Congratulations, you are eligible to lose about 1.5 to 5k dollars. With the numbers still rising on the Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac bailouts we can be rest assured that we will be paying the bill. Let’s forget for a moment the ignorance required to believe this is a good idea; let’s ask the question "How is this even constitutional?”
There is nothing, nothing in the constitution that allows this. What is this you ask? Well literally buying three companies (Fannie Mae, Freddy Mac and AIG). The government will get the stock majority of these three companies and essentially run them into the ground. Apparently a bunch of House Dems took us seriously when we told them to “try running their own company”. The federal government is supposed to dismantle the failed corporations once the bailout is complete but this assumes the government actually does what it is supposed to do. Sorry if I don’t believe their sincerity, but then again this same government said Social Security is to be used only for Social Security.
Understand that when the government says you will bailout Fannie and Freddie (no I did mean you); it means the debt incurred by the “inevitable” bailout. I wonder what Biden would say about this. Whether or not he supports this is probably determined by how it affects Amtrak. No this is a problem for Barrack Obama. He has received the second largest amount from PACs and individuals associated with Fanny and Freddy totaling $126,349. (individuals includes employees of those two companies. Data courtesy of OpenSecrets.org)
This debt incurred will start as half a trillion to, some say, as high as 1.8 trillion dollars but we have to pay interest on that sum too. In the end we will all bite this big one. Not because we have to or even should, but because the government has once again started playing SimCity with the market. Somehow throwing money at the problem seems like the opposite of what we need to do.
Don’t get me wrong either, this once again is a bi-partisan effort to screw us all. G.W. himself said we ‘need’ to do this. Seems like every time I can start to be happy again about him being in office he says something stupid. McCain has also bought into this dogma. God save us all.
I suggest we forget this all. Let every company that is going to fail do just that, fail. Sure, the stock market will take one hell of a hit. Many people will find themselves in trouble but in the end the stock market will strike back strong and most people will get their assets in order. However if we go down this path, which believe me we will, then the entire U.S. economy will suffer for it. The corporations will suffer from higher taxes and our countries credit will crumble further. Inflation will definitely occur and in the end someone will make millions writing a book about how we might have made a mistake. Well someone has to benefit from this.
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Sunday, September 7, 2008
Margret Sanger would be proud.
While I was gone, lost in the first weeks of school, McCain picked his VP nominee. Believe me, everyone was surprised. I mean seriously, Alaska? Well Sarah Palin turned out to be a terrific choice. Not only is she both a fiscal and a social conservative, but she has the kind of following that makes even Obama do a double take.
This post though, isn't about Sarah Palin. As the title would suggest, this is about the abortion issue. Sarah Palin has given birth to a wonderful baby with Down Syndrome. The kicker is that she knew about the disability before she actually gave birth to the young one. This is compared to the 90% of expecting mothers who usually abort. So the left-wing media congratulated her with hit pieces and numerous blog insults. After all, what kind of evil villain would allow baby Trig to live!?
Lets face it, the biggest problem for the Obama-maniacs is that not only is she female, but she is conservative. STOP THE PRESSES!!! GET THE POLICE AND ARREST HER BEFORE SHE SPEAKS HER MIND!!! How dare she not fall in line with the NOW Loons. NOW, of course, is attacking Palin like Ted Kennedy attacks a bottle of Jack. Planned Parenthood is also not a fan of hers. I say come and get her, you baby-killing loons.
This boils down to the Pro-Abortion... sorry Pro-Womyn's Health Choicers. The argument against abortion goes like this. Murder is defined as the killing of an innocent person by another person. There are three ways to try to define aborted fetuses (aka the Alpo secret ingredient) outside of the definition of murder. Either they are not innocent, "That baby killed my Ma'mah" they are not people (this would take one heck of a deranged person to make that argument) or they cannot be killed. The last one is the most popular argument. By defining life as starting at x number of weeks past conception we can con the justice system into not tossing these baby killers in prison. The argument is mostly arbitrary, and, in order to hide this fact, many words like Nazi are tossed around with sobs about raped women.
The fact is that once you get to the arbitrary nature of the law it becomes obvious just how dangerous this is. Say someone gets in and states that all Morons and Idiots should be sterilized. This might sound extreme but someone named Margaret Sanger suggested just that and was somewhat successful at it. So obviously we need a definition that is not up for arbitration. The problem is that most definitions lead to horrible consequences.
Here are some examples. If we define life as being a complete human (thereby allowing the exclusion of fetuses) then the definition of “complete” comes under fire. Depending on what you mean by complete, life starts at either conception (complete DNA) and going out to months out and perhaps even after birth. Certainly many of the Womyn would agree with most of that. “Complete”, though, can be pushed even further. If I stated that the mentally deficient are not “complete”, then they are not alive. Imagine an Orwellian world of non-persons and suddenly this seems to make sense. "But no one would ever do that!" Wrong!! It has been done before by progressives back in the early 1900's. Many people today still hold these crazy views.
Another example is what if we say life begins once they can feel pain (Makes sense if you are "humane"). Suddenly lepers would need to hide to avoid a parade of murderous thugs that would come after them. How ‘bout life begins once the fetus is human-like? This might push life to three months after conception, but runs into more problems. What is human-like? Is human like somewhat human? If I had MS would I be human? If I had AIDS and suddenly did not have an immune system, would that lack of an immune system make me less human? What if I was born without a pinky toe? With an eleventh finger? What if Darwin or Nietche rose from the dead and suggested that the "savage races" were not really human? (Can you tell I don't like Eugenics yet?)
Let’s face it, not only is conception the best, and by best I mean most humane, place to begin, but science and religion agree. I mean come on; I thought you guys liked science. The definition of life, according to science, is so broad that it encompasses viruses and bacteria. To say that human fetuses are not living is to say they are less that the bacteria we wash off our hands.
"But what about cases of rape? Are you going to allow a woman to live with that horrible burden?"
First, I would NEVER consider a child brought into the world as anything but a miracle, possibly excluding Michael Moore. Even granting this position, why not give the child up for adoption? If you cannot take care of a child, could you not at least put up with the burden for a couple months? Let’s assume we allowed children who were rape babies be aborted, then how far can you take this? What about a year old? If a mother smothered her child in its crib would we let her off because it was a rape baby?
"It's not the same thing." YES IT IS!!! That is the point. There is no line you can draw past conception where these fuzzy details can't be argued.
Life begins at conception. Simple and to the point. It makes sense. Not only does life begin there, but it is the only scientific point where life can begin. At that moment the embryo will one day grow into a baby capable of living outside of the womb. At that point it is possible for the baby to become what it was meant to be. Even excluding God from the picture you must come to this conclusion. At the point of conception the DNA is complete and has formed the basis of human life.
This fact will not stop the Now morons from attacking Sarah Palin, but at least we can conclude that their arguments are illogical. So I give a toast to you, Rosie, the Womyn of NOW and Planned Parenthood. A few million more abortions and you may beat the Nazis by a factor of ten. I have no doubt that Margaret Sanger would be proud of your accomplishments.
This post though, isn't about Sarah Palin. As the title would suggest, this is about the abortion issue. Sarah Palin has given birth to a wonderful baby with Down Syndrome. The kicker is that she knew about the disability before she actually gave birth to the young one. This is compared to the 90% of expecting mothers who usually abort. So the left-wing media congratulated her with hit pieces and numerous blog insults. After all, what kind of evil villain would allow baby Trig to live!?
Lets face it, the biggest problem for the Obama-maniacs is that not only is she female, but she is conservative. STOP THE PRESSES!!! GET THE POLICE AND ARREST HER BEFORE SHE SPEAKS HER MIND!!! How dare she not fall in line with the NOW Loons. NOW, of course, is attacking Palin like Ted Kennedy attacks a bottle of Jack. Planned Parenthood is also not a fan of hers. I say come and get her, you baby-killing loons.
This boils down to the Pro-Abortion... sorry Pro-Womyn's Health Choicers. The argument against abortion goes like this. Murder is defined as the killing of an innocent person by another person. There are three ways to try to define aborted fetuses (aka the Alpo secret ingredient) outside of the definition of murder. Either they are not innocent, "That baby killed my Ma'mah" they are not people (this would take one heck of a deranged person to make that argument) or they cannot be killed. The last one is the most popular argument. By defining life as starting at x number of weeks past conception we can con the justice system into not tossing these baby killers in prison. The argument is mostly arbitrary, and, in order to hide this fact, many words like Nazi are tossed around with sobs about raped women.
The fact is that once you get to the arbitrary nature of the law it becomes obvious just how dangerous this is. Say someone gets in and states that all Morons and Idiots should be sterilized. This might sound extreme but someone named Margaret Sanger suggested just that and was somewhat successful at it. So obviously we need a definition that is not up for arbitration. The problem is that most definitions lead to horrible consequences.
Here are some examples. If we define life as being a complete human (thereby allowing the exclusion of fetuses) then the definition of “complete” comes under fire. Depending on what you mean by complete, life starts at either conception (complete DNA) and going out to months out and perhaps even after birth. Certainly many of the Womyn would agree with most of that. “Complete”, though, can be pushed even further. If I stated that the mentally deficient are not “complete”, then they are not alive. Imagine an Orwellian world of non-persons and suddenly this seems to make sense. "But no one would ever do that!" Wrong!! It has been done before by progressives back in the early 1900's. Many people today still hold these crazy views.
Another example is what if we say life begins once they can feel pain (Makes sense if you are "humane"). Suddenly lepers would need to hide to avoid a parade of murderous thugs that would come after them. How ‘bout life begins once the fetus is human-like? This might push life to three months after conception, but runs into more problems. What is human-like? Is human like somewhat human? If I had MS would I be human? If I had AIDS and suddenly did not have an immune system, would that lack of an immune system make me less human? What if I was born without a pinky toe? With an eleventh finger? What if Darwin or Nietche rose from the dead and suggested that the "savage races" were not really human? (Can you tell I don't like Eugenics yet?)
Let’s face it, not only is conception the best, and by best I mean most humane, place to begin, but science and religion agree. I mean come on; I thought you guys liked science. The definition of life, according to science, is so broad that it encompasses viruses and bacteria. To say that human fetuses are not living is to say they are less that the bacteria we wash off our hands.
"But what about cases of rape? Are you going to allow a woman to live with that horrible burden?"
First, I would NEVER consider a child brought into the world as anything but a miracle, possibly excluding Michael Moore. Even granting this position, why not give the child up for adoption? If you cannot take care of a child, could you not at least put up with the burden for a couple months? Let’s assume we allowed children who were rape babies be aborted, then how far can you take this? What about a year old? If a mother smothered her child in its crib would we let her off because it was a rape baby?
"It's not the same thing." YES IT IS!!! That is the point. There is no line you can draw past conception where these fuzzy details can't be argued.
Life begins at conception. Simple and to the point. It makes sense. Not only does life begin there, but it is the only scientific point where life can begin. At that moment the embryo will one day grow into a baby capable of living outside of the womb. At that point it is possible for the baby to become what it was meant to be. Even excluding God from the picture you must come to this conclusion. At the point of conception the DNA is complete and has formed the basis of human life.
This fact will not stop the Now morons from attacking Sarah Palin, but at least we can conclude that their arguments are illogical. So I give a toast to you, Rosie, the Womyn of NOW and Planned Parenthood. A few million more abortions and you may beat the Nazis by a factor of ten. I have no doubt that Margaret Sanger would be proud of your accomplishments.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)