalker hiding out on some remote planet of the universe as he secretly tries to prepare an amassing Rebel force for one last attempt to overthrow the evil Emperor and his conflicted sidekick, Darth Vader.

So who is our Luke Skywalker?
The answer is not Sean Hannity. Luke would never have chosen poison by degrees (John McCain) over a shotgun blast to the head (Barry Obama). He would have fought equally hard against both of them. But what about someone like Rick Santelli or these high school kids in Mesa, Arizona? Or how about a conservative governor who refuses to sell his state to the Emperor.

When did conservatism first go into hiding?
I would disagree with Hannity’s implied presumption that conservatism has only recently been forced into hiding. George Bush’s big government, big spending, open borders policies will not exactly get him mistaken for Ronald Reagan by any true conservative. Nor will the policies of his father, Bush 41. In fact, I would argue that with the exception of Newt Gingrich and the short lived “Contract with America” fiscal conservatives have been in exile since 1988. That’s twenty years. How old was Luke when he first met Yoda?

In the end, the Death Star was destroyed. I'll let you figure out what the Death Star might represent.

Trust the Conservative States?

It seems like every presidential election cycle candidates start to reinvent themselves to appeal to a larger number of voters. As a conservative, hearing people like John McCain describe themselves as part of the "Reagan Revolution" makes me sick. So how do we know which candidates are the true conservatives and which are just CINO's (Conservatives in Name Only)? One way is to listen to true conservatives like Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter and Laura Ingraham. But what if we tried the following:

(1) Determine the five most conservative voting states in the previous general presidential election based on the percentage of those voting Republican (i.e. Idaho voted 68% Republican which would put it at the top). I know the term Republican is not synonymous with conservative, but it is the closest we have to a conservative party for now;

(2) Have the Republican Primary voting/caucuses for each of these states take place at least one week before the rest of the states vote/caucus.

This method will allow the most conservative states first crack at voicing their opinions on which candidates they believe represent true conservatives and allow momentum to build for those candidates.

This year’s five states would include:
Idaho (68%) –voted for John McCain
Utah (64%) –voted for Mitt Romney in Primary
Alabama (60%) –voted for John McCain
Arizona (59%) –voted for John McCain
Tennessee (58%) ½ vote –voted for Mike Huckabee
Wyoming (58%) ½ vote –voted for Mitt Romney in Primary

And the winner is: John McCain with three votes.

Okay, so it’s either a flawed system or John McCain was the most conservative candidate which is really saying something about the Republican party. Better stick to Rush et al.

An Ocean Tale

The AP has done another fine job of investigative reporting. Apparently the lady who supposedly swam across the Atlantic Ocean last week made up most of the story. You can read the article here. The author of the piece said "a few seconds of thought and a pocket calculator" could have disproved the woman's claim.

Perhaps with all the budget cutbacks the AP has either run out of calculators or people who can operate them. As for reporters, we know they ran out of them years ago.

No Deep Analysis. Just One Conservative's Optimism

Stand on Principle
The 2009 general Presidential election was a depressing one for me. I felt forced to either stand on my conservative principles and write in a dark horse candidate (see Ann Coulter's rant for my exact feelings) or fall in line with the Republicans and get behind John McCain. To a large extent this election was about the difference between Conservatives and Republicans; not Republicans and Democrats.

I think Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh passed the test. Sean Hannity failed.

Chump Change
But now that the election is behind us, it is time to experience what Obama meant when he said his campaign was about "Change." You see, Obama is a lawyer and lawyers are trained to use words that have more than one meaning for a reason. In this case, the word "Change" can mean, among other things, (1) taking the country in a different direction. It can also mean, (2) reinventing oneself to fit a particular situation. Salamanders and other animals do this all the time to avoid detection. Another meaning of change is (3) the money left over after all of the real money has been spent.

I’ll let you decide what Obama meant by “Change.” When our nation is attacked by terrorists again, when he stands up in front of a conservative audience and sounds like Ronald Reagan, when he promises an additional $1,000.00 for working families but refuses to extend the previous administrations tax cuts beyond their current expiration dates, when the same people who were running the show in D.C. during the 90’s are now running the show again, when I have to close the doors to my small business and lay off our 7 employees because of the ever increasing tax burden – when each of these things happen (and they will) then I want you to be honest in your assessment of what Obama means by change.

Optimistic
And now for the optimism. It is very likely that Obama’s presidency will galvanize conservatives and produce and honest to goodness conservative during the next election cycle. John McCain’s “across the aisle politics” would have only served to further dilute the republican party and depress true conservatives. Does anyone else get the feeling McCain would have had just about the same cabinet as Obama?

By McCain losing this election, Conservatives actually won.

An American Tail?

My kids used to sing a song from the cartoon An American Tail titled "There Are No Cats in America." The song is sung by mice onboard a ship leaving Russia headed for America. As it turns out the mice were wrong. Almost as soon as the mice stepped onto the dock at Ellis Island they were assaulted by cats trying to destroy them.
The most dangerous of the cats is named "Warren T. Rat." With the help of some devious rats, a clever cockroach and a rat nose disguise, Warren sells himself to an unsuspecting mice population as the savior of the mice; offering his protection for pay. He tickles the ears of tiny unsuspecting mice with promises of a better life, convincing them that their lives will improve if they will but follow him. Once convinced, the mice are then snared and sold into a sweatshop servitude.
Near the end of the movie the mice finally discover what the audience has known for awhile. (1) that Warren is really a cat who's every move has been calculated to ultimately destroy them; (2) that if they will work together using an entreprenuerial spirit and the strength of each individual mouse they can save themselves; and (3) American tyrrants should be sent to China, not put in charge of governing their lives.
Warren T. Rat's final line in the movie is "I wonder how you say 'trust me' in Chinese."

The Problem with Socialism

"The problem with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money."

- Margaret Thatcher

Pro-Choicers outraged? I doubt it.

How often does this happen?

I know many of you social liberals out there think the termination of a fetus is just a choice a woman should have the right to make. You know. Oatmeal or cereal, paper or plastic, fast food or sit down dinner, abort or give birth. But the newest choice in "family planning" (brains sucked out or suffocation) has really pushed the creative envelope; even for you.

Scenario 1
The mother starts into labor and if the Abortion Clinic doctor gets there in time he can turn the baby around while her head is still inside the mother, stick a sharp set of prongs into the base of the baby’s skull and vacuum out her brains. All the while the baby’s arms and legs are moving around as she struggles for life. Then suddenly her body goes limp. The doctor then removes the head from the mother’s body and throws the body into the same bag the Abortion Clinic owner used.

-OR-

Scenario 2
The doctor doesn't quite get there in time for the abortion so he just cuts the newborn's umbilical cord and puts her into a plastic bag to suffocate to death. Saves the baby from the stress of a forcibly breached partial birth and (all in all) seems to be a more humane way of carrying out the mother's "choice."

What I would really like to know is whether you find anything wrong with the Abortion Clinic owner bagging up a new-born baby and throwing her into the garbage. And if you do find something wrong with it, why? Does the split second between pre-birth and birth make that big a difference to you?

I personally doubt that many true pro-choicers are genuinely outraged at what the owner did. If I'm wrong then I apologize (not really) but you would have to explain how these two real life scenarios are different.

Go Noles!

Florida State may not have the highest rated recruiting class this year, but if all of our commitments sign we may have exactly what we needed. Check out our 2009 recruiting class here.

New day. New Blog.

If this global warming thing keeps up, I am going to freeze to death.